Korean Journal of Psychology : General

理쒓렐샇 寃깋

Korean Journal of Psychology : General - Vol. 40, No. 2

[ Article ]
The Korean Journal of Psychology: General - Vol. 40, No. 2, pp.187-211
ISSN: 1229-067X (Print)
Print publication date 25 Jun 2021
Received 21 May 2021 Accepted 10 Jun 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.22257/kjp.2021.

대학생 자녀가 지각한 부모의 과보호 양육태도에 따른 친사회적 행동의 차이: 공공재 게임 내 메시지 유형과 딜레마 상황 반복의 효과
정경미1) ; 조성현2) ; 박찬솔
1)연세대학교 심리학과, 전임교원 (kmchung@yonsei.ac.kr)
2)연세대학교 심리학과, 석사과정 (tscho923@gmail.com)

Differences in prosocial behavior associated with perceived parental overprotection among undergraduate students: Effect of message framing and dilemma repetition
Kyong-Mee Chung1) ; Sunghyun Cho2) ; Chansol Park
1)Yonsei University
2)Yonsei University
Correspondence to : 박찬솔, 연세대학교 심리학과, 석사과정, 서울특별시 서대문구 연세로 50 Tel : 02-2123-7536, E-mail : parkchans51@gmail.com

Funding Information ▼


본 연구에서는 대학생이 인식한 부모의 과보호 양육태도와 친사회적 행동의 관계를 탐색하고, 메시지 유형과 딜레마 상황의 반복이라는 맥락적 변인이 이에 어떠한 영향을 미치는지 알아보고자 하였다. 이를 위해, 한국 과보호 양육척도(K-POS) 점수에 따라 145명의 참가자들을 과보호와 비과보호 집단으로 분류하였다. 그 후 각 집단을 긍정 및 부정적 외부효과 강조 프레이밍, 중립적 메시지 조건에 배정하였고, 모든 참가자는 딜레마 상황을 반복 제시받았다. 본 연구에서는 실제 딜레마 상황과 유사한 상황을 유도하기 위해 ‘공공재 게임’이라는 도구를 사용하였다. 게임 내에서 참가자에게 개인계정과 공공계정에 토큰을 투자하는 것과 관련된 긍정 및 부정적 외부효과 강조 프레이밍, 또는 중립적 메시지를 제공 후 블록 당 8시행인 딜레마 상황을 4블록 반복 제시하였다. 연구 결과, 삼원상호작용이 나타나 메시지 유형별 사후 분석을 진행하였는데, 부정적 외부효과 강조 프레이밍에서 딜레마 상황을 2-3블록 제시하였을 때 과보호 집단이 비과보호 집단에 비해 유의하게 낮은 수준의 친사회적 행동을 보이는 것으로 나타났다. 또한 부정적 외부효과를 강조한 메시지 유형에서 집단의 주효과가 나타나, 과보호 집단이 비과보호 집단에 비해 더 낮은 수준의 친사회적 행동을 보이는 것으로 드러났다. 이러한 결과는 과보호를 인식한 대학생 집단이 항상 낮은 수준의 친사회적 행동을 보이는 것이 아니고, 친사회적 행동은 다양한 맥락적 요인의 영향을 받음을 의미한다.


The current study examines the relationship between parental overprotection and prosocial behavior of undergraduate students, and how the contextual variables such as message framing and dilemma repetition affect the relationship. For this purpose, A total of 145 participants were determined as either parental overprotection group or non-overprotection group based on the Korean-Parental Overprotection Scale(K-POS) scores. Then, an experimental paradigm called ‘public goods game’ was conducted to measure prosocial behavior in context similar to the actual situation where dilemma occurs. In ‘public goods game,’ participants were presented with message that emphasizes positive or negative external effect, or neutral messages related to investing tokens in personal and public accounts, and then repeatedly presented with a 4-block dilemma, consisting of 8 trials per block. The results showed that a group reported parental overprotection shows significantly lower levels of prosocial behavior than the other only in condition that emphasizes negative external effect, especially when dilemma were presented in block 2 and 3. This suggests that a group experiencing parental overprotection does not always show a low level of prosocial behavior, rather prosocial behavior is influenced by various contextual variables.

Keywords: Parental overprotection, prosocial behavior, message framing, dilemma repetition, public goods game
키워드: 과보호 양육태도, 친사회적 행동, 메시지 프레이밍, 딜레마 반복, 공공재 게임


본 연구는 2017년도 대한민국 교육부와 한국연구재단의 지원을 받아 수행된 연구임(NRF-2017S1A5A2A01023824).

1. Andreoni, J. (1995). Warm-glow versus cold-prickle: the effects of positive and negative framing on cooperation in experiments. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110(1), 1-21.
2. Barber, B. K., Stolz, H. E., Olsen, J. A., Collins, W. A., & Burchinal, M. (2005). Parental support, psychological control, and behavioral control: Assessing relevance across time, culture, and method. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, i-147.
3. Barry, C. M., Padilla-Walker, L. M., Madsen, S. D., & Nelson, L. J. (2008). The impact of maternal relationship quality on emerging adults’ prosocial tendencies: Indirect effects via regulation of prosocial values. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 37(5), 581-591.
4. Barry, C. M., & Wentzel, K. R. (2006). Friend influence on prosocial behavior: The role of motivational factors and friendship characteristics. Developmental Psychology, 42(1), 153.
5. Baumard, N., André, J.-B., & Sperber, D. (2013). A mutualistic approach to morality: The evolution of fairness by partner choice. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36(1), 59-78.
6. Baumrind, D. (1991). The influence of parenting style on adolescent competence and substance use. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 11(1), 56-95.
7. Berg, J., Dickhaut, J., & McCabe, K. (1995). Trust, reciprocity, and social history. Games and Economic Behavior, 10(1), 122-142.
8. Berndt, T. J. (2002). Friendship quality and social development. Current directions in psychological science, 11(1), 7-10.
9. Biddle, B. J., Bank, B. J., & Marlin, M. M. (1980). Parental and peer influence on adolescents. Social Forces, 58(4), 1057-1079.
10. Bronson, P., & Merryman, A. (2009). NurtureShock: New thinking about children. Twelve.
11. Burns, J., & Keswell, M. (2015). Diversity and the provision of public goods: Experimental evidence from South Africa. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 118, 110-122.
12. Cadsby, C. B., & Maynes, E. (1998). Gender and free riding in a threshold public goods game: Experimental evidence. Journal of economic behavior & organization, 34(4), 603-620.
13. Carlo, G., Knight, G. P., McGinley, M., & Hayes, R. (2011). The roles of parental inductions, moral emotions, and moral cognitions in prosocial tendencies among Mexican American and European American early adolescents. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 31(6), 757-781.
14. Carlo, G., Mestre, M. V., McGinley, M. M., Tur-Porcar, A., Samper, P., & Opal, D. (2014). The protective role of prosocial behaviors on antisocial behaviors: The mediating effects of deviant peer affiliation. Journal of Adolescence, 37(4), 359-366.
15. Carlo, G., White, R. M. B., Streit, C., Knight, G. P., & Zeiders, K. H. (2018). Longitudinal relations among parenting styles, prosocial behaviors, and academic outcomes in US Mexican adolescents. Child Development, 89(2), 577-592.
16. Chaudhuri, A. (2018). Belief heterogeneity and the restart effect in a public goods game. Games, 9(4), 96.
17. Chen, X.-P., Wasti, S. A., & Triandis, H. C. (2007). When does group norm or group identity predict cooperation in a public goods dilemma? The moderating effects of idiocentrism and allocentrism. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 31(2), 259-276.
18. Chung, KM, Yoon L. J. (2015). Development and Validation of the Korean-Parental Overprotection Scale: For High School students. The Korean Journal of School Psychology, 12(1), 1-29.
19. Cookson, R. (2000). Framing effects in public goods experiments. Experimental Economics, 3(1), 55-79.
20. Cox, C. A. (2015). Decomposing the effects of negative framing in linear public goods games. Economics Letters, 126, 63-65.
21. Crick, N. R. (1996). The role of overt aggression, relational aggression, and prosocial behavior in the prediction of children’s future social adjustment. Child Development, 67(5), 2317-2327.
22. Croson, R., Fatas, E., & Neugebauer, T. (2005). Reciprocity, matching and conditional cooperation in two public goods games. Economics Letters, 87(1), 95-101.
23. Croson, R. T. A. (1996). Partners and strangers revisited. Economics Letters, 53(1), 25-32.
24. Darlow, V., Norvilitis, J. M., & Schuetze, P. (2017). The relationship between helicopter parenting and adjustment to college. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 26(8), 2291-2298.
25. Dyer, W. G. (1986). Cultural change in family firms: Anticipating and managing business and family transitions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
26. Eberly, M. B., & Montemayor, R. (1999). Adolescent affection and helpfulness toward parents: A 2-year follow-up. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 19(2), 226-248.
27. Eisenberg, N., & Fabes, R. A. (1992). Emotion, regulation, and the development of social competence. In M. S. Clark (Ed.), Review of personality and social psychology, Vol. 14. Emotion and social behavior (pp. 119-150). Sage Publications, Inc
28. Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A., & Spinrad, T. L. (1998). Prosocial development. In Damon W (Series Ed.) & Eisenberg N (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, Emotional and personality development.
29. Fabes, R. A., Carlo, G., Kupanoff, K., & Laible, D. (1999). Early adolescence and prosocial/moral behavior I: The role of individual processes. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 19(1), 5-16.
30. Farrant, B. M., Devine, T. A., Maybery, M. T., & Fletcher, J. (2012). Empathy, perspective taking and prosocial behaviour: The importance of parenting practices. Infant and Child Development, 21(2), 175-188.
31. Fehr, E., Fischbacher, U., & Gächter, S. (2002). Strong reciprocity, human cooperation, and the enforcement of social norms. Human Nature, 13(1), 1-25.
32. Fehr, E., & Gächter, S. (2000). Fairness and retaliation: The economics of reciprocity. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 14(3), 159-181.
33. Fehr, E., & Leibbrandt, A. (2011). A field study on cooperativeness and impatience in the tragedy of the commons. Journal of public economics, 95(9-10), 1144-1155.
34. Fischbacher, U., Gächter, S., & Fehr, E. (2001). Are people conditionally cooperative? Evidence from a public goods experiment. Economics Letters, 71(3), 397-404.
35. Forsythe, R., Horowitz, J. L., Savin, N. E., & Sefton, M. (1994). Fairness in simple bargaining experiments. Games and Economic Behavior, 6(3), 347-369.
36. Fujimoto, H., & Park, E.-S. (2010). Framing effects and gender differences in voluntary public goods provision experiments. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 39(4), 455-457.
37. Girden, E. R. (1992). ANOVA: Repeated measures (No. 84). Sage.
38. Gonzales, N. A., Cauce, A. M., & Mason, C. A. (1996). Interobserver agreement in the assessment of parental behavior and parent adolescent conflict: African American mothers, daughters, and independent observers. Child development, 67(4), 1483-1498.
39. Güth, W., Schmittberger, R., & Schwarze, B. (1982). An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 3(4), 367-388.
40. Hart, D., Atkins, R., & Ford, D. (1998). Urban America as a context for the development of moral identity in adolescence. Journal of Social Issues, 54(3), 513-530.
41. Hastings, P. D., Rubin, K. H., & DeRose, L. (2005). Links among gender, inhibition, and parental socialization in the development of prosocial behavior. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly (1982-), 467-493.
42. Hofer, B. K., & Moore, A. S. (2011). The iConnected parent: Staying close to your kids in college (and beyond) while letting them grow up. New York, NY: Atria.
43. Hwang, H., Bae, S., Hong, J. S., & Han, D. H. (2021). Comparing Effectiveness Between a Mobile App Program and Traditional Cognitive Behavior Therapy in Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: Evaluation Study. JMIR Mental Health, 8(1), e23778.
44. Kim, J. H., Kang, J. J. (2008). The effect of parental care and parental overprotection on the problem behavior of middle school students. Proceedings of the Korean Home Economics Education Association 2008 summer conference, 137-138.
45. Knafo, A., & Plomin, R. (2006). Parental discipline and affection and children's prosocial behavior: genetic and environmental links. Journal of personality and social psychology, 90(1), 147.
46. Kouros, C. D., Pruitt, M. M., Ekas, N. V, Kiriaki, R., & Sunderland, M. (2017). Helicopter parenting, autonomy support, and college students’ mental health and well-being: The moderating role of sex and ethnicity. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 26(3), 939-949.
47. Krevans, J., & Gibbs, J. C. (1996). Parents’ use of inductive discipline: Relations to children’s empathy and prosocial behavior. Child Development, 67(6), 3263-3277.
48. Lee, J. H. (2008). The Effect of Parental Behavior within the Confucian context on the Shaping of Moral Integrity. Korean Journal of Psychology: General, 27(3), 783-818.
49. Lee S. E., Lee J. C. (2008). The Mediating Effect of Perceived Social Support on the Relationship Between Parental Bonding and Interpersonal Attachment. The Korean Journal of Counseling and Psychotherapy, 20(1), 83-101.
50. Lee, S. H. (2009). A study on the relationship between adolescents' perception of parental rearing attitudes and the developmental levels of moral judgment. [Unpublished master’s thesis dissertation], University of Busan National, Graduate School of Education.
51. Lee S. M., Kim J. H., Kim. M. R. H., Kim J. J. (2020). The Effects of Well-Being Cognition Technique Using the Smartphone App on the Depression and Subjective Well-Being of Mid-Life Adults. Korean Journal of Health Psychology, 25(2), 393-416.
52. Leibbrandt A (2012). Are social preferences related to market performance? Experimental. Economics, 15(4), 589-603.
53. Leung, J. T. Y., & Shek, D. T. L. (2018). Validation of the perceived Chinese overparenting scale in emerging adults in Hong Kong. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 27(1), 103-117.
54. Levine, M. (2006). The price of privilege: How parental pressure and material advantage are creating a generation of disconnected and unhappy kids. HarperCollins Publishers.
55. Maccoby, E., & Martin, J. A. (1983). Socialization in the context of family: Parent-child interaction. EM Hetherington ve PH Mussen,(Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Socialization, personality, and social development (4. baskı) içinde (1-101). New York: Wiley.
56. Marano, H. E. (2008). A nation of wimps: The high cost of invasive parenting. Broadway Books.
57. McGinley, M. (2018). Can hovering hinder helping? Examining the joint effects of helicopter parenting and attachment on prosocial behaviors and empathy in emerging adults. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 179(2), 102-115.
58. Miceli, M. P., Dozier, J. B., & Near, J. P. (1991). Blowing the whistle on data fudging: A controlled field experiment 1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21(4), 271-295.
59. Moilanen, K. L., & Manuel, M. L. (2019). Helicopter Parenting and Adjustment Outcomes in Young Adulthood: A Consideration of the Mediating Roles of Mastery and Self-Regulation. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 28(8), 2145-2158.
60. Murnighan, J. K., & Wang, L. (2016). The social world as an experimental game. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 136, 80-94.
61. Murray, S. L., & Holmes, J. G. (2009). The architecture of interdependent minds: A motivation-management theory of mutual responsiveness. Psychological Review, 116(4), 908.
62. Nowak, M. A. (2006). Five rules for the evolution of cooperation. Science, 314(5805), 1560-1563.
63. Nowell, C., & Laufer, D. (1997). Undergraduate student cheating in the fields of business and economics. The Journal of Economic Education, 28(1), 3-12.
64. Padilla-Walker, L. M. (2014). Parental socialization of prosocial behavior: A multidimensional approach.
65. Padilla-Walker, L. M., & Nelson, L. J. (2012). Black hawk down?: Establishing helicopter parenting as a distinct construct from other forms of parental control during emerging adulthood. Journal of Adolescence, 35(5), 1177-1190.
66. Park, E. S. (2000). Warm-glow versus cold-prickle: a further experimental study of framing effects on free-riding. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 43(4), 405-421.
67. Park. R. Y., & Lee. E. S. (2014). Collective Identity, Social Exchange Relationship and Prosocial Behaviors. Korean Journal of Business Administration, 27(6), 955-977. http://www.dbpia.co.kr/journal/articleDetail?nodeId=NODE02428720
68. Park, Y. S., & Chae, K. M. (2010). The mediation effects of shame-proneness tendency on the relationship between parenting attitude and adolescent social anxiety. The Korean Study of Youth Counselling, 18(2), 133-147.
69. Pruitt, D. G., & Kimmel, M. J. (1977). Twenty years of experimental gaming: Critique, synthesis, and suggestions for the future. Annual Review of Psychology, 28(1), 363-392.
70. Randall, B. A., & Wenner, J. R. (2014). Adopting a multidimensional perspective on college students’ prosocial behaviors. Prosocial Development: A Multidimensional Approach, 374-392.
71. Regnerus, M. D. (2003). Religion and positive adolescent outcomes: A review of research and theory. Review of Religious Research, 394-413.
72. Rohner, R. P. (1986). The warmth dimension: Foundations of parental acceptance-rejection theory. Sage Publications, Inc.
73. Rusbult, C. E., & Van Lange, P. A. M. (2003). Interdependence, interaction, and relationships. Annual Review of Psychology, 54(1), 351-375.
74. Rustagi, D., Engel, S., & Kosfeld, M. (2010). Conditional cooperation and costly monitoring explain success in forest commons management. science, 330(6006), 961-965.
75. Samuelson, P. A. (1954). The Pure Theory of Public Expenditure. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 36(4), 387-389.
76. Schiffrin, H. H., Liss, M., Miles-McLean, H., Geary, K. A., Erchull, M. J., & Tashner, T. (2014). Helping or hovering? The effects of helicopter parenting on college students’ well-being. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 23(3), 548-557.
77. Schonert-Reichl, K. A. (1999). Relations of peer acceptance, friendship adjustment, and social behavior to moral reasoning during early adolescence. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 19(2), 249-279.
78. Segrin, C., Woszidlo, A., Givertz, M., Bauer, A., & Taylor Murphy, M. (2012). The association between overparenting, parent‐child communication, and entitlement and adaptive traits in adult children. Family Relations, 61(2), 237-252.
79. Sherman, S. J. (1980). On the self-erasing nature of errors of prediction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(2), 211.
80. Smetana, J. G. (1999). The role of parents in moral development: A social domain analysis. Journal of Moral Education, 28(3), 311–321.
81. Son E. J. (2016), The Relationship between Happiness and Prosocial Behavior in Cooperation Setting: Mediation Effect of Selfish Motive. Korean Psychological Association Conference program & Abstract, 272-272.
82. Song E. H., & Park J. H. (2011). The Effect of Parent-Child Bonding on Adolescent Health Promotion Behavior - A Study on the Mediating Effect of Self-Efficacy. Korean Journal of Youth Studies, 18(6), 75-98
83. Steinberg, L., Mounts, N. S., Lamborn, S. D., & Dornbusch, S. M. (1999). Authoritative parenting and adolescent adjustment across varied ecological niches. Adolescents and Their Families: Structure, function, and parent-youth relationships, 129-146.
84. Tansley, D. P., Jome, L. M., Haase, R. F., & Martens, M. P. (2007). The effect of message framing on college students career search expectations: development of the career search efficacy scale. Journal of Career Assessment, 2, 111-123.
85. Thielmann, I., Spadaro, G., & Balliet, D. (2020). Personality and prosocial behavior: A theoretical framework and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 146(1), 30.
86. Volk, S., Thöni, C., & Ruigrok, W. (2011). Personality, personal values and cooperation preferences in public goods games: A longitudinal study. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(6), 810-815.
87. Yoon L. J., Chung, KM. (2014). The relationship between the Level of perceived parental overprotectiveness and college students’ morality. The Korean Journal of Culture and Social Issues, 20(4), 307-328. http://www.dbpia.co.kr/journal/articleDetail?nodeId=NODE06373969
88. West, T., Ravenscroft, S., & Shrader, C. (2004). Cheating and moral judgment in the college classroom: A natural experiment. Journal of Business Ethics, 54(2), 173-183.
89. Wobbrock, J. O., Findlater, L., Gergle, D., & Higgins, J. J. (2011). The aligned rank transform for nonparametric factorial analyses using only anova procedures. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 143-146). ACM.
90. Yoon, C., Laurent, G., Fung, H. H., Gonzalez, R., Gutchess, A. H., Hedden, T., ⋯ Peters, E. (2005). Cognition, persuasion and decision making in older consumers. Marketing Letters, 16(3-4), 429-441.