Longitudinal Social Implications of Promoting and Undermining Autonomy

1
Longitudinal Social Implications of Promoting and
Undermining Autonomy in Mother-Adolescent
Interactions Kathleen McElhaney, Jill Antonishak
Joe Allen
We would like to thank NIMH for funding awarded
to Joseph P. Allen, Principal Investigator
(R01-MH58066)
INTRODUCTION Past research has demonstrated that
promotion vs. undermining of autonomy within
parent-adolescent relationships has differential
consequences for adolescent emotional and
behavioral development. However, much of this
work assesses autonomy functioning at only one
time point, without consideration of the
developmental changes in autonomy needs that are
assumed to occur during adolescence.
SAMPLE (N184) 86 males, 98 females (and their
mothers and close friends) Mean age T1 13.4 yrs
(sd 0.6) Mean age T4 16.4 yrs (sd 0.9)
MEASURES Autonomy Relatedness Coding System
(observational) (Allen et.al, 2000
) Interpersonal Competence Questionnaire
(peer-report) (Buhrmester et.al, 1988) Peer
Influence Questionnaire (self-report) (Marsh
et.al, 1999)
HYPOTHESIS It was expected that the relation
between maternal behaviors promoting vs.
undermining adolescents autonomy and
adolescents social functioning would be
moderated by the age of the adolescent.
RESULTS

• UNDERMINING AUTONOMY
• There was a significant interaction with regard
  to mothers behaviors undermining autonomy (b
  -.32, plt.001), such that
• Adolescents whose mothers exhibited high levels
  of undermining autonomy at age 13 but low levels
  at age 16 reported the lowest levels of negative
  peer influence at age 16 (Figure 1).
• In contrast, adolescents whose mothers exhibited
  low levels of undermining autonomy at age 13, but
  high levels at age 16 reported the greatest
  relative increases in negative peer influence
  over time (Figure 1).

• PROMOTING AUTONOMY
• Both mothers and adolescents behaviors
  promoting autonomy at age 13 were significantly
  predictive of increases in teens ability to
  assert their influence with peers over time, as
  reported by their close friends (See Table 1).
• Neither mothers nor adolescents behaviors
  promoting autonomy at age 16 contributed to the
  prediction of changes in ability to assert
  influence with peers.

FIGURE 1
TABLE 1
Peer Report Assertion of Influence (Age 16) Peer Report Assertion of Influence (Age 16) Peer Report Assertion of Influence (Age 16) Peer Report Assertion of Influence (Age 16)
b Entry b Final DR2 Total R2
Peer Report Assertion of Influence (Age 13) .11 .09 .01 .04
Mothers Promotion of Autonomy (Age 13) .26 .26
Adolescents Promotion of Autonomy (Age 13) .27 .27 .12 .16