Roth believes that people with internal control points think that they should be responsible for their own actions and reinforcement, while people with external control points think that powerful others, luck or circumstances beyond their control should be responsible for their own actions and reinforcement. Roth believes that having internal control points is a more adaptable motivation state, and internal control is positively related to the expectation of results, including the pursuit of achievement.
Specific to the development of children or adolescents, we need to know specifically:
In the process of children's socialization, an important goal is to help children learn to consciously control their behavior and make it conform to social expectations and standards. Family is the main place for children's socialization, and the controlled communication between parents and children is the main mechanism for children's socialization. Usually, when a child is one to two years old, parents ask the child to control himself, and the child is aware of the requirements of the people around him and has a certain ability to control his behavior, and the socialization of the child begins. In early childhood, "self-control" is often expressed in the form of "obedience". It is found that parents' behaviors with weak control, such as suggestions and explanations, are positively related to children's obedience. Strong control strategies, such as criticism and reprimand, are antagonistic and angry to children.
3.3 Relevant factors of compliance behavior
3.3. 1 Parents' Reactivity and Children's Compliance
Some studies believe that parents' response to children is related to children's obedience. Schaefer and Crook (1980) observed 15 months and 24 months old children and their mothers in the laboratory. In order to ensure the interaction between mother and child, mothers are required to let their children play with all the toys in the laboratory. The mother's instructions are divided into: look (for example, "look here"), touch (guide the child to establish contact with something), and complete the task (ask the child to take concrete action on something). Children's obedience is also divided into three types accordingly. The results show that the degree of children's obedience depends on the state at that time. When the child's attention is not directed to a specific object, the mother gives him a "pointing" instruction, so the child is obedient half the time. However, if the mother gives the instruction of "contact" or "finish the task" at this time, the child's compliance rate is very low (15 months old children almost never follow it). Verbal instructions can attract children's attention more effectively if they are matched with body posture. If the child's eyes have pointed to something, it is easier to get the child's obedience to the "contact" instruction. The success of the "task" requirement depends to some extent on whether children have entered the "contact" state (at least for children of 65,438+05 months). Mccomby believes that the positive emotion between mother and child is of positive significance for children to prepare their mother's instructions and requirements in the future. Kochanska and Aksan (65 65,438+0995) found that positive emotions between mother and child can predict children's conscious obedience.
The research on aggressive children and children who come to the psychological clinic for treatment found that some disobedience behaviors were caused by dysfunction [13]. Patterson (1982) defines the concept of disobedience as "high pressure reaction caused by parents' inexperience in managing children's behavior" [13]. He believes that early disobedience can easily bring problems to children, such as
The role of non-problem level disobedience is not widely known, but it is obvious that children in normal families also show a lot of disobedience. The discrepancy rate of different research reports is between 20% and 40% [12]. Patterson and forehand (1987) pointed out that the failure rate of boys in10/1was 40%-50% [65438
More and more evidence shows that children's response to parental control must be viewed from the perspective of development. By the age of two or three, children's ability to control their own behavior and obey their parents' requirements is gradually enhanced [3]. The characteristics of disobedience also changed during this period. Children began to have a sense of self-determination, which showed that children often held a negative attitude towards their parents' control for a period of time, and their public resistance to their parents also increased significantly [16].
Kuczynski, Kochanska and others (1987) believe that children's disobedience can be regarded as a strategy adopted by children to persuade their parents to give up or change their requirements. In this case, disobedience has a positive effect on children's social development: ① children insist on their autonomy in parent-child relationship; ⑵ Children develop social skills and strategies to express their autonomy through social recognition [8]. Different researchers put forward different models of children's disobedience. It is believed that children's resistance to the authority of their parents to a certain extent is a positive sign that children develop autonomy and dare to express themselves. In fact, this assumption holds a view of sustainable development.
4.2 Several forms of disobedience [5]
Kuczynski, Kochanska and others (1987) classify children's disobedience strategies into the following four categories from the perspective of social skills: (1) direct confrontation. Often accompanied by anger, parents often feel that their children are too straightforward and accompanied by negative emotions, which is regarded as an unskilled strategy. (2) Simple refusal. Although it is not directly accompanied by negative emotions, it is regarded as a disobedient strategy with medium skills. (3) consultation. It is the child who tries to persuade his parents to adjust their requirements by talking about conditions, compromise or explanation. This social strategy is indirect and will not be accompanied by negative emotions, so it is considered as a skilled disobedience strategy. (4) passive disobedience. The explanation of their social skills is not so simple, because it is difficult to judge the intention of children's behavior. Too young children ignore their parents' requirements, probably because they don't understand their parents' requirements, or they don't adjust their behavior as required [5]. Children may also deliberately ignore their parents' demands in an attempt to make their parents' demands self-invalid. However, the frequency of negative disobedience may reflect the low social skills of children, because although there is no negative emotion, ignoring parents' demands will still make parents feel annoying.
Kuczynski, Kochanska and others (1990) further divided "negotiation" into "defense" and "negotiation". Defense is a defense strategy that provides an explanation or excuse for not carrying out parents' instructions. Conditionality is a more active strategy. Children put forward an alternative or compromise to their mother's initial instructions and demands, so that her mother has to explain or prove that her demands are correct. They found that the mother's use of reasoning and suggestions in control is related to children's disobedience through negotiation, while the more direct control strategy is related to children's direct confrontation [6].
refer to
Socialization in the Family Context: Parent-child Interaction. In: Musen P H (series editor. ), hetherington ·E·M (Volume II, edited). Handbook of Child Psychology: Volume 4. Socialization, personality and social development. New york: John Wiley,1983.1-110.
[2] Whiting B. Edwards C. P, Children in Different Worlds. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Developmental Psychology, 1988,18:199-214
[3] Kopp C.B. The antecedents of self-regulation: a developmental perspective. 1982
[4] Schaffer H R, Crook C K. Children's compliance and mother control technology. Developmental Psychology, 1980, 16: 54-6 1
[5]Kuczynski L, Kochanska G, Radke-Yarrow M, Girnius-Brown O. Developmental explanation of children's disobedience. Developmental psychology, 1987, 23: 799-806
[6]Kuczynski L, Kochanska G. The development of disobedience strategies from toddlers to 5-year-olds. Developmental Psychology,1990,26 (3): 398-408
[7]Kochanska G, Aksan N. The positive interaction between mother and child, the quality of children's compliance with requirements and prohibitions, and the mother's control are the related factors of early internalization. Child development, 1995, 66: 236-254
[8]Parpal M, Macco by e. Mother's Reaction and Subsequent Child Compliance. Child development,1985,56:1326-1334
[9] Lepper M.R. "Children's Intrinsic and External Motives: The Harmful Effects of Extra Social Control". At: Collins Publishing Company. Minnesota seminar on child psychology. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 198 1. 155-2 14
[10] Rothbart m.k. Moderation and Development. In: Kohnstamm G A, Bates J E, Rothbart M K ed. The temperament of childhood. New york: Willie, 1989. 187-247
Daily rules of behavior: what mothers expect from their young children. Developmental psychology, 1993, 29: 537-854
[12] Forehand R. Children's disobedience to parents' requirements: behavior analysis and treatment. In: Hersen M, Eisler R M, Miller P M ed Progress in Behavior Correction (Volume 5). new york: Academic Press, 1977.
[13] Patterson g.r. Compulsory Family Procedure. Eugene, Oregon: Castalia, 1982
The development view of antisocial behavior. American psychologist, 1989, 44: 329-335
Parents and Teenagers: Living Together. Eugene, Oregon: Castalia, 1987
Vejnar c on negativism. Human development,1982,25:1-23