1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK Locus of control

Locus of control in social psychology refers to the extent to which individuals believe that they can control events that affect them. Understanding of the concept will be developed by Julian B. Rotter in 1954, and has since become an important aspect of personality studies. Individuals with a high internal locus of control believe that events result primarily from their own behavior and actions. Those with a low internal locus of control believe that powerful others, fate, or chance primarily determine events. Those with a high internal locus of control have better control of their behavior, tend to exhibit more political behaviors, and are more likely to attempt to influence other people than those with a low external locus of control. Those with a high internal locus of control are more likely to assume that their efforts will be successful. They are more active in seeking information and knowledge concerning their situation. One's "locus" (Latin for "place" or "location") can either be internal (meaning the person believes that they control their life) or external (meaning they believe that their environment, some higher power, or other people control their decisions and their life).

Locus of control personality orientations

Rotter (1975) cautioned that internality and externality represent two ends of a continuum, not an either/or typology. Internals tend to attribute outcomes of events to their own control. Externals attribute outcomes of events to external circumstances. For example, college students with a strong internal locus of control may believe that their grades were achieved through their own abilities and efforts, whereas those with a strong external locus of control may believe that their grades are the result of good or bad luck, or to a professor who designs bad tests or grades

capriciously; hence, they are less likely to expect that their own efforts will result in success and are therefore less likely to work hard for high grades.

Scales to measure locus of control

The most famous questionnaire to measure locus of control is the 23-item forced choice items and six filler items scale of Rotter (1966), but this is not the only questionnaireindeed, predating Rotter's work by five years is Bialer's (1961) 23-item scale for children. Also of relevance to locus of control scale are the Crandall Intellectual Ascription of Responsibility Scale (Crandall, 1965), and the Nowicki-Strickland Scale. Many measures of locus of control have appeared since Rotter's scale, some that use a five-point scale, such as The Duttweiler Control Index (Duttweiler, 1984), and some that relate to specific areas, such as health.

SELF-ESTEEM
Self-esteem is a simplistic term for varied and complex mental states pertaining to how one view oneself. It takes but little research in the voluminous literature to see the vagueness and inconsistencies in its various definitions.

DEFINING SELF-ESTEEM
Self-esteem is a term used in psychology to reflect a person's overall evaluation or appraisal of his or her own worth. Self-esteem encompasses beliefs and emotions such as triumph, despair, pride and shame.

Self-esteem is the summary judgment of everything a person can assess about him/herself. Those judgments concern: (1) who one is (i.e. one's philosophy of life and character); (2) what one does (i. e. ones tangible and/or intangible work products regarding people, nature, objects, or oneself); (3) what one has (i.e. one's inherent, developed, or acquired qualities and quantities); (4) the different levels in how one appears (i.e. Ones physical body, personality, and reputation); and (5) to whom or what

one is attached (e.g. God, a concept, a "special" person or group, money, possessions, or power). Despite being assessed by different methods, each of these five categories and each of the subcategories, levels, or dimensions contained in these five have "positives" and "negatives" related to worth and/or value. If all of the "positives" outweigh the "negatives" and thereby establish a level of self-confidence, one's view of oneself is that of having a "good" or "high" self-esteem; if the reverse, a "low" self-esteem.

Quality and level of self-esteem

Level and quality of self-esteem, though correlated, remain distinct. Level-wise, one can exhibit high but fragile self-esteem (as in narcissism) or low but stable self-esteem (as in humility). However, investigators can indirectly assess the quality of self-esteem in several ways: 1. in terms of its constancy over time (stability) 2. in terms of its independence of meeting particular conditions (non-contingency) 3. in terms of its ingrained nature at a basic psychological level (implicitness or automatized)

PERCEIVED PARENTAL BEHAVIOR

The child rearing attitudes or parental behavior may be discussed in terms of many different dimensions such as- acceptance, affection control, warmth, permissiveness, restrictiveness and demandingness. Typically warmth and control are thought to be the most important ways in which parents influence the development of their offspring or children (Maccoby & Martin, 1986). These dimensions are parental control (permissiveness strictness) and parental warmth (acceptance rejection). For the past 20 years Baumrind conducted a series of researches to identify the parental behavior and its association with childrens behavior.

1.2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE LITRATURE REVIEW

Branden1, who somewhat claims to have brought self-esteem to the public's attention in the late 1950s, defines it as the estimate one individual passes on him/herself by way of a value judgment. Ayn Rand said it is reliance on ones power to think. Sigelman refers to self-esteem as "your overall evaluation of your worth as a person, high or low, based on all the positive and negative self perceptions that make up your self-concept." Since these and other literature definitions do not seem to match. Hill (1980) theorized that parenting style has a major influence on the development of the child and there has been a growing awareness of the importance about parenting style and its impact on the Upbringing of child among researchers. Hill also theorized that children of very critical parents, with unrealistically high expectations, might develop anxiety during the preschool years. Kaushik & Rani (2005) have stated that perfectionist attitude of mothers is positively related with anxiety among children. Similarly, unreasonable parental expectations; Especially when accompanied by faulty parental behavior pattern adversely affect the Childs psychological wellbeing (Wang, 2002). According to Thergaonkar and Wadkar (2007), inculcating a democratic style of parenting and greater acceptance of parents among children may prevent anxiety. Baumrind (1971) stated that research has examined the four parenting styles and he found that the authoritative parenting style is recognized as the most successful style for developing competent and confident children (Berk,2002; Berns,2004). Lung et al. (2004) noted that a parental bonding directly affect personality characteristics. Emmelkamp (2006) suggested that a significant amount of variance of Type A behaviour can be

counted for by perceived parental characteristics, especially rejection and lack of emotional warmth and negative evaluation of children by their parents may lead to an internalized maladaptive cognitive set in the children. In a research Muris et al. (2000) found that parental rearing behaviours, in particular rejection and anxious rearing were positively associated with worry. Furnham and Cheng (2000) examined the paternal and maternal rearing styles and found that a reasonable discipline exercised by mothers toward their children was particularly beneficial in enhancing the off-springs self-esteem. Maccoby & Martin, (1986) The child rearing attitudes or parental behavior may be discussed in terms of many different dimensions such as- acceptance, affection control, warmth, permissiveness, restrictiveness and demandingness. Typically warmth and control are thought to be the most important ways in which parents influence the development of their offspring or children Rohner; (1986) Rohner & Rohner (1981) reported major parenting dimensions in different human societies. These dimensions are parental control (permissiveness strictness) and parental warmth (acceptance rejection). Baumrind (1967) tried to conceptualize three global styles of parenting. According to her, Authoritarian parents were those who had strict ideas about discipline and behavior which were not open to discussion. They attempted to shape, control and evaluate the behaviors and attitudes of their children in accordance with an absolute set of standards Baumrind and Dornbusch (1978); Lamborn (1991) demonstrated that adolescents whose parents were accepting, firm and democratic (i.e. authoritative) scored higher in measures of academic performance. They also found that both authoritarian and permissive parenting styles were negatively associated with grades.

Steinberg (1989, 1992); Taylor, Hinton & Wilson (1995) reported that variables such as parental belief systems, expectations, styles and behavior pattern are related to academic outcomes n children. Lamborn et al (1991) suggested that adolescents who described their parents as either neglectful or indulgent had lower grades than adolescents from authoritative homes. They also scored lower as did adolescents from authoritarian families on self perceived academic competence. Kagan & Moss, (1962) Morrow & Wilson (1961), Shaw & Dutton (1962) Walters & Stinett, (1971) stated that greater parental control was associated with poorer performance However, studies by other researchers showed appositive relationship between parental control andacademic achievement (Backer, 1964, Hoffman,Rossen & Lipitt, 1960; Watson, 1934). Keith et al (1993) demonstrated that parental involvement in students academic lives was indeed a powerful influence on eight grade students achievement. Srivastava (1995) suggested several aspects of parental behaviors likelove; discipline and dominance had a positive effect on the pupils academic achievement whereas rejection and punishment had a negative effect. De Bruyn et al (2003) concluded that boys and girls shared the some pathway from maternal disciplinary strategies to school success mediated by childs goal orientations and cognitive classroom engagement Path analysis revealed moderate associations between parenting and goal orientations. Goal orientations were found to be moderately linked to classroom behavior. Joshi et al (2003) found that parenting style scores were unrelated to college. Some researchers reported that parental attitude of encouragement; parental warmth and verbalization were positively related with academic competence (Padhi & Desh, 1994; Wagnor & Phillip, 1992)

(Allee, 1978) stated that self-esteem is a widely researched area in the quest for further understanding of human behavior and attributes. There is a global definition of self-esteem that is widely accepted. Self-esteem is to regard oneself with respect or affection, to set a value upon, to rate highly, or have a favorable opinion of oneself By definition, self-esteem is a positive quality or trait to possess, therefore, the majority of the research on self-esteem is directed at exploring low self-esteem. (Blake, 1995) defined that different psychological theories have diverse views of self-esteem. Abraham Maslows theory of human motivation was based upon a hierarchy of human needs. One level in this hierarchy is esteem needs. Maslow believed that all people have a desire or need for a stable, firmly based, and usually high evaluation of themselves, for self-respect, or self-esteem, and for the esteem for others. Koole, Dijksterhuis, and Van Knippenber (2001) explored self-esteem in the context of whether self-evaluation is accomplished through conscious (explicit) or unconscious (implicit) effort. These researchers found that while people have a conscious evaluation of themselves that influences their esteem, there is also an implicit self-esteem that is automatic, highly practiced, generally positive, and stable over time (Koole, Dijksterhuis, & van Knippenber, 2001). Trzesniewski, Donnellan, & Robins (2003) the stability of self-esteem has been found to be curvilinear over time; developing throughout childhood, stabilizing in adulthood, and decreasing in old age. Blake (1995) theorized that there are stages a person goes through where different areas of physical, emotional, or psychological development occur. Eric Eriksons theory of development included the school age stage in which a child determines whether they feel industrious or inferior.

1.3 RATIONALE OF THE STUDY

Many studies have already been done across the globe on perceived parental behavior to locus of control and self-esteem of graduate students. In this study there are three variables: perceived parental behavior, locus of control and self-esteem of the graduate students. Here perceived parental behavior is the independent variable and other two e,i locus of control and self-esteem of the graduate students. In this study we have found out the effect of perceived parental behavior on self-esteem and locus of control. As parents behavior has a great impact on their children performance and in adolescent period parents become more possessive as their children start trusting their peers. In this research we have found that perceived parental behavior has no effect on the self-esteem of graduate students on the other hand perceived parental behavior effects the another factor that is locus of control therefore, This research has opened new dimensions for further study.

1.4 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

1. To design a questionnaire for perceived parental behavior in order to measure the perception of graduates about their parents.

2. To measure the impact of perceived parental behavior on locus of control.

3. To measure the impact of perceived parental behavior on self-esteem of graduate students. 4. To study the impact of 5. To open new vistas for further research.

2 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
2.1THE STUDY
The study is non-experimental in nature with survey method being used to collect data.

2.2THE SAMPLE DESIGN

2.2.1 Population: All the students of Gwalior region 2.2.2 2.2.3 2.2.4 2.2.5 Sample element: individual graduate students Sampling technique: Judgmental sampling Sample size: 200 students Sample frame: The sample frame of the study includes all the graduate students irrespective of their gender.

TOOLS USED FOR DATA COLLECTION

A standardized questionnaire by Rotter is being used for measuring self esteem of graduate students. A standardized questionnaire by is being used to measure the Locus of Control. A questionnaire is being designed to measure the Perceived Parental Behavior among the graduate students. A Likert scale is being used to measure the responses on a scale of 1-5 where 1 stands for minimum agreement and 5 stands for maximum agreement.

10

TOOLS USED FOR DATA ANALYSIS

Internal consistency will be established through item to total correlation. Reliability test will be applied to check whether data items in the questionnaire are reliable or not through Cronbachs alpha. Validity of the questionnaire will be checked by using face validity method. Factor analysis will be applied to identify the underlying dominant factors responsible for .. Single Regression tests will be applied in the research to the impact of perceived parental behavior on locus of control and self-esteem.

11

3 RESULTS AND DISSCUSSIONS

3.2 Reliability Measure
The reliability of all the four measures viz. brand attitude, brand awareness, perceived Quality, and brand acceptability was computed by using SPSS software. Cronbach alpha reliability coefficients were computed to calculate reliability of all items in the questionnaire. Cronbach Alpha reliability method has been applied to calculate reliability of all items in the questionnaire. During reliability analysis some items have been dropped due to their low reliability and after dropping the items the value of Cronbach alpha have been increased. Reliability test using SPSS software and the reliability test measures are given below: Table 3.2: Alpha Reliability Statistics for total data Measures Perceived parental behavior Locus of control Self-esteem Cronbach Alpha value .721 .726 .711

It is visible that all reliability values are greater than .6.It is considered that reliability of all measure is adequate. So the statements in the questionnaire were treated as reliable statements PERCIEVED PARENTAL BEHAVIOR: RELIABILITY
Case Processing Summary N Cases Valid Excludeda Total 200 0 200 % 100.0 .0 100.0

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.

12

Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Cronbach's Alpha .717 Items .721 N of Items 23

LOCUS OF CONTROL: RELIABILITY

Case Processing Summary N Cases Valid Excludeda Total 200 0 200 % 100.0 .0 100.0

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.

Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Cronbach's Alpha .709 Items .726 N of Items 24

13

SELF-ESTEEM OF GRADUATE STUDENTS

Case Processing Summary N Cases Valid Excludeda Total 200 0 200 % 100.0 .0 100.0

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.

Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Cronbach's Alpha .701 Items .711 N of Items 22

3.3 Factor Analysis Principle component factor analysis with Varimax rotation was applied. The factor analysis applied on perceived parental behavior,self-esteem and locus of control. The details about factors, the factor name, Eigen value, Variable convergence, Loadings, Variance% and cumulative% are given in the table

14

PERCIEVED PARENTAL BEHAVIOR

FACTOR NAME SUPPORT 4.389 4.389 4.389 4.389 4.389 4.389 4.389 4.389 4.389 4.389 4.389 4.389 4.389 COMFORT LEVEL 2.527 2.527 2.527 TRUST 2.220 2.220 2.220 2.220 UNDERSTANDING 8.540 8.540 8.540 8.540 Lack of encouragement from parents to achieve goals Parents blame for wrong career choice. Parents respect suggestions of children. Disclosing inner feelings to parents. 9.718 9.718 9.718 Rare emotional support from parents. Confiding to parents makes them uncomfortable. I feel comfortable confiding in parents. 16.879 16.879 16.879 16.879 16.879 16.879 16.879 16.879 16.879 16.879 16.879 16.879 16.879 Parents not supportive for achieving goals. Sharing life with parents. Parents reliable for emotional support. Support decision regarding career. Not comfortable revealing inner feelings with parents Parents interested in knowing career plans. Parents Inviting friends to family functions Not accepting friends as a part of family. Friends welcome to attend functions. Considering friends as part of family. Parents concerned about well being. Parents ask about daily activities. Regularly attends parents meeting. EIGEN VALUE % OF ITEM CONVERGED VARIANCE EXPLAINED FACTOR LOAD

15

1.803 1.803 1.803 1.803 ACCEPTANCE 1.586 OPENNESS 1.395

6.935 6.935 6.935 6.935

Lack of communication between parent and child. Parents helping paying bills. Open communication with parents. Parents sharing the experiences about their struggle. Friends considered as a part of family. Parents talk openly about childrens experiences related to career. Parents defend children for their mistakes.

6.101 5.367

1.157

4.450

LOCUS OF CONTROL
FACTOR NAME LUCK 3.612 3.612 3.612 3.612 3.612 3.612 3.612 3.612 3.612 3.612 3.612 3.612 FATE 2.178 2.178 9.470 9.470 Grades of students are affected with accidental happening. Do not trust fate for taking important 15.706 15.706 15.706 15.706 15.706 15.706 15.706 15.706 15.706 15.706 15.706 15.706 Unhappy things are the outcome of bad luck. Lack of interest in politics results in wars. Some people dont get recognition no matter how hard they try. Capable people fail to become leaders have missed good opportunities. Some people just dont like you no matter how hard you try. No one can control the happenings. Unfair test does not exist for well prepared students. Powerful people rule the world and common man cannot act. I make sure that my plans are executed. My decisions are not based on luck. What happens to me is my own doing. People who are self centered cannot make others to like them. EIGEN VALUE % OF ITEM CONVERGED VARIANCE EXPLAINED FACTOR LOAD

16

2.178 2.178 CONTROL 1.894 UNCERTAINTY 1.652 PERCEPTION 1.516 RIGHT 1.359 DEEDS 1.105 TIME 1.056

9.470 9.470

decisions. Government decisions are being affected by normal citizens. Long term planning cannot be successful because of fate. I dont have control over direction of my life. Many times studying is not worth when exam papers are unrelated. The idea that teachers are unfair to students is nonsense. In the long run, people get the respect they deserve in this world. Peoples misfortune result from the mistakes they make. Without the right breaks, one cannot be an effective leader.

8.235

7.183

6.589

5.907

4.805

4.592

SELF ESTEEM
FACTOR NAME SELF ACCEPTANCE 3.690 3.690 3.690 3.690 3.690 3.690 3.690 16.771 16.771 16.771 16.771 16.771 16.771 16.771 You like yourself. You take responsibility for your actions. Comfortable with parties. Always finish the work once started. Recognition makes you feel good. Always boosted with confidence. Believing in giving before getting. EIGEN VALUE % OF ITEM CONVERGED VARIANCE EXPLAINED FACTOR LOAD

17

3.690 3.690 3.690 3.690 COMPARISON 2.340 2.340 CONCERN 1.803 1.803 ABILITY 1.695 1.695 PERCEPTION 1.457 WORTHINESS 1.351 INTROVERT 1.233 1.233

16.771 16.771 16.771 16.771 10.636 10.636 8.196 8.196 7.706 7.706 6.624

Telling truth to oneself. Capable of handling situations. Like being alone sometimes. Achieving goals. Compare yourself to others. Blame others often. Concerned about what others think of you. You are concerned about your goals. You want to look different. Know your talents. Concerned with failures rather than success. Being worthy to be loved. Feeling lonely most of the time. Take a stand for yourself.

6.139 5.604 5.604

Regression Analysis
The regression is calculated by taking the total effect of perceived parental behavior on locus of control and self-esteem of graduate students among which perceived parental behavior as an independent variables and locus of control and self-esteem as dependent variable using SPSS software. The linear regression was separately applied between the relationship between perceived parental behavior as an independent variables locus of control and self-esteem as dependent variable.

18

Effect of perceived parental behavior on self-esteem of graduate students

Variables Entered/Removedb Variables Model 1 Variables Entered PPBa Removed Method . Enter

a. All requested variables entered. b. Dependent Variable: SE

Model Summaryb Std. Error R Model 1 145 R .

a

Change Statistics R Square F df1 1 df2 197 Sig. F Durbin-

Adjusted

of the

Square R Square Estimate .021 .016 8.36885

Change Change .021 4.229

Change Watson .041 1.979

a. Predictors: (Constant), PPB b. Dependent Variable: SE

ANOVAb Model 1 Regression Residual Total a. Predictors: (Constant), PPB b. Dependent Variable: SE Sum of Squares 296.224 13797.424 14093.648 df 1 197 198 Mean Square 296.224 70.038 F 4.229 Sig. .041a

19

Coefficientsa Standardized Unstandardized Coefficients Model 1 (Constant) PPB a. Dependent Variable: SE B 67.944 .118 Std. Error 5.156 .057 .145 Coefficients Beta t 13.177 2.057 Sig. .000 .041

Y= a +bx + Y=67.944+118.x+ Y= self-esteem (dependent variable) X= perceived parental behavior (independent variable) = error The value of R square is 14.5%that indicates independent variable perceived parental behavior explains 14.5% variance in self-esteem in another words perceived parental behavior contributes 14.5%to. Self-esteem in graduate students. The model used for regression has good fit as indicated by F-value 4 .229 which is significant at 0% level of significance indicating a high predictability of model. The relationship between perceived parental behavior as independent and self-esteem as dependent variable is indicated by standardized coefficient Beta with a value of .145.

Effect of perceived parental behavior on locus of control

20

Variables Entered/Removedb Variables Model 1 Variables Entered PPBa Removed Method . Enter

a. All requested variables entered. b. Dependent Variable: LOC

Model Summaryb Std. Error Mode l 1 R .085a R Square .007 Adjusted R Square .002 of the Estimate 9.33571 R Square F df1 1 df2 197 Change Statistics Sig. F Change .234 DurbinWatson 1.883

Change Change .007 1.427

a. Predictors: (Constant), PPB b. Dependent Variable: LOC

ANOVAb Model 1 Regression Residual Total a. Predictors: (Constant), PPB b. Dependent Variable: LOC Sum of Squares 124.362 17169.619 17293.980 df 1 197 198 Mean Square 124.362 87.155 F 1.427 Sig. .234a

Coefficientsa Standardized Unstandardized Coefficients Model 1 (Constant) PPB a. Dependent Variable: LOC B 83.185 .076 Std. Error 5.752 .064 .085 Coefficients Beta T 14.462 1.195 Sig. .000 .234

21

Y= a +bx + Y=83.185+.076x+ Y= locus of control (dependent variable) X= perceived parental behavior (independent variable) = error The value of R square is
85a

% that indicates independent variable perceived parental behavior

explains 85% variance in locus of control in another words perceived parental behavior contributes 85% to locus of control in case of students. The model used for regression has good fit as indicated by F-value 0% level of significance indicating a high predictability of model. The relationship between perceived parental behavior as independent and locus of control as dependent variable is indicated by standardized coefficient Beta with a value of .085.
1.427

which is significant at

4 IMPLICATIONS
The research is intended to be useful for further research studies where researchers want to find effect of perceived parental behavior to locus of control and self-esteem of graduate students. It is also intended to be useful contribution for further researches because it provides a link between theory and practice.

22

Reference of study can also be helpful to researchers for their research. Researchers for their further research may use questionnaire.

SUGGESTIONS
The analysis is based on 200 respondents and if we increase the number of respondents result may vary. To ensure generalization further study should be carried out on a much larger sample. The study has been done in Gwalior region only so it is suggested to take larger area or other region so that more appropriate results can be obtained. 23

5 SUMMARY
This study has been divided into five parts in which first part includes introduction, conceptual framework, review of literature, rationale and objective. Introduction includes the brief introduction of the topic. Conceptual framework consists of all the definition and some details regarding the variables which are used in

24

the study. In literature review all the researches have been written which has been done previously, rationale is the need of study i.e. why we are going this research. Second part is research methodology, which includes study, sample and tools for data collection, analytical tools. In the study we have to specify which type of study it is, like this one is non-experimental study and methodology used in this is through questionnaire then next is sample which includes what type of sampling technique have been adopted like in sample which includes what type of sampling technique have been adopted like in this research we have used judgmental sampling as this research is purposive in nature and it also includes the sample size of the Gwalior. Then tools for data analysis shows that what type of tools has been applied, like in this research factor analysis, reliability and regression has been applied. Third is results and discussion which includes the results of our research and discussion means that whether review of literature match with our results or not and the fourth part is implication and suggestion. Fifth chapter consists of summary and in the end references and annexure.

CONCLUSION
The study examined the effect of perceived parental behavior on locus of control and self-esteem of the graduate students of Gwalior region. The questionnaires were filled by students of gwalior studying in different courses in various colleges of gwalior irrespective of their courses and gender. By applying tests like reliability, regression and factor analysis it can be concluded the perceived parental behavior has effect on

25

the locus of control on the other side perceived parental behavior has very slight or no effect on the self-esteem of the graduate students .we can say that the self-esteem of the students does not gets effected with perceived parental behavior This study reflects the high degree of relationship between perceived parental behavior and locus of control.

26