Methodology to Assess Adolescent Autonomy in Situations of Interpersonal Conflict 1

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Methodology to Assess Adolescent Autonomy in Situations of Interpersonal Conflict 1"

Daniela Shepherd
5 years ago
Views:

1 Methodology to Assess Adolescent Autonomy in Situations of Interpersonal Conflict 1 Phyllis Holditch Marla Zucker English Norman Deborah F. Deckner Gabriel Kuperminc Georgia State University & Joseph P. Allen University of Virginia Georgia State University Abstract This poster examines autonomy as a motivational-developmental process underlying adolescents strategies for resolving interpersonal conflict. A coding system was developed based on Ryan & Deci s self-determination theory (Ryan & Deci, 2000, Ryan, Deci, & Grolnick, 1995) and used to score narratives of adolescents descriptions of recent conflicts with parents and peers. Acceptable levels of inter-rater reliability were achieved. As hypothesized, ratings of autonomy were correlated with social problem solving competence and observed autonomy-relatedness. In addition, the combination of high levels of autonomy and high levels of negotiation strategies was associated with low levels of engagement in problem behaviors. 1 Presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research on Adolescence, Chicago, IL, March 30-April 1, Data collection was funded by the W.T. Grant and Smith Richardson Foundations to Joseph Allen, Ph.D. at the University of Virginia. Funding for preparation of this report was provided by a Georgia State University Research Initiation Grant to Gabriel Kuperminc, Ph.D. Correspondence should be addressed to Gabriel Kuperminc, Department of Psychology, Georgia State University, 140 Decatur St., 11 th Floor, Atlanta, GA or gkuperminc@gsu.edu.

2 Introduction Rationale Most research has focused on autonomy within adolescent-parent relationships; However, recent findings also point to the importance of adolescents autonomy strivings in the context of relationships with peers (Gavazzi, Anderson, & Sabatelli, 1993; Kuperminc, Allen, & Arthur, 1996). In this poster, autonomy is defined as the experience of choice in the initiation, maintenance, and regulation of behavior, and the experience of connectedness between one s actions and personal goals and values (Connell, 1990, p. 62). Assessing Autonomy in Situations of Interpersonal Conflict (Figure 1) A sequence of regulatory processes from external regulation through integration were used to describe adolescents reasoning in their descriptions of recent interpersonal conflicts (Ryan et al., 1995; Ryan & Deci, 2000, pp ). Externally regulated behaviors are performed to satisfy external demands or reward contingencies (experienced as controlled or alienated ). Introjected behaviors are performed to avoid anxiety or guilt or to attain ego enhancements, such as pride (somewhat internalized but experienced as being regulated by external standards). Identified behaviors reflect a conscious valuing of goals such that actions are accepted as personally important. Integrated behaviors are fully assimilated into the self, have been evaluated and brought into congruence with the self. This general framework was expanded by taking account of three interrelated processes likely to affect the quality of adolescents strategy choices. Autonomous Goal Reasoning: capacity for autonomous regulation of social problem solving goals; Perceived Support for Autonomy: perceptions that others involved in the conflict will support autonomous strategies; Affective Reasoning: capacity for regulating the emotions which accompany situations of interpersonal conflict. Hypotheses Following Ryan & Deci s (2000) elaboration of self-determination theory, we hypothesized that:

3 Autonomous self-regulation in situations of interpersonal conflict will be positively correlated with measures of social problem solving competence. It is expected that adolescents who feel capable of resolving disagreements will be more likely to adopt autonomous strategies. Autonomous self-regulation in situations of interpersonal conflict will be positively correlated with experiences of autonomy in relationships with mothers. Autonomous self-regulation in situations of interpersonal conflict will moderate the associations between social problem solving competence and engagement problem behaviors, such that the combination of high autonomy and high competence will be associated with low levels of problem behavior. Method Participants (Table 1). 105 adolescents in grades 9 and % female 33% racial or ethnic minority 40% lived with two parents or family adults Median family income was $30,000 (S.D. = $20,600) with a range of 7,500 to 70,000. Procedure Interview The Teen Interpersonal Problem Solving Interview (TIPSI) was designed to elicit adolescents' descriptions of recent interpersonal conflicts involving peers and parents. Adolescents were asked to describe "the hardest time in the last six months when you felt like you disagreed with [a peer or parent]" and were asked a semi-structured set of open-ended questions about the adolescents' appraisals of that conflict. Coding System The 3 facets of autonomy were coded according to the Deci & Ryan framework (Figure 1) on a scale that included 1 (Externally Regulated), 3 (Introjected), 5 (Identified), and 7 (Integrated). Intermediate scores were assigned to responses that were judged to fall between specific levels. Scoring criteria and example quotes are provided in Tables 2-4 for Autonomous Goal Reasoning, Affective Reasoning, and Perceived Support.

4 Collateral Measures Social Problem Solving Competence (Freedman et al., 1978) and Sophistication of Interpersonal Negotiation Strategies (Brion-Meisels & Selman, 1984) were assessed using adolescents responses to a series of hypothetical conflicts (see Kuperminc & Allen, 1998). Observed autonomous-relatedness was assessed from videotaped discussions between adolescents and their mothers (Allen, Hauser, Bell, & O Connor, 1994) and focused on speeches from adolescent to mother and from mother to adolescent which either promoted or inhibited autonomy and relatedness. A composite measure of total Problem Behavior measured parent, peer, and self-reports of engagement in delinquent activity and drug involvement (see Kuperminc & Allen, 1998). Results Interrater Reliability (Table 5). Verbatim transcripts were scored by 5 trained raters so that each transcript was scored by at least 2 raters. Pairs of the ratings for each code were used to generate reliability estimates, and final scores for each code were calculated by averaging the two scores. Weighted Kappa estimates ranged from.57 to.72. Spearman-Brown r provides an estimate of the reliability of each code after averaging the scores from two raters; these estimates ranged from.73 to.84. Descriptive Statistics for Autonomous Self-Regulation (Table 6). On average, adolescents displayed an introjected level of autonomous self-regulation across situations. Adolescents demonstrated a significantly higher level of autonomous goal reasoning in situations of peer conflict than in situations of parent conflict. Scale Development Composite scores were created, reflecting Autonomous Self-Regulation in: situations of peer conflict (sum of z-scores for autonomous goal reasoning, affective reasoning, and perceived support; alpha =.70); and situations of parent conflict (sum of z-scores for autonomous goal reasoning, affective reasoning, and perceived support; alpha =.73). A total composite score was also created (sum of z-scores for all six ratings in both peer and parent conflict situations; alpha =.80). These composite ratings were used in all further analyses.

5 Correlations of Autonomous Self-Regulation with Demographics (Table 7). Higher autonomous self-regulation in peer conflicts was displayed by girls and adolescents living with two parents, and from higher income families. Racial/ethnic minorities displayed lower autonomous self-regulation in parent conflicts. Higher total autonomous self-regulation was displayed by non-minorities and adolescents from higher income families. Correlations of Autonomous Self-Regulation with Social Competence (Table 7). As hypothesized, higher autonomous self-regulation in peer and parent conflicts, and total autonomous selfregulation were associated with more sophisticated interpersonal negotiation strategies. Higher autonomous self-regulation in peer conflicts was associated with higher levels of social problem solving competence. Correlations of Autonomous Self-Regulation with Observed Autonomous-Relatedness in Interaction with Mother (Table 7). Autonomous self regulation in peer situations and total autonomous self-regulation were positively associated with mothers efforts to promote their sons /daughters autonomy and relatedness. Autonomous self-regulation (across contexts) was positively associated with adolescents efforts to promote their mothers autonomy and relatedness. Regressions of Problem Behavior on Autonomous Self-Regulation and Social Competence (Tables 8 and 9; Figures 2 and 3). As hypothesized, autonomous self-regulation moderated the associations between social competence and problem behaviors. The combination of high autonomous self-regulation in conflicts with parents and high levels of interpersonal negotiation strategies was associated with low levels of problem behavior. Notably, low levels of both autonomous self-regulation and interpersonal negotiation strategies were also associated with low levels of problem behavior. Also, high levels of either interpersonal negotiation strategies or autonomous self-regulation (but not both) were associated with high levels of problem behavior. A similar interaction was found for total autonomous self-regulation and interpersonal negotiation strategies.

6 Conclusions Significant correlations of autonomous self-regulation with social problem solving competence and observed autonomous-relatedness were consistent with our hypotheses and support the validity of the scoring system. As hypothesized, low levels of problem behavior were associated with low autonomy and low interpersonal negotiation strategies (INS) and with high autonomy and high INS. On the other hand, high levels of problem behavior were associated with high scores on either autonomy or INS, but not both. The findings that racial/ethnic minorities scored lower than non-minorities on autonomous self-regulation warrant further research. These findings could indicate the coding system is insensitive to ethnic group differences in discourse styles. References Allen, J. P., Hauser, S. T., Bell, K. L., & O'Connor, T. G. (1994). Longitudinal assessment of autonomy and relatedness in adolescent-family interactions as predictors of adolescent ego development and self-esteem. Child Development, 65, Brion-Meisels, S., & Selman, R. L. (1984). Early adolescent development of interpersonal negotiation strategies: Understanding and intervention. School Psychology Review, 13, Connell, J. P. (1990). Context, self and action: A motivational analysis of self-system processes across the lifespan. In D. Cicchetti & M. Beeghly (Eds.), The self in transition: Infancy to childhood (pp ). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Freedman, B. J., Rosenthal, L., Donohoe, C. P., Schlundt, D. G., & McFall, R. M. (1978). A social behavioral analysis of skill deficits in delinquent and nondelinquent adolescent boys. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 46, Gavazzi, S. M., Anderson, S. A., & Sabatelli, R. M. (1993). Family differentiation, peer differentiation and adolescent adjustment in a clinical sample. Journal of Adolescent Research, 8, Kuperminc, G. P., & Allen, J. P. (1998). Social orientation: Adolescent problem behavior and motivations toward interpersonal problem solving. Manuscript submitted for publication. Kuperminc, G. P., Allen, J. P., & Arthur, M. W. (1996). Autonomy, relatedness, and male adolescent delinquency: Toward a multi-dimensional view of social competence. Journal of Adolescent Research, 11, Ryan, R. M. & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, Ryan, R. M., Deci, E. L., & Grolnich, W. S. (1995). Autonomy, relatedness, and the self: Their relation to development and psychopathology. In D. Cicchetti & D. J. Cohen (Eds.), Developmental Psychopathology, Vol. 1: Theory and Methods. New York: Wiley & Sons.

8 Figure 1: Schematic of regulatory styles associated with the development of autonomy. REGULATORY PROCESSES EXTERNAL REGULATION INTROJECTION IDENTIFICATION INTEGRATION ASSOCIATED PROCESSES Compliance Reward Pursuit Punishment Avoidance Guilt/Anxiety Avoidance Self-Esteem Maintenance Conscious Valuing, Acceptance of, and Commitment to Goals Awareness of Conflicts Hierarchical Synthesis PERCEIVED LOCUS OF CAUSALITY External External Internal Internal RELATIVE AUTONOMY Very Low Low High Very High Note: Adapted from Ryan, Deci, & Grolnick, 1995, p Table 1: Sample Characteristics (n = 105). Percent Median (SD) Gender (Female) 51.0% Racial/Ethnic Minority 33.1% Lives with Two Parents 40.6% Family Income (x $ ) $30.0 ($20.6)

9 Table 5: Interrater Reliability for Autonomous Goal Reasoning, Affective Reasoning, and Perceived Support for Autonomy Spearman-Brown r Weighted Kappa 1 Peer Conflict Situation Autonomous Goal Reasoning Affective Reasoning Perceived Support Parent Conflict Situation Autonomous Goal Reasoning Affective Reasoning Perceived Support Estimates weighted to allow ratings within 1 point to be scored as agreements. Table 6: Descriptive Statistics for Interview Ratings of Autonomous Self-Regulation Peer Conflict M (SD) Parent Conflict M (SD) t-value Autonomous Goal Reasoning 3.81 (1.59) 3.00 (1.60) 4.74** Affective Reasoning 2.86 (1.52) 2.74 (1.50) 0.62 Perceived Support 2.61 (1.60) 2.51 (1.37) 0.50 ** p <.01; Note: Multivariate F(3,101) = 7.96, p <.01 Table 7: Correlations of Autonomous Self-Regulation with Demographics, Social Competence, and Observed Autonomous-Relatedness Autonomous Self- Regulation in Peer Conflict Autonomous Self- Regulation in Parent Conflict Total Autonomous Self-Regulation Gender (Female).20* Racial/Ethnic Minority -.42** -.32** -.43** Lives with Two Parents.21* Family Income.30**.17.27** Social Problem Solving Skills.26* Interpersonal Negotiation Strategies.26*.24*.29** Observed Autonomous-Relatedness

10 Mother Adolescent.36**.19.31** Adolescent Mother.35**.44**.46** * p <.05; ** p <.01

11 Table 8: Regression of Problem Behavior on Social Competence and Autonomous Self-Regulation in Parent and Peer Conflicts ß R 2?R ***.18*** Social Problem Solving Skills (SPS) -.47*** Interpersonal Negotiation Strategies (INS) ***.03 Autonomy in Peer Conflict.10 Autonomy in Parent Conflict ***.04* INS X Aut. Parent -.22* * p <.05; *** p <.001 Table 9: Regression of Problem Behavior on Social Competence and Total Autonomous Self-Regulation ß R 2?R ***.18*** Social Problem Solving Skills (SPS) -.42*** Interpersonal Negotiation Strategies (INS) ***.02 Total Autonomous Self-Regulation ***.04+ SPS X Total Autonomy.18 INS X Total Autonomy -.27* + p <.10; * p <.05; *** p <.001

12 Table 2: Scoring Criteria and Examples for Autonomous Goal Reasoning Category Operationalization Sample Quote Adolescent evaluates strategy in terms of External Regulation Avoidance of punishment; Pursuit of rewards; Avoidance of anger or observable consequences; Simple compliance Introjection Effects on reputation; Avoidance of guilt, shame, or anxiety; Maintenance of self-esteem; Internal rewards and punishments (e.g., standing up for oneself as a way of asserting personal power or maintaining a sense of honor) Power struggles Identification An internal value system to which the individual is committed (e.g., this is who I am, independent of what others think. ) Conscious valuing "Cause I would ve got in trouble." "[I did that] so I wouldn't feel so bad." "Ahh I would say go ahead and talk stand up for what you believe in. I wouldn t tell them to fight someone physically, but I think it s fine to say what you believe in." Integration Awareness of all sides of a conflict (weighing alternatives); Varying levels of importance in goals (e.g., my vs. your goals, short vs., long-term goals, judgments about goals, or most important vs. minor goals) " It's better to talk it through so you don't hate each other because you're supposed to be able to trust each other and talk through things." Note: These sample quotes are derived from questions that probe why the teen chose a certain strategy or rated a strategy as effective.

13 Table 3: Scoring Criteria and Examples for Affective Reasoning Category Operationalization Sample Quote Adolescent describes regulation of feelings / emotions by External Regulation Denying the role of feelings/emotions in a situation. Failing to mention feelings/emotions (as if someone would have to bring up the topic in order for the person to even consider it) Introjection Simply labeling feelings/emotions Trying to suppress or control feelings/emotions Expressing that feelings/emotions dictate behavior Identification Taking account of feelings when evaluating alternative strategies Demonstrating an awareness of how feelings are related to outcomes This code is best exemplified by no mention of feelings/emotions. "And then I got real mad and my temper just flares I mean it goes off I was gonna beat her up and I don t usually do that. I knew [the situation] would probably make me feel bad about myself it made me feel like everybody had given up on me. Integration Recognize complexity in that it is sometimes preferable to act counter to feelings/emotions. Show an interest in the significance of feelings, both one s own and those of others "Um, I didn't yell. I pretty much expressed my feelings. Um, and explained too that I understood he was hurt, but he hurt himself Note: These sample quotes are derived from the entire interview, as there were no questions that asked specifically about the emotions involved in the conflict.

14 Table 4: Scoring Criteria and Examples for Perceived Support Category Operationalization Sample Quote Adolescent feels that the other person. External Regulation Will not consider the adolescent's point of view and will not allow the adolescent's point of view as input. Wishes either to avoid conflict or to get his/her own way. Will not be satisfied unless the adolescent does what s/he wants. Introjection Recognizes the teen s right to have differing point of view but will not encourage the assertion of that point of view. (The adolescent may be worried or feel guilty, self-conscious, or inhibited about any efforts to assert himself/herself). Identification Recognizes and respects the adolescent s right to disagree. Attempts, through discussion, to persuade the adolescent to see his/her side, rather than attempting to achieve mutual understanding. "Because if I had voiced my feelings then he would be against me.he will not listen to anybody else's opinion with any chance of agreeing with them." "I think she appreciates that I am doing what she asks, but I really think she'd want me to put in that extra study time." "I think they thought I made a good decision. You know, they respect my situation, but they weren't sure if they agreed." Integration Is genuinely interested in understanding the adolescent s point of view. Encourages the adolescent to discuss his/her point of view, even if it differs from how the other person feels. "He said I was probably the best friend he had for helping him out with that because he needed advice, and I was there to help." Note: These sample quotes are derived from questions that probe how the teen feels the other person would have rated her/his strategies.

15 Figure 2. Interaction of Total Autonomous Self-Regulation and Social Competence in Predicting Problem Behavior Problem Behavior Low Total Auton. Average Total Auton Low Interpersonal Negotiation Strategies High High Total Auton.

16 Figure 1. Interaction of Autonomous Self-Regulation in Parent Situations and Social Competence in Predicting Problem Behavior Problem Behavior Low Parent Autonomy Average Parent Autonomy High Parent Autonomy Low Interpersonal Negotiation Strategies High

Methodology to Assess Adolescent Autonomy in Situations of Interpersonal Conflict 1

Methodology to Assess Adolescent Autonomy in Situations of Interpersonal Conflict 1 Phyllis Holditch Marla Zucker English Norman Deborah F. Deckner Gabriel Kuperminc Georgia State University & Joseph P.