Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nr4z6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-14T21:20:28.023Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Social status, types of family interaction and educational styles*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2009

Jean Kellerhals ,
Cléopâtre Montandon  and
Gilbert Ritschard
Get access

Extract

It is A well-established fact that families vary quite widely in their educational practices. In the past twenty years a certain number of studies on socialization have revealed a clear relation between the socioeconomic status of the parents and their educational style. Kohn (1977), for example, has shown that the emphasis parents put on discipline and immediate conformity is more pronounced in lower-class groups, whereas middle class groups value more the internalization of instructions and the development of personal motivations. In the same vein, psychologists and social psychologists have observed that the ‘authoritarian’ style of parent-child relationship (consisting of strong control and weak support) prevails more often in lower-class groups than in middle class groups, the latter being more prone to exercise strong support combined with marked control in their child's education (Bronfenbrenner 1958). Family sociologists have produced quite exhaustive articles covering the literature in this field (Gecas 1979; Peterson and Rollins 1987).

Type
The social construction of self-interest
Information
European Journal of Sociology / Archives Européennes de Sociologie , Volume 33 , Issue 2 , November 1992 , pp. 308 - 325
Copyright
Copyright © Archives Européenes de Sociology 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Anderberg, Michael R., 1973. Cluster Analysis for Applications (London, Academic Press).Google Scholar
Ascher, Herbert B., 1983. Causal Modeling (London, Sage).Google Scholar
Blalock, Huber M., 1988. Social Statistics (New York, McGraw Hill).Google Scholar
Bronfenbrenner, U., 1958. Socialization and Social Class through Time and Space, in Maccoby, E. E., Newcomb, T. M. and Hartley, E. L. (eds), Readings in Social Psychology (New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston).Google Scholar
Constantine, L. L., and Israel, J. T., 1985. The Family Void: Treatment and Theoretical Aspects of the Synchronous Family Paradigm, Family Process, XXIV, 525–548.Google Scholar
Gecas, V., 1979. The Influence of Social Class on Socialization, in Burr, W. R., Hill, R., Nye, F. I. and Reiss, I. L. (eds), Contemporary theories about the family, Vol. I (New York, Free Press).Google Scholar
Goodman, Leo A. and Kruskall, William H., 1954. Measures of Association for Cross Classification, Journal of the American Statistical Association, XLIX, 732–734.Google Scholar
Kellerhals, J., 1987. Les types d'interaction dans la famille, Année sociologique, XXXVII, 153–179.Google Scholar
Kellerhals, J., Perrin, J. F., Steinauer, G., Vonèche, L. and Wirth, G., 1982. Mariages au quotidien (Lausanne, Favre).Google Scholar
Kellerhals, J. et Troutot, P. Y., 1988. Une construction interactive de types familiaux, Annales de Vaucresson [Paris], 367–417.Google Scholar
Kellerhals, J. et Montandon, C., avec Gaberel, P. E., McCluskey, H., Osiek, F., Sardi, M., 1991. Les stratégies éducatives des families. Milieu social, dynamique familiale et éducation des préadolescents (Neuchâtel/Paris, Delachaux & Niestlé).Google Scholar
Kellerhals, J., Montandon, C., Ritschard, G., Sardi, M., 1992. L'estime de soi des adolescents : un aspect central du processus de socialisation, à paraître dans la Revue française de sociologie XXXIII, 313–333.Google Scholar
Kohn, M. L., 1977. Class and Conformity: a Study in Values2 (Chicago, University of Chicago Press).Google Scholar
Montandon, C., 1987. Pratiques éducatives et paradigme familial, in Montandon, C. et Perrenoud, P., Entre parents et enseignants : un dialogue impossible ? Vers l'analyse sociologique des interactions entre la famille et l'école (Berne, P. Lang).Google Scholar
Olson, D. H., McCubbin, H. I., Barnes, H., Larsen, A., Muxen, M. and Wilson, M., 1983. Families: What Makes them Work (Beverly Hills CA, Sage Publications).Google Scholar
Peterson, G. W. & Rollins, B. C., 1987. Parent-Child Socialization. Pp. 471–507in Sussman, M. B. and Steinmetz, S. K. (eds), Handbook of Marriage and the Family (New York, Plenum Press).Google Scholar
Reiss, D., 1981. The Family's Construction of Reality (Cambridge Mass., Harvard University Press).Google Scholar
Troutot, P.-Y. and Montandon, C., 1988. Systèmes d'action familiaux, attitudes éducatives et rapport à l'école : une mise en perspective typologique. Pp. 133–157in Perrenoud, Ph. and Montandon, C. (eds), Quimaîtrise l'école ? Politiques d'institutions et pratiques des acteurs (Lausanne, Réalités sociales).Google Scholar