A DISSERTATION REPORT ON

SELF-ESTEEM AND RESILIENCE AMONG YOUNG ADULTS OF SINGLE

PARENT’S
OCTOBER-NOVEMBER-2024

BY
SHAISTA.M
REG NO: P03NK22S114026
UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF
DR. ROHINI SHIVANANDA

DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY

JNANA BHARATHI, BANGALORE UNIVERSITY

BENGALURU, INDIA-560056
 CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the Dissertation entitled “SELF-ESTEEM AND RESILIENCE AMONG
YOUNG ADULTS OF SINGLE PARENTS”. Submitted by SHAISTA.M Reg no.
P03NK22S114026 in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree in Psychology,
JnanaBharathi, Bangalore university, Bengaluru 560056, represents her original work carried out
by her under my guidance and superior, which is based on the results of her own research work
and is a record of the candidate’s personal effort.

DR.ROHINI SHIVANANDA
Professor & Guide
INTERNAL EXAMINER:

EXTERNAL EXAMINER:

Dr SREENIVAS M
Chairman
 DECLARATION

I, hereby declare that research has been conducted by me under the guidance of DR.ROHINI
SHIVANANDA Department of psychology, JnanaBharathi Bangalore University, Bangalore,
560056 during the year 2023 in fulfillment of the requirements for the Master’s degree in
psychology in Bangalore University. This report or part therefore, has not been submitted to
any other institution or organization for other purpose

PLACE : BANGALURU SHAISTA.M

DATE: P03NK22S114026
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT

This Dissertation would not be possible without the guidance and the help of several people who
contributed their valuable assistance in the preparation and completion of this report. Firstly, I
would like to express my gratitude to university students who are studying in Bangalore
university for giving me an opportunity to explore theoretical knowledge and providing me a
practical working experience during my masters degree.
My sincere gratitude to our beloved chairman Dr SREENIVAS M, Department of Psychology,
for giving me a chance to have an exposure in the outside working space. I am also very
thankful for Dr Rohini shivananda for taking her precious time and guiding me throughout the
process and helping me out to prepare this ideal report.

I would also like to extend special thanks to the entire post graduate students from all the
departments studying in Bangalore university for their full cooperation, guidance and support
during my Dissertation.

Yours Sincerely,

SHAISTA.M
 INDEX

Page No.
SI.
NO
1 Abstract 8

2 Chapter - I - Introduction 9-32

3 Chapter - II – Review of Literature 33-40

4 Chapter - III – Methodology 41-46

47-53

5 Chapter - IV – Results and Discussion

Chapter - V – Summary and Conclusion 54-57

6

58-60
7 References
Appendices

Appendix A – Informed Consent Form 61-62

Appendix B – Demographic details 63

63
Appendix C – Rosenburg’s self-esteem scale

Appendix D – Connor-Davidson’s resilience scale 64

 ABSTRACT

The study aims at studying “SELF-ESTEEM AND RESILIENCE AMONG YOUNG

ADULTS OF SINGLE PARENTS” There were N=125 participants in the study, age range
between 20-30 years. The Sampling method used in the study is Purposive sampling. The tool
used for this study Rosenburg’s self-esteem scale was developed by Morris Rosenburg and
Connor-Davidson’s resilience scale developed by Kathryn M. Connor and Jonathan R.T.
Davidson. The data analysis was done using SPSS version 20. The obtained data were scored and
tested. The Statistical analysis used to study the descriptive statistics for self-esteem and
resilience young adults of single parents.
Pearson’s correlation test was used to find out the correlation between two variables self-esteem
and resilience. Based on the obtained analysis of results there is significant positive correlation
between the self-esteem and resilience among young adults of single parents, hence alternative
hypothesis H1 is accepted. Independent sample t-test was used to find out the difference between
two groups Based on the obtained analysis of results there was no significant difference in male
and female young adults of single parents and there is moderate levels of self-esteem and
resilience found among young adults of single parents, hence the alternative hypothesis H2and
H3 is not accepted, the p value is .312 male young adults of single parents, followed by female
young adults of single parents having p value is .312. H4 is not accepted p-value is .172 male
young adults of single parents, followed by female young adults of single parents having p-value
is Overall, there was no difference in self-esteem and resilience between male and female young
adults of single parents based on the p value. The probable reasons were discussed on this study.

Keywords: Self-esteem, Resilience, young adults of single parents.

CHAPTER Ⅰ

INTRODUCTION
 INTRODUCTION

The impact of self-esteem on the development of resilience in single-parent children is a topic of

significant importance in the field of child psychology and family studies. Understanding how a
child's self-esteem can influence their ability to adapt and thrive in single-parent households is
crucial in addressing the unique challenges faced by these children.

Self-esteem, often defined as one's overall sense of self-worth and self-value, plays a pivotal role
in a child's emotional and psychological well-being. For single-parent children, who often
confront the absence of one parental figure, financial constraints, and potential social stigmas,
cultivating a healthy self-esteem becomes even more critical. In this context, self-esteem can be
seen as a protective factor, as it can act as a buffer against the various stressors and adversities
that singleparent families may encounter.

Resilience, on the other hand, refers to a child's ability to bounce back from adversity, adapt to
challenging circumstances, and ultimately lead a healthy and fulfilling life. Research has shown
that high levels of self-esteem are positively correlated with increased resilience in children. This
is because a child with a strong sense of self-worth tends to have a more positive self-image,
selfefficacy, and a greater belief in their ability to overcome difficulties, which are all essential
components of resilience.
In the context of single-parent families, where children may experience feelings of loss,
instability, or reduced access to resources, nurturing resilience is of paramount importance.
Children who possess a healthy level of self-esteem are better equipped to cope with the changes
and challenges associated with single-parent households, as they have a foundational belief in
their own abilities and value.

This topic underscores the interplay between self-esteem and resilience and highlights the
importance of identifying strategies and interventions that can foster self-esteem in single-parent
children. By enhancing their self-esteem, we can empower these children to build the
psychological resilience necessary to thrive in the face of adversity and achieve their full
potential. In this essay, we will delve deeper into the intricate relationship between self-esteem
and resilience in single-parent children, exploring the factors that influence self-esteem, its
impact on resilience, and the practical implications for parents, educators, and policymakers in
promoting the well-being of these children.

Certainly, self-esteem plays a significant role in building resilience among children of single
parents. Here are some points on the impact of self-esteem in this context:

1. **Self-Worth and Confidence:** A healthy self-esteem provides children with a sense of

selfworth and confidence. When single parents nurture their child's self-esteem, it helps them
believe in their abilities, which is crucial for resilience. They are more likely to face challenges
with a positive attitude.

2. **Emotional Stability:** Children with good self-esteem are better equipped to handle
emotional ups and downs. Single-parent households may experience additional stress, but a
child's self-esteem can act as a buffer, helping them manage their emotions and stress more
effectively.
3. **Problem-Solving Skills:** High self-esteem encourages children to develop problem-
solving skills. They are more likely to view difficulties as challenges to overcome rather than
insurmountable obstacles, which is a key aspect of resilience.

4. **Social Skills:** Self-esteem influences a child's social interactions. Those with a

healthy selfesteem tend to build positive relationships, which can be a valuable source of support
in singleparent families. Strong social networks contribute to a child's resilience.

5. **Motivation and Goal Setting:** Children with self-esteem are often more motivated to
set and achieve goals. This motivation can be a powerful tool in overcoming adversity. Single-
parent children who believe in themselves are more likely to strive for success.

6. **Coping Mechanisms:** High self-esteem fosters the development of effective coping

mechanisms. When faced with stress or setbacks, these children are more likely to engage in
healthy coping strategies, like seeking help when needed or staying persistent in the face of
challenges.

7. **Adaptability:** Resilience involves adaptability. Children with good self-esteem tend

to adapt more easily to changing circumstances, which is particularly important in single-parent
households where routines and responsibilities can shift.

8. **Less Vulnerability to Peer Pressure:** A strong sense of self-esteem can make a child
less vulnerable to negative peer influences. This is crucial in maintaining resilience and making
positive choices, especially when faced with peer pressure to engage in risky behavior.

9. **Self-Compassion:** Self-esteem also includes self-compassion. Children who are kind

and understanding towards themselves are better at handling setbacks and failures. They see
these experiences as opportunities for growth, contributing to resilience.
In summary, self-esteem is a foundational factor in the development of resilience in single-parent
households. It helps children navigate the unique challenges they may face and equips them with
the emotional and psychological tools to bounce back from adversity and thrive. Single parents
can support their child's self-esteem through love, encouragement, positive reinforcement, and
fostering a safe and nurturing environment.

1.1 RESILIENCE

According to Masten (2000), resilience is a general phrase that denotes the result of successful
adaptation under trying conditions. According to Green et al. (2002), it comes from the Latin
verb resiliens, which means "an elastic worth of a material." According to Rutter (2007), the
word resilience has an etymology that describes how one becomes strong by overcoming
adversity and adapting and recovering. It suggests to optimism, conviction, openness, and
consistency. These terms are those that both allude to the same term, namely resilience, as per
Braun et al. (2021). The resilience takes expectation-related factors into account, which lessens
suffering. Sense of coherence is defined as the will to emotionally invest in the coping process
and the drive to survive. The word salutogenesis, coined by Antonovsky in 1979, suggests that an
individual possessing a strong sense of coherence does not see stressful circumstances as
dangerous and instead make use of their strengths to circumstances, in order to improve health
and lessen worry.

People that are resilient transform themselves when they face obstacles in conquering adversity,
as stated by Alvord &Grados (2005). Among material scientists, Resilience is the ability to both
emit and absorb energy from a strike and leaping back. Stretching atomic bonds is referred to as
resilience or fortitude. Merriam Webster characterizes resilience, as the capacity to recuperate
from or adjust easily to harsh conditions. To recognize the pain & to bear it or to normalize a
situation is resilience in field of medicine, as mentioned by Ickovics& Park in 1998.Resilience
confers minimum dysfunctional behavior by an individual according to Conner (1993).
Study of epidemiology (prevalence of diseases) which uncovers the protective factors & risks
helped researchers to define resilience. Werner used the term resilience in 1971.Researcher
studied that, when children grow in poor families or when parents are mentally disturbed they
can develop fierce behaviors. In these unfavorable circumstances, one third of the children were
found to be calm. Such individuals were termed resilient, by Werner. That way, first research on
resilience was available to study. Subsequently tools were created to study systems which
sustained development of resilience.

Resilience became a topic of interest when schizophrenic mothers were studied in 1989 by
Kathryn. Schizophrenia is a mental disorder which involves breaking a relationship between
emotions, thoughts & behavior. Children of these sick mothers flourished well & skilled in
academics. It was also found that the mental processes were used by them, in protecting
themselves from dangers & harmful effects of stressful conditions to return back to pre-crisis
status. Thus term psychological resilience came into being.

Resilience has gone through several stages, in the past years. The initial focus of psychologists
was on the vulnerable child. Finally the focus shifted to the promotion of resilience. Search
began for the factors affecting resilience, at three levels namely individual, family and
community. The individual factors involve attachment & responsiveness for others, positive
temperament, self-efficacy, self-esteem, internal locus of control, social maturity &
perceptiveness. The family factors includes family harmony, sufficient financial & material
resources, whereas neighbor, peer support, adult role models, positive teacher influences &
success are categorized as the community factors, as explained by Olsson et al. (2003).

Resilience is a relative resistance to psychosocial risk experiences. It is regarded as a process not

a trait which changes through time. It is created when protective factors, for e.g. immune system
reduces the effects of the risk factors, which is refer to as healing. A construct with two
dimensions namely significant adversity & positive adaptation is resilience. As research on
resilience progressed it became important to characterize & identify resilience on the basis of the
risk involved. Thereafter interplay of risk, vulnerability & protective factors, in resilience
became significant.

In 2004, Newman defined these factors as:

i) Risk is any element or blend of factors, which expand the chances of unfortunate results.
Risk factors may be chronic or situational. The factors, responsible for chronic diseases are
termed as chronic risk factors. Situational risk factors trigger impulsive individuals, to influence
their behavior.

ii) Vulnerability is a weakness that delivers an individual more proneness, to a danger.

When a person is vulnerable, the interaction of risk factors occurs hence, the response to the risk
intensifies. It is important to identify the vulnerability & study the factors involved. When risk
factors occur together, they have greater effect, rather when occur in isolation. Identification also
helps in the search for the actual causal mechanisms or processes. Self regulation & self-
organization both are important to save a person from being vulnerable.

iii) Protective elements are the defensive elements or the conditions that moderate the
impacts of risks, leading to a sound existence. The virtues like fortitude, forgiveness & gratitude
provides the strength to attain resilience. These days, the research on resilience, focuses on the
ability to gather social support so as to increase the protective factors. This reduces the impact of
risk factors hence recovery can be attained at faster rate.

Models are presented below to explain working of resilience-

There are three models for explaining resilience. All models, operates on similar mechanisms
thus are able to explain adaptation in relation to stress. These three models are:

The compensatory model - It explains the use of resilience, for neutralization of risk.
1. The challenge model - The enhancement of adaptation, in presence of risk, can be
explained by this model.
2. The protective or defensive model - Interaction of hazards & defensive factors to
reduce the adverse results is the rationalization of this model.

Internal variables for Resilience

Resilience can be explained according to three variables, namely self-factors, personality factors
& the individual resources. These factors involve use of cognitive & personal resources,
temperament, intellectual abilities & the determination along with the control in one’s
surroundings as explained by Unger (2004). Repressor in emotional dissociation is also an
internal variable of resilience as predicted by Patterson & Kelleher (2005).

External variables for Resilience

As the study is related to single parenting, it is important to mention that relationships in the
family & social support both are very important for measuring resilience, as stated by Nishikawa
(2006). The individual, who encounters availability of support during a calamity, acquires a
sense of protection easily in relationships.

1.1.1 Resilience & Social Support

According to UNESCAP (United Nations Economic & Social Commission for Asia & the
Pacific) progress report 2021, social support is an important factor in attaining resilience, in the
critical situation. According to this entity, resilience can be observed through empowerment &
support from the community. Thus, the family emerges as a unit, to build resilient societies.
Social relationships create trust & love, thus offers reliable alliance & reassurance of worth that
provide the ability to recover from all hardships and a person move forward in an adaptive way.
Social milieu of a person is a criterion of an individual’s resilience & self-esteem which are
strong protective factors for the physical, mental & general health. Thus a person lives longer.
Economically & psychologically sound communities, are needed where people rise above all
odds, to raise their livelihood according to the data, provided in World Economic Forum Meet
(2014).
 1.1.2 Resilience & Self-esteem

Most significant marks of a psychologically healthy & social state of a person include both
variables viz. resilience & self-esteem. Daniel &Wassell (2002) described resilience in terms of
intrinsic factors, which includes a sense of selfefficacy, high self-esteem, sense of belonging &
security as the family extrinsic factors. Adolescents with low confidence & esteem are reluctant
to confront difficulties. They show helplessness & dissatisfaction in life. They endure with
numerous psychological problems including sadness, tension, dietary issues & substance misuse.
Their behavioral problems lead them to more negative feedback among children. They often feel
terrible about themselves & sense
mistreated, most of the time. Children of low self-esteem are absorbed with a feeling that people
will not accept them. Such children are hard on them hence, are critical regarding their own self.
Low self-esteem is unfortunately for an individual. One has to accept challenges to overcome
this feeling of negativity. Resourcefulness and self-assurance dilutes the majority of impacts of
negative life occasions and also helps in the adjustment in society. Intercessions are required to
work, on the social change of adolescents. The enhancement of resilience and self-esteem is
considered as the most important intervention for reducing the problems faced by children. Need
is to develop certain strategies, which help to build resilience & enhance self-esteem in
adolescents.

Some of these strategies are listed as followsa)

Encouragement of adolescents so that they can use their energy in positive direction.
b) Use of positive statements with adolescents, rather than critical ones.

c) Exposure to media should be least.

d) Cultivation of independence & responsibility.

e) Balanced living should be supported.

f) Encouragement of values like gratitude & giving.

g) Spirituality should be fostered in children, as they grow and turn into adolescents.
Elders should lay stress on the efforts shown by children & adolescents rather on completion
of task or the performance achieved.

1.1.3 Resilience & Behavioral Problems of Adolescents

Behaviorism term was coined by Watson in 1913. The focus was on outward or external
behaviors of an individual. The observable behavior of a person is due to a response generated to
an environmental stimulus or change. It can also be stated that action & mannerism shown by a
person is called his/her behavior. If the behavior is not appropriate, it is termed as a behavioral
disorder.
Adolescence (In Latin language adolescere means ‘to grow into maturity’) is a
phase of achieving the maximum growth of knowledge, skills, attitudes & beliefs along with
physical & mental abilities, needed for effective participation in society. Erikson (1968)
explained the developmental stage of the identity can result into risk taking attitude, in
adolescents. Hazards or risks are fundamental tools, in the arrangement of the way of life, as the
juvenile tests various identities. Fischhoff (1998) clarified that children & adolescents believe
themselves, to be insusceptible to danger. The behavioral disorders are of various categories,
which include noncompliance, bad temper, suicidal depression, obsession, breakup & buzzing.
Behavior of an adolescent changes altogether in this crucial phase of life when everything should
be perfect for their growth & development. Childhood behavioral disorders are considered as the
second leading cause of diseases, in adolescents of age group of 10- 14 years.
World Health Organization (2019) strategizes various resources, for helping the governments, in
response to the needs of adolescents, in terms of their mental health. Some of the resources can be
enlisted as:
1) Providing guidance for the accelerated action plan, for health of adolescents in associated
countries.
2) Strategy for improving health of women, children & adolescents (2016-2030).

3) Plan for mental health improvement (2013-2020).

1.2 SELF-ESTEEM

A well known American psychologist & anthropologist, James (1892) defined self-esteem as the
recognition of strength. According to the theory given by James, self-esteem is the proportion to
explain person’s actual behavior, in contrast to the assertions. Inner values of a person are very
much linked to self-esteem. It is measured in terms of gap between ideal self (what the perfect
person should be) &
self-image. If the ideal self is close to person’s self image then at that point, the individual is
having high esteem, as well as confidence. In 1965, it was characterized comprehensively by
Rosenberg, as an ideal or troublesome attitude toward oneself.
In 1969, Branden explained self-esteem as the experience of being skilled to adapt, to the
difficulties of life. Reber (1985) regarded self-esteem as a degree to value oneself. Several
definitions were given by various psychologists to explain the concept of self-esteem. Totality of
the individual’s perception was also termed as self- esteem by Steffenhagen (1987).

Two components were used, to explain self-esteem by Frey &Carlock in

1989.They area)
Competent to live (confidence of one’s mind & beliefs). b) Worthy of living (affirmation of
oneself).
Blascovich&Tomaka in 1991 thought that esteem, is the evaluative part of the self-idea or
concept. They included all aspects of self-esteem whether cognitive, evaluative, behavioral or
affective. Self-esteem is imperative in every sphere of life. It is considered as a basic human
need. It describes the nature of a person, which can be changed.
1.2.1 Effects of Self-Esteem

High self-esteem is important for the life satisfaction, which includes mental & physical health.
It is a vital factor which helps to attain success happiness & overall well-being. It assists the
buffering process for persons suffering from the results of unpleasant occasions, affecting
pleasure in everyday life. It was explored by Jordan & Cameron (2017). It motivates a person to
believe in his/her abilities, so that one can thrive & steer well in life with hopefulness, as
explained by, Steiger et al. (2015). According to Anyamene et al. (2016) a person with high
levels of self-esteem acts assertively thus does not feel any guilt. Feeling of ease is experienced
while communicating with others. Such persons share their experiences with others hence enjoy
the humorous aspects of life. Concentration on solving problems is important for people with
high self-esteem. They believe in loving & respectful relationships, more as compared to persons
with low self-esteem who are found pleasing people& getting angered or irritated easily. Low
esteem individuals are highly sensitive to opinions of other persons. They consistently
experience feelings of trouble and worthlessness hence finds it difficult to keep connections with
people. Negative feelings like apprehension & dissuasion are often felt, by such people.

1.2.2 Self-Esteem & Psychology

Various terms are being used in place of self-esteem like self-concept, selfimage, self-confidence,
self-worth, self-efficacy & self-compassion. It was mentioned by Sanford & Donovan in 1985.
There are certain differences between these terms.
These differences are explained as:

Self-Esteem & Self-Concept

Self-concept is a dynamic term which includes organized system of learned beliefs, according to
Ackerman (2021). It is an aptitude to believe about one's own individuality, skills & behavior
whereas self-esteem is an attitude or view that an individual has about him or herself. Self-
esteem is in fact a part of self-concept.

Self-Esteem & Self-Image

According to Katz &Ziglar (1967) self-image is based on false beliefs. It is only somewhat close
to reality. Difficult life dealt by a person lowers his/her self-image.
More the difference between real & ideal self lower is the self-esteem.
Self-Esteem & Self-Confidence

According to Burton (2015) self-confidence is the trust in one-self, to deal with challenges. It
depends on superficial magnitude of accomplishments whereas self-esteem values the internal
measure.

Self-Esteem & Self-Worth

Self-worth is the global acknowledgment that a person is having worth. It regards a person as a
valuable human being, as explained by Hibbert (2013).

Self-esteem & self-compassion

Fixation on how we identify & recount ourselves with others, rather than how we
pass judgment or see ourselves is compassion, as expressed by Neff (2003). Selfcompassion can
lead an individual to a healthy sense of self-esteem.

Self-Esteem & Self-Efficacy

To have the faith in one's capacity is self-efficacy. It helps to carry out specific undertakings &
tasks as expected by people. It was explained by Neill, in 2005. It is more precise and depends
on outer achievement of an individual rather than inward
value. Esteem is a sensible view of a person’s capacity to accomplish & flourish throughout life
while efficacy is the means by which a person feels about the aptitude to work in various
situations.

1.2.3 Place of Esteem in Maslow’s Theory

Maslow’s theory was given in 1954.The focus of this theory, was on the outer proportions of
views like reputation, position, achievement & acknowledgment. As per Maslow, healthy self-
esteem is required for the fulfillment & progression in life to increase, esteem & confidence.
Needs of esteem envelops firmness, potency & self-conviction. It is based on individual & social
acknowledgment from others. These requirements are addressed as one of the vital stages in
achieving satisfaction & self-completion. Esteem needs also involve social & personal
acceptance.

Maslow’s theory can be explained as-

Self-worth & proficiency leads to attainment of higher level of self-esteem, according to Maslow.
Internal feelings of accomplishment & self-praise are also the factors which govern high esteem.
External feelings of accomplishment & praise from others results in lower level of self-esteem.
Maslow's theory of needs or requirements is an inspirational theory that portrays the necessities,
which drives human conduct. The initial two levels of necessities are essential requirements of
water, food, well-being & security. The third degree of needs can be viewed as the need that
depends on the psychological aspects & social associations. In the fourth level of Maslow's system
of needs are feelings. The requirement for esteem & dignity are present at this level. Achieving the
initial four degrees of necessities finally prompts the last phase of necessities, which depends on
what a person encounters in life & self-realization. This fourth phase of Maslow's progressive
system of requirements has the focus on esteem which alludes to the requirement for regard,
confidence & self-assurance.
These needs are the reason or basis for the human survival. Having good sentiments for oneself
& others is very important for passion, well-being &success. Without appropriateness of such
needs a person is pre-occupied with vibrations of inadequacy & pessimism in life.

This level can be characterized into two classes in Maslow's theoryi)

Esteem for oneself which includes pride, triumph, power & independence. ii) The longing for the
honor or regard from others (e.g. status & fame).
Maslow has shown that the requirements for respect & regard are generally significant or
important for all viz. children, youth & adults. It is placed before genuine respect & esteem.
Each individual is fit for climbing or moving up in this hierarchical order so that one can move
towards a degree of self-completion. Sometimes progress can be disturbed by an inability to
meet lower level requirements for e.g. educational encounters or regarding an employment. This
can influence an individual to change between levels of the sequence of needs.
 1.2.4 Self esteem & Behavior of an Adolescent

Erikson in 1968, described the human strengths, in following stages of development- 1) Infant
tries to figure out the development of trust on guardians.
2) Child learns self-control & independence, at the age of 2 or 3 years in performing tasks.
3) Child learns to use imagination at the age between 3-6 years.

4) Child learns how to work with others in the age range of 6-12 years.

5) Child turning into an adolescent between ages of 12-18 years and undergo identity diffusion in
this stage. The young adult evaluates & tries various gatherings to see where he/she is truly fit
for, in this phase.
6) Fortitude, closeness & the relation with segregation, is important when a person is in his/her
twenty’s.
7) Self-absorption occurs between 20-50 years of age.

8) Truthfulness versus misery happens, after fifty’s. Person experiences to try the real meaning of
life.
Erikson's fifth phase of dissemination & relation to personal identity compares to juvenile
development. In this stage sexual mindfulness increases which undermines, the recent self-
perception. Social jobs take on another framework, in this phase.
Attempts are made to acquire acknowledgment, in the public.

Adolescents experience barometric self-esteem, which means temporary change in self-esteem,

which is dependent on the situation. It is adversely affected by family circumstances, which lead
to dejection therefore self-esteem decreases. Adolescents turn into juvenile delinquents due to
erratic & overly strict behavior of their parents, which involves physical punishment and high
degree of opposition along with the negative response or rejection. Consequences are the
development of a child with low self-esteem.

1.2.5 Self esteem & Single Parenting

Unfavorable situations such as stigmatized family structure are one of the major causes of low
self-esteem. Low quality home environment due to the absence of parent/s has a negative impact
on self-esteem of children as explained by Orth et al. (2018).The low self-esteem in children of
single parent families make them addicted to substance misuse due to the peer pressure which
affect their psychological functioning, Harter in 1990 explained. Low esteem is related with
savagery (violent behavior) & high dropout rates with low accomplishment in studies.
Children of broken homes have little care from their single parents thus possesses low self-
esteem whereas children living in happy families, possess high self-esteem. Bishop & Ingersoll
(1989) found that conflicts in a marriage have an impact on adolescents’ self-concept, which
further lowers the self-esteem of a child along with, his/her social competence. Thus long term
changes e.g. fretfulness & despair in adolescents can be seen due to family conflicts. Women
with low self-esteem (for e.g. of divorced families) often raise children with similar self-esteem,
as examined by Frey&Carlock (1989).
Families can be a source of support & encouragement for a child but it is seen that relationships
within a family pose a threat to self-esteem of a child hence he/she is raised into an adolescent of
low self-esteem. In families having individuals with less self-esteem, connections & dealings
turn out to be dangerous at the same time, the relationships can become mutually affirming in
families, which involves individuals with appropriate esteem. Sound self-appreciation lowers
disappointment & increases critical thinking in an individual. When a person is high in self-
esteem, he/she is self motivated, happy, eager to learn makes a good impression & always tries to
stay connected with others.
1.3 SINGLE PARENTING

According to Roll (1992) single parenting involves a pattern, where a person lives without a
partner or spouse. Single parent probably lives with his/her parents with at least one dependent
child, under 18 years old. Single-parent family structure arises due to death of the partner,
intentional artificial insemination (unmarried parenting by choice), breakdown of the joint family
system, adoption & increasing rate of divorce. In last two decades single parent families has
increased considerably. Some possible reasons are-
1) In advanced societies, a woman prefers to be alone, as she is not given access to valuable
resources, in the family. Work provided to her in the family, has not been given an appropriate
status. Therefore, women are no longer an emotional or instrumental center. Family
synchronization can be created by present women, in need, thus can access family power, with
better humane connection hence, in present days families are headed by women, which are on
rise. 2) Child rearing through agencies is common, nowadays.
3) Due to urbanization & development of industries society is turning materialistic day by day
thereby emotional strain on the family is increasing, so people prefer to be single for long, in
want of earning more money.
Babalis (2013) explained the reasons behind the advancement of the peculiarity of single
parenting. It incorporates factors, explaining segments & identified them, with family working.
Individual elements are explained as follows-

Demographic factors

In the developing countries death & desertion are the common causes behind single parent
families rather divorce. India is still developing and comprises 4.5% of children living in single
parent households.
In developed countries divorce is more common cause of the rise of families, having single
parent. United States has the most prominent level of single-parent families (18.58 million,
2020) in comparison to other countries (15.31 million, living with single mother & rest with
single father). Almost a quarter of U.S children under age 18 live with one parent.
Family functioning

Important factor for proper family functioning is the effective communication between family
members, but when it includes never ending conflicts distortion of family functioning occurs.
3) Individual factors

These factors include pregnancy by choice & adoption.

1.3.1 Coping strategies Adopted by a Single Parent

According to Lazarus &Folkman (1984) coping can be defined as a change in cognitive &
behavioral contexts. Efforts are constantly made to manage the internal &external demands faced
by a person that exceed the resources. It involves spending of the mental energy, to reduce stress
& attain homeostasis.
There are two types of coping strategies used by a single parent. When a person thinks that the
condition can be improved, it is called as coping, which has the focus on the problems. Emotion
related coping is applied by a person when the situation is tolerated for the reduction of negative
emotions such as fear, anxiety, gloominess & nuisance. These strategies are used as a set of
adaptive tools, in response to a stressor & for getting rid of troubles faced by an individual in
life.
In single parent families, life can be made smoother & easier so that a child can adjust well in
adverse situations. Resilience & adequate social support are important parameters to survive in
hard circumstances. Need is to prepare children of single families, so that they can be raised as
responsible resilient adolescents thus are able to recover from undesirable conditions soon, as the
children of intact families (having both the parents) often do.
Positive care & fostering by parents has a significant impact on children which builds up close
emotional bonding between parent & child. Attention & affection received by children of single
parent family can create a positive effect only if effective patterns of communication & coping
strategies are applied. Sensitive, responsive, balanced & flexible parenting can make a child
protected, in families, headed by a single parent.
1.3.2 Changes faced by Children of Single Parent Families

a) Parent disagreements: It leads to deviant behaviors in children, as acknowledged by

Buchanan (1991). Neighborhood: Children of separated or divorced families have a changed
neighborhood thus as the environmental changes occur behavior pathology among the divorced
group increases. Income: There is remarkable decline in the standard of living of a single parent.
Lowering of socio-economic status also occurs. Increase in behavioral problems is associated
social exclusion & poverty, according to Bougioukos (2011). Children of single parent family are
argumentative associated with less selfcontrol. They are unable to cope with the situations
emotionally & psychologically.
1.3.3 Single Parenting & Behavioral Problems

Even a small change in a family disturbs a child a lot but if the change is related to parents, it
leads to an immediate change in life of a child. These changes can be positive or negative. If the
changes are negative then the result is the occurrence of problems in behavior commonly seen in
children, particularly adolescents. These problems are mild, in the initial stage but can lead to
severe disorders, in behavior. Behavior is the way, in which an animal or person in response to a
particular situation. When there is some difference in behavior, as set by norms of society, it is
called as a behavioral disorder. The pattern of disruptive behaviors, in children at home and in
social situations leads to various mental disorders.
 Adolescents and youngsters experience, different kinds of externalizing & internalizing
problems. Former incorporates forceful & resistant conduct, absence of self-guidelines, low
responsibility, towards friends & loneliness, reduced rational capacity, & scholarly success.
Uneasiness, troublesome side effects & issues with social connections, addresses general
internalizing problems.
Every child has one or more disorder in behavior at times, but these disorders are more
prominent in children of single parent families. Symptoms of a behavioral disorder include
getting annoyed, irritated, putting fault on others, denying following the guidelines, addressing,
opposing, having temper & experiencing issues, in dealing with discontent. Outburst of
antagonism is common, in adolescents raised in single parent families.

Some common behavioral disorders are listed below-

1. ADHD-Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder

2. ODD -Oppositional defiant disorder

3. ASD-Autism spectrum disorder

4. Anxiety disorder

5. Depression

6. Bipolar disorder

7. Learning disorder

8. Conduct disorder

Adolescents from separated from families have lower intellectual implementation. They try to
skip from school & make a mess of routine classes as compared to children of normal families,
where both parents are alive. Single parenting to a child means restrictions, interfering parents,
geographical constraints, psychological problems & new connections, within the family, like
remarriage which results in reduced links, between children & single parent.
Violence in a family affects development of an adolescent, who feels ashamed, hence
looses all hope & confidence in life. The anxiety level increases in fright, as to when
next incident of violence, will hit him/her now. Adolescents either run away from
such situations or tend to become felonious or anti-social.
Costello &Laub (2020) found that the strength of the bonding of children with parents is the
main component in mounting or decreasing the probability of children, showing criminal
conduct. Thus it is obvious that in single parent families, children show more misconduct
problems, because of feeble relations with parents. As one of the parents is absent proper
command to control & regulate and socialization is missing, from child’s life, which result in
engagement of child, in the immoral behavior. Such children are deprived in terms of health &
well-being, family & social movements, associations, contrasted with children of intact families.
Such children are dependent on the addiction of harmful drugs, to keep them high on esteem.
Family crisis in single parent families causes troubles related to mental peace & social strain in
youngsters. When the adolescents are taken care of, in such families they grow up into a resilient
individual. The family can provide either the developmental foundation or deficiencies in
development of social, behavioral
& emotional skills of a child. Values gained by the adolescents’ influences their selection or
association with peers. Role of both the parents is very important. When children are brought up
by a single parent whether mother or father, half of his/her support diminishes, in terms of
emotional, intellectual & psychological level, which undermines his/her growth as an adult or as
a responsible citizen of the nation.
1.3.4 Gender Differences in Adolescents with Single Parent

How parents treat their children also affects differences in girls & boys.

According to Taylor et al. (2012) self-esteem of the adolescent girls of single parent family, is
found to be low, exhibiting more psychological disturbance. They feel disillusionment &
negative response in life, as compared to boys. In long-term, parental divorce, has been shown to
have less damaging consequences, in boys, therefore, they show more locus of control, in
comparison to girls, as studied by, Amato & Keith (1991).
Although findings of Owens (2016) suggested that behavioral problems observed in boys are
more as compared to girls due to large number of development interferences. Research related to
the gender differences has some contradictory results for the adjustment problems, which are
seen to less extent in boys as compared to girls, according to Kaye (1989).
 Similar results were found by Amato & Keith in 1991. Research also indicates that no gender
differences exist, between boys & girls, according to study conducted by Zill et al. (1993). More
insight is required in this context.
1.3.5 Steps for Improvement in Life of Adolescents

Measures are required as a support to make life smoother, for the single parent family & their
children. Measures can be applied as:
a) Identification of the behavior & understanding by parents is required to reduce stress in
adolescents.
b) Professional educators, within school system should be hired to deal with the problems of
students, in their adolescent phase.
c) Least restrictive environment should be maintained, within school campus.

d) Appropriate public education.

e) Individualized educational plans (IEP) for students particularly having disturbance, should be
arranged. IEP helps to explain levels of performance & needs of students.
f) Behavioral & emotional skills training (B.E.S.T) for a parent, is required.

g) Employee assistance plan (EAP) for a single parent, is need of hour.

nation.

h) Getting the mental health assessment for a child &parent is necessary.

i) Guidance related to divorce on the Web portals can be used.

j) Parenting plans should be prepared for setting the standards, for making decision &
resolution of dispute. It has to be set by both parents, who can encourage the
agreements & discussions, amongst them.

k) Mediators can act as a support system in negotiations, if lawyers are not able to handle
the situation. Inappropriate & adversarial nature of legal system delays the judgments
& thus poses a negative impact on the psychological well-being, of the child.
l) Shifting from sociological family, to psychological affective family network is
required.
m) Consideration of the family dynamics is important, rather than the family
structure.
n) Parents in their conflicts should not involve children, as passive arms or active
participants, as behavioral problems increases, due to child involvement, in disputes.
Duration of child involvement in disputes also matters, according to Johnston et al.

(1985).

o) Remarriage may is a shielding factor for children, in some cases, according to

Hetherington (1993) as family income, parental supervision & support increases.
p) Joint custody of father is of great support in child development, as predicted by Bahr et al. in
1994.
q) Societies developed for research on adolescence (SRA) must be consulted, to handle the
problems associated, with adolescent psychology.
r) Marriage counselors or school counselors can act as peace mediators, in resolving conflicts
related to family. Adolescents can be guided to be away from pessimistic people, who can drain
their energy which decreases the potential to work & move ahead in life. Counselors can also
help to diagnose symptoms of depression, in the young minds e.g. not eating properly, not
sleeping properly (poor sleeping habits lower the motivation & affects the internal drive to
achieve the targets) showing mood swings, lack of confidence, low self-esteem, poor academic
performance & inferiority complex, of any kind. It is important to make them calm & compost
so that they can avoid losing their control, in bad situations.
s) A theory was put forth by Bronfenbrenner (1994) which explains the growth of a child is in two
frameworks viz. school & family. Both are necessary, to identify issues, related to child
psychology.
t) Repression of feelings (about worst fears) in children should be discouraged by the single parent.
u) Pets can be kept in family who can act as peacemakers hence, provide connections within the
family and can divert from tensions, in crisis.
1.3.6 Rethinking the Concept of Single Parent families

Need is of social consciousness, with new structures & behaviors. Single parents can help other
single parents, in their critical phase of life. They can act as an opportunity, for the social
support, which has the potentially, to promote courage, to support the way to versatility. Women
should break their desperate existence, after being single. They should adopt a new life plan,
with a satisfying work. Adolescents can show a different behavior in inadequate circumstances.
They can start taking responsibility of keeping peace, within the family, rather getting nurturance
& safety from family they themselves can turn resilient, without anybody’s help. Children should
be given responsibilities, without any guilt, so that they can feel their own need, in the family.
Adoption of positive discipline is important, in single parent families. Focus should be on
solving problems, with appropriate solutions for children. Sitting together & sharing will
certainly heal the family, in the critical phase. This curative process can help the family, to tackle
all problems faced in difficult periods, which can be disparaging for relationships. The
undesirable situations harm peace & harmony, between family members. Regular family
meetings should be conducted with adolescents. In this way, they will feel empowered, needed &
motivated to meet their responsibilities. Children return the respect they gather & receive from
their family.
Listening is important, the person, who is listened, is valued. Children have their own choices
that control their lives. Role of parents is to avoid demanding obedience & imposition of control,
over them, which disrupts the relationships & rise of conflicts within the family. When this will
be a common practice, in a family facing crisis, children will be less affected. Single families are
neither, inferior or superior to intact families. Need is of attention & concern. Differences can
become failures and sources both. It depends on a person’s resilience, how he/she visualizes the
critical phase of life.
1.4 Implications of the study

1. Central role of parents & educators is in shaping the future of a child, especially an adolescent
belonging to single parent family because such children have less financial & educational
advantages as compared to families, having both the parents for support. Also they receive less
concentration & direction in every sphere of their life, thus becomes emotionally withdrawn.
Low self-esteem of the child creates a gap in the relationship with the parent.
2.The biggest worry for most of the single parent families is providing an adequate role model
for the missing parent. The children particularly adolescents experience serious pressure, on
regular basis when parents are involved, in another relationship, as soon as, the separation
occurs. Need is of appropriate social support to be chosen, as the role model, with care.
3.Welfare organizations in society can render financial help to single parents at lower rate of
interest. Single parents should maintain their resources, for career development & future safety
of family. Awareness should be passed on to these families about monetary planning, so that
neither parent nor children faces the brunt of financial crisis, as explored by John, in 2020.
4.Measures & interventions can be adopted, so that our youth living in such families can
overcome problems they are facing, to fare well in life, like the children of intact families. They
are actually out of the control (of elders). In these conditions their conduct is controlled by their
own moral & social set of rules. Adolescents who feel compassion & assistance from their
parents are less liable to take part in unsafe practices.

CHAPTER Ⅱ

REVIEW OF LITERATURE
 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Studies related to Resilience

Satapathy et al. (2020), in their study investigated, resilience in children & adolescents, when
they experience traumatic life events. Assessment of the tools and the application for clinical
referral & intervention was also mentioned, in this study. Twelve tools to measure resilience
were reviewed, for children having age, between 5 -18 years. Analysis of scales was based on
age, item numbers, category, and use of scale (for screening & profiling and for intervention),
availability of manual, cut off score along with many other psychometric properties. It was
found after analysis that focus should be on various dimensions of resilience, which are needed
to be explored, by more precise methods.

Matos et al. (2021), stated that if the families are not living in outrageous poverty & neediness
then also, they face problems due to finances. Pressure of financial setbacks is more pronounced
in women, in single parent families, where ninety percent are affected. This study confirmed that
generally impact on women is due to the hardships, they face in such families. Moreover, the
outcomes showed that the higher the neediness level, the lower is the resilience in the family.
Aspects related to work, information, development of individuals in the family particularly
adolescents, helps to improve the assets & resources which can upgrade resilience, in the family.
Malhi et al. (2019), studied resilience in adolescents in phase of adversity. According to the
researchers no doubt resilience is a multi-faceted construct, adaptive components of resilience,
particularly those which are counter felt by difficulties, have not been realized so far. Need is to
integrate the components, in neurobiological & psychosocial terms. This study emphasized the
role of skill acquisition, using strengthening processes, in the phase of development of an
adolescent. Study also provided the framework for the identification of both neurobiological &
psychosocial targets for prevention & therapeutic interventions along with the individual
variance in resilience.

Gart land et al. (2019), studied factors that can affect resilience, in the adolescents, when they
face a social misfortune. These factors can be parent loss, poverty, or any other kind of traumatic
event, faced by an adolescent. When positive outcomes like good mental health, despite
adversity, is shown by a person, then term resilient is used. The family, community & school are
associated with these outcomes. Most important is the role of caregivers, in enhancing individual
coping skills for being resilient e.g. cognitive skills, academic engagement, relationship with
elders & emotional regulation in the unacceptable conditions. Such factors promote resilience
hence, diminishes the long-term impact of any kind of hardship, faced by the adolescent.

Chen et al. (2018), explored on the relationship among adolescents perceived stress, family
resilience & parent adolescent communication. Trends in family resilience were also considered.
This study explored the differences in parent adolescent communication, in reference to gender
of the parent. Sample constituted 96 adolescents having age in range of 12-18, with a parent,
with cancer. It was observed that resilience in the family was associated adversely with stress,
faced by adolescents & positively associated with the connection between the juveniles & their
parents. The degree of adolescent communication was higher with mothers.

Sharma & Jasleen (2017), undertook a study to examine the resilience & parent - adolescent
attachment, to assess the happiness level in adolescents living in families, having single parent.
The tools used were, an inventory for measuring happiness, scale to measure social & economic
status & a resilience scale. Administration of the tools was performed on one hundred & twenty
respondents having age, between 13-19 years. Adolescents belonged to the middle socio-
economic group of single parent families. Purposive sampling was adopted for the study.
Statistical techniques used were correlation, t-test & chi-square test. Results indicated that
adolescents with single parent, perceived, average level of happiness. Gender differences were
found in the study. It was found that female adolescents were significantly happier, as compared
to male respondents.

Resilience was positively correlated to happiness. Similar results were found for attachment of
respondents with their parents & happiness.

Hopf (2010), investigated on the risks & strength attained by being resilient children, dealing &
adapting to parental separation. Separation is difficult & distressing event in life of adolescents
and for their parents. Significant stressors & risk factors underlying the cause of parental
separation & struggle, loss of essential relations, issues related to finances & remarriage, were
found in this study.

Studies Related to Self Esteem

Henrik sen et al. (2017), conducted a study, on esteem & its linkage to psychological well-being
& mental health. Few studies are undertaken in relation to self-esteem & attention problems of
adolescents. According to the researchers there is a dire need in the improvement of the
manifestations in self-esteem, to overcome the nervousness & misery from the life of immature
children viz. adolescents. Information was gathered from adolescents from a psychiatry
department in Norway. Self-reports were used to estimate, the stress in adolescents, in relation to
self-esteem. Re-evaluation of respondents after three years was performed. Uneasiness, anxiety,
attention problems & depression in children, can be lessened by applying principles to enhance
self-esteem. Results featured the significance of the increase in worldwide esteem with respect
to emotional issues & problems related to attention.
Koskinen (2016), explored on relationship between resilience, self-efficacy, parental rearing,
inefficient coping strategies. Inventory for coping given by Carver in 1997, was used to assess
respondents coping styles. The general self- efficacy scale was utilized to assess the self-efficacy
of the respondents. Resilience scale given by Smith et al. in 2008, was used to measure
resilience. The parental authority survey proposed by Buri in 1991 was utilized to evaluate
parental rearing.

Regression analysis was performed, to assess the relationship between these variables.
Respondents who participated in the study were, one hundred & twenty-nine in number. Results
of the study indicated that the adolescents with low self-viability, low esteem & resilience used
maladaptive adapting techniques, frequently to cope up with the circumstances. Discoveries from
this study, focused on the requirement, for interventions, to expand individual’s self-adequacy,
esteem & flexibility, so that people can utilize more versatile & adapting techniques.

Enejoh et al. (2016) explored that very less knowledge is available on the impact of self-esteem
on the risky sexual behavior. To overcome the limitation they performed, research on association
of sexual behavior involving risk and the relation with self-esteem. Rationale of this study was to
know whether high self-esteem predicts lower sexual behavior in comparison to adolescents,
with less esteem. Survey was performed on three hundred & sixty adolescents of high schools,
situated in Nigeria. The Rosenberg scale, was utilized to know about adolescent’s esteem. A
screener for HIV was used to explore the sexual conduct problems. Chi square ratio was used to
determine the differences, based on the tools applied. A ’t’-test was conducted to find out the
differences based on the mean scores provided by the screener & based on esteem. Gender
differences were not found based on self-esteem of adolescents. Programs aimed at reducing
risky sexual behavior. Interventions should be provided by the educators & researchers to raise
the self-esteem of adolescence.
Atindanbila et al. (2012) analyzed the impact of parenting, on esteem & confidence, among
adolescents of a high school. In all, one hundred & sixty-five respondents were selected. Both
males & females having age (between 15-20 years) were chosen for study by stratified random
sampling. The cross-sectional design for survey, was utilized for satisfying, the needs of the
study. The Rosenberg scale was used to gather the information, based on the esteem of the
adolescents. Outcomes of the study showed that the esteem of adolescents living with the dual
parent families was more than those living with single parents. Results showed that male
adolescents had more esteem, than the female adolescents.

Driscoll (2012) investigated the connection between the nurturing styles of parents & self-esteem
of the adolescents. Information from hundred & eighty-three respondents was gathered through
an internet-based survey. Nurturing styles of parents were surveyed by using a four-component
model & esteem was assessed by using two distinctive scales. Various examinations were
finished. It was concluded that esteem changed with the age, also with the nurturing styles of
parents. The study explored the relation of variables & their dependence on each other.

Yaacob (2006), examined the relationship between parent & adolescents’ self-esteem. According
the researcher mother child relationship forms the basis of every future relationship. The result of
the advancement & development of an adolescent depends upon their self-image strength. They
should give up their self-image, to promote a more developed self-appreciation. It was assessed
that working of the entire family, is dependent on the personal relations & intimacy of the young
mind in a family.

Studies Related to Single Parent

Mishra et al. (2021) conducted a study, on single parenthood. This study concentrated on case
studies related to divorced single mothers in the Indian context. According to the researchers,
change in family structure in India, has given rise to single parent families, enormously. Very less
research is performed on the problems, faced by single parents, particularly women. The single
parenthood, poses a serious challenge to women in India. After the marital disruption, to earn the
livelihood for a single mother seems very difficult & challenging.

Mohan & Priya (2020) explored in their descriptive study about the peer group relationship
&selfesteem in adolescents of single parent families. Imbalanced family systems can create a
sense of insecurity in adolescents. In such families there is lack of proper concern & support.
This reduces self-esteem in them. They look for more & more of support, in their peer group.
Data was collected, from two schools of Kollam district in Kerala, by a survey conducted using a
questionnaire.

Sample included 51 adolescents of class 8th-12th. The tools consisted of socio-demographic

data, peer group relation scale & Rosenberg’s scale, to measure the self-esteem. Results have
shown a significant relation between self-esteem & peer group relationship, of adolescents.

Gupta &Kashyap (2020), worked on the well-being of an adolescent which is challenged in

single parent families whether it is emotional, behavioral, educational, psychological, or social.
In an ideal setting, both father & mother have a specific role to play, which provides a sense of
security & stability to their children. In single parent families these expectations are not fulfilled.
In India, single parent families are increasing affected by various factors. One of the important
factors is the influence of western societies. Emphasis in this article was on coping strategies,
adopted by single parents, for the difficult situations, faced by them, in improving well-being of
their adolescents.

Zoleykha (2017) studied the life spent by the adolescents of single & intact families. Focus of the
study was also on the behavioral problems faced by adolescents of single parent family. Total
two hundred & fourteen adolescents were selected for the study. Fifty percent of the respondents
were from the intact families, as well. Equal number of male & females were selected. Causal
comparative approach was followed. Significant differences were obtained in terms of the
behavioral problems, shown by two groups. Anxiety & depression were more among children
with the single parent. Implications were provided, for the future research on single parenting for
the betterment of adolescents.

Daryanai et al. (2016) conducted a study on a sample of 385 adolescents and their single
mothers. Both male & female adolescents were selected as the sample. It was found that single
mothers show poor parenting behaviors, as compared to mothers in intact families. Single
mothers try to control behaviors of their children psychologically therefore, increasing the
externalizing disorders, in adolescents. It was found to be more pronounced in girls. They also
found that compromised parenting practices are adopted by single mothers. Thus, low
socioeconomic status is linked to single parenting.

Malik &Irshad (2012), studied on depression, stress and anxiety, to analyze the relationship of
single parenting & its contribution to behavior problems, in children of such families. Sample
constituted thirty-three parents & thirty-three school going children. Information regarding
demographics was collected. A scale was used to measure stress, depression & anxiety, in the
study. Questionnaire was used for assessing the behavior problems in children. Independent
sample tests & Pearson’s correlation were applied, as statistical techniques to analyze the results.
Single parents were found to have higher scores in terms of their anxiety, depression & stress as
compared to the control group. Results were also significant, for the behavior problems,
experienced by children. Hypotheses framed for the purpose of study were accepted. It was
concluded that single parenting contributes to the behavior problems, in children as more
depression, stress & anxiety is found in these parents.
 CHAPTER Ⅲ

METHODOLOGY
 METHODOLOGY

Aim:

To assess the self-esteem and resilience among young adults of single parents.

Plan:

To administer the Rosenberg’s self-esteem scale and Connor-Davidson’s Resilience scale to

subject. Score and interpret the responses.

Operational Definition:

Resilience:

Resilience refers to one’s capacity to recover or adjust when confronted with difficulties,
obstacles or failures.

Self – esteem:

Self-esteem is the overarching perception of one’s self-worth and significance, influencing how
individuals view themselves and their self-assurance.

Single parent child:

Single parent children are kids brought up by just one parent, often because of demise, divorce,
separation or the non presence of the other parent.

Early adulthood:
 Young adults approximately ages from 20 to 30 years, it’s the phase where individual is expected
to become financially independent, to take responsibility, to play a active role in the societal
groups. Young adults play avital role in developing of the community/family. They are the role
models of the younger generations, it might be either in family or society.

Objectives of the study:

• To find out the correlation between self-esteem and resilience among young adults of single
parents.
• To find out the significant difference between self-esteem male and female young adults of
single parents.
• To find out the significant difference in resilience male and female among young adults of single
parents.

Need for the study:

To know the significance of self-esteem and resilience among young adults of single parents.

Study design:

Between group design

Hypothesis of the study:

• H1- There is a positive correlation between self-esteem and resilience among young adults of
single parents.
• H2- There is no significant difference between self-esteem male and female young adults of
single parents.
• H3- There is no significant difference between resilience male and female young adults of single
parents.

Variables in the study:

Dependent variable: Self-esteem and Resilience

Independent variable: Young adults of single parents

 Measurement tools:

• Rosenberg’s self-esteem scale

The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale presented high ratings in reliability areas; internal consistency
was 0.77, minimum Coefficient of Reproducibility was at least 0.90 (M. Rosenberg, 1965, and
personal communication, April 22, 1987). A varied selection of independent studies each using
such samples as – parents, men over 60, high school students, and civil servants – showed alpha
coefficients ranging from 0.72 to 0.87 (all fairly high). Test-retest reliability for the 2-week
interval was calculated at 0.85, the 7-month interval was calculated at 0.63 (Silber &Tippett,
1965, Shorkey& Whiteman, 1978). The RES is closely connected with the
CoopersmithSelfEsteem Inventory.

• Connor Davidson’s resilience scale

The CD-RISC is a concise, self-evaluated or rated, amount of adaptability that has sound
psychometric properties. The CD-RISC has demonstrated good reliability (0.88-0.89) &testretest
reliability (0.87).Psychometric properties of the Connor Davidson Resilience Scale (CDRISC)
were studied, in the Indian context, by Singh &Xiaonan in 2017.

The CD-RISC consists of 25 items. These are evaluated on a 5-point Likertscale,having range
from 0-4. These responses are: not true at all (0), rarely true (1), sometimes true (2), often true
(3) & true nearly all of the time (4). Thus the resultant scores lie, between 0-100.Total scores are
calculated by summing all 25 items. A higher score indicates higher resilience.

Sample unit:

Young adults of single parents

Sample size: 125

Gender MALE FEMALE

 N 60 65

Sampling design:

Purposive sampling

The purposive sampling was used to collect the data, purposive sampling technique is a
nonprobability sampling that is selected based on characteristics of a population and the
objective of the study.

Sample procedure:

The purposive sampling was used to collect the data, purposive sampling technique is a
nonprobability sampling that is selected based on characteristics of a population and the study.

Procedure:

The subject is given the Rosenberg’s self-esteem scale and Connor Davidson’s resilience scale
and the following instructions are given. After the instructions administer both the test to the
subject. Both the test usually take15-20 minutes to be completed. After which both the test is
scored referring to the scoring keys and interpreted using the norms.

Instructions:

Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale

Below is a list of statements dealing with your general feelings about yourself. If you strongly
agree, circle SA. If you agree with the statement, circle A. If you disagree, circle D. If you
strongly disagree, circle SD.

Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC)

 The following is an optional topic, tick the option you agree with to indicate your level of
agreement or disagreement, among them “not true at all (=1); a little true (=2); somewhat true
(=3); mostly true (=4); true all the time (=5)”.

Precautions:

• Instructions given should be clear to the subject.

• The subject should answer all the questions.

• The subject should interpret the questions by himself / herself.

• Ensure the about the confidentiality

Pilot study:

An initial pilot study was conducted using appropriate tools to determine the right direction for
the main study. The pilot study had inclusion sample size of 10 male and female young adults of
single parents. The test shows reliability value of 0.65 and 0.925 for Rosenburg’s self-esteem
scale & ConnorDavidson’s resilience scale respectively, which indicates that the tests are
reliable.

Inclusion criteria:

• Single parent children

• Age group between (20-30years)

• Students

• Basic English comprehensive skill.

Exclusion criteria:

• Participant having both parents

• Age group of below 20 years.

• Age group of above 30 years.

• Non-Basic English comprehensive skill.

CHAPTER Ⅵ

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

 RESULT AND DISCUSSION

Data analysis has an important role in the interpretation of the research findings. Data is
always collected with a purpose in mind. While planning a scientific study the method of data
analysis is mostly kept in mind and analysis is carried out accordingly. The data for the present
study was collected with the help of Morris Rosenberg’s self-esteem scale and Test and
ConnorDavidson’s resilience scale; which have already been mentioned in the previous chapter.
In the present chapter, the collected data has been carefully analyzed with appropriate statistical
techniques in the light of the objectives set forth for the investigation.

The study was conducted on 125 participants aged between 20 to 30 years, among which
60 were male and 65 were female.

Along with the questionnaires, participants consent other demographic details like Name,
Gender, Age, Place of living, current status, marital status, educational qualification, type of
family, currently living with (mother or father) and reason for single parenting were collected.
Hypothesis testing was done using this data. Descriptive statistics are interpreted by analyzing
mean score, standard deviation and t-test and Pearson’s correlation was done to find the
relationship between self-esteem and resilience using SPSS 20 Version.

Table 1: Shows descriptive Statistics of self-esteem and resilience among young adults of single
parents.

Descriptive Statistics
N Mean Std. Deviation Skewness Kurtosis

Resilience total 125 86.9760 17.87342 -.359 -.618

Self-esteem total
125 16.6400 4.62183 .299 1.046

Graph 1 showing descriptive statistics of self-esteem and resilience among young adults of
single parents.

5
4.4 4.5
4.5 4.3

4
3.5
3.5

3 2.8
2.4 2.5
2.5

2 1.8

1.5

0.5

0
mean sd skewness kurtosis

resilience selfesteem

The descriptive statistics presented in table 1 shows the total mean score, SD, skewness and
kurtosis of the self-esteem and resilience among young adults of single parents. The result found
that the young adults of single parents have moderate level of resilience and self-esteem as
described by Rosenberg’s self-esteem scale and Connor Davidson’s resilience scale. For the
resilience total mean score is found to be 86.97 and total SD is found to be 17.87; for the
selfesteem total mean score is found to be 16.64 and total SD is found to be 4.62 respectively.
The present study is found moderate level of resilience and self-esteem among young adults of
single parents.
 In the resilience skewness is -.359 and kurtosis is -.618, here both skewness and kurtosis are
in the range of +/-1.96 hence it is normally distributed.
In the self-esteem skewness is .299 and kurtosis is 1.04, here both skewness and kurtosis are
in the range of +/-1.96 hence it is normally distributed.

Objective 1: To find out the correlation between self-esteem and resilience among young adults
of single parents.

Table 2: Shows correlation between self-esteem and resilience among young adults of single
parents.

Correlations
Selfestee resilience
m

Pearson 1

Correlation .224* .012

Selfesteem Sig. (2-tailed)

N 125 125

Pearson
.224* 1
Resilience Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .012

N 125 125

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2tailed).

Table 2 – shows the correlation between self-esteem and resilience among young adults of single
parents. As we can observe in the above table, there is a correlation between self-esteem and
resilience with the value of r = .224, with corresponding p value .012 which is statistically
correlated at 0.05 level. Hence there is a significant relationship between self-esteem and
resilience among young adults of single parents.

Therefore, Hypothesis – 2 has been accepted which states that there is significant relationship
between self-esteem and resilience among young adults of single parents.
This study is not supporting any other studies like Sharma &Jasleen (2017), undertook a study to
examine the resilience & parent - adolescent attachment, to assess the happiness level in
adolescents living in families, having single parent, Koskinen (2016), explored on relationship
between resilience, self-efficacy, parental rearing, inefficient coping strategies.

Objective 2: To find out the significant difference in self-esteem male and female among young
adults of single parents.

Table 3 Shows independent t-test for self-esteem among young adults of single parents.

Independent Samples Test

Self-esteem N Mean SD P-Value

Male 60 44.39 21.18 .312

Female 65 39.58 15.48 .312

Table - 3 shows independent -test for self-esteem among young adults of single parents.

Group 1 indicate self esteem among young adults of single parents showed the result of male and
the sample size is 60, the Mean is 44.39 and Standard deviation is 21.18 and the P value is .312
Group 2 indicates self esteem among young adults of single parents showed the result of female
and the sample size is 65, the Mean is 39.58 and the standard deviation is 15.48 and the P value
is .312
Thus there is no significance difference between group 1 and group 2 , the p value is .312 which
is greater than the significant level of 0.05 .
Thus hypothesis 1 proved .
Table 4 shows independent t-test for resilience among young adults of single parents.

Independent Samples Test

Resilience N Mean SD P-Value

Male 60 44.39 21.18 .312

Female 65 39.58 15.48 .312

Table -4 shows independent t-test and for resilience among young adults of single parents.

Group 1 indicate resilience among young adults of single parents the results of 60
male have Mean is 15.90 , standard deviation is of 10.78, with the P value of .172
Group 2 indicates resilience among the young adults of single parents showed of 65 female have
Mean is of 15.90, standard deviation is 11.06 and with the P value of .172.
Thus there is no significance difference between group 1 and group 2 , as the P value
is .172 which is greater than the significant level of 0.05.
Thus hypothesis is proved.

.
 CHAPTER Ⅴ

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

51
SUMMARY

The purpose of this research was to assess the relationship between self-esteem and resilience

(Objective 1) states that “To find out the correlation between self-esteem and resilience among
young adults of single parents”; (Objective 2) states that “To find out the significant difference in
self-esteem male and female among young adults of single parents” and (Objective 3) states that
“To find out the significant difference in resilience male and female among young adults of
single parents”.

The between group design, correlative study design is used to conduct the research.

Rosenburg’s self-esteem scale was developed by Morris Rosenburg and Connor-Davidson’s

resilience scale developed by Kathryn M. Connor and Jonathan R.T. Davidson; which have
already been mentioned in the previous chapter. In the present chapter, the collected data has
been carefully analyzed with appropriate statistical techniques in the light of the objectives set
forth for the investigation. The sample of 125 participants responses from young adults of single
parents was collected by using purposive sampling technique. Detailed instructions were given
to the participants and the responses were obtained and which was scored later. The obtained
scores were subjected to statistical analysis using SPSS version 2.0.

Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the broad aspect of the data obtained such as mean
and standard deviation. The correlation was used to find the relationship between the self-esteem
and resilience. Independent sample t test was used to find the difference in self-esteem male and
female among young adults of single parents. Independent sample t test was used to find the
difference in resilience male and female among young adults of single parents.

52
 CONCLUSION
The research was conducted with the main purpose of identifying the relationship between the
self-esteem and resilience among young adults of single parents.

As the conclusion it can be stated that

1. There is a significant relationship between self-esteem and resilience among young adults of
single parents.
2. There is no significant difference in difference in self-esteem male and female among young
adults of single parents
3. There is no significant difference in difference in resilience male and female among young adults
of single parents

MAJOR FINDINGS OF THE STUDY

• There is a moderate level of self-esteem found among young adults of single parents.

• There is a moderate level of resilience found among young adults of single parents.

• There is a significant relationship between self-esteem and resilience among young adults of
single parents.
• There is significant difference in difference in self-esteem male and female among young adults
of single parents
• There is significant difference in difference in resilience male and female among young adults of
single parents

LIMITATIONS

• Since, the participants responded at their leisure intervening variables could have an impact such
as personal circumstances, health, emotions, fatigue, distraction, and time could have also played
a role.

53
• This research was conducted on young adults of single parents of Karnataka state, the test may
differ in results when it given to other region young adults of single parents.

• The sample was limited in size due to specific requirements of the study.

• Responses collected only from participants having single parent (mother or father)

• Responses collected only from participants between the ages of 20 to 30 years

SUGGESTIONS

The present study is an attempt to study the function of self-esteem and resilience.

To suggest problems for future research, some of the points are suggested:-

• A study can be effectively done on other positive emotions to suggest rightful interventions for
the group.
• A comparative study of participants having single parents and both parents can be done.

• Studies may be undertaken to find out the relationship between of self-esteem and social support.
• The study can be done on different age group people and different region people.

IMPLICATIONS
• These findings contribute valuable insights into the self-esteem and resilience dynamics within
the context of single parent households
• This study focuses on building self-esteem which could indirectly contribute to improved
resilience and vice versa
• Mental health support for single parent families

54
 REFERENCES

Belhekar,V.M.(2019).What Lies at the Center of Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale? Network

Analysis and Latent Structure of Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale for Indian Data.

Blascovich, J. &Tomaka, J. (1991). Measures of self-esteem. In J. P. Robinson, P. R.

Cheeseman, S. (2010). The experience of single mothers: Resilience in their multiple roles.

Chen, J. D. & George, R. (2005).Cultivating Resilience in Children from Divorced Families.

TheFamilyJournal,13(4), 452-455.

Chen, Y., Huang, C., Cheung, S., Greene, L. & Lu, S. (2019). Resilience, emotional problems,
and behavioral problems of adolescents in China: roles of mindfulness and life skills. Health
Social Care Community, 27, 1158-1166.

Conner, D. R. (1993).Managing at the speed of change: How resilient managers succeed and
prosper where others fail. New York, NY: Villard Books.

Connor, K.M. & Davidson, J.R.T. (2003). Development of a new resilience scale: The
ConnorDavidson resilience scale (CD-RISC).Depression and Anxiety, 18(2), 76-82.

Demo, D. H. & Alan, C. A. (1988). The impact of divorce on children. Journal of Marriage and
the Family, 50, 619-648.

Dias, P.C. &Cadime, I. (2017).Protective factors and resilience in adolescents: The mediating
role of self-regulation. PsicologíaEducativa, 23(1), 37-43.

Dray,J.(2021).Child and adolescent mental health and resilience focused Interventions: A

conceptual analysis to inform future research. International Journal Environmental Research
Public Health, 18, 7315.

Driscoll, L.C.(2013). Parenting Styles and Self-Esteem. Scripps Senior Theses. Paper 155.
Fergus, S. & Zimmerman, M.A. (2005). Adolescent resilience: a framework for understanding
healthy development in the face of risk. Annual Review of Public Health, 26, 399-419.

55
Gray, L. B., Williams, V.S.L. & Hancock, T.D. (1997). An item response theory analysis of the
Rosenberg self-esteem scale. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23(5), 443-451.

Greeff, A.P. &Ritman, I.N.(2005). Individual characteristics associated with resilience in single-
parent families. Psychological Reports, 96(1), 36-42.

Gujar, N.M. & Ali, A. (2019).Effects of psychological capital and self-esteem on emotional and
behavioral problems among adolescents. Journal Mental Health Human Behavior, 24(2), 85-90.

Günseli, Y. &Sibel, S. (2017).The Relation between Resilience and Life Satisfaction in

PreService Preschool Teachers in Turkey. Journal on Educational Psychology, 11(1), 5-13.

Gupta, A.&Kashyap, S. (2020).Growing up in a single parent family; A Determining factor of

Well-being. Advanced Journal of Social Science, 7(1), 138-144.

Harkness, S.(2020).The Rise in Single-Mother Families and Children’s Cognitive Development:

Evidence from Three British Birth Cohorts. Child Development, 91(5), 1762-1785

Hawley,D.R.&DeHaan,L.(1996).Toward a definition of family resilience: integrating life span

and family perspectives. Family Process, 35,283-298.

Hawley, D.R.(2000).Clinical implications of family resilience. The American Journal of Family

Therapy, 28, 101-116.

Crandal, R. (1973). The measurement of self-esteem and related constructs, Pp. 80-82 in J.P.

Lorenzo-Hernandez, J. &Oullette, S.C. (1998). Ethnic identity, self-esteem, and values in

Dominicans, Puerto Ricans, and African Americans. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28,
2007-2024.

McCreary, M.L, Slavin, L.A., & Berry, E.J. (1996). Predicting problem behavior and self-esteem
among African American Adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Research, 11, 216-234.

56
Robinson & P.R. Shaver (Eds), Measures of social psychological attitudes. Revised edition. Ann
Arbor: ISR. Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton
University Press. View

Simmons, R.G., Rosenberg, F., & Rosenberg, M. (1973). Disturbance in the self-image at
adolescence. American Sociological Review, 38, 553-568. This paper includes the six item
version referenced by McCreary et al. (1996).

Wylie, R. C. (1974). The self-concept. Revised edition. Lincoln, Nebraska: University of

Nebraska Press.
Henderson,H.L.D. (2011). Urban African-American Single Mothers Using Resiliency and Racial

Socialization to Influence Academic Success in Their Young Sons.Doctoral dissertation, Texas

A&M University

Herz, L. &Gullone, E. (1999). The relationship between self-esteem and parenting style: A cross-
cultural comparison of Australian and Vietnamese Australian adolescents. Journal of Cross-
Cultural Psychology, 30(6), 742-761.

Hess, C. R.,Papas, M.A., Maureen, M.S. & Black, M. (2002). Resilience among African
American Adolescent Mothers: Predictors of Positive Parenting in Early Infancy, Journal of
Pediatric Psychology, 27(7), 619-629.

Hibbert, C. (2013). If Self-Esteem is a Myth, then What is the Truth: UnderstandingSelf-Worth.

Available at:http://www.psychologytoday.com

Hilton, J. M. &Desrochers, S. (2002). Children's behavior problems in single-parent and

married-parent families: Development of a predictive model. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage,
37(1-2), 13-36.

Hopf,S. M.(2010). “Risk & Resilience in Children"CopingwithParentalDivorce"Dartmouth

Journal of Science. Retrieved from: dujs. dartmouth.edu.

57
 APPENDIX

INFORMED CONSENT FORM

Title: SIGNIFICANCE OF SELF-ESTEEM AND RESILIENCE AMONG YOUNG

ADULTS OF SINGLE PARENTS
Information to participants: The aim of this to study the sleep quality and level of stress amongst
chauffeurs. Study Assessments: This study will be carried out using google forms/paper pencil
questionnaires. The assessments on questionnaires will take approximately 15 minutes. There
may be no direct benefits by participating in this study; however, the findings will help the
researchers. Confidentiality: All the information provided by you will be kept confidential.
Information provided by you will be open for scrutiny only for regulatory authorities and
institute ethics committee. The results of this research study may be presented at scientific
meetings or in publications; however, your identity will not be disclosed at these meetings.
Before signing this consent form, you are free to ask the me any question about the study that is
not clear to you. Undertaking by the Researcher: the information you provide will be kept
confidential and the data will be used only for the purpose of the research. You have the right to
refuse consent or withdraw from the study at any point without giving any reason. If you have
any doubts about the study, please feel to clarify the same. You are free to contact me for any
further clarification or assistance if you so desire. Consent: I have been informed about the
procedures of the study. I have understood that I have the right to refuse my consent or withdraw
it at any point. I am aware that by participating in this study, I will have to give time for the
assessment by the researcher. I.........................................................., the undersigned, give my
consent to be a participant of this study.

For Queries Contact: Pranith, student of M.Sc Psychology, Department of Psychology,

Bangalore University, Bengaluru. Phone: 7019096484 or email:

shettypranith125@gmail.com Research Guide Dr. Sowmyashree K N, Assistant Professor of
Psychology, Bangalore University, Bengaluru.
Signature of the participant Date:

58
DEMOGRAPHIC DETAILS

Name/Initials: _______________________ Contact Details: ________________________

Gender: Male_________ Female_________ Others____________

Age: ___________ Place of Living: ___________________________________________

Educational Qualification: ____________________________________

Type of Family: Nuclear family_________________ Joint family ___________________

Marital Status: Single___________ Married___________ Others_____________

Currently living with: Mother ___________ Father ________________

Reason for single parenting: Demise ________ Divorce ______________ Separated

__________

Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale

Instructions: Below is a list of statements dealing with your general feelings about yourself. If
you strongly agree, circle SA. If you agree with the statement, circle A. If you disagree, circle
D.
If you strongly disagree, circle SD.
_____ 1. On the whole, I am satisfied with myself.
_____ 2. At times I think I am no good at all.
_____ 3. I feel that I have a number of good qualities.
_____ 4. I am able to do things as well as most other people.
_____ 5. I feel 1do not have much to be proud of.
_____ 6. I certainly feel useless at times.
_____ 7. I feel that I'm a person of worth.

_____ 8. I wish I could have more respect for myself.

59
_____ 9. All in all, I am inclined to think that I am a failure.

_____ 10. I take a positive attitude toward myself.

Scoring: SA=3, A=2, D=1, SD=0. Items with an asterisk are reverse scored, that is, SA=0, A=1,
D=2, SD=3. Sum the scores for the 10 items. The higher the score, the higher the self esteem.

Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC)

The following is an optional topic,Tick the option you agree with to indicate your level of
agreement or disagreement,among them “not true at all (=1); a little true (=2); somewhat true
(=3); mostly true (=4); true all the time (=5)”.

11 Can handle unpleasant feelings 1 2 3 4 5

12 Know where to get help 1 2 3 4 5

13 Have to act on a hunch 1 2 3 4 5

14 Things happen for a reason 1 2 3 4 5

60
15 Tend to bounce back after illness or hardship 1 2 3 4 5

16 Best effort no matter what 1 2 3 4 5

17 Able to adapt to change 1 2 3 4 5

18 Coping with stress strengthens 1 2 3 4 5

19 1 2 3 4 5
Past success gives confidence for new challenges

20 Pride in your achievements 1 2 3 4 5

21 One works to attain one’s goals 1 2 3 4 5

22 See the humorous side of things 1 2 3 4 5

23 Sometimes fate and God can help 1 2 3 4 5

24 Close and secure relationships 1 2 3 4 5

25 Can deal with whatever comes 1 2 3 4 5

61