| Literature DB >> 35353817 |
Joyce Hayek1,2, Francine Schneider1, Nathalie Lahoud3,4, Maya Tueni2, Hein de Vries1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this prospective study is to examine how parenting style relates to academic achievement of Lebanese adolescents and test the mediating effect of self-efficacy and intention towards getting good grades. Potential moderation by demographic factors (age, gender, school type, religion and parents' education) was also examined.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35353817 PMCID: PMC8967044 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0265595
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Research framework.
Descriptive characteristics of the sample (N = 345).
| Characteristics | Frequency (%) |
|---|---|
|
| |
| Male | 161 (46.7) |
| Female | 184 (53.3) |
|
| |
| Mean (±SD) | 16.57± 0.76 |
|
| |
| Public | 118 (34.2) |
| Private | 227 (65.8) |
|
| |
| Christian | 302 (87.5) |
| Non-Christian | 43 (12.5) |
|
| |
| Low | 29 (8.9) |
| Medium | 149 (45.7) |
| High | 148 (45.4) |
|
| |
| Low | 12 (3.6) |
| Medium | 141 (41.8) |
| High | 184 (54.6) |
|
| |
| Live with both parents | 317 (91.9) |
| Other arrangements | 28 (8.1) |
|
| |
| Mean (±SD) | 0.69 ± 1.05 |
|
| |
| Mean (±SD) | 1.05 ± 0.87 |
|
| |
| Mean (±SD) | -0.61 ± 1.02 |
|
| |
| Mean (±SD) | 1.18 ± 0.94 |
|
| |
| Mean (±SD) | 1.02 ± 0.91 |
|
| |
| Mean (±SD) | 1.18 ±0.77 |
|
| |
| Mean (±SD) | 0.61 ± 0.87 |
|
| |
| Mean (±SD) | 0.15 ± 0.65 |
|
| |
| Mean (±SD) | 1.24 ±0.77 |
|
| |
| Mean (±SD) | 12.89 ± 2.13 |
| Range (over 20) | [6.7;18.5] |
|
| |
| Neglectful | 66 (19.4) |
| Permissive | 68 (19.9) |
| Authoritarian | 100 (29.3) |
| Authoritative | 107 (31.4) |
Correlations between academic achievement and parenting styles and socio-demographics: Bivariate associations.
| Variables | Academic Achievement Mean ± SD | Test statistic (df) | p |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| -1.010 | 0.313 | |
| • Males | 12.77 ± 2.25 | ||
| • Females | 13.00 ± 2.02 | ||
|
| - | -0.163 | 0.003 |
|
| -8.589 | <0.001 | |
| • Public | 11.65 ± 2.02 | ||
| • Private | 13.54 ± 1.89 | ||
|
| -2.906 | 0.004 | |
| • Christian | 13.02 ± 2.11 | ||
| • Non-Christian | 12.02 ± 2.09 | ||
|
| 6.899 | 0.001 | |
| • Low | 11.95 ± 1.77 | ||
| • Medium | 12.62 ± 2.23 | ||
| • High | 13.33 ±2.07 | ||
|
| 10.165 | <0.001 | |
| • Low | 11.72 ± 1.31 | ||
| • Medium | 12.42 ± 2.19 | ||
| • High | 13.36 ±1.99 | ||
|
| 2.119 | 0.035 | |
| • Live with both parents | 12.96 ± 2.08 | ||
| • Other arrangements | 12.08 ±2.51 | ||
|
| - | 0.102 | 0.059 |
|
| - | -0.015 | 0.780 |
|
| - | 0.066 | 0.227 |
|
| - | 0.020 | 0.706 |
|
| - | -0.066 | 0.224 |
|
| - | -0.005 | 0.923 |
|
| - | 0.097 | 0.074 |
|
| - | 0.272 | <0.001 |
|
| - | 0.252 | <0.001 |
|
| 2.243 | 0.083 | |
| • Neglectful | 12.56 ± 2.20 | ||
| • Permissive | 12.88 ± 2.20 | ||
| • Authoritarian | 12.69 ± 2.05 | ||
| • Authoritative | 13.31 ± 2.09 |
Notes:
a p-value for the Independent Samples T-test,
b p-value for the Spearman correlation,
c p-value for ANOVA,
d p-value for the Pearson correlation.
Associations between academic achievement and parenting styles and demographics: Multivariate analysis.
| Variables | Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| β | 95% CI | p | β | 95% CI | p | β | 95% CI | p | β | 95% CI | p | |
|
| ||||||||||||
| • Authoritative | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| • Neglectful | -0.87 | [-1.55, -0.19] | 0.012 | -1.07 | [-1.69, -0.45] | 0.001 | -0.82 | [-1.43, -0.21] | 0.008 | -0.66 | [-1.26, -0.06] | 0.032 |
| • Permissive | -0.47 | [-1.15, 0.21] | 0.173 | -0.68 | [-1.29, -0.07] | 0.029 | -0.70 | [-1.29, -0.11] | 0.020 | -0.64 | [-1.22, -0.07] | 0.029 |
| • Authoritarian | -0.62 | [-1.23, -0.01] | 0.045 | -0.83 | [-1.39, -0.27] | 0.004 | -0.69 | [-1.24, -0.16] | 0.012 | -0.62 | [-1.15, -0.09] | 0.023 |
|
| -0.38 | [-0.67, -0.09] | 0.010 | -0.35 | [-0.63, -0.07] | 0.015 | -0.31 | [-0.59, -0.04] | 0.025 | |||
|
| ||||||||||||
| • Public | 1 | 1 | 1 | |||||||||
| • Private | 1.96 | [1.42, 2.50] | <0.001 | 1.86 | [1.33, 2.39] | <0.001 | 1.84 | [1.32, 2.36] | <0.001 | |||
|
| ||||||||||||
| • Non-Christian | 1 | 1 | 1 | |||||||||
| • Christian | -0.25 | [-0.98, 0.48] | 0.502 | 0.009 | [-0.70, 0.72] | 0.981 | 0.09 | [-0.60, 0.79] | 0.787 | |||
|
| ||||||||||||
| • Low | 1 | 1 | 1 | |||||||||
| • Moderate | -0.18 | [-1.04, 0.67] | 0.670 | -0.12 | [-0.94, 0.71] | 0.780 | -0.17 | [-0.97, 0.64] | 0.684 | |||
| • High | -0.001 | [-0.89, 0.88] | 0.998 | 0.07 | [-0.78, 0.94] | 0.860 | -0.004 | [-0.85, 0.84] | 0.993 | |||
|
| ||||||||||||
| • Low | 1 | 1 | 1 | |||||||||
| • Moderate | 0.32 | [-0.88, 1.52] | 0.603 | 0.08 | [-1.07, 1.25] | 0.880 | -0.08 | [-1.22, 1.06] | 0.892 | |||
| • High | 0.43 | [-0.79, 1.66] | 0.487 | 0.29 | [-0.89, 1.49] | 0.621 | 0.19 | [-0.98, 1.35] | 0.750 | |||
|
| ||||||||||||
| • Live with both parents | 1 | 1 | 1 | |||||||||
| • Other arrangements | -0.48 | [-1.32, 0.35] | 0.259 | -0.48 | [-1.29, 0.32] | 0.238 | -0.46 | [-1.25, 0.33] | 0.252 | |||
|
| 0.13 | [-0.07, 0.33] | 0.199 | 0.09 | [-0.10, 0.29] | 0.359 | ||||||
|
| 0.14 | [-0.10, 0.38] | 0.261 | 0.09 | [-0.14, 0.34] | 0.436 | ||||||
|
| 0.72 | [0.39, 1.05] | <0.001 | 0.60 | [0.28, 0.93] | <0.001 | ||||||
|
| 0.51 | [0.24, 0.79] | <0.001 | |||||||||
β = Unstandardized Coefficient; CI = confidence interval. Dependent variable: Academic Achievement.
Model 1: Variables entered: Parenting style (Permissive, authoritarian, neglectful).
Association was significant: p < 0.05
R2 = 0.023
Model 2: Variables entered: Variables in Model 1 + Age, Type of school, Religion, Father’s educational level Mother’s educational level, Family structure.
Association was significant: p < 0.05
R2 = 0.257
Model 3: Variables entered: Variables in Model 2 + Attitude, Social norm-teacher, Self-efficacy.
Association was significant: p < 0.05
R2 = 0.323
Model 4: Variables entered: Variables in Model 3+ Intention
Association was significant: p < 0.05
R2 = 0.352
Serial mediation modelling linking parenting style and academic achievement (n = 338).
| Coefficient | SE | P-value | LLCI | ULCI | |
|
|
| ||||
| • Authoritarian | -0.16 | 0.09 | 0.107 | -0.35 | 0.03 |
| • Permissive | 0.04 | 0.11 | 0.713 | -0.17 | 0.25 |
| • Neglectful | -0.25 | 0.11 | 0.022 | -0.47 | -0.03 |
|
| 0.29 | 0.06 | <0.001 | 0.03 | 0.08 |
|
|
| ||||
| • Authoritarian | -0.14 | 0.11 | 0.190 | -0.36 | 0.07 |
| • Permissive | -0.13 | 0.12 | 0.281 | -0.37 | 0.11 |
| • Neglectful | -0.34 | 0.12 | 0.006 | -0.58 | -0.09 |
|
| 0.53 | 0.14 | <0.001 | 0.26 | 0.80 |
|
| 0.65 | 0.16 | <0.001 | 0.34 | 0.96 |
|
|
| ||||
| • Authoritarian | -0.62 | 0.26 | 0.020 | -1.14 | -0.09 |
| • Permissive | -0.64 | 0.29 | 0.027 | -1.22 | -0.07 |
| • Neglectful | -0.73 | 0.30 | 0.016 | -1.32 | -0.13 |
Serial mediation model taking parenting style as X, academic achievement as Y, and self-efficacy and intention as mediators 1 and 2.
†All models adjusted for age, type of school, religion, father education and mother education. Models using Process Macro model #6 (Hayes, 2013).
Direct and indirect effects of parenting style on academic achievement.
|
| ||||
| Effect | P-value | LLCI | ULCI | |
|
|
| |||
| • Authoritarian | -0.62 | 0.020 | -1.14 | -0.09 |
| • Permissive | -0.64 | 0.027 | -1.22 | -0.07 |
| • Neglectful | -0.73 | 0.016 | -1.32 | -0.13 |
|
| ||||
| Parenting style => Self-efficacy => Academic Achievement | ||||
| Effect | Boot LLCI | Boot ULCI | ||
|
|
| |||
| • Authoritarian | -0.10 | -0.25 | 0.02 | |
| • Permissive | 0.02 | -0.09 | 0.16 | |
| • Neglectful | -0.16 | -0.37 | -0.002 | |
| Parenting style => Intention => Academic Achievement | ||||
|
|
| |||
| • Authoritarian | -0.08 | -0.24 | 0.04 | |
| • Permissive | -0.07 | -0.25 | 0.05 | |
| • Neglectful | -0.18 | -0.39 | -0.04 | |
| Parenting style => Self-efficacy => Intention => Academic Achievement | ||||
|
|
| |||
| • Authoritarian | -0.02 | -0.07 | 0.005 | |
| • Permissive | 0.01 | -0.03 | 0.03 | |
| • Neglectful | -0.04 | -0.11 | -0.003 | |