Citation

Mageau GA, Lessard J, Carpentier J, Robichaud JM, Joussemet M, Koestner R. J. Appl. Dev. Psychol. 2018; 54: 12-22.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2018, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/j.appdev.2017.11.001

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Using hypothetical scenarios of rule-breaking situations, this study contrasted two behavioral limitation (BLIMIT) strategies that differ in terms of their connection to the transgression-induced problem (logical consequences vs. mild punishments, compared to no BLIMIT). A total of 215 children (M age=10.42) and their mothers rated the effectiveness and acceptability of these strategies, when preceded by different discipline climates (autonomy-supportive [AS] vs. controlling). Mothers rated logical consequences as the most effective and acceptable strategy in both climates and perceived BLIMIT strategies more positively in AS climates. A significant interaction also revealed that all differences between BLIMIT strategies were accentuated in AS climates. Children believed that logical consequences and mild punishments were equally effective and more effective than no BLIMIT, but they rated logical consequences as more acceptable. Children also perceived BLIMIT strategies more positively in AS climates. However, for children, climates did not moderate the effect of BLIMIT strategies.

Language: en

Keywords

Authority exertion; Autonomy support; Compliance; Internalization; Logical consequences; Mild punishments