This study examines the relationship between parenting and proactive versus reactive aggression among preschool children in China. Children (1164) from 10 kindergartens in Shanghai were rated by their parents and teachers using the Parent Behavior Inventory (PBI) and the Aggressive Behavior—Teacher's Checklist. Children had higher levels of reactive than proactive aggression, and older children and boys had higher levels of both proactive and reactive aggression. Hostile/coercive parenting style and low father education were significantly linked to aggression in children. These findings suggest that parenting style and type of aggression should be addressed when considering prevention and intervention.
Aggressive behavior has been reported as a serious mental health issue among children even in early childhood in both Western and Eastern cultures (Fung and Tsang, 2006, Harachi et al., 2006, McNamara et al., 2010 and Vitaro et al., 2006). In China, the prevalence rate of aggressive behavior among preschool children was found to be from 8.8 to 11.9% (Guan, Wang, Liu and Chen, 2005 and Guan, Wang, Liu, Wu, et al., 2005). Aggression is stable in children and may last into adulthood, which can have adverse influences on children (Huesmann, Dubow, & Boxer, 2009). Previous studies confirmed that aggressive behavior could affect children's psychological health and social development, and even lead to behavioral disorders in adolescence and crimes in adulthood (Harachi et al., 2006 and Huesmann et al., 2009). Therefore, identifying risk factors associated with the aggressive behavior of children has meaningful implications for formulating effective ways to improve their lives.
Child aggression has been conceptualized into two subtypes according to differences in function or motivation underlying the behavior: proactive aggression (PA) and reactive aggression (RA) (Dodge & Coie, 1987). Proactive aggression is described as planned and goal-oriented aggressive behaviors utilized to reach a goal, including material or territorial gain or social dominance (Card and Little, 2006 and Hubbard et al., 2010). Alternatively, reactive aggression is defined as frustrated and hostile behavior in response to provocation or stimulation (Hubbard et al., 2010, Vitaro et al., 2006 and Xu et al., 2009).
Increasing evidence suggests that proactive and reactive aggression are empirically and theoretically distinct subtypes of aggression with different antecedents and consequences, although the same individual often experiences both. This distinction appears to have significant implications for prevention and intervention in children's aggression (Card and Little, 2006, Dodge and Coie, 1987, Dodge et al., 2006, Kempes et al., 2005, Vitaro et al., 2006 and Xu et al., 2009). However, to date, studies on aggressive behavior in Chinese children are far fewer than those in Western culture, and the majority of these studies concentrated on physical aggression or disruptive behaviors. Therefore, a focus on proactive and reactive aggression in Chinese children will add new knowledge to the literature.
Parenting and aggressive behavior among children
It has been proposed that parenting style is a specific, fixed combination of parenting behaviors rather than any single parenting behavior that contributes to child development, competency, or psychopathology (McKee, Colletti, Rakow, Jones, & Forehand, 2008). Although there are many methods of categorizing parenting styles, in order to understand parenting difficulties among children with behavioral problems, two dimensions of parenting styles are of primary interest: supportive/engaged and hostile/coercive. Supportive/engaged parenting is defined by behaviors that display the parent's acceptance of the child through affection, shared activities, and emotional and instrumental support, while hostile/coercive parenting refers to behaviors that manifest a negative affect or indifference toward the child and may include the use of threat, coercion, or physical punishment to affect the child's behavior (Lovejoy, Weis, O'Hare, & Rubin, 1999).
It has been found in a handful of studies that both the absence of supportive/engaged parenting (i.e., lack of affectionate contact and teaching between parent and child) and the presence of hostile/coercive parenting (i.e., restrictive control of child) affect the development of behavioral problems in children (Nelson, Hart, Yang, Olsen, & Jin, 2006). Children with parents who employed more supportive parenting practices showed fewer disruptive behaviors when compared to children who experienced coercive parenting practices (Denham et al., 2000 and Kim et al., 2003). It was also proposed that supportive/engaged parenting approaches that minimize the probability of aggressive behavior in children include warm, supportive, sensitive, responsive parenting; parental involvement; and parental monitoring (Beyers et al., 2003 and O'Connor, 2002). In contrast, hostile/coercive parenting behaviors, including harsh discipline, hostile parental control, punitive/non-reasoning strategies, and low levels of warmth and nurturance are associated with negative outcomes, such as higher levels of aggression, conduct problems, and less pro-social behavior in children (Benzies et al., 2009, Chang et al., 2003, Kim et al., 2003, McNamara et al., 2010, Nelson et al., 2006, Vitaro et al., 2006 and Xu et al., 2009).
According to some studies, Chinese parents are more authoritarian or controlling than their Western counterparts (Liu and Guo, 2010 and Pearson and Rao, 2003). Studies in China have also indicated that authoritarian parenting is positively related to aggressive behavior in young children (Chan, 2010, Chang et al., 2003, Chen et al., 2002, Chen et al., 2001 and Nelson et al., 2006). However, studies that examine how different parenting styles correlate with aggression among preschool children in Chinese culture are still limited.
