مقايسه سبك‌هاي فرزندپروري، دشواري در تنظيم هيجان و تاب‌آوري در جوانان مجرم و غير مجرم

An Investigation of the Relationship between Parenting styles, emotion regulation difficulties and resilience among the young offenders and nonoffenders

هدف اين پژوهش مقايسه سبك‌هاي فرزند پروري، دشواري در تنظيم هيجان و تاب‌آوري درجوانان مجرم و غير مجرم شهر ايلام است. جامعه آماري اين پژوهش شامل كليه زندانيان محكوم به جرايم عمومي وجوانان عادي شهر ايلام است كه با استفاده از روش نمونه‌گيري تصادفي ساده تعداد 280 (140نفر از هر گروه) به عنوان نمونه اين پژوهش انتخاب شدند. ابزارهاي استفاده شده در اين پژوهش شامل پرسشنامه اقتدار والدين (Buri, 1991)، پرسشنامه دشواري در نظم بخشي هيجاني (Gratz & Romer, 2004) و پرسشنامه تاب‌آوري (Conner & Davidson, 2003) است. براي تحليل داده‌ها از تحليل واريانس چند متغيره استفاده شد. يافته‌هاي اين پژوهش نشان داد كه بين سبك‌هاي فرزند پروري، دشواري در تنظيم هيجان و تاب‌آوري در جوانان مجرم و غير مجرم در سطح P<0.01 تفاوت معناداري وجود دارد، با توجه به تأثير مؤلفه‌هاي فوق در پديده‌ گرايش به جرم در بين جوانان توجه به آن‌ها گامي مهم در راستاي كاهش اين پديده مخرب اجتماعي است.

Introduction Attention to youth issues always is the most central issues. One of the factors that impact on crime among youths is deficits in emotion regulation that dealing with the development growth environment, otherwise it remains in the first shape. One of the other components that youth crime deprives them of many positive opportunities is parenting style which has a strong influence on emotion regulation difficulties with resilience in young people to committing crime have been taken into account. Parenting style is methods and specific behaviors that separately or in interact with each other affect the child's development. Authoritative parenting: It's the most appropriate approach of parenting; the authoritative parents demand reasonable requests by setting limits and insisting that children must obey, put into force. Authoritarian parenting: Parents expect their children to obey their orders without questioning them and less talk. Loose style: parents are love and acceptance, but do not expect to have any selfcontrol, permissive parents freeing their children at any age, even though they are not capable of decisionmaking or can make decision (Papala, 2004; Davood Arab Ghahestani, 2011). Youth stage generally divided into transient from childhood to adulthood and adolescence and youth stage. However, in current circumstances, we talk to the youth to middle age; but transient and asymmetric development, as well as causes variety social harms; in such situation it is more important to pay attention to youth issues problems. On the other hand, decreasing slightly youth never means taking them out of the spotlight and also doesn't indicative of loss and reduction of problems.For this reason, addressing youth issues should be in a top priority, especially when allocated nearly half the youth population of the study and more than 70% of prisoners in Ilam city.   Material & Methods Participants The population of this study consisted of all prisoners sentenced to common crimes and all ordinary youth in Ilam city, in which 280 patients (140 in each group) were selected by simple random sampling. Instrumentation The Parents authority The Parents authority Questionnaire (PAQ) (Burri, 1991) was used in the present study. The scale contained 30 items which has a 5 point Likert scale for responses and for the respondents completely disagree 1 score and completely agree 5 score. Emotion regulation difficulty This scale was developed by Gratzv Roemer (2004). This scale is composed of 36 items grading items; it uses a Likerttype rating scale. Resiliency Scale In this study, resilience was measured using the resiliency scale (CDRIS) (ConnorDavidson, 2003). It includes 25 items; a 5point Likert scale from 0 to 4 is used to measure the strength against pressure and threats. A minimum and maximum score of resiliency are zero and 100 . Descriptive findings, that is, mean, standard deviation, and frequency. As well as to measure the hypothesis the multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was used. Research hypothesis: There is difference between parenting styles, emotion regulation difficulties and resilience in young offenders and nonoffenders. There is difference between authoritative parenting style with difficulty in emotion regulation and resiliency in young offenders and nonoffenders there. There is difference between authoritarian parenting style with youth offenders and nonoffenders, in control of emotion regulation difficulties. There is difference between permissiveness style with youth offenders and nonoffenders, in control of emotion regulation.   Discussion of Results & Conclusions Descriptive statistics Table 1.1The mean and SD of the two groups of offenders and nonoffenders Group Statistics index Authoritarian permissive Arbitrary Emotion regulation Resiliency   offender mean 25.38 27.05 37.33 95.87 47.62 SD 4.56 4.85 4.54 16.82 19.69 N 140 139 139 140 139   nonoffender mean 33.49 36.51 24.18 85.72 58.78 SD 5.21 6.25 7.57 18.05 15.11 N 140 139 139 140 139   As is seen in Table 1.1, the descriptive statistics showed the mean and standard deviation for offender and nonoffender groups. Inference statistics: Table 2.1 MANOVA on dependent variable in offender and nonoffender groups  Trace   numerator   degrees of freedom hypothesis   degree of freedom error F   P   Wilk's lambda trace HotellingLawley's trace Roy's largest root   0.082 0.918 0.089 5 5 5 273 273 273 4.854 4.854 4.854     0.001 0.001 0.001       Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOA) was computed to assess the differences between offender and nonoffender groups on independent variables. As shown in Table 2.1, difference between offender and nonoffenders in one of the independent variables0.05) p<0.01) is significant. It can be concluded that the effect of guilty or not guilty on research linear combination variables is significant.         Table 3.1 Analysis of variance on the dependent variable scores in the of offenders and nonoffenders groups Variable Sums of Squares   Degrees of Freedom   Mean Squares   F P effect Size Statistical power Authoritarian Permissive Arbitrary Emotion regulation Resiliency 38.809 82.234 120.086 1220.586   7171.74 1 1 1 1   1 38.809 82.234 120.086 1220.586   7171.74 3.95 4.02 4.14 4.013   23.280 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001   0.001 0.069 0.071 0.075 0.073   0.078 0.92 0.95 0. 98 0. 97   0. 99   As in Table 3.1 reveal, difference between offender and nonoffender groups is significance in authoritarian, arbitrary, emotion regulation, and resiliency parenting style. The results indicated that there was significant positive relationship between offender and nonoffender groups according to parenting style. The results showed a significant differencebetween parenting style, difficulty regulating emotions and resilience in young offenders and nonoffenders. It can be stated that due to the complex interactions, relationships, and experiences of the family members, with mental space of the family determined reactions space in accordance with this atmosphere. The findings of this study is accordance with the findings of Abolqasemi (1389) in regard to emotion regulation and tendency toward crime, the results showed that differences between the reactivity of the top and negative emotion regulation is significant. Zaree (2004) showed that strict parents indirectly cause the tendency of youths to crime. Also the finding of this study is accordance with findings of Alden (2009), Dowlatabadi et al., (2013).