The Effects of Parenting Style on Motivationand Academic Success

Melissa Holt and Cassandra BergerCalifornia State University, Channel Islands

PREVIOUS RESEARCH◦ Self Determination Theory & Intrinsic, Extrinsic, and

Amotivation ▫ Authoritative style had greater intrinsic

motivation values in areas of mental, interactive and physical elements to a person’s existence

▫ Aids the individual towards achievements in abilities such as skill building, educational learning, and autonomy (Deci & Ryan, 2000)

◦ College students (N=264) ▫ Examined Baumrind’s (1966) parenting styles,

Authority Questionnaire (Buri, 1991), Academic Motivation Scale-College Version (Vallerand, 1992), GPA, Self-Efficacy and Study Skills Questionnaire (SESS).

Parental control styles (Authoritative), mediating positive effects stem from intrinsic motivation that affect academic performance, self-efficacy, and self-esteem (Chandler, Turner, Heffer, 2009).

PREVIOUS RESEARCH◦ High school students in Malaysia (N=493)

▫ Findings showed support that the Authoritative parenting style has a positive effect on areas which involve a student’s self-concept and academic performance in school (Ishak, Lau, Low, 2012).

◦ Undergraduate students (N=759; 397) from six separate Canadian campuses ▫ Findings: Student perception of university support

provides similarities to parental support found in Baumrind’s theory (1966)

▫ High school students in the Bay Area (N=7,836)◦ Findings: Authoritarian parenting had the strongest

effect on a student’s grades, but authoritative parenting produced the children with the best grades (Dornbusch, Ritter, Leiderman, Roberts & Fraleigh, 1987)

REASONS FOR RESEARCH

REASONS FOR RESEARCH

◦ Parental styles (Authoritative/Flexible, Authoritarian, Permissive) (Baumrind, 1966) in early childhood development play teach children at an early age types of motivation found within the Self Determination Theory (Intrinsic, extrinsic, and amotivation) (Deci & Ryan, 2000).

◦ Research has supported the idea that the authoritative parenting style is the most favorable, with the most well-adjusted and competent children having benefitted from its influence (Baumrind, 1967)

REASONS FOR RESEARCH

◦ Both Parenting Styles and SDT help guide self-worth, channel positive communication styles for interacting with others, achievement in school, and can serve as a possible mediator for individual success across the lifespan (Chandler, Turner, Heffer, 2009).

◦ Previous support has been found in areas of academic and psychological motivation that influences areas of success, social interaction, and academic performance in high school and college populations.

HYPOTHESISChildren raised according to Baumrind's authoritative parenting style (1966) will show higher levels of academic performance (GPA), and academic and intrinsic motivation than their peers.

SAMPLE POPULATION DEMOGRAPHICS67 Southern California University undergraduates (68% women, 31.9% men)Ages 19 - 48 (M = 24.13, SD = 4.22)Majority of students were Caucasian (44.6%) or Hispanic (40%)

METHODSMaterialsParental Authority Questionnaire (PAQ)

Employed a 5 point Likert-type scale, with 1 being “strongly disagree” and 5 being “strongly agree,” addressing sentiments regarding 30 statements.

Used to determine the style of parenting employed by the parents of the participants.College version of the Academic Motivation Scale (AMS-C 28) Employed a 7 point scale with 1 being “does not correspond at all” and 7 being “corresponds exactly,” and consisted of 28 items. Used to determine where a college student’s motivation comes from.

METHODS

ProceduresParticipants were administered the questionnaires in a classroom and given a brief statement that detailed the purpose of the questionnaires. They were given as much time as they needed to complete them.

FINDINGS◦ The results examined no significant relationship between◦ Academic Student Motivation (CollegeMOT) & Baumrind (1966) parenting prototypes; ◦ authoritative; r (61) = .127, p >.05,two tailed (not supported)◦ authoritarian; r (61) = .167, p >.05, two tailed (not supported)

◦ Academic Student Motivation (CollegeMOT) (N=61) & GPA (N=67)◦ r= -.124, p>.05, two tailed (not supported)

◦ Baumrind (1966) parenting prototypes (N=61) & GPA (N=67)◦ authoritarian; r= .014, p>.05, two tailed (not supported)◦ permissive; r= -.134, p>.05, two tailed (not supported)

Place your screenshot here

Indicators of Success in College Students

FINDINGS◦Significant correlations were found

between:◦ Permissive Parenting and College

Motivation r (61) = - .260 ◦ Authoritarian Parenting and GPA r (61) =

- .301

“

DISCUSSION◦ Parental influence through authoritative upbringing of a

child was not supported

◦ Authoritative parenting style was not supported as directly having a positive effect on areas which involve a student’s self-concept and academic performance in school (Ishak, Lau, Low, 2012)

◦ Authoritative parenting styles (Baumrind, 1966/1996), academic college motivation, and GPA was found to be non-significant and differs from what was hypothesized.

◦ Results that authoritative parenting increased levels of intrinsic motivation contributing to self-esteem and self efficacy and influenced academic achievement found by Chandler, Heffer, Turner (2009) were not found to be supported.

“DISCUSSION◦ There is support for the Authoritarian and Permissive

parenting styles being inferior to the Authoritative parenting style as they were both found to correlate negatively with measurements of student success.

DISCUSSION

PERMISSIVENegative correlation with College Motivation

AUTHORITATIVE

No negative correlations found

AUTHORITARIANNegative correlation with GPA

REFERENCES

◦ Baumrind, D., (1996). Effects of Authoritative Parental Control on Child Behavior. Child development 37(4): 887-907

◦ Baumrind, D. (1967). Child Care Practices Anteceding Three Patterns of Preschool Behavior. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 75(1), 43-88. Retrieved September 14, 2015, from http://www.cla.csulb.edu/departments/hdev/facultyinfo/documents/Baumrind_childcarepracticesantecedingthreepatternsofpreschoolbehavior.pdf.

◦ Chandler, M., Heffer, R., Turner, E.A., (2009). The influence of Parenting Styles, Academic Motivation, and Self-Efficacy on Academic  

◦     Performance in College Students. Journal of College Student Development 50(3):337-346

◦ Deci, E.L., Ryan, R.M., (2000). Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classical Definitions and New Directions. Contemporary Educational

◦     Psychology,25:54-67◦ Gauvain, M., & Huard, R. D. (1999). Family interaction, parenting style, and the

development of planning: A longitudinal analysis using archival data. Journal Of Family Psychology, 13(1), 75-92. doi:10.1037/0893-3200.13.1.75.

◦ Ishak, Z., Lau, P.L., Low, S.F, (2012). Parenting style as a Moderator for Students’ Academic Achievement. J Sci Educ Technol

◦     12:487-493◦ Strage, A., & Brandt, T. S. (1999). Authoritative parenting and college students'

academic adjustment and success. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(1), 146-156. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.91.1.146.

◦ Vallerand, J.R., Pelletier, L.G., Blais, M.R., Briere, N.M., Senecal, C.B., Vallieres, E.F. (1992). Academic Motivation Scale

◦     College Version (AMS-C 28). Educational and Psychological Measurements, 52,53

IMAGE REFERENCES

◦ http://smallbusiness.chron.com/examples-intrinsic-workplace-motivation-11382.html

◦ https://sustainingcommunity.wordpress.com/2015/02/04/what-are-parenting-styles/

◦ http://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/news/local/communities/2014/09/05/college-students-east-side/15154251/

Thanks!QUESTIONS?