Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorPiza Burgos, Narcisa
dc.contributor.authorCarpio Yepez, Milena Lisbeth
dc.contributor.authorGuato Yanez, Eloisa Liseth
dc.date.accessioned2025-06-03T14:34:32Z
dc.date.available2025-06-03T14:34:32Z
dc.date.issued2025
dc.identifier.urihttp://dspace.utb.edu.ec/handle/49000/18510
dc.descriptionThe present research, aims to analyze how different parenting styles influence students' socio-emotional development. A quantitative approach with a correlational design was used, and a sample of 123 students between 12 and 16 years old was selected. Data collection was conducted using three instruments: the "Parenting Styles Test" developed by Pierrehumbert et al. (1996), the "Social and Emotional Skills Assessment Test" created by Goleman (1995), and statistical analysis of the data using SPSS software. The results revealed that the predominant parenting styles in the sample were authoritarian (47%), democratic (35%), and permissive (18%). In terms of socio-emotional development, 60% of students with a democratic parenting style showed more developed socio-emotional skills, while only 25% of students with an authoritarian style and 15% with a permissive style showed adequate social and emotional abilities. The correlation obtained between parenting styles and socio-emotional development was 0.35, indicating a weak positive relationship, but not statistically significant. Although the correlation was not significant, the findings suggest that the democratic parenting style fosters better socio-emotional development in students. In conclusion, the results do not fully support the hypothesis that parenting styles play a decisive role in socio-emotional development, but a positive trend was observed, particularly in the democratic parenting group. The importance of balanced parenting approaches for fostering the emotional well-being of adolescents is emphasized.es_ES
dc.descriptionThe present research, aims to analyze how different parenting styles influence students' socio-emotional development. A quantitative approach with a correlational design was used, and a sample of 123 students between 12 and 16 years old was selected. Data collection was conducted using three instruments: the "Parenting Styles Test" developed by Pierrehumbert et al. (1996), the "Social and Emotional Skills Assessment Test" created by Goleman (1995), and statistical analysis of the data using SPSS software. The results revealed that the predominant parenting styles in the sample were authoritarian (47%), democratic (35%), and permissive (18%). In terms of socio-emotional development, 60% of students with a democratic parenting style showed more developed socio-emotional skills, while only 25% of students with an authoritarian style and 15% with a permissive style showed adequate social and emotional abilities. The correlation obtained between parenting styles and socio-emotional development was 0.35, indicating a weak positive relationship, but not statistically significant. Although the correlation was not significant, the findings suggest that the democratic parenting style fosters better socio-emotional development in students. In conclusion, the results do not fully support the hypothesis that parenting styles play a decisive role in socio-emotional development, but a positive trend was observed, particularly in the democratic parenting group. The importance of balanced parenting approaches for fostering the emotional well-being of adolescents is emphasized.es_ES
dc.description.abstractEl presente trabajo de investigación, tiene como objetivo principal analizar cómo los diferentes estilos de crianza influyen en el desarrollo socioemocional de los estudiantes. Se utilizó un enfoque cuantitativo con diseño correlacional, y se trabajó con una muestra de 123 estudiantes de entre 12 y 16 años. La recolección de datos se realizó a través de tres instrumentos: el "Test de Estilos de Crianza" desarrollado por Pierrehumbert et al. (1996), el "Test de Valoración de Habilidades Sociales y Emocionales" elaborado por Goleman (1995), y el análisis estadístico de los datos con el software SPSS, los resultados obtenidos revelaron que los estilos de crianza predominantes en la muestra fueron el estilo autoritario con un 47%, el democrático con un 35%, y el permisivo con un 18%. En cuanto al desarrollo socioemocional de los estudiantes, el 60% de los estudiantes con estilo democrático mostraron habilidades socioemocionales más desarrolladas, mientras que solo el 25% de los estudiantes con estilo autoritario y el 15% con estilo permisivo presentaron habilidades sociales y emocionales adecuadas. La correlación obtenida entre los estilos de crianza y el desarrollo socioemocional fue de 0.35, lo que indica una relación positiva débil, pero no estadísticamente significativa, a pesar de que la correlación no fue significativa, los hallazgos sugieren que el estilo de crianza democrático favorece un mejor desarrollo socioemocional en los estudiantes. En conclusión, los resultados no apoyan completamente la hipótesis de que los estilos de crianza tienen un impacto determinante en el desarrollo socioemocional, pero sí se observó una tendencia hacia una relación positiva, especialmente en el grupo de crianza democrática. Se destaca la importancia de los enfoques equilibrados de crianza para fomentar el bienestar emocional de los adolescentes.es_ES
dc.format.extent86 p.es_ES
dc.language.isoeses_ES
dc.publisherBABAHOYO: UTB, 2025es_ES
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 United States*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/us/*
dc.subjectEstilos de crianzaes_ES
dc.subjectDesarrollo socioemocionales_ES
dc.subjectCompromiso parentales_ES
dc.subjectAutonomíaes_ES
dc.titleEstudio comparativo en los estilos de crianza y su incidencia en el desarrollo socioemocional de los estudiantes de básica superior de la Unidad Educativa Vinceses_ES
dc.typebachelorThesises_ES


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 United States
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 United States