PARENTING STYLES AND OSTRACISM IN

ADOLESCENCE

Group #7
Irfa Rahat (17368)
Fareeha Sardar (17302)
Sadia Nasir (17330)
Uzma Younas (17363)
Nimra Arshad (17292)

BS Applied Psychology
Session: 2016-2020

Supervised by
Ms. Shafkat Nawaz
DEPARTMENT OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY
GOVT. POST GRADUATE COLLEGE FOR WOMEN
SATELLITE TOWN, GUJRANWALA
 Table of Content

Content Page no.

Chapter I
Abstract -
Introduction 1
2
1.1 Parenting Styles
1.1.1 Classification of Child-Rearing 3
1.1.2 Theatrical Framework 5
1.2 Ostracism 7
1.2.1 Subtypes of Ostracism 8
1.2.2 Theatrical Framework 9
Chapter II
Literature Review 17
2.1 International Researches 17
2.2 Indigenous Researches 20
2.3 Rationale 23
2.4 Objectives 24
2.5 Hypothesis 24
Chapter III
Method 25
3.1 Research Design 25
3.2 Sampling Strategies 25
3.3 Sample 25
3.3.1 Inclusion Criteria 25
3.3.2 Exclusion Criteria 25
3.4 Operational definition of variables 26
3.4.1 Parenting Styles 26
3.4.2 Ostracism 26
3.5 Assessment Measures 27

I
 3.5.1 Demographic Information Questionnaire 27
Statistics of Demographic Variables 28
3.5.2 Parenting Styles Index 28
3.5.3 Ostracism Experience Scale for Adolescents 29
3.6 Procedures 29
3.7 Ethical Considerations 29
Chapter IV
Results 31
Summary of Findings 34
Chapter V
Discussion 36
5.1 Conclusion 37
5.2 Suggestions and Limitations 37
5.3 Implementation 38
References -
Appendices -

II
 Abstract

The current study will be aimed to find the relationship between Parenting Styles

and Ostracism in adolescence. It is hypothesized that there will be a significant positive

relationship between strictness-supervision parenting style and ostracism. It is also

hypothesized that there will be a mean gender difference in experienced ostracism in

adolescents. Data was collected from 100 participants (50=male and 50=female) by using

Parenting Style Index (Steinberg, 2019) and Ostracism Experience Scale for Adolescents

(Gilman, Carter-Sowell, DeWall, Adams, and Carboni 2012). Pearson product moment

correlation was applied which showed that there is no significant relationship between

behavioral strictness-supervision and ostracism. Independent sample t-test was used to find

out the gender differences which showed non-significant gender difference in experienced

ostracism. The findings of this study have important implication as it provides an insight

in parenting styles influence in experiencing ostracism.

Keywords; Parenting Styles, Ostracism, Adolescents

III
 1

Chapter I

Introduction

Human are social animals—they depend upon forging and maintaining

relationships with each other for their survival and psychological well-being (Lieberman,

2013). Evidence suggests that family environments constitute the basic ecology where

children’s behavior is manifested, learned, learned, encouraged, and suppressed (Dishion,

2006). Parenting refers to the intricacies of raising a child and not exclusively for a

biological relationship (Brooks, 2012). Parent’s roles in the family environment have

primarily been to prepare children for adulthood through rules and discipline. During

adolescence, however, the influence of peers also serves as an important socialization

agent. Despite this new sphere of influence, research has clearly demonstrated that

parenting accounts for more variance in externalizing behaviors in adolescence than any

other one factor. (Crosswhite and Kerpelman, 2009). Ostracism, is taken as being ignored

or excluded by others in another negative interpersonal experience that happens in a

variety of contexts and cultures throughout the world (Williams, 2007). As it thwarts

people’s fundamental need for social relationships and belongings, it is a painful and

distressful experience with powerful negative effects on individuals (Nezlek, 2012).

As the age of adolescents (10-19) is the critical part of one’s life where an

individual expands his knowledge to the outside world. Despite of being a unique person,

one cannot overcome the influence of parenting. This influence might also create an

impact on one’s peer relation and so, thus the present study explores the relationship

between parenting styles and ostracism in adolescence. Furthermore, it also strived to

know the gender difference of experienced ostracism by adolescents.

 2

1.1 Parenting Styles

Developmental psychologists have been interested in how parents influence the

development of children's social and instrumental competence since at least the 1920s.

One of the most robust approaches to this area is the study of what has been called

"parenting style" (Darling, 1999). The word “parenting” is derived from the Latin verb

parere, a word defined as “to bring forth or produce”. Parenting is a performing a role of

a parent by care-giving, nurturance and protection of the child by a natural or substitute

parent. The parent supports the child by exercising authority and through consistent,

empathic, appropriate behavior in response to the child’s needs. “It is the process of

promoting and supporting the physical, emotional, social, and intellectual development of

a child from infancy to adulthood. Parenting refers to the activity of raising a child rather

than the biological relationship”. Style is a constellation of attitudes toward the child that

are communicated to the child and create an emotional climate in which the parent's

behaviors are expressed...tone of voice, body language, inattention, bursts of temper and

so on (Darling and Steinberg, 1993). Parenting style is considered a characteristic of the

parent that is stable over time and constitutes the environmental and emotional context

for child-rearing and socialization (Baumrind, 1989). Altogether, parenting styles are

conceptualized as a constellation of attitudes toward the child that are communicated to

the child, and that, taken together, create an emotional climate in which the parents’

behaviors are expressed. (Darling and Steinberg, 1993). Parenting is a complex activity

that includes many specific behaviors that work individually and together to influence

child outcomes. Although specific parenting behaviors, such as spanking or reading

aloud, may influence child development, looking at any specific behavior in isolation
 3

may be misleading. Many writers have noted that specific parenting practices are less

important in predicting child well-being than is the broad pattern of parenting. Most

researchers who attempt to describe this broad parental milieu rely on Diana Baumrind's

concept of parenting style. The construct of parenting style is used to capture normal

variations in parents' attempts to control and socialize their children (Baumrind, 1991).

Parenting style captures two important elements of parenting: parental

responsiveness and parental demandingness (McCord,). Parental responsiveness (also

referred to as parental warmth or supportiveness) refers to "the extent to which parents

intentionally foster individuality, self-regulation, and self-assertion by being attuned,

supportive, and acquiescent to children's special needs and demands" (Baumrind, 1991, p.

62). Parental demandingness (also referred to as behavioral control) refers to "the claims

parents make on children to become integrated into the family whole, by their maturity

demands, supervision, disciplinary efforts and willingness to confront the child who

disobeys" (Baumrind, 1991).

1.1.2 Classification of Child-Rearing. Based on two dimensions (responsiveness

& demandingness) a four-fold classification of child-rearing patterns has been described

(Baumrind, 1991). Authoritative parents are both demanding and responsive. This means

that they are controlling but not restrictive. The child-centeredness typical of them

includes high parental involvement, such as interest and active participation in the child's

life (Paulson, 1994), a high level of open communication (Maccoby and Martin, 1983),

encouragement of psychological autonomy (Ginsburg and Bronstein, 1993), and high

behavioral and monitoring control, including awareness of where their children are,

whom they are with, and what they are doing (Barber, 1996). Authoritarian parents are
 4

demanding but not responsive. They show fewer affiliative relationships with their

children compared with authoritative parents. Typical of their parenting is a low level of

trust and engagement toward their child, a discouraging of open communication, and a

strict control which is more adult-centered than child-centered (Maccoby and Martin,

1983). Permissive parents, in turn, are responsive but not demanding. They generally

have a warm accepting and child-centered attitude toward their child (Baumrind, 1989).

Neglectful parents are neither responsive nor demanding. They do not support or

encourage their child's self-regulation, and also often fail to monitor or supervise the

child's behavior. (Maccoby and Martin, 1983). Typical of them, in addition to a non-

controlling attitude, is an overall uninvolvement (Baumrind, 1991).

From another view point, there are three styles of parenting including:

“acceptance-involvement”, “psychological autonomy-granting” and “behavioral

strictness-supervision”. (Steinberg, Dornbusch and Darling, 1992). Acceptance-

involvement is based on one’s perception of the amount of paying attention and

responsiveness of parents; these parents are warm, firm, involved, and sensitive to their

children’s changing needs, and set realistic standards and clear rules (Jaffe, 1998).

Psychological autonomy-granting parenting styles refer to parent’s tolerance against

children’s opinions, and they use democratic discipline in parent-child relationship also

the parents don’t push their children to compliant the rules. In behavioral strictness

supervision style, parents shape, control and evaluate the behavior and attitudes of the

child in accordance with a set of standards of conduct, usually the absolute standards

(Baumrind 1996), and child is not allowed to express his opinions and there is little

opportunity to think about situations or employ reasoning (Knight et al., 2000).

 5

1.1.3 Theoretical Framework. Models of parenting are divided into two basic

categories; conventional models of parenting and modern models of parenting.

1.1.3.1 Conventional Models of Parenting. Rules of traffic model is an

instructional approach to upbringing. Parents explain to their children how to behave,

assuming that they taught the rules of behavior as they did the rules of traffic. What you

try to teach a child doesn’t necessarily mean it’ll get through to them. For example, a

teenager was told "a thousand times" that stealing was wrong yet the teen continued to do

so. The problem of parenting, in this case, is not that they tried to teach him/her the right

thing, but that they considered parenting as a single, narrow-minded method of parenting,

without fulfilling the range of parental duties. Fine gardening model explains that parents

believe that children have positive and negative qualities, the latter of which parents

should weed out or prune into an appropriate shape. The problem in this parenting

method is that parents fight with the faults of their child rather than appreciate their

current achievements and/or capabilities; a method which may continue through their

whole life without success. Which may directly or indirectly influence the child social

life. However, the models' rules of traffic and fine gardening are especially dangerous

because we following our best motives, constantly quarrel with our children, destroy

relationships, and all our parental work becomes a hopeless effort. Moreover, we don’t

understand why this has happened" (Soloveychik, 2008).

Reward and punishment model (RaP) is a most popular model of parenting based

on logic: for a good action - a reward/praise and for a bad action – a

punishment/scolding/reprimand. To teach a child by this logic is relatively easy and can

even be effective, especially if it is done consistently. It is because it forms a sense of

 6

justice in a child's mind that it works. But, simultaneously, it imparts the child's universal

image of the reward and punishment and when real life doesn't prove to be just it

undermines the child's faith in justice, according to S. Soloveychik. He writes, "It is

dangerous for the future of children. It may happen that a man, grown up by this model,

facing the first serious failure or first trouble, would lift his arms and ask, “Why me?”

(Soloveychik, 2008).

1.1.3.2 Modern Models of Parenting. Parenting typically utilizes tools of reward

and punishment method, but most child development experts now agree that corporal

punishment is not an effective behavior modification tool and social up bring of the child.

Nurturant parent model describes a family model where children are expected to explore

their surroundings with protection from their parents. Strict father model places a strong

value on discipline as a means to survive and thrive in a harsh world. Taking Children

Seriously Sees both praise and punishment as manipulative and harmful to children and

advocates other methods to reach an agreement with them. Attachment parenting Seeks

to create strong emotional bonds, avoiding physical punishment and accomplishing

discipline through interactions recognizing a child's emotional needs all while focusing

on a holistic understanding of the child. Bowlby initially developed attachment theory to

explain why infants develop close relationships with their caregivers, as well as why and

to what extent disruptions in such relationships affect later development. His theory

provides a developmental framework that helps to explain both normative development

and individual differences in social, emotional and behavioral outcomes over the course

of infancy and early childhood. Within the past two decades, researchers have turned to
 7

questions related to the nature and function of the attachment system over the course of

the life span, with a particular focus on adolescence (Allen and Land, 1999).

The primary function of the attachment system during infancy is to maximize the

safety and protection of the developing infant (Bowlby, 1982), but research also shows

that there are effects on adolescent and parent relationships based on whether they have a

secure or insecure attachment to one another. A parent's interaction with their child

during infancy creates an internal working model, which is the development of

expectations that a child has for future relationships and interactions based on the

interactions they had during infancy with their caregiver. As children mature, they

develop a larger repertoire of behaviors for achieving proximity to caregivers, and the

focus on protection shifts somewhat to something more akin to emotional support. If an

adolescent continues to have a secure attachment with their caregiver, they are more

likely to talk to their guardian about their problems and concerns, have stronger

interpersonal relationships with friends and significant others, and also have higher self-

esteem. Conclusively, by adolescence, the outcome of activation of the attachment

system is more towards “felt security” on the part of the teenager, rather than actual

physical safety (Allen and Land, 1999).

1.2 Ostracism

Belonging is a fundamental requirement for security, reproductive success, and

mental health (Smith et al. 1999). The past decade has witnessed a proliferation of

research interest on what happens when the person does not belong, through acts of

ostracism, social exclusion, and rejection. Ostracism defined here as being excluded and

ignored, has a powerful immediate effect on individuals. By all accounts, ostracism

 8

occurred long before it was named (ostrakismos) around 500 B.C., when Athenians cast

their votes on shards of clay, ostraca, to determine whether a member of the community,

usually a former political leader, should be banished for a period of 10 years. Indeed,

ostracism, defined here as being ignored and excluded, has been observed in almost all

social species (e.g., primates, lions, wolves, buffalos, bees); in anthropological accounts

of tribes from around the world; in modern industrialized nations; in governmental,

religious, military, penal, and educational institutions; in informal groups and in close

relationships (relational ostracism, or the silent treatment); in playgrounds; and by

children, adolescents, and adults (Williams, 2001).

Psychology’s interest in ostracism and related phenomena such as social

exclusion and rejection was largely implicit for the first century. A research on opinion

deviance in group discussions found that if those who disagreed with the group did not

yield to communicative attempts to conform to the group’s opinion, they would face

expulsion from the group (Schachter’s, 1951). It appears that ostracism is pervasive and

powerful. Within even a brief episode of a minimal ostracism experience, individuals

report distress, anger, sadness, and lower levels of belonging, self-esteem, control, and

meaningful existence (Williams and Richardson, 2004). Ostracism is a universal social

phenomenon that can be seen across all known human cultures (Williams, 2001).

Ostracism may lead to other maladaptive decisions and behaviors precisely because of a

need to belong and to be accepted by others (Baumeister and Leary 1995).

1.2.1 Subtypes of ostracism. Two ostracism subtypes often identified in

stoichiometric studies. The first subgroup, often referred to as socially rejected (i.e.,

excluded). Social exclusion appears to be defined as being excluded, alone, or isolated,

 9

sometimes with explicit declarations of dislike, but other times not (Twenge et al. 2001).

Often consists of youth who display overt and largely inappropriate behaviors (e.g.,

physical or verbal aggression, behavioral disruption, gossip spreading) that lead them to

be actively excluded by their peers (Crick et al., 2009). The second subgroup is referred

as; socially neglected (i.e., ignored) do not display the types of behaviors that elicit active

exclusion; for various reasons such as displaying state specific anxiety or lacking

appropriate social skills, these youths are simply overlooked by peers (Rubin, Coplan and

Bowker, 2009). Rejection is typically operationalized as a declaration by an individual or

group that they do not (or no longer) want to interact or be in the company of the

individual (Leary et al. 2005).

1.2.2 Theoretical framework. A few scattered studies prior to 1990 examined

reactions to being ignored, excluded, or rejected, they had little theoretical foundation or

impact (Williams, 2001). Subsequent to this, a model and examples of ostracism were put

forth that explicated a taxonomy (various types of ostracism, different modes, motives,

etc.), the need-threat notion (ostracism threatens belonging, self-esteem, control, and

meaningful existence needs), and short-term (attempts to fortify threatened needs) and

long-term (giving up) responses. Additionally, a theory of the need to belong was

published that elevated interest in inclusion and exclusion (Baumeister and Leary 1995).

1.2.2.1 Paradigms and Manipulations of Ostracism, Social Exclusion, and

Rejection. Several paradigms have enjoyed frequent use in research on ostracism and

related phenomena. Undoubtedly, these paradigms themselves may account for some of

the discrepant outcomes (i.e., pro- versus antisocial responses), so it is wise to consider

each and to note which paradigms are associated with which outcomes. Ball Tossing, a
 10

minimal ostracism paradigm in which participants are ignored and excluded within the

context of an emergent ball-tossing game that appears to have no connection with the

experiment itself. Participants (two confederates and one actual participant) are told to

wait quietly for the experimenter’s return, at which point the experiment will begin. One

of the confederates notices a ball and starts to toss it around. Once each person has had a

chance to catch and throw a few times, participants randomly assigned to the ostracism

condition are never again thrown the ball, nor are they looked at or responded to. The two

confederates continue playing enthusiastically for another four or so minutes. In the

inclusion condition, participants continue to receive the ball approximately one-third of

the time (Williams, 2007).

Cyberball a virtual analogue to the ball-tossing paradigm that was intended to be

more efficient (it requires no confederates) and less traumatic. Instead of an emergent

game that occurs ostensibly outside the experiment, researchers inform participants over

the computer that the study involves the effects of mental visualization on a subsequent

task, and that a game, Cyberball, has been found to work well in exercising their mental

visualization skills. Participants are told they are playing with two (sometimes three)

others who connected over the Internet (or Intranet) and that it does not matter who

throws or catches, but rather that they use the animated ball-toss game to assist them in

visualizing the other players, the setting, the temperature, and so on. This cover story,

like the emergent game in the ball-tossing paradigm, is meant to assure participants that

not getting the ball has no detrimental effects on their performance in the experiment. As

in ball tossing, ostracized participants receive the ball substantially less than did the
 11

included participants, usually getting only one or two tosses near the beginning of the

game. Typically, the game proceeds for 30–50 throws (Williams, 2007).

Life Alone a personality test, the lifealone prognosis paradigm, in which

participants respond to a personality questionnaire, receive accurate

introversion/extraversion feedback, and are randomly assigned to one of three additional

forms of feedback. In the accepted/high-belonging condition, participants are told that

they are the type who has rewarding relationships throughout life; that they will have a

long and stable marriage, and have lifelong friendships with people who care about them.

In the rejected/low-belonging condition, they are told that they are the type who will end

up alone later in life; that although they have friends and relationships now, by the time

they are in their mid-20s most of these will disappear. They may have multiple marriages,

but none of them will last, and they will end up being alone later in life. As a negative-

feedback control condition, participants in the accident-prone condition are told they will

endure a lifetime of accidents and injuries (Williams, 2007).

Get Acquainted paradigm, involves the use of a small group of actual participants

engaged in a get-acquainted discussion. They are given examples of topics to discuss

(e.g., favorite movies, major in college) and take turns talking within the group setting.

Following this discussion, they are separated and asked to identify the individual from the

group with whom they would most like to work. A few minutes later, they receive one of

two types of feedback concerning how the others voted, that either everyone wanted to

work with them (inclusion) or that no one wanted to work with them (rejection)

(Williams, 2007).
 12

Several other ostracism, social exclusion, and rejection paradigms have been used

with less frequency. Ostracism, social exclusion, and/or rejection have been manipulated

within the context of a continuous public goods dilemma game (Ouwerkerk et al. 2005),

chat rooms (Williams et al. 2002), face-to-face conversations (Geller et al. 1974), cell

phone text messaging (Smith and Williams 2004), role-playing (Zadro et al. 2005),

reliving or imagining rejection experiences (Williams and Fitness 2004), scenario

descriptions of rejection and social exclusion (Hitlan et al. 2006), and a variety of virtual

reality worlds (Williams, 2007).

1.2.2.2 Theories of Ostracism, Social Exclusion, and Rejection. Whereas many

hypotheses have been proposed to explain specific experimental predictions, there are

currently three major theories that attempt to explain and predict the impact and

consequences of ostracism, social exclusion, and rejection (Williams, 2007). A temporal

examination of responses to ostracism outlines that although only a few theorists have

emphasized the importance of examining the impact of ostracism over time (Brewer

2005), the extant literature supports the utility of such a temporal framework. As with

responses to many situational factors, there are automatic reflexive responses to ostracism

that are followed by more deliberative reflective reactions. This temporal examination

can be taken further to examine (although perhaps not through experiments) the impact of

cumulative instances of frequent exposures to ostracism or to long-lasting episodes of

ostracism. Williams proposes the following sequence: (a) reflexive painful response to

any form of ostracism, unmitigated by situational or individual difference factors; (b)

threats to the need for belonging, self-esteem, control, and meaningful existence, and

increases in sadness and anger; and (c) a reflective stage that is responsive to cognitive
 13

appraisals of the situation, the sources of ostracism, the reasons for ostracism, and

predisposing inclinations that reflect individual differences residing within the target of

ostracism, all of which guide the individual to fortify the most threatened needs. If

relational needs (belonging and self-esteem) are most thwarted, then ostracized

individuals will seek to fortify these needs by thinking, feeling, and behaving in a

relatively prosocial manner. If, however, efficacy and existence/recognition needs are

most thwarted, ostracized individuals will attempt to fortify these needs, which in many

instances may result in controlling, provocative, and even antisocial responses. For

individuals who encounter multiple episodes (or single long-term episodes) of ostracism,

their ability to marshal their resources to fortify threatened needs will be diminished, and

feelings of helplessness, alienation, and despair will infuse their thoughts, feelings, and

actions (Williams and Zadro 2005).

The social monitoring system and sociometer theory—helps regulate optimal

levels of belongingness. When belonging is threatened, the individual is motivated to

attend more carefully to social cues, presumably to achieve success in subsequent social

interactions (Leary et al. 1995 & 1998) sociometer theory, which asserts that self-esteem

is a gauge of relational valuation that, when low, signals the individual that changes must

be made to improve inclusionary status (Williams, 2007).

Cognitive deconstruction and self-regulation impairment theoretical framework

argued that the blow of social exclusion is much like the blow of a blunt instrument, and

it causes a temporary state of cognitive deconstruction (Baumeister et al., 2002), much

like the affectively flat stage that precedes suicide attempts. This explanation has been

offered especially when socially excluded individuals show no signs of mood impact
 14

(Baumeister and DeWall 2005). Consistent with this explanation of cognitive impairment

is the premise that social exclusion impairs individuals’ ability to self-regulate, which

inhibits their ability to utilize the cognitive/motivational resources that are necessary to

avoid impulsive acts and to engage in hedonic sacrifice and delayed gratification. This

explanation fits nicely with observations of anger and indiscriminant aggression that

sometimes follow social exclusion, and with recent evidence showing impaired inhibition

against eating nonnutritive foods and avoidance of less tasty, nutritive foods (Williams,

2007).

Several other theories of ostracism, social exclusion, and rejection includes theory

of belongingness which argues on the development of positive and negative relationships

in one’s life. It further forces that positive affect in an individual’s life is due to

interpersonal satisfaction, fulfillment of their basic needs. Similarly, negative affect is

due to experiencing stress, dejection and pressure from society or environment

(Baumeister and Leary, 1995). They also defined need of belongingness; as it is related to

individual’s fundamental need of social acceptance or refusal. If an individual is socially

accepted, it puts positive effect on an individual’s health and well-being and avoids

negative effects of socially rejection. The lasting effects of ostracism are comprised of

despair, learned helplessness, and depression (Williams, 2001). Belongingness is the

human emotional needs to be an accepted member of group. Whether it is family, friends

co -worker, or something else people have to inherent desire to belong and be important

part of something greater than themselves. The need to belong is the need to give and

receive attention from other. If belonging of children strong with their parents then child

able to create identity of themselves without belonging children cannot identify

 15

themselves as clearly therefore children having difficulties to communicating and relating

to their surroundings (Wikipedia, 2019).

Another theory is, theory of reciprocity. Reciprocity here refers to “exchanges of

roughly equivalent values in which the actions of each party are contingent on the prior

actions of the others in such a way that good is returned for good, and bad for bad”

(Keohane, 1986). Therefore, ostracized children are guided by negative reciprocity

beliefs. In such a condition they start believing that it is justified to retaliate directly

against those who excluded them. Reciprocity have two types, positive reciprocity and

negative reciprocity. Positive reciprocity occurs when an action committed by one

individual that has positive effect of someone else is returned with an action that has

approximately equal positive effect. If parents not gave the positive response to the

children thus also children not gave the positive responses to the parents. This is cause of

ostracism in children if parents neglect the children then children also neglect the parents

(Miller, 1941).

Lastly, displaced aggression suggest that such individuals may display their

hostility against different objects in their environment (e.g., their organization).

Consequently, when individuals go through ostracism, they can also be involved in

different counterproductive activities. Displaced aggression occurs when someone cannot

aggress towards the source of incitement or provocation so instead takes it out on

something else and behaves aggressively towards another individual that had nothing to

do with initial conflict. If parents show the displaced aggression to the children not pay

attention to their children or neglect therefore children show the displaced aggression to
 16

their parents thus children have not initial conflict with their parents (Dollard et al.,

1939).
 17

Chapter II

Literature Review

Literature review section include a detailed and comprehensive analysis on

previously conduct researches. All comprised articles are written by professionals and

published under authorized institutions. The purpose is to study the specific area of

interest and critically analyze it, for the welfare of being. Following are such;

2.1 International Researches

Hirata & Kamakura, (2018) conducted a survey on the effects of parenting styles

on each personal growth initiative and self-esteem among Japanese university students.

Overall, 329 students (164 males, 165 females), aged from 18 to 23 participated for the

studies. The Parental Authority Questionnaire (PAQ), the Personal Growth Initiative

(PGI), and the self-esteem scale were used for data collection. Multiple regression

analyses showed that personal growth initiative and self-esteem were significantly

affected by the authoritative parenting style. The results also showed that most of the

subscales of Personal Growth Initiative and self-esteem were not significantly affected by

the authoritarian parenting style whereas, for female students, readiness for change which

is subscale of Personal Growth Initiative was significantly affected by the authoritarian

parenting style. On the other hand, Personal Growth Initiative and self-esteem were not

significantly affected by the permissive parenting style. These results indicate the

importance of the influence of the authoritative parenting style on each personal growth

initiative and self-esteem among Japanese university students.

Rosli, (2014) examined the effect of parenting styles on children's emotional and

behavioral Problems among different ethnicities of Muslim children in the U.S. Data
 18

were collected from 112 Muslim students from 6th to 12th grades. The researcher used

the Parenting Style Index (PSI), acceptance and behavioral control scales for data

collection. The researcher used the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences

Professional 19 (SPSS 19) to analyze the data. The independent sample t-test revealed

that there is no difference in the difficulties experienced by the respondent under

consistent or inconsistent parenting style.

Niu, Sun, Tian, Fan & Zhou, (2016) examined the effect of resilience in the

relation between ostracism and depression among adolescents. Ostracism was measured

by the Ostracism Experience Scale for Adolescents. Participants were recruited from two

middle schools and two high schools in central China. Convenience sampling was used to

choose two classes in each grade of each school. A total of 1126 adolescents between 12

to 18 years of age participated in this study. Results showed that, ostracism was

positively associated with depression, while resilience was negatively associated with

depression. Resilience was also found to moderate the association between ostracism and

depression, with a stronger effect for individuals with low resilience.

Tobin, Vanman, Verreynne, & Saeri, (2015) investigated two potential threats to

belonging: lurking i.e., lack of active contribution (Study I) and ostracism i.e., lack of

feedback from others (Study II). The Need Satisfaction and Ostracism scale was used.

One hundred and ninety-two individuals began study I lurking (i.e., lack of active

contribution). In study II, ostracism (i.e., lack of feedback from others), participants were

79 undergraduate psychology students from the University of Queensland. In Study I,

participants were either allowed or not allowed to share information on Facebook for 48

hours. Results showed that those who were not allowed to share information had lower
 19

levels of belonging and meaningful existence. In Study II, participants engaged in a

laboratory-based Facebook activity. Half of the profiles were set up so that participants

would not receive any feedback on their status updates. Participants who did not receive

feedback on their updates had lower levels of belonging, self-esteem, control, and

meaningful existence. Together, these findings indicate that a lack of information sharing

and feedback can threaten belonging needs.

Leung, Wu, Chen, & Young, (2011) examined the effects of personal and

situational determinants on work engagement and service performance. Workplace

ostracism, Neuroticism, Work engagement and Service performance scale was used to

collect data. The population was hotels in China. Sample was consisted of 19 hotels in

southern China, longitudinal data was collected from 304 supervisor–subordinate dyads.

Results found that workplace ostracism was negatively correlated with work engagement

and service performance. The results also suggested that work engagement mediates the

relationship between workplace ostracism and service performance. In addition,

neuroticism moderates the relationship between workplace ostracism and engagement,

and work engagement mediates the interactive effect of workplace ostracism and

neuroticism on service performance. In conclusion, this study suggested that workplace

ostracism can be harmful to organizational performance.

Yaakobi, (2017) aimed to examine the social rejection are painful like physical

pain. MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) instrument is used for this study. In an analysis

of 500 MRI studies. In one neuroimaging study, scans were obtained of participants

while being excluded in a virtual ball-tossing game. Results shows the scans showed that

the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), a region also responsive during physical pain, was
 20

more active during exclusion than during inclusion and was found to be directly

associated with the level of self-reported distress.

2.2 Indigenous Researches

Aslam & Sartaj, (2010) conducted a research on Role of Authoritative and

Authoritarian Parenting in Home, Health and Emotional Adjustment. The purpose of this

research was to investigate the impact of authoritarian and authoritative parenting in

home, health and emotional adjustment. Moreover, the study explored the relationship of

parenting with Adjustment. Relationships of authoritative and authoritarian parenting

with home, health and emotional adjustment of adolescents were compared. The sample

of the study consisted of 200 college students (100 female and 100 male). They were

selected from the different colleges of Rawalpindi and Islamabad, Pakistan. Age range of

the sample was 16 to 19 years. Parental Authority Questionnaire and Indian Adaptation

of Bell’s Adjustment Inventory Scale were used in the study. Results showed that

adolescents raised by authoritative parents have better home, health and emotional

adjustment as compared to adolescents raised by authoritarian parents.

Mohammadi, & Firoozi, (2016) investigated the relationship between parenting

styles and happiness with the mediating role of emotional intelligence. The research

method adopted was correlational and descriptive in nature. The population of the study

was all the male and female high school students. The sample of the study was 345 high

school students chosen through multistage random cluster sampling. For the purpose of

data collection; Oxford Happiness Questionnaire, Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire

and Parenting Style Questionnaire. The findings showed that parenting styles could

predict happiness. In addition, the two variables of self-awareness and optimism could act
 21

as mediators between the internal variables of authoritarian and authoritative styles and

happiness. Generally speaking, it could be said that in addition to parenting styles,

emotional intelligence plays an important role in happiness.

Jabeen, Anis-ul-Haque & Riaz, (2013) conducted a research on Parenting Styles

as Predictors of Emotion Regulation among Adolescents. The purpose of this research

was to examine the role of maternal and paternal parenting styles on the prediction of

emotional regulation among adolescents. Sample of the current research consisted of

adolescents (N = 194) belonging to 7th, 8th, and 9th classes. Parental Authority

Questionnaire and Early Adolescents Temperament Questionnaire were used to collect

the information from the participants. The objectives of the study were threefold

including examining the effect of maternal and paternal parenting styles on the prediction

of emotional regulation among adolescents, identifying the differences in parenting styles

of mothers and fathers for girls and boys, and investigating gender differences in

emotional regulation. Most of the hypotheses were supported in the present study.

Maternal and paternal authoritative parenting style positively predicted emotional

regulation whereas maternal and paternal permissive parenting style negatively predicted

emotional regulation among adolescents. The findings were non-significant on both

maternal and paternal authoritarian parenting style.

Khan, Ahmad, Hamdan & Mustaffa, (2014) conducted a research on Educational

Encouragement, Parenting Styles, Gender and Ethnicity as Predictors of Academic

Achievement among Special Education Students. The purpose of this research was to

examine the predictors of academic achievement: role of parenting styles, educational

encouragement, gender and ethnicity among special education students. Participants of

 22

this study consisted 200 special education students (N = 105 boys and N = 95 girls) age

varies 14 to 19. Parenting Practices Questionnaire and Educational Encouragement Scale

were used to collect data. Moreover, Academic achievements were assessed from their

last exam grades and Personal Data Sheet: Gender, Ethnicity, Age, and Academic CGPA.

Results showed positive relationship of academic achievement with educational

encouragement (from mother, father, parents and teachers) and authoritarian parenting

styles.

Haq, (2018) conduct a research on Combined Effects of Workplace Ostracism and

Resilience on Job Performance, Job Stress and Emotional Exhaustion. The purpose of

this study was to investigate the effects of workplace ostracism on job performance, job

stress and emotional exhaustion in the South Asian context of Pakistan. Specifically, the

study aimed to extend knowledge by examining the moderating effect of resilience on

these relationships. Data were collected in three waves from 507 employees of six

telecommunication companies located in various cities of Pakistan. Results revealed that

workplace ostracism was related to job performance and emotional exhaustion.

Furthermore, resilience significantly moderated the detrimental impact of workplace

ostracism on job performance, job stress, and emotional exhaustion.

Haq, (2014) conduct a research on Workplace Ostracism and Job Outcomes:

Moderating Effects of Psychological Capital. The purpose of this study was to examine

the relationship between workplace ostracism, psychological capital, job performance,

and job stress and turnover intention. With two waves survey (N= 229 paired responses)

of full-time employee working in different organizations of Pakistan, present research

examined the relationship of workplace ostracism with job outcomes (job performance,
 23

job stress and turnover intention) by focusing the moderating effect of psychological

capital. Data collected form variety of public and private organizations of Pakistan.

Sample includes employee of 4 privates’ school, 4 banks, 2 universities and employees of

one call center. Job performance was measured by supervisor rated, whereas all other

measures were gained from self-reported questionnaire. Workplace ostracism and

Psychological Capital Questionnaire scales were used. Supervisor rated job performance

was measured by 7 questions developed by William and Anderson and 3 items measure

by Vigoda (2000) was used to access turnover intention. Results suggested that

workplace ostracism shows significantly positive relationship with job stress and turnover

intention and negative relationship with job performance.

Jahanzeb, Fatima, & Malik, (2018) conducted a research on supervisor ostracism

and defensive silence. The purpose of this research was to investigate the sequential

mediating effects of threats to efficacy needs and defensive silence between supervisor

ostracism and emotional exhaustion. Data was collected through time-lagged (i.e. two

waves) and self-reported measure in Pakistan. Supervisor Ostracism, Threatened Efficacy

Needs, Defensive Silence and Emotional Exhaustion scales were used to collect data.

Results showed that supervisor ostracism, threat to efficacy needs and defensive silence

contribute towards emotional exhaustion.

2.3 Rationale

Parenting is a performing a role of a parent by care-giving, nurturance and

protection of the child by a natural or substitute parent. It plays a vital role in the life of

an individual and one requires a proper parenting for the well-being of the self. Parenting

styles are psychological constructs representing standard strategies that parents use in
 24

their child rearing. Proper parenting and nourishing can affect one’s life either positively

or negatively through creating a great impact on person’s behavior, emotions and thought

patterns. As parenting alone can shape the human life but it does turn into unforgeable

mold if other factors reaction along, one is the ostracism. Ostracism is the feeling of

being excluded and/or ignored by your family, peers’ group and acquaintances. Almost

all spices on this wide earth has experienced ostracism and it does create a powerful

immediate effect on beings. Individuals experience distress, anger, sadness, and lower

levels of belonging, self-esteem, control, and meaningful existence even when they go

through a minimal episode of ostracism. The present study explores to find how

behavioral strictness-supervision parenting style and ostracism are connected to each

other. Furthermore, it strives to find out the gender difference in terms of experienced

ostracism.

2.4 Objectives

The objectives of the study are;

• To assess the relationship between parenting styles and ostracism in

adolescence.

• To assess the gender difference in term of experienced ostracism.

2.5 Hypothesis

• There will be a positive relationship in behavioral strictness-supervision

parenting style and ostracism in adolescents.

• There will be a gender difference in terms of experiencing ostracism in

adolescents
 25

Chapter III
Method

The aim of this Study is to investigate the relationship between parenting styles

and ostracism in adolescents. Parenting Styles Index and Ostracism Experience for

Adolescents are to be used for data collection. The interested sample is of higher

secondary education students of different colleges across Gujranwala.

3.1 Research Design

To determine the relationship between parenting styles and ostracism in

adolescent’s correlation research design is used.

3.2 Sampling Strategies

To collect the date from sample with regards to our study a planned sampling

strategy is practiced.

3.3 Sample

The representative sample of the study is of 100 adolescents (50=male and

50=female) with age range of 10-19 to conduct this study. Data is to be collected from

various colleges of Gujranwala.

3.3.1 Inclusion Criteria.

• Adolescents age of 10-19

• Both Female and Male

• Adolescents from schools and colleges of Gujranwala

3.3.2 Exclusion Criteria.

• Individuals who have any physical disability and/or psychological hazard

• Adolescents whom have terminated their education

 26

3.4 Operational Definition of Variables

Following are the operational definition of parenting styles and ostracism;

3.4.1 Parenting Styles. Parenting Styles conceptualized as a constellation of

attitudes toward the child that are communicated to the child, and that, taken together,

create an emotional climate in which the parents’ behaviors are expressed. Steinberg

classified parenting styles in three categories; (1) Acceptance-involvement is based on

one’s perception of the amount of paying attention and responsiveness of parents; these

parents are warm, firm, involved, and sensitive to their children’s changing needs, and set

realistic standards and clear rules (Jaffe, 1998); (2) Psychological autonomy-granting

parenting styles refer to parent’s tolerance against children’s opinions, and they use

democratic discipline in parent-child relationship also the parents don’t push their

children to compliant the rules; (3) In behavioral strictness supervision style, parents

shape, control and evaluate the behavior and attitudes of the child in accordance with a

set of standards of conduct, usually the absolute standards (Baumrind 1996), and child is

not allowed to express his opinions and there is little opportunity to think about situations

or employ reasoning (Knight et al., 2000). The acceptance/involvement scale measures

the extent to which the adolescent perceives his or her parents as loving, responsive, and

involved. The strictness/supervision scale assesses parental monitoring and supervision of

the adolescent. (Lamborn et al., 1991).

3.4.2 Ostracism. Ostracism, the act of ignoring and excluding, is a universally

applied tactic of social control. Two subtypes of ostracism are; (1) socially rejected (i.e.,

excluded), often consists of youth who display overt and largely inappropriate behaviors

(e.g., physical or verbal aggression, behavioral disruption, gossip spreading) that lead
 27

them to be actively excluded by their peers, conversely those referred to as; (2) socially

neglected (i.e., ignored) do not display the types of behaviors that elicit active exclusion;

for various reasons such as displaying state specific anxiety or lacking appropriate social

skills, these youth are simply overlooked by peers. High scores indicate more ostracism

experiences encountered in daily life (Gilman, 2012).

3.5 Assessment Measures

Following measures are to be used for data collection;

3.5.1 Demographic Information Questionnaire. DIQ holds the basic and

necessary information about the participant of the research, which can also help to

determine what factors may influence a respondent answers, interests and opinion such as

age, religion, gender, education, family system and socioeconomically status (monthly

income). Following in table is the descriptive statistics of demographic variables.

 28

Table 3.1

Descriptive statistics of Demographic Variables (N=100).

Characteristics f(%) M(SD)

Age 17.58(1.68)
14-16 27(27%)
17-19 73(73%)
Gender 1.50(.50)
Male 50(50%)
Female 50(50%)

Education 2.24(.85)
Metric 27(27%)
Intermediate 22(22%)
Bachelors 51(51%)
Family System 1.42(.49)
Nuclear 58(58%)
Joint 42(42%)

Socioeconomic Status 1.96(.31)

Low 7(7%)
Middle 90(90%)
High 3(3%)
Note; M= mean, SD= standard deviation, f= frequencies, %= percentages

3.5.2 Parenting Style Index (PSI). The parenting style index used in this study

was developed by Steinberg and his colleagues (Lamborn et al., 1991; Steinberg et al.,

1994). It comprises of three subscales: acceptance-involvement, autonomy-granting and

behavioral strictness-supervision. It has 18 items on a 4-point Likert scale (4= strongly

agree, 1= strongly disagree). Two of its items are consists of true/false statements. The

Index also has another set of 6 items on a 3-point Likert scale, including "How much do
 29

your parents really; know where you go at night?" The choices range from "don't know"

to "know a lot".

3.5.3 Ostracism Experience Scale for Adolescence (OES - A). The Ostracism

Experience Scale for Adolescents (OES–A) is developed by Gilman and his colleagues

(Gilman et al., 2012). It is a 19 item self-report measure with two factors: ‘ignored by’

(11 items) or ‘excluded from’ (8 items) the social group. All items begin with the stem

“In general, others . . .” followed by wording that reflects each ostracism subtype. The

response to each item is made on a 5-point Likert-type scale (1= never, 5= always).

3.6 Procedure

The data was collected from various colleges of Gujranwala. Parenting Styles

Index and Ostracism Experience Scale for Adolescents measure was used to fulfill the

requirement of the studies. The psychometric properties of these measures were proved

and permission from respective authors was taken. For the purpose of data collection;

volunteer participants were taken. Confidentiality was assured, followed by informed

consent. The brief-out of the research purpose was given and instructions were stated

regarding research measures. Data was only collected one time from each participant and

administrators were present to address any questions. The final participants were 100

individuals, half of each gender.

3.7 Ethical Consideration

• Research measures were used with the respective author's agreement.

• The research was conducted under the authority of the authorized institution.

• Informed consent was taken before data collection.

• Confidentiality and autonomy were respected.

 30

• Objectivity was exercised and biases were eliminated.

• Data, results, methods, and procedures were reported honestly.

 31

Chapter IV

Results

The present study focuses on the parenting styles and ostracism in adolescents. A

series of statistical analysis were conducted to test the hypothesis. The socio-

demographic information of the sample was examined by computing descriptive

statistics. A Pearson product moment correlation analysis was conducted to examine the

relationship between parenting styles and ostracism in adolescents. Independent sample t-

test was carried out to examine gender differences in adolescent.

Psychometric analysis was carried out to check the Cronbach’s Alpha reliability

shown in table 4.1

 32

Table 4.1

Reliability Coefficients of The Scales and The Descriptive Statistics of Study Variables

(N= 100).

Range

Variables K a M SD Potential Actual

Parenting Style Index 26 .87 64 6.26 26-104 47-76

Acceptance-involvement 9 .85 27 5.57 9-36 9-35

Psychological autonomy- 9 .68 19 4.44 9-36 10-31

granting

Strictness-supervision 8 .68 16 2.70 8-40 11-20

OES – A 19 .76 54 12.45 19-95 23-80

Ignored 12 .59 32 7.52 12-60 15-51

Excluded 7 .83 22 7.35 7-35 7-35

Note. k= No. of items, a= Cronbach’s Alpha, M= mean, SD= Standard deviation, OES –

A, Ostracism Experienced Scale for Adolescents.

The result of the table showed that the reliability of study variables was good

while the reliabilities of their sub-factors were acceptable and satisfactory.

It was hypothesized that there is likely to be a significant positive relationship

between the behavioral strictness-supervision parenting style and ostracism in

adolescents. To test the hypothesis Pearson Product Correlation was applied. Results are

presented in table 4.2

 33

Table 4.2

Pearson Product Correlations of Parenting Styles and Ostracism (N=100)

Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1. Parenting Styles - .66** .14 .72** .03 -.02 .07

2. PSI: acceptance-involvement - -.58** .43** .16 .03 .24*

3. PSI: autonomy-granting - -.14 -.17 -.04 -.25*

4. PSI: Strictness-supervision - .02 -.05 .08

5. OES – A - .84** .83**

6. OES – A: Ignored - .40**

7. OES – A: Excluded -

Mean 63.51 27.48 19.43 16.60 54.48 32.45 22.03

S. Deviation 6.25 5.57 4.44 2.70 12.45 7.52 7.35

Note: *p<.05, **p<.01

The correlation matrix showed that 7 out of 21 correlations were statistically

significant at point (p<.01) and 2 out of 21 are significant at point (p<.5). Also, some

correlations are non-significant. In general, the hypothesis was disapproved because

results indicated a non-significant trending in the predicted direction indicating p-value

(p=.02). However, there is a significant relationship between acceptance-involvement and

ostracism sub-factor excluded, and autonomy-granting and ostracism sub-factor excluded

indicating that parents who involves in their children’s life and dots them may experience

ostracism to some extent in their lives.

 34

It was hypothesized that there is likely to be a gender difference in experienced

ostracism in adolescents. Independent sample t-test was concluded to compare

experienced ostracism of adolescents in table 4.3

Table 4.3

Independent Sample T.Test For Comparing Boys and Girls in Terms of Experienced

Ostracism in Adolescents.

Boys (n=50) Girls (n=50) 95% C1

Variable M(SD) M(SD) t(df) P LL UL Cohen’s d

Ostracism 54(13.1) 54(11.9) -.37(98) .714 -5.88 4.04 0.174

Note: M= mean, SD= standard deviation, t= Welch’s t, df= degree of freedom, P= p-

value.

Independent sample t-test was conducted to compare mean of experienced

ostracism in male and female adolescents. Result does not show statistically significant

difference in males and females. The magnitude of difference in the means was very

small (.174) which indicates that males are likely to be experience ostracism in compare

to females.

Summary of Findings

The present research has focused on parenting styles and ostracism in adolescents.

Reliability analysis, Pearson product moment correlation and t-test were applied to test

the hypothesis. The finding revealed that parenting styles and ostracism do not have

significant correlation but some of their factors are significantly correlated. It was also

found that there is a very small gender difference in experienced ostracism in adolescents.
 35

Results indicates that males are slightly more to be experienced ostracism in compare to

females.
 36

Chapter V
Discussion
The study investigated the relationship between parenting styles and ostracism in

adolescents. It was hypothesized that there would be a relationship between strictness-

supervision parenting style and ostracism. Results disapproved the hypothesis and

revealed no relationship between strictness-supervision parenting styles and ostracism.

However, it also revealed that other parenting styles; acceptance-involvement and

autonomy-granting does have a significant relation with ostracism sub-factor; being

excluded. Moreover, it found a very small gender difference in experiencing ostracism.

Firstly, it was hypothesized there will be a positive relationship in behavioral

strictness-supervision parenting style and ostracism in adolescents. After conducting

analysis, results indicate that there is no relationship between strictness-supervision

parenting styles and ostracism. However, it also indicates there is a significant

relationship between acceptance-involvement and ostracism sub-factor excluded, and

autonomy-granting and ostracism sub-factor excluded. When parents dot their children

and/or enforce their standards to discipline, it is likely that they may experience being

socially excluded when they don’t get the same attention from their peers and society.

Previous researches support this finding, for example, Zakeri and Karimpour (2011)

found that the acceptance-involvement and psychological autonomy-granting parenting

styles are a significant positive predictor of self-esteem. They also found that behavioral

strictness-supervision style didn't have a significant predictor of self-esteem (Zakeri &

Karimpour, 2011). In another research, Zakeri, Jowkar, and Razmjoee (2010) found that

the acceptance-involvement parenting style was a significant positive predictor of

 37

resilience, whereas autonomy-granting and strictness-supervision styles didn't have a

significant predictor of resilience (Zakeri et al, 2010).

Secondly, it was hypothesized there will be a gender difference in terms of

experiencing ostracism in adolescents. Finding revealed that this is no significant gender

difference in experiencing ostracism. An example of a similar finding can be seen in the

literature. Williams and Sommer (1997), for example, found that the effects of ostracism

on primary needs were not moderated by gender, men and women demonstrated distinct

behavioral responses following experimentally induced ostracism. They found that

women were more likely to socially compensate (i.e., work harder on collective tasks),

whereas men were more likely to engage in social loafing (Williams & Sommer, 1997).

Such evidence suggests that while the girls in our study were just as threatened as the

boys by ostracism, however the way they responded to this threat may vary.

5.1 Conclusion

The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between parenting

styles and ostracism in adolescents. Findings shows that there is no relationship between

strictness-supervision parenting style and ostracism. It also shows that there is a

significant difference in acceptance-involvement and ostracism sub-factor excluded, and

autonomy-granting and ostracism sub-factor excluded. Finding also shows that there is a

small gender difference in experiencing ostracism. Males are likely to experience slightly

more ostracism than females.

5.2 Limitations and Suggestions

Limitations and Suggestions are given for future researches regarding the

betterment of the future work.

 38

• In the present study data was collected from adolescents of schools and govt.

colleges. The size of the sample studied was small and restricted to Gujranwala. So,

the results cannot be generalized to those populations which are in other schools

and colleges.

• Research was conducted on limited sample of people and it cannot be generalized

on overall population.

• Provided time for data collection was limited.

• Sample size should be large enough to generalize the results.

• Sample should be taken from the more institutes and from the different cities to

increase the generalization.

5.3 Implications

Some implications of the present research are given in the following:

• This study will helpful to those students who will take interest to conduct the

research to know the relationship between parenting styles and ostracism.

• There is need to investigate the parenting styles and ostracism in students of other

colleges.

• Moreover, future researches should be conducted in order to be able to make

comparison between the results of the present study to heave deep knowledge of

parenting styles and ostracism.

 References

Allen, J. P., & Land, D. (1999). Attachment in adolescence.

Barber, B. K. (1996). Parental psychological control: Revisiting a neglected construct. Child

Development, 67, 3296-3319.

Baumeister, R. F., & DeWall, C. N. (2005). The inner dimension of social exclusion:

Intelligent thought and self-regulation among rejected persons. The social outcast:

Ostracism, social exclusion, rejection, and bullying, 53-73.

Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: desire for interpersonal

attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological bulletin, 117(3), 497.

Baumeister, R. F., DeWall, C. N., Ciarocco, N. J., & Twenge, J. M. (2005). Social exclusion

impairs self-regulation. Journal of personality and social psychology, 88(4), 589.

Baumeister, R. F., Twenge, J. M., & Nuss, C. K. (2002). Effects of social exclusion on

cognitive processes: Anticipated aloneness reduces intelligent thought. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 817–827.

Baumeister, R.F., & Leary, M.R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal

attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497

529.

Baumrind, D. (1989). Rearing competent children. In: Damon W, ed. Child Development

Today and Tomorrow. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 1989:349–378.

Baumrind, D. (1991). The influence of parenting style on adolescent competence and

substance use. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 11(1), 56-95.

Baumrind, D. (1996). The discipline controversy revisited. Family Relations, 45 (4).

Bowlby, J. (1982). Attachment and loss: retrospect and prospect. American journal of

Orthopsychiatry, 52(4), 664.

Brewer, M. B. (2005). The Psychological Impact of Social Isolation: Discussion and

Commentary.

Crick, N. R., Murray-Close, D., Marks, P. E. L., & Mohajeri-Nelson, N. (2009). Aggression

and peer relationships in school-age children: Relational and physical aggression in

group and dyadic contexts. In K. H. Rubin, W. M. Bukowski, & B. Laursen (Eds.),

Handbook of peer interactions, relationships, and groups (pp. 287–302). New York,

NY: Guilford Press.

Crosswhite, J. M., & Kerpelman, J. L. (2009). Coercion theory, self-control, and social

information processing: Understanding potential mediators for how parents influence

deviant behaviors. Deviant Behavior, 30(7), 611-646.

Darling, N. (1999). Parenting Style and Its Correlates. ERIC Digest.

Darling, N., & Steinberg, L. (1993). Parenting styles as context: An integrative model.

Psychological Bulletin, 113, 487- 496.

Dishion, T.J.; Patterson, G.R. (2006). The development and ecology of antisocial behavior in

children and adolescents. In Developmental Psychopathology; Cicchetti, D., Cohen,

D.J., Eds.; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2006; Volume 3, pp. 503–541.

Dollard, J., Miller, N. E., Doob, L. W., Mowrer, O. H., & Sears, R. R. (1939). Frustration

and aggression.

Geller DM, Goodstein L, Silver M, Sternberg WC. (1974). On being ignored: the effects of

violation of implicit rules of social interaction. Sociometry 37:541–56.

Gilman, R., Carter-Sowell, A., DeWall, C. N., Adams, R. E., & Carboni, I. (2012, December

3). Validation of the ostracism experience scale for adolescents. Psychological

assessment, 25(2), 319.

Ginsburg, G. S. and Bronstein, P. (1993). Family factors related to childern's

intrinsic/extrinsic motivational orientation and academic performance. Child

Development, 64, 1461-1474.

Haq, I. U. (2014, June). Workplace ostracism and job outcomes: Moderating effects of

psychological capital. In Human capital without borders: Knowledge and learning for

quality of life: Proceedings of the management, knowledge and learning international

conference 2014 (pp. 1309-1323).

Haq, I. U. (2018). Combined Effect of Workplace Ostracism and Resilience on Job

Performance, Job Stress, And Emotional Exhaustion. ToKnowPress.

Hirata, H., & Kamakura, T. (2018). The effects of parenting styles on each personal growth

initiative and self-esteem among Japanese university students. International Journal

of Adolescence and Youth, 23(3), 325-333.

Hitlan, R. T., Kelly, K. M., Schepman, S., Schneider, K. T., & Zárate, M. A. (2006).

Language exclusion and the consequences of perceived ostracism in the workplace.

Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 10(1), 56.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belongingness

Jabeen, F., Anis-ul-Haque, M., & Riaz, M. N. (2013). Parenting styles as predictors of

emotion regulation among adolescents. Pakistan Journal of Psychological Research,

28(1).

Jaffe, M. L. (1998) Adolescence. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Jahanzeb, S., Fatima, T., & Malik, M. A. R. (2018). Supervisor ostracism and defensive

silence: a differential needs approach. European Journal of Work and Organizational

Psychology, 27(4), 430-440.

Jane B. Brooks (28 September 2012). The Process of Parenting: Ninth Edition.

Keohane, R. O. (1986). Reciprocity in international relations. International organization,

40(1), 1-27.

Khan, A., Ahmad, R., Hamdan, A. R., & Mustaffa, M. S. (2014). Educational

Encouragement, Parenting Styles, Gender and Ethnicity as Predictors of Academic

Achievement among Special Education Students. International Education Studies,

7(2), 18 24.

Knight, K. H., Elfenbein, M. H., Capozzi, L., Eason, H., Bernardo, M. F., & Ferus, K. S.

(2000). Relationship of connected and separate knowing of parental style and birth

order. Sex Roles, 43, 229 - 240.

Lamborn, S. D., Mounts, N. S., Steinberg, L., & Dornbusch, S. M. (1991). Patterns of

competence and adjustment among adolescents from authoritative, authoritarian,

indulgent, and neglectful families. Child development, 62(5), 1049-1065.

Leary MR, Kelly KM, Cottrell CA, Schreindorfer LS. (2005). Individual differences in the

need to belong: mapping the nomological network. Work. Pap, Dep. Psychol. Wake

Forest Univ., Winston-Salem, NC

Leary, M. R., Haupt, A. L., Strausser, K. S., & Chokel, J. T. (1998). Calibrating the

sociometer: The relationship between interpersonal appraisals and the state self-

esteem. Journal of personality and social psychology, 74(5), 1290.

Leary, M. R., Tambor, E. S., Terdal, S. K., & Downs, D. L. (1995). Self-esteem as an

interpersonal monitor: the sociometer hypothesis. Journal of personality and social

psychology, 68(3), 518.

Leung, A. S., Wu, L. Z., Chen, Y. Y., & Young, M. N. (2011). The impact of workplace

ostracism in service organizations. International Journal of Hospitality Management,

30(4), 836-844.

Lieberman, M. D. (2013). Social: Why our brains are wired to connect. OUP Oxford.

Maccoby, E. E., & Martin, J. A. (1983). Socialization in the contex of the family: Parent-

child interaction. Handbook of Child Psychology 4th Edition. Socialization,

personality, and social development, Vol 4, 1-101.

Miller, N. E., & Dollard, J. (1941). Social learning and imitation.

Mohammadi, M., & Firoozi, M. (2016). The Relationship between Parenting Styles and

Happiness with the Mediating Role of Emotional Intelligence. International Journal

of Medical Reseach & Health Sciences, 5(9), 667-673.

Nezlek, J. B., Wesselmann, E. D., Wheeler, L., & Williams, K. D. (2012). Ostracism in

everyday life. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 16(2), 91.

Niu, G. F., Sun, X. J., Tian, Y., Fan, C. Y., & Zhou, Z. K. (2016). Resilience moderates the

relationship between ostracism and depression among Chinese adolescents.

Personality and Individual Differences, 99, 77-80.

Ouwerkerk, J. W., Kerr, N. L., Gallucci, M., & Van Lange, P. A. (2005). Avoiding the social

death penalty: Ostracism and cooperation in social dilemmas. The social outcast:

Ostracism, social exclusion, rejection, and bullying, 321-332.

Paulson, S. E. (1994). Relations of parenting style and parental involvement with ninth-grade
Rosli, N. A. (2014). Effect of parenting styles on children's emotional and behavioral

problems among different ethnicities of Muslim children in the US.

Rubin, K. H., Coplan, R. J., & Bowker, J. C. (2009). Social withdrawal in childhood. Annual

review of psychology, 60, 141-171.

Sartaj, B., & Aslam, N. (2010). Role of Authoritative and Authoritarian Parenting in Home,

Health and Emotional Adjustment. Journal of Behavioural Sciences, 20(1).

Schachter, S. (1951). Deviation, rejection, and communication. The Journal of Abnormal and

Social Psychology, 46(2), 190.

Smith ER, Murphy J, Coats S. (1999). Attachment to groups: theory and measurement. J.

Personal. Soc. Psychol. 77:94–110

Smith, A., & Williams, K. D. (2004). RU there? Ostracism by cell phone text messages.

Group dynamics: Theory, research, and practice, 8(4), 291.

Soloveychik, S. (2008). Parenting For Everyone. Wordclay Inc.

Steinberg, L., Lamborn, S. D., Darling, N., Mounts, N. S., & Dornbusch, S. M. (1994). Over‐

time changes in adjustment and competence among adolescents from authoritative,

authoritarian, indulgent, and neglectful families. Child development, 65(3), 754-770.

Steinberg, L., Lamborn, S. D., Dornbusch, S. M., & Darling, N. (1992). Impact of parenting

practices on adolescent achievement: Authoritative parenting, school involvement,

and encouragement to succeed. Child development, 63(5), 1266-1281.

Steinberg, L. (May, 2019). Parenting Scale. Personal communication via e-mail.

Tobin, S. J., Vanman, E. J., Verreynne, M., & Saeri, A. K. (2015). Threats to belonging on

Facebook: Lurking and ostracism. Social Influence, 10(1), 31-42.

Williams, K. D. (2001). Ostracism: The power of silence. New York: Guilford.

Williams, K. D. (2007). Ostracism: The kiss of social death. Social and Personality

Psychology Compass, 1(1), 236-247.

Williams, K. D., & Fitness, J. (2004). Social and physical pain: Similarities and differences.

Society for Experimental Social Psychology, Ft. Worth, TX.

Williams, K. D., & Zadro, L. (2005). Ostracism: The indiscriminate early detection system.

Yaakobi E (2017) Ostracism: Recent Neurological, Cognitive and Personality Research. J

Cogn Neuropsychol.

Zadro, L., Williams, K. D., & Richardson, R. (2005). Riding the ‘O’train: Comparing the

effects of ostracism and verbal dispute on targets and sources. Group Processes &

Intergroup Relations, 8(2), 125-143.

Zakeri, H., & Karimpour, M. (2011). Parenting styles and self-esteem. Procedia-Social and

Behavioral Sciences, 29, 758-761.

Zakeri, H., Jowkar, B., & Razmjoee, M. (2010). Parenting styles and resilience. Procedia-

Social and Behavioral Sciences, 5, 1067-1070.

 Appendix

Demographic Information Questionnaire

Name _____________________

Age _______________________

Gender ____________________

Education _________________

Family System

Nuclear Joint

Socioeconomic Status

Upper Middle Lower

 Parenting Style Index
(Steinberg et al., 2019)
My Parents

Strongly Agree Disagree Strongly

No. Item Agree Somewhat Somewhat Disagree
4 3 2 1
1 I can count on my parents to help
me out, if I have some kind of
problem.
2 My parents say that you shouldn't
argue with adults.
3 My parents keep pushing me to do
my best in whatever I do.
4 My parents say that you should
give in on arguments rather than
make people angry.
5 My parents keep pushing me to
think independently.
6 When I get a poor grade in school,
my parents make my life
miserable.
7 My parents help me with my
schoolwork if there is something I
don't understand.
8 My parents tell me that their ideas
are correct and that I should not
question them.
9 When my parents want me to do
something, they explain why.
10 Whenever I argue with my
parents, they say things like,
"You'll know better when you
grow up."
11 When I get a poor grade in school,
my parents encourage me to try
harder.
12 My parents let me make my own
plans for things I want to do.
13 My parents know who my friends
are.
14 My parents act cold and
unfriendly if I do something they
don't like.
15 My parents spend time just
talking with me.
16 When I get a poor grade in school,
my parents make me feel guilty.
17 My family does things for fun
together.
18 My parents won't let me do things
with them when I do something
they don't like.

My Free Time
1. In a typical week, what is the latest you can stay out on SCHOOL NIGHTS (Monday-
Thursday)?
I am not allowed out
before 8:00
8:00 to 8:59
9:00 to 9:59
10:00 to 10:59
11:00 or later
as late as I want
2. In a typical week, what is the latest you can stay out on FRIDAY OR SATURDAY
NIGHT?
 I am not allowed out
before 8:00
8:00 to 8:59
9:00 to 9:59
10:00 to 10:59
11:00 or later
as late as I want
3. How much do your parents TRY to know ...
- Don’t Try Try a Little Try a Lot
Where you go at night?
What you do with your free time?
Where you are most afternoons after
school?
4. How much do your parents REALLY know ...
- Don’t Know Know a Know a Lot
Little
Where you go at night?
What you do with your free time?
Where you are most afternoons after
school?

Scoring: the first 18 items (MY PARENTS) alternate between the involvement (odd

numbered items) and psychological autonomy-granting (even items) scales. All of the

psychological autonomy items are reverse scored, with the exception of #12.

Authoritativeness can be scored as a continuous variable, or scale scores can be used to

classify families into theoretically meaningful categories.

 Ostracism Experience Scale for Adolescents (OES–A)
(Gilman et al., 2012)
No. Items Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never
5 4 3 2 1
In general, others….
1. treat me as if I am invisible

2. look through me as if I do not exist

3. have ignored my greetings when we
are walking by one another
4. ignore me during conversation
5. ignore me
6. “hang out” with me at my home
7. invite me to join their club,
organization, or association
8. include me in their plans for the
holidays
9. make an effort to get my attention
10 invite me to go out to eat with them
11. invite me to join them for weekend
activities, hobbies, or events
12. Pick me to be on their team
13. “hang out” with me at my home
14. Invite me to join their club,
organization, or association
15. Include me in their plans for the

holidays

16. Make an effort to get my attention

17. Invite me to go out to eat with them

18. Invite me to join them for weekend

activates, hobbies, or events

 In general, when I am around others…

19. I am the center of attention

Scoring: none of the items are scored reversely, higher scores reflected higher levels

of perceived ostracism.
PARENTING STYLES AND OSTRACISM IN
ADOLESCENCE

Group #7
Irfa Rahat (17368)
Fareeha Sardar (17302)
Sadia Nasir (17330)
Uzma Younas (17363)
Nimra Arshad (17292)

BS Applied Psychology
Session: 2016-2020

Supervisor Signature ________________

Supervised by
Ms. Shafkat Nawaz
DEPARTMENT OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY
GOVT. POST GRADUATE COLLEGE FOR WOMEN
SATELLITE TOWN, GUJRANWALA