Socialization Values of Hard Work for Children: A Study on Parental Perception in the Rural-Urban Context of Bangladesh

Socialization Values of Hard Work for Children: A Study on Parental Perception in the Rural-Urban Context of Bangladesh

S.M. Shahidul

Department of Education, Pundra University of Science & Technology, Bogura, Bangladesh

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.8100055

Received: 25 September 2024; Accepted: 03 October 2024; Published: 02 November 2024

ABSTRACT

This study attempts to examine the unfolding issue of whether and how parental preferences of hard work as the most important quality for their children differ in the rural-urban context of Bangladesh, as this issue is not much clear in the previous literature. The present study analyzed the data from the World Value Survey (WVS), wave-7 (2017-2022) of Bangladesh. Crosstab analysis with a chi-square test was used to clarify whether there is a significant distinction in parental choice among the items of socialization values for their children. Binary logistic regression was performed to determine the effect of parental class background and their residential area on the observed variable (hard work), and finally interaction effects between residential area and parental social class were measured. Results show that parents of rural regions less prefer the “importance of hard work” compared to parents who live in urban regions. Parents with low-level social background status usually prefer hard work for their children more compared to the parents with upper-level social class background status. Finally, according to the interaction effect of the residential region, it was observed that despite having a low level of class background status, parents who live in rural regions usually do not prefer hard work for their children like the parents of urban regions in Bangladesh.

Keywords: Socializations, Perception, Values, Hard work, Social class.

INTRODUCTION

It makes sense that hard work is frequently viewed as a virtue. Success in many faces of life, such as relationships, careers, and education, can be attained via hard work. However, what factors underlie diligence? Why is there a difference in the likelihood of hard work among individuals? The psychology of hard work is influenced by various factors. The belief in one’s own ability to succeed, or self-efficacy, is one crucial component. Individuals that have a high sense of their own abilities are more inclined to set difficult objectives for themselves and to keep going when things get difficult. They also tend to credit their own diligence for their accomplishments more often than chance or outside influences.

Intrinsic motivation drive to pursue goals for their own sake rather than for recognition from others is a significant component of the psychology of hard labor. An individual’s likelihood of finding their employment enjoyable and fulfilling is higher when they possess intrinsic motivation. Additionally, even in the face of difficulty, they are more likely to persevere and put in a lot of effort. There are several more elements that can influence the psychology of hard labor in addition to self-efficacy and intrinsic motivation. These include character qualities like diligence and perseverance and moral principles like the value of hard work. In order to represent work-related variables, researchers from different disciplines have used the terms work values, work ethics, work orientations, and work attitudes, sometimes with only slight differences in meaning (Sparrow et al. 2010). For instance, the terms “evaluative attitudes” and “values” were used interchangeably in one of the first sources on work values, Cieciuch et al. (2015), which serves as the basis for many modern studies. In a similar vein, work ethic is defined in the European Values Survey as the extent to which people consider hard work to be inherently beneficial and place it at or near the center of their life. This definition is strongly tied to work values. Arslan (2001) refers to “work ethic values” as a general positive attitude toward working hard and the value of hard work.

Although some people are more driven to work hard naturally than others, numerous factors can influence the value of hard work. Sociologists to explain the children’s socialization process indicate that parenting style has a significant impact in this case, which is called inter-generational transmission of values (Friedlmeier and Trommsdorff, 2011). Schonpflug (2001) also identified parenting style as a form of “transmission belt” that enhances the transmission of values from parents to their children. From this point of view, this study argues that as children, the socialization process is allied with parental socioeconomic class background and other cultural elements; hence, parental values of hard work for their children are also determined by the parental residential aspects, which means rural-urban context and their class backgrounds as well. Therefore, the research question of this study is to find out whether and how parental preferences of hard work as the most important quality for their children differ in the rural-urban context of Bangladesh when children are socialized by the parents in the family.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Parents are a significant factor in a child’s work development because they are their first and primary role models in the workplace (Cemalcilar, Secinti, & Sumer, 2018). Perception is one kind of experience in which an individual views and believes as well as interpret something using sensory impression. Hence, parental perception on children values refers how parents process or interpret their children behavior to fulfill their needs. This is because, children are typically considered as various types of needs for their parents such as economic needs, social needs and psychological needs as well. And parental expectations for their children depend on parental views and demand which yield from socio-cultural environment and economic factors of the family as well. Various studies since Kohn’s foundational research have linked parents’ class position and occupational characteristics, as well as parents’ work values, to their children’s work values ( M. K. Johnson & Mortimer, 2015). Parents’ social class as well as work experience also influence on the values of raising their children. Research examined that the relationship between parental social class and their views of children socialization values mediated by their work experience. Ataca et  al. (2005) examined that parents are the provider of norms for the their offspring. Studies of
Tam and Lee (2010) described the values that parents like to their children. It highlighted the need to consider the concept of norms in understanding family socialization. Study of Tulviste and Ahtonen (2007) found that value of rising children was not depend on the gender of the children but it depended on the cultural context of the society. Hoff et al. (2002) also examined that the socialization values hold parents shape the future for their children. This study also found that parents’ socialization values for the children substantially differ by various types of background factors such as education, occupation, income, neighborhood and gender. Despite ample of the studies have been examined how socialization values hold parents for their children effect on the future of the children, however it has still unanswered an issue whether or how parental preference of hard work as the most.

SOCIALIZATION PROCESS AND WORK VALUES TRANSMISSION IN ADOLESCENTS

Traditional sociological and psychological research on value formation, including career development, has mostly concentrated on youth, Mortimer et al., (2015). This emphasis aligns with the idea that adolescent development is the main identity development stage that includes job-related characteristics including work values, interests in the workplace, and choice of career Personnel. But according to more recent research, adolescence is a crucial but not exclusive stage for identity development, expanding the scope of socialization research to include socialization that takes place before and beyond adolescence (Mortimer et al., 2015). Given the dearth of structured pathways connecting education to the workplace in the United States, the process of developing a work-related identity may take particularly long (Kerckhoff, 2003; Mortimer et al., 2015). In the United States, young people frequently “flounder” in their early years of the workforce, working a series of unconnected occupations and going through spells of unemployment (Vuolo, Mortimer, & Staff, 2014). Socialization models place equal emphasis on the child observing the events and conduct of their parents as much as on direct instruction. Parents discuss their job with their children, and children listen to their parents discussing work with others and with each other when it comes to the development of work values. There are occasions when kids get to go to their parents’ jobs. Children become more conscious of their parents’ employment experiences as they get older, as well as how their parents view and interpret them. Children have the chance to learn from their parents about the things that matter to them when it comes to work and the things that should be taken into account when deciding what kind of work to pursue. As children and parents are in considerably closer proximity during childhood and adolescence than they are as adults, socialization mostly takes place during this time. In a model of Hitlin & Piliavin (2004) linked parents’ occupations to children’s values through the influence work had on parents’ own values and their subsequent approach to parenting.  Authors examined that children whose fathers experience high level of self-direction in their work their children also experience high level of self-direction. Conversely, children whose father experience low level of self-direction their children also experience low level of self-direction in work. Various studies since Kohn’s foundational research have linked parents’ class position and occupational characteristics, as well as parents’ work values, to their children’s work values ( M. K. Johnson & Mortimer, 2015; Porfeli & Vondracek, 2007). The authors also found that   both mothers’ and fathers’ education levels and occupational self-direction were positively associated with their adolescent children’s intrinsic work values.

METHODS

Data

The present study accessed data from the World Value Survey (WVS), the international research platform. This study analyzed the data of wave 7 (2017-2022) of Bangladesh. The target sample size was 1,200 respondents. It was a nationwide representative survey based on a representative selection of rural and urban sample sites and the class background of the respondents. Parents (respondents) were asked the question: Here is the list of qualities of 11 items that children can be encouraged to learn at home. Parents were asked to choose up to five items that they considered to be the most important qualities for their children. The qualities are: importance of good manners, independence, hard work, feeling of responsibility, imagination, tolerance and respect for other people, thrift saving money and things, determination, perseverance, religious faith, unselfishness, and obedience.

Analytical Strategy:

To identify the most important quality for their children from those 11 items of socialization values, the current study conducted crosstab analysis with a chi-square test to clarify whether there is a statistically significant distinction in parental choice of socialization values for their children. Binary logistic regression was performed to determine the effect of parental class background and their residential area on the observed variable (hard work). This is because responses on the outcome variable were collected in a dichotomous manner in which the importance of the hard work of the children was considered “yes” and non-important responses were considered “no.” It was conducted in three models, in which model-1 and model-2 were conducted to find out the effects of residential and parental social effects, respectively, on the outcome variable. At last, interaction effects between residential area and parental social class were measured in model 3 to determine whether and how the parents of rural areas with low levels of class background affect the outcome variable of hard work. SPSS version 22 was used to perform the analysis of this study.

Interaction effect: The regression method usually measures two kinds of effects called main effect or simple effect and interaction effect. Main effect occurs between independent variable and a depended response variable. Interaction effect is relationship between two independent variables and how this relationship affects to the dependents variable. For instance, increasing food intake may increase weight but weight gaining also depends on a person’s age, means the relationship between food taking and age. In this study, it was measured how the relationship between parental class background and their living area effect on the outcome variable of hard work.

RESULTS

The results in Table 1 exhibit that the percentage of parents with working class, lower class, and lower middle class status is higher in rural areas (74.1%, 81.0%, and 77.8%, respectively) compared to the parents who live in urban areas (25.9%, 19.0%, and 22.2%, respectively) in Bangladesh. Parents with self-employment status and people engaged in home not otherwise employed are higher in rural areas (83.5% and 76.6%, respectively) compared to the rate of urban areas (16.5% and 23.4%, respectively) of Bangladesh. Likewise, the rate of parents with low levels of education and income is higher in rural areas (77% and 68.4%, respectively) compared to the rate in urban areas (23.0% and 31.6%, respectively) of Bangladesh.

Table: 1. Rural Urban differences of Parental Social Background Status (%).

Source: World Values Survey Data, Wave-7

Results on proportional analysis (table 2) exhibit that parental perception of child socialization values differ in rural urban settings. Although parental perceptions of child qualities differ by their residential areas, all the differences are not statistically significant except one quality, which is the importance of hard work. The result in this respect shows that 57.10 percent of urban parents prefer hard work for their children, compared to 49.90 percent for rural parents, and the difference is statistically significant as the p-value of the chi-square is.03, which is less than.05.

Table: 2. Proportional Analysis for Rural Urban Differences in Parental Perception on Child Socialization values (N=1200).

Source: World Values Survey Data, Wave-7.

Table: 3. Result of Logistic Regression Models; Effect of Residential Area and Parental Social Class on Importance of Hard Work for the Children. N= 1200

P* <.05, P** <.01, P*** <.001, Source: Author Calculation, World Values Survey Data,Wave-7.

Model Fitness: The model fitness indices show that the value of R-square in model-1 is 0.038 which implies that all the control variables can account for a 3.8% variation in the income outcome. However, after adding the independent variable (loan of TMSS) the value of R-square in the driven model-2 becomes increases which are 0.068. Consequently, the R-square change in model-2 exhibits the value 0.030 which means the contribution of new predictors explains an extra 3% variation in the outcome. This contribution of adding new predictors on the outcome is statistically significant when change statistics of F value is statistically significant as well (65.352, P<.001). The change statistics, therefore, tell about the difference made by adding new predictors to the model.

Results of regression analysis (table 3) in model 3 show that parental preference for the importance of hard work for their children differs in residential contexts, in which parents of rural areas less prefer the “importance of hard work” compared to the parents who live in urban areas of Bangladesh, and the result is statistically significant (-0.514**). Results on parental social class background status exhibit that parents with lower class, working class, and lower middle class backgrounds prefer “importance of hard work” more for their children compared to the parents with upper class background status in Bangladesh, as all the coefficients in this regard show positive and statistically significant (0.136**, 0.655**, and 0.472**, respectively) values as well. It implies that if the percent of parents who have a low level of social class background status increase, then their preference of the importance of hard work for their children also increases. In short, parents with low social background status usually prefer hard work for their children more compared to the parents with upper social background status.

Although parental low levels of social class status have a positive effect on parental preference of hard work for their children, interesting results show in the analysis of the interaction effect. In which parental low levels of social class status show negative effects when they interact with the rural area. In this respect, results show that parents with lower class, working class, and lower middle class status in rural areas have a negative effect on parental preference for the importance of hard work for their children, and all the coefficients are statistically significant (-0.642**, -0.110**, and -0.279**, respectively). It means if the percent of parents with low levels of class background status in rural areas increases, then the likelihood of parental preference for the importance of hard work for their children decreases. Hence, according to the interaction effect of the residential region, it was observed that despite having a low level of class background status, parents who live in rural regions usually do not prefer hard work for their children like the parents of urban regions in Bangladesh.

DISCUSSION

Results of this study show that parents of rural areas less prefer the “importance of hard work” compared to the parents who live in urban areas of Bangladesh. Results also indicate that parents with a low level of social background status usually prefer hard work for their children more compared to parents with an upper level of social background status. However, despite having a low level of class background status, parents who live in rural regions usually do not prefer hard work for their children like the parents of urban regions in Bangladesh. There are several reasons why parents of rural regions prefer hard work less for their children compared to the parents of urban areas of Bangladesh. The most valued reasons are that most of the parents of rural regions are self-employed and engaged in informal sectors, especially in agriculture like fishing, livestock farming, shelf-made shopping, etc. On the other hand, it is noteworthy that formal employment is more common in urban regions than in rural ones in Bangladesh. The informal job sectors usually require less competence compared to the formal jobs. Therefore, parents need to prepare their children to be competitive, skilled, and hard workers for attaining quality jobs in urban areas, which are less important in the jobs sector of rural areas of Bangladesh.

A person’s level of hard work might be influenced by their life circumstances. For instance, someone could be more driven to work hard to overcome obstacles if they are in a difficult work environment or having financial issues. Living costs in urban areas are usually higher compared to the cost of rural areas of Bangladesh, hence, people need to do hard work to overcome the difficult circumstances of living in urban areas. Consequently, parents of urban areas try to instill a hard-working attitude in their children in the socialization process in the family.

CONCLUSION

From the analysis of this study, it would be concluded that though child work ethics is transmitted from parents to their offspring, parental preference for the importance of hard work depends on their social class background status as well as the geographical region where they live. Despite having a low level of parental social class status, parents of rural regions prefer less the importance of hard work for their children compared to the parents who live in urban regions due to several causes. In fact, it may be that parents with self-employment status and informal job sectors are more available in rural regions compared to the urban regions of Bangladesh, which require less competence. On the contrary, the competitive and competent job environment as well as the difficult life circumstances of urban regions inspired parents to cultivate a hard work attitude in their children when they socialize them in family. Finally, this study recommends that, to better understand the underlying causes why rural parents less prefer the importance of hard work for children compared to the parents of urban regions, it is important to compare the data of job environment settings in rural and urban regions of Bangladesh and to examine the relationships with child socialization values, which would be the future direction of this study.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The author (S.M. Shahidul, full name, Md. Shahidul Islam Sarker) is grateful to Pundra University of Science & Technology, Bogura, Bangladesh for the academic support which allowed writing this paper.

REFERENCES

1. Arslan, M. (2001). The work ethic values of Protestant British, Catholic Irısh and Muslim Turkish managers. Journal of Business Ethics, 31, 321–339.
2. Ataca, B., Kagitcibasi, C., & Diri, A. (2005). Turkish family and the value of children: Trends over time. In G. Trommsdorff & B. Nauck (Eds.), The value of children in cross cultural perspective: Case studies from eight societies (pp. 91-119). Lengerich, Germany: Pabst Science.
3. Cemalcilar, Z., Secinti, E., & Sumer, N. (2018). Intergenerational transmission of work values: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 47, 1559–1579.
4. Cieciuch, J., Schwartz, S. H., & Davidov, E. (2015). Values, social psychology of. In: Wright, James D (Ed.), International Ency clopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (Second Edition, pp. 41–46). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
5. Friedlmeier, M., & Trommsdorff, G. (2011). Are mother–child simi larities in value orientations related to mothers’ parenting? A comparative study of American and Romanian mothers and their adolescent children. European Journal of Developmental Psy chology, 8(6), 661–680.
6. Hitlin, S., & Piliavin, J. A. (2004). Values: Reviving a dormant concept. Annual Review of Sociology, 30, 359–393.
7. Hoff, E., Laursen, B., & Tardif, T. (2002). Socioeconomic status and parenting. In M. H. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of parenting: Biology and ecology of parenting (pp. 231– 252). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
8. Johnson, M. K., & Mortimer, J. T. (2015). Parents’ work and financial conditions in the Great Recession and adolescents’ work values. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 87, 89–100. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2014.12.005.
9. Kerckhoff, A. C. (2003). From student to worker. In J. Mortimer & M. Shanahan (Eds.), Handbook of the life course (pp. 251–267). New York, NY: Kluwer Academic.
10. Mortimer, J. T., Lam, J., & Lee, S. (2015). Transformation, erosion, or disparity in work identity? Challenges during the contemporary transition to adulthood. In K. McLean & M. Syed (Eds.), Oxford handbook of identity development (pp. 319–336). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
11. Porfeli, E. J., & Vondracek, F. W. (2007). Vocational identity. In B. Skorikov & W. Patton (Eds.), Career development in childhood and adolescence (pp. 143–168). Rotterdam, the Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
12. Tam, K. & Lee, S. (2010). What values do parents want to socialize in their children? The role of perceived normative values. Journal Cross-Cultural Psychology, 41 (2), 175-181.
13. Tulviste, T. & Ahtonen, M. (2007). Child-rearing values of Estonian and Finnish mothers and fathers. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 38(2), 137-155.
14. Vuolo, M., Mortimer, J. T., & Staff, J. (2014). Adolescent precursors of pathways from school to work. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 24, 145–162. doi:10.1111/jora.12038