PARENTAL DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES AS CORRELATE OF ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOUR AMONG IN-SCHOOL ADOLESCENTS IN OBIO/AKPOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA OF RIVERS STATE

PARENTAL DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES AS CORRELATE OF ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOUR AMONG IN-SCHOOL ADOLESCENTS IN OBIO/AKPOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA OF RIVERS STATE

PARENTAL DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES AS CORRELATE OF ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOUR

AMONG IN-SCHOOL ADOLESCENTS IN OBIO/AKPOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA OF RIVERS STATE

BY

ISIGUZO, BLESSING CHIOMA (Ph.D) & NSIRIM, SOLOMON HOMACHI

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.,                                                      This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Department of Educational Psychology, Guidance and Counselling,

Faculty of Education, University of Port Harcourt, Port Harcourt, Rivers State.

Abstract

This study investigated parental disciplinary practices as correlates of antisocial behavior among in-school adolescents in Obio-Akpor Local Government Area of Rivers State. Using the correlational research design, the study was guided by two research questions and their corresponding null hypotheses. A sample of 400 in-school adolescents was drawn using simple random sampling technique. Two instruments were used for data collection namely Parental Disciplinary Practices Scale (PDPS) and Antisocial Behaviour Scale (ABS). The reliability of the instrument using Cronbach Alpha yielded the coefficients of 0.71, 0.77 and 0.78 for preventive, supportive and corrective jointly and independently relate with antisocial behavior among in-school adolescents in Obio-Akpor Local Government Area of Rivers State. It was recommended among others, that parents should instill a sense of greater trust between them and the adolescent-child in order to improve his social development. This will help to reduce the rate of anti-social behavior among in-school adolescents.

Keyword: Anti-social behaviour, disciplinary practices, adolescents.

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION

The adolescence period is characterized by self-identification, self-acceptance and self-esteem which make it a stressful and stormy period for most individuals. Due to the fact that this phase of life has been identified as the crime curve age characterised by rapid increase in deviancy, especially at mid and late-adolescence, and a marked decrease in early adulthood. Behaviour which is common among living organisms may be the way organisms act, respond and interact with themselves and their environment. According to Nwankwo (2017), this way of responding could be covert (directly observed) or overt (indirectly observed). It can change through different stages of life and it is not peculiar with the adolescence stage. When behaviour such as fighting, drug abuse, examination malpractice, loitering, rape, smoking, restiveness is commonly repeated, the adolescent could be said to exhibit anti-social behaviour.

According to Sanders (2014), anti-social behaviour is an action that harms or lacks consideration for the well-being of self and others. This kind of behaviour breaks the right of another and it is characterised by harm to humans and the social and physical environment. It is also an act initiated to hurt and harm and it can adversely affect the wellbeing of the victim (Kavussanu & Stanger, 2017). The Encyclopaedia of Children Health Forum (2018) opined it involves disruptive acts characterised by covert and overt hostility and intentional aggression towards others. When in school adolescents get involve in behaviour that are inimical to societal norms and values, it could lead them to become miscreants or grow up as hoodlums, assassins etc.

At the introduction of formal education in Nigeria in 1859, there were more adults at primary and post primary schools with no laudable deviant behaviours, but today, where a majority of in-school students are adolescents, antisocial behaviour have become very serious problems in schools and societies synonymous with these adolescents. Moreso, if the excesses of these adolescents are not controlled by the right parental disciplinary practices, they may eventually grow up as deviants who violate social norms and cause malformation in national development. Some common types of antisocial behaviour in our society include extortion and stealing, sex offences, drugs offences and smoking, cultism, disobedience, truancy and loitering, fight, thuggery and hooliganism, absenteeism, suicide, assault and insult, dishonesty, among others. Some of the symptoms are increased features of criminal traits, disregard for persons’ authority, and exploitation attitude among others.

While it is common for adolescents to exhibit these varied behaviour, it is imperative to understand some factors that either promote or inhibit anti-social behaviour. Within the context of this study, the focus is on examining the extent to which parental disciplinary practices correlate with antisocial behaviour among in-school adolescents in Obio-Akpor Local Government Area of Rivers State.

Discipline is a universal aspect of socialization strategies adopted by parents and caregivers in all cultures to teach children the values and normative behaviours of their society. Goodman (2017) describes discipline as prescription of societies towards certain characteristics that their members are expected to possess and certain things people must not do, if they are to function adequately as members of their society. Disciplinary practices are behavioural models parents and caregivers adopt to prevent, support or correct the behaviour of children. According to Hoffman in Kim and Kochanska (2015), disciplinary practices may be love-withdrawal (withholding attention, affection or approval), inductive (reasoning, reminding children the rules and explaining the impact of children’s behaviour on others) or power-assertive (physical punishment, threats or withdrawal of privileges). Ikediachi and Akande (2015) in their study found out that parenting styles of authoritative, authoritarian and neglectful jointly relation to anti-social behavior. They further noted that some of the children are arise in aversive, punitive  or violent environment while some are nurtured in blissful in environment with love, care and compassion.   Parents may alternate these disciplinary practices as the child passes through one stage of development to another for effective socialization. However, this study adopted Rudolf Dreikurs’ parental disciplinary practices of preventive discipline, supportive discipline and corrective discipline.

Preventive discipline is the measure many educators take to avert misbehaviour by keeping children engaged. It is concerned with establishing various platforms that assist in modifying behaviour such that the desirable behaviours are more engaging over the undesirable ones. For example, parents may inform an adolescent through dialogue, the effect of associating with a particular peer group or involving in the abusive use of drugs. By such prior information, the adolescent may resolve to do what is right against wrong doings. Restrictions, advice, caution and establishment of rules are some preventive methods parents may adopt. However, Igbo (2014) study revealed that students from permissive home develop more anti-social behaviour.

Supportive discipline is a model used by teachers and parents which focuses on strengthening or weakening the behaviour of the adolescent child-student without necessarily inflicting verbal or physical pain on the individual. It is based on the idea that there are no bad children, just good and bad behaviours. Good behaviour can be taught and reinforced while weaning the bad behaviours without hurting the child verbally or physically. People engaging in supportive discipline are not ignoring problems. Rather, they are actively involved in helping the child learn how to handle situations more appropriately while remaining calm, friendly and respectful to the children themselves. Supportive discipline includes a number of different techniques that can lead to a more effective way for parents to manage their kid’s behaviour, or for teachers to manage groups of students (Stattin, 2000). This is in line with the study of Sangawi, John and Nadja (2015) on the effects of parenting styles on children’s behavioural problems in different cultures which indicated that parenting styles impact on children’s behavioural problems.

Corrective discipline otherwise known as power-assertion, involves a number of actions aimed at correcting a misbehaviour that causes disruption especially with coercion, threats of punishment or reprimands, without focusing on underlying norms and reasons for the child to behave adequately. These misbehaviours or violations could be first-level violations that do not immediately cause disruption, but a violation that need to be corrected to prevent repetition or mitigate escalation. A child could get flogged for losing one of his dress buttons in school in order for him not to lose all or more of his valuable belongings. Juxtapose it with the idea of a punitive discipline which is an action aimed to punish a person for a violation(Landrum & Kauffman, 2013).

Corrective discipline or power assertion appears to be effective to elicit immediate compliance in children, possibly due to the high degree of coercive pressure used. However, the use of this method tends to undermine long-term internalization of social rules and may even have a counterproductive effect in case of excessive use of such disciplinary techniques. Corrective discipline has been associated with positive outcomes among adolescents, too. Researchers have found that corrective discipline was associated with positive adolescent adjustment. Corrective discipline also buffers adolescents against the effects of a variety of stressful and negative events. For instance, researchers found that corrective discipline buffered the effects of peer group affiliation on girls’ alcohol use, but not among boys. Further, corrective parental disciplinary behaviors may even inadvertently reinforce adolescent’s conduct problems. Adolescents’ aggressive and noncompliant behavior is reinforced when parents engage in corrective discipline practice when the parent makes a request, the adolescent responds negatively, and the parent backs down. Numerous researchers found associations between higher levels of in corrective discipline and more behavior problems. However, corrective discipline has been associated with problematic psychological adjustment of adolescents, such as depression and anxiety and externalizing behaviors, such as delinquent acts (Hair, Moore, Garrett, Ling & Cleveland, 2008). In particular, coercive discipline is associated with children’s emotional and behavioural problems (Tudge, 2012). Furthermore, Denbi (2014) study revealed significant and positive relationship between parental punitiveness and anti-social behaviour.

When facing children’s misbehaviours in their daily interactions, parents rarely resort to a single disciplinary behaviour, often using a combination of several strategies, simultaneously or sequentially. For instance, parents can explain to their children the negative consequences of their misbehaviour while reprimanding them. This verbal punishment behaviour contributes to a greater efficacy in the transmission of inductive messages. Moreover, given a repeated display of inappropriate behaviour by the child, parents’ behaviours can change according to their appraisal of the effectiveness of their own behaviours. For example, Kremer, Smith and Lawrence (2010) reported that, in nearly three quarters of disciplinary incidents, parents display several disciplinary strategies until they succeeded in making the child comply. Therefore, the perception that parents have of the effectiveness of disciplinary behaviours should be considered when we intend to understand these behaviours (Cruz, 2013). Based on this background, this study is focused on assessing parental disciplinary practices as correlate of antisocial behaviour among in-school adolescents in Obio-Akpor Local Government Area of Rivers State.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to investigate parental disciplinary practices as correlate of antisocial behaviour among in-school adolescents in Obio-Akpor Local Government Area of Rivers State. Specifically, the objectives of this study sought to:

1. Investigate the independent relationship between preventive disciplinary practice and antisocial behaviour among in-school adolescents in Obio-Akpor Local Government Area of Rivers State.
2. Examine the independent relationship between supportive disciplinary practice and antisocial behaviour among in-school adolescents in Obio-Akpor Local Government Area of Rivers State.
3. Investigate the independent relationship between corrective disciplinary practice and antisocial behaviour among in-school adolescents in Obio-Akpor Local Government Area of Rivers State.
4. Ascertain the joint relationship between parental disciplinary practices (preventive, supportive and corrective) and antisocial behaviour among in-school adolescents in Obio-Akpor Local Government Area of Rivers State.

Research Questions

The following research questions guided the study.

1. To what extent does preventive disciplinary practice relate with antisocial behaviour among in-school adolescents in Obio-Akpor Local Government Area of Rivers State?
2. To what extent does supportive disciplinary practice relate with antisocial behaviour among in-school adolescents in Obio-Akpor Local Government Area of Rivers State?
3. To what extent does corrective preventive disciplinary practice relate with antisocial behaviour among in-school adolescents in Obio-Akpor Local Government Area of Rivers State?
4. To what extent do parental disciplinary practices (preventive, supportive and corrective) jointly relate with antisocial behaviour among in-school adolescents in Obio-Akpor Local Government Area of Rivers State?

Hypotheses

The following hypotheses which were tested at 0.05 level of significance further guided the study.

1. Parental disciplinary practices (preventive, supportive and corrective) do not jointly relate with antisocial behaviour among in-school adolescents in Obio-Akpor Local Government Area of Rivers State.
2. Preventive disciplinary practice does not significantly relate with antisocial behaviour among in-school adolescents in Obio-Akpor Local Government Area of Rivers State.
3. Supportive disciplinary practice does not significantly relate with antisocial behaviour among in-school adolescents in Obio-Akpor Local Government Area of Rivers State.
4. Corrective disciplinary practice does not significantly relate with antisocial behaviour among in-school adolescents in Obio-Akpor Local Government Area of Rivers State.

 

RESEARCH METHODS

The design for this study is a correlational research design. The population for the study was made up of senior secondary school students from all public secondary schools in Obio/Akpor local government area of Rivers state as at the time of the study. A sample size of four hundred (400) students was used for the study. Two instruments used for this study were Parental Disciplinary Practices Scale (PDPS) and Antisocial Behaviour Scale (ABS). The modified 4 point Likert scale was used for scoring, where SA (Strongly Agreed), A (Agreed), SD (Strongly Disagreed) and D (Disagreed). The instrument was validated by two experts in the field of Measurement and Evaluation, from Department of Psychology, Guidance and Counselling, University of Port Harcourt. Their suggestions, corrections and modification were integrated into the final version of the instrument. To ensure the reliability of the instruments Cronbach alpha (a) technique was used for both the PDPS and ABS. Copies of the instruments were administered on 20 students who was not part of the sample for the study and after which the obtained scores were subjected to Cronbach alpha technique. The alpha coefficients of 0.71, 0.77 and 0.78 were obtained for the preventive, supportive and corrective parental disciplinary practices respectively, while for the anti-social behavior is 0.76. Simple regression was used to answer the research questions while ANOVA associated to simple regression and learner regression were used to test the corresponding null hypothesis at 0.05 level of significance

 

 

 

RESULTS

Table 1:Simple Linear regression coefficient of preventive disciplinary practice on antisocial behaviour

R = 0.182			R2 = 0.033		Adj R2 = 0.031
Model		Sum of Squares	Df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
1	Regression	4.622	1	3.522	12.304	0.000
	Residual	1614.898	399	9.211
	Total	1619.52	400

Data presentation on the relationship between preventive disciplinary practice and antisocial behaviour of in-school adolescents showed that an R value of 0.182 was gotten with an R² value of 0.033 and an adjusted R²of 0.031. On the basis of the adjusted R²value obtained, it can be seen that preventive disciplinary practice accounted for 3.1% variation in the antisocial behaviour in Obio-Akpor L.G.A of Rivers State. When this value was subjected to an ANOVA associated with simple regression, an F-value of 12.304 was obtained at 1 and 399 degrees of freedom, with an associated p-value of 0.000 which was less than the chosen alpha for the study, 0.05. This result showed that preventive disciplinary practice had a significant independent relationship with antisocial behaviour of in-school adolescents in Obio-Akpor L.G.A of Rivers State. The null hypothesis was therefore rejected.

Table 2:Simple Linear regression coefficient of supportive disciplinary practice on antisocial behaviour.

R = 0.114			R2 = 0.034		Adj R2 = 0.041
Model		Sum of Squares	Df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
1	Regression	9.887	1	10.887	11.153	.0001
	Residual	1027.633	399	9.574
	Total	1037.52	400

 

According to the result displayed in table 2, a simple regression coefficient of 0.024 was gotten from the independent contribution of supportive disciplinary practice on antisocial behaviour. From the same table, it was shown that an R² of 0.114 was gotten, with a corresponding Adj R² of 0.034. On the basis of the Adj R², it therefore implies that 4.1% of antisocial behaviour among in-school adolescents in Obio-Akpor LGA of Rivers State. These values obtained were further subjected to ANOVA associated with simple regression to test their significance. The result obtained showed an F-value of 11.153 at 1 and 399 degrees of freedom, with an associated p-value of 0.0001, which was less than the chosen alpha of 0.05. This result therefore suggests that the supportive disciplinary practice had a significant relationship with antisocial behaviour of in-school adolescents in Obio-Akpor LGA of Rivers State. The null hypothesis was therefore rejected.

Table 3: Linear regression coefficient of corrective disciplinary practice on antisocial behaviour

R = 0.054			R2 = 0.012		Adj R2 = -0.034
Model		Sum of     Squares	Df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
1	Regression	4.764	1	4.764	0.554	.002
	Residual	1702.756	399	8.600
	Total	1707.520	400

From the analysis shown in table 3, it can be observed that when in-school adolescents’ response on corrective preventive disciplinary practice were regressed against their scores on antisocial behaviour, it was seen that an R value of 0.054 was gotten with am R²value of 0.012 with an adjusted R² value of 0.001. The adjusted R²value of 0.002 showed that corrective preventive disciplinary practice accounted for only 0.34% variation in their antisocial behaviour. This result showed that corrective disciplinary practice had a very high relationship on the antisocial behaviour of in-school adolescents in Obio-Akpor LGA of Rivers State. Further analysis using ANOVA associated with simple regression yielded an F-value of 0.554 at 1 and 399 degrees of freedom which showed a p-value of 0.002, less than 0.05 the chosen alpha for the study. This result therefore suggested that corrective disciplinary practice had a significant independent relationship with antisocial behavior in Obio-Akpor LGA of Rivers State. The null hypothesis was therefore rejected.

 

 

Table 4: Summary of multiple regression Joint Predication of Antisocial behaviour on dimensions of parental disciplinary practices.

R	R2	adjR2	Std error of the estimate
0.316	0.302	0.312	0.34

 

In table 4, it is shown that the combined effect of the parental disciplinary practices dimensions of preventive, supportive and corrective on students’ antisocial behaviour yielded a coefficient value of 0.316. It also yielded a coefficient of determination of 0.302 and an adjusted efficiency of determination (adj R2) of 0.312. This based on the adjusted coefficient of determination (adj R²) value, it is deduced 0.34 charges in students’ antisocial behaviour are dependent on the charged of the joint effect of the parental disciplinary dimensions earlier mentioned on the other hand the remaining 07.66 changes in their parental disciplinary practices are attributed to variations in other factors beyond the parental disciplinary practices dimensions understudied.

To verify if the extent parental disciplinary practices dimensions jointly relate to antisocial behaviour among in-school adolescents was checks for a significant. To this, scores of in-school adolescents on the various dimension of P.D.P were subjected to analysis of variance associated with multiple regression. The results obtained are displayed in table 5.

Table 5: Summary of analysis of variance associated with multiple regression on the relationship between parental disciplinary practices using dimensions of P.D.P on Antisocial Behaviour.

Source of variance	Sum of Squares	df	Mean square	F	P. Value
Regression	1123.07	2	245.14
Residual	2123.28	398	7.14	39.66	0.0005
Total	3246.35	400

 

Table 5 shows that the calculated F value of 48. 16 were obtained at adj of 4 and 388 at 0.0005 level of significance.  Thus since the obtained level  of probability (P < 0.005) is  less than the chosen level of probability of 0.05, it becomes that the dimensions of parental disciplinary of preventive, supportive and corrective disciplinary practices jointly relate antisocial behaviour  among  in-school adolescents.

Discussionof Findings

From the analysis of research question one and the corresponding null hypothesis in table 1, it was shown thatpreventive disciplinary practice had a significant independent relationship with antisocial behaviour of in-school adolescents in Obio-Akpor L.G.A of Rivers State. This relationship is found to be statistically significant at 0.05 level of significance. The meaning of this result is that individual or students whose parents adopt preventive disciplinary practices will develop more antisocial behaviour than others. On the basis of the instrument administered, students who reported high values on the section of preventive disciplinary practice are most likely to score high on their antisocial behaviour as tested using the instrument for the study. Conversely those who score high on the section of preventive disciplinary practice are most likely to score low in their antisocial behaviour. This result is not surprising to this researcher, because preventive discipline is concerned with establishing various platforms that assist in modifying the behaviour of adolescents such that the desirable behaviours are more engaging over the undesirable ones.The findings of this result are a further confirmation of that obtained by Igbo (2014). In his study he found out that students who were from permissive home developed more antisocial behaviour. However, this study differs in the instrument and variables used as the present study used parental disciplinary practices and the previous used parenting styles.

From the analysis of research question two and the corresponding null hypothesis in table 2, it was shown thatsupportive disciplinary practice had a significant relationship with antisocial behaviour of in-school adolescents in Obio-Akpor LGA of Rivers State. This relationship is found to be statistically significant at 0.05 level of significance. This result implies that students who scored highly on the section of supportive disciplinary practice are prone to score high in their antisocial behaviour. However, the reported strong positive relationship indicates that all those who prefer supportive disciplinary practice also scored high in their antisocial behaviour. The result that supportive disciplinary practice is related to antisocial behaviour is not surprising to this researcher. Supportive parents struggle to adjust to the demands that parenting their child through the teenage years brings. Because it is a time that can put even the strongest and most loving relationships to the test. A child needs his parents at this time just as much as they have always needed them, but in a different way. This could be a probable explanation for the positive relationship between supportive disciplinary practice and antisocial behaviour. This result is similar to that obtained by Sangawi, John and Nadja (2015) who found out that parenting styles of students do shape their behaviour. Despite the similarity in results, the sample from both study differed to a reasonable extent.

From the analysis of research question three and the corresponding null hypothesis in table 3, it was revealed thatcorrective disciplinary practice had a significant independent relationship with antisocial behaviourin Obio-Akpor LGA of Rivers State. This relationship is found to be statistically significant at 0.05 level of significance. This result implies that students who are from corrective home are prone to score moderately low in their antisocial behaviour. However, the reported moderate negative relationship indicates that all those who prefer corrective disciplinary practice also scored low in their antisocial behaviour. The result that corrective disciplinary practice is related to antisocial behaviour is not surprising to this researcher. This is because corrective disciplinary practiceinvolves a number of actions aimed at correcting a misbehavior that causes disruption especially with coercion, threats of punishment or reprimands, without focusing on underlying norms and reasons for the child to behave adequately. In the study conducted by Denbi (2010), a significant relationship between parenting styles and antisocial behaviour was obtained, just as gotten from the present study. However in his study, the sample was undergraduates in a university, while in the present study the sample constituted secondary school students. Also the statistical technique used was different in that while the present study used simple correlational statistics, his study used factorial multivariate analysis of variance.

The study revealed in tables4 and 5 that dimensions of parental disciplinary of preventive, supportive and corrective disciplinary practices jointly relate antisocial behaviour among in-school adolescents in Obio-Akpor LGA of Rivers State. This relationship is found to be statistically significant at 0.05 level of significance. This joint relationship between parental disciplinary of preventive, supportive and corrective and antisocial behaviour means that as the score on parental disciplinary of preventive, supportive and corrective increases, there is corresponding decrease in antisocial behaviour and vice versa. This means that the three parental disciplinary practices do predict about 0.34% of students antisocial behaviour. The result from this study is similar to that obtained by Ikediachi and Akande (2015)who found out that parenting styles of authoritative, authoritarian and neglectful jointly relate to antisocial behaviour of secondary school students.The finding from both study differed in that the sample size used varied and the variables used varied too. The present study used parental disciplinary practices of preventive, supportive and corrective while his study used parenting styles of authoritative, authoritarian and neglectful.

CONCLUSION

Based on the finding of this study, it is a clear evidence that adolescents antisocial and other deviance behaviours came in to existence as a result of lack of monitoring and supervision, inefficient communication and understanding between parents and their children, over control and under control, harsh and corporal punishment and poor parental discipline which are occurred as a result of poor educational status are some of the causes’ of antisocial behaviour among adolescents. The finding of this study concluded that antisocial behaviour of adolescents is the product of preventive, supportive and corrective parental disciplinary practices.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Parents should instill a sense of greater trust between them and the child in order to improve his social development. And this will help to reduce the rate of antisocial behaviour among in-school adolescents.
2. Parents should alternate the type of disciplinary practices they adopt in order to bring out the best in the child in relation with his developmental stage.
3. Physicians should take care to provide anticipatory guidance and appropriate support to parents who are under stress, isolated, disadvantaged or impaired. Physicians should be familiar with the resources in the family’s community.
4. Teachers should consider the role of the parent in influencing the child’s misbehaviour. For example, a depressed caregiver who is influencing the behaviour and development of a child may require referral to another appropriate professional.
5. Government should pay close attention to social control of the child. For instance establishing an agency that will curb the menace of social mayhem among in-school adolescents.

REFERENCES

Cruz, O. (2012). Estilosdisciplinares e comportamentos de ensinomaternos, Amazônica, 8(1), 80-113.

Denbi, T. B (2010). The relationship between parenting styles and antisocial behaviour. Thesis (M.A. (Clinical Psychology))-University of Limpopo,

Hair, E. C., Moore, K. A., Garrett, S. B., Ling, T., & Cleveland, K. (2008). The continued importance of quality parent-adolescent relationships during late adolescence. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 18(1), 187–200.

Igbo, J. N (2014). Gender differences, delinquent behaviours and academic achievement of secondary school students in Nigeria, International Journal of Latest Research in Science and Technology, 3(4), 40-46.

Kavussanu, M., & Stanger, N. (2017). Moral behavior in sport. Current Opinion in Psychology, 16, 185–192.

Kim, S., & Kochanska, G. (2015). Mothers’ power assertion: Children’s negative, adversarial orientation: And future behavior problems in low-income families: Early maternal responsiveness as a moderator of the developmental cascade. Journal of Family Psychology, 29(1), 1-9.

Kremer, M., Smith, A. B., & Lawrence, J. A. (2010). Family discipline incidents: An analysis of parental diaries. Journal of Family Studies, 16(3), 251-263. http://dx.doi.org/10.5172/jfs.16.3.251

Landrum T. J & Kauffman, J. M (2013). Behavioral approaches to classroom management. Handbook of Classroom Management. Routledge Handbook Online and CRC Press UK.

Nwankwo, O.C. (2017). Behavior modification: principles and application. Port Harcourt: University of Port Harcourt Press.

Ikediachi, N. N & Akande, J. A. (2015). Anti-social behaviour among Nigerian adolescents. Journal of Research & Method in Education, 5(1), 31-36.

Sanders, M.R (2014). The Triple P-Positive Parenting Program: A systematic review and meta-analysis of a multi-level system of parenting support. Clinical Psychology Review, 34(4), 337-357.

Sangawi, H. S., John, A. & Nadja, R. (2015). The Effects of Parenting Styles on Behavioral Problems in Primary School Children: A Cross-Cultural Review. Asian Social Science, 11(22), 171-186.

Stattin, H. (2000). Parental monitoring: A reinterpretation. Child Development, 71, 1072–1085.

Tudge, J. R. H (2012). Child-rearing values in southern Brazil: Mutual influences of social class and parents’ perceptions of their children’s development. Journal of Family Issues, 34(10), 1379-1400.

• Prev
• Next