Family Process Effects on Adolescent Males' Susceptibility to Antisocial Peer Pressure.

FAMILY PROCESS EFFECTS ON ADOLESCENT MALES' SUSCEPTIBILITY TO ANTISOCIAL PEER PRESSURE* Mary Elizabeth Curtner-Smith and Carol E. MacKinnon-Lewis** A previous study found that teenage boys living in single-mother families exhibited higher rates of deviant behavior than boys living in either single-mother families containing an additional adult (e.g., grandparent, uncle, or mother's friend) or boys living in biological two-parent families (Dornbusch et al., 1985). Dornbusch et al. speculated that the difference in the boys' deviancy rates was due to the presence of an additional adult within the household, thereby providing greater control over adolescents than mothers alone can exert. Steinberg (1987), however, questioned the additional adult hypothesis because Dornbusch et al. found that the deviancy rates for boys residing in stepparent families were similar to the deviancy rates of boys residing in single-mother families, and because Steinberg found in his own study that boys residing in stepparent families were as susceptible to antisocial peer pressure as boys residing in single-mother families. Both researchers found family structure to be the strongest predictor of either susceptibility to antisocial peer pressure or deviancy. Neither researcher, however, examined how family processes might differ among mothers, fathers, stepfathers, and additional adults, which may explain why adolescents' functioning varied with family structure. Not all researchers have found an association between child developmental outcomes and family structure. Kurdek and Sinclair (1988), for example, found that family structure was unrelated to assessments of young adolescents' goal-directedness, school-related problems, and symptoms of maladjustment (i.e., somatization, self-consciousness, depression, hostility). Nevertheless, most studies investigating the association between family structure and child functioning generally indicate that children whose parents have divorced are at greater risk for negative outcomes (Amato & Keith, 1991). Family Processes Contributing to Adolescent Behavior There is strong evidence connecting parenting styles to child outcomes (Baumrind, 1971; Maccoby, 1992; Maccoby & Martin, 1983). Parents who adopt an authoritarian parenting style are generally overly restrictive and demanding of children, and exhibit little warmth and affection. Authoritarian parents typically make decisions regarding their children based on the needs of the adults rather than on the needs of the children. Communication between authoritarian parents and their children, therefore, tends to be unilateral, with parents dictating the outcomes of decisions to children without considering the children's needs or wishes. In contrast, parents who adopt a permissive parenting style are undemanding and highly tolerant of their children's impulsive behaviors. Children of permissive parents, for the most part, tend to make their own decisions with little parental input. Finally, parents who adopt an authoritative parenting style make age-appropriate demands for their children's behavior and display high levels of warmth and affection. Authoritative parents are generally open to listening to the children's point of view when considering decisions involving their children. Communication between authoritative parents and their children, therefore, tends to be bilateral, with much negotiation. Both permissive parenting and, especially, authoritarian parenting are associated with adolescents' antisocial behavior and poor school performance (Dornbusch et al., 1985; Hetherington et al., 1992; Steinberg, 1987). In contrast, authoritative parenting, as well as other dimensions of parenting that typically co-occur (e.g., supportiveness, inductive reasoning, and nonpunitive discipline), is associated with adolescents' personal and social competence (Amato, 1989; Lamborn, Mounts, Steinberg, & Dornbusch, 1991). …