Learning and Individual Differences 49 (2016) 378–385

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Learning and Individual Differences

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/lindif

Perception of parenting styles and academic achievement: The mediating

role of goal orientations
Loredana R. Diaconu-Gherasim ⁎, Cornelia Măirean
Department of Psychology, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, 3 Toma Cozma, Iasi 700554, Romania

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This study examined the relation between of the adolescents' perception of parenting styles with their goal ori-
Received 20 April 2015 entations and academic achievement. The mediational role of goal orientations in the associations between par-
Received in revised form 12 March 2016 enting styles and achievement was also investigated. The sample included 174 high school students (59.8% girls)
Accepted 24 June 2016
aged between 14 and 18. The adolescents completed measures regarding their perception of parenting styles and
goal orientations. The findings showed that parenting styles were significantly associated with adolescents' goal
Keywords:
Parenting styles
orientations and academic achievement. Further, the goal orientations mediated the relations between percep-
Goal orientations tion of parenting styles and achievement. Specifically, the parental rejection was associated with achievement
Academic achievement due to its association with mastery goals, while the parental autonomy was associated with academic achieve-
Adolescence ment due to its association with mastery-avoidance goals. The findings highlight the importance that parenting,
Mediation in interrelation with goal orientations, plays in the high school adolescents' achievement.
© 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction (Darling & Steinberg, 1993). According to Schaefer (1965), the parent-
importan ing styles vary along two dimensions, including acceptance/hostility
ta
Academic achievement represents an important predictor of the ado- and autonomy/control. Parental acceptance is defined as the extent to
studiere
lescents' future professional career, attainment of social status as well as which parents intentionally foster individuality, self-regulation and
concept
of their personal well-being (Creed, Patton, & Prideaux, 2007; Sijtsema, self-assertion by being attuned, supportive, and acquiescent to the
Verboom, Penninx, Verhulst, & Ormel, 2014). Due to the high importance children's needs and demands (Haskett, Nears, Ward, & McPherson,
of academic achievement in the adolescents' future development, the 2006; Schaefer, 1965). Parental (psychological) control focuses on con-
practitioners and researchers continuously seek factors that could en- trolling the children's psychological experiences and potentially inhibits
hance students' achievement. The achievement goal researchers argue their psychological development through love withdrawal, fear and
limite lit.
that goal orientations are important lens to understand the students' ac- guilt induction, negative affect and excessive personal control (Barber,
anterioar
ademic achievement and learning (Ames, 1992; Meece, Anderman, & 1996; Soenens & Vansteenkiste, 2010).
e cu
dovezi
privire laAnderman, 2006). Further, previous literature showed that parenting Previous literature has shown that parenting style is associated with
ale
factori style plays an important role in the adolescents' motivation and academic distinct levels of motivation and academic achievement in adolescents.
achievement (Grolnick, Ryan, & Deci, 1991). However, the influences of Overall, studies revealed that perceived parental acceptance was posi- relatiei
parenting practices on students' goal orientations are only recently exam- tively related, while rejection was negatively related to the students' ac- VI si VD

scopuri ined (e.g., Duchesne & Ratelle, 2010; Luo, Aye, Hogan, Kaur, & Chan, ademic achievement (Beran, 2009; Khan, Haynes, Armstrong, & Rohner,
2013). The first goal of this study was to evaluate how parenting relates 2010; Uddin, 2011). Further, a higher parental psychological control
to goal orientations and academic achievement. The second goal was is was related to a lower level of achievement (Jiang, Yau, Bonner, &
to investigate the mediational role of goal orientations in the relation be- Chiang, 2011; Stright & Yeo, 2014) while parental autonomy was relat-
tween parenting style and academic achievement. ed to better school performance (Khan et al., 2010; Tulviste & Rohner,
2010; Uddin, 2011). In addition, few studies have focused on the psy-
limita:
1.1. Parenting style and academic achievement chological mechanisms that may explain how parenting is related to ac- mecanis
ademic achievement. The previous studies showed that the personality mele
definire
concept Parenting style refers to a constellation of parental behaviour condu- traits, such as conscientiousness may act as one specific mechanism explicati
VI cive to a persistent emotional climate in a broad range of situations linking parenting styles to success in school (e.g., Kaiser & Diewald, ve
2014), whereas other studies suggested that motivation, such as academ-
⁎ Corresponding author. ic engagement behaviour, functioned as a mediator between parenting
E-mail address: [email protected] (L.R. Diaconu-Gherasim). and adolescents' academic achievement (You, Hong, & Ho, 2011).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2016.06.026
1041-6080/© 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
 L.R. Diaconu-Gherasim, C. Măirean / Learning and Individual Differences 49 (2016) 378–385 379
rezultate
relatia Although achievement goals are important motivational factors for found that mastery-approach goals were not linked to achievement
parentinunderstanding engagement and learning, the influences of parenting (e.g., Bipp & van Dam, 2014; King & McInerney, 2014). Little research
g-
on students' achievement goals are only recently examined. Overall, measured mastery-avoidance goals and also reported mixed results;
scopuri
the studies reported that parental involvement or autonomy were asso- some studies showed that mastery-avoidance goals were negative pre-
+ studii
despre ciated with mastery goals, while parental control was related to perfor- dictors of achievement (e.g., Elliot & McGregor, 2001; Luo et al., 2013),
rol mance goals (Duchesne & Ratelle, 2010; Gonzalez, Doan Holbein, & while others found that these goals were not related to achievement
mediator Quilter, 2002; Gurland & Grolnick, 2005). Recently, Luo et al. (2013) ex- (e.g., Bipp & van Dam, 2014; Bong, 2009). Further, some studies found
u plored the relation between parenting style and all four types of goal positive associations between achievement and performance-approach
scopurilorientations. The results revealed that the parental control was related goals (e.g., Dinger, Dickhauser, Spinath, & Steinmayr, 2013), while
or to mastery-avoidance, performance-approach and performance-avoid- others found no links (e.g., King & McInerney, 2014) or negative associ-
ance goals, while parental acceptance was linked to mastery-approach, ations (e.g., Luo et al., 2013). Finally, performance-avoidance goals have
performance-approach as well as avoidance goals. been consistently found as negative predictors of achievement (e.g.,
Very limited research has examined the mediational role of achieve- Dinger et al., 2013; Luo et al., 2013), however, recent studies revealed
ment goals in the relation between parenting style and the adolescents' that these goals were not predictive of adolescents' achievement (e.g.,
learning outcomes. In one study, Boon (2007) reported that both paren- Bipp & van Dam, 2014; King & McInerney, 2014). These contradictory
tal involvement and strictness/supervision were positively correlated findings suggest that more studies are still needed to examine the rela-
with adolescents' mastery goals, self-efficacy and negatively correlated tion between achievement goals and the adolescents' achievement as
with self-handicapping, and all these variables mediated the relation well as the factors that may have a significant influence on them, in
between parenting and academic achievement. To our knowledge, order to improve the understanding of the role of goal orientations.
only Luo et al. (2013) have examined the mediational role of goal orien-
tations based on the 2 × 2 achievement goal framework in the relation 1.3. The current study
between parenting style and learning outcomes. They found that paren-
tal acceptance was associated with a positive learning profile, including This current study explored the mediational role of goal orientations
high achievement, due to its positive association with mastery-ap- in the relation between parenting style and academic achievement on a
proach goals. Further, parental control was associated to a negative sample of adolescents. The first goal of the study was to investigate the
Scop 1+
learning profile, including low achievement, through the perfor- ipoteze
relation of the adolescents' perception of parenting with their goal ori-
mance-avoidance goals. These findings provide empirical support for entations and academic achievement. Specifically, we hypothesized
the mediational role of achievement goals in relation of parenting that parental acceptance would be associated with higher mastery-ap-
with students' achievement. proach goals and higher achievement, while parental control would be
related to performance-avoidance goals and lower achievement. The Scop 2 +
1.2. Achievement goals and academic achievement second goal was to explore whether goal orientations mediated the as- ipoteze
definire sociation between parenting style and academic achievement (see Fig.
mediator Achievement goal theory is one of the most prominent theoretical 1). We expected a mediational role of mastery (-approach) goals in
+ perspectives on understanding students' achievement motivation the relation between parental acceptance and achievement. Finally,
rezultate
(Hulleman, Schrager, Bodmann, & Harackiewicz, 2010; Wirthwein, we expected a meditational role of mastery-avoidance and both perfor-
anteriaor
Sparfeldt, Pinquart, Wegerer, & Steinmayr, 2013). Achievement goals mance goals in the relation between perception of parental control and
e despreare defined as general reasons that lead students to approach, engage, achievement.
legaturaand respond in different achievement tasks and situations in specific We investigated these relations on a sample of high school students,
VM si
ways (Ames, 1992; Dweck & Leggett, 1988). The traditional achieve- because during the adolescence period motivation and achievement
VD
ment goal theory differentiated between mastery and performance start to decrease, while the relations with parents undergo a transfor- particula
goals (Dweck & Leggett, 1988). Later, a distinction between the ap- mation because of the increase in the adolescents' autonomy and inde- ritati
proach and avoidance dimensions was added to both performance pendence (Meece et al., 2006; Scholte & Van Aken, 2006). However, populati
(Elliot & Church, 1997) and mastery goals (Elliot & McGregor, 2001). previous literature suggests that the majority of adolescents continue e
Thus, the 2 × 2 achievement goal framework resulted, which posits to rely on their parents for emotional support and advice (Ozer, Flores,
four types of goals: (1) mastery-approach goals orientated towards Tschann, & Pasch, 2013), revealing that parents still play an important
achieving new knowledge, improving and developing knowledge and role in the adolescents' motivation and achievement (Huang, 2012;
skills; (2) mastery-avoidance goals referring to avoiding misunder- Wirthwein et al., 2013).
standings and not mastering the task; (3) performance-approach Little research on parenting, goal orientations and academic achieve-
goals oriented towards demonstrating one's competences and ment was carried out on students from Eastern European countries context
outperforming others; and (4) performance-avoidance goals focused (Butnaru, Gherasim, Iacob, & Amariei, 2010; Puklek Levpuscek & cultural
on preventing failures and avoiding normative incompetence. Compre- Zupancic, 2009). To enhance the literature, this study was conducted
hensive literature reviews suggest that achievement goals theory is on a sample of Romanian high school students. The Romanian school
employed to predict and understand different students' learning out- system consists of a nine-year basic education cycle that is divided
comes, including learning strategies and academic engagement (see into triads: elementary (first to the fourth grades), middle (fifth to the
Senko, Hulleman, & Harackiewicz, 2011; Wigfield & Cambria, 2010, for eighth grades) and high (ninth to 12th grades) school. In the high school
extensive reviews). Since most of the previous studies used a three- system, Romanian children are streamed into different school types, on
dimensional goal model (see Wirthwein et al., 2013, for a review), the the basis of the middle school level of achievement (average grades) but
consequences of pursuing mastery-avoidance goals have been less inves- also based on their scores on standardized tests that are administered at
tigated and more research still needed to examine how this dimension is the end of the eighth grade.
empirically different from other dimensions of achievement goals.
Recent literature reviews and meta-analysis indicated that the evi- 2. Method
dence for the links between the goal orientations and academic achieve-
ment on samples of middle and high school students is mixed (Huang, 2.1. Participants
2012; Wirthwein et al., 2013). Specifically, some studies reported a pos-
itive association between mastery-approach goals and achievement Students were recruited from three urban schools in the North East-
(e.g., Keys, Conley, Duncan, & Domina, 2012), while other studies ern part of Romania. Schools distributed the invitation letters describing
380 L.R. Diaconu-Gherasim, C. Măirean / Learning and Individual Differences 49 (2016) 378–385

Fig. 1. The conceptual model of the study.

the study, and parents returned consent forms if they agreed to allow respectively for the mother and father forms. The instrument has dem-
their child to participate in the study. The sample included 174 high onstrated good test-retest reliability, and consistent correlations with
school students (59.8% girls), mean age = 15.67 years (SD = 1.22; various aspects of family functioning and adolescent's outcomes
range = 14–18 years), with 29.9% in the 9th grade (27 girls), 45.4% in (Bean, Barber, & Crane, 2006; Varela, Niditch, Hensley-Maloney,
the 10th grade (52 girls), and 24.7% in 11th grade (25 girls). Most ado- Moore, & Creveling, 2013).
lescents reported intact-family status (85.6%), with 14.4% indicating
non-intact families (divorced, separated or widowed).
2.2.2. Goal orientations
2.2. Measures An adaptation of the 12-item Achievement Goal Questionnaire
(AGQ, Elliot & McGregor, 2001) was used to measure the four types of
The instruments were translated into Romanian using the forward- achievement goals: mastery-approach (3 items), mastery-avoidance
backward translation design and following the guidelines given by the (3 items), performance-approach (3 items), and performance-avoid-
literature (Hambleton, 2005; Van der Vijver, 2003). Two translated ver- ance (3 items). The participants responded to each item using a 7-
sions were obtained for each scale from two separate teams, each com- point scale ranging from 1 (not at all true for me) to 7 (very true for
posed of a psychologist familiar with the parenting and motivation me). Confirmatory factor analysis indicated that the model fit well the
fields and a professional translator. Next, the two translations were data: χ2 (48) = 69.22, p = 0.024; RMSEA = 0.05, 90% CI: [0.02, 0.07];
compared and discussed, forming a single version which was later CFI = 0.96; GFI = 0.93; TLI = 0.94). Previous studies showed that
back-translated into English by a certified professional. The few discrep- AGQ has good psychometric properties in that it correlates with various
ancies between the original and the back-translated version were measures of the adolescents' learning strategies, academic engagement
solved, thus obtaining the final version. The back-translation method or emotional adjustment, which supported the construct validity of the
retained the conceptual meaning of the original measures. scale (Dinger et al., 2013; Keys et al., 2012). Alphas for the subscales
ranged from 0.60 to 0.74.
2.2.1. Parenting style
The participants completed a 57-item Romanian version (Butnaru et 2.2.3. Academic achievement
al., 2010) of the Children's Report of Parenting Behavior Inventory We collected from school registers the adolescents' grades for each
(CRPBI; Schludermann & Schludermann, 1970), a well-known scale de- of the most important subjects (Maths, Physics, Chemistry, Biology, Ro-
signed to assess the adolescents' perceptions of their parents' behaviour. manian, Geography and English) at the end of the first semester. The
On a 3-point scale ranging from 1 (like) to 3 (dislike), the children an- overall average grade was calculated for each student. We also comput-
swered each question separately for mothers and fathers. This research ed separate averages for the different subjects: languages, mathematics
measured the Acceptance versus Rejection dimension and the Autono- and natural sciences. Because the results from zero-order correlations
my versus Psychological Control dimension. The scales for the Rejection and mediation analyses did not differ from the overall average grade,
dimension were Positive involvement (8 items), Acceptance (8 items), we further reported the result only for the overall achievement, as a de-
Child centeredness (5 items), and Acceptance of individuation (8 pendent variable.
items). The scales for the Psychological Autonomy dimension were Con-
trol through guilt (5 items), Inconsistent discipline (5 items), withdraw-
al of relations (5 items), Hostile control (8 items), and Instilling 2.3. Procedure
persistent anxiety (5 items). In order to verify the factorial validity of
the dimensions, we used confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). For the As part of a larger study, the students filled in the questionnaires
model fit we applied the maximum-likelihood estimation and reported during the first semester. All participants were informed about the con-
the following fit indexes: Root Mean Square Error of Approximation fidentiality and anonymity of their responses and were encouraged to
(RMSEA), Comparative Fit Index (CFI), and Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) provide honest answers in the questionnaire. Also, students were as-
(Hu & Bentler, 1999). The model fit results were: χ2 (22) = 37.27, sured that they could quit the session whenever they decided to do so.
p = 0.022; RMSEA = 0.06, 90% CI: [0.02, 0.09]; CFI = 0.98; GFI = The survey took place in the classroom in groups of 20–25 students,
0.95; TLI = 0.97). Taking into account the recommended thresholds of on a regular school day, in the presence of an experienced research as-
these values, we consider this model to fit the data in a satisfactory de- sistant, and lasted for about 30 min. The students were offered to get in-
gree. We computed the average across items describing the parents, dividualized feedback regarding their personal characteristics regarding
taken together, and total scores indicated a higher level of parental re- the constructs assessed. Permission for the study was obtained from
jection and autonomy, respectively. Alphas ranged from 0.72 to 0.87 school authorities and principals. In each school, the grades were col-
for the Rejection subscales and.59 to 0.74 for the Autonomy subscales, lected only for the students that were at school on the day of testing.
 L.R. Diaconu-Gherasim, C. Măirean / Learning and Individual Differences 49 (2016) 378–385 381

3. Results 3.3. Mediation analyses

3.1. Preliminary analyses Mediation analyses were performed to verify whether the relations
between the adolescents' perception of parenting style and their
Because the observations on the students are nested within school, achievement were mediated by goal orientations. In order to test the
data were examined for “nested” data structures (e.g., children nested hypothesized mediation model we used the PROCESS custom dialog
within schools) following the steps outlined by Peugh (2010). Analyses for IBM SPSS (Hayes, 2013). This solution permits building bootstrap-
indicated no significant between-school variability (the intraclass corre- based confidence intervals in order to test the statistical significance of
lation, ICC, equal to zero), suggesting that data from all four schools mediation effects in a nonparametric and less biased way (Preacher &
could be combined for the primary analyses. Hayes, 2008). In the present study we used 5000 resamples in order
The results showed that there were no significant correlations be- to estimate 95% confidence intervals. When zero is not in the 95% confi-
tween age and goal orientations, and achievement respectively (rs dence interval, one can conclude that the indirect effect is significantly
(174) ˂ 0.08, all ps N 0.05). Further, independent sample t-tests indicated different from zero at p b 0.05 (two-tailed) and, thus, that the effects
significant gender differences in mastery-avoidance goals and achieve- of the parenting styles on the achievement are mediated by goal orien-
ment, ts (172) = −1.97 and −2.20, respectively, all ps b 0.05, revealing tations. Gender was included as a covariate.
that boys reported lower levels of mastery-avoidance goals and In the first analysis (see Table 3), the parental rejection was the inde-
achievement, respectively, M (SD) = 14.41(3.57) and M (SD) = 8.85 pendent variable, achievement was the dependent variable, and mas-
(0.54) compared to girls, M (SD) = 15.46 (3.32) and 9.06 (0.65). tery-avoidance, mastery-approach, performance-avoidance, and
performance-approach were the four potential mediators. The parental
rejection had a significant overall effect on achievement (B = −0.01;
3.2. Associations among main study variables t = −2.70, df = 174, p = 0.007), so that higher rejection was associated
with low academic achievement. This total indirect effect has a point es-
Zero-order correlations among parental practices, goal orientations timate of −0.0021 and a 95% BC bootstrap CI of −0.0061 to 0.0001. The
and achievement are presented in Table 1. The parental autonomy pos- total amount of variance accounted for in this model was 9% (adjusted
itively correlated with achievement while the parental rejection nega- R2 = 0.09). Based on these data, we computed the statistical power of
tively correlated with it. The associations between goals and the results, using the post-hoc statistical power calculator for multiple
achievement were not significant, except for a positive link between regressions. The results indicated an adequate observed statistical
mastery-avoidance goals and grades. Further, parental autonomy posi- power of 0.92 (Cohen, Cohen, West, & Aiken, 2003).
tively correlated with mastery-avoidance goals, while parental rejection An examination of the specific indirect effects indicated that mas-
was negatively associated with mastery-avoidance and performance- tery-avoidance goals were significant mediators of the relation between
approach goals. Controlling for the adolescents' gender did not change this parenting style and achievement based on the following results: pa-
any of these results. None of the correlation coefficients for the relations rental rejection significantly predicted mastery-avoidance goals
between the variables exceeded 0.80, suggesting no problems with (B = −0.06; t = −3.60, df = 174, p b 0.001); next, mastery-avoidance
multicollinearity (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007). goals (B = 0.05; t = 3.94, df = 174, p b 0.001) and parental rejection
Due to mixed previous findings on the effects of gender, we conduct- (B = −0.01; t = − 2.70, df = 174, p = 0.007) significantly predicted
ed exploratory analyses to investigate whether there were differences achievement. When the entire model was tested, the parenting style
in the associations between the adolescents' perception of parenting no longer significantly predicted achievement (B = − 0.01;
style, goal orientations and achievement. The patterns of correlations t = − 1.79, df = 174, p = 0.074). As the 95% confidence interval
among the main study variables, presented in Table 2, were not signifi- (CI95 = −0.0065 to −0.0012) did not contain the value zero, the me-
cantly different for boys and girls (all zs b 1.96, ps N 0.05). However, the diated effect was significant. Further, mastery-approach goals were also
association between the mastery-approach goals and achievement, z = mediators of the relation between parental rejection and achievement.
2.05, p = 0.04 were significantly stronger for girls than for boys. Further, This parenting style significantly predicted mastery-approach goals
associations between mastery-avoidance goals and both parental au- (B = − 0.04; t = − 2.366, df = 174, p = 0.019). Next, mastery-ap-
tonomy and acceptance were stronger for girls than for boys, zs = proach goals (B = −0.03; t = −2.52, df = 174, p = 0.012) and parental
2.63 and 1.74, respectively, all ps b 0.08. All date presented above indi- rejection (B = − 0.01; t = − 2.70, df = 174, p = 0.007) significantly
cate that gender was significantly related to the students' achievement predicted academic achievement. When the entire model was tested,
in the overall sample, and therefore, the following analyses we con- parental rejection no longer significantly predicted achievement
trolled for participants' gender. (B = − 0.01; t = − 1.79, df = 174, p = 0.074). The 95% confidence

Table 1
Descriptive statistics and associations among the main study variables for the entire sample.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1. PR −0.60⁎⁎ −0.31⁎⁎ −0.19⁎ −0.02 −0.19⁎⁎ −0.20⁎⁎

2. PA −0.60⁎⁎ 0.24⁎⁎ −0.01 −0.05 0.04 0.21⁎⁎
3. MAV −0.28⁎⁎ 0.24⁎⁎ 0.34⁎⁎ 0.33⁎⁎ 0.41⁎⁎ 0.19⁎⁎
4. MAP −0.18⁎ −0.03 0.28⁎⁎ 0.06 0.34⁎⁎ −0.05
5. PAV −0.03 −0.05 0.35⁎⁎ 0.13 0.40⁎⁎ −0.07
6. PAP −0.19⁎⁎ 0.07 0.43⁎⁎ 0.28⁎⁎ 0.47⁎⁎ 0.05
7. Ach −0.22⁎⁎ 0.21⁎⁎ 0.29⁎⁎ −0.08 −0.09 0.09
M 66.33 143.96 20.31 26.93 22.28 24.71 8.98
SD 16.15 24.24 4.37 5.60 5.90 6.61 0.62
Range 40–118.75 81.75–187.50 4–21 6–21 3–21 3–21 7.13–10

Note: upper right – zero-order associations; lower left – partial correlations controlling for the adolescents' gender. N = 174; PR = parental rejection; PA = parental autonomy; MAV =
mastery-avoidance goals; MAP = mastery-approach goals; PAV = performance-avoidance goals; PAP = performance-approach goals; Ach = achievement.
⁎ p b 0.05.
⁎⁎ p b 0.01.
382 L.R. Diaconu-Gherasim, C. Măirean / Learning and Individual Differences 49 (2016) 378–385

Table 2
Descriptive statistics and associations among the main study variables for each gender sample.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 M SD

1. PR −0.64⁎⁎ −0.41⁎⁎ −0.24⁎ −0.02 −0.24⁎ −0.22⁎ 64.72 17.19

2. PA −0.52⁎⁎ 0.40⁎⁎ 0.04 −0.06 0.01 0.20⁎ 144.03 25.18
3. MAV −0.16 0.01 0.33⁎⁎ 0.21⁎ 0.42⁎⁎ 0.33⁎⁎ 20.90 4.13
4. MAP −0.10 −0.11 0.35⁎⁎ −0.04 0.20⁎ 0.03 26.87 5.46
5. PAV −0.02 −0.04 0.54⁎⁎ 0.23⁎ 0.40⁎⁎ −0.09 22.75 6.36
6. PAP −0.11 0.11 0.40⁎⁎ 0.54⁎⁎ 0.41⁎⁎ 0.09 24.81 6.70
7. Ach −0.15 0.22† −0.02 −0.20 −0.04 −0.03 9.06 0.65
M 68.72 143.86 19.44 27.02 21.58 24.55 8.85
SD 14.26 22.96 4.60 5.83 5.09 6.53 0.54

Note: upper right – zero-order associations for the girls sample (n = 104); lower left – zero order associations for the boys sample (n = 70). PR = parental rejection; PA = parental au-
tonomy; MAV = mastery-avoidance goals; MAP = mastery-approach goals; PAV = performance-avoidance goals; PAP = performance-approach goals; Ach = achievement.
†
p = 0.062.
⁎ p b 0.05.
⁎⁎ p b 0.01.

interval (CI95 = 0.0002 to 0.0035) did not contain the value zero, indi- 4. Discussion
cating that the mediated effect is significant. Thus, the parental rejection
accounted for academic achievement through its association with both The first goal of the present study was to explore the associations be-
mastery-approach and mastery-avoidance goals. The performance tween the adolescents' perception of parenting style, goal orientations reamintir
goals did not mediate the link between this parenting style and achieve- and achievement. The second goal was to examine the mediational e
ment in our sample (Fig. 2). role of achievement goals in the relation between the parenting style
In the second analysis, the all four goals were entered simultaneous- and achievement.
ly as mediator variables of the relation between parental autonomy and In agreement with previous studies, our results revealed significant
Scop 1+
academic achievement. This parenting style had a significant overall ef- links between parenting and achievement; parental rejection was neg- rezultate
fect on achievement (B = 0.01; t = 2.83, df = 174, p = 0.005); the re- atively associated with achievement while parental autonomy was pos- anterioar
sults indicated that the greater the autonomy, the greater the school itively associated with it (Khan et al., 2010; Stright & Yeo, 2014; Tulviste e+
grades. This total indirect effect has a point estimate of 0.0021 and a & Rohner, 2010; Uddin, 2011). As expected, parental rejection was neg- explicatii
95% BC bootstrap CI of 0.0012 to 0.0047. The total amount of variance atively associated with mastery-approach and performance-approach
accounted for in the overall model, which included this parental behav- goals, while parental autonomy was positively associated with mas-
iour and the proposed mediators, was 16.52% (adjusted R2 = 0.1652). tery-avoidance goals (Gonzalez et al., 2002; Luo et al., 2013), but unre-
The observed statistical power for these results is 0.88 (Cohen et al., lated to performance-avoidance goals (Boon, 2007). However, contrary
2003). with previous findings (Boon, 2007; Gurland & Grolnick, 2005), in our
An examination of the specific indirect effects indicates that there study the associations between parental control and both mastery-ap-
are significant indirect effects of the parental autonomy on achievement proach and performance-approach goals were non-significant. These
through achievement goals (see Table 4). The results indicated that only inconsistent findings may be explained by the way we measured par-
the mastery-avoidance goals served as a mediator of the relation be- enting compared to other previous studies. In Boon's (2007) study,
tween this parenting style and achievement based on the following re- the parental control was defined as perceived parental monitoring and
sults: parental autonomy significantly predicted mastery-avoidance supervision, while in our study, parental control involved in addition in-
goals (B = 0.04; t = 3.31, df = 174, p = 0.001); next, mastery-avoid- consistent discipline, withdrawal of relations, hostile control, and
ance goals (B = 0.06; t = 3.86, df = 174, p b 0.001) and parental auton- instilling persistent anxiety. Moreover, these inconsistent results could
omy (B = 0.01; t = 2.83, df = 174, p = 0.005) significantly predicted be explained by the differences concerning the participants' age. We ex-
the adolescents' achievement. When the entire model was tested, pa- plored the relation between parenting and goal orientations on a sam-
rental autonomy no longer significantly predicted achievement (B = ple of high school students, while previous studies explored these
0.01; t = 1.44, df = 174, p = 0.151). As the 95% confidence interval relations on younger students, from elementary and middle school
(CI95 = 0.0007 to 0.0042) did not contain the value zero, the mediated (Boon, 2007; Gurland & Grolnick, 2005).
effect is significant. Thus, the parental autonomy influenced the adoles- In terms of the associations between goal orientations and achieve-
Scop 2+
cents' achievement due to its association with mastery-avoidance goals. ment, our data indicated that achievement was positively associated
explicatii
The mastery-approach and performance goals did not mediate the rela- only with mastery-avoidance goals. These results contradict previous rezultate
tion between parental autonomy and achievement (Fig. 3). findings showing a negative association or no association between contradi
these constructs (Elliot & McGregor, 2001; Eum & Rice, 2011). The par- ctorii
ticipants' age could explain these contradictory findings, due to the fact
Table 3
Mediation of the effect of parental rejection on the adolescents' academic achievement
that, compared to our study, previous research was conducted on un-
through goal orientations. dergraduate students (Cumming, Smith, Smoll, Standage, & Grossbard,
2008; Eum & Rice, 2011). Nevertheless, our results are consistent with
Point estimate Product of Bias corrected and
coefficients accelerated CI
previous studies revealing non-significant relations of achievement
with mastery-approach, performance-approach and avoidance goals
SE z 95% lower 95% upper
on high school students (e.g., Bipp & van Dam, 2014; King &
PR MAV −0.0034 0.0013 −2.5634 −0.0065 −0.0012 McInerney, 2014).
MAP 0.0013 0.0008 1.7119 0.0002 0.0035
Regarding the mediational role of achievement goals in the relation Scop 3+
PAV 0.0002 0.0005 0.4547 −0.0016 0.0018 rezultate
PAP −0.0003 0.0007 −0.4530 −0.0031 0.0003 between parenting and achievement, our data are in line with previous
anterioar
Total −0.0021 0.0013 −1.6217 −0.0061 0.0001 findings (Boon, 2007) and showed that adolescents' perception of the
e+
Note: PR = parental rejection; MAV = mastery-avoidance goals; MAP = mastery-ap-
parental rejection was associated with their achievement due to its as- explicatii
proach goals; PAV = performance-avoidance goals; PAP = performance-approach sociation with both the mastery-approach and mastery-avoidance
goals; 5000 bootstrap samples. goals. We did not found a mediation role of performance goals on the
 L.R. Diaconu-Gherasim, C. Măirean / Learning and Individual Differences 49 (2016) 378–385 383

Fig. 2. Multiple mediation models depicting the relations between parental rejection, multiple mediators, and achievement. Notes: Graph A depicts the total effect of parental autonomy on
academic achievement. Graph B depicts the direct effect of parental autonomy on achievement after including mediators. The values represent unstandardised regression coefficients ±
standard error.

relation between parenting and academic achievement. However, the framework, especially of the mastery-avoidance concept on high school
mediational role of mastery goals between parental rejection and students. There is empirical evidence that younger students were not
achievement reveals that goal orientations are important to understand successful in distinctively validating the two goal avoidance scales,
the relation between parenting style and learning outcomes (Luo et al., and concluded that adolescents range do not cognitively differentiate
2013). between mastery-avoidance and performance-avoidance goal orienta-
The context specificity where the parenting was measured across tions (Cumming et al., 2008). Furthermore, according to Elliot and
studies can explain these unexpected findings. In the Luo et al.’s McGregor (2001, p. 502) mastery-avoidance could be considered as a
(2013) study parenting style was measured as the involvement in the “past-referential” goal, whereby the individual's standard of evaluation
students' learning activities, while in our research it was measured as is based on own personal performance history. Since previous studies
general practices that parents use in the relations with their children. found a low endorsement of mastery-avoidance goals in samples of
Another explanation could be the applicability of the 2 × 2 goal middle school students, a past-referent goal like mastery-avoidance
might be more relevant to older participants who have a significant
past performance history with which to make a comparison with
Table 4
Mediation of the effect of parental autonomy on adolescents' academic achievement
(Bong, 2009). Thus, future research should consider the concept of mas-
through goal orientations. tery-avoidance on samples of older students, such as high school ones.
This study has some limitations which should be taken into account.
Point estimate Product of Bias corrected and limite +
coefficients accelerated CI
First, the proposed causal sequence of parenting, achievement goals and
directii
achievement cannot be justified by the cross-sectional nature of this viitoare
SE z 95% lower 95% upper
study. The correlational design of this study does not provide evidence
PA MAV 0.0017 0.0008 2.2825 0.0007 0.0042 for causal connections between the students' perception of parenting
MAP 0.0001 0.0003 0.2044 −0.0004 0.0012
style, goals, and their performance in school. Longitudinal studies with
PAV 0.0002 0.0003 0.6848 −0.0007 0.0016
PAP 0.0001 0.0001 0.4426 −0.0001 0.0015 more detailed observations should be conducted in order to understand
Total 0.0021 0.0008 2.6720 0.0012 0.0047 the dynamic interplay between the perception of the parents' behaviour
Note: PA = parental autonomy; MAV = mastery-avoidance goals; MAP = mastery-ap-
and the adolescents' characteristics, including goal orientations and ac-
proach goals; PAV = performance-avoidance goals; PAP = performance-approach ademic achievement. Second, the results of this study might not be gen-
goals; 5000 bootstrap samples. eralized and applied to younger students, because the relative
 384 L.R. Diaconu-Gherasim, C. Măirean / Learning and Individual Differences 49 (2016) 378–385

Fig. 3. Multiple mediation models depicting the relations between parental autonomy, multiple mediators, and academic achievement.

importance of these two dimensions of parenting might change with The findings of this study have important implications for students, rezultate
age (Cumming et al., 2008; Wirthwein et al., 2013). Third, this study ex- parents and school leaders. Although mastery avoidance goals were si
amined the mediational role of achievement goals in the context of positively associated with achievement, teachers should encourage stu- implicatii
overall academic achievement, but the findings are not available for par- dents to be more oriented towards improving and developing knowl-
ticular domains or for certain learning contexts. It had been pointed out edge and skills, mastering their tasks and learning materials, and less
that goal orientations are different during success/failure situations, in towards avoiding misunderstandings. Since mastery avoidance goals
competitive learning environments or when self-confidence about are associated with positive outcomes in high-school students, but
one's competences is high/low (Dweck & Leggett, 1988; Wirthwein et might be inefficient in the long term, teachers should work more in
al., 2013). Future research conducted with different samples in a variety order to emphasize the students' orientation towards the future, not
of learning contexts could address such issues through longitudinal and only towards the immediate rewards. Further, since parenting style is
cross-sectional analyses. an important determinant of the adolescent's education and plays a
Scontrib Despite these limitations, this study is one of the few to explore how role in reproducing the educational inequalities (Kaiser & Diewald,
utii ale parenting style relates to goal orientations as well as academic achieve- 2014; Lareau, 2011), parents should be encouraged to adopt specific
studiuluiment on a sample of adolescents. First, our data support the relation of practices that support their children in their learning activities and
parenting with goal orientations and achievement on a sample of high thus, could reduce the social inequality. Specifically, parents should be
school students, which is of particular importance considering that taught how to provide appropriate autonomous support to their adoles-
most previous studies were conducted with samples of college students. cent children, and how to accept their needs. In addition, more public
Perceiving a high parental rejection or a low autonomy would be critical campaigns should be launched to inform parents about the adolescents'
for the achievement and goal orientations emphasis during adoles- development and about the way to promote a better cognitive adjust-
cence. Second, we measured goal orientations using the 2 × 2 achieve- ment for their children.
ment goal model, and, thus, we extended the knowledge on this topic,
particularly regarding the mastery-avoidance goals, which were less
studied previously. Third, this study adds to the limited literature on the Acknowledgements
mediating role of goal orientations in the relation between parenting
style and academic achievement. Therefore, our findings contribute to a The data collection of this study was supported by a grant from the
better understanding of the psychological mechanisms that can explain Romanian National Council of Scientific Research in Higher Education,
the association between parenting style and academic achievement. CNCSIS-UEFISCDI, project number 849 PNII_IDEI 2026/2008-2011.
 L.R. Diaconu-Gherasim, C. Măirean / Learning and Individual Differences 49 (2016) 378–385 385

References Jiang, Y. H., Yau, J., Bonner, P., & Chiang, L. (2011). The role of perceived parental autono-
my support in academic achievement of Asian and Latino American adolescents.
Ames, C. A. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 9(2), 497–522.
Educational Psychology, 84, 261–271. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.84.3.261. Kaiser, T., & Diewald, M. (2014). Social origin, conscientiousness, and school grades: Does
Barber, B. K. (1996). Parental psychological control: Revisiting a neglected construct. Child early socialization of the characteristics orderliness and focus contribute to the repro-
Development, 67, 3296–3319. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1131780. duction of social inequality? Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 38, 93–105.
Bean, R. A., Barber, B. K., & Crane, D. R. (2006). Parental support, behavioral control, and http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rssm.2014.07.001.
psychological control among African American youth the relationships to academic Keys, T. D., Conley, A. M., Duncan, D. J., & Domina, T. (2012). The role of goal orientations
grades, delinquency, and depression. Journal of Family Issues, 27(10), 1335–1355. for adolescent mathematics achievement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 37,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0192513X06289649. 47–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.09.002.
Beran, T. (2009). Correlates of peer victimization and achievement: An exploratory Khan, S., Haynes, L., Armstrong, A., & Rohner, R. P. (2010). Perceived teacher acceptance,
model. Psychology in the Schools, 46(4), 348–361. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pits. parental acceptance, academic achievement, and school conduct of middle school
20380. students in the Mississippi Delta Region of the United States. Cross-Cultural
Bipp, T., & van Dam, K. (2014). Extending hierarchical achievement motivation models: Research, 44(3), 283–294. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1069397110368030.
The role of motivational needs for achievement goals and academic performance. King, R. B., & McInerney, D. M. (2014). The work avoidance goal construct: Examining its
Personality and Individual Differences, 64, 157–162. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid. structure, antecedents, and consequences. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 39,
2014.02.039. 42–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2013.12.002.
Bong, M. (2009). Age-related differences in achievement goal differentiation. Journal of Lareau, A. (2011). Unequal childhoods: Class, race, and family life. Berkley and Los Angeles:
Educational Psychology, 101(4), 879–896. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419- University of California Press.
1428-6_804. Luo, W., Aye, K. M., Hogan, D., Kaur, B., & Chan, M. C. Y. (2013). Parenting behaviors and
Boon, H. (2007). Low- and high-achieving Australian secondary school students: Their learning of Singapore students: The mediational role of achievement goals.
parenting, motivations and academic achievement. Australian Psychologist, 42(3), Motivation and Emotion, 37, 274–285. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11031-012-9303-8.
212–225. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00050060701405584. Meece, J. L., Anderman, E. M., & Anderman, L. H. (2006). Classroom goal structure, student
Butnaru, S., Gherasim, L. R., Iacob, L., & Amariei, C. (2010). The effects of parental support motivation, and academic achievement. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 487–503.
and attributional style on children's school achievement and depressive feelings. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070258.
International Journal of Learning, 17(8), 397–408. Ozer, E. J., Flores, E., Tschann, J. M., & Pasch, L. (2013). Parenting style, depressive symp-
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation toms, and substance use in Mexican American adolescents. Youth and Society, 45,
analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence 365–388. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0044118X11418539.
Earlbaum Associates. Peugh, J. L. (2010). A practical guide to multilevel modeling. Journal of School Psychology,
Creed, P. A., Patton, W., & Prideaux, L. (2007). Predicting change over time in career plan- 48(1), 85–112. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2009.09.002.
ning and career exploration for high school students. Journal of Adolescence, 30(3), Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Contemporary approaches to assessing mediation in
377–392. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2006.04.003. communication research. In A. F. Hayes, M. D. Slater, & L. B. Snyder (Eds.), The Sage
Cumming, S. P., Smith, R. E., Smoll, F. L., Standage, M., & Grossbard, J. R. (2008). Develop- sourcebook of advanced data analysis methods for communication research
ment and validation of the achievement goal scale for youth sports. Psychology of (pp. 13–54). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Sport and Exercise, 9(5), 686–703. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2007.09. Puklek Levpuscek, M., & Zupancic, M. (2009). Math achievement in early adolescence:
003. The role of parental involvement, teachers' behavior, and students' motivational be-
Darling, N., & Steinberg, L. (1993). Parenting style as context: An integrative model. liefs about math. Journal of Early Adolescence, 29, 541–570. http://dx.doi.org/10.
Psychological Bulletin, 113(3), 487–496. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.113.3. 1177/0272431608324189.
487. Schaefer, E. S. (1965). Children's report of parental behavior: An inventory. Child
Dinger, F. C., Dickhauser, O., Spinath, B., & Steinmayr, R. (2013). Antecedents and conse- Development, 36, 413–424.
quences of students' achievement goals: A mediation analysis. Learning and Schludermann, E., & Schludermann, S. (1970). Replicability of factors in children's report
Individual Differences, 28, 90–101. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2013.09.005. of parent behavior (CRPBI). Journal of Psychology, 76, 239–249. http://dx.doi.org/10.
Duchesne, S., & Ratelle, C. F. (2010). Parental behaviors and adolescents' achievement 1080/00223980.1970.9916845.
goals at the beginning of middle school: Emotional problems as potential mediators. Scholte, R. H. J., & Van Aken, M. A. G. (2006). Peer relations in adolescence. In S. Jackson, &
Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 497–507. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0019320. L. Goossens (Eds.), Handbook of adolescent development (pp. 175–199). New York:
Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and per- Psychology Press.
sonality. Psychological Review, 95(2), 256–273. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033- Senko, C., Hulleman, C. S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2011). Achievement goal theory at the
295X.95.2.256. crossroads. Old controversies, current challenges, and new directions. Educational
Elliot, A. J., & Church, M. A. (1997). A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance Psychologist, 46, 26–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2011.538646.
achievement motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(1), Sijtsema, J. J., Verboom, C. E., Penninx, B., Verhulst, F. C., & Ormel, J. (2014). Psychopathol-
218–232. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.72.1.218. ogy and academic performance, social well-being, and social preference at school.
Elliot, A. J., & McGregor, H. A. (2001). A 2 × 2 achievement goal framework. Journal of The TRAILS study. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 45(3), 273–284. http://
Personality and Social Psychology, 80(3), 501–519. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022- dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10578-013-0399-1.
3514.80.3.501. Soenens, B., & Vansteenkiste, M. (2010). A theoretical upgrade of the concept of parental
Eum, K., & Rice, K. G. (2011). Test anxiety, perfectionism, goal orientation, and academic psychological control: Proposing new insights on the basis of self-determination the-
performance. Anxiety, Stress and Coping, 24, 167–178. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ ory. Developmental Review, 30, 74–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2009.11.001.
10615806.2010.488723. Stright, A. D., & Yeo, L. K. (2014). Maternal parenting styles, school involvement, and
Gonzalez, A. R., Doan Holbein, M. F., & Quilter, S. (2002). High school students' goal orien- children's school achievement and conduct in Singapore. Journal of Educational
tations and their relationship to perceived parenting styles. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 106(1), 311–314. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0033821.
Psychology, 27, 450–470. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/ceps.2001.1104. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn
Grolnick, W. S., Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (1991). Inner resources for school achievement: and Bacon.
Motivational mediators of children's perceptions of their parents. Journal of Tulviste, T., & Rohner, R. P. (2010). Relationships among perceived teachers' and parental
Educational Psychology, 83(4), 508–517. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.83.4. behavior, and adolescent outcomes in Estonia. Cross-Cultural Research, 44(3),
508. 222–238. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1069397110366797.
Gurland, S. T., & Grolnick, W. S. (2005). Perceived threat, controlling parenting, and Uddin, M. K. (2011). Parental warmth and academic achievement of adolescent children.
children's achievement orientations. Motivation and Emotion, 29, 103–121. http:// Journal of Behavioural Sciences, 21(1), 1–12.
dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11031-005-7956-2. Van der Vijver, F. R. J. (2003). Test adaptation/translation methods. In R. Fernández-
Hambleton, R. K. (2005). Issues, designs, and technical guidelines for adapting tests into Ballesteros (Ed.), Encyclopedia of psychological assessment (pp. 960–964). Thousand
multiple languages and cultures. In K. Hambleton, P. F. Merenda, & C. D. Spielberger Oaks, CA: Sage.
(Eds.), Adapting educational and psychological tests for cross-cultural assessment Varela, R. E., Niditch, L. A., Hensley-Maloney, L., Moore, K. W., & Creveling, C. C. (2013).
(pp. 3–38). Publishers, Mahwah, New Jersey: Laurences Erlbaum Associated. Parenting practices, interpretive biases, and anxiety in Latino children. Journal of
Haskett, M. E., Nears, K., Ward, C. S., & McPherson, A. V. (2006). Diversity in adjustment of Anxiety Disorders, 27(2), 171–177. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2012.12.004.
maltreated children: Factors associated with resilient functioning. Clinical Psychology Wigfield, A., & Cambria, J. (2010). Students' achievement values, goal orientations, and in-
Review, 26, 796–812. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2006.03.005. terest: Definitions, development, and relations to achievement outcomes.
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: Developmental Review, 30, 1–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2009.12.001.
A regression-based approach. New York: Guilford Press. Wirthwein, L., Sparfeldt, J. R., Pinquart, M., Wegerer, J., & Steinmayr, R. (2013). Achieve-
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure anal- ment goals and academic achievement: A closer look at moderating factors.
ysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Educational Research Review, 10, 66–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.07.
Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118. 001.
Huang, C. (2012). Discriminant and criterion-related validity of achievement goals in You, S., Hong, S., & Ho, H. (2011). Longitudinal effects of perceived control on academic
predicting academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational achievement. The Journal of Educational Research, 104(4), 253–266. http://dx.doi.
Psychology, 104, 48–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0026223. org/10.1080/00220671003733807.
Hulleman, C. S., Schrager, S. M., Bodmann, S. M., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2010). A meta an-
alytic review of achievement goal measures: Different labels for the same constructs
or different constructs with similar labels? Psychological Bulletin, 136, 422–449.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0018947.