PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL FACTORS AS CORRELATES OF ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOURS AMONG SECONDARY SCHOOL ADOLESCENTS
PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL FACTORS AS CORRELATES OF ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOURS AMONG SECONDARY SCHOOL ADOLESCENTS
EKPO JOY EVANS
A PROJECT SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY, GUIDANCE AND COUNSELING, FACULTY OF EDUCATION, UNIVERSITY OF
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF THE DEGREE OF BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN EDUCATION (B.SC/ED) IN PSYCHOLOGY, GUIDANCE AND COUNSELING.
This work investigates personality and social factors as correlates of antisocial behavior among secondary school adolescents in Port Harcourt Local Government Area of Rivers State. in the course of this work six research question were used to guide the study. The instrument used was personality and social factors as correlates of Antisocial Behaviors among secondary school Adolescents questionnaire (PSFCABBSAQ). The questionnaire was a twenty items (20) constructed by the researcher to guide the study which is aimed at eliciting information from respondents. This was duly validated by the researcher’s supervisor and two other experts in the department. While test and retest method was used to obtain it reliability. The research design used was simple percentage used for data analysis. The researcher recommended that antisocial behavior should be properly check o enable secondary school adolescent to attain their academic goals in Port Harcourt Local Government Area.
1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
Adolescent anti-social behaviours have become an endemic problem in our society especially in the rural areas. Anti-social behaviours are disruptive acts characterized by hostility and aggression toward others. It is also characterized by a persuasive pattern of disregard for and violation of the rights of others. Antisocial behavior begins at early adolescence and continuing into young adulthood with such signs and symptoms as failure to confirm to social norms, manifested b repeated unlawful behavior.
Deceitfulness as indicated by repeated lying or swindling for pleasure or personal gain. Impulsivity or failure to plan ahead, frequent cases of assaults or fight and disregard for respect for self and others.
Adolescence is the period of transition from childhood stage to adulthood stage. The average range is between 12 and 20 years, about 65% of people in our society constitute this age group which is the youth (EYSENCK, 1982).
It is also the span of years between childhood and adulthood. In Nigeria, it begins at about age 12 or 13 and ends at either the late teens or by early twenties. It’s beginning is heralded by the onset of pubescence, the stage of rapid physiological growth when reproductive functions and primary sex organs mature and secondary sex characteristics appear. (Eriega , 2006).
Generally speaking, the adolescents (youths) in Nigeria are associated with the problem of antisocial behavior antisocial behaviors have caused much concern to people generally in society. The period breakdown of law and order restiveness and undue violence has characterized communities statistics. Besides, the prevalence of antisocial behaviours among adolescence, have fairly contributed to poor development of infrastructures, one major reason for retarded development in the villages (Ingiahua, 2004). Hence, this study is designed to examine the factors that have contributed to the problem of antisocial behaviors among the adolescents in Port Harcourt local government area of rivers state, Nigeria.
1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
The standard of education in secondary schools have tremendously fallen largely due to increased antisocial behaviours. There are incidents of vandalization of school properly, excessive violation and fighting which bring about indiscriminate killings as a result of peer group pressure and drug addiction, increase anti-social behaviours among in-school adolescent. Hence, this study is to identity the influence of personality and social factors on antisocial behavior among adolescents in Port Harcourt local government area of rivers state, Nigeria.
1.3 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of the study is to determine:
i. If personality factors influence antisocial behaviours among adolescents.
ii. Whether family type factors influence antisocial behavior among adolescents
iii. Peer group factor influence antisocial behavior among adolescents.
iv. If family size factor influence antisocial behaviours among adolescents
v. Whether location (rural or urban ) influence antisocial behaviors among adolescents?
vi. If religion (muslim and christian ) influence antisocial behaviors among adolescents.
1.4 SIGNIFANCE OF THE STUDY
This study will help to re-orientate adolescent and youths and reduce antisocial when we know the exact factors that predispose them to antisocial behaviours. This will be a rightful measure to curb violence among in school adolescents. With the curbing of the anti-social behaviours, society is rest assured of achieving their life goals.
The study will not only suggest positive ways parents, government and school administrators can handle antisocial behaviours among youths but how to effectively identify their symptoms. The study will go a long way in sensitizing and providing the population information that will help them deal with future occurrence among adolescents. It will also assist teachers, parent and other significant person on how to effectively manage and minimize the antisocial behaviours among in-school adolescent.
1.5 SCOPE OF THE STUDY
To investigates personality and social factors as correlates of anti-social behaviours among adolescents. The researcher would limit the study to Secondary School adolescents in Port Harcourt Local Government Area of Rivers State.
1.6 RESEARCHER QUESTION
i. To what extent does personality (extrovert and introvert) factors influence antisocial behaviours among adolescent?
ii. To what extent does family (Nuclear and Extended) type influence antisocial behaviours among adolescent?
iii. To what extent does peer group influence antisocial behavior among adolescents?
iv. To what extent does family size influence antisocial behaviors among adolescent?
v. To what does location (rural or urban) influence antisocial behaviours among adolescent?
vi. To what extent does religion (Muslim and Christian) influence antisocial behaviours among adolescents?
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
In this chapter, review related literature was discussed under the following headings:
• Conceptual Framework
• Theoretical Framework
• Empirical Framework and
• Summary of Literature
2.1 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
CONCEPT OF ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOUR
Antisocial behaviours are disruptive behaviours characterized by covert and overt hostility and international aggression towards others. Antisocial behavior covers a range of issues including substance misuse, drunken, rowdy and nuisance behavior, begging, hate incidents, noise nuisance, animal related problem, vehicle related nuisance, hoax calls and maticiceus communication and prostitution related activity, etc. antisocial behaviour’s is also characterized by a pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation of the rights of others.
Children’s lies, ass differentiated from mere exaggeration of facts, offer sufficient problem to the average teacher and parents. All children lie sometimes since the number and type of lies are simply the product of usual development of bids for attention from one’ peers at the going age at adolescence. The confusions between fact and fancy characterize three to six year-old children are another type of so-called lies which I the by-product of stage of so-called lie which is the by-product of stage of development.
Other children lie playfully, watering to see effect upon the audience. The fact that other children of equal or of less factual experience sometimes believe these stories leads children to take a chance on what adult reaction will be. Some children’s lies are lies of loyalty to protect a friend in trouble or to appear noble in assuming blame and punishment to protect another child. This I likely to happening during the gang age.
Sharing of responsibility for property used by all is an excellent lesson not only in responsibility but also in respect for property. One moral lesson which every child of early school age. (Six to ten) seems to have to learn is not to steal. Scarcely any child of this age fails to have at least one experience in taking something which does not belong to him. This is so frequent at the age of six that Gesell (2006) describing honesty in the six-year old child says:
“His needs are strong. Some of the limits of ownership are weak. Thus, he takes what he sees and wants, regardless of who owns it. At seven, takes home school pencils and some erasers. At eight, the child needs what he wants. If not provided for may take money, which is now meaning fiii in terms of what it will buy”.
Apparently, one experience in taking what does not belong to them in the primary school years is necessary to teach all but a small minority of children the requisite self-control in the face of temptation. This stealing is most often in the form of taking money from the parent’s purse. Children see their parents shop, exchanging the magic coins for things desired. Continuing stealing, of course require special attention since it indicates that something is basically wrong. Such that offences repeated over a long period of time indicate either that the development of conscience is defective, that more basic lessons is self control are needed or that the stealing is satisfying some deep emotional need . This is the case that attention is being focused since it requires clinical attention.
This is another type of behavior characteristic of many children throughout the school age group which must be dealt with intensively if the moral development of such children is to be satisfactory. Among children of school age bullying of other children may result from the example of adults or peers. Occasionally however, it is due to illness or fatigue which ‘sow’ the child’s disposition. Often, it is simply the danger signal or idleness. Such that currently to animal, or other children may simply be curiosity or experimentation with things or with standards when more constructive occupation is lacking.
Bullying may also be due to jealousy or may serve as a compensation for feelings of inferiority. In any case, a child who persistently ‘picks on’ or bullies younger or weaker children needs special attention. sometimes however, bullying could assume the of aggressiveness. That is, a child who feels he cannot get his own way except by intimidating others or except by being offensive may in fact be indicating some emotional inadequacy or poor moral development.
The picture is therefore familiar with many school grounds of the big strong boy who pushes his weight about. He realizes his strength and he is only too read to dominate a young and feeble member of the group. It is equally familiar that such boys always avoid stronger boys of equal physical stamina.
Bullying is hardly ever seen in isolation in the case of the child who bullies his mother by whining, the purpose of sometimes to gain something the other child has. Sometimes, as in the case of brothers and sisters in particular ad in age group in general, jealousy may play part in bullying. Although the beginning of bullying may be an expression of the peer group, success of the need to layout one’s strength competitively against the peer group, success in this attempt often leads to its being resorted to in situation where the child is involved in his own personal gain.
Student absence from school for unexpected reasons is not only anti-social but reserved to as truancy. One important reason that attendance is adopted is that they express public consensus about the value of education. This is because education is thought to be important as a source of individual growth and development, a key to effective and informed citizenship, an access route to better jobs and upward mobility and crucial to a healthy economy.
School participation and attendance question is important for the individual and society. When individual children fail to participate or when schools have large number of students who are continuously absent from school, it becomes a problem. It is a problem for several reasons:
1. When children are not in school they are usually in violation of the law and are defying a widely held expectation that they should be in school. Apart from the consequence this have on individual child and the family, it increases the work load for the school administrators we should at least enforce attendance requirements (Whitehead & Marchell, 2008).
2. Absent children cannot benefit from the education programme that the school offers. Truancy, in the form of absenteeism interrupts the continuity of course which is crucial for learning (Moos & Moss 2003). Not only does the child miss the educational experience, they can become discouraged learners and could withdraw completely. And so, may never gain needed credentials for success to adult roles. This limits the child’s opportunities and growth.
Finally, such children are not only missing educational opportunities may not be very well supervised. This often generates community concerns about delinquency which lead community to blame children who are out of school for neighborhood crimes.
2.1 causes of antissocial behaviour
Generally Eysenck believed that human personality can be determined by our genetic endowment, that is, whether you are an introvert or extrovert, you did not learn it, was genetically inherited (Eysenck in Njoku, 2010). Extrovert is someone who is sociable outgoing and who quickly establishes personal relationship with other. Extroverts enjoy activities like mount aim climbing, gambling, driving cars, they are sociable lively, active assertive, carefree, dominating, verdures one. Introvert which is the opposite side of extraversion is someone who is very quiet, he is not sociable, and he does not like mingling with people. He is passive, pessimistic, shy, egocentric (self centre). He likes studying and being alone, (Lucas and Fujita in Njoku, 2010).
PSYCHOTICISM: it is an independent personality factor, people with high level of psychoticism are often egocentric, cold, non-conformity. (They like doing things in their own way), impulsive, hostile, aggressive, suspicious, psychopathic and antisocial, whereas people with low level of psychoticism tend to be altruistic, highly socialized, empathic, caring, cooperative and conventional.
EXTRAVERSION: is someone who is sociable, outgoing and who quickly establishes personal relationships with others. Extroverts enjoy activities like mountain climbing, gambling, driving cars, they are sociable, lively and active assertive, carefree, dominating ventures. An introvert – which is the other side of extraversion is someone who is very quiet, he is not sociable, and he does not like mingling with people. He is passive, pessimistic, shy, egocentric (self centered). He likes studying and being alone.
NEUROTICISM: individuals who posses this have the tendency to experience negative emotions, neuroticism has neurotic traits such as anxiety, hysteria and obsessive compulsory disorder. Generally Han Eysenck believed that human personality can be determined by our genetic endowment, that is, whether you are an introvert or extrovert, you did not learn it, it was generally inherited, (Eysenck in Njoku, 2010). So they believe that antisocial behaviours are not learned but they are inherited from their family.
LOCATION: Anti-social behavior and disorder is a high concern in both Urban and rural communities, Chauhon (1991), examines the role of the ecology, homes, schools and other societal factors in explaining the incidence of antisocial behavior in rural and urban communities. He believes that antisocial behavior comes from highly and diversely populated areas and especially congested wards of cities. This explains why more antisocial are found at the different shore and water sides round rural and urban cities. The nearer is given locality is to the centre of the city, the higher will be its rate of antisocial behaviors. To substantiate this, reports (ready cited) indicate that more antisocial behaviours are found in industrialized town, like Port Harcourt, warn, and Lagos, to mention but a few.
FAMILY TYPE: Family type like the single parent families, this has been regarded as a factor that encourages antisocial behaviours. According to Adebu Miz, (1998) the emotional climate of the child’s home life is probably the important factor in the development of antisocial behaviours, that is to say that must acts of antisocial often comes from one parent resulting from separation, divorce, death or prolonged absence of a parent. Ruther (1971) confirms the worth of other n findings when he indicated that antisocial and conduct disorders are associated with parental divorce, or separation, but not with parents deaths. This suggest that it may be the discord and disharmony rather than the breakup of the family, as such, which leads to antisocial behaviours. Reviewing a set of other studies, Ruther (1971) further found that the antisocial rates were nearly doubled for boys whose parents were divorced or separated is compared to normal, but for boys whose parent is dead, the antisocial rate was only slightly higher.
FAMILY SIZE: The more children in a family. the greater the risk of antisocial behaviors this is because each of the children have their own pattern of traits and the higher the number of the children the problems of antisocial behaviours. The children become adolescents and thus give rise to the problems of generation gap. Young people influence by their peers may do things that their parents do not understand. Unfortunately, most parents start to blame each other for the misbehavior of their adolescent children.
PEER GROUP: This group (peers) is the most susceptible to antisocial behavior, the adolescent being usually blindly loyal to peer groups over and above the family, and even school authorities. These compelling influences of the peer group sometimes push the adolescent to behave antisocial (Adeloye, 1990), Amos (1990) also asserts that some adolescent are strongly motivated to do what the group thinks is right even if it conflicts with their own values.
2.3 Theories Personality And Antisocial Behaviour
Theories of personality are sets of principles used to explain behaviours an experiences relating to personality. Schultz and Schultz (2005) are of the opinion that personality theories must be able to clarify and explain the data of personality by arranging the data into a coherent work. Personality theories should help as to predict and understand behavior. If they do, then they may be used to more meaningful and acceptable behavior. Under the theories of personality, Hans Eysenck extracted three super factors as dimensions of personality and they are psychotic ism, Extraversion and Neuroticism.
Behavioural Theory And Antisocial Behaviours
The most important principle of behavior changes according to its immediate consequences increase the frequency of response, that is, strength behavior, while annoying or dissatisfying or unpleasant consequences decrease the frequency of a response. They believe that antisocial behaviours can be change through reinforcement or reward and punishment, and that this behaviours comes as a result of the need to satisfy primary reinforces which to events such as good, water, security, warmth and sex, etc. or as a result of satisfying basic biological needs of the organisms such as hunger, thirst, shelter drivers etc.
Social Learning Theory And Antisocial Behaviour
This viewpoint states that the most important aspects of our behavior are learned from other persons in society, we learn to be who we are from our family, friends and culture. They believe that antisocial behaviours are learned from in appropriate experiences of classical conditioning, operant conditioning and modeling. In other words, individuals are antisocial because their environment taught them to be. Albert Bandura as one of the major proponent of this of this theory said that humans learn through observation or by example. He also said that most human behaviors are learned by following a model rather than through the processes of classical and operant conditioning.
This where viewers learn behaviours from watching other and may imitate them. They believe that antisocial behaviors of adolescents is as result of what they are watching and hearing through madia.
Personality And Antisoacial Behaviour:
Some studies have shown a positive relationship between personality and antisocial behavior, Galto(1809) and Dugdale (1977)have proved that intelligence and crimes are inherited from generation to generation. It is reported that Dugdale studies 750 members of the fake family have found over seven generation that mental deficiency was predominant in this highly inbred group. In showing relationship between intelligence and antisocial, Heally and Bronner (1957) in that study reported that 371 antisocial behaviors were within the sub-normal range of intelligence. They concluded that antisocial behavior have five to ten times likely to occur among the mentally handicapped than among the normal group. Although personality, as the name implies, may play a role in the development of antisocial behaviours, it does not explain the role of factors outside the individual especially those from the social.
LOCATION AND ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOUR
Chauhon(1991) examines the role of the ecology, homes, school and other societal factors in explaining the incidence of antisocial behaviors. Ecological factors is defined as the physical surrounding and climate that impact on the growth and development (including behaviour)of organism, some ecological studies by Burgress and Park (1926) have slum the following:
Antisocial behavior come from highly and diversely populated areas and especially congested wards of cities. This explains why more antisocial behaviours are so found at the different shore and watersides round rural and urban.
The social phenomenon in the City was related to antisocial behaviours. High percentage of antisocial behaviours comes from manufacture commercial plants and highly industrialized parts of the city. To substantiate this reports, (already cited) indicated that more antisocial behaviours are found in industrialized towns. Like Calabar, Warn, Aba and Lagos to mention but a few.
The nearer a given locality is to the centre of the City, the higher will be its rate of antisocial behaviors. Slum areas of the city breed highest percentage of antisocial behaviours (for instance Ajegunle area of Lagos).
Family Type And Antisocial Behaviours
The strongest predictors of early on-set violence include family type, family size and parental anti-social history. Early temperamental difficulties in the child coupled with parental antisocial behaviours that interfere with proactive parenting are also thought to be important in the development of early onset behaviours problems (Williams, 1990). Hence this has been regarded as a factor that encourages antisocial behaviours. According to Adebunmiz (1990) the emotional climate of the child’s home life is probably the most important factor in the development of antisocial behavior.
Yoloye (1971) carried out a study on the background of two types of home and its influence on children’s behaviours. Yoloye said that polygamous parents had greater difficulties in getting their children into secondary schools. He went further to say that many of the children polygamous homes were left with their mother to care for which lead to antisocial behaviours that means that the polygamous family system reduces the chance of children getting secondary education and also reduced the chances of achieving their goals. This point to the influence of family factor or background that affect the behavior of their children.
Egwueche (1981) in his investigation of four thousand (4,000) in-school adolescents from Ibadan in Nigeria, found that 88% of the adolescents from extended family situation were influenced by grandparents, aunts and uncles in discipline at home, 92% complained of lack of clear standards to follow, 91% complained of being unable to study at home because of their being sent on errands by relatives. The study also found that 25% were bed waters indicating probable emotional problems when compared with 6% of adolescents from nuclear families; 78% justified the need to lie as a means of escaping blames and punishments from all sides and 73% admitted regular stealing. The extended family system, he said appeared to the less favourable than nuclear family for the emotional and academic well-being of the adolescents.
Family Size And Antisocial Behaviours:
Writing on the effects of the size of the family on the adolescents, Egwuche (1981) noted that family size determines to a great extent the relative amount of physical attention and time which each adolescent gets from his parent. He illustrated that too many children in the home entails less amount of attention in term of time available to the parents for each child, that a mother will be able to cope with and assisting her children with their school work and behavior. If she has only two or three of them, but this becomes more difficult if she had more. Evan assert that parental assistance to children provide greater encouragement and motivation towards behavior development and learning. Thus with fewer children, parents were able to look into behavior and school work of the children, ask questions and help them out with any problem arising from their behavior and home work. Also in an investigation conducted in Britain by Musgrave (2004), it was found that the greater the number of children in the family, the lower the measured IQ of the subsequent children. The tendency was found at each social level through the factors did not become very significant until the family constrained four or more. It is thought that this is due to the fact that in large families, there is no adequate spacing of children. The children of such families therefore do not have the opportunity to develop their innate intellectual capabilities to the full before the arrival of another child. Even after the arrival of a new baby, attention is usually concentrated on the new infant often at the expense of the older siblings. This situation become more acute as the number of children in the family increases and point is reached when the parents can no longer cope with giving individual attention to each of the children.
Peer Droup And Antisocial Behaviours:
Shaw (1995) noted that peer influence on adolescents antisocial behavior. Usually appear developmentally later than individual and family influences. Many children entering school with wrong peers ended up not doing academically well in their studies. Mikay (1981), mentioned that association with deviant peer is related to increase offending and in a minority cases the joining of gangs. Since it has been said that “birds of the same feather flock together” hence “bad company corrupts” he also mentioned that antisocial peers influences non-antisocial peer especially during the period of their transition to adolescence. Also, this group is the most susceptible to antisocial behaviors. The adolescent period is characterized by the adolescent being usually blindly loyal to peer groups over and above the family and even school authorities. These compelling influences of the peer group sometimes pus the adolescent to behave antisocially (Adeloye, 1990), Amos (1990) also asserts that some adolescents are strongly motivated to do what the group thinks is right, even if at conflicts with their own values.
2.5 Summary Of Literature Review
This chapter tries to analyze and review what other authors have said about antisocial behaviours. However, the concept of antisocial is a serious problem among in-school adolescent in Port Harcourt Local Government Area of Rivers State. Stealing, truancy, vandalism, terrorism, drug addiction, sexual assault, to mention but a few. Poor orientation among adolescents in their early years of life is a major cause of antisocial behavior. Some factors were critically analyzed which includes personality factors, family type factor, family size factor, location factor and peer group factor. Also some theories were critically analyzed or looked into which includes personality theory, social learning theory and behavioural theory.
This chapter highlights how the study is carried out, it considered the population, the sampling technique sample, size and the instrument used in data collection basically for personality and social factors as correlates of antisocial behavior among in-school adolescent in Port Harcourt Local Government Area of Rivers State. For clarity of purpose the method is discussed under the following headings:
3.1 RESEARCH DESIGN
The research is a descriptive survey designed. A descriptive study that systematically and accurately describe educational parts in a defined population. The present study is a survey in-school adolescent in Port Harcourt Local Government Area to find out the personality and social factors as correlates antisocial behaviours.
The target population fir the study is all in-school adolescent in Port Harcourt Local Government Area of River State. The focus of the study is the area, and this category of persons were selected on the assumption that they have already passed through childhood stage going towards adulthood, and also on the fact that this antisocial behaviours is mostly found among persons of this stage.
3.3 AREA OF STUDY
This study was conducted in Port Harcourt Government Area of Rivers State only the above is chosen based on the fact the researcher is conversant with the area because the researcher resides and is very aware of the environment.
3.4 SAMPLE AND SAMPLE TECHNIQUE
For effectiveness, the method adopted for the selection of the study sample is the simple random sampling technique.
The sample consisted of three hundred (300) adolescents selected randomly and independently. There are one hundred and eight in-school adolescents male and one hundred and twenty in-school adolescents female selected all were randomly selected. The researchers consider this sample to be a representative of the total number of in-school adolescent in the area.
3.5 INSTRUMENT FOR DATA COLLECTION
The instrument used for collection Adolescents Antisocial Behavior Scale (AABS) on a modified 4 point likert type scale of Strongly Agree (SA), Agree (A), Strongly Disagree (SD) and Disagree (D).
3.6 VALIDITY OF INSTRUMENT
To ensure the face and content validity of the instrument, the terms of the questionnaire will be given to three experts in Department of educational Psychology, guidance and Counseling. They all agreed that the item are measuring what they pupports to measure, making the instrument to possess validity.
3.7 RELIABILLITY OF INSTRUMENT
A pilot test of their instrument was carried out in Port Harcourt Local Government Area. Copies of the questionnaire were administered through a test-retest method to a randomly drawn sample of 300 respondents. A retest of the same instrument was carried out after a week’s interval. The initial and retest scores of the sample were correlated using Pearson’s Product Moment correlation Formular. A relaiability coefficient of 0.75 was obtained. This value is high enough to permit the use of the instrument for this study.
3.8 PROCEDURE FOR DATA COLLECTION
The main method of collecting data is the administration of questionnaires to in-school adolescents by distributing it in all the selected areas. However the in-school adolescent will not be allowed to respond to the statement on the questionnaire until they will be made to understand the differences between the concepts of strongly agree, disagree. Also they will be assured of confidentially of their responses. Complete questionnaire will be collected and analyzed.
3.9 METHOD OF DATA ANALYSIS
Data collected in course of this were analyzed by arithmetic mean and percentage.
PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA
This chapter is concerned with presentation and analysis of data collected. Questionnaire was used for data collection and the presentations of analysis of data were done with simple percentage tables.
4.1 research question one
To what extent does personality (extrovert and introvert) factors influence antisocial behavior among secondary school adolescents?
TABLE 4.1: Showing the influence of personality on adolescent’s antisocial behavior.
VARIABLE AGREE SCORES % DISAGREE %
Extrovert 224 71 76 27
Introvert 90 100 286 100
Total 314 100 286 100
From the table 4.1 above, 224 secondary school adolescents representing 71% and 90 secondary school adolescents representing 29% accepted positively that personality (Extrovert and introvert) factors influence anti-social behavior among secondary school adolescents while 76 secondary school adolescents representing 27% and 210 of the respondents representing 73% responded negatively that personality (extrovert and introvert) factors influence anti-social behavior in-school adolescents.
4.2 research question two
To what extent does family (Nuclear and Extended) types of influences antisocial behaviours among secondary school adolescents?
TABLE 4.2: Showing the influence of family types of adolescent anti-social behavior.
VARIABLES AGREE SCORES % DISAGREE %
Nuclear 186 58 114 41
Extended family 134 42 166 59
Total 314 100 286 100
From the 4.2 above, 186 secondary school adolescents representing 58% and 134 secondary school studiers representing 42% accepted positive that family (Nuclear and Extended) types of factors influence anti-social behavior among secondary school adolescents. While 114 of the respondents representing 41% and 166 of the respondents representing 59% disagree negatively that family (Nuclear and Extended) types influence anti-social behaviours among secondary school adolescents.
4.3 research question three
To what extent does peer group influence antisocial behaviours among secondary school adolescents?
TABLE 4.3: Showing the influence of peer group on secondary school adolescent anti-social behaviours
VARIABLES AGREE SCORES % DISAGREE %
Cliques 248 86 52 17
Isolates 46 14 260 83
Total 314 100 286 100
From the table 4.3 above, 248 secondary school adolescents representing 14% agree positively that peer group influence antisocial behavior among in-school adolescents. While 53% of the respondents representing 17% and 260 of the respondents representing 83% disagree that peer group (cliques and isolates) factors influence anti-social behavior among secondary school adolescents.
4.4 research question four
To what extent does family size (1-4 and 5 and above) factor influence antisocial behaviours among secondary school aadolescents?
TABLE 4.4: Showing the influence of family size on adolescent antisocial behavior.
VARIABLE AGREE SCORES % DISAGREE %
Family siz 1-4 20 10 280 71
Family size 5-above 188 90 112 29
Total 314 100 286 100
From table 4.4 above, 20 secondary school adolescents representing 10% of the respondents accepted positively that family size (1-4) factors influence anti-social behavior among in-school adolescents. While 280 secondary adolescents representing 71% of the respondents responded negatively that family size (1-4) factors influence anti-social behaviours among in-school adolescents representing 90% of the respondent accepted positively that family size (5 and above)factors influence antisocial behaviours among in-school adolescents. While 112 secondary school adolescents representing 29 percent of the respondent accepted negatively that family size (5 and above) factors influence antisocial behaviours among secondary school adolescents.
4.5 research question five
To what extent does location (rural and urban) influence antisocial behaviours among school adolescents?
VARIABLE AGREE SCORES % DISAGREE %
Rural 142 36 158 76
Urban 250 64 50 24
Total 314 100 286 100
From the table 4.5 above, 142 secondary school adolescents representing 36 percent of the respondents and 250 secondary school adolescents representing 64 percent of the respondents accepted positively that location (rural/urban) factors influence antisocial behaviours among secondary school adolescents. While 158 secondary school adolescents representing 76% and 50 in-school adolescents representing 24% accepted negatively that location (urban rural) factors influence antisocial behavior among the secondary school adolescents.
4.6 RESEARCH QUESTION SIX
To what doe (Muslim and Christian influence antisocial behaviours among secondary school adolescents?)
TABLE 4.6: Showing the influence of religion on adolescent’s antisocial behavior.
VARIABLE AGREE SCORES % DISAGREE %
Extrovert 160 92 140 33
Introvert 14 8 286 67
Total 314 100 286 100
From table 4.6 above, 160 secondary adolescents representing 92 percent of the respondent accepted positively that religion (Muslim) influence antisocial behaviours among secondary school adolescents. While 140 in-school adolescents representing 33 percent of the respondent accepted negatively that religion (Muslim) factors influence antisocial behaviours among secondary school adolescents.
14 secondary school adolescent representing 8 of the respondent accepted that religion (Christian) influence antisocial behaviours among secondary school adolescents. While 286 in-school adolescents representing 67 percent of the respondent accepted negatively that religion (Christian) factors influence antisocial behaviours among secondary school adolescents.
SUMMARY OF FINDING
Six research questions were evaluated ad also percentages score was gotten on adolescent antisocial behavior scale from the analysis that was shown though the results that the respondents were positively affirmed to personality (Extrovert) factor, family (Nuclear), factor, peer group (cliques) factor, family size (5-6 above), location (urban) factor, and religion(Muslim) factor and negative to personality (introvert), family (extended), peer group (isolates), family size (1-4), location (rural) and religion (Christian ) factors. The secondary school adolescent’s antisocial behaviours are influenced by the small member of the family reason because outside parents no other person to talk to the children when they do badly. The secondary school adolescent’s antisocial behavior is as a result of friends in both school and outside school. The secondary school adolescents antisocial behavior I influenced by overpopulation of the family. The secondary school adolescent antisocial behaiviours are influenced by the lifestyle of people in developed areas. The secondary school adolescents antisocial behaviours are influenced by Muslim belief which state that anybody that dies in war will go to heaven.
DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION, IMPLICATION
Various result obtained from this study were discussed in this chapter. Also highlighted are the conclusion, recommendations, implications, limitations and suggestions for further study.
5.1 Discussion of findings
From the results obtained in table one, the percentage of secondary school adolescents who strongly agree, agree with personality factors influence antisocial behavior positively is more than those who disagree, strongly disagree, with negative personality factors influence antisocial behavior. This shows that secondary school adolescents have positive responses to the personality factors influence antisocial behavior. This answers research question one. In-school adolescents responses to the personality influence antisocial behavior positive. Research question two, to what extent does family type influence antisocial behaviours, table 2 shows that the secondary school adolescents who respondents of strongly agree; agree to positive family type influence antisocial behavior is more than those that respondent negative.
Research question three seeks to find out what extent does peers group factors influence antisocial behavior. From the result to obtain in table three, the percentage of secondary school adolescents who strongly agree and agree with positive peer group (cliques) factor is more than those that respondents negative. While those who strongly disagree and disagree with negative peer group (isolates) factor is more that those that respondent positively.
Research question four, seeks to find out to what extent does family size influence antisocial behaviours. Table four illustrates that the percentage of secondary school adolescents ho respondent negative in family size (1-4) factor is more than those that respondents positively. While those who responded positively in family size (5-6 above) factor is more than those that responded negatively.
Research question five, seeks to find out to what extent does location influence antisocial behavior. Table five illustrates that the percentage of in-school adolescent who responded positively in location factors influence antisocial behavior is more than those who responded negatively. This shows that location factor influence antisocial behavior positively.
Research question six, seeks to find out to what extent does religion influence anti-social behaviours. Table six shows that the percentages of secondary school adolescents who responded negatively to religion influence antisocial bahaviour negatively.
The personality and social factors as correlates of antisocial behavior among in-social adolescents in Port Harcourt Local Government Area Rivers state have been successfully explored and found to be personality factors, family size factors, and location factors as the factors that lead to antisocial behaviours. However, data analyzed shows that secondary school adolescents have positive response to personality factors influence antisocial behavior, to family type factors, influence antisocial behaviours, to peer group factors influence antisocial behaviours, to family size factor influence antisocial behaviours and location factors influence antisocial behavior.
In conclusion, there might be other factors which must have been responsible for antisocial behaviours and the positive responses by the secondary school adolescent.
5.3 Implications of the findings
Finding show that personality and social factors as correlates of anti-social behaviours among secondary school adolescent as mentioned in the foregoing chapters have some serious implications for the educational policy planning in the nation, measures have been suggested on show the evil effects may be arrested in order for the country to achieve the goals set for herself as outline in the national policy on education. Also the issue of anti-social behaviours must be well addressed for the sake of further generations. This is because what affect our secondary school adolescents today will definitely affect future ones even those yet unborn.
The main limitation of the study is that materials were not easily obtained, even when the reputable universities libraries and the internet were consulted. Furthermore, the geographical location of the ten communities sampled for study in Port Harcourt Local Government Area for the distribution and collection of the questionnaires was a costly and difficult activity.
5.6 suggestions for further research
Based on the limitation of this study, the following suggestions are put forward for further studies. What factors could be extended to investigate the influence of such factors as inadequate knowledge of parents, the type of environments, socio-economic background of parents etc on the attitudes of in-school adolescent towards antisocial. This similar study could be carried out with large number of respondents. This study could be carried out in all the Local Government Area of Nigeria so as to have a generalized opinion on personality and social factors as correlates antisocial among in-school adolescents. A follow-up study could also be conducted after several years to find out if there has been any change in the attitude of in-school adolescent towards anti-social behaviour both in-school and outside the school.
Abdel Kadir (2004). Marriage family life in islam. Pillar pub.
Cherian, V. I. (1994). Corporal punishment and academic achievement of Xhosa children from polygamous and monogamous families, journal social polygamous and monogamous families, journal of sociology and psychology, 134:387-389 (151) (medicine)
Andrew, M.C (2003). A dictionary of psychology. Oxford
Baharat sadasiran (2002). Happy families-Hux and the global family,
Humanscape New York.
Benjamin, B.L (2004). Psychology an introduction. Eight edition edition
Cherian, V.I. (1994). Corporal punishment and academic
Enakeno. E.G (2006).Understanding Developmental psychology. Abe
Eysenck, H.J (1982). Personality, Genetics and Behaviour
Garmefski, N; & Okma, S. (1996). Addition-risk and aggressive/ criminal
Behaviour in adolescence: influence of family, school and peers.
Journal of adolescence, 19,503-512.
Hazan, C.,Cardonret, R. & Zeifman, D. (1994). Sex and the psychology tether.
In advances in personal Relationship- Attachment processes in Adulthood
Bartholomew pub. London
Ingiahuna, E.T. (2004). Human societies: An introduction to sociology.
Amethyst and colleagues pub. Port Harcourt.
Joyce N. (2010). Personality and its theories: Aduudo Owerri.
Nmom, O.C. ( 2002). Man’s Basic Institutions and social environment.
Pearl pub. Port Harcourt
Seiftge-Krenke I. (2003). Testing therories of romantic development
From adolescence to young Adulthood-evidence of a development
Sequence. International journal of Behavioural Development,
Steinberg L. & morris A.S (2001). Adolescent Development.
Annual Review of Psychology.