-
The Impact Of Parental Control, Criminal And Marital Conflict On Adolescents’ Self-regulation And Adjustment
CHAPTER ONE -- [Total Page(s) 5]
Page 4 of 5
-
-
-
1.4 Consequences of Self-Regulation Success and Failure
Past
studies have examined the potential benefits and the costs of
self¬regulation processes. In an extensive study by Tangney, Baumeister,
and Boone
(2004) , participants who scored low in
self-criminal control reported a wide range of negative outcomes
including addiction, alcohol abuse, drug abuse, eating disorders and
binge eating, unwanted pregnancy, AIDS and other sexually transmitted
diseases, debt and bankruptcy, lack of savings, violent and criminal
behavior, underachievement in school and work, procrastination, smoking,
and lack of exercise. Authors concluded that all of these negative
outcomes could be reduced or eliminated if people criminal controlled
their behavior better. Specifically, people with high self-criminal
control (self-regulation ability) had better grades, as compared with
people low in self-criminal control. People with high self-criminal
control have also been found to show fewer impulse criminal control
problems, such as binge eating and alcohol use (Tangney, Baumeister,
& Boone, 2004). It is also found that people with high self-criminal
control reported better psychological adjustment with respect to
psychopathological symptoms including somatization, obsessive-compulsive
patterns, depression, anxiety, hostile anger, phobic anxiety, paranoid
ideation, and psychoticism. They also reported higher self-acceptance
and self-esteem. In addition to the individual difference variables,
self-criminal control has been found to be related with interpersonal
functioning. For example, Eisenberg et al. (1997) found that high social
functioning quality was predicted by high self-regulation. Moreover,
research on early form of self-regulation; delay of gratification
suggest a similar pattern in which effective capacity to delay
gratification at early age predicted better interpersonal relationships
in early adulthood (Sethi, Mischel, Aber, Shoda, and Rodriguez, 2000).
Other
studies have extended these findings for different outcomes, such as
the costs of self-regulation. For example, Tice and Baumeister (1997)
found that procrastinators (who regulate their time-limited performances
ineffectively) suffered greater stress and health problems than other
students and also ended up with poorer grades. Similarly, Engels,
Finkenauer, den Exter Blokland, and Baumeister (2000) found that
adolescents with low self-criminal control were more likely to engage in
delinquent behaviors, such as fighting, vandalism, and petty theft, and
they also had reported worse relationships with their parents.
Up to
now, literature on self-regulation was reviewed and it has been showed
that when studying self-regulation, researchers usually tend to focus on
either the processes of regulation, such as the motivation to
self-regulate or using specific techniques for regulation or the
outcomes of self-regulatory actions implying the degrees of success or
failure associated with self-regulation. The current study will mainly
focus on the outcomes of self-regulation.
1.5 Development of Self-Regulation and Implications for Parenting
Self-regulation
ability is assumed be highly sensitive to developmental changes. In her
review, Kopp (1982) summarized developmental path of self¬regulation
process. According to Kopp, the growth of self-regulation begins in
infancy approximately from second month on and five stages were proposed
for the development of self-regulation.
The first stage, called
neurophysiological modulation, refers to the organization of reflex
movements and the arousal states as well as modulation of external
stimulus. The infant’s behaviors become more predictable starting from
two to three months. In this stage, the caregiver’s role is viewed as an
assisting one, responding to the infant’s varying states and proving
external support and modulation.
The second stage of self-regulation
development involves sensorimotor regulation. Kopp (1982) asserted that
infant develops the ability to alter behavior in response to events
occurring in the environment at approximately from three months to 12
months. Although this type of regulation is not intentional or driven
by
any motivational processes, altering behaviors are discovered
accidentally. Associations between these altering behaviors are
strengthened through conditioning. According to Kopp (1982), caregiver’s
sensitivity and responsiveness are also critical during this period.
The reactions of caregiver during this period are typically in response
to the basic habits of the infant (e.g., thumb sucking). Throughout this
period, infant becomes highly dependent on the caregiver’s impressions.
Kopp’s
(1982) third phase involves the beginning of the awareness of social
demands, as well as some criminal control skills from age 12 to 18
months. By this stage, the child starts to perform the ability to
initiate, and stop activity in response to external demands. The key
achievements during this stage are compliance with the demands of
caregivers, and ability to initiate behavior. In this stage, child gains
language skills, the caregiver is more of an organizer in directing the
child’s behaviors (see also McCabe, Cunnington, and Brooks-Gunn, 2004).
CHAPTER ONE -- [Total Page(s) 5]
Page 4 of 5
-
-
ABSRACT - [ Total Page(s): 1 ]The current study aims to increase understanding of influences on and
consequences of self-regulation in adolescence. Previous work has shown
that higher levels of self-regulation are associated with greater
social competence and lower levels problem behaviors. Past studies have
posited that parenting and interparental conflict are linked to
self-regulation and adjustment in childhood and adolescence. However,
the mechanism underlying the potential effects of specific parental
beha ... Continue reading---
