Developmental Antecedents of Proactive and Reactive Rebelliousness: The Role of Parenting Style, Childhood Adversity, and Attachment

Adolescence is a time of developmental transition that for one in five young people is characterised by feelings of oppositionality, rebellion, and negativism. Despite the prevalent experience of teen turbulence and despite its significance within the phenomenological framework provided by reversal theory (RT), the childhood antecedents of rebelliousness in adolescence and adulthood have not been given extensive empirical attention within RT, although such work has been carried out using other constructs and theories. We examined recalled parenting style, childhood adversity, and attachment style in adulthood as correlates of proactive and reactive rebelliousness in a sample of 80 participants, aged 18 to 50 years. Each participant responded to a questionnaire package containing the revised Adult Attachment Scale, the Parental Bonding Instrument, the Childhood Experience of Care and Abuse Questionnaire, and the Negativism Dominance Scale. We found that paternal abusive parenting, followed by paternal parenting style, paternal neglect, and paternal antipathy were independently predictive of scores on proactive rebelliousness, the sensation-seeking form. Maternal and paternal indifferent parenting styles each were found to equivalently and independently predict scores on reactive rebelliousness, the interpersonal disaffection form. The results of this study suggest these two forms of rebelliousness may have distinctly different antecedents. A longitudinal study is needed to examine the potentially causal pathways that are suggested by the results of this cross-sectional research. We consider reversal theory explanations of these results and contrast them with complementary theoretical frameworks.

‘Running with the Fox and Hunting with the Hounds’: Social Work Tutors' Experiences of Managing Failing Social Work Students in Practice Learning Settings

The paper explores the issues raised by social work students failing in practice learning settings from the perspective of university tutors, by drawing on existing literature in this area from social work and nursing, as well as findings from a small‐scale empirical qualitative study. The qualitative study was influenced by practitioner‐researcher and practice‐near paradigms; and is based on interviews with twelve social work tutors in England. The findings reveal that tutors are able to articulate the important tasks and functions of their roles when issues of failing students in practice learning settings arise, although the process can be challenging. The challenges include: supporting practice educator and student, concerns about other tutors’ practices, the difficulties in promoting appropriate professional standards and values within higher education contexts and frustrations with practice educators and placements. Only a third of the respondents (four) however, articulated their gate keeping roles and responsibilities although this was not without its difficulties. Given the current reforms in social work education in England at this present time, with greater emphasis on threshold standards at entry level, and at key stages throughout the programme of study, the research is timely in terms of the critical consideration of the tutor role and challenges inherent in promoting appropriate standards.