1. Objectifs

Intentions :
«In an effort to pursue the work currently conducted on authority exertion in rule-breaking contexts, [the authors] examined the role of the problem-constraint link (logical consequences vs. mild punishments) and interpersonal climates (autonomy-supportive vs. controlling) on children’s anticipated reactions of anger and empathy. Additionally, [they] investigated whether children’s anticipated emotional reactions could mediate Mageau et al.’s (2018) reported effects of interpersonal climates and constraint strategies on children’s acceptability beliefs […].» (p. 1514)

Questions/Hypothèses :
The «main hypotheses were that AS [autonomy support] interpersonal climates and logical consequences would independently elicit less anticipated anger and more anticipated empathy than respectively CTL [controlling] interpersonal climates and mild punishments. [The] secondary hypotheses were that stronger anticipated reactions of empathy and weaker anticipated reactions of anger would be associated with higher acceptability beliefs regarding the employed authority exertion strategies, such that significant indirect links from interpersonal climates and constraint strategies to acceptability beliefs, via anticipated emotions, would be observed.» (p. 1514)

2. Méthode

Échantillon/Matériau :
L’échantillon est composé de 221 dyades mère-enfant. La région de provenance des participants n’est pas mentionnée, mais l’étude a été conduite par une équipe de Montréal.

Instruments :
Questionnaire

Type de traitement des données :
Analyse statistique

3. Résumé

The «effects of constraint strategies and interpersonal climates on children’s anticipated emotional reactions were found to be additive rather than interactive. […] Specifically, children anticipated that they would feel angrier and less empathic in response to logical consequences than to mild punishments, whether parents reminded the rule in an autonomy-supportive or in a controlling way. […] Concerning the indirect impact of constraints on acceptability beliefs, the model fit indices indicated that this effect could be fully mediated by children’s anticipated reactions of anger and empathy. This result suggests that inasmuch as logical consequences generate an emotional state fostering internalization more effectively than mild punishments, they may also facilitate children’s cognitive disposition to internalize. However, it is important to temper this conclusion by pointing out that, due to [this] cross-sectional assessment of emotional reactions and acceptability beliefs, it is not possible to make actual directionality inferences between these two outcomes. Thus, while the fit indices of the assessed model did not reject the possibility that children’s anticipated emotions could mediate the relation between authority exertion strategies and acceptability beliefs, it nevertheless remains possible that acceptability beliefs would also have an influence on children’s anticipated emotions […]. What seems clear, however, is that children’s anticipated emotional reactions and cognitive appraisals are related to one another and are both affected by variations in authority exertion strategies.» (p. 1519-1520)