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.

The Effect of Water Consumption on Schoolchildren's Fine Motor Skills, Cognitive Function and Mood

Previous research has suggested that dehydration may have a negative effect on some aspects of mood, cognitive performance and motor skills (Benton, 2011). Furthermore, a large proportion of children arrive at school in a dehydrated state (Baron, Courbebaisse, Lepicard, & Friedlander, 2015). The present work investigated whether supplementing children with water may, as a consequence of reducing dehydration, improve their cognitive performance and motor skills. In studies 1, 2, 3 and 5, it was found that tasks that predominantly tested motor skills, were improved in children who had a drink, compared to those who did not. Furthermore, study 3 showed that this effect was moderated by hydration status. One theoretical explanation for the poorer performance of dehydrated children is that they may lack the neurological resources to sustain their effort and thus performance does not improve over time. In support of this, these studies showed that, when re-hydrated, performance on these tasks improves to the level of non-dehydrated children. Study 2 showed that the number of errors increased in a StopSignal task in children that had high self-rated levels of thirst, compared to low levels: and hydration status did not moderate this effect. A possible explanation for the increased number of errors in children with high self-rated thirst is that the thirst sensation diverts attention away from the task, causing task performance to deteriorate. In study 4, it was observed that there was a large variation in intra-individual and inter-individual hydration scores throughout the day, which was not related to volume drank or levels of thirst. Further studies should use imaging techniques to study brain activity during dehydration and rehydration, and during periods of high thirst, to help to further elucidate the mechanism underlying the negative effect of dehydration on motor performance, and the effect of self-rated thirst on attention.