JJ Final

OBEDIENT AND DISOBEDIENT TENDENCIES AMONG SENIOR
SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS IN RELATION TO THEIR
HOME ENVIRONMENT AND PEER INFLUENCE
A Dissertation Submitted to the
School of Education
In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree
Of
Master of Education
By
Hardeep Kaur
Regd. No. 11306469
Lovely Professional University
Phagwara, Punjab (India)
2014
i
Declaration
I do hereby declare that the dissertation entitled “OBEDIENT AND DISOBEDIENT

TENDENCIES AMONG SENIOR SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS IN RELATION TO
THEIR HOME ENVIRONMENT AND PEER INFLUENCE” Submitted in partial fulfillment of
the requirement for the award of the degree of M.Ed. is entirely my original work and all ideas
and references have been duly acknowledged. It does not contain any work that has been
submitted for the award of any other degree or diploma of any university.
Signature
Hardeep kaur
Regd.no.11306469
ii
Certificate
This is to certify that Hardeep Kaur has completed her dissertation entitled “Obedient and
disobedient tendencies among senior secondary school students in relation to their home
environment and peer influence” under my guidance and supervision. To the best of my
knowledge, the present work is the result of her original investigation and study. No part of the
dissertation has been submitted for any other degree or diploma to any other university. The
dissertation is fit for submission for the partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of
M.Ed. degree.
Signature
Ms. Tina.
Assistant Professor
Department of Education
Lovely Professional University
iii
Acknowledgement
It is true that one cannot express her feelings fully by just writing few words on a piece of
paper. But sometime few words give a sense of solace. First of all I am thankful to Almighty
Allah not just because I have completed my dissertation, but also the Almighty has enlightened
me in all aspects of this work. I am highly indebted to my advisor. Ms. Tina, Assistant Professor,
Department of Education, whose cooperation, enthusiastic attitude, problem solving ability,
encouragement and devotion towards work helped me in completing this work smoothly, timely
and successfully.
I am also highly obliged to Dr. H.G. V. Singh, Head of School of Education, who
provided me the platform to conduct the research work.
I would also like to express my words of thanks to all the faculty members, librarians and
other people belonging to Lovely School of Education who have directly or indirectly helped me
in completing this work.
My heartfelt gratitude goes to my parents Mr. Manjit Singh and Mrs. Manjit Kaur and
my friends for their support, blessings, encouragement which plays a pivotal role for my higher
academic pursuits.
Dated: ……………… Hardeep Kaur
iv
Abstract
This study was conducted to evaluate the obedient and disobedient tendencies among senior
secondary school students in relation to their home environment and peer influence. Descriptive
survey method was used in this study to obtain pertinent and precise information. The objectives
of the study were to find out difference between senior secondary school students having
obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to different dimensions of home environment &
to find out difference between senior secondary school students having obedient and disobedient
tendencies with respect to peer influence. The sample of this study included 200 senior
secondary school students selected by using simple random sampling method from Khanna City.
The three standardized tools were used by the investigator. For the purpose of drawing out the
result the investigator used statistical technique like chi square with graphic representations.
The conclusions of the study are there exists no significant difference between senior secondary
school students having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to different dimensions
of home environment except the dimensions protectiveness & punishment & there exists
significant difference between senior secondary school students having obedient and disobedient
tendencies with respect to peer influence.
Keywords: Obedient and disobedient tendencies, peer influence and home environment.
v
Table of Contents
Description Page No.
Declaration II
Certificate III
Acknowledgement IV
Abstract V
Table of contents VI-VII
List of tables VIII-IX
List of graphs X
CHAPTER-1 INTRODUCTION 1-23
1.1 Theoretical Orientation of the Problem 1-23
1.2 Significance of the problem 23
1.3 Statement of the problem 23-24
1.4 Operational definition of the terms 24
1.5 Objectives 24-25
vi
1.6 Hypotheses 25-26
1.7 Delimitations of the study 26
CHAPTER-2 METHODOLOGY 27-33

2.1 Research method 27
2.2 Sampling 27
2.3 Tools of data collection 27
2.3.1 Obedient and disobedient tendency scale 28 -29
2.3.2 Home environment inventory 29-30
2.3.3 Questionnaire on peer influence 30-31
2.4 Procedure of data collection 31
2.5 Data analysis technique 32
CHAPTER-3 ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION 33-53
3.1-3.10 Results pertaining to the variables obedient and 33-52
Disobedient tendencies and different dimensions of
Home environment
3.11 Results pertaining to the variables obedient and disobedient 52-53
Tendencies and peer influence
CHAPTER-4 CONCLUSIONS, SUGGESTIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS 54-56
4.1 Conclusions 54-55

4.2 Suggestions 55
4.3 Recommendations 55-56
vii
BIBLIOGRAPHY
APPENDICES
Appendix – I
Appendix – II
Appendix – III
List of Tables
S.No. Description Page No.
3.1 Showing results of chi square on significant difference between senior 34

Secondary school students having obedient and disobedient
Tendencies with respect to control dimension of home environment.
3.2 Showing results of chi square on significant difference between 36

Senior secondary school students having obedient and disobedient
tendencies with respect to protectiveness dimension of home environment.

Secondary school students having obedient and disobedient tendencies
With respect to dimension punishment of home environment.

senior secondary school students having obedient and disobedient
Tendencies with respect to dimension conformity of home environment.

Tendencies with respect to social isolation dimension of home environment.
viii
tendencies with respect to reward dimension of home environment.

secondary school students having obedient and disobedient tendencies
environment.

secondary school students having obedient and disobedient tendencies
with respect to nurturance dimension of home environment.

tendencies with respect to dimension rejection of home environment.

tendencies with respect to permissiveness dimension of home environment.

Tendencies with respect to peer influence.
ix
List of Figures
S.No. Description Page No.
3.1 Showing percentage of students having obedient and disobedient tendencies 35

with respect to control dimension of home environment.
with respect to protectiveness dimension of home environment.
with respect to dimension punishment of home environment.
with respect to dimension conformity of home environment.
with respect to social isolation dimension of home environment.
with respect to reward dimension of home environment.
with respect to dimension deprivation of privileges of home environment.
with respect to nurturance dimension of home environment.
x
with respect to dimension rejection of home environment.
3.1 Showing percentage of students having obedient and disobedient 52
tendencies with respect to permissiveness dimension of home environment.
with respect to peer influence.
xi
CHATER-1
INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER-1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Theoretical Orientation of the Problem
Early adolescence is the most important period of human life. Poets have described it
as the spring of life and an important era in the total life span. The word “adolescence” came
from a Greek word “adolescere”, which means to grow to maturity. Many researchers had
viewed adolescence under three sub-stages. According to Hurlock (1986), it was divided
into three sub-stages: (1) early adolescence (aged 10–12), (2) middle adolescence (aged 14–
17) and (3) late adolescence (aged).The ages 11 through 14 years are time of many varied
and rapid changes. Child grows taller and stronger and also starts to feel and think in more
mature ways. One may feel amazed as he watches his child begin to turn an adult. But this
can be confusing time for both kids and parents. Both must get used to the new person the
child is becoming. During adolescence, children develop the ability to comprehend, abstract
content, such as higher mathematic concepts and develop moral philosophies, including
rights and privileges. They establish and maintain satisfying personal relationship by
learning to share intimacy without inhibition or dread, move gradually towards a more
mature sense of identity and purpose. During adolescence it is appropriate from their parents
to establish an individual identity. In some cases, this may occur with minimal reaction on
the part of all involved. However, in some families, significant conflict may arise over the
adolescent’s pull act or gestures of rebellion, and the parents’ needs to maintain control and
have the youth comply, as adolescents pull away from parents in a search for identity, the
peer group takes on special significance. It may become a safe haven, in which the peer
group is both a social group and a primary group of people. Peer group may be defined as a
group of people who, through homophile, share similarities such as age, background, and
social status. The members of this group are likely to influence the person’s beliefs and
behavior. Peer groups contain hierarchies and distinct patterns of behavior. 18 year olds are
not in a peer group with 14 year olds even though they may be in school together.
During adolescence, peer groups tend to face dramatic changes. Adolescents tend to
spend more time with their peers and have less adult supervision. Adolescents’
communication shifts during this time as well. They prefer to talk about school and their
1
careers with their parents, and they enjoy talking about sex and other interpersonal
relationships with their peers. Children look to join peer groups who accept them, even if the
group is involved in negative activities. Children are less likely to accept those who are
different from them. Lization. At an early age, the peer group becomes an important part of
socialization. A 2002 study titled "Adolescents' Peer Groups and Social Identity" published
in the journal Social Development supports this statement. Unlike other agents of
socialization, such as family and school, peer groups allow children to escape the direct
supervision of adults. Among peers, children learn to form relationships on their own, and
have the chance to discuss interests that adults may not share with children, such as clothing
and popular music, or may not permit, such as drugs and sex.
Developmental psychologists, Lev Vygotsky, Jean Piaget and social learning
theorists have all argued that peer relationships provide a unique context for cognitive,
social, and emotional development. Modern research echoes these sentiments, showing that
social and emotional gains are indeed provided by peer interaction. Vygotsky's Sociocultural
Theory focuses on the importance of a child's culture and notes that a child is continually
acting in social interactions with others. He also focuses on language development and
identifies the zone of proximal development. The Zone of Proximal development is defined
as the gap between what a student can do alone and what the student can achieve through
teacher assistance. The values and attitudes of the peer group are essential elements in
learning. Those who surround themselves with academically focused peers will be more
likely to internalize this type of behavior. Piaget's theory of cognitive development identifies
four stages of cognitive development. He believes that children actively construct their
understanding of the world based on their own experiences. In addition Piaget identified
with aspects of development, occurring from middle childhood onwards, for which peer
groups are essential. He suggested that children’s speech to peers is less egocentric than
their speech to adults. Erikson's stages of psychosocial development include eight stages
ranging from birth to old age. He has emphasized the idea that the society, not just the
family, influences one's ego and identity through developmental stages. Erikson went on to
describe how peer pressure is a key event during the adolescence stage of psychosocial
development. In his Latency stage, he includes children from 6–12 years old and this is
when the adolescents begin to develop relationships among their peers. Harry Stack Sullivan
has developed the Theory of Interpersonal Relations. Sullivan described friendship as
providing the following functions: (a) offering consensual validation, (b) bolstering feelings
2
of self-worth, (c) providing affection and a context for intimate disclosure, (d) promoting
interpersonal sensitivity, and (e) setting the foundation for romantic and parental
relationships. Sullivan believed these functions developed during childhood and that true
friendships were formed around the age of 9 or 10.Social learning theorist Albert Bandura
argue for the influences of the social group in learning and development. Behaviorism,
Operant Learning Theory, and Cognitive Social Learning Theory all consider the role the
social world plays on development. In The Nurture Assumption, JR Harris suggests that an
individual's peer group significantly influences their intellectual and personal development.
Several longitudinal studies support the conjecture that peer groups significantly affect
scholastic achievement, but relatively few studies have examined the effect peer groups have
on tests of cognitive ability. However, there is some evidence that peer groups influence
tests of cognitive ability.
Peer group resources as a source of information. Peer groups provide perspective
outside of the individual’s viewpoints. Members inside peer groups also learn to develop
relationships with others in the social system. Peers, particularly group members, become
important social referents for teaching other members customs, social norms, and different
ideologies. Adolescent peer groups provide support as teens assimilate into adulthood.
Major changes include: decreasing dependence on parents, increasing feelings of self-
sufficiency, and connecting with a much larger social network. Adolescents are expanding
their perspective beyond the family and learning how to negotiate relationships with others
in different parts of the social system. Peers, particularly group members, become important
social referents. Peer groups also influence individual members' attitudes and behaviors on
many cultural and social issues, such as: drug use, violence, and academic achievement and
even the development and expression of prejudice. Peer groups provide an influential social
setting in which group norms are developed and enforced through socialization processes
that promote in-group similarity. Peer groups' cohesion is determined and maintained by
such factors as group communication, group consensus, and group conformity concerning
attitude and behavior. As members of peer groups interconnect and agree on what defines
them as a group, a normative code arises. This normative code can become very rigid, such
as when deciding on group behavior and clothing attire. Member deviation from the strict
normative code can lead to rejection from the group. Peer groups can help individuals form
their own identity. Identity formation is a developmental process where a person acquires a
sense of self. One of the major factors that influence the formation of a person’s identity is
3
his or her peers. Studies have showed peers provide normative regulation, and they provide
a staging ground for the practice of social behaviors. This allows individuals to experiment
with roles and discover their identities. The identity formation process is an important role in
an individual’s development.
Other side of peer shows negative part of the coin. The term peer pressure is often
used to describe instances where an individual feels indirectly pressured into changing
his/her behavior to match that of his/her peers. Taking up smoking and underage drinking
are two of the best known examples. In spite of the often negative connotations of the term,
peer pressure can be used positively, for example, to encourage other peers to study, or not
to engage in activities such as the ones discussed above. Although peer pressure is not
isolated to one age group, it is usually most common during the adolescence stage.
Adolescence is a period characterized by experimentation, and adolescents typically spend a
lot of time with their peers in social contexts. Teenagers compel each other to go along with
certain beliefs or behaviors, and studies have shown that boys are more likely to give in to it
than girls. Success of peer relationships is linked to later psychological development and to
academic achievement. Therefore if one does not have successful peer relationships it may
lead to developmental delays and poor academic achievement — perhaps even incompletion
of a high school degree. Children with poor peer relationships may also experience job
related and marital problems later in life. Several studies have shown that peer groups are
powerful agents of risk behaviors in adolescence. Adolescents typically replace family with
peers regarding social and leisure activities, and many problematic behaviors occur in the
context of these groups. A study done in 2012 focused on adolescents’ engagement in risk
behaviors. Participants completed a self-report measure of identity commitment, which
explores values, beliefs, and aspirations, as well as a self-report that measures perceived
peer group pressure and control. Both peer group pressure and control were positively
related to risky behaviors. However, adolescents who were more committed to a personal
identity had lower rates of risk behaviors. Overall, this study shows us that adolescent
identity development may help prevent negative effects of peer pressure in high-risk
adolescents. Social behaviors can be promoted or discouraged by social groups, and several
studies have shown that aggression and prosociality are susceptible to peer influence. A
longitudinal study done in 2011 by fledman focused on these two behaviors. A sample of
adolescents was followed over a one-year period, and results showed that adolescents who
joined an aggressive group were more likely to increase their aggression levels. Also,
4
adolescents were likely to display prosaically behaviors that were similar to the consistent
behaviors of the group they were in. An adolescent's peer group plays a role in shaping him
or her into an adult, and the lack of positive behavior can lead to consequences in the future.
Adolescence is also characterized by physical changes, new emotions, and sexual urges and
teenagers are likely to participate in sexual activity.
A longitudinal study done in 2012 published by American institute of family studies
followed a group of adolescents for thirteen years. Self-reports, peer nominations, teacher
ratings, counselor ratings, and parent reports were collected, and results showed a strong
correlation between deviant peer groups and sexual promiscuity. Many teens claimed that
the reasons for having sex at a young age include peer pressure or pressure from their
partner. The effects of sexual activity at a young age are of great concern. Researchers,
educators and parents are concerned about the short and long-term consequences that come
from adolescent negative behavior (both externalizing and internalizing behaviors) for
decades. Among these concerns are questions about the effect that negative behaviors have
on education, drug use and family relationships. While many studies try to focus on the
children who engage in negative behaviors and search for the reasons that they engage in
these behaviors, it is important to understand why there are adolescents who are engaging in
positive behaviors and not negative behaviors. It is also important to understand the long
term consequences of these behaviors both in the long and short term. For many years
researchers have been concerned with the development of negative behaviors in adolescents.
Researchers have focused on the importance of parents and peers in the development of
these behaviors. Most of these studies find that parents play an important role in which peers
an adolescent chooses to be friends with and keeping an eye on what types of behaviors
those peers are engaging in (Ary et al., 1999). A study done by Donovan and Jessor (1985)
tried to identify a single cause for adolescent’s negative behavior. While no single cause
from problem behavior could be found, in four cohorts there was a common variable of high
levels of drinking, smoking, drug use and risky sexual behaviors. This study showed that
across time there is a strong relationship between risky behaviors and negative behaviors in
adolescence. Due to the fact that negative behaviors tend to co-occur with many risky
behaviors, such as drug and alcohol use, it is important that research understand the relation
between drug and alcohol use and negative behaviors (Boles, Biglan, & Smolkowski, 2006;
Donovan & Jessor, 1985). In fact when asked about drug use in the past thirty days, there
was only a one percent difference between the amount of high school seniors who reported
5
smoking cigarettes and those who had smoked marijuana. For tenth graders, the percent of
those smoking cigarettes within the thirty days was less than those who had smoked
marijuana (Johnson, O’Malley, Bachman, & Schulenburg, 2009).
While the development of negative behaviors in adolescence has been well
documented, the development of positive behaviors, however, has not been as thoroughly
researched. In the past, many studies have assumed that the lack of negative behaviors was
an indication of positive behavior. However research is now focusing on these two
constructs as separate models of adolescent development (Benson, 2007). When behaviors
are grouped into the two categories (some positive behaviors, other negative behaviors) the
co-occurrence between one positive behavior, such as academic achievement, and a negative
behavior, such as hard drug use, is extremely low (1%) (Boles, Biglan & Smolkowski,
2006). However, these low-incidence results have not been replicated. While the connection
between positive behaviors and negative behaviors is important to study, many researchers
have also begun to look at activities that promote positive behaviors. Extra-curricular
activities are one of the many activities that have been linked to an increase in positive
behaviors. Adolescents who are highly involved in an activity, such as sports, a community
organization, or volunteer work, are more likely to engage in more positive behaviors
(Bartko & Eccles, 2003). Research, however, has been inconclusive when it comes to the
use of drug and alcohol use in adolescents who participate in extra-curricular activities.
Some studies see a general positive correlation between activity involvement and others note
that time involved in an activity is more important to predict drug and alcohol use (Eccles &
Barber, 1999; Zill et al., 1995)
Role of parents in the socialization of adolescents:
Parenting is both a biological and a social process (Lerner, Castellino, Terry,
Villarruel &McKinney, 1995; Tobach & Schneirla, 1968). Parenting is the term
summarizing the set of behaviors involved across life in the relations among organisms who
are usually conspecifics, and typically members of different generations or, at the least, of
different birth cohorts. Parenting interactions provide resources across the generational
groups and function in regard to domains of survival, reproduction, nurturance, and
socialization. Thus, parenting is a complex process, involving much more than a mother or
father providing food, safety, and success to an infant or child. Parenting involves
bidirectional relationships between members of two (or more) generations; can extend
through all or major parts of the respective life spans of these groups; may engage all
6
institutions within a culture (including educational, economic, political, and social ones);
and is embedded in the history of a people--as that history occurs within the natural and
designed settings within which the group lives (Ford & Lerner, 1992). The key function of a
child's family is to raise the young person in as healthy manner as possible (e.g., see
Bornstein, 1995). The parents' role is to provide the child with a safe, secure, nurturing,
loving, and supportive environment, one that allows the offspring to have a happy and
healthy youth; this sort of experience allows the youth to develop the knowledge, values,
attitudes, and behaviors necessary to become an adult making a productive contribution to
self, family, community, and society (Lerner, et al., 1995).What a parent does to fulfill these
"duties" of his or her role is termed parenting; in other words, parenting is a term that
summarizes behaviors used by a person--usually, but, of course, not exclusively, the mother
or father--to raise a child. Given the above-described characteristics of this set of activities,
it is clear that parenting is the major function of the family. However, adolescents live in
different family structures. This variation influences both the way parents interact with
youth and, in turn, the behavior of adolescents. For instance, in a study of urban, African
American adolescents living in either (1) single-mother, (2) step parent, (3) dual parent, (4)
mother-with-extended-family (e.g., grandparent, aunt, or uncle), or (5) extended-family-only
settings (e.g., only an aunt is present), the social support provided to youth was generally the
same across family types, with one exception: Youth living in single-mother families were
given more support than the youth in the other four family types (Zimmerman, Salem, &
Maton, 1995). The classic research of Diana Baumrind (1967, 1971) resulted in the
identification of three major types of child rearing styles: Authoritative, authoritarian, and
permissive.
The first style of rearing is marked by parental warmth, the use of rules and
reasoning (induction) to promote obedience and keep discipline, non-punitive punishment
(e.g., using "time out" or "grounding" instead of physical punishment), and consistency
between statements and actions and across time (Baumrind, 1971; Lamborn, Mants,
Steinberg & Dornbusch, 1991). Authoritarian parents are not warm, stress rigid adherence to
the rules they set (obey--just because we, the parents, are setting the rules), emphasize the
power of their role, and use physical punishment for transgressions (Baumrind, 1971;
Belsky, Lerner & Spanier, 1984). Permissive parents do not show consistency in their use of
rules, they may have a "laissez-faire" attitude towards their child's behaviors (i.e., they may
either not attend to the child or let him or her do whatever he or she wants), and they may
7
give the child anything he or she requests; their style may be characterized as being either
more of a peer or, instead, as an independent "observer" of their child. Indeed, because of
the diversity of behavioral patterns that can characterize the permissive parenting style,
Maccoby and Martin (1983) proposed that this approach to parenting can best be thought of
as two distinct types: Indulgent (e.g., "If my child wants something, I give it to her") and
neglectful (e.g., "I really don't know what my child is up to. I don't really keep close tabs on
her").Whether the three categories of rearing style originally proposed by Baumrind (1967,
1971), the four categories suggested by Maccoby and Martin (1983), or other labels are
used, it is clear that the behavioral variation summarized by use of the different categories is
associated with differences in adolescent behavior and development (Lamborn, et al., 1991).
For example, in a study of over 4,000, 14 to 18 year olds, adolescents with authoritative
parents had more social competence and fewer psychological and behavioral problems than
youth with authoritarian, indulgent, or neglectful parents (Lamborn, et al., 1991). In fact,
youth with neglectful parents were the least socially competent and had the most
psychological and behavioral problems of any group of adolescents in the study. In turn,
youth with authoritarian parents were obedient and conformed well to authority, but had
poorer self-concepts than other adolescents. Finally, while youth with indulgent parents had
high self-confidence, they more often abused substances, misbehaved in school, and were
less engaged in school. Similarly, in a study of about 10,000 high school students,
adolescents whose parents are accepting, firm, and democratic achieve higher school grades,
are more self-reliant, less anxious and depressed, and less likely to engage in delinquent
behavior than are youth with parents using other rearing styles (Steinberg, Mounts, Lamborn
& Dornbusch, 1991); this influence of authoritative parenting held for youth of different
ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds and regardless of whether the adolescent's family
was intact. Moreover, adolescents with authoritative parents are more likely to have well-
rounded peer groups, that is, groups that admire both adult as well as youth values and
norms, e.g., academic achievement/school success and athletics/social popularity,
respectively (Durbin, Darling, Steinberg & Brown, 1993). In turn, youth with uninvolved
parents had peer groups that did not support adult norms or values, and boys with indulgent
parents were in peer groups that stressed fun and partying (Durbin, et al.,
1993).Considerable additional research confirms the generally positive influence on
adolescent development of authoritative parenting and, in turn, of the developmental
problems that emerge in youth when parents are authoritarian, permissive, indulgent, or
8
uninvolved (e.g., Almeida & Galambos, 1991; Baumrind, 1991; Simons, Johnson, &
Conger, 1994; Wentzel, Feldmen, & Weinberger, 1991). Moreover, this research confirms
as well that the positive influences of authoritative parenting extend to the adolescent's
choice of, or involvement with peers (e.g., Brown, et al., 1993). Thus, the influence of
parents is often highly consistent with the influence of peers among adolescents (Lerner &
Galambos, 1998).
Whatever style parents use to rear their adolescents, the goal of parenting is to raise a
child who is healthy and successful in life, who can contribute to self and to society, who
accepts and works according to social order. The process used over time to reach these goals
is termed as socialization. Although all societies socialize their youth there are marked
differences see in a youth that has been "successfully" socialized. Said another way, there is
great diversity in the specific goals parents have in socializing their youth. One way of
illustrating this contextual variation and, as well, of judging whether parents and society at
large have been successful in shaping youth to accept social values, is to ask youth what it
means to be a good or a bad child. In one study that took this approach American, Japanese,
and Chinese adolescents were asked "What is a bad kid?" (Crystal & Stevenson, 1995). In
America, youth answered that a lack of self control and substance abuse were the marks of
being bad. In China, a youth who engaged in acts against society was judged as bad. In
Japan, a youth who created disruptions of interpersonal harmony was regarded as bad.
Another way of understanding the socialization process is to see how immigrants to a new
country give up the values and customs of their country of origin and adopt those of their
new one--a set of changes termed acculturation. This approach was used in a series of
studies involving youth of Chinese ancestry, who were either first generation Americans
(their parents were born in China and immigrated before the adolescent was born) or second
generation Americans (their grandparents were born in China, but their parents had been
born in the United States). These youth were contrasted to Chinese adolescents from Hong
Kong, to youth of Chinese ancestry whose parents had immigrated to Australia, to European
American youth, and to Anglo Australian youth. In one study both first and second
generation Chinese American youth were similar to the non-immigrant youth groups in their
levels of adolescent problems (Chiu, Feldman, & Rosenthal, 1992). However, immigration
resulted in lowered perceptions of parental control; but it was not related to views about
their parents' warmth. In turn, Chinese American adolescents' value on the family as a
residential unit changed across the generations (in the direction of placing less value on the
9
family for this function), and thus showed variation consistent with acculturation to both
Anglo Australian and European American values (Feldman, Mont-Reynaud, & Rosenthal,
1992); however, the Chinese Americans still differed from these other groups in this value.
In addition, there may be implications for youth simply because, when their mother
is at work, there is no parent in the home. Indeed, a mother's time at work is obviously
associated with the amount of unsupervised time a youth experiences after, and sometimes
before, school (Muller, 1995). These problems can be counteracted, however. For example,
when parents exert firm control over the way their youngsters spend time in "self care" at
home, problem behaviors can be reduced (Galambos & Maggs, 1991). For example, Boys
and Girls Clubs, and community athletics, can provide youth with attractive, positive, and
productive ways to spend their time. Current opinion among leaders of such youth-serving
organizations is that if such community programs are strengthened young adolescents will
have richer experiences and fewer life problems (Carnegie Corporation of New York, 1992).
Obedient and disobedient behavior
Behavior is a way in which an individual or a group acts relating to community,
state, or national affairs, broadly speaking, anything an organism does, including his/her
overt physical actions, internal physiological and emotional process, and implicit mental
activities. Hence, the way in which an individual interacts and behaves in society (i.e., in
home, institution, family members, and peer members) is called behavior. Behavior of an
organism is entirely based upon his or her previous experiences, either they were satisfying
or annoying. Behavior elicited also depends upon the types of rearing, parents, school, and
community, an organism got in his/her life time. These standards are the products of the
formative experiences and pressures from the groups around them. And also in the
democratic society, every individual must have the ability to use inner control and his/her
willingness to accept responsibilities for his/her behavior. Middle adolescence occurs during
the high school years. The onset of adolescence varies from culture to culture, depending on
the socio-economic conditions of a country. In this period, great changes occur in all
development dimension of an individual. Adolescents are not so well coordinated and
graceful as adults, but they are better coordinated than children. As soon as a child enters the
adolescence, his social roles and responsibilities change. Change in roles requires
adjustment to new situations in a different way. The adolescents have to change his/her old
habit of childhood in home, school, and society. Society expects them as graceful as adults
because of their size, but do not accord them with full adult responsibilities. In the
10
misbehavior regarding morality, the adolescents satisfy their emotional disturbances,
conflicts, and frustrations by steeling, injuring, and doing fraud, etc., but the most common
and serious behavior problem shown by adolescence is “disobedience”. Many adolescents,
when unable to find the path to approval, resolve their conflicts by exaggerating
independence. The antonym of “disobedience” is “obedience”, and the behavior which is
shown according to the set rules and regulations is called obedience. Dictionary of
Education defines the meaning of “obedience” as “compliance in action with dictates or
desire of an authority”. “Obedience” can also be defined as “a pattern of conduct dictated by
a set of rules and regulations enforced by a superior”. The new meaning of obedience must
be expanded to include constructive direction toward responsible behavior that children
should be made to learn, to work out problems by themselves, to make decisions in the light
of their own effect upon others, to accept responsibilities and limitations, and to plan and
carry out project. Dictionary of Education defines the meaning of “disobedience” as “the
behavior that is antisocial in nature”. “Disobedience” denotes a type of behavior in which
the performers’ or the people’s actions or deeds do not confirm to the expectations of society
or an authority.
It can be said that when the impulses and energies are allowed to go directionless,
the result is disobedience, while, if they are controlled and well directed, it is obedience. A
person who rebels the established norms of society or an authority is a disobedient person.
Most of the adolescents are suffering from behavioral problems and showing disobedient
behavior. In disobedient behavior, the adolescents violate the laws and mores set by an
authority. Some of the characters shown by disobedient adolescents in school are coming
late to school, showing truant behavior, copying in examination; school absence, making
noise in class, doing fraud with fellow pupils and teachers, telling lies to teachers, upsurge
of sex feeling, destroying school property. In home disobedient behavior includes fighting
with parents, abusing and injuring siblings, fighting for pocket money, using bad language
and abusing words at home, showing irresponsible behviour at home.
Disobedient adolescents are basically those unhappy children who have not organized
themselves for productive work, the ones who feel grossly inadequate and unimportant, the
quiet or withdrawn children, and the shy or fearful ones who often come quietly in and out
of school and receive no more than passing consideration.
In the present study, the researcher has reviewed the following studies conducted in
the field of obedient/disobedient behavior. Barra (2005) found: (1) Disobedience/aggression
11
increased the risk of cognitive/concentration problems which predicted emotional immunity,
while, hyperactivity predicted disobedience/aggression; (2) Teachers’ global opinion of poor
achievement predicted cognitive/concentration problems and poor conduct predicted
hyperactivity: (a) Behavioural problems rated by parents in the first grade predicted their
persistence; (b) Detection of problems in the first grade predicted the sixth grade outcomes,
providing information for implementing preventive interventions. Bierbaum, Henrich, and
Zigler (2004) in their study on obedient/disobedient behavior in children with intellectual
disability found that: (1) Compared to both mental age and chronological age of comparison
groups, children with intellectual disability showed increased disobedient behavior, when
faced with the inappropriate level task; but they showed no significant difference on the
appropriate level task. Kumar and Shravan (2006) pointed out that boys differed
significantly from girls in obedient/disobedient tendency, i.e., boys were disobedience
tendency of govt. and private aided school student.
Recently Mark Easton, a BBC editor, observed that the “teenage rebels are not what
they were.” By reviewing some of the recent analyses, he showed how much the new
generations of teenagers are different from the past ones in the cases of using the banned
drugs, drinking alcohol or smoking. Then he asked “today, though, where are the rebellious
sub-cultures?” And correctly adds that “no-one is suggesting that young people do not
misbehave, but teenagers no longer seem to define themselves by wild disobedience.”
Easton’s hypothesis is also interesting. He believes that “these days, perhaps, adolescent
identity is defined more by the use of social media rather than the use of illicit drugs.” Now
it means that youth gangs are now going virtual. Then they show their disobedience on the
social networks like Facebook which is almost out of the control of the past generation.
“The archetypal teen is evolving.” There is no doubt on it. And also internet and the digital
gap between the generations also constituted a new sphere of action for the teenagers to be
together and create their own new –however virtual- world very easily. Then they have their
own kingdom and there is no need to challenge the other –more real- kingdoms. From this
perspective, yes, they became more obedient and probably submissive.It is thought-
provoking to think about other more sociological and historical causes for this phenomenon.
Peer influence is commonly defined as the extent to which peer exert influence on
the attitudes, thoughts and actions of an individual (Bristol and Mangleburg, 2005).
Adolescence is a time of rapid growth and change in human developmental process, at this
time in their lives, adolescents are particularly susceptible to outside influence upon their
12
behavior and perception of their lives. Peer influence on adolescent development is
generally associated with negative connotations. It is widely accepted that membership in
peer groups is a powerful force during adolescence. These groups provide an important
developmental point of reference through which adolescents gain an understanding of the
world outside of their families. Adolescents who experience difficulty in means end thinking
often exhibit characteristics of impulsivity, engaging peers in a discussion that helps the
youth, identify potential obstacles that must be overcome (means) facilitates a process
whereby the child actually reaches his or her intended goal (the end). The potential for peers
to affect individual achievement is central to many important policy issues in elementary
and secondary education, including the impacts of school choice programs ability tracking
within schools, mainstreaming of special education students and racial and economic
desegregation. Peer influence is a powerful factor in adolescent development. The research
literature suggests that peer group programs have produced orderly, productive and positive
academic and rehabilitative environments. Peer group paradigms have also generated
positive results in creating productive social group living environments and have helped
reduced aggressive behaviors in group living settings. The impact of peer influence on
adolescents’ development is generally associated with negative connotations. I believe that
the use of the peer group as a vehicle for problem solving development has not been fully
utilized, even though it presents significant opportunities for childcare practitioners and
educators. Nora &Shang (2010) found that peers played a significant role in discouraging
cheating by expressing disapproval and informing teachers of dishonest behavior. It is
widely accepted that membership in peer groups is a powerful force during adolescence.
These groups provide an important developmental point of reference through which
adolescence gain an understanding of the world outside of their families. Failure to develop
close relationships among age mates, however often results in a variety of problems for
adolescents from delinquency and substance abuse to psychological disorder (Hops et al
1997). Furthermore higher peer stress and less companionship support from peers have been
associated with a lower social self- concept in adolescents (Wenz-Gross et al, 1997). Leung
& Choi (2010) found that overall effectiveness of peer support program could enhance the
students’ academic performance and peer affiliations and this was agreed by the participants,
teachers, trainer and researchers. As children progress through adolescence, they build
knowledge bases that help them navigate social solutions. An abundance of literature has
suggested that there is a considerable individual variation regarding cognitive skill
13
development during adolescence as it relates to peer influence Dodge’s (1993) research
indicated that poor peer relationship were closely associated with social cognitive skill
deficits. He found that adolescents who had developed positive peer relationships generated
more alternative solution, proposed more mature solutions, and were less aggressive than
youth who had developed negative peer relationship. Along those same lines, Bansal (1996)
found that adolescents who compared themselves negatively in reference to their peer
experienced a reduction in attention to problem solving tasks. The successful formation and
navigation of interpersonal relationship with peers is a process central to adolescent
development in all cultures. By high school, teens are spending more than half of their time
in the company of their peers (Updegaff et al, 2001) because adolescents spent a large time
with peers, it is not surprising that they play a highly influential role in adolescents’ lives.
The creditability, authority, power and influence of peers are greater during adolescence
than any other point in life.
Although the process of socialization and individualization occurs in all cultures, the
development time frame, goals, and practices are often unique (copper 1994). In united-
states, adolescents’ development path is characterized by a transfer in closeness from parents
to peers. In comparison with the emphasis placed by Europian-American cultures on
individualism, other cultures Asian and African culture in particular accentuate the
socialization of “interdependence, self- control, social inhibition, and compliance. Research
convincingly demonstrates that children relationships are important to social, cognitive, and
physical development (Nervcomp, Bokowoski, & Hartup, 1996) however, it has also
become clear that not all peer interactions influence each other to engage in drug abuse,
vandalism, and various other negative activities. In fact, some researchers (Branfenbrnner,
1970) report peer influence to be largely negative, particularly in the absence of adult
supervision. Furthermore, theories of deviance and delinquency have placed considerable
emphasis on the negative influence of peers (ELLIOT, Huizinga, & Ageton, 1985, Miller,
1958). Peer influence has negative impact also while childhood is a time where fundamental
skills of social competency are learned, researchers (Parker & Asher, 1987) report that
children also learn roguish, inappropriate behaviours, such as stealing and vandalizing from
their peers. Findings suggested that many deviant activities need the content of a peer group
for their initiation as well as their maintenance. That is, children usually do not behave
mischievously on their own. Kandel (1978) reported that children who are friends
consistently have similar attitudes and engage the child’s burgeoning sense of self, or self-
14
concept, is a result of the multitude of ideas, attitudes, behaviors, and beliefs that he or she is
exposed to. The information that surrounds the child and which the child internalizes comes
to the child within the family arena through parent-child interactions, role modeling,
reinforcement of desired behavior, and parental approval or disapproval (Santrock, 1994).
As children move into the larger world of friends and school, many of their ideas and beliefs
are reinforced by those around them. A further reinforcement of acceptable and appropriate
behavior is shown to children through the media. From all of these socialization agents,
children learn gender stereotyped behavior. As children develop cognitively, these gender
stereotypes become firmly entrenched beliefs. It has been suggested that children develop
gender stereotypes in three stages firstly learning what types of things are associated each
sex (i.e., boys play with cars, girls play with dolls). Secondly learning associations for what
is relevant to their own sex but not the opposite sex. Thirdly learning the associations
relevant to the opposite sex (Martin, Wood, & Little, 1990). If one’s friend uses drugs, they
will be more likely to engage in illegal drugs use themselves. While drug use may be one
kind of negative behavior friends facilitate in each other’s such as alcohol, cigarette
smoking, premarital sex, academic cheating and stealing, vandalizing and showing
disrespect to authority figures. Grahm, Marks, and Hanson(1991) investigated seventh
graders about how often their friends invited them to drink alcohol, compared to seventh
graders who were not asked. Finding confirmed that those asked by their friends were highly
likely to show an increase in alcohol use a few months later. Searchers found that the peer
group a child belongs to has differential effects on deviant, aggressive, and pro social
behavior. A study of 526 children in grades 5 through 8 revealed that children in the "cool"
group were more likely influenced by their friends than children in groups that are well-
liked. The findings imply that being a part of the popular group may have some benefits, but
also may increase risky behavior and social aggression. Children who are part of the cool
group are more likely to be influenced by their friends than children who are friends with
peers who are kind, nice, and well-liked.
Acknowledging that by early adolescence, peer groups have a significant influence on
children's behavior; researchers at the University of Western Ontario sought to determine
whether some peer groups are more influential than others. Specifically, they contrasted the
effects of two types of peer group status on youngsters' deviant, aggressive, and prosocial
behavior. The first type of group had children who were cool and popular. The second type
was made up of the kind, nice children everyone likes. Over a three-month period, the
15
researchers found that the children generally tended to become more similar in behavior to
the others in their group. However, this occurred to a much greater extent in popular groups
than in well-liked groups. Children's strong desire to belong to a popular group, together
with pressure from group members to conform to group norms, may account for the
profound influence of such groups.
Adolescence is a time when peers play an increasingly important role in the lives of
youth. Teens begin to develop friendships that are more intimate, exclusive, and more
constant than in earlier years. In many ways, these friendships are essential components of
development. They provide safe venues where youth can explore their identities, where they
can feel accepted and where they can develop a sense of belongingness. Friendships also
allow youth to practice and foster social skills necessary for future success. Nonetheless,
parents and other adults can become concerned when they see their teens becoming
preoccupied with their friends. Many parents worry that their teens might fall under negative
peer influence or reject their families’ values and beliefs, as well as are pressured to engage
in high-risk and other negative behaviors.
In actuality, peer influence is more complex than our stereotype negative influences from
friends. First, peer influence can be both positive and negative. While we tend to think that
peer influence leads teens to engage in unhealthy and unsafe behaviors, it can actually
motivate youth to study harder in school, volunteer for community and social services, and
participate in sports and other productive endeavors. In fact, most teens report that their
peers pressure them not to engage in drug use and sexual activity. Second, peer influence is
not a simple process where youth are passive recipients of influence from others. In fact,
peers who become friends tend to already have a lot of things in common. Peers with similar
interests, similar academic standing, and enjoy doing the same things tend to gravitate
towards each other. So while it seems that teens and their friends become very similar to
each other through peer influence, much of that similarity was present to begin with.
Friendships that emerge during adolescence tend to be more complex, more
exclusive, and more consistent than during earlier childhood. New types (e.g., opposite sex,
romantic ties) and levels (e.g., best friends, cliques, and “crowds”) of relationships emerge,
and teens begin to develop the capacity for very close, intimate, and deep friendships. The
adult perception of peers as having one culture or a unified front of dangerous influence is
inaccurate. More often than not, peers reinforce family values, but they have the potential to
encourage problem behaviors as well. Although the negative peer influence is
16
overemphasized, more can be done to help teenagers experience the family and the peer
group as mutually constructive environments.
Parent relationships are not necessarily undermined by peer relationships. During
adolescence, relationships between parents and teens are more often re-negotiated rather
than rejected. During adolescence, teens become increasingly autonomous and take on more
adult roles. They also develop their own ideas and start mapping their own lives. They begin
to spend more time with and value their friends more than they used to. Thus, it might seem
as if they are starting to cut ties with parents and reject their ideals. In fact, rather than
cutting off ties, teens are just renegotiating the parent-child relationship. What this means is
that they are beginning to shift the relationship to incorporate their increasing independence
and maturity. As teens become more mature, the type of relationship they have with their
parents naturally begin to shift as the teen begins to mature. While it seems that teens are
influenced by their peers, parents continue to be the most influential factor in their lives.
Despite fears parents have about their teens rejecting their values and beliefs, parents
continue to be of significant influence. Teens report having political, religious, and general
beliefs similar to their parents, and consider their parents as being highly significant and
influential in their lives. Positive relationships between parents and teens also equip youth to
have healthy relationships with friends. Teens who have high quality relationships with
parents also report having a positive relationship with their peers.
Parent-adolescent conflict increases between childhood and early adolescence;
although in most families, its frequency and intensity remains low. Typically, conflicts are
the result of relationship negotiation and continuing attempts by parents to socialize their
adolescents, and do not signal the breakdown of parent-adolescent relations. Parents need to
include adolescents in decision-making and rule-setting that affects their lives.
Parents who continue to communicate with their teens, even when there are conflicts,
actually maintain closer relationships. While it might seem futile to talk to teens when it
leads to conflicts and disagreements, most teens continue to report having a close
relationship with their parents, and as mentioned earlier, they still report parents as being a
significant influence on their lives. So parents need to continue talking to their teens and
maintaining an open line of communication, rather than simply trying to avoid
disagreements.
Teens often have multiple layers and groups of friendships. Unlike in childhood,
when friendships usually meant two or more close friends, teens often have multiple friends
17
and belong to multiple groups. They might have intimate and close relationships with one or
a handful of individuals, and might also belong to one or more ‘cliques’ or groups of friends
that have similar demographics (sex, race, socioeconomic status), orientation towards
school, and other interests. Peer friendships are dynamic. This simply means that peer
friendships may change. For instance, while teens can have friendships that are long term,
they often move from one clique to another, and they might develop new friendships and
lose others. Peers tend to choose those who are similar to themselves. Whether it is gender,
age, socioeconomic status, ethnicity, or interests, teens tend to gravitate towards those who
are more similar to them. Peer friendships can be a healthy venue for positive youth
development. Peer friendships can be a safe place for youth to explore their identity, learn
about social norms, and practice their autonomy. Healthy friendships provide youth with
social support for dealing with some of the challenges of adolescence, and can also provide
youth with some of the most positive experiences during those years. Many teens report
having some of the happiest and most fun moments with their peers, likely due to shared
interests as well close relationships. While the point has been made here that peer influence
and peer pressure do not necessarily have to be negative, peer pressure can lead youth
towards unhealthy and unsafe behaviors. To minimize the negative effects of peer pressure,
youth, parents, school and community leaders must come together to establish workable and
effective strategies to guide teen behavior and to support their transition from children to
mature, responsible adults. Here are several strategies to consider (partly based on Brown,
1990) nurture teens’ abilities and self-esteem so that they are equipped to foster positive
peer relationships and deflect negative pressures. Adolescents with positive self-concept and
self-worth will be less likely to be easily swayed to follow others’ negative influences. It is
essential that these aspects of positive development should be encouraged in youth.
Positive relationships should be encouraged between significant adults and teens.
Parents, teachers, school counselors, other relatives and professionals should try to have
constructive and positive relationships with teens. These can serve as good models for
healthy relationships, and can be a venue through which the teens can feel valued and where
they can develop positive views about themselves. Youth should know that they can go to
these caring adults for help or advice about their peer relationships. Parents, teachers,
community leaders, and clergy can model appreciation for ethnic, gender, socioeconomic
status, religious, and other differences and support cross-group friendships. Schools and
youth organizations can assist by encouraging youth from diverse backgrounds to work and
18
play together. Parents need to be better informed about the dynamics of adolescent peer
groups and the demands and expectations teenagers face in peer relationships. Information is
available through various sources including books, some parenting magazines, and other
publications one should keep eye out for programs particularly targeted towards families and
teen issues that might be available. Seeking information is not a sign of weakness, and
showing interest in these issues might actually show one’s teens that you are concerned
about them. Youth should be equipped with the skills necessary to resist negative behaviors,
as well as to make good decisions. Teens will inevitably be confronted with situations where
they will have to make a decision whether or not to engage in certain behaviors, whether to
give in to peer pressure, and also to make other difficult decisions. It is essential that youth
are given the necessary skills to analyze the situation and make the appropriate decision.
This includes helping youth develop the skills for ‘costs vs. benefits’ analysis — teaching
them to look at both the negative and positive sides to making a decision. For instance, if
being pressured to smoke, the teen should be able to think about what the possible desired
outcomes are (e.g., peer acceptance, looking “cool,” feeling excitement about trying
something new) with the possible undesirable outcomes (e.g., becoming hooked, the health
issues, smelling bad, the financial costs). It is best to try to deal with peer pressure before it
even happens. Talk to youth about potential scenarios, and think through strategies together
on how to deal with those scenarios if they arise. This could be done by discussing
hypothetical scenarios or even role-playing. It is helpful to think about these things ahead of
time rather than dealing with situations as they occur or trying to recover after they happen.
Home environment
By action and by example, parents shape the lives of their children from birth
through adulthood. In adolescence, the influence of friends and peers take on greater
importance, but research clearly demonstrates the continued significance of parents in
shaping the behaviors and choices of teens as they face the challenges of growing up. Close
parent/adolescent relationships, good parenting skills, shared family activities and positive
parent role modeling all have well-documented effects on adolescent health and
development. These are parents can make choices to make positive changes for their
children, and where social policy can help support parents in taking such steps.
Close relationships, healthy open communication, and perceived parental support are
especially important during adolescence, as children experience many physical and
19
emotional changes. For example, research shows teens who have positive relationships with
their parents are less likely to engage in various risk behaviors, including smoking, fighting,
and drinking. They are also less likely to report symptoms of depression and more likely to
report high levels of perceived well-being. Adolescents who report difficulty talking with
their parents are more likely to drink alcohol frequently, have problems with binge drinking,
smoke, and feel unhappy (especially girls).Parental monitoring includes knowing children’s
where about after school, as well as knowing children’s friends and activities. These
behaviors, when combined with parental support, have been shown to be positively related
to higher adolescent self-esteem, higher GPAs in school, and greater academic success. In
addition, parental monitoring has been associated with fewer internalizing behaviors, such as
withdrawal and depression, and externalizing behavior problems, such as fighting and
disturbing others as well as a lower likelihood of drinking, smoking, and engaging in other
risky behaviors. Family meals serve as an important time for adolescents to communicate
with and spend time with their parents, and have been associated with less substance use,
delinquency, depressive symptoms, and suicide attempts, and with better grades and
academic performance. Adolescents who eat meals regularly with their parents are also more
likely to eat fruits, vegetables, and dairy foods and less likely to skip breakfast. More
frequent family meals, a more structured family meal environment, and a positive
atmosphere at family meals are associated with a lower likelihood of disordered eating.
Parents’ health-related behaviors can affect adolescent well-being in several ways including
positive (or negative) role models and by contributing to healthy or unhealthy physical and
social environments. Parental habits can also shape adolescent health behaviors by
increasing easy access to cigarettes or alcohol in the home, or, on the positive side,
increasing access to healthy foods. It is obvious that a child academic performance is
directly related to his/ her environment as well as learning facilities and other socio cultural
issues. Every child is born with the same intellectual ability, but a good and conducive
environment with adequate learning facilities will help to boost the intellectual and
academic capability of the child. Parents from good learning environment will always have
good attitudes towards education and provide learning materials such as the television,
instructional video track, books and journals etc. that will facilitate the learning process.
These as a matter of fact can give a child an edge over his or her counterparts in an
environment with poor learning facilities. Educated parents will always express the belief
that it is important to help a child with his or her homework and to review the school work
20
that the child had done but a child from a poor home environment to a large extent is
deprived of such opportunities and thus, he or she struggles. A student in this category is
therefore not confident and consisted. According to Abubakar (1990), the education which a
child receives from his or her parents is most likely to have a highly significant and
dominant effect on his behavior in his later life invariably what the child learns at home and
how his family motivates him toward education contributes to the child’s success or failure
at school. The environment plays a very remarkable role in the life of every individual and
the educational aspect is also affected.
There are home environment factors such as parent’s level of education, occupation
and socio-economic status, family size and type. Parents who form warm relationships with
their children and have minimal conflict with them, provide adequate monitoring and
supervision can protect youth from developing substance use disorders. Lack of strong
positive relationships with parents increases involvement with deviant peers, which
increases adolescents’ risk for a variety of problems, including precocious transitions, such
as early pregnancy, premature independence from parents, and school dropout. Many social
risk factors have been shown to increase the likelihood that adolescents will engage in risk
behaviors as well as to disrupt parenting and family processes. Thus, parenting and family
processes are the most common targets of interventions for families experiencing adversity,
such as economic hardship; parental divorce, death, or mental illness; or parental criminal
activity. Research has shown that these core processes work the same way across many
racial and ethnic groups; where cultural differences are evident, they reveal differences in
the magnitude of the effect. Core family values, expectations, and goals, however, do vary
across ethnic groups, and these differences must be taken into account when implementing
family interventions, Parents' expectations have a positive correlation to the academic
performance of their children (Amato & Ochiltree, 1986; Chen & Laa 1998; Clark, 1988,
1993; Henderson, 1981; Henderson, 1988; Marjoribands, 1979; Scott-Jones, 1984; ).
Parents' expectations have a powerful influence on children's school performance: It is clear
that high achieving children tend to come from families who have high expectations for
them, and who consequently are likely to 'set standards' and to make greater demands at an
earlier age" (Boocock, 1972). Usui, Lei, and Butter (1981) found that the brighter a child is
perceived to be, the higher the educational expectations the parents have. Henderson (1988)
also confirmed that the powerful influence of parent's expectations on children's academic
achievement exists across all social, economic, and ethnic backgrounds. Chen and Lan
21
(1998) stated that if the parents expect them to do well, and have communicated this
expectation from an early age, then it is likely that their children will perform well in school.
Parental support is a critical influence on children's success in school (Clark, 1990;
Markowitz & Ginsburg, 1986; Schneider & Lee, 1990; S Stevenson, Lee, & Stigler, 1986).
Parental support can come in many forms, such as attention and responsibility to
what is happening in children's lives and in the provision of information and experiences
that foster children's development. Parents can also help to monitor homework, teach
problem-solving and negotiation skills, purchase equipment and materials, establish outlines
for children and provide verbal and/or material encouragement. Developmental phase can
dramatically influence the chances that someone will develop an alcohol use disorder."
Previous research suggests that genetic influences on drinking are influenced by
environmental factors, such as exposure to parental drinking.
Students who know their style can adapt study patterns. Student strategies result in a
variety of individual roles and a variety of labels such as drifters, planners, teacher’s pet,
nobodies, brains, and popular. Whatever it is, parent’s play an important role in their
children’s learning. When schools work together with families to support learning, children
tend to succeed not just in school, but throughout life. In fact, the most accurate predictor of
a student’s achievement in schools is not income or social status, but the extent to which that
student’s family is able to: create a home environment that encourages learning; express
high (but not unrealistic) expectations for their children’s achievement and future careers;
become involved in their children’s education at school and in the community. Handerson &
Mapp (2002) have found that parent and community involvement that is linked to student
learning has great effect on achievement than more general forms of involvement. To be
effective, the form of involvement should be focused on improving achievement and be
designed to engage families and students in developing specific knowledge and skills.
Parents should set the climate for learning at home and establish routines for children around
schoolwork. Parents should also be a learner’s role model and provide the tools that the
child needs to read, write, and do homework. Communication with family should be regular,
two-way, purposeful and effective. It should be conversational as well as provide
information. As parents, they should take advantage of parent-child activities and practice
parent-child responsive strategies. Parents should go for parent workshops available at
schools and seek out new ways to engage their child in learning; share new things that they
22
have learned with their children. Parents should provide a supportive home learning
environment to promote student’s success.
1.2 Significance of the Problem
Parents shape the lives of their children from birth to adulthood. They act as role
model for their children. Home is considered as first school of the child and it is home
environment which inculcates good behavior among children. As the child passes through
the age of 12-19 which is also considered as adolescence stage, influence of peers takes on
greater importance. Close parent adolescents relationship, good parenting skill, shared
family activities and passive parent role modeling all have well documented effects on
children’s behavior and development. In families where parents impose their decisions on
their children, in such family’s adolescents have no right to say anything in family matters
due to which they get hyper and hence show disobedient tendencies. In families where
children are allowed to take decisions, decisions are not imposed on them by their family
members and their ideas and views are respected by parents, obedient tendencies develop in
the children. But when a child is not given due importance, children pull away from parents
in a search for identity and then the peer group takes on special significance. It may become
safe haven in which adolescents can test new ideas and compare physical and psychological
growth. Socially peer relation becomes much more important than before. Peer influence is a
powerful force which may develop obedient and disobedient tendencies in children.
Investigator has collected the reviews and explored that different researches have been
conducted on adolescents, home environment and peer influence but investigator did not
find sufficient researches on obedient and disobedient tendencies, home environment & peer
influence collectively. Due to inadequate researches done on these variables, investigator
felt the need to take up this study.
1.3 Statement of the Problem

The study investigated how obedient and disobedient tendencies among senior
secondary school students are related with their home environment and peer influence.
Obedient and disobedient tendencies of adolescents depend upon the kind of environment
which they receive from home and the kind of company which they receive from peers.
Keeping in mind the above view the researcher explored the study as OBEDIENT AND
23
DISOBEDIENT TENDENCIES AMONG SENIOR SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS
IN RELATION TO THEIR HOME ENVIRONMENT AND PEER INFLUENCE.
1.4 Operational Definition of the Terms

Obedient
Children who obey or comply with commands of those who are in authority are
called obedient children.
Disobedient
Children who do not obey or comply with commands of those who are in authority
are called disobedient children.
Home environment
The home is the single most significant environmental factor in enabling children to
develop the trust, attitude and skills that will help them to learn and engage positively with
the world – a process that starts at birth, if not before. It is the foundation from which babies
and young children can grow to achieve their full potential. A good home environment
provides the love, security, stimulation, encouragement and opportunities that help children
to flourish.
Peer Influence
Peer influence is commonly defined as the extent to which peers exert influence on
attitudes, thoughts, and actions of an individual.
1.5 Objectives
1. To find out difference between senior secondary school students having obedient and
disobedient tendencies with respect to control dimension of home environment.
disobedient tendencies with respect to protectiveness dimension of home
environment.
disobedient tendencies with respect to dimension punishment of home environment.
disobedient tendencies with respect to dimension conformity of home environment.
24
disobedient tendencies with respect to social isolation dimension of home
environment.
disobedient tendencies with respect to reward dimension of home environment.
disobedient tendencies with respect to dimension deprivation of privileges of home
environment.
disobedient tendencies with respect to nurturance dimension of home environment.
disobedient tendencies with respect to dimension rejection of home environment.
disobedient tendencies with respect to permissiveness dimension of home
environment.
disobedient tendencies with respect to peer influence.
1.6 Hypotheses
1. There exists no significant difference between senior secondary school students
having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to control dimension of
home environment.
having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to protectiveness dimension
of home environment.
having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to dimension punishment of
home environment.
having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to dimension conformity of
home environment.
25
having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to social isolation
dimension of home environment.
having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to reward dimension of
home environment.
having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to dimension deprivation of
privileges of home environment.
having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to nurturance dimension of
home environment.
having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to dimension rejection of
home environment.
having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to permissiveness
having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to peer influence.
1.7 Delimitations of the Study

1. The study was delimited to senior secondary school students.
2. Only Khanna city was considered for the study.
26
CHAPTER-2
METHODOLOGY
CHAPTER-2
METHODOLOGY
2.1 RESEARCH METHOD
In the preceding chapter, introduction, significance of the study, delimitations,
review of related literature and hypotheses were discussed. The present chapter deals with
the method of the study, which covers sample, design of the study, development and
description of the tools, procedure and statistical techniques used for analysis of the data.
Method refers to the way, logical plan of solving the problem. It is a way of doing
something in a systematic way, implies an orderly logical arrangement and the procedure
refers to a way of solving problem. It is an orderly arrangement of parts or steps to
accomplish an end. It is a set of prescribed actions or events that must be enacted or take
place to achieve certain results. Method and procedure of the study depend on the type and
scope of the problem. The objective of the present study is to find obedient and disobedient
tendencies among senior secondary school students in relation to their home environment
and peer influence which is descriptive research.
2.2 SAMPLING
Investigator selected a sample of 200 senior secondary school students. Students
were selected from 4 schools of Khanna city. Simple random sampling method was applied
for collection of data.
2.3 TOOLS OF DATA COLLECTION

The investigators used following tools for the collection of the data:
1. Obedient and Disobedient Tendency Scale by Dr. C.S. Mehta and Dr. N. Hasnain(1971).
2. Home Environment Inventory by Dr. Karuna Shankar Misra (1971).
3. Questionnaire on Peer Influence by Ms. Sukhminder Bir Kaur (2011).
27
2.3.1 OBEDIENT AND DISOBEDIENT TENDENCY SCALE
2.3.1.1 Description of the Scale
Obedience and disobedience are antonyms, which denote two opposite types of
behavior. There are certain characteristics which are if possessed by a student is called
obedient. In the absence of these characteristics, the student is called disobedient. Obedient
and disobedient behaviors are important in the context of increasing in disciple in school and
colleges in modern age. The studies on obedient and disobedient are scarcely found in
Indian context due to the non-availability of a suitable and standardized tool. Keeping this
aim in view, the present scale was constructed and standardized.
2.3.1.2 Reliability
The coefficient of reliability was determined by using the following methods:
1. The split-half reliability (N=100) of the test was computed by applying Spearman
Brown formula and the reliability coefficient of correlation was found to be .57.
2. The test-retest method (N=100) was employed to determine the temporal stability of
the test. The coefficient of correlation between the test and retest score was found to be .68.
2.3.1.3 Validity
The construct validity of the test was calculated by extreme group method. The value
was found to be 10.91, which was significant at .01 level. Construct validity was calculated
by comparing high and low groups with the help of ‘t’ test. ‘t’ value was found to be 6.81
with 46 df, which was significant at .01 level.
2.3.1.4 Scoring
The test can be scored accurately by hand. For any response tick as ‘Yes’ the subject
should be awarded the score of one, and zero for ‘No’ response on positive statements.
Yes No
Positive 1 0
Negative 0 1
The scoring on negative statements would be in a reverse order. The maximum possible
score on the test is 36 and the minimum is zero.
28
2.3.2 HOME ENVIRONMENT INVENTORY
2.3.2.1 Description of the Inventory
HEI contains 100 items related to ten dimensions of home environment. The ten
dimension are- (a)control, (b) protectiveness, (c) punishment, (d) conformity, (e) social
isolation, (f) reward, (g) deprivation of privileges, (h) nurturance, (i) rejection, and (j)
permissiveness.
S.no. Dimensions Items
1 Control 10
2 Protectiveness 10
3 Punishment 10
4 Conformity 10
5 Social isolation 10
6 Reward 10
7 Deprivation of privileges 10
8 Nurturance 10
9 Rejection 10
10 Permissiveness 10
2.3.2.2 Reliability
The ‘home environment inventory’ was administered to 113 students (54 boys and 59
girls). Split half reliabilities were worked out separately for all ten dimensions of home
environment. The split-half reliabilities (corrected for length) for various dimensions of
home environment are as follows:
Split half reliability coefficient for ten dimensions of home environment as measured by
HEI
Sr. no. Inventory Dimension Reliability Coefficient

29
A Control .879
B Protectiveness .748
C Punishment .947
D Conformity .866
E Social isolation .870

F Reward .875
G Deprivation of privileges .855
H Nurturance .901
I Rejection .841
J Permissiveness .726
2.3.2.3 Validity
Home environment inventory has been found to possess content validity as measured
with the help of views expressed by judges. Criterion related validity could not be
established because of lack of appropriate external criteria.
2.3.3 QUESTIONNAIRE ON PEER INFLUENCE
2.3.3.1 Preparation of First Draft
The investigator after the review of the literature available, experiences and
discussions with the experts concluded different items of the scale. For the first draft the
investigator prepared 50 items. After steps of the initial try out and checking by different
experts for grammatical correctness and ambiguity of the items. 10 items were taken out
which led to preparation of questionnaire consisting of 40 items.
2.3.3.2 Preparation of Second Draft
One expert with long standing in the field of education at university level was
approached for the purpose. It was reviewed by the investigator herself and items
overlapping were deleted and items reduced to 35 in numbers.
2.3.3.3 Item Analysis
30
It was administered on 50 senior secondary school students. Instructions were given
to fill the questionnaire. After collection of the data the responses for each item were
tabulated. For preparation of the final form out of the results of the trial form, item analysis
was done to find out the significance of each item and insignificant items were deleted and
items in scale reduced to 30 in number.
2.3.3.4 Validity
The validity is an important character of a good test. A test may be highly valid for
use in one situation and not in other situation. A test is valid if its intended use is suitably
connected with the intended ability. To find the validity of the scale, suggestions by the
expert in the field of educational research were sought. For this purpose the test was sent to
five experts in the related field by post and meeting personally.
2.3.3.5 Reliability
Split half method was applied to determine the reliability of the scale. It was
administered on 50 senior secondary school students. Instructions were given to fill the
scale. After the collection of the data the responses for each item were tabulated. To find out
the significance of each item correlation was employed and the value of which is found to be
.84.
2.3.3.6 Scoring
For the purpose of scoring two points questionnaire was selected. The total score on
peer influence was obtained by adding the marks of yes category.
2.4 PROCEDURE OF DATA COLLECTION

In order to conduct the study, 200 senior secondary school students from different
schools were selected through simple random sampling. The sample was collected from
Khanna city. Each respondent was contacted to collect information about obedient and
disobedient tendencies, peer influence and home environment. Their demographic profiles
were taken into account. After developing good relation and making them clear about the
purpose of the study, obedient and disobedient tendencies scale, peer influence questionnaire
and home environment inventory was administered on selected sample. After the collection
of the information, scoring was done and scores were subjected to statistical analysis.
31
2.5 DATA ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE
Statistical technique brings objectivity in interpretation and leads to the reliability in
results. In research studies, statistics is used not only to understand and compare data but
also to test the hypotheses. Investigator used chi-square method for data analysis.
32
CHAPTER-3
ANYALSIS AND
INTERPRETATION
CHAPTER-3
ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

The data may be adequate, valid and reliable to any extent. It does not serve any
worthwhile purpose unless it is carefully edited, systematically classified and tabulated,
intelligently interpreted and rationally concluded. In the present investigation the data was
collected with the help of the scales & questionnaire on obedient and disobedient tendencies,
peer influence and home environment from the sample of 200 senior secondary students.
The present report is based on an investigation seeking obedient and disobedient tendencies
among senior secondary school students in relation to their home environment and peer
influence.
Hypothesis 3.1: There exists no significant difference between senior secondary school
students having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to control
The first objective of the present study was to find out the difference between senior
secondary school students having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to
control dimension of home environment. After collection of data chi square was applied and
results have been presented in table 3.1
Table 3.1
Results of chi square on significant difference between senior secondary school students
having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to control dimension of home
environment
Chi-square
Tendencies Low control High control Result
value
Obedient 8 18 Not
2.54 Significant
Disobedient 24 24
34
Table 3.1 shows obedient tendencies and disobedient tendencies and chi square value
for senior secondary school students receiving high and low control at home. It is clear from
the table that the chi square value is 2.54 at 1 degree of freedom. The table value at .05 level
of confidence is 3.841. The calculated value of chi square is less than table value, which
signifies that there exists no significant difference between senior secondary school students
having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to control dimension of home
environment.
Graph 3.1
Showing percentage of students with obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to
control dimension of home environment
80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
DISOBEDIENT
40.00% OBEDIENT
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%
LOW CONTROL HIGH CONTROL
students having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to protectiveness
The second objective of the present study was to find out the difference between
senior secondary school students having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to
protectiveness dimension of home environment. After collection of data chi square was
applied and results have been presented in table3.2.
35
Table3.2
having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to protectiveness dimension of
home environment
Low High Chi square

Tendencies Result
protectiveness protectiveness value
Obedient 4 32
17 36 6.45
Disobedient Significant
for senior secondary school students receiving high and low protectiveness at home. It is
clear from the table that the chi square value is 6.45 at 1 degree of freedom. The table value
at .05 level of confidence is 3.841 & 6.63at 0.01 level. The calculated value of chi square is
more than table value, which signifies that there exists significant difference between senior
protectiveness dimension of home environment at 0.05 level.
Graph 3.2
protectiveness dimension of home environment
36
80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
40.00% disobedient
obedient
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%
students having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to dimension
punishment of home environment.
The third objective of the present study was to find out the difference between senior
dimension punishment of home environment. After collection of data chi square was applied
and results have been presented in table3.3.
Table3.3
having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to dimension punishment of home
environment
Low Punishment High Punishment Result

Tendencies Chi square
Obedient 10 27
Significant
24 26 3.92
Disobedient
37
Table 3.3 shows obedient and disobedient tendencies and chi square value for senior
school secondary school students receiving high and low punishment at home. It is clear
from the table that the chi square value is 3.92 at 1 degree of freedom. The table value at .05
level of confidence is 3.84 and 6.63 at .01 level of confidence. The calculated value of chi
square is more than table value, which signifies that there exists significant difference
between senior secondary school students having obedient and disobedient tendencies with
respect to punishment dimension of home environment at .05 level of confidence.
Graph 3.3
dimension punishment of home environment
80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
Disobedient
40.00% Obedient
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%
LOW PUNISHMENT HIGH PUNISHMENT
conformity of home environment.
The forth objective of the present study was to find out the difference between senior
dimension conformity of home environment. After collection of data chi square was applied
and results have been presented in
Table 3.4
38
having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to dimension conformity of home
environment
Tendencies Low conformity High conformity Result

Chi square
value
Obedient 8 23
2.69 Not significant
Disobedient 24 31
secondary school students receiving high and low conformity at home. It is clear from the
table that the chi square value is 2.69 at 1 degree of freedom. The table value at .05 level of
confidence is 3.841. The calculated value of chi square is less than table value, which
having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to dimension conformity of home
environment.
Graph 3.4
Showing the percentage of students with obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to
dimension conformity of home environment
80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
Disobedient
40.00% Obedient
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%
LOW CONFORMITYHIGH CONFORMITY
39
students having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to social isolation
The fifth objective of the present study was to find out the difference between senior
secondary school students having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to social
isolation dimension of home environment. After collection of data chi square was applied
and results have been presented in table3.5.
Table 3.5
having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to social isolation dimension of
home environment
Tendencies Low social High social Chi square Result

isolation isolation value
Obedient 13 9
.95 Not significant

Disobedient 17 20
secondary school students under high and low social isolation at home. It is clear from the
table that the chi square value is .95 at 1 degree of freedom. The table value at .05 level of
having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to social isolation dimension of
home environment
40
Graph 3.5
social isolation dimension of home environment
90.00%
80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
Disobedient
40.00% Obedient
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%
LOW SOCIAL HIGH SOCIAL
ISOLATION ISOLATION
students having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to reward dimension
of home environment.
The sixth objective of the present study was to find out the difference between senior
reward dimension of home environment. After collection of data chi square was applied and
results have been presented in table 3.6.
Table 3.6
41
having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to reward dimension of home
environment
Low High Chi Square

Tendencies Result
Reward Reward Value
Obedient 7 25
Not
3.04
Disobedient 18 26 significant
secondary school students receiving high and low reward at home. It is clear from the table
that the chi square value is 3.04 at 1 degree of freedom. The table value at .05 level of
having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to reward dimension of home
environment.
Graph 3.6
42
reward dimension of home environment
80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
Disobedient
40.00% Obedient
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%
LOW REWARD HIGH REWARD
deprivation of privileges of home environment.
The seventh objective of the present study was to find out the difference between
senior secondary school student having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to
dimension deprivation of privileges of home environment. After collection of data chi
square was applied and results have been presented in table3.7.
Table 3.7
43
having
Obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to dimension deprivation of privileges of
home environment
Low deprivation High deprivation Chi square

Tendencies Result
of privileges of privileges value
Obedient 21 8
Not
3.50 significant
Disobedient 20 20
Table 3.7shows obedient and disobedient tendencies and chi square value for senior
secondary school students receiving high and low deprivation of privileges at home. It is
clear from the table that the chi square value is 3.50 at 1 degree of freedom. The table value
at .05 level of confidence is 3.841. The calculated value of chi square is less than table
value, which signifies that there exists no significant difference between senior secondary
school students having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to dimension
deprivation of privileges of home environment.
Graph 3.7
44
dimension deprivation of privileges of home environment
80.00%
60.00%
40.00%
20.00%
0.00%
] disobedient
S S
GE GE obedient
ILE ILE
IV IV
PR PR
OF OF
N N
TIO TIO
VA VA
P RI P RI
DE DE
W GH
LO HI
students having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to nurturance
The eighth objective of the present study was to find out the difference between
senior secondary school students with obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to
nurturance dimension of home environment. After the collection of the data chi square was
applied and results have been presented in table 3.8.
Table 3.8
having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to nurturance dimension of home
environment
High Chi square
Tendencies Low Nurturance Result
Nurturance value
Obedient 4 20
Not
.009
significant
Disobedient 30
8
45
for senior secondary school students receiving high and low nurturance at home. It is clear
from the table that the chi square value is .009 at 1 degree of freedom. The table value at .05
level of confidence is 3.841. The calculated value of chi square is less than table value,
which signifies that there exists no significant difference between senior secondary school
students having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to nurturance dimension of
home environment.
Graph 3.8
nurturance dimension of home environment
70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
20.00% Disobedient
Obedient
10.00%
0.00%
E E
A NC A NC
UR UR
URT URT
N N
W GH
LO HI
rejection of home environment.
The ninth objective of the present study is to find the difference between senior
dimension rejection of home environment. After the collection of the data chi square was
applied and results have been presented in table 3.9.
Table 3.9
46
having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to dimension rejection of home
environment
Chi square Results

Tendencies Low Rejection High Rejection
Value
Obedient 10 13
Not
0.657 significant
Disobedient 14 28
secondary school students receiving low and high rejection at home. It is clear from the table
that the chi square value is .657 at 1 degree of freedom. The table value at .05 level of
having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to dimension rejection of home
environment.
47
Graph 3.9
dimension rejection of home environment
70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
40.00% Disobedient
Obedient
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%
LOW REJECTION HIGH REJECTION
students with obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to permissiveness
The tenth objective of the present study is to find the difference between senior
permissiveness dimension of home environment. After collection of data chi square was
applied and results have been presented in table3.10.
48
Table 3.10
having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to permissiveness dimension of
home environment
Tendencies Low Permissiveness High Permissiveness Chi square Results

Value
Obedient 10 13
Not
2.48 significant
14 41
Disobedient
Table 3.10 shows obedient and disobedient tendencies and chi square value for
senior secondary school students having high and low permissiveness at home. It is clear
from the table that the chi square value is 2.48 at 1 degree of freedom. The table value at .05
level of confidence is 3.841. The calculated value of chi square is less than table value,
which signifies that there exists no significant difference between senior secondary school
students having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to permissiveness
49
Graph 3.10
permissiveness dimension of home environment
80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
20.00% disobedient
10.00% obedient
0.00%
S S
NES NE
IV IS V
ISS M
IS
RM ER
PE P
W GH
LO HI
students having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to peer influence.
The eleventh objective of the present study is to find the difference between senior
secondary school students having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to peer
influence. After collection of data chi square was applied and results have been presented in
table3.11.
Table 3.11
Results of chi square on significant difference in senior secondary school students having
obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to Peer influence
Chi square
Tendencies Low Peer influence High Peer influence
Value
Obedient 16 9
13.28
Disobedient 13 33
50
Table 3.11 shows obedient and disobedient tendencies and chi square value for
senior secondary school students under high and low peer influence. It is clear from the table
that the chi square value is 13.28at 1 degree of freedom. The table value at .01 level of
confidence is 6.63. The calculated value of chi square is more than table value, which
signifies that there exists significant difference between senior secondary school students
having obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to peer influence.
Graph3.11
peer influence
100.00%
90.00%
80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
50.00% disobedient
obedient
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%
LOW PEER HIGH PEER
INFLUENCE INFLUENCE
51
CHAPTER-4
CONCLUCIONS,
RECOMMENDATIONS
AND SUGGESTIONS
CHAPTER - 4
CONCLUSIONS, SUGGESTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 CONCLUSIONS
Conclusions are very essential aspect of any investigation. They provide a finished
touch and review of the whole of critical work. The following conclusions have been drawn
on the basis of present investigation which was conducted on obedient and disobedient
tendencies among senior secondary school students in relation to their home environment
and peer influence. Results show acceptance or rejection of hypothesis.
1. There exists no significant difference between senior secondary school students having
obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to control dimension of home
environment.
2. There exists significant difference between senior secondary school students having
obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to protectiveness dimension of home
environment.
obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to dimension punishment of home
environment.
obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to dimension conformity of home
environment.
obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to social isolation dimension of home
environment.
obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to reward dimension of home environment.
obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to dimension deprivation of privileges of
home environment.
52
obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to nurturance dimension of home
environment.
obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to dimension rejection of home
environment.
obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to permissiveness dimension of home
environment.
obedient and disobedient tendencies with respect to peer influence.
4.2 SUGGESTIONS
Research is never ending process. Every investigator after completing the research
becomes aware of areas in which further research is needed and naturally feels motivated to
indicate areas which may be taken up for further research by other investigators. The
investigator by virtue of her experience in the field of study offers the following suggestions
for further research:
1. Study can be conducted on the college students.
2. The present study needs to be replicated on large sample for its more generalization of
findings.
3. The study can be conducted with few other variables like school environment, socio-
economic status, values etc.
4. 3 RECOMMENDATIONS
Parents must provide a healthy home environment to children so that they may easily
adapt to environment. There should be arrangements of guidance and counseling
programmers which help in developing obedient tendencies among students. Seminars and
conferences should be organized focusing on inculcation of values among students.
Conducive environment within schools should also be provided for harmonious
53
development of students. Value education may be a part of school curriculum. Creative
projects may be given to students to be completed with team spirit. Values may be
inculcated among students through different value based pictures, dramas, through
celebration of different festivals in the school.
54
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Amato, P. R. & Ochiltree, G. (1986). Family resources and the development of child
competence, Journal of Marriage and the Family, 48, 47-56.
Almeida, D.M., & Galambos, N.L. (1991). Examining father involvement and the quality of
father-adolescent relations. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 1(2), 155-172.
Ary, D. V., Duncan, T. E., Biglan, A., Metzler, C. W., Noell, J. W., & Smolkowski, K. (1999).
Development of adolescent problem behavior. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 27(2),
141-150.
Bansal, R. (1996). Motivational determinant of problem solving task in peer-presence conditions:

A survey of reviews. Indian Journal of Psychometry and Education, 27,107-110.
Barra, F.(2005). Production behavior problem in school children, Child psychiatry Bartko, W., &
Eccles, J. S. (2003). Adolescent participation in structured and unstructured activities: A person-
oriented analysis. Journal of Youth, 27(2), 155-172.
Baumrind, D. (1971). Current patterns of parental authority. Developmental Psychology

Monographs, 40.
Belsky, J., Lerner, R.M., & Spanier, G.B. (1984). The child in the family. Reading, MA:
Addison-Wesleyand human development, New York: Spring Publication.
Benson, P. L., (2007). Developmental assets: An overview of theory, research, and practice.
London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Boocock, S. P. (1972). An introduction to the sociology of learning. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Bristol, T. & Mangleburg, T.F. (1989). Not telling the whole story: Teen deception in
purchasing. Journal of The Academy of Marketing Science, 33(1), 79-95.
Carnegie Corporation of New York (1992). A Matter of Time: Risk and Opportunity in the
Nonschool Hours. New York: Carnegie Corporation of New York.
55
Chiu, M.L., Feldman, S.S., & Rosenthal, D.A. (1992). The influence of immigration on parental
behavior and adolescent distress in Chinese families residing in two western nations. Journal of
Research on Adolescence, 2(3), 205-239.
Clark, R. M. (1988). Parents as providers of linguistic and social capital. Educational lloriums,
66(2), 93-95.
Crystal, D.S. & Stevenson, H.W. (1995). What is a bad kid? Answers of adolescents and their
mothers in three cultures. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 5(1), 71-91.
Dodge, K. (1993). Social cognitive mechanisms in the development of conduct disorder and
depression, Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Donovan, J. E., & Jessor, R. (1985). Structure of problem behavior in adolescence and young
adulthood. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 53(6), 890-904.
Durbin, D. L., Darling, N., Steinberg, L. & Brown, B. B. (1993). Parenting style and peer group
membership among European-American adolescents. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 3(1),
87-100.
Eccles, J. S., & Barber, B. L. (1999). Student council, volunteering, basketball, or marching
band: What kind of extracurricular involvement matters? Journal of Adolescent Research, 14,
10-43.
Elliott, D. S., Huizinga, D., & Ageton, S. S. (1985). Explaining delinquency and drug use.
Beverly Hills: Sage.
Evans, R. I. (1989). Albert Bandura: The man and his ideas: A dialogue. New York: Praeger.
Feldman, S.S., & Weinberger, D.A. (1994). Self-restraint as a mediator of family influences on
boys' delinquent behavior: A longitudinal study. Child Development, 65, 195-211.
Feldman, S.S., Mont-Reynaud, R., & Rosenthal, D.A. (1992). When east moves west: The
acculturation of values of Chinese adolescents in the U.S. and Australia. Journal of Research on
Adolescence, 2(2), 147-173.
56
Ford, D. L., & Lerner, R. M. (1992). Developmental systems theory: An integrative approach.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Galambos, N.L., & Maggs, J.L. (1991). Out-of-school care of young adolescents and self-
reported behavior. Developmental Psychology, 27(4), 644-655.
Graham, J., Marks, G. & Hansen, W. (1991). Social influence processes affecting adolescent
substance use. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 291-98.
Hendersoa, A. (1988). Parents are schools best friends. Phi Delta Kappan, 70,148-153.
Johnston, L. D., O’Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & Schulenberg, J. E. (2010). Monitoring the
future national results on adolescent drug use, Bethesda, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
Kaur, Sukhminder (2011). Loafing behavior among adolescents in relation to their self- concept
and peer influence, M.Ed. Dissertation , Lovely Professional University, Phagwara.
Lamborn, S. D., Mants, 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, 1049-1065.
Lerner, R. M., Castellino, D. R., Terry, P. A., Villarruel, F. A., & McKinney, M. H. (1995). A
developmental contextual perspective on parenting. In M. H. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of
parenting. Biology and Ecology of Parenting, 2, 285-309.
Lerner, J. V. & Galambos, N. L. (1985). Mother role satisfaction, mother-child interaction, and
child temperament: A process model. Developmental Psychology, 21(6), 1157-1164.
Lerner, R. M. (1995). America's youth in crisis: Challenges and options for programs and
policies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Lung, C. & Choi, E. (2010). A Qualitative study of self-esteem, peer affiliation, and academic
outcome among low achieving students in Hong Kong. New Horizons in Education, 58(1), 22-
42.
57
Maccoby, E. & Martin, J. (1983). Socialization in the context of the family: Parent-child
interaction. Handbook of Child Psychology: Socialization, Personality, and Social Development
4, 1-101.
Martin, C. L., Wood, C. H., & Little, J. K. (1990). The development of gender stereotype
components. Child Development, 61, 1891-1904
McLeod, Saul. (2012). Zone of Proximal Development. Simply Psychology. Retrieved 22

November 2013.
Mordkowitz; E.R., & Ginbury, H.P. (1986). Early academic socialization of successful Asian-
American college students. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational
Research Association, San Francisco, CA (ERIC Document Reproduction service no. ED
280927)
Muller, C. (1995). Maternal employment, parent involvement, and mathematics achievement

among adolescents. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57, 85-100.
Nora, W.L.Y., & Zhang, K.C. (2010). Motives of cheating among secondary students: The role
of self-efficiency and peer influence. Asia Pacific Education Review, 11(4), 573-584.
Parker, J. G., & Asher, S. R. (1993). Friendship and friendship quality in middle childhood:
Links with peer group acceptance and feelings of loneliness and social dissatisfaction.
Developmental Psychology, 29, 611–621.
Piaget, Jean (1983). Piaget's Theory. In Handbook of Child Psychology, 1(4).
Scott-Jones, D. (1984). Family influences on cognitive development and school achievement.

Review of Research in Education, 11,159-304.
Simons, R. L., Johnson, C., & Conger, R. D. (1994). Harsh Corporal punishment versus quality
of parental involvement as an explanation of adolescent maladjustment. Journal of Marriage and
the Family, 56, 591-607.
Stevenson, H. W., Lee, S. & Stigler, J. W. (1986). Mathematics achievement of Chinese,

Japanese, and American children. Science, 231,693-696.
58
Steinberg, L., Mounts, N. S., Lamborn, S. D., & Dornbusch, S. M. (1991). Authoritative
parenting and adolescent adjustment across varied ecological niches. Journal of Research on
Adolescence, 1(1), 19-36.
Tobach, E., & Schneira, T. C. (1968). The biopsychology of social behavior of animals. New
York: McGraw-Hill.
Updegraff , K.A. (2001). Parents’ involvement in adolescents’ peer relationships: A comparison

of mothers’ and fathers’ roles. Journal of Marriage and the Family,63 (1), 655–668.
Vygotky, Lev (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wenz-Gross, M. & Siperstein, G. N. (1997). Importance of social support in the adjustment of

children with learning problems. Exceptional Children, 6,183-194.
Zimmerman, M., Salem, D., & Maton, K. (1995). Family structure and psychosocial correlates
among urban African-American adolescent males. Child Development, 66, 1598-1613.
59

JJ Final

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

JJ Final

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

OBEDIENT AND DISOBEDIENT TENDENCIES AMONG SENIOR

SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS IN RELATION TO THEIR

HOME ENVIRONMENT AND PEER INFLUENCE

A Dissertation Submitted to the

In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree

Regd. No. 11306469

Lovely Professional University

Phagwara, Punjab (India)

I do hereby declare that the dissertation entitled “OBEDIENT AND DISOBEDIENT

Lovely Professional University

Dated: ……………… Hardeep Kaur

Description Page No.

Table of contents VI-VII

List of tables VIII-IX

CHAPTER-1 INTRODUCTION 1-23

1.1 Theoretical Orientation of the Problem 1-23

1.2 Significance of the problem 23

1.3 Statement of the problem 23-24

1.4 Operational definition of the terms 24

1.5 Objectives 24-25

1.7 Delimitations of the study 26

CHAPTER-2 METHODOLOGY 27-33

2.3 Tools of data collection 27

2.3.1 Obedient and disobedient tendency scale 28 -29

2.3.2 Home environment inventory 29-30

2.3.3 Questionnaire on peer influence 30-31

2.4 Procedure of data collection 31

2.5 Data analysis technique 32

CHAPTER-3 ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION 33-53

3.1-3.10 Results pertaining to the variables obedient and 33-52

Disobedient tendencies and different dimensions of

3.11 Results pertaining to the variables obedient and disobedient 52-53

Tendencies and peer influence

CHAPTER-4 CONCLUSIONS, SUGGESTIONS AND

4.1 Conclusions 54-55

4.3 Recommendations 55-56

S.No. Description Page No.

3.1 Showing results of chi square on significant difference between senior 34

3.2 Showing results of chi square on significant difference between 36

3.3 Showing results of chi square on significant difference between senior 37

3.4 Showing results of chi square on significant difference between 39

3.5 Showing results of chi square on significant difference between 41

3.7 Showing results of chi square on significant difference between senior 45

3.8 Showing results of chi square on significant difference between senior 47

3.9 Showing results of chi square on significant difference between 49

3.1 Showing results of chi square on significant difference between 51

3.2 Showing results of chi square on significant difference between 52

S.No. Description Page No.

3.1 Showing percentage of students having obedient and disobedient tendencies 35

1.3 Statement of the Problem

1.4 Operational Definition of the Terms

1.7 Delimitations of the Study

2.3 TOOLS OF DATA COLLECTION

S.no. Dimensions Items

Sr. no. Inventory Dimension Reliability Coefficient

E Social isolation .870

2.3.3.3 Item Analysis

2.4 PROCEDURE OF DATA COLLECTION

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

Low High Chi square

Low Punishment High Punishment Result

Tendencies Low conformity High conformity Result

Tendencies Low social High social Chi square Result