PARENTAL EDUCATIONAL STYLES FROM PARENTS’ AND CHILDREN’S PERSPECTIVES
Estilos educativos parentales desde la perspectiva
de los progenitores y menores

MERCEDES INDA-CARO, CARMEN-MARÍA FERNÁNDEZ-GARCÍA AND MARÍA-PAULINA VIÑUELA-HERNÁNDEZ
Universidad de Oviedo (España)

DOI: 10.13042/Bordon.2023.94551
Fecha de recepción: 06/05/2022 • Fecha de aceptación: 11/05/2023
Autora de contacto / Mercedes Inda-Caro. E-mai: indamaria@uniovi.es
Cómo citar este artículo: Inda-Caro, M., Fernández-García, C.-M.ª and Viñuela-Hernández, M.ª-P. (2023). Parental educational styles from parents’ and children’s perspectives. Bordón, Revista de Pedagogía, 75(3), 85-101. https://doi.org/10.13042/Bordon.2023.94551

INTRODUCTION. The construction of parental educational styles is diverse and they develop along with the children being raised. Self Determination Theory (SDT) establishes two dimensions to define parental educational behaviours: autonomy support versus control, and structure versus chaos. On the basis of SDT, two parental educational styles are pointed: authoritative and harsh. This study analyses the relationship between parental education styles and children’s perceptions of their parents’ behaviours, and the influence of the parent gender. METHOD. The sample comprised 2,404 parents, and 1,234 children from 3 autonomous communities in Spain. The Parents as social context questionnaire was applied, and the Perceived Parental Autonomy Support Scale and Dependency-oriented psychological control scale in children. All of the instruments were adapted into Spanish. Multigroup path analysis was performed to identify the most appropriate model about parental educational styles in family dynamics, taking into account the parent’s gender. RESULTS. Firstly, the authoritative and harsh parental styles were confirmed via confirmatory factor analysis. The findings showed that the ideal model was that where there was no bi-directionality between parents’ perceptions about their educational styles and their children’s perceptions. The chosen model indicates a unidirectional path from parents to children. Being necessary to keep a relation between the child’s perception about the received support for autonomy and parental control. The invariance of the model based on the gender was partially maintained. DISCUSSION. This study shows a model where the authoritative parental style influences child’s perceived autonomy support and where the harsh parental style has effects on child’s perceived threat. The concept of parental psychological control has been discussed. Finally, a balance between authoritative and harsh style, is proposed inside families.

Keywords: Parenting styles, Parent child relationship, Parent influence, Family structure.

Introduction

The socialization goals and strategies that parents use with their children are related to the warmth of their relationships, their levels of communication (acceptance versus rejection, affection versus hostility, closeness versus coldness), and the parents’ behaviour in guiding their children’s development (autonomy support versus control, permissiveness versus strictness). The variables or dimensions which describe parental educational styles are diverse, and they may be combined in a variety of ways; pure models cannot be identified. Nonetheless, mixed styles, which change according to the child’s development, show that parental educational styles are conditioned by children’s behaviour and vice versa (Bernal et al., 2020Bernal, T., Melendro, M., Charry, C. L., & Goig, Rosa. (2020). La influencia de la familia y la educación en la autonomía de los jóvenes: una revisión sistemática. Bordón: Revista de pedagogía, 72(2), 29-44. https://doi.org/10.13042/Bordon.2020.76175). Nowadays, being a parent is a difficult task which does not allow for improvisation. Moreover, parents have to apply specific strategies in order to deal with new societal needs. Parental educational styles reflect how adults act with regard to children in daily life contexts, their decision-making processes, and how they solve conflicts. Therefore, expectations and models are deployed with the aim of regulating behaviours and setting parameters that will be a benchmark for behaviours and attitudes (Torío et al., 2008Torío-López, S., Peña-Calvo, J.-V. & Rodríguez-Menéndez, M.-C. (2008). Estilos educativos parentales: revisión bibliográfica y reformulación teórica. Teoría de la Educación. Revista Interuniversitaria, 20, 151-178. https://doi.org/10.14201/988).

Three classic proposals have been used to define parental educative styles (Aroca et al., 2014Aroca, C., Cánovas, P. & Sahuquillo, P. (2014). Los estilos educativos. En P. Cánovas y P. Sahuquillo (coord.), Familias y menores: retos y propuestas pedagógicas (pp. 195-232). Tirant lo Blanch.). The traditional model, established unidirectional relationships between parents and children. This model was based on three dimensions: warmth vs hostility, permissiveness vs restrictiveness and, calm vs anxiety. In the model of joint construction, the basic relationships between parents and children were bidirectional. Baumrind (1967Baumrind, D. (1967). Childcare practices anteceding three patterns of preschool behavior. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 75, 43-88., 1971Baumrind, D. (1971). Current patterns of parental authority. Developmental Psychology Monograph, 41(1), 1-103. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0030372) defined three parental educational styles (authoritative, authoritarian and permissive), Maccoby & Martin (1983Maccoby, E. E. & Martin, J. A. (1983). Socialization in the context of the family: Parent-child interaction. In P. Mussen and E. M. Hetherington (eds.), Handbook of Child Psychology, volume IV: Socialization, personality, and social development (pp. 1-101). Wiley.) subsequently reviewed Baumrind’s model starting from two basic dimensions: control or demandingness, and responsiveness and warmth. From the combination of these two factors, they produced a model of four parental educational styles: authoritative, authoritarian, indulgent and neglectful. Since then, researchers have reviewed and refined the core dimensions of these parental educational styles. The third theoretical model was the interactive parenting one (Aroca & Cánovas, 2012Aroca, C. & Cánovas, P. (2012). Los estilos educativos parentales desde los modelos interactivo y de construcción conjunta: revisión de las investigaciones. Teoría de la Educación. Revista Interuniversitaria, 24(2), 149-176. https://doi.org/10.14201/10359). In this model, the patterns in the family are not lineal, in fact, one parental educational style can take different outcomes depending on children’s characteristics. Aroca & Cánovas (2012Aroca, C. & Cánovas, P. (2012). Los estilos educativos parentales desde los modelos interactivo y de construcción conjunta: revisión de las investigaciones. Teoría de la Educación. Revista Interuniversitaria, 24(2), 149-176. https://doi.org/10.14201/10359) pointed out three dimensions in the minor which could determine the effect of parental educational styles: temperament, positive emotion and, regular development.

Several additions have been made from Self Determination Theory (SDT). SDT establishes two longitudinal factors which define these styles: parental autonomy support (vs control) and structure (vs chaos) (Soenens et al., 2015Soenens, B., Vansteenkiste, M. & Van Petegem, S. (2015). Let us not throw out the baby with the bathwater: applying the principle of universalism without uniformity to autonomy-supportive and controlling parenting. Child Development Perspectives, 9(1), 44-49. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12103). SDT establishes a difference between the content of goals and the regulatory processes in pursuit of them (Deci & Ryan, 2000Deci, E. L. & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological inquiry, 11(4), 227-268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01).

There are two other central concepts in SDT: psychological needs satisfaction and motivation. Satisfaction of psychological needs is key to understanding human behaviour, while motivation refers to the ways of satisfying these psychological needs, which are considered innate and not learned. SDT defines three principal needs: competence, relatedness and autonomy (Deci & Ryan, 2000Deci, E. L. & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological inquiry, 11(4), 227-268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01, p. 232). Parents are crucial for satisfying these needs in their children, while they are within this first institution of socialization (the family).

SDT requires some conceptual clarifications: parental autonomy support refers to situations in which parents take their child’s point of view into consideration, support their child’s development, and use communication with them to establish rules. In contrast, controlling parenting refers to the use of strategies such as rejection or coercion. Children of controlling parents report that their behaviour is controlled by reward contingencies such as deadlines or punishments, and pressured by parental expectations, feelings of withdrawal, being made to feel guilty, or shaming.

The other dimension in SDT, structure vs chaos, also needs clarification. Structure refers to the family environment being organized so as to promote children’s competence. In these families, rules and their consequences are clearly stated, whereas in families without structure, rules change frequently, children do not know what parents expect from them, and parents or guardians take the lead without listening to children’s opinions (Grolnick et al., 2014Grolnick, W., Raftery-Helmer, J., Marbell, K., Flamm, E., Cardemil, E. & Sánchez, M. (2014). Parental provision of structure: implementation and correlates in three domains. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 60(3), 355-384. https://doi.org/10.13110/merrpalmquar1982.60.3.0355).

Two contrasting parental educational styles can be established based on these dimensions. Firstly, an authoritative educational style, which demonstrates the dimensions of warmth, autonomy support, and structure. The other is a harsh parenting style dominated by rejection, chaos or coercive behaviours (Egeli et al., 2015Egeli, N. A., Rogers, W. T., Rinaldi, C. M. & Cui, Y. (2015). Exploring the factor structure of the revised-parent as a social context questionnaire. Parenting, 15(4), 269-287. https://doi.org/10.1080/15295192.2015.1053334).

A huge amount of research has attempted to define and explore controlling parenting. According to SDT, the elements of this dimension include threating to punish the child, making them feel guilty, manipulating them so that they do what the parent wants, and making them feel ashamed for not meeting parental demands (Grolnick et al., 2014Grolnick, W., Raftery-Helmer, J., Marbell, K., Flamm, E., Cardemil, E. & Sánchez, M. (2014). Parental provision of structure: implementation and correlates in three domains. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 60(3), 355-384. https://doi.org/10.13110/merrpalmquar1982.60.3.0355; Mageau et al., 2015Mageau, G. A., Ranger, F., Joussemet, M., Koestner, R., Moreau, E. & Forest, J. (2015). Validation of the perceived parental autonomy support scale (P-PASS). Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement, 47(3), 251-262. https://doi.org//10.1037/a0039325; Soenens et al., 2010Soenens, B., Vansteenkiste, M. & Luyten, P. (2010). Toward a Domain-Specific Approach to the Study of Parental Psychological Control: Distinguishing Between Dependency-Oriented and Achievement-Oriented Psychological Control. Journal of Personality, 78(1), 217-256. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2009.00614.x). Consequently, parents who do not engage in this controlling behaviour achieve high levels in warmth, autonomy support and structure, and exhibit low scores in rejection, chaos and coercion (Egeli et al., 2015Egeli, N. A., Rogers, W. T., Rinaldi, C. M. & Cui, Y. (2015). Exploring the factor structure of the revised-parent as a social context questionnaire. Parenting, 15(4), 269-287. https://doi.org/10.1080/15295192.2015.1053334; Soenens & Vansteenkiste, 2010Soenens, B. & Vansteenkiste, M. (2010). A theoretical upgrade of the concept of parental psychological control: proposing new insights on the basis of self-determination theory. Developmental Review, 30, 74-99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2009.11.001). In addition, parents can engage in controlling behaviour which limits their children’s freedom to live their own lives, trying to be excessively close to their children. This can produce a dependency mechanism inside the family, which can lead to maladjustment in the children (Chyung et al., 2022Chyung, Y. J., Lee, Y. A., Ahn, S. J. & Bang, H. S. (2022). Associations of Perceived Parental Psychological Control with Depression, Anxiety in Children and Adolescents: A Meta-Analysis. Marriage & Family Review, 58(2), 158-197. https://doi.org/10.1080/01494929.2021.1941496; Flipello et al., 2020 Filippello, P., Buzzai, C., Messina, G., Mafodda, A. V. & Sorrenti, L. (2020). School refusal in students with low academic performances and specific learning disorder. The role of self-esteem and perceived parental psychological control. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 67(6), 592-607. https://doi.org/10.1080/1034912X.2019.1626006; Romm et al., 2020Romm, K. F., Metzger, A. & Alvis, L. M. (2020). Parental psychological control and adolescent problematic outcomes: A multidimensional approach. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 29(1), 195-207. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-019-01545-y; Soenens et al., 2010Soenens, B., Vansteenkiste, M. & Luyten, P. (2010). Toward a Domain-Specific Approach to the Study of Parental Psychological Control: Distinguishing Between Dependency-Oriented and Achievement-Oriented Psychological Control. Journal of Personality, 78(1), 217-256. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2009.00614.x).

Examination of possible differences in parental control according to parental gender showed that controlling parenting mediated between indifference and aggressive behaviours in fathers, while the warmth dimension did not influence controlling parenting. Meanwhile, controlling parenting was affected by the warmth dimension in mothers (Fernández-García et al., 2017Fernández-García, C.-M., Rodríguez-Menéndez, C. & Peña-Calvo, J.-V. (2017). Parental control in interpersonal acceptance-rejection theory: a study with a Spanish sample using Parents’ Version of Parental Acceptation-Rejection/Control Questionnaire. Anales de Psicología/Annals of Psychology, 33(3), 652-659. https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.33.3.260591). It is necessary to consider how these dimensions work in fathers and mothers, and even more important to determine whether the fact that a parent exhibits a predominant educational style makes it possible to recognise the quality of the aforementioned basic dimensions in order to establish a relationship of quality. It should be noted that the relationships between parents and children are bidirectional, children influence their parents and vice versa. In this vein, Baumrind (1967Baumrind, D. (1967). Childcare practices anteceding three patterns of preschool behavior. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 75, 43-88., 1971Baumrind, D. (1971). Current patterns of parental authority. Developmental Psychology Monograph, 41(1), 1-103. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0030372) already noted an interrelationship between basic parenting dimensions: control, communication and warmth. However, there are no conclusive results about the relationship between parents’ and children’s behaviours (Cappa et al., 2011Cappa, K. A., Begle, A. M., Conger, J. C. Dumas, J. & Conger, A. (2011). Bidirectional Relationships between Parenting Stress and Child Coping Competence: Findings from the Pace Study. Journal of Child Family Studies, 20, 334-342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-010-9397-0; Johnco et al. 2021Johnco, C. J., Magson, N. R., Fardouly, J., Oar, E. L., Forbes, M. K., Richardson, C. & Rapee, R. M. (2021). The role of parenting behaviors in the bidirectional and intergenerational transmission of depression and anxiety between parents and early adolescent youth. Depression and anxiety, 38(12), 1256-1266. https://doi.org/10.1002/da.23197; Xerxa et al. 2021Xerxa, Y., Rescolar, L., Van der Ende, J. Hillegers, Manon, Verhulst, F. C. & Tiemeier, H. (2021). From Parent to Child to Parent: Associations Between Parent and Offspring Psychopathology. Child Development, 92(1), 291-307. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13402). Recent studies have reported clear relationships between both sides. Hickey et al. (2020Hickey, E. J., Bolt, D., Rodriguez, G. & Hartley, S. (2020). Bidirectional Relations between Parent Warmth and Criticism and the Symptoms and Behavior Problems of Children with Autism. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 48, 865-879. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-020-00628-5) found a bidirectional relationship between parent and child; in the main, warmth influenced child functioning and vice versa —child behaviour affected parental warmth. Zhang et al. (2020Zhang, J., Lee, S. K., Piehler, T. F., Gewirtz, A. H. & August, G. J. (2020). Bidirectional relations between parenting practices and child externalizing behaviors in formerly homeless families: A random-intercept cross-lagged panel analysis. Parenting, 20(3), 177-199. https://doi.org/10.1080/15295192.2019.1694833) indicated bidirectionality between children’s external behaviours and effective parenting. Hentges et al. (2021Hentges, R. F., Graham, S. A., Plamondon, A., Tough, S. & Madigan, S. (2021). Bidirectional associations between maternal depression, hostile parenting, and early child emotional problems: Findings from the all our families cohort. Journal of Affective Disorders, 287, 397-404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2021.03.056) focused on the influence of maternal depression on problems related to internalization of children’s behaviour. However, hostile paternal behaviour could be influenced by disruptive behaviour from the children. A study by Allman et al. (2021Allmann, A. E., Klein, D. N. & Kopala-Sibley, D. C. (2021). Bidirectional and transactional relationships between parenting styles and child symptoms of ADHD, ODD, depression, and anxiety over 6 years. Development and Psychopathology, 9, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579421000201) reported that maladaptive parenting persisted due to children’s symptoms, and psychological problems in children increased as a result of inadequate parenting educational styles.

The aim of the present study was to establish and analyse the relationship between parents’ parenting behaviours and their children’s perceptions of them. Two models were tested. Model 1 defined a linear relationship between parents’ and children’s perceptions (figure 1) while Model 2 defined a bi-directional relationship between the two sides, parents and children (Circular model) (figure 2).

Figure 1. Linear model to define family education style (Model 1) [View full size] [Descargar tamaño completo]

Figure 2. Circular model to define family education style (Model 2) [Descargar tamaño completo]

Methodology

Participants

The sample comprised 2,404 parents and 1,234 children from 3 Autonomous Communities in Spain. The distribution by gender was 1,147 (47.7 %) fathers, and 1,224 (50.9%) mothers. 33 (1.4%) participants did not report this data. Of the children, 594 (48.2%) were boys, 636 (51.5 %) girls, 3 non-binary (0.2%), and one case (0.1%) did not report this information. Students included in the sample were in the following grades: 0.6% in first grade, 0.3% second, 24.4% third, 21.3% fourth, 26.9% fifth and, 26.5 % from sixth. Families’ incomes averaged between 25,000 and 35,000 euros per year. Most of the parents (79.6%) were married, 8% were living together, 7.2% were separated, 4.8% were single, and 0.4 % were widowed. The median (50 %) parental educational level was vocational educational training, level II. All the participants gave their written informed consent and the appropriate ethics committee reviewed and approved the study (code: 200/19).

Procedure

Once the project was approved by the Research ethics committee of the Principality of Asturias (Spain) (nº200/19), the study sample was selected. Because data collection started during the COVID lockdown, the sampling procedure needed to be changed from random to incidental in some regions. An invitation to join the study was sent to all primary schools in order to achieve the highest level of participation. The information sent to school head teachers included a letter explaining the aims of the project, along with examples of questionnaires for parents and children. The research team also contacted schools by telephone to answer any questions about the information and to determine whether they agreed to participate in the study. In the final stage, two members of the research team went to the schools to collect the data.

Instruments

Parents as social context questionnaire. Parent report (PSCQ) (Egeli et al., 2015Egeli, N. A., Rogers, W. T., Rinaldi, C. M. & Cui, Y. (2015). Exploring the factor structure of the revised-parent as a social context questionnaire. Parenting, 15(4), 269-287. https://doi.org/10.1080/15295192.2015.1053334, Skinner et al., 2005Skinner, E., Johnson, S. & Snyder, T. (2005). Six dimensions of parenting: A motivational model. Parenting: Science and practice, 5(2), 175-235. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327922par0502_3)

This scale consists of 31 items using a Likert scale (1 = not at all true to 4 = very true) which assesses the six basic SDT parenting dimensions: warmth, rejection, structure, chaos, autonomy support, and coercion. The original version was translated into Spanish following a back translation procedure (Hambleton et al., 2005Hambleton, R. K., Merenda, P. & Spielberger, C. (eds.) (2005). Adapting educational and psychological tests for cross-cultural assessment. Lawrence Erlbaum Publishers.). Factorial analysis revealed a five factor structure (Bartlett’s statistic = 17,543.8, p = .000, KMO = .883), which explained 52.429% of variance. The fit indices were χ² = 1,967.931, df = 320, p = .000; TLI = .985; CFI = .990, RMSEA = .036, RMSR = .0400. The reliability indices were Cronbach’s α = .916 and McDonald’s Ω = .912. The resultant factors covered warmth (.872), structure (.814), autonomy support (.916), coercion-rejection (.882) and chaos plus two items of rejection (.791).

The Spanish structure maintained the general structure of the original except for the rejection dimension which was split between coercion and chaos. Three items were located in coercion, 7 “I don’t understand my child very well”, 8 “Sometimes my child is hard to like” and 9 “At times, the demands that my child makes feel like a burden”. Likewise, two items were located in chaos, item 10 “My child needs more than I have time to give him/her” and 11 “Sometimes I feel like I can’t be there for my child when he/she needs me”. The alpha values in the original version were warmth .79, rejection .72, structure .81, chaos .75, autonomy support .84 and coercion .80. The α value for the total PSCQ was .80.

Perceived Parental Autonomy Support Scale (Joussemet et al., 2014Joussemet, M., Mageau, G. A. & Koestner, R. (2014). Promoting optimal parenting and children’s mental health: A preliminary evaluation of the how-to parenting program. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 23(6), 949-964. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-013-9751-0)

This instrument consists of an 18-item scale evaluating perceived autonomy support and controlling parenting of children. Possible responses range from almost never to almost always. The instrument was also translated into Spanish following a backtranslation procedure. The fit indices demonstrated very good fit to a two-factor structure (Bartlett’s statistic = 14,277.6, p = .000, KMO = .865), χ² = 1,370.693, df = 118, p = .000; TLI = .944; CFI = .957, RMSEA = .074, RMSR = .0600. The reliability for each factor was autonomy support α = .875 and psychological control α = .862. The internal consistency scale was, Ω = .874, α = .875. In the original version, the values were .70 and .78.

Dependency-oriented psychological control scale (DPC) (Soenenes et al., 2010Soenens, B., Vansteenkiste, M. & Luyten, P. (2010). Toward a Domain-Specific Approach to the Study of Parental Psychological Control: Distinguishing Between Dependency-Oriented and Achievement-Oriented Psychological Control. Journal of Personality, 78(1), 217-256. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2009.00614.x) Spanish version (García-Pérez et al., 2019García-Pérez, O., Rodríguez-Menéndez, C., Torío-López, S. & Rodríguez-Pérez, S. (2019). Validation of the Dependency-Oriented and Achievement-Oriented Psychological Control Scale (DAPCS) in a Spanish-speaking late adolescent sample. Anales de Psicología/Annals of Psychology, 35(3), 453-463. https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.35.3.329991)

This instrument contains eight items rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree) assessing controlling parenting to keep children within close physical and emotional boundaries. In the Spanish version the reliability was .90 in fathers and .83 in mothers. Values of Cronbach’s alpha in the original version were .86 for maternal DPC ratings and .83 for paternal DPC ratings. In our sample, alpha was α = .761, Ω = .763. The indices of fit indicated a very good single-factor structure (Bartlett’s statistic = 5,673, p = .000, KMO = .891), χ² = 95.549, df = 20, p = .000; TLI = 990.; CFI = .993, RMSEA = .042, RMSR = .042.

Treatment of missing data

Analysis of missing data indicated a percentage between 7.7% and 26.6%. The data were not missing completely at random, MCAR, as Little’s test gave χ² = 115,679, df = 65, p = .000. The pattern of missing data was also examined: the outcomes were 348 (20%), 469 (40%), 170 (60%), 27 (80%) and nine reports with 100% missing data. The total number of records with at least one missing piece of data was 1,023.

In addition, the sociodemographic characteristics of this group of records were examined. To that end, a χ² test was performed to compare the group with and without missing data. Participants with missing data exhibited particular features: medium level of qualifications, lower annual incomes, male children in the first grades of primary education (between the first and third year of elementary school); male parent, private or private publicly funded school, actively working (outside or inside the home). Significant differences in terms of research variables were not found in parental factors (p > .05). However, there were significant differences in the child-related dimensions. With regard to children’s perception of parental autonomy support, the participant group with missing data had a lower mean score than those without missing data (means = 3.130 vs 3.200, t = -2.651, p = .008). In the two variables which assessed children’s perceptions of parental control, members of the missing data group reported higher scores than the group without missing data, in PPASS psychological control, means = 1.720 vs 1.632 t = 3.659, p = .000, in dependency psychological control, means = 1.809 vs 1.679, t = 4.127, p = .000.

To handle missing not at random data (MNAR) 80/20, and considering that the best multiple imputation procedure overestimates the original mean by 5% (Fernández-Alonso et al., 2012Fernández-Alonso, R., Suárez-Álvarez, J. & Muñiz-Fernández, J. (2012). Imputación de datos perdidos en las evaluaciones diagnósticas educativas. Psicothema, 24(1), 167-175. https://www.psicothema.com/pii?pii=3995), the best solution established two subsamples: one without any missing data (n = 1,381, Group 1) and the other containing the records with missing data to do the data imputation (n = 1,023, Group 2). An imputation procedure in the core variables with linear regression was carried out in the second sample. The number of imputations was 5. A t Student test let us choose the imputation group with the fewest differences in the five criterion variables. Records with all data missing were deleted (n = 7).

Data Analysis

A multigroup path analysis model was produced to identify which of the two models better explained how different parental educational styles inside the family work and the influence of parents’ gender. After discovering that the missing data group exhibited different traits from the other records, two different analyses, for group 1 and group 2 were run simultaneously.

As skewness and kurtosis gave absolute values lower than one, the normality of data from both groups was accepted. Maximum likelihood estimation was used to assess the models. The models were assessed using AMOS 22.0 software with the following indices of fit: the Chi-Square test (χ²), χ² /df; the Tucker Lewis index (TLI), the comparative fit index (CFI), Steiger’s Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) and Akaike’s information criterion (AIC). To explore the role of parents’ gender in the model, five conditions were considered: a. the parameters were free (unconstrained model), b. equivalence of intercepts in fathers and mothers, c. uniformity in means d. covariance equivalence and, e. similarity in the residual values.

The indices of fit were examined to assess whether the models varied by gender: χ² /df < 5 indicating adequate fit (Marsh & Hocever, 1985Marsh, H. W. & Hocevar, D. (1985). Application of confirmatory factor analysis to the study of self-concept: first-and higher order factor models and their invariance across groups. Psychological Bulletin, 97(3), 562-582. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.97.3.562); differences in CFI and TLI values should be lower than .01 and in RMSEA lower than .05 (Atitsogbe et al., 2018Atitsogbe, K., Moummoula, I., Rochat, R., Antonietti, J. Ph. & Rossier, J. (2018). Vocational interests and career indecision in Switzerland and Burkina Faso: Cross-cultural similarities and differences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 107, 126-140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2018.04.002; Milfont & Fischer, 2010Milfont, T. L. & Fischer, R. (2010). Testing measurement invariance across groups: Applications in cross-cultural research. International Journal of Psychological Research, 3(1), 111-121. https://doi.org/10.21500/20112084.857; Savickas & Perfeli, 2012Savickas, M. L. & Porfeli, E. J. (2012). The career adapt-abilities scale: Construction, reliability, and measurement equivalence across 13 countries. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80, 661-673. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2012.01.011). Smaller differences between models’ AIC indicate greater invariance (Akaike, 1974Akaike, H. (1974). A new look at statistical model identification. Transactions on Automatic Control, AC-19, 716-723. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAC.1974.1100705).

Results

Correlations between basic dimensions

In accordance with the previous studies by Skinner et al. (2005Skinner, E., Johnson, S. & Snyder, T. (2005). Six dimensions of parenting: A motivational model. Parenting: Science and practice, 5(2), 175-235. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327922par0502_3) and Egeli et al. (2015Egeli, N. A., Rogers, W. T., Rinaldi, C. M. & Cui, Y. (2015). Exploring the factor structure of the revised-parent as a social context questionnaire. Parenting, 15(4), 269-287. https://doi.org/10.1080/15295192.2015.1053334), parental educational styles had the following syntax: the authoritative educational style included the dimensions of warmth, structure, and autonomy support; the harsh educational style included coercion and chaos dimensions. Additionally, a second-order Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was conducted to ensure that this was suitable. The outcome of the two-factor CFA for mothers (Bartlett’s statistic = 10,728.1, p = .000, KMO = .851) were as follows: χ² = 1,727.650, df = 404, p = .000; TLI = .955; CFI = .961, RMSEA = .059. The authoritative style gave a value of α = .919 and the harsh style gave α = .888. For the fathers’ group (Bartlett’s statistic = 8,701.9, p = .000, KMO = .864), χ² = 1,599, df = 404, p = .000; TLI = .959; CFI = .965, RMSEA = .062. The authoritative style gave a value of α = .926 and the harsh style gave α = .903.

Table 1 shows the descriptive and Pearson correlations for the observed variables in both parents and children. The authoritative style was negatively correlated with the harsh style in both fathers and mothers. In terms of the children’s perceptions, parental autonomy support exhibited a negative relationship with two kinds of control (threating and dependency) in both fathers and mothers. The harsh style was positively correlated with the control dimension in PASS and DAPCS. However, this educational style had a negative relationship with perceived autonomy support of children. The similar values for the descriptive statistics in the two groups leads us to conclude the validity of these findings.

Analysis of models of parental educational styles

Table 2 shows the result of model 1 and model 2 in the five conditions in both groups (1 and 2). Model 1 was defined by the fact that parental educational styles influenced children’s perceptions, which were not related with each other. Model 2 indicated that parental educational styles are constructed through their children’s perceptions and children are influenced by parental educational styles. Likewise, children’s perceived parental behaviours are related to each other, in fact, this bi-directionality is the key to all of the dynamics of the model. Before taking model 2, other options were also tested, such as the independence of children’s perceived parental styles. However, as the correlations in table 1 indicate, these variables are strongly related. In fact, the covariance between each children’s dimension and between parental educational styles had to be included in model 1 in order to achieve a good fit. In both groups, TLI and CFI were < .80, and RMSEA > .08 when this covariance was not considered.

Once these two parameters were reflected in model 1, it had a better fit than model 2 (table 2). Although TLI and CFI exhibited appropriate values, the majority were > .90, except Model 2 in group 2, the values for RMSEA were worse. In model 2b it was higher than .08 (mediocre fit), Χ²/df was higher than 5 in model 2a in both groups and in models 2b and 2c in group 2 (table 2). Consequently, model 1 was more acceptable in both groups.

Analysing the invariance of the model by parents’ gender, the overall goodness-of-fit indices improved in the five models and the tests of differences in fit between adjacent support measurement invariance also improved. Nevertheless, the invariance of intercepts was partial, ΔCFI = .05, and in both groups the fit was worse. This meant that the value of the intercept was not the same for mothers and fathers; consequently, children’s perceptions of parental educational styles were different depending on the parents’ gender. Maintaining the invariance of intercepts was more difficult in group 2.

It is interesting to note that the number of fathers in this group was higher than in group 1. The means invariance model (Model 1c), and covariance and residuals invariance models (Model 1d and 1e) provided excellent fit to the data in both groups and ΔCFI and ΔTLI were less than .01, with ΔRMSEA lower than .05. These values reinforce the fact that the means of parental educational styles were the same in fathers and mothers, and that the difference in observed and expected values (estimation errors) were the same for both parents. We can summarize by saying that the pattern of the model was equal for mothers and fathers when describing the influence of parenting styles on how they were perceived by their children. However, this picture did not work when we analysed parenting behaviour only from child’s perception.

The proposed final model is presented in figure 3. Although the figures for Group 1 and Group 2 (imputed data) were similar, there was a small increase as result of the imputation process, as shown in figure 3. This authoritative parental style exhibited a positive influence on children’s perceptions of their parents’ autonomy support. The influence of the harsh parenting style was that it meant children perceived control, the weight was similar to that from authoritative style parenting (β ₁ = .10, p = .000). More specifically, the influence was noted on perceived control exerted through threats, making children feel guilty, and focusing on performance goals. The weight of perceived dependency on psychological control was not significant (β ₁ = .03, p = .358). The influence of parenting behaviour on children’s perceptions was determined by the covariance between parenting styles (β ₁ = .37, p = .000). When parents exhibited an authoritative style, there was a negative relationship with the harsh style. There was a similar occurrence with the covariance between children’s perceptions: the findings demonstrated negative relationships between autonomy support and two kinds of psychological control, which was stronger with psychological control from PPASS (β ₁ = -.31, p = .000).

Figure 3. Final model defining family education style [View full size] [Descargar tamaño completo]

Discussion

This study has highlighted the complexity of family relationships. Research has defined how parental education styles are employed, however, the key is to try and understand how the relationships between parents’ and children’s behaviours can be understood. The present study began by describing two different models, starting from the basic factors of parental educational styles. In addition, the study faced a significant issue concerning how missing data was managed, a situation that is not uncommon in research like this involving data collection from families. As previous sections have covered, the missing data group was mainly made up of fathers, with specific characteristics. The issue was dealt with and we were able to analyse the results with two samples to ensure the validity of outcomes and to establish possible differences based on the characteristics of this group.

The results confirm the structure of both parenting styles: authoritative parenting shows warmth, structure and autonomy support behaviours, meanwhile a harsh educational style includes behaviours related to psychological control. This finding is similar to previous research (Axpe et al., 2019Axpe, I., Rodríguez-Fernández, A., Goñi, E. & Antonio-Aguirre, I. (2019). Parental socialization styles: The contribution of paternal and maternal affect/communication and strictness to family socialization style. International Journal Of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(12), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16122204; Egeli et al., 2015Egeli, N. A., Rogers, W. T., Rinaldi, C. M. & Cui, Y. (2015). Exploring the factor structure of the revised-parent as a social context questionnaire. Parenting, 15(4), 269-287. https://doi.org/10.1080/15295192.2015.1053334; García et al., 2020García, O. F., Fuentes, M. C., Gracia, E., Serra, E. & García, F. (2020). Parenting warmth and strictness across three generations: Parenting styles and psychosocial adjustment. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(20), 1-18. https://doi.org//10.3390/ijerph17207487; Luo et al., 2021Luo, Y., Chen, F., Zhang, X., Zhang, Y., Zhang, Q., Li, Y., Zhou, Q. & Wang, Y. (2021). Profiles of maternal and paternal parenting styles in Chinese families: Relations to preschoolers’ psychological adjustment. Children and Youth Services Review, 121, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105787; Skinner et al., 2005Skinner, E., Johnson, S. & Snyder, T. (2005). Six dimensions of parenting: A motivational model. Parenting: Science and practice, 5(2), 175-235. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327922par0502_3,). The final model showed that the relationship between parental educational styles and children’s perceptions of parental behaviours is unidirectional. This is an important issue that has been studied before, although with different results. Most previous research has focused on the influence of educational styles in specific childhood disorders and how these may be affected by parental behaviours. However, there are almost no studies focusing on the relationship between basic parental educational dimensions from parental and child perspectives. The originality of the present study is the analysis of this crucial relationship considering fathers’ and mothers’ educational styles.

The data supported the simpler model which relies on a unidirectional relationship from parental educational styles to children’s perceptions about them (Cappa et al., 2011Cappa, K. A., Begle, A. M., Conger, J. C. Dumas, J. & Conger, A. (2011). Bidirectional Relationships between Parenting Stress and Child Coping Competence: Findings from the Pace Study. Journal of Child Family Studies, 20, 334-342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-010-9397-0; Johnco et al. 2021Johnco, C. J., Magson, N. R., Fardouly, J., Oar, E. L., Forbes, M. K., Richardson, C. & Rapee, R. M. (2021). The role of parenting behaviors in the bidirectional and intergenerational transmission of depression and anxiety between parents and early adolescent youth. Depression and anxiety, 38(12), 1256-1266. https://doi.org/10.1002/da.23197; Xerxa et al. 2021Xerxa, Y., Rescolar, L., Van der Ende, J. Hillegers, Manon, Verhulst, F. C. & Tiemeier, H. (2021). From Parent to Child to Parent: Associations Between Parent and Offspring Psychopathology. Child Development, 92(1), 291-307. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13402; Zhou et al., 2021Zhou, A. M. & Buss, K. A. (2021). Trajectories of internalizing symptoms in early childhood: Associations with maternal internalizing symptoms and child physiology. Developmental Psychobiology, 63(5), 1295-1308. https://doi.org/10.1002/dev.22104). This relationship is similar in fathers and mothers. The authoritative educational style impacts children’s perceived autonomy support, however, the opposite does not occur. Because the indices of fit for model 2 were not acceptable, and because the model was more complex, model 1 was selected. The harsh educational style includes more controversial conceptual dimensions —the type of parental control. As result of this, two measures of controlling parenting were included. Our results showed that the harsh parental style had the strongest influence on children’s perceptions of psychological control related to parental behaviours such as threatening punishment, making the child feel guilty for not doing what the parent wants, and forcing the child to be the best. This is a very interesting result because it shows the path to follow in order to examine the concept of parental psychological control more deeply. These findings reinforce the presence of different kinds of psychological control. For instance, in our sample, fathers and mothers with harsh educational styles had less influence on perceived parenting psychological control related to keeping children close, sharing feelings or ideas with parents, and not leaving the family home.

Another strength of the study was the analysis of the stability of the model in both fathers and mothers. Studies including these two perspectives remain scarce. However, the results of our multigroup analysis allow us to note the consistency in both parents. This is particularly evident in the strong covariance between authoritative and harsh styles. When this relationship was not considered, the model did not fit. This is interesting for families with two parents, as having different educational styles can have a positive influence on their children.

The difference in intercepts indicates that if we focus on children’s perceived parenting styles independently from the parental educational style, the child’s perception would be different for each parent. Biological, psychological and social factors may explain how children arrive at their perceptions about their parents’ behavior. We can also question the direct influence of parents over children. In fact, there are differences in “retrospective perception” about fathers’ and mothers’ parenting styles. When children were asked about their parents’ parenting behaviors, studies such as Aldhafri (2020, p.64) reported that children viewed fathers as more authoritative than mothers. Furthermore, these findings can support a new parental educational paradigm, between the traditional model, the unidirectional pattern and the interactive parenting one. It claims the need to take into account the minor`s perceptions to determine the influence of parents’ educational styles (Aroca et al., 2014Aroca, C., Cánovas, P. & Sahuquillo, P. (2014). Los estilos educativos. En P. Cánovas y P. Sahuquillo (coord.), Familias y menores: retos y propuestas pedagógicas (pp. 195-232). Tirant lo Blanch.).

Limitations and Future Research

This study has two main limitations. Firstly, the characteristics of the sample, as the majority of couples were married. It would have been interesting to have a more balanced composition according to civil status in order to determine whether this might affect the relationship between parents’ educational styles and their children’s perceptions.

Secondly, there were different replies according to parental gender. As the missing data analyses showed, many fathers did not complete the whole questionnaire. This forced us to split the sample into two groups —one without missing data and one with missing data— in order to develop an imputation procedure. From a methodological point of view, this was a positive outcome because it allowed the comparison of the same data in two different groups. However, family research should attempt to address this common issue. For instance, setting up more motivational projects for this kind of sample, launching awareness campaigns at schools and parents’ groups so that fathers’ needs can be addressed and updated. Above all, this should be done in line with the social, educational, psychological, and economic characteristics of each group.

Another key point is agreement between parents and children about parenting behaviors. It would be useful to analyze the match between the two perceptions. Some previous studies have not found much equivalence between parents’ and children’s points of view (Aldhafri, 2020Aldhafri, S. (2020). Children’s perceptions of parenting styles: Ten years of research with Omani families. In Families and Social Change in the Gulf Region, 60-79. Taylor and Francis.; Mayuri et al., 2015Mayuri, K., Divya, V. & Kiran, K. (2015). Parenting styles as perceived by parents and children. International Journal of Science and Research, 6, 978-982. https://www.ijsr.net/get_abstract.php?paper_id=ART20176089). This agreement should be examined in the Spanish population in order to explore possible differences. If such differences were confirmed, they would have to be taken into account when designing and developing parental programs. Otherwise, interventions with families may be in error due to the starting point not being the same in parents and children.

References

Resumen

Estilos educativos parentales desde la perspectiva de los progenitores y menores

INTRODUCCIÓN. La construcción de los estilos educativos parentales es diversa y estos se van desarrollando con la educación de los menores. La teoría de la autodeterminación (TAD) establece dos dimensiones para definir los comportamientos parentales: apoyo a la autonomía versus control, estructura versus caos. Partiendo de la TAD, se construyen dos estilos educativos: autoritativo y severo. Este estudio analiza la relación entre la percepción de los progenitores y la de los menores acerca de los estilos educativos parentales y la influencia del género del progenitor. MÉTODO. 2.404 progenitores y 1.234 hijos/hijas procedentes de tres comunidades autónomas españolas cumplimentaron el cuestionario para padres/madres: “Los progenitores como contexto social”, “Escala de apoyo parental percibido” y “Escala de control psicológico orientado a la dependencia”. Todos los instrumentos fueron adaptados al castellano. Se llevó a cabo un path analysis multigrupo para identificar el modelo más adecuado sobre los estilos educativos parentales en la dinámica familiar, teniendo en cuenta el género del progenitor. RESULTADOS. A través de un análisis factorial confirmatorio se verificaron los dos estilos educativos parentales. Se confirma que el modelo ideal era aquel donde no hay bidireccionalidad entre las percepciones de los progenitores acerca de sus conductas parentales y las de sus hijos/hijas. El modelo elegido muestra una unidireccionalidad desde los padres hacia los menores. Siendo necesario mantener la relación entre la percepción del menor sobre el apoyo a la autonomía y el control parental recibidos. La invarianza del modelo basándose en el género fue parcial. DISCUSIÓN. Este estudio revela un modelo donde el estilo autoritativo influye en el apoyo parental percibido por el menor y el estilo severo determina el miedo percibido. Se discute el concepto de control psicológico parental. Por último, se propone un equilibrio, dentro de la familia, entre el estilo autoritativo y el severo.

Palabras clave: Estilos parentales, Relaciones padres hijos, Influencia parental, Estructura familiar.

Résumé

Les styles d’éducation parentale au regard des parents et des enfants

INTRODUCTION. La construction des styles d’éducation parentale est diverse et ceux-ci évoluent au fur et à mesure avec l’éducation des enfants. La théorie de l’autodétermination (TDA) établit deux dimensions pour définir les comportements parentaux : le soutien à l’autonomie versus contrôle et structure versus chaos. Sur la base de cette théorie deux styles éducatifs sont construits : l’autoritaire et le sévère. Cette étude analyse la relation entre la perception des parents et celle des enfants à propos des styles d’éducation parentale, ainsi que l’influence de la dimension de genre. MÉTHODE. 2404 parents et 1234 enfants, issus de trois communautés autonomes espagnoles, ont répondu au questionnaire sur la parentalité : “Parents en tant que contexte social”, “Échelle de soutien parental perçu”, “Échelle de contrôle psychologique orienté vers la dépendance”. Tous les instruments ont été adaptés à l’espagnol. Une analyse de cheminement multigroupe a été effectuée pour identifier le modèle le plus adéquat parmi les styles d’éducation parentale dans la dynamique familiale, en considérant le genre des parents. RÉSULTATS. Une analyse factorielle confirmatoire à permis de vérifier les deux styles d’éducation parentale. Il est confirmé que le modèle idéal est celui où il n’y a pas de bidirectionnalité entre les perceptions des parents sur leurs propres comportements et celles des leurs enfants. Le modèle choisi montre l’unidirectionalité qui va des parents vers les enfants. La relation entre la perception par l’enfant du soutien à l’autonomie et le contrôle parental reçu doit être maintenue. L’invariance du modèle en fonction du genre a été partielle. DISCUSSION. Cette étude révèle un modèle où le style autoritaire influence le soutien parental perçu par l’enfant et le style sévère détermine la peur perçue. Le concept de contrôle psychologique parental est aussi abordé. Enfin, au sein de la famille un équilibre, entre le style autoritaire et le style sévère, est proposé.

Mots-clés: Styles de parentalité, Relations parents-enfants, Influence parentale, Structure familiale.

Authors profiles

Mercedes Inda-Caro (corresponding author)

PhD, Associate Professor at the University of Oviedo (Spain) with lectures in the Degrees of Pedagogy, Primary Education Teaching and Psychology; and in the Master’s Degree in Lower Secondary Education, Upper Secondary Education and Vocational Education and Training and Master’s Degree in Intervention and Socio-educational Research. She is member of the the Spanish Society of Pedagogy. Researcher of ASOCED (Sociological and Cultural Analysis of School and Educational Processes) Research Team. Her main lines or research are : Family and Gender, Teaching effectiveness and, Gender and STEM. Coordinador at the University of Oviedo of the interuniversity PhD Program in Equity and Innovation in Education.

ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4752-3258

Email: indamaria@uniovi.es

Corresponding author : Facultad de Formación del Profesorado y Educación Despacho 314 Campus Llamaquique. C/ Aniceto Sela, s/n, 33005, Oviedo, España.

Carmen-María Fernández-García

PhD, Associate Professor at the Department of Educational Sciences at the University of Oviedo (Spain) with lectures in the Degree of Pedagogy and in the Master’s Degree in Lower Secondary Education, Upper Secondary Education and Vocational Education and Training. She is member of the Spanish Society of Comparative Education, the Spanish Society of Pedagogy and the ASOCED (Sociological and Cultural Analysis of School and Educational Processes) Research Group. Her main lines or research are: teaching effectiveness, comparative education and family and education.

ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6314-355x

Email: fernandezcarmen@uniovi.es

María-Paulina Viñuela-Hernández

PhD, Professor at the Department of Educational Sciences at the University of Oviedo (Spain) with lectures in the Degree of Pedagogy and in the Master’s Degree in Lower Secondary Education, Upper Secondary Education and Vocational Education and Training. She is member of the ASOCED (Sociological and Cultural Analysis of School and Educational Processes) Research Group.

ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9413-432X

Email: paulina@uniovi.es