Abstract

The current research intends to study the effects of parenting styles on university student's self-efficacy and motivation to achievement. Moreover, it intends to examine how the differences in age, gender, education, and family support affect the aforementioned variables. Data was collected from 180 respondents(110 males and 70 females) between the age group of 19 to 30 years through a convenient sampling technique from Gilani Law College and the Institute of Media and Communication Studies at Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan. The General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE) and Parental Authority Questionnaire(PAQ;Buri, 1991) were used as tools for data collection. The results revealed that a relationship exists between self-efficacy and accomplishment motivation among the students, and so does between self-efficacy and parenting styles. The results indicated positive impacts of self-efficacy and achievement motivation of parenting styles among BZU students. The results of the current research would be a meaningful contribution to the existing literature.

Key Words

Parenting Style, Self-Efficacy, Achievement Motivation, Convenient Sampling, BZU Students

Introduction

Self-efficacy, according to Bandura (2004), is a belief that one can succeed in a particular endeavor or can complete a task. How someone will deal with the job objectives and problems is significantly influenced by one's sense of self-efficacy (Luszczynska & Schwarzer, 2020). The self-efficacy concept, suggested by Bandura (1978), is related to the opinion that one can convey a specific behavior successfully. Self-efficacy, as defined by Ozer and Bandura (1990) involves “the inspiration, mental assets, and courses for action necessary for maintaining control over given occurrences. ''Motivation is the individual's own interest in desiring to know, like, be near to, or related to a specific thing. Thus, it represents a person's determination, drive, and expectation of achievement. In spite of obstacles, he will finally find a method to complete his tasks (Elliot & Covington, 2001). Motivation is a drive which is commonly understood as an inner state that encourages, aims, and provides performances.

There are three main parenting styles authoritative, authoritarian, and permissive identified by Baumrind (1971). Parenting styles as "a collection of attitudes towards the child that remain communicated to the child as well that, taken together, make an emotional environment in which the parent's behaviors remain expressed". Authoritative parents remain caring and open-minded to their kid's thoughts. Parents provide guidelines as well as support to their kids.  In the Authoritative parenting style, the parents are supportive, responsive, and caring and set safe boundaries and limits for their children. They struggle to control children's behavior, activities, and performance by explaining discussing rules, reasoning also cognitive abilities. They try to listen to their child's viewpoint but don't always accept it. Authoritative parents discuss their children's wants and ideas and frequently ask for their opinions when making decisions for the family (Baumrind, 1991; Weiss & Schwarz, 1996).  The authoritative parenting style is a technique in which parents include child education that relates to friendliness, understanding, sympathy, kindness, and setting of boundaries and limits. Parents use intelligence and positive reinforcement to control their children and avoid to punishments or threats. This style is common in the middle class and educated, connected through brilliant results all over the world. Responsible parents not only show care toward their children but give listen to their children's perspectives. Such parents provide guidance and support to their children. 

Parenting style approaches contribute extremely to encouraging children's educational and social improvement. Literature suggests a relationship between parental attitudes and children's academic achievements. For example, children raised with authoritative parents become self-determinant, optimistic, independent, psychologically positive, self-confident, socially accepted, and well-mannered with high grades in academics. These children are more observed reporting low hopelessness, learning disabilities, stress and anxiety, and engagement in antisocial behavior like misbehavior, selfishness, indulgence in criminal activities, and drug use. People sometimes confuse authoritative parenting with authoritarian parenting, which is an absolutely different style of parenting. "Parents with authoritative style need positive hopes for their children, however, they use support to encourage good behavior, confidence, and attitude." Though authoritative parents make rules for their children and set boundaries and guidelines, they provide them with care, also facilities support when they need to succeed. "The parents using that style of parenting are careful with their children and listen to their kids if they have any complaints, needs or demands." Authoritative parents use open-minded enhancement and are extra sympathetic if a child doesn't meet opportunities and expectations when there are justifying situations. In general, an authoritative parent will depend more on encouragement and positive reinforcement of the child, as compared to punishing them to perform better next time. Such parents listen to their children's wants and ideas and frequently ask for their opinions when making decisions for the family (Baumrind, 1991; Weiss & Schwarz, 1996). 

Of all the parenting styles out there, most experts praise authoritative parenting the most. This style combines the best of all the techniques: it is respectful towards kids' feelings, attitudes, and behavior, but simultaneously explains to them that they must accept the rules for positive outcomes and meet the expectations. Research shows that this style of parenting helps children to develop into mature, confident, self-regulated adults. 

Another style of parenting is permissive parenting where children are allowed to make choices and take decisions in their lives. There is no force or direction from parents. A permissive parenting style is child-focused but has a non-challenging attitude. Permissive parents are tolerant and accepting of their children's wishes, wants, desires, and actions. Permissive parents are determined not to be demanding and they avoid conflict, struggles, and authority over their kids. 

Neglected parenting style is yet another type of parenting. This parenting style is low in parents’ responsiveness. Neglectful parents do not observe their kids' activities and behaviors and feel discomfort in providing a plan to their kids, they neglect self-discipline totally or use strict disciplinary practices occasionally. Such parents are neither both caring and kind nor are they supportive, and sympathetic. Next in line are authoritarian parents who are highly unsympathetic, challenging, and demanding obedience from their kids. 

Parenting styles and academic achievement all of the parenting styles need changing physical appearance across cultures. People of different cultures understand parenting styles according to their standards. For example, Chinese American parents verified more strictness as compared to European Americans provided empirical evidence that authoritarian parenting styles and permissive are connected with negative psychological as well as communication outcomes. Also Pong et al. (2009) found that there is a strong relationship between academic achievement and authoritative parenting as compared to academic achievement with authoritarian and permissive styles of parenting. Some experimental studies show that parenting styles are greatly influenced by cultural influences and social standards. Neglectful parents have low communication with their children and remain indifferent to their kid's wants, desires, and demands. In some cultures, people are more accepting of authoritarian parenting styles than others.

Self-determination theory (SDT) developed by Deci, Ryan, and others, is an organismic theory of development that emphasizes the function of motivation is learning than development (e.g., Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2004; Ryan & Deci, 1985). Self-determined actions, broadly speaking, are behaviors that come from a person as a result of them expressing their free will. Self-determined actions make people psychologically healthier and more likely to be freely driven. The three basic or fundamental psychological needs put forth by Deci, Ryan, and their co-workers are the requirement for ability, the requirement for independence, and the requirement for a connection (Deci & Ryan, 2001; Ryan & Deci, 2012). These basic requirements must be satisfied in order to be healthy. The importance of achievement motivation concepts to academic success and performance has remained the subject of psychological educational study for a long Encouraging education factors that help with orientation to an activity are included in motivation.




The Following Hypotheses were Formulated

1. There will be a significant effect of authoritative parenting style on self-efficacy.

2. There will be a significant effect of the authoritarian parenting style on self-efficacy.

3. There will be a significant effect of permissive parenting style on self-efficacy.

4. There will be a significant effect of authoritative parenting style on achievement motivation.

5. There will be a significant effect of the authoritarian parenting style on achievement motivation.

6. There will be a significant effect of permissive parenting style on achievement motivation.

7. There will be a positive relationship between parenting style and self-efficacy.

8. There will be a positive relationship between parenting style and achievement motivation. 

9. There will be a positive relationship between self-efficacy and achievement motivation.

Methodology

The analysis occurred throughout APA's code of ethics. The analysis used a survey design, and the sample was individually contacted through convenient sampling. All participants' informed consent was received, and confidentiality and privacy were promised. 180 students from Gilani Law College and the Institute of Media and Communication Studies, BZU, Multan participated in the present study. The questionnaire's completion instructions were also provided to the responders.




Measures:

Self-Efficacy Scale

The self-efficacy scale is a ten-item scale. Internal consistency for the General Self-Efficacy Scale = ranges from 0.76 to 0.90, Scores range from 1 for not at all true, 2 for hardly true, 3 for reasonably true, and 4 for accurately true.

Conclusion the total every point outcome in the conclusive mark. The complete mark at the GSE scores from 10 to 40, taking an upper mark score suggesting greater self-efficacy.




Parenting Style: (PAQ) 

Parenting approach The authoritarian, permissive, and authoritative parenting philosophies of Baumrind (1971) were evaluated using the Parental Authority Questionnaire (PAQ; Buri, 1991). A Likert-type scale was used to assess the measure's 30 items, with 1 being the strongest disagreement and 5 being the strongest agreement. The test was slightly modified so that it could be used by participants from either single-parent or two-parent households. The initial legislation included separate components for mothers and fathers. Participants in the present study self-identified as to which parent they planned to take the measure for. An upper mark on the PAQ suggests an upper level to the approach to parenting prototype measured, with a score on the PAQ ranging from 10 to 50. The authoritarian (=.87), authoritative (=.81), and permissive (=.76) consistency ratings for the present study indicate strong reliability for the 3 PAQ subscales, which is equivalent to the basic measure that ranged from =.74 to =.87 (Buri). Description: The PAQ is made to evaluate disciplinary methods or parental authority from the perspective of the kid (of any age).




Achievement Motivation Inventory (AMI) 

In 1997, Schuler, Heinz, Thornton, George C; Frintrup, Andress, and Muller-Hanson, Rose established the Achievement Motivation Inventory (AMI). There are 32 total items on the scale, 18 of which are like and 14 are dislike. The final scale's positive and negative items were selected at random. Items with positive wording contain their serial numbers. 3,4,5,6,11,13,14,16,17,20,23,24,26,28,29,30,31,32. Items with negative wording contain serial numbers 1, 2, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 15, 18, 19, 21, 22, 25, and 27. All responses were evaluated using a five-point Likert scale. There is entire agreement, partial agreement, majority agreement, complete disagreement, and complete disagreement with the points. Positively phrased items received scoring weights of 5, 4, 3, 2, and 1, whereas negatively worded things received scoring weights of 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. With this grading system, it was confirmed that a higher score corresponded to a higher level of success desire and a lower score to a lower level. AMI The total scores' reliability (Cronbach's a) is.96, whereas that of the individual scale ranges from .66 to .83.

Retest Reliability for the total result is rtt=.94 (single scales range from rtt=.71 to rtt =.89).

Results

To determine the effects on the sample, the results were statistically analyzed using multiple techniques. The following statistics were applied in achieving the objectives and aims of the current study: reliability study, regression were used to examine the effects of the independent variables on the dependent variables, mean standard deviation, and percentage were used to measure the demographic information given by the respondents. The association between parenting style, achievement motivation, and self-efficacy was measured using Pearson product correlation.




 

Table 1

Demographics description of Report

N	Min	Max	M	SD
180	20.00	30.00	1.5587	.49771

 

Table 2

Demographic rate of variable

Demographic Variable	F	Percentage
M F	110 80	61.1 44.4

Table 3

Reliability test for PAQ, SET, and AMT

Scale	N	Cronbach’s Alpha
PAQ SET AMT	30 10 32	.851 .815 .835

 




Cronbach's Alpha rate must be above 70 for good reliability. The consistency effect for PAQ is .851 which shows that it is an extremely reliable analysis. The reliability score SET is .815 which means that it is consistent and the consistency for AMT is .835, which shows that it is a trustworthy scale.




 

Table 4

Regression Analysis showing the impact of Authoritative parenting style on self-efficacy

Modal	B	Std. E	Beta	T	P
Constant	16.741	2.383		7.027	.000
PAQ	.373	.066	.362	5.636	.000

Dependent Variable: GSE

 




Note.R²=.131, Adjusted R²=.127, F (31.766), p>.000, PAQ (Parental Authority Questionnaire)

GSE (General self-efficacy scale)

The hypothesis tests if the Authoritative parenting style carries a meaningful influence on self-efficacy. Authoritative parenting style significantly predicts self-efficacy because the relationship is significant. F (31.766) = 1,211, p< .000 which indicates that authoritative parenting style is affecting self-efficacy. B .362, and P< .000. The outcome is having a positive impact on the authoritative parenting style. Also, the value of R^2 = .131 describes a 13.1%  variation in self-efficacy.




 

Table 5

Regression Analysis showing the impact of Authoritarian parenting style on Self-Efficacy.

Model	B	Std. E	Beta	T	P
Constant	24.122	3.185		11.038	.000
PAQ	.175	.064	.185	2.739	.007

Dependent Variable: GSE

 




Note.R²=.019, Adjusted R²=.014, F (3.980), p>.007, PAQ (Parental Authority Questionnaire)

GSE (General self-efficacy scale)

The hypothesis tests if the Authoritarian parenting style carries an important effect on Self-Efficacy. Authoritarian parenting style significantly predicted Self-Efficacy because the relationship was significant. F (3.980) = 1,211, p< .007 which indicates that the Authoritarian parenting style can play an important part in determining Self-Efficacy. The value of B .136, and the value of P< 007.




 

Table 6

Regression Analysis showing the impact of Permissive Parenting style on Self-efficacy.

Model	B	Std. E	Beta	T	P
Constant	18.699	3.448		7.640	.000
PAQ	.335	.072	.307	4.678	.000

Dependent Variable: GSE

 




Note.R²=.094, Adjusted R²=.090, F (21.880), p>.000, PAQ (Parental Authority Questionnaire)

GSE (General self-efficacy scale)

The hypothesis tests if the Permissive Parenting style carries an influence on Self-Efficacy. A permissive Parenting style significantly predicted Self-Efficacy because the relationship was significant. F (21.880) = 1.211, p< .000 which indicates that the Permissive Parenting style can play an important part in determining Self-Efficacy. The value of B -.307 whereas the value of p< .000.




 

Table 7

Regression Analysis Showing the impact of Authoritative parenting style on Achievement Motivation.

Model	B	Std. E	Beta	T	P
Constant	82.877	5.245		15.802	.000
PAQ	.538	.146	.247	3.694	.000

Dependent Variable: GSE

 




Note.R²=.061, Adjusted R²=.057, F (13.645), p>.000, PAQ (Parental Authority Questionnaire)

GSE (General self-efficacy scale)

The hypothesis tests if the Authoritative parenting style carries a significant impact on Achievement Motivation. Authoritative parenting style significantly predicted Achievement Motivation because the relationship was significant. F (13.645) = 1,210, p< .000 which indicates that the Authoritative parenting style can play an important part in influencing Achievement Motivation. The value of B .247, whereas the value of p< .000.




 

Table 8

Regression Analysis Showing the impact of Authoritarian parenting style on Achievement Motivation.

Model	B	Std. E	Beta	T	P
Constant	92.892	4.673		19.877	.000
PAQ	.273	.137	.136	1.995	.047

Dependent Variable: AMI

 




Note.R²=.019, Adjusted R²=.014, F (3.980), p>.047, PAQ (Parental Authority Questionnaire)

AMI (Achievement motivation inventory)

The hypothesis tests if the Authoritarian parenting style carries a significant impact on Achievement Motivation. Authoritarian parenting style significantly predicted Achievement Motivation because the relationship was significant. F (3.980) = 1,211, p< .047 which indicates that Authoritarian parenting style can play an important part in determining Achievement Motivation.




 

Table 9

Regression Analysis showing the impact of Permissive Parenting style on Achievement Motivation.

Model	B	Std. E	Beta	T	P
Constant	83.166	5.293		15.713	.000
PAQ	.560	.155	.247	3.614	.000

Dependent Variable: AMI

 




Note.R².058, Adjusted R²=.054, F (13.061), p>.000, PAQ (Parental Authority Questionnaire)

AMT (Achievement motivation inventory)

The hypothesis tests if the Permissive Parenting style has a significant impact on Achievement Motivation. Permissive Parenting style significantly predicted Achievement Motivation because the relationship was significant. F (13.061) = 1,211, p< .000 which indicates that the Permissive Parenting style can play an important part in influential Achievement Motivation. The value of B is .247 whereas the value of p< .000.




 

Table 10

Pearson product correlation

Scale	Mean	SD	PST	SET	AMT
Parental Authority Questionnaire	103.0094	14.13778	1	.535**	.447**
General Self-Efficacy Scale	30.0141	5.69962	.535**	1	.693**
Achievement Motivation Scale	102.0704	12.08967	.447**	.693**	1

 




Pearson product correlation of Parenting Style and Self-Efficacy was found to be moderately positive as well as statistically significant. Hence, our hypothesis is accepted. This shows that an increase in better Parenting Style would lead to higher self-efficacy. Pearson product correlation of Parenting Style and Achievement Motivation was found to be moderately positively and statistically significant. Hence, our hypothesis is accepted. This shows that an increase in better Parenting Style would lead to high Achievement Motivation. Pearson product correlation of Achievement Motivation and Self-Efficacy was found to be moderately positively and statistically significant. Hence, our hypothesis is accepted. This shows that an increase in Achievement Motivation would lead to higher self-efficacy.

Discussion

The current study measures the impacts of parenting style on motivational achievement and self-efficacy among students of Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan.  Parenting style was our independent variable while self-efficacy and achievement motivation were the dependent variables. We hypothesized that participants with higher levels of self-efficacy and motivational achievement would report a better parenting style. We used regression analysis to check the influence of parenting type on self-efficacy and motivational achievement among students of BZU, Multan.   

The first assumption was that there would be a positive outcome towards an authoritative Parenting style on self-efficacy. The outcomes of the survey data show that an authoritative parenting style enhances the self-efficacy of students.

The second assumption was that there would be students with high involvement in an authoritarian Parenting style who would show less self-efficacy. Authoritarian parenting style significantly predicted Self-Efficacy because the relationship was significant. Our results showed that authoritarian parenting style has an important influence on self-efficacy.

The third assumption was that a permissive parenting style would increase self-efficacy among students. Our results showed that permissive parenting style has an important influence on self-efficacy which means that permissive parenting style enhances the self-efficacy of students.

The fourth assumption was that an authoritative parenting style would affect achievement motivation among law students. Our results showed that authoritative parenting style has a significant influence on achievement motivation which means that authoritative parenting style enhances the achievement motivation of BZU students.

 The fifth assumption was that the authoritarian parenting style would affect the motivational achievement of BZU students. Our results showed that there is a significant outcome of authoritarian parenting style in achievement motivation which means that authoritarian parenting style enhances the achievement motivation of university students.

The sixth assumption was that a permissive parenting style would increase the motivational achievement of students. Our results showed that there is a significant outcome of a permissive parenting style in achievement motivation. This hypothesis was accepted which means that a permissive parenting style enhances the achievement motivation of university students.

The seventh assumption was that there would be a correlation between parenting style plus self- efficacy of law students. Pearson product correlation of Parenting Style and self-efficacy was found moderately statistically significant and positive. Hence, our hypothesis is accepted. This shows that a better parenting style will increase the self-efficacy of students.

 The eighth assumption was that there would be a correlation between parenting style towards achievement motivation. Pearson product correlation of parenting style and Achievement Motivation was found to be moderately positively and statistically significant. Hence, our hypothesis is accepted. This shows that an increase in better Parenting Style would lead to high levels of achievement motivation.

The ninth assumption was there is a positive connection between the self-efficacy and achievement motivation. Pearson product correlation of achievement motivation and Self-Efficacy was found to be statistically significant and positive. Hence, our hypothesis is accepted. This shows that an increase in achievement motivation would lead to higher levels of self-efficacy.

Conclusion

This research investigated the influence of parenting style on self-efficacy and achievement motivation among students of Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan. Results were significant and showed a positive impact among parenting styles on self-efficacy and achievement motivation. Our results showed that impact of authoritative, authoritarian & permissive Parenting types towards self- efficacy with achievement motivation among the BZU students is quite influential. So parenting style enhances achievement motivation and self-efficacy among university students. Pearson product correlation of Parenting Style and self-efficacy was found to be moderately statistically significant and positive. This shows that a better parenting style will increase the self-efficacy and achievement motivation of students. 

Data Availability Statement

Data is available and will be shared on request.




Ethics Declaration

I Confirm that all the research meets ethical guidelines and adheres to the legal requirements of the study country. Human participants are involved and their consent forms are available which can be provided on request. However, as there was not any sensitive issue involved, the approval from ethics committee was not required.

References

• Bandura, A. (1978). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Advances in Behaviour Research and Therapy, 1(4), 139–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/0146-6402(78)90002-4

• Bandura, A. (2004). Health promotion by social cognitive means. Health Education & Behavior: The Official Publication of the Society for Public Health Education, 31(2), 143–164. https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198104263660
• Baumrind, D. (1971). Current patterns of parental authority. Developmental Psychology, 4(1, Pt.2), 1–103. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0030372
• Baumrind, D. (1991). The influence of parenting style on adolescent competence and substance use. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 11(1), 56–95. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431691111004
• Buri, J. R. (1991). Parental authority questionnaire. Journal of Personality Assessment, 57(1), 110–119. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa5701_13
• Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in human behavior. In Springer eBooks. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7
• Deci, E. L. (2012). The relation of interest to the motivation of behavior: A self-determination theory perspective. In K. A. Renninger, S. Hidi, & A. Krapp (Eds.), The role of interest in learning and development (pp. 43–70). Erlbaum.
• Elliot, A. J., & Covington, M. V. (2001). Approach and Avoidance Motivation. Educational Psychology Review, 13(2), 73–92. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1009009018235
• Luszczynska, A., & Schwarzer, R. (2020). Changing behavior using social Cognitive theory. In Cambridge University Press eBooks (pp. 32–45). https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108677318.003
• Ozer, E. M., & Bandura, A. (1990). Mechanisms governing empowerment effects: A self-efficacy analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(3), 472–486. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.58.3.472
• Pong, S., Johnston, J., & Chen, V. (2009). Authoritarian Parenting and Asian Adolescent School Performance: Insights from the US and Taiwan. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 34(1), 62–72. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025409345073
• Schuler, H., & Thorn, G. C. (1997). Achievement motivation inventory [Dataset]. In PsycTESTS Dataset. https://doi.org/10.1037/t03297-000
• Weiss, L. H., & Schwarz, J. C. (1996). The Relationship between Parenting Types and Older Adolescents’ Personality, Academic Achievement, Adjustment, and Substance Use. Child Development, 67(5), 2101. https://doi.org/10.2307/1131612