Journal of Child and Family Studies

, Volume 27, Issue 5, pp 1415–1427 | Cite as

Parental Rearing Behaviors and Adolescent’s Social Trust: Roles of Adolescent Self-esteem and Class Justice Climate

  • Yan Liu
  • Leishi Fei
  • Xiaomin Sun
  • Cong Wei
  • Fang Luo
  • Zhongquan Li
  • Liming Shen
  • Gang Xue
  • Xiuyun Lin
Original Paper
  • 151 Downloads

Abstract

Research on the antecedents and underlying mechanisms of the formation of adolescent social trust is scant. Family and school are two major environments in which adolescents become socialized. The current study examined the effect of parental rearing behaviors (rejection, emotional warmth and overprotection) on adolescent social trust, exploring the mediating role of adolescent self-esteem and the multilevel moderated role of the Level 2 variable class justice climate. The sample included 612 (12–16 years old) middle school students in China. Participants completed the s-EMBU, the Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale, Rosenberg’s Faith in People Scale and the perceptions of class justice scale, along with other control variables. The results suggested that parental rearing behaviors significantly predicted adolescent social trust, regardless of adolescent gender or age. Additional mediation analysis suggested that parental rearing behaviors had both direct effects on adolescent social trust and indirect effects through adolescent self-esteem. Further multilevel structural equation modeling indicated that class justice climate moderated the effect of parental rejection on adolescent self-esteem. The findings suggest that family and school practice jointly shape adolescents’ social trust. How parents treat their children has a huge influence on the degree to which their children trust other people. In addition, perceived class justice could buffer the harmfulness of negative parental rearing behaviors.

Keywords

Parental rearing behaviors Adolescent Social trust Self-esteem Class justice climate 

Notes

Author Contributions

Y. L.: Designed and executed the study and assisted in revising the manuscript. L. F.: Conducted data analysis and wrote the method and result section of the manuscript. Y. L. and L. F. contributed equally to this work and share first authorship. X. S.: Conceptualized and designed the study, wrote the introduction and discussion section of the manuscript, and revised the manuscript. C. W.: Assisted in data analysis. F. L.: Assisted in data analysis. Z. L.: Assisted in data analysis. L. S.: Assisted in data analysis. G. X.: Collaborated in writing the manuscript. X. L.: Assisted in editing the final manuscript.

Funding

This study was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant number 71101012), the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities, the State Scholarship Fund from the China Scholarship Council (grant number 201406045033) and the Advanced Innovation Center for Future Education at Beijing Normal University.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. Akers, R. L., Krohn, M. D., Lanza-Kaduce, L., & Radosevich, M. (1979). Social learning and deviant behavior: A specific test of a general theory. American Sociological Review, 44, 636–655.  https://doi.org/10.2307/2094592.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Arrindell, W. A., Sanavio, E., Aguilar, G., Sica, C., Hatzichristou, C., Eisemann, M., Recinos, L. A., Gaszner, P., Peter, M. Battagliese, G., Kállai, J., van der Ende, J. (1999). The development of a short form of the EMBU: Its appraisal with students in Greece, Guatemala, Hungary and Italy. Personality and Individual differences, 27, 613–628.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(98)00192-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Balliet, D., & Van Lange, P. A. M. (2013). Trust, conflict, and cooperation: a meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 139(5), 1090–1112.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030939.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bauer, D. J., Preacher, K. J., & Gil, K. M. (2006). Conceptualizing and testing random indirect effects and moderated mediation in multilevel models: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 11, 142–163.  https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.11.2.142.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Berti, C., Molinari, L., & Speltini, G. (2010). Classroom justice and psychological engagement: Students’ and teachers’ representations. Social Psychology of Education, 13, 541–556.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-010-9128-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boehnke, K. (2001). Parent-offspring value transmission in a societal context: Suggestions for a utopian research design--With empirical underpinnings. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32(2), 241–255.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022101032002010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bowlby, J. (1988). A secure base: Parent-child attachment and healthy human development. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  8. Burke, P. J., & Stets, J. E. (1999). Trust and commitment through self-verification. Social Psychology Quarterly, 62(4), 347–366.  https://doi.org/10.2307/2695833.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Buss, A. H., & Plomin, R. (1984). Temperament: Early developing personality traits. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  10. Chan, T. W., & Koo, A. (2011). Parenting style and youth outcomes in the UK. European sociological Review, 27, 385–399.  https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcq013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cohen-Charash, Y., & Spector, P. E. (2001). The role of justice in organizations: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86, 278–321.  https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.2001.2958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cook, K. S. (2005). Networks, norms, and trust: The social psychology of social capital. Social Psychology Quarterly, 68, 4–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Curran, T., & Wexler, L. (2017). School-based positive youth envelopment: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of School Health, 87, 71–80.  https://doi.org/10.1111/josh.12467.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Dalbert, C., & Stoeber, J. (2006). The personal belief in a just world and domain-specific beliefs about justice at school and in the family: A longitudinal study with adolescents. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 30, 200–207.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025406063638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Deal, T. E., & Peterson, K. D. (1999). Shaping school culture: The heart of leadership. 350 Sansome Street, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers.Google Scholar
  16. Delhey, J., & Newton, K. (2003). Who trusts? The origins of social trust in seven societies. European Societies, 5, 93–137.  https://doi.org/10.1080/1461669032000072256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Erikson, E. H. (1953). Growth and crises of the healthy personality. In: C. Kluckhohn, & H. Murray (eds.), Personality in nature, society, and culture. New York, NY: The Josiah Macy Jr. Foundation.Google Scholar
  18. Flanagan, C. (2003). Trust, identity, and civic hope. Applied Developmental Science, 7(3), 165–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Flanagan, C. A., & Stout, M. (2010). Developmental patterns of social trust between early and late adolescence: Age and school climate effects. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 20, 748–773.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-7795.2010.00658.x.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. Fukuyama, F. (1995). Social capital and the global economy. Foreign Affairs, 74, 89–103.  https://doi.org/10.2307/20047302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gouveia-Pereira, M., Vala, J., Palmonari, A., & Rubini, M. (2003). School experience, relational justice and legitimation of institutional. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 18, 309–325.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03173251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Govier, T. (1993). Self-trust, autonomy, and self-esteem. Hypatia, 8, 99–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  24. Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Huo, Y. J., Smith, H. J., Tyler, T. R., & Lind, Ea (1996). Superordinate identification, subgroup identification, and justice concerns: Is separatism the problem; is assimilation the answer? Psychological Science, 7, 40–45.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1996.tb00664.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. James, L. R. (1982). Aggregation bias in estimates of perceptual agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 219–229.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.67.2.219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., & Wolf, G. (1993). rwg: An assessment of within-group interrater agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 306–309.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78.2.306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Katz, H. A., & Rotter, J. B. (1969). Interpersonal trust scores of college students and their parents. Child Development, 40, 657–661.  https://doi.org/10.2307/1127434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mahrer, A. R. (1956). The role of expectancy in delayed reinforcement. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 52, 101–106.  https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040837.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Mak, A. S. (1990). Testing a psychosocial control theory of delinquency. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 17, 215–230.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854890017002005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mischel, W. (1961a). Father-absence and delay of gratification: Cross-cultural comparisons. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 63, 116–124.  https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046877.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Mischel, W. (1961b). Preference for delayed reinforcement and social responsibility. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 62, 1–7.  https://doi.org/10.1037/h0048263.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Molinari, L., Speltini, G., & Passini, S. (2013). Do perceptions of being treated fairly increase students’ outcomes? Teacher-student interactions and classroom justice in Italian adolescents. Educational Research and Evaluation, 19(1), 58–76.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13803611.2012.748254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Paxton, P. (2002). Social capital and democracy: An interdependent relationship. American Sociological Review, 67, 254–277.  https://doi.org/10.2307/3088895.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Perris, C., Jacobsson, L., Linndström, H., Knorring, L., & Perris, H. (1980). Development of a new inventory for assessing memories of parental rearing behaviour. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 61, 265–274.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0447.1980.tb00581.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Preacher, K. J., Zhang, Z., & Zyphur, M. J. (2016). Multilevel structural equation models for assessing moderation within and across levels of analysis. Psychological Methods, 21, 189–205.  https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000052.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rapee, R. M. (1997). Potential role of childrearing practices in the development of anxiety and depression. Clinical Psychology Review, 17, 47–67.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-7358(96)00040-2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Resh, N. (2009). Justice in grades allocation: Teachers’perspective. Social Psychology of Education, 12, 315–325.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-008-9073-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rosenberg, M. (1956). Misanthropy and political ideology. American Sociological Review, 21, 690–695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent child. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Rotenberg, K. J. (2010). Interpersonal trust during childhood and adolescence. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rotter, J. B. (1954). Social learning and clinical psychology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Schmitt, D. P., & Allik, J. (2005). Simultaneous administration of the Rosenberg self-esteem scale in 53 nations: Exploring the universal and culture-specific features of global self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 623–642.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.89.4.623.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Schneider, B., White, S. S., & Paul, M. C. (1998). Linking service climate and customer perceptions of service quality: Tests of a causal model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 150–163.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.83.2.150.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Uslaner, E. M. (2000). Producing and consuming trust. Political Science Quarterly, 115, 569–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Uslaner, E. M. (2002). The moral foundations of trust. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wray-Lake, L., & Flanagan, C. A. (2012). Parenting practices and the development of adolescents’ social trust. Journal of Adolescence, 35, 549–560.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2011.09.006. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Beijing Key Laboratory of Applied Experimental Psychology, National Demonstration Center for Experimental Psychology Education (Beijing Normal University), Faculty of PsychologyBeijing Normal UniversityBeijingChina
  2. 2.Experimental School Affiliated to Haidian Teachers Training CollegeBeijingChina
  3. 3.Department of Psychology, School of Social and Behavior SciencesNanjing UniversityNanjingChina
  4. 4.Department of Public AdministrationChinese Academy of GovernanceBeijingChina
  5. 5.Institute of Developmental PsychologyBeijing Normal UniversityBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations