Acceso usuarios
[1]
El objetivo del presente estudio es adaptar el Inventario de dimensiones parentales en su versión abreviada (Power, 2002) a la población argentina. Se tradujeron los 13 ítems incluidos en la evaluación de la dimensión general, que abarca las dimensiones de: Apoyo/cuidado, Inconsistencia y Seguimiento a través de la disciplina/control. El inventario traducido se administró a una muestra intencional de 771 adultos, 535 mujeres y 236 varones, de entre 26 y 63 años de edad (M = 38.56; DE = 4.76), de clase media (Estrato II de la Escala Graffar/Méndez Castellanos), de población no clínica, y padres y madres de niños que cursaban preescolar en 12 escuelas privadas de distintas provincias de Argentina (Buenos Aires, Córdoba, Mendoza, Santa Fe y Tucumán). El análisis factorial confirmatorio mostró que el modelo teórico de tres dimensiones, propuesto por los autores de la prueba original, ajustó satisfactoriamente a los datos e indicó una adecuada consistencia de la estructura de la prueba. Además, se analizó la confiabilidad como consistencia interna evaluada a través del omega de McDonald y se obtuvieron los siguientes valores: Apoyo/cuidado = .74; Seguimiento a través de la disciplina/control = .70, e Inconsistencia = .74.
Es de hacer notar que, en este inventario, la dimensión Seguimiento a través de la disciplina corresponde a un control moderado, es decir, apropiado para un estilo autoritativo.
Finalmente, dado que el inventario ha sido estudiado con una muestra extensa, extraída de varias provincias argentinas, los resultados obtenidos son generalizables a casi todo el país.
Diana Baumrind (1966) proposed three primary parenting styles: the authoritarian style, the permissive style, and the authoritative style. Almost two decades later, Maccoby and Martin (1983) theoretically added a fourth (negligent) parenting style. Parental styles are based on variations in the levels of the parental dimensions of sensitivity (warmth, affection), parental demand (parental control) and autonomy granted (Richaud, Lemos & Vargas Rubilar, 2013). It has been suggested that the findings related to broad parenting styles are not always easy to interpret (Stewart & Bond, 2002) and that Baumrind's three-category parenting style typology can be usefully disaggregated into parenting dimensions (Darling and Steinberg, 1993). A dimensional approach can be particularly valuable in allowing an independent assessment of parenting and discipline (Locke & Printz, 2002).
One of these dimensional models is that of Power (2002), which includes 11 dimensions of which the first three: Sensitivity, Inconsistency and Follow-up through discipline, evaluate a general dimension of the relationship of parents with their children, as perceived by parents. These three basic dimensions correspond to those of Baumrind described above: sensitivity (warmth, affection), autonomy granted (permissiveness) and parental demand (parental control), respectively. Power's Parenting Styles Inventory (PDI) assesses parenting styles from a parent's perspective. It is a self-report that, as we said, assesses 11 dimensions of parents' attitudes and behaviors towards their children. It has 57 items organized into 11 scales, each of which evaluates different dimensions of parent-child relationships. The first three scales, which include 13 items, measure a “general dimension” (Support / care, Inconsistency and Follow-up through discipline / control). The following scales assess different types of control and are distinguished from the general dimensions, in that they focus on disciplinary practices in response to the child's misbehavior. The PDI-S is a shortened version, which retains the most valid and reliable components of the original PDI. The PDI-S can be used with parents of children between 3 and 12 years old, and was developed from the PDI (Slater & Power, 1987).
Given the importance of having an adequate instrument to assess parental style from the parents' perspective, the objective of this study is to adapt the Inventory of Parental Dimensions in its short version (Power, 2002) to the Argentine population.
The 13 items included in the evaluation of the General Dimension, were translated, which includes the dimensions: Support / care, Inconsistency and Follow-up through discipline / control). The translated Inventory was administered to an intentional sample of 771 adults, 535 women and 236 men, between 26 and 63 years of age (Me = 38.56 SD = 4.76), middle class (Stratum II of the Graffar / Méndez Castellanos Scale), of the non-clinical population, and parents of children who attended pre-school in 12 private schools in different provinces of Argentina (Buenos Aires, Córdoba, Mendoza, Santa Fe and Tucumán). The Confirmatory Factor Analysis showed that the three-dimensional theoretical model, proposed by the authors of the original test, satisfactorily adjusted to the data, indicating an adequate consistency of the test structure. In addition, reliability was analyzed as internal consistency evaluated through McDonald's omega, obtaining the following values: Support / care = .74; Follow-up through discipline / control = .70 and Inconsistency = .74. Finally, given that the Inventory has been studied with an extensive sample, drawn from several Argentine provinces, the results obtained are generalizable to almost the entire country.
