Chapter 1

THE PROBLEM AND ITS SCOPE

Introduction

Parenting style is a psychological construct representing strategies that parents use

in their child rearing (Vander, 2013). The construct parenting style has been largely

influenced by Baumrind’s (1971) conceptualization of authoritarian, permissive and

authoritative parenting styles which encompasses various characteristics such as maturity,

communication styles, nurturance, warmth and involvement (Darling & Steinberg, 1993).

Authoritarian parenting style suggested that children are expected to be submissive to

their parent’s demands, while parents were expected to be strict, directive, and

emotionally detached. Permissive parenting style like the name implies connotes less

parental restrictions or limits on the child. The implication of this is that children are

expected to regulate their own activities. Authoritative parenting style similar to

authoritarian parenting entailed clear and firm direction to children. However, the

difference between the two similar parenting styles lies in moderating discipline with

warmth, reason, and flexibility as ensued by authoritative parenting. From the different

types of parenting style, Asian parents studies have shown exhibit authoritarian parenting

style (Kawamura, Frost, &Marmatz, 2002; Pong, Hao, & Gardner, 2005).

Parenting styles appears certain influences on children’s behavior. Parenting

styles has a great effect in their socio-emotional development. According Kim et al.

(2008) explained that because of pressure experienced by the children might develop an

anxiety disorder. Stated by Wijsbroek et al. (2011), parental behavior control may

decrease children’ self efficacy. Another study, Hoeve et al. ( 2009), indicated that

1
behavior control has a strong link to violence. Commonly, the impact of parenting style

in socio emotional development brought consequence in the behavior of the children. The

children would rebel to their parents on the parenting style they made to adopt. Asserted

by Hoeve, Blokland et al. (2008), parenting style may linked to serious persistent

delinquency such as murder, rape, robbery and selling hard drugs.

Dapitan City, Zamboanga del Norte particularly the four different schools

namely: Tamion, Lawaan, Sulangon and Kauswagan which are commonly having

difficulty in molding their child’s behavior. Instances were happened, a child who does

not have motivation to go in school because of the deficient of parenting style were the

parents need to cope up. Children must have good parenting style in order to develop

their self especially their socio emotional aspect. In line with the above, the study will be

conducted to investigate possible effects upon the parenting style to preschoolers’ socio-

emotional development.

Theoretical Frameworks
The study is anchored on Bowen’s Family system theory on human behavior

(2001). The theory views the family as an emotional unit and uses systems thinking to

describe the complex interactions in the unit.It is the nature of a family that its members

are intensely connected emotionally. Often people feel distant or disconnected from their

families, but this is more feeling than fact. Family members so profoundly affect each

other’s thoughts, feelings, and actions that it often seems as if people are living under the

same “emotional skin.” People solicit each other’s attention, approval, and support and

react to each other’s needs, expectations, and distress. This theory aims to explain how

families operate through an emotional interdependence. In other words, families are made

2
up of semi-autonomous members who influence one another. Bowen discovered the

reciprocal nature of family relationships.

The connectedness and reactivity make the functioning of family members

interdependent. A change in one person’s functioning is predictably followed by

reciprocal changes in the functioning of others. The emotional interdependence

presumably evolved to promote the cohesiveness and cooperation families require

protecting, shelter, and feed their members. Heightened tension, however, can intensify

these processes that promote unity and teamwork, and this can lead to problems. When

family members get anxious, the anxiety can escalate by spreading infectiously among

them. As anxiety goes up, the emotional connectedness of family members becomes

more stressful than comforting. Eventually, one or more members feel overwhelmed,

isolated, or out of control.  The emotional system affects most human activity and is the

principal driving force in the development of clinical problems. Knowledge of how the

emotional system operates in one’s family, work, and social systems reveals new and

more effective options for solving problems in each of these areas.

The following are the parenting styles which have possible effects on

preschoolers’ socio-emotional development. These are the common parenting style

employed by parents.

The first parenting style is authoritative parenting style. It is characterized by a

high degree of responsiveness to children and moderate levels of demandingness and

warmth.  These parents believe they are responsible for pleasing their children, but within

limits.  These parents tend to display high degrees of interaction with their children and

are more likely than either of the previous styles to display bilateral constraints, in which

3
both the child and parents are expected to adapt their behavior to please the other.

Authoritative parents also tend to grant their children more freedom than parents using

the authoritarian or tough love styles.  They expect their children to be independent, but

also set firm limits on what their children are allowed to do.  These parents are also more

willing to negotiate with their children.  When their children desire to exceed the

boundaries set by their parents, authoritative parents evaluate the situation and consider

the child's wishes and reasons, as well as the risks.  They will listen to their child's

reasons and may then either agree to modify the rule, negotiate with the child, or

explain why things must be as they are able to learn (Oscar et.al, 2002).

The second is authoritarian style of parenting. This style is summarized by the

phrase, "Children should be seen and not heard."  These parents believe it is their

responsibility to provide for their children and that their children have no right to tell the

parent how best to do this.  Adults are expected to know from experience what is really in

the child's best interest and so adult views are allowed to take precedence over child

desires.  Children are perceived to know what they want but not necessarily what is best

for them.  As a result, these parents tend to be highly demanding, and display low levels

of responsiveness in their interactions with children.  These parents also tend to display

low levels of communication with their children.  And most of the communication is a

one way street, in which the parents tell the children what to do.  Most of their

interactions with their children are characterized by the imposition of unilateral

constraints, in which the child must do what the parent wants but parents need not do

what the child wants.  In addition, they tend to perceive warmth as a relatively

4
unimportant dimension of child rearing.  As a result, authoritarian parents are often

perceived as stern, inflexible, and even harsh (Duhanoo et.al, 2001).  

Permissive. This is the third parenting style parents. Parents of this style believed

that they are responsible for making sure their children are happy.  Sometimes these

parents have had a rough time as children and have decided that they will do everything

they can to make their children happy.  As a result, permissive indulgent parents tend to

be highly responsive to their children's needs and desires, and display low levels of

demandingness.  In effect, these parents are extremely supportive, to the extent that the

child winds up taking control of the situation.  In many ways, this style is the opposite of

the authoritarian style.  Permissive indulgent parents often believe that, "Nothing is too

good for my child (Baumrind 1971)

Socio- emotional development. The child’s experience, expression, and

management of emotions and the ability to established positive and rewarding

relationships with others (Cohen 2005). It encompasses both intra – and interpersonal

processes. The core features of emotional development include the ability to identify and

understand one’s feeling, to accurately read and comprehend emotional states in others,

to manage strong emotions and their expression in a constructive manner, to develop

empathy for others, and to establish and maintain relationships. (National Scientific

Council on the Developing child 2004).

The figure that follows on the next page shows the schema of the study. The first

box contains the parenting styles which are the authoritative, permissive and authoritarian

as independent variables. The second box contains the dependent variable which is the

preschoolers socio- emotional development. The arrow pointing from the first box to the

5
second box denotes the effects of parenting styles to preschoolers’ socio-emotional

development. An arrow pointing from the third box which contains the income, highest

educational attainment, and time spent by parents to their children to the first box shows

the possible effects of respondents profile to parenting styles.

6
 Parenting Styles
1. Authoritative Preschoolers’ Socio-
2 .Permissive emotional
3. Authoritarian Development

1.1. Income
1.2. Highest
Educational
Attainment
1.3. Time spent by
parents to their
children

Figure 1 Schema of the Study

7
Statement of the Problem

This study aimed to determine the effects of parenting styles to preschoolers’

socio-emotional development particularly Barangay Tamion, Sulangon, Lawaanand

Kauswagan during the School Year 2015-2016.

Specifically, this research sought to answer the following questions:

1. What is the profile of the respondents in terms of:

1.1. Income;

1.2. Highest Educational Attainment; and

1.3. Time spent by parents to their children?

2. What are the parenting styles of parents among preschoolers in terms of:

2.1 Authoritative;

2.2 Authoritarian; and

2.3 Permissive;

3. What is the level of preschooler’s socio-emotional development?

4. Is there a significant difference on the parenting styles when analyzed as to:

4.1 Income;

4.2 highest educational attainment;

4.3time spent of parents to children?

5. Do parenting styles affect preschoolers’ socio-emotional development?

8
Hypotheses

The following hypotheses will be tested:

Ho1. There is no significant difference on parenting styles when analyzed as to

income, highest educational attainment and time spent of parents to children.

Ho2. Parenting styles do not affect preschoolers’ socio-emotional development.

Significance of the Study

This study is important in many ways particularly to the following:

Children. The result of the study will give benefit to the children in putting up

the good way of parenting in a socio- emotional development. They will be able to know

the respective style in catering their disparity of personality and give importance of their

weaknesses towards self – enhancement. The result of the study also will give children-

parents motivational factors in arousing their potentials and capabilities.

Parents. The study is significant to the parents in determining what parenting

styles’ do they are going to use in order to have a good development of their child. It is

also the avenue for parents in their children.

Teachers. The result of the study would great help to the teachers when coping

up the strength and weaknesses of their learner. It will be serve a base line in promoting

good ideal in teaching children with diversified attitude.

Future Researchers. This will serve as the starting point and can be a perfect

training ground in the field of research. In terms of the learners, this will be a reflection

for them to realize the essence of parenting styles’ in a socio- emotional development.

9
Scope and Delimitation of the study

The focus of this study is to determine the effects of parenting styles to

preschoolers’ socio-emotional development particularly at Barangay Sulangon, Tamion,

Lawaan and Kauswagan during School Year 2015-2016. Specifically, the independent

variable will determine the Parenting Style. The independent variables which are the

different Parental Styles, is comprised of three types namely: Authoritarian,

Authoritative, and Permissive style. The limitation of this Study covers the accessibility,

the collaboration, willingness to participate, and the honesty of our respondents in

answering the questionnaires. As well as we limit our data to respondents living with

their biological parents. Limitations also include the availability of the data needed to be

collected from the adviser’s of the preschool students. The parents of preschooler’s of

Barangay Sulangon, Tamion, Lawaan and Kauswaganas the suitable respondents whose

census is enough to assess the validity and reliability of the study.

Definition of Terms

The following terms are operationally defined to help better understanding the

study.

Authoritarian Parenting style. This term describes parent who shows low

support, control their children and request them to follow specific rules. The lower

responsiveness and higher demandingness are two elements that describe authoritarian

parenting. Parents who scored higher on demandingness and lower on responsiveness are

considered as authoritarian parents.

Authoritative Parenting Style. The terms refer to parents who are responsive,

supporting, and attached to their children. Responsive and demandingness are two

10
elements that describe authoritative parenting. Parents who scored higher on both

responsiveness and demandingness are considered authoritative parents.

Emotional Problems. This term describes as a child who experiencing anxious,

depressed, having somatic complaints and withdrawn from social activities (McCrae,

2009).

Parenting style. The terms refer to a psychological construct representing

standard strategies that parents use in their child hearing.

Permissive Parenting Style. This term describes parents who exhibit behaviors

that highly support their children and are very lenient to their children. High

responsiveness and lack of demandingness are two elements that describe permissive

parenting. Parents who more receptive and less demanding are considered permissive

parents.

Socio- emotional development. In this study, the terms refer to the child’s

experience, expression, and management of emotions and the ability to establish positive

and rewarding relationships with others (Cohen 2005).

11
 Chapter 2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE AND STUDIES

This chapter presents the literature and studies that are useful in coming up with

the total concept of the study.

Literature Review

Parenting style is one of the variables that have been studied extensively in human

development (Baldwin, Mclntyre, & Hardaway, 2007). It is considered an important

determinant of several aspects of children’s outcome (Gadeyne, Ghesquiere, &Onghena,

2004). The notion have been related to children and adolescent academic achievement

(Lamborn, Mounts, Steinberg, &Dornbusch, 1991), optimism (Baldwin, Mclntyre, &

Hardaway, 2007), confidence (Strage& Brandt, 1999), motivation (Gonzalez &Wolters,

2006), externalizing problem behaviour and attention problems (Gadeyne, Ghesquiere,

&Onghena, 2004).

Parenting style depends on the behavior and attitude of parents. Parenting style is

a psychological construct which represented standard strategies parents use in raising

their children. The term is a complex activity that includes many specific behaviors that

work individually and collectively to influence the child. Two major variables identified

by Baumrind (1971) centered on parenting styles and child outcomes. One of them was

the responsiveness of parents to their child’s needs in a reasonable, nurturing and

supportive way. Parenting style captures two important elements of parenting: parental

responsiveness and parental demand (Maccoby& Martin, 1983). In spite of the agreement

on the effects of parenting practices on child’s development, many questions about the

construct parenting style remain unanswered. Particular pressing issues were the

12
variability in the effects of parenting style as a function of a child's cultural background

and the processes through which parenting style influences a child's development, and

operationalization of parenting. Drawing on historical review, the authors presented a

model that integrated two traditions in socialization research. The study of specific

parenting practices coupled with that of global parental characteristics. Many authors

proposed that parenting style was best conceptualized as a context that moderates the

influence of specific parenting practices on the child. It was argued that only by

maintaining the distinction between parenting style and parenting practice can researchers

address questions and concerns on socialization. A strong relationship between parental

involvement and children’s school achievements has been reported in the literature.

Research has shown that the relationship between parenting style and academic

achievement found that psychosocial maturity (expansion of social knowledge and

wellbeing) mediated this relationship. In other words, authoritative parenting impacts

psychosocial maturity, which in turn, influences how students perform in school.

Conversely, psychosocial maturity was measured by self-reliance (control over life),

work orientation (students work skills & work goals), and self identity (self esteem & life

goals). Each of these variables, both separately and collectively correlated with higher

grades. Parental involvement has emerged as one of today’s most important topics in

educational circles.

Studies

According to Jeynes, (2000), In her study entitled “Impact of Parental

Involvement and its effects on Specific aspect of Parenting”. The study revealed that the

impact of parental involvement on the academic achievement of minority children was

13
significant for all marginal groups. For all the groups, parental involvement as a whole,

affected all the academic variables by at least two tenths of a standard deviation unit.

However, the results indicated that parental involvement affected the academic

achievement of minority students (Jeynes, 2003). Prior studies have noted the importance

of parenting styles and academic achievement in schools.

A study of Leung, Lau and Lam (1998), entitled “The relationship between

parenting styles and academic achievement in Hongkong”. States and Australia revealed

that Australian parents were lower than both Chinese and American parents in academic

authoritarianism. Chinese parents were higher in general authoritarianism, but lower in

academic and general authoritativeness. All groups, academic achievement was

negatively related to academic authoritarianism, but showed no relationship with

academic authoritativeness. Academic achievement www.ccsenet.org/ijps International

Journal of Psychological Studies Vol. 2, No. 2; December 2010 Published by Canadian

Center of Science and Education 219 was positively related to general authoritarianism in

Hong Kong and among children from the United States and Australia whose parents did

not have any college education. Academic achievement was positively related to general

authoritativeness only among the two English-speaking groups. In addition, appropriate

forms of parental control related positively with parental hostility, while maladaptive

forms of parent-child interaction related negatively to classroom-specific measures of

social responsibility (Feldman &Wentzel, 1990).

Another study by Cohen, Deborah, Rice and Janet (1997) on children in grade 8-9

and their parentsIOI (aged 26–45 yrs), parenting styles were associated with academic

achievement. Ratings of parenting styles from 386 matched parent-child pairs were

14
analyzed for parent and student classification of parents as authoritative, authoritarian,

permissive, or mixed parenting styles. Agreement on parenting styles between parents

and their children was poor. Students perceived their parents as less authoritative, less

permissive and more authoritarian than parents considered them self. High grades were

associated with children and parents perception of higher authoritativeness, low

permissiveness, and low authoritarianism. Results provided further evidence that

parenting styles and adolescents' perceptions were associated with children’s

achievement. Child perception was strongly associated with grades than was parent

perception.

According to Greespan (2006), Baumrind combined the best elements of

permissive parenting (high warmth) with the best elements of authoritarian parenting

(high control) to create the authoritative parenting styles. The qualities of the

authoritative are responsive, supportive, demanding and guidance (Baumrind, 1966,

1971; Hoeve et al, 2009). Parents with an authoritative parents understand their children’s

and teach them how to regulate themselves and guide them to learn from any mistake

they make (Marsiglia, Walczyk, Buboltz, &Griffit-Ross, 2007). They show warmth, are

responsive, and emotionally supportive of their children (Darling & Steinberg, 1993;

Suldo& Huebner, 2004) and they encourage communication, so both parties feel satisfied

with each other (Steinberg, Mounts, Lamborn, &Dornbusch, 1991).

Authoritative parents encourage children to be independent and develop their own

identities, but at the same time they also provide rules and boundaries for their children

(Grolnick&Pomerantz, 2009; Takeuchi & Takeuchi, 2008). Due to the guidance children

receive, once authoritative parents set rules and guidelines, the children tend to follow

15
them consistently (Timpano et al., 2010). Authoritative parents recognize and set

expectations appropriate for a child’s developmental stage. Parents are firm with the rules

and give clear reasons to children about why they have to follow them (Baumrind, 1966,

1971). Parents with an authoritative style more openly discuss problems with their

children (Baumrind, 1978). Two way communication exists between parents and

children, which helps develop good parent-child relationships (Kim &Rohner, 2002).

One might say that authoritative parents treat children with respect and give reasons why

they punish or reward their children.

In the study of (Furnham& Cheng, 2000; Steinberg, Blatt-Eisengart, &Cauffman,

2006) entitled “The Effects of Authoritative Parenting Style on Children’s Emotions and

Behaviors”. The study revealed the relationship between children’s development of

emotion, cognition, and the parenting style they received. Other researchers have focused

on parenting style effects on children’s behavior (Knutson et al., 2005; Schaffer et al.,

2009). Their research showed that there is a relationship between parenting style and

children’s emotions and behavior. In this section, the researcher will explain the effects

of authoritative parenting style on children’s emotions and behaviors.

According to Melnick and Hinshaw (2000), authoritative characteristics shown by

parents such as affection, monitoring, and stability have impacts on children’s emotions.

One multi-wave longitudinal study that looked at the relationship between authoritative

parenting behavior, child emotional development, and child behavioral style was

conducted by Zhou, Eisenberg, Losoya, Fabes, et al. (2002). Children were followed

from kindergarten through third grade. The researchers found that those children who

received authoritative 20 parenting exhibited higher empathy toward both negative

16
emotions and positive emotions. Another study looked at children’s effortful control and

their externalizing behavior (Eisenberg, Zhou, Spinrad, Valiente et al., 2005). They found

that parents who displayed empathy elements such as more warmth and less punishment

toward children between ages seven and twelve had children who showed more effortful

control and had less externalizing problems two and four years later. One might say that

the children learn to feel empathy from their authoritative parents.

Recent researchers such as Liem et al. (2010) investigated whether authoritative

parenting during childhood correlates with young adult depression four years later. The

results of their study supported their hypotheses that authoritative parenting during

childhood does negatively correlate with young adult depression symptoms (Liem et al.,

2010). In addition, Milevsky, Schlechter, Netter, and Keehn (2007) found that children of

authoritative parents scored lower on depression when compared to children raised by

other parenting styles. Furthermore, Lamborn et al. (1991) and Steinberg et al. (1994)

found that authoritative parenting reduces the possibility of developing depression among

children. Also, Jackson and Schemes (2005) found that authoritative parenting may

contribute to less depression among children. Overall, one might conclude that

authoritative parenting will lead to less depression among children.

Suldo and Huebner (2004) investigated the role of authoritative parenting on life

satisfaction. They assessed 1201 early, middle, and late adolescents between 11 to 19

years old from middle and high school. They used the dimensions of strictness-

supervision, social support/involvement, and psychological autonomy granting to

measure parenting style. Their results found correlations among all authoritative

17
dimensions with adolescents’ life satisfaction, with parental social support showing the

highest correlations (Suldo&Huebner, 2004).

A study by Milevsky, Schlechter, Klem, and Kehl (2008) also found that children

raised by authoritative parents (either one or both) obtained higher scores on life

satisfaction. Life satisfaction was measured by asking the participants to respond to the

Likert scale from 1 to 7, where 1 represented being extremely dissatisfied and 7 being

extremely satisfied. Thus we can see that there tends to be a high correlation between

authoritative parenting and life satisfaction amongst children.

Study by (Baumrind, 1991),children raised by authoritative parents are better able

to develop social competence compared to other children When authoritatively raised

children grow up, they become adults who are ready to adjust in the community and

know what is socially acceptable (Baumrind, 1967). As one can see, Baumrind found

authoritative parenting leads to better adjustment in community even though children in

authoritative homes are from an individualistic culture because children from

authoritative homes received acceptance and responsiveness from their parents that helps

children develop social competence (Kazemi et al., 2010; Veneziano, 2003).

According to Baumrind (1966, 1971), permissive parents exhibit non punitive,

acceptance, and affirmative behavior toward their children’s needs, desires, and actions.

There are positive and negative elements of permissive parenting. Hoeve et 31 al. (2009)

found that permissive parents show high responsiveness and support for their children,

while at the same time having low or little control of the children. Gfroerer et al. (2004)

emphasized that permissive parents are more liberal and give full autonomy to children

and support what children like to do. Parents are nurturing and accepting and are

18
responsive to the child’s needs and wishes. Permissive parents encourage children to do

whatever they want to do (Timpano et al., 2010). According to Marsiglia et al. (2007),

permissive parents give their children freedom to act without monitoring and setting

limits. Permissive parents hope that by giving their children freedom, their relationship

with their children will become closer (Marsiglia et al., 2007). Thus, children of

permissive parents often plan and regulate their own activities at a young age without

parental attention. Baumrind (1991) stated that because children of permissive parents

always do their activities independently, these children are more mature and more

responsible. Lee et al. (2006) found that while parents with a permissive parenting style

are responsive to the children, they fail to set expectations or boundaries for their

children. Permissive parenting style is potentially unsafe for children because it is

unsuccessful in developing good judgment among children (Milevsky, Schlechter, Netter,

&Keehn, 2007).

In summary, one might say that permissive parents show less care and attention to

their children. The children grow up alone without receiving full attention from their

parents. This affects their development later in life where they might have low selfesteem

and lack of confidence when compared to their peers. Even though parents encourage

them to do whatever they like to do, a small child still needs guidance from parents. The

children also find it difficult to choose what is right and what is wrong. The 32 next

section will describe the specific effects of permissive parenting on children’s emotions

and behaviors.

Study of (Knutson, DeGarmo, & Reid, 2004; Liam et al., 2010; William, Dagnan,

Perez-Edgar, Henderson et al., 2009), entitled the Effects of Permissive Parenting Style

19
on Children’s Emotions and Behaviors. When reviewing the research on parenting style,

it is difficult to find a study that singled out permissive parenting style. Most parenting

scholars tend to do research about authoritative and authoritarian parenting styles or they

focus their research on the relationship among parenting styles (Joshi et al., 2009;

Milevsky et al., 2007). Despite this gap in the research, it has been found that the

permissive parenting style can cause problematic behavior among children (Baumrind,

1996; Joshi et al., 2009).

A study by Joshi et al. (2009) found that the association between parenting style

and depression is not consistent. They found that for adolescents raised by permissive

parents there were negative and weak correlations with depression than adolescents

raised by authoritative parents. Interestingly, they found that highly permissive parents

had adolescents with lower levels of depression than authoritative parents. In the same

line, Milevsky et al. (2007) found that adolescents of permissive mothers scored higher

on depression than adolescents of authoritative mothers. However, Baumrind (1971)

argued that permissive parenting has both positive and negative effects on children.

According to Gfroerer et al. (2004) permissive parents are more supportive of what their

children want to do and this attitude decreased depression among children. In contrast, 33

Milevsky et al. (2007) found that permissive parenting contributes to depression among

children because when parents are too lenient and allowed whatever the children wish to

do, the children have no focus and might do something inappropriate. One may predict

that permissive parenting results in more problematic children’s behavior.

Beron, and Rosen (2009) and Knutson et al. (2004) found that permissive

parenting style has positive correlations with antisocial behavior. As in authoritarian

20
parenting, several researchers found that permissive parenting may cause antisocial

behavior such as rebelliousness and disruption among children (Grogan-Kaylor, 2005;

Schaffer et al., 2009). One might say that permissive parents seem to have no discipline,

are too laissez-faire and allow their children to do whatever the children want. Parents

seem to not care if their children may exhibit troublesome behavior which may be

rejected by society. Overall, permissive parenting contributes to depression and antisocial

behavior among children. Parents with a permissive parenting style are too lenient and

tolerant of their children without setting limits. This situation may cause children to lack

the ability to differentiate what is good and bad for them. Permissive parents are relaxed

and inconsistent in providing feedback to their children which may cause children to feel

confused about what is good and bad. In permissive homes, children may think that they

can do whatever they want and do not learn to respect anything. The next section is the

fourth parenting style; neglectful parenting style.

Study of (Knutson et al., 2004), entitled “the Effects of Neglectful Parenting Style

on Children’s Emotions and Behaviors”. Neglectful parenting style also has an effect on

children’s emotions and behaviors Children of neglectful or uninvolved parents may

develop mental health problems (Spinrad et al., 2004). The effect of neglectful parenting

style on depression and life satisfaction. Milevsky et al. (2007) in their study on the

relationship among mothers’ parenting styles, depression and life satisfaction revealed

that adolescents who received neglectful parenting from their mothers obtained lower

scores on both self-esteem and life satisfaction and got higher depression scores than

children receiving the other three parenting types from their mothers. Others found that

neglectful parenting led to dissatisfaction, depression, and sadness among children

21
(Spinrad, Eisenberg, Harris, Hanish et al., 2004). The effect of neglectful parenting style

on aggression and antisocial behavior According to the U. S. Department of Health and

Human Services, Administration and Children, Youth, and Families in 2002 (U.S.

Department of Health and Human Services), neglect is the most common parenting

pattern experienced by children in the United States (Knutson et al., 2005). Following the

2002 survey conducted by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Knutson

et al. (2005) conducted a study regarding parenting styles and found as well that a large

number of parents in 36 U.S. exhibit the neglectful parenting style. Given the argument

that there is a relationship between neglectful parenting behavior and children’s

aggression and antisocial behavior, Knutson et al. posited that the increase in aggressive

and antisocial behaviors in the U.S. is linked to this neglectful parenting style. In the

Knutson, DeGarmo, and Reid (2004) study a year before that, they found that neglect and

harsh discipline are related to socioeconomic problems and adolescent behavior

problems, especially aggression and antisocial behavior. Knutson et al. (2004) found that

neglectful parenting, which included supervisory neglect, and care neglect, contributed to

children’s aggression and antisocial behavior.

. Steinberg et al. (2006) entitled “The effect of neglectful parenting on attitudes”

reported that adolescents from neglectful homes exhibited less desired attitudes such as

disrespect, immorality, aggression and violence. Interestingly, according to Steinberg et

al. (2006), these adolescents reported low conflict with their peers because they spend

more time with peers than with their parents. One might say that neglected children have

a tendency to show a disrespectful attitude towards their parents. This attitude may have

occurred because they are ignored by their parents and tend to spend more time with their

22
friends. In conclusion, neglectful parenting style has an effect on depression, life

satisfaction, aggression, antisocial behavior, delinquency, and attitudes. One may

conclude that neglectful parenting mostly worsens children’s psychological development

even though children may have good relationships with their peers. In addition, children

who are neglected may develop depression and low self-esteem. They might think that

their parents do not care about them, so that they do whatever they want. They may think

their parents have little or no monitoring on their behavior. Therefore, neglectful

parenting disadvantages children and contributes to the development of antisocial

behavior and aggression among children.

Kaisa, Hakan and Jari-erik (2000) studied the extent to which adolescents'

achievement strategies were associated with parenting styles in the family. Three hundred

and fifty-four 14-year-old adolescents completed the strategy and attribution

questionnaire and a family parenting style inventory. Based on the adolescents' report of

parenting styles, four types of families were identified. These were authoritative,

authoritarian, permissive, and neglectful parenting styles. The findings revealed that

adolescents from authoritative families practiced adaptive achievement strategies which

were characterized by low levels of failure expectations, task-irrelevant behaviour,

passivity and self-enhancing attributions. Adolescents from neglectful families, in turn,

applied maladaptive strategies characterized by high levels of task-irrelevant behaviours,

passivity and a lack of self-enhancing attributions. Findings revealed that parenting styles

influenced adolescents' academic achievement. Chao (1994) examined inconsistencies in

the literatures involving parenting style among Asians. Chinese parents has often been

described as "controlling" or "authoritarian."These styles of parenting have been found to

23
be predictive of poor school achievement among European-Americans, while it improved

Chinese children’s performance in schools. The study suggested that the concept of

authoritative and authoritarian parenting style were somewhat ethnocentric and does not

capture important features of Chinese child rearing, especially in explaining their school

success. Immigrant Chinese and European-American mothers of preschool-aged children

were administered standard measures of parental control and authoritative-authoritarian

parenting style as well as Chinese child-rearing items involving the concept of "training."

After controlling for education, and scores on standard measures, Chinese mothers were

found to score significantly higher on "training" ideologies. The concept of "training" has

important features, beyond authoritarian notion, that may explain Chinese school success.

Xitao and Michael (2001) found parental involvement as positively related to

students' academic achievement. In line with the finding, the society in general, and

educators in particular, have considered parental involvement as an important ingredient

which accounted for many problems in education. However, the vast proportion of

literatures in this area, is qualitative and non empirical. Among the empirical studies that

have investigated the issue quantitatively inconsistencies abound. In a meta-analysis

conducted to synthesize quantitative literature on the relationship between parental

involvement and students' academic achievement a small to moderate, and practically

meaningful, relationship between parental involvement and academic achievement was

found. Through moderator analysis, it was revealed that parental aspiration/expectation

for children's education achievement had the strongest relationship, whereas parental

home supervision had the weakest relationship, with students' academic achievement. In

addition, the relationship was stronger when academic achievement was represented as a

24
global indicator (e.g., GPA) than as a subject-specific indicator (e.g., math grade).

Adolescents from neglectful families applied maladaptive strategies which were

characterized by high levels of task-irrelevant behaviour, passivity and a lack of self

enhancing attributions. The results provided the basis for understanding some processes

by which parenting styles may influence adolescents' academic achievement and

performance.

McGrath, Emily, Repetti and Rena (1995) examined parents' satisfaction with

their children's school performance and parents' value for their children's academic

success as variables that may influence children's perceptions of academic success or

failure. Parents' values (parents n=240) were assessed with a ten-item paired-comparison

scale made of five value items. Children's perceptions of their academic competence

(children n=179) were measured with the seven-item Perceived Competence Scale, with

children's report card grades as indicators of actual academic performance.

www.ccsenet.org/ijps International Journal of Psychological Studies Vol. 2, No. 2;

December 2010 220 ISSN 1918-7211 E-ISSN 1918-722X Results of the analysis

indicated that parents' satisfaction with their children's school performance was

associated with children's perceptions of academic competence, which was independent

of children's actual school performance. Parents who valued academic success had

children who perceived themselves as academically competent. However, this general

positive association masked important differences between highly competent and

incompetent children in schools. Among children who were doing well in schools, having

parents who placed importance on academic success was associated with low perceptions

of academic competence. In the third group, having parents who placed importance on

25
academic success was associated with higher perceptions of academic competence. In

general, the data suggested that parents' attitudes toward their children's academic

performance may directly, or indirectly, shape children's perceptions of their academic

competence. The findings by Dornbusch et al. (1987) suggested that Asian Americans

should have poorer academic results than European Americans schools because of the

authoritarian nature of their parents. In consonance with Dornbusch et al. (1987)

A recent study from Jeup (2008) found a relationship between authoritative

parenting and the predictors of psychosocial maturity. Paradoxically, Asian Americans

generally show better academic results than European Americans (Sue & Okazaki, 1990).

In an attempt to justify the result, Steinberg, Dornbusch and Brown (1992) argued that

Asian Americans, parental influence on school performance was not as important as peer

influence, and that the effects of authoritarian parents outweighs positive peer influence.

Turner, Chandler and Heffer (2009) indicated that authoritative parenting continues to

influence academic performance of college students, by revealing that both intrinsic

motivation and self-efficacy predicted academic performance Doyle (1986) has suggested

that, although most children learn classroom rules and norms, low achieving and minority

students often have difficulty understanding these rules and learning context-appropriate

behavior. These children's inability to learn and respond to rule systems at school may be

directly related to how their parents teach them to respond to authority and their

interpersonal problems.

In accordance with social learning theory which postulated that children learn by

observing and imitating their parent (Bandura & Walters, 1963). Barnes and Farrell found

that parents who used coercive control such as yelling, screaming, shouting, slapping, and

26
hitting had adolescents who were more likely to exhibit deviance behaviour and act out at

school. Also, adolescents who reported having more house rules or higher levels of

parental monitoring displayed the lowest levels of behavioral problems (drinking, illicit

drug use, deviance, or misconduct at school) (Patock-Peckham& Morgan-Lopez, 2006).

In line with the finding, an earlier study by Dishion and Loeber (1985), revealed

that low parental monitoring indirectly impacted adolescent substance abuse by

increasing the likelihood of more time being spent with deviant peers. The above

discovery became important because other studies conducted in the 90’s equally confirm

that under controlled children were more likely to use marijuana (Shedler& Block, 1990)

as well as other gateway drugs (Iacono, Carlson, Taylor, Elkins, &McGue, 1999). In the

assessment of parenting style, a number of instruments have featured prominently, some

of these instruments include: Parental Authority Questionnaire (PAQ: Buri 1991)

designed to measure the three different types of parenting styles: permissive,

authoritarian and authoritative parenting styles as defined by Baumrind (1971). The scale

consists of 30 items asking the respondents to rate their mother’s and father’s parenting

behavior on a scale of one (strongly disagree) to five (strongly agree), with a ten items for

each subscale (i.e., permissive, authoritarian, authoritative). Higher scores for each

subscale represented higher endorsement of the measured parenting style. Measure of

Parental Styles (MOPS: Parker et al., 1997) is a 15-item self-report questionnaire of

recalled parenting style (Parker et al., 1997). Respondents were asked to rate “how true”

they judge each of the 15 items as a description of how their mother and father acted

(“Overprotective of me,” “Sought to make me feel guilty”) until they were 16 years of

age. Permissive, Authoritarian, and Authoritative Parental Authority Prototypes

27
(Baumrind, 1971) is a measure which consists of 60 items (30 per parent) that ask

individuals how they perceived their parents’ style of authority while they were growing

up.

However, the study of Davis and Cumming (1994), couple of conflict affects the

children’s sense of security about family function. Therefore, a difference parenting

styles may cause children to worry. Additionally, (Cummings & Davis, 1966),

hypostasized that inter parental conflict might influence children views of multiple family

relationships. Specifically, it affects how the child views his/her mother – child

relationship, his/her father- child relationship and /or how he/she views him/herself in the

context of the parent relationship. Roman (2011) stressed outthat comparison on

children’s’ parenting styles of single and married mother. It was found out in the study

there is no significant difference of parenting styles on single and married mother.

The literature and studies in this chapter presented different results as compared to

the results of the current investigation. Most of them yielded a significant relationship

between the parenting styles in preschoolers. However, the current study had contrasting

results in which it revealed that there was no significant relationship between the

preschooler to preschoolers socio- emotional development.

28
 Chapter 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents the method used, research environment, research

instrument, validating the instrument, scoring procedure, data gathering procedure and

statistical treatment which were employed to gather the data and information considered

in the study.

Method Used

This study utilized the descriptive-correlational method of research with the aid of

the question checklist and documentary analysis techniques. Correlational analysis was

prepared to establish the relationship between the independent and dependent variables

of the study.

Research Environment

This study was conducted at different four Schools namely: Sulangon,Tamion,

Lawaan and Kauswagan in the City of Dapitan, Zamboanga del Norte. The Schools’

stated are institutions having a great population number of Preschoolers’. These four

Institutions said to have a complete elementary and primary level.

The conditions of the respondents in the said schools were some of the children

having no motivation in going school because of some factors considering the parenting

style.Some parents cannot cater the needs of the children in their socio emotional aspect,

children made to rebel in their parents for some deficient important things in

development good parenting styles.

Respondents of the Study

29
 The respondents of the study were the Parents of Preschoolers’ of Sulangon

Elementary School which consisted of 43 or 41.74% parent-respondents. Tamion

Elementary consisted of 15 or 14.56%. Lawaan Elementary School consisted of 25 or

24.27% and Kauswagan Elementary School consisted of 20 or 19.41% during the school

year 2015-2016.

Table 1 Distribution of total no. of respondents

Name of School No. of respondents Percentage

Tamion 15 14.56%
Lawaan 25 24.27%
Sulangon 43 41.74%

Kauswagan 20 19.41%
Total 103 100%

Research Instruments

The study will employ a standardized questionnaire. The questionnaire was

adopted from Mandleco, Oslen& Hart (1995).The questionnaire was divided into two

parts. The first part contained the profile of the respondents. The second part asked on the

elicit information regarding the parenting style practices. Using the Likert type scale, the

respondents were asked to choose the answers using the five (5) scale choices such as: (5)

Always, (4) Often, (3) Sometimes, (2) Rarely, (1) Never.

Scoring Procedure

30
 To measure the extent in which respondents on the parenting style practices, the

following numerical description and its corresponding verbal description were presented

below.

Range Numerical Verbal Interpretation

Description Description

4.21-5.00 5 Always (A) This means that he/she always practice the
intended parenting style.

3.41-4.20 4 Often (O) This means that he/she often practice the
intended parenting style.
2.61-3.40 3 Sometimes (S) This means that he/she sometimes practice
the intended parenting style.

1.81-2.60 2 Rarely (R) This means that he/she rarely practice the
intended parenting style.
1.00-1.80 1 Never (N) This means that he/she never practice the
intended parenting style.

Interpretation of Scaled Score of Socio- Emotional Development

Scaled Score Interpretation

1-3 Suggest significantly delay in overall development
4-6 Suggest slight delay in overall development
7-13 Average overall development
14-16 Suggest slightly advanced development
17-19 Suggest highly advance development
Data Gathering Procedure

After approval of the researcher proposal, permission from the Principal of

different four School’s namely: Tamion, Lawaan, Kauswagan and Sulangon was asked to

conduct the study and distributing the questionnaire to the respondents. As soon as

permission is granted, the researchers will personally distribute the questionnaire to the

Parents of the Preschoolers.

31
 The respondents will be given sufficient time to answer the questionnaires, after

which this will be retrieve. The data will be tallied, tabulated, analyzed and interpreted.

Statistical Treatment

The following statistical treatment was used in this study:

Frequency and Percentage. This was used to calculate the profile of the

respondents. The formula is

P=f x 100
N
Where:

P = percentage

F = frequency

N = number of cases

Weighted Mean is use to compute the parenting styles of the parents in preschoolers

with the following formula:

where:  

Ʃx = summation

x = weighted mean

x1 = x1,x2,x3...... = items given

fi = f1,f2,f3,...... = frequencies corresponding to the given items.

Kruskal Wallis. It was used to measure the degree of significance between

parenting style as to income, highest educational attainment and time spent by parent

with their children.

H= 12 ∑ Ri2 - 3 (n+1)

32
 N (n+1) ni

Where :

H = Kruskal Wallis Test

n= the number of observation

12= constant

3=constant

Contingency Coeffecient. It was used to measure the degree of relationship

between the Parenting style and the socio emotional development. And it was also used

to measure the relationship between relationship of the Profile of the respondents and the

socio emotional development of the preschoolers. The contingency coefficient formula is

shown below:

Contingency Coefficient =

where:

X2 = Chi Square value

N = no. of cases

Interpretation/ Analysis of the Contingency Coeffecient Values

1.0 to 0.09 = no association

0.10 to 0.49 = low association

0.50 to 0.70 = moderate association

33
 Chapter 4

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

34
 This chapter presented the statement of the problem and supporting data in

tabulated form, gathered by the researchers using their research tool, the questionnaire

and these have been analyzed and interpreted.

Problem no. 1 What is the profile of the respondents in terms of:

1.1Income

1.2 Highest Educational Attainment; and

1.3 Time spent by parents to their children?

Income

Table 1 shows the frequency distribution of respondents in terms of their family

income. The findings show that there were77 respondents or 74.76% had family income

ranges from 3,000 and below; fifteen respondents or 14.56% ranges from 3,001 to 6,000

pesos; moreover;and eight respondents or 7.77% range from 6,001 to 9,000 pesos. Two

respondents or 1.94% had family income ranges from 9,001 to 12,000 pesos and 1

respondent or 0.97% family income ranges from 12,001 and above.

The table emphasizes that most of the respondents experiencing the scarcity of

resources. This means that majority of people who live on a far flung areas doesn’t have a

stable work.

In the latest survey of the National Statistics Coordination Board, the family

should meet the required the minimum income to surpass the poverty line. On the other

hand, it has been emphasized by the aforementioned agency that a sole breadwinner in a

five-member family living in a highly urbanized cities in National Capital Region (NCR)

is expected to experience financial difficulties if he earns only Php 350 per day and the

scarcity of resources cannot be controlled due to the low income.

35
 However, in places which are considered as poor provinces like Zamboanga del

Norte, the family income that ranges from Php 6001 – Php 9000 can be considered as

having an adequate income which can able to supply their daily basic needs in the low

standard way of living as compared to urban places in the country (National Statistics

Office and Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program 4P’s, 2015).

Table 1 Frequency Distribution of Respondents in terms of Income

Income Bracket Frequency Percent

P3000 and below 77 74.76%
P6000 – P3001 15 14.56%
P9000 – P6001 8 7.77%
P12,000 – P9001 2 1.94%
P12,001 and above 1 0.97%
Total 103 100.00%

Highest Educational Attainmentof the Parents

Table 2 manifests the frequency distribution of respondents in terms of highest

educational attainment. As shown, the respondents are composed of the following:

Sixteen or 15.53% were elementary graduate, sixteen or 15.53% high school level, forty

or 38.83% High school graduate, twenty or 19.42% college level, eleven or 10.68% were

college graduate. It can be gleamed in the table that respondent’s highest educational

attainments belong to high school graduate. This means that most of the people today

cannot pursued their college due to some stabilities or financial incapacity were in it

becomes burden to achieve their goal.

According toRepublic Act no. 9155,an act instituting a framework of governance

for basic education, establishing authority and accountability, renaming the department of

education, culture and sports as the department of education, and for other purposes. This

36
Act shall be known as the “Governance of Basic Education Act of 2001”. It is hereby

declared the policy of the State to protect and promote the right of all citizens to quality

basiceducation and to make such education accessible to all by providing all Filipino

children a free and compulsory education in the elementary level and free education in

the high school level. Such education shall also include alternative learning systems for

out-of-school youth and adult learners. It shall be the goal of basic education to provide

them with the skills, knowledge and values they need to become caring, self- reliant,

productive and patriotic citizens.

Table 2 Frequency Distribution of Respondents in terms of highest

educational attainment

Highest Educational Frequency Percent

Attainment
Elementary Graduate 16 15.53%
High school level 16 15.53%
High school graduate 40 38.83%
College level 20 19.42%
College graduate 11 10.68%
Total 103 100.00%

Hours spent to their children

Table3 shows the frequency distribution of respondents in terms of hours spent to

their children. As shown, there are 8 or7.77% respondents were belong to 5 hours and

below in their hour spent with their children, twelve or 11.65% belong to 6 hours to 10

hours spent, nine or 8.74% belong in 11 hours to 15 hours spent, five or 4.85% in 16 or

twenty hours spent and sixty nine or 66.99% in 21 hour to 25 hours in spent. Based on the

data shown, most of the respondents belonged to the bracket of 21 hours to 25 hours

37
spent. This means that parents always give comfort, guidance and support to their

children since children basically needs care to their parents. However, the table revealed

that there are respondents belonged to the bracket of 5 hours and below hours spent. This

means that some parents do not fully spend their time with their children. Due to some

financial problem nowadays, both father and mother striving to have worked in order to

sustain their daily needs.

Table 3 Frequency Distribution of Respondents in terms of hours spent to

their children

Hours spent Frequency Percent

5 hours and below 8 7.77%
6 hours to 10 hours 12 11.65%
11 hours to 15 hours 9 8.74%
16 hours to 20 hours 5 4.85%
21 hours to 24 hours 69 66.99%

Problem no 2 What are the parenting style of parents among preschoolers in

terms of:

1.1. Authoritative;
1.2. Authoritarian; and
1.3. Permissive;

Table 4 shows the level of parenting style of parents among preschoolers in terms

of authoritative. As shown, with an average value of 4.35 describes as always under the

Authoritative as level of parenting style of parents among preschoolers.The table

reflected that parents were “Always” responsive to the child’s feelings and needs.This

means that the main function of the parents to their children is to provide the needs of

their child since learning starts at home were parents is the foundation all learning in

38
their empty mind. According to John Locke, a philosopher state that the mind of a child is

a”tabularasa” or a blank slate. Seven statements below were rated “always” from the

respondents for the reason that I am responsive to my child’s feelings and need, I explain

to my child how I feel about his/her good/bad behavior, I encourage my child to talk

about his/her feelings and problems, I explain the reasons behind my expectations, I

provide comfort and understanding when my child is upset, I compliment my child and

I respect my child’s opinion and encourage him/her to express them in accordance to the

consolidated results from the respondents (means = 4.82, 4.66, 4.58, 4.27,4.44, 4.37and

4.21 respectively). This implies that most of the respondents are characterized by a high

degree of responsiveness to children and moderate levels of demandingness and warmth,

believed they are responsible for pleasing their children, but within limits and tend to

display high degrees of interaction with their children and are more likely than either of

the previous styles to display bilateral constraints, in which both the child and parents are

expected to adapt their behavior to please the other.

In addition to,  the table divulges that most of the respondents tend to grant their

children more freedom than parents using the authoritarian or tough love styles.  They

expect their children to be independent, but also set firm limits on what their children are

allowed to do.

According to (Grolnick&Pomerantz, 2009; Takeuchi & Takeuchi, 2008)

emphasizes that authoritative parents encourage children to be independent and develop

their own identities, but at the same time they also provide rules and boundaries for their

children. Due to the guidance children receive, once authoritative parents set rules and

guidelines, the children tend to follow them consistently (Timpano et al., 2010).

39
Authoritative parents recognize and set expectations appropriate for a child’s

developmental stage. Parents are firm with the rules and give clear reasons to children

about why they have to follow them (Baumrind, 1966, 1971). Parents with an

authoritative style more openly discuss problems with their children (Baumrind, 1978).

Two way communication exists between parents and children, which helps develop good

parent-child relationships (Kim &Rohner, 2002). One might say that authoritative parents

treat children with respect and give reasons why they punish or reward their children. As

one can see, Baumrind found authoritative parenting leads to better adjustment in

community even though children in authoritative homes are from an individualistic

culture because children from authoritative homes received acceptance and

responsiveness from their parents that helps children develop social competence (Kazemi

et al., 2010; Veneziano, 2003).

However, Three statements below were rated “often” under authoritative as one of

the level of parenting style of parents. This means that some of the parents do not take

into consideration of their child wishes and allowed to take into their wants.

It further emphasized by (Jackson and Schemes 2005) revealed that authoritative

parenting may contribute to less depression among children. This could be concluded that

authoritative parenting will lead to less depression among children.

Table 4 Level of parenting style of parents among preschoolers in terms

of Authoritative

Items Weighted Description

40
 Mean
1. I am responsive to my child’s feelings and need. 4.82 Always
2. I take my child’s wishes into consideration 4.10 Often
before I ask him/her to do something.
3. I explain to my child how I feel about his/her 4.66 Always
good/bad behavior
4. I encourage my child to talk about his/her 4.58 Always
feelings and problems:
5. I encourage my child to freely “speak his/her 4.05 Often
mind”, even if he/she disagrees with me
6. I explain the reasons behind my expectations 4.27 Always
7. I provide comfort and understanding when my 4.44 Always
child is upset
8. I compliment my child 4.37 Always
9. I consider my child’s preferences when I make 3.97 Often
plans for the family (e.g., weekends away and
holidays)
10. I respect my child’s opinion and encourage 4.21 Always
him/her to express them.
Average Weighted Mean 4.35 Always

Legend:
Numerical rating Ranges of the Mean Description
1 1.00 – 1.80 Never
2 1.81 – 2.60 Rarely
3 2.61 – 3.40 Sometimes
4 3.41 – 4.20 Often
5 4.21 – 5.00 Always

Table 5 shows the level of parenting style of parents among preschoolers in terms

of authoritarian. As shown,most of the respondents rated an average weighted value of

2.61 describe as “sometimes” under authoritarian. This means that most of the parents

havethe low levels of communication with their children.  And most of the

communication is a one way street, in which the parents tell the children what to do. This

41
implies that most of the parents tend to be highly demanding, and display low levels of

responsiveness in their interactions with children.  

In addition to, they tend to perceive warmth as a relatively unimportant dimension

of child rearing and are often perceived as stern, inflexible, and even harsh.

However, one statement below stated that “I spank my child when I don’t like what

he/she does or says” rated by the respondents as “never” under authoritarian. This means most of

the parents do not practice physical attachment to the child.

According to the republic act no. 7610 an act providing for stronger deterrence and

special protection against child abuse, exploitation and discrimination, and for other purposes.

As a result, these parents tend to be highly demanding, and display low levels of

responsiveness in their interactions with children.  These parents also tend to display low

levels of communication with their children.  And most of the communication is a one

way street, in which the parents tell the children what to do.  Most of their interactions

with their children are characterized by the imposition of unilateral constraints, in which

the child must do what the parent wants but parents need not do what the child wants.  In

addition, they tend to perceive warmth as a relatively unimportant dimension of child

rearing

Table 5 Level of parenting style of parents among preschoolers in terms of

Authoritarian

Items Weighted Mean Description

1. When my child asks me why he/she has to do 3.55 Often
something I tell him/her it is because I
said so, I am your parent, or because that is what I
want.

42
 2. I punish my child by taking privileges away 2.77 Sometimes
from him/her (e.g., TV, games, visiting
friends):

3. I yell when I disapprove of my child’s behavior 2.70 Sometimes

4. I explode in anger towards my child 2.13 Rarely
5. I spank my child when I don’t like what he/she 1.77 Never
does or says
6. I use criticism to make my child improve 3.02 Sometimes
his/her behavior
7. I use threats as a form of punishment with little 1.84 Rarely
or no justification
8. I punish my child by withholding emotional 2.48 Rarely
expressions (e.g., kisses and cuddles)
9. I openly criticize my child when his/her 2.82 Sometimes
behavior does not meet my expectations
10.I find myself struggling to try to change how 3.05 Sometimes
my child thinks or feels about things
Average Weighted Mean 2.61 Sometimes

Legend:
Numerical rating Ranges of the Mean Description
1 1.00 – 1.80 Never
2 1.81 – 2.60 Rarely
3 2.61 – 3.40 Sometimes
4 3.41 – 4.20 Often
5 4.21 – 5.00 Always

Table 6 divulges the level of parenting style of parents among preschoolers in

terms of permissive. As shown most of the respondents rated with the average weighted

value of 2.02 describes ‘rarely” under permissive in the level of parenting style. This

means thatmost of the parents indulgent to be highly responsive to their children's needs

and desires, and display low levels of demandingness. All statements below were rated

by the respondents “rarely” for the reasons that I find it difficult to discipline my child, I

give into my child when he/she causes a commotion about something,I spoil my child

43
andI ignore my child’s bad behavior in accordance to the consolidated results from the

respondents (mean = 2.14, 2.52, 2.04 and 1.40 respectively). This means that

respondents do not practice the above statement. Thus, they only practice authoritarian and

authoritative.

According to Milevsky et al. (2007) found that permissive parenting contributes

to depression among children because when parents are too lenient and allowed whatever

the children wish to do, the children have no focus and might do something inappropriate.

One may predict that permissive parenting results in more problematic children’s

behavior

One might say that permissive parents seem to have no discipline, are too laissez-

faire and allow their children to do whatever the children want. Parents seem to not care

if their children may exhibit troublesome behavior which may be rejected by society.

Overall, permissive parenting contributes to depression and antisocial behavior among

children. Parents with a permissive parenting style are too lenient and tolerant of their

children without setting limits. This situation may cause children to lack the ability to

differentiate what is good and bad for them. Permissive parents are relaxed and

inconsistent in providing feedback to their children which may cause children to feel

confused about what is good and bad. In permissive homes, children may think that they

can do whatever they want and do not learn to respect anything. (Grogan-Kaylor, 2005;

Schaffer et al., 2009).

Table 6 Level of parenting style of parents among preschoolers in

terms of Permissive

44
 Items Weighted Mean Description
1. I find it difficult to discipline my child 2.14 Rarely
2. I give into my child when he/she causes a 2.52 Rarely
commotion about something
3.I spoil my child 2.04 Rarely
4. I ignore my child’s bad behavior 1.40 Rarely
Average Weighted Mean 2.02 Rarely
Legend:
Numerical rating Ranges of the Mean Description
1 1.00 – 1.80 Never
2 1.81 – 2.60 Rarely
3 2.61 – 3.40 Sometimes
4 3.41 – 4.20 Often
5 4.21 – 5.00 Always

Problem no. 3 What is the level of preschooler’s socio-emotional

development?

Table 7 shows the level of the preschooler’s socio-emotional development. The

table divulges from the weighted value of 22.30 which describe “average overall

development”. This means that most of the respondents are within the average level of

preschooler’s socio emotional development. This implies that parents provide comfort,

care and most of all the give needs of being children.

This emphasized further that most of the parents established positive and

rewarding relationship with their children. Thus, parent is the profound were the child

create a good management of emotions.

Table 7 Mean Score of Preschooler’s Socio-emotional Development

Variable Mean Stdev Description

Socio-emotional 22.30 1.62 Average overall
development score development

45
Problem no. 4 Is there a significant difference on the parenting styles when
analyzed as to income, highest educational attainment and time
spent of parents to children?

Table 8 showed the test of significant difference on the parenting style

(authoritative) when analyzed as to profile using Kruskal-wallis test for the ranges of the

respondents‘ profile. As presented in the table that all the profile of the respondents

namely: monthly income, educational attainment and time spent have computed the P

value of 0.603, 0.244 and 0. 094 respectively are all greater than 0.05 as the level of

significance. Therefore, the null hypothesis belongs to the region of acceptance when

plotted into the normal curve. This indicates that there is no significant difference on the

parenting styles when analyzed as to income, highest educational attainment and time

spent of parents to children. This means that the parenting style (authoritative) does not

differ the profile of the respondents.

This emphasizes further that the parenting style of the parents as authoritative

does not differ in their ratings and interpretation about their profile namely: monthly

income, educational attainment and time spent.

Table 8 Test of Significant Difference on the parenting style (Authoritative)

when analyzed as to their Profile

Profile Kruskal – Wallis Test P-value Decision on

Ho
Monthly Income 1.012 0.603 Accept Ho
Educational Attainment 5.45 0.244 Accept Ho
Time Spent 7.93 0.094 Accept Ho
Note: Level of significance set at 0.05

Table 9 showed the test of significant difference on the parenting style

(authoritarian) when analyzed as to profile using Kruskal-wallis test for the ranges of the

respondents’ profile. As presented in the table that all the profile of the respondents

46
namely: monthly income, educational attainment and time spent have computed the P

value of 0.096, 0.646 and 0. 575 respectively are all greater than 0.05 as the level of

significance. Therefore, the null hypothesis belongs to the region of acceptance when

plotted into the normal curve. This indicates that there is no significant difference on the

parenting styles when analyzed as to income, highest educational attainment and time

spent of parents to children. This means that the parenting style (authoritarian) does not

affects the profile of the respondents.

This emphasizes further that there are no differences on the parenting style

(authoritarian) when analyzed as to their profile. The parenting style of the parents as to

authoritarian views based on their capacities and abilities on how they molded and

developed their children

Table 9 Test of Difference on the parenting style (Authoritarian) when

analyzed as to their Profile

Profile Kruskal – Wallis Test P-value Decision on Ho

Monthly Income 4.68 0.096 Accept Ho
Educational Attainment 2.495 0.646 Accept Ho
Time Spent 2.899 0.575 Accept Ho
Note: Level of significance set at 0.05

Table 10 showed the test of significant difference on the parenting style

(permissive) when analyzed as to profile using Kruskal-wallis test for the ranges of the

respondents‘ profile. As presented in the table that all the profile of the respondents

namely: monthly income, educational attainment and time spent have computed the P

value of 0.517, 0.778 and 0. 100 respectively are all greater than 0.05 as the level of

significance. Therefore, the null hypothesis belongs to the region of acceptance when

plotted into the normal curve. This indicates that there is no significant difference on the

47
parenting styles when analyzed as to income, highest educational attainment and time

spent of parents to children. This means that the parenting style (permissive) does not

affects the profile of the respondents.

This emphasizes further that the parenting style of the parents as permissive does

rely in their ratings and interpretation about their profile namely: monthly income,

educational attainment and time spent.

Table 10 Test of Difference on the Parenting Style (Permissive) when analyzed

as to their Profile

Profile Kruskal – Wallis Test P-value Decision on Ho

Monthly Income 1.32 0.517 Accept Ho
Educational Attainment 1.77 0.778 Accept Ho
Time Spent 7.79 0.100 Accept Ho
Note: Level of significance set at 0.05

Problem no. 5 Do parenting styles affect preschoolers’ socio-emotional

development?

Table 11 implies the relationship between the parenting style and preschooler’s

socio-emotional development. The data describe that the spearman rank, value 0.128

interpreted as slightly positive correlation. It serves as an indication of no significant

relationship between parenting styles and preschoolers socio-emotional development. It

simply implies that the parenting style as to authoritative does not affect the preschooler’s

socio-emotional development. The computed r for the authoritarian is -0.212. It reveals

that there is moderate negative correlation between parenting styles (authoritarian) and

preschooler’s socio-emotional development.

Table 11 Test of Relationship between parenting styles and preschooler’s

socio-emotional development Score

Variables correlated Spearman Rank p-value Remarks Decision on

Value Ho

48
 Authoritative Socio- 0.128 0.196 Slight Accept Ho
emotional positive
developme correlatio
nt score n
Authoritarian -0.212 0.031 Moderate RejectHo
Negative
correlatio
n
Permissive -0.057 0.569 Almost Reject Ho
Negligibl
e
correlatio
n
Note: Level of significance set at 0.05

Chapter 5

SUMMARY, FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter presents the summary of the study. It includes the presentation of the

findings, the conclusions drawn and recommendations offered.

Summary

49
 This study aims to determine the effects of parenting styles to preschoolers’ socio-

emotional development particularly Barangay Tamion, Sulangon, Lawaanand

Kauswagan during the School Year 2015-2016.

Specifically, this research sought to answer the following questions:

1. What is the profile of the respondents in terms of:

1.1. Income;

1.2. Highest Educational Attainment; and

1.3. Time spent by parents to their children?

2. What are the parenting styles of parents among preschoolers in terms of:

2.1 Authoritative;

2.2 Authoritarian; and

2.3 Permissive;

3. What is the level of preschooler’s socio-emotional development?

4. Is there a significant difference on the parenting styles when analyzed as to:

4. 1 Income,

4.2 highest educational attainments;

4.3 time spent of parents to children?

5. Do parenting styles affect preschoolers’ socio-emotional development?

The descriptive survey method was used of the researchers prepared standardized

questionnaire on the effects of the parenting among preschoolers in their parenting style.

There were 103 respondents involved in the study. The main statistical tools used were

percentage, frequency count, weighted mean,Kruskal-wallis test and spearman rank test.

50
Findings

Based on the results in Chapter 4, the following findings were made.

1. Most of the respondents belonged to the income bracket of 3000 and below

having a number of 77 or 74.76%. Majority of themare high school graduate

having a number of 40 or 48.83%.Most of the respondents belonged to the

hours spent of 21 to 24 hours having a number of 60 or 66.99%.

2. Most of the respondents “always” practice authoritative parenting having a

weighted value of4.35. Authoritarian parenting style is “sometimes” practiced

and permissive parenting style is “rarely” practiced by the respondents.

3. The level of the preschooler’s socio-emotional development is good based on

the weighted value of 22.33.

4. There was no significant difference on the parenting styles when analyzed as

to income, highest educational attainment and time spent of parents to

children.

5. There was a significant relationship on permissive and authoritarian parenting

styles as to preschoolers socio emotional development.

6. There was no significant relationship on authoritative parenting styles as to

preschoolers socio-emotional development.

Conclusions

Permissive parenting style show less care and attention to their children. The

children grow up alone without receiving full attention from their parents. This affects

their development later in life where they might have low self esteem and lack of

confidence when compared to their peers. Even though parents encourage them to do

51
whatever they like to do, a small child still needs guidance from parents. The children

also find it difficult to choose what is right and what is wrong. Most of the parents

practiced authoritative parenting styles. This revenue characterized by a high degree of

responsiveness to children and moderate levels of demandingness and warmth and

believed they are responsible for pleasing their children, but within limits and tend to

display high degrees of interaction with their children and are more likely than either of

the previous styles to display bilateral constraints in which both the child and parents are

expected to adapt their behavior to please the other. No matter the parents have low

income it doesn’t vary their way of parenting to their children and even they achieved the

lower educational attainment they still cater the needs of their children.

Recommendations

In line with the findings and conclusions of this study, the following

recommendations were hereby offered.

1. Parents should continue their good parenting styles to their children.

2. Parents should remind that they should not practice authoritarian and

permissive parenting style because it could make problem to the children in

their socio-emotional development.

3. Parents should let their children to feel being a child and expose them into a

good environment.

4. Parents and teachers must communicate each other in order to know the

performance of their children.

5. Teachers in preschoolers should practice as a mother or second parents in

order to cater the needs to their children.

52
6. Parents should spend time to their children so that it would not become

spoiled.

7. Parents should discipline their children in a good way.

7. Parents should not take for granted the bad attitudes of their children.

53