39980801

PertanikaJ. Soc. Sei. & Hum. 16(2): 285-299 (2008) ISSN: 0128-7702 Universiti Ptitra Malaysia Press

Family Functioning, Perceived Social Support, AcademicPerformance and Self-Esteem

Tarn Cai LanDepartment of Psychology, School of Health and Natural Sciences, Sunway University College

No. 5, Jalan Kolej, Bandar Sunway, 46150 Petalingjaya, Selangor, MalaysiaE-mail: [email protected]

ABSTRACTThis study aimed to investigate the relationships between family functioning, social support, academicperformance and self-esteem among young adults. A single survey was carried out to gather data fromthe subjects. The sample consisted of 378 students, aged between 18 to 26 years old. The sampleswere drawn through a convenience and stratified sampling from Universiti Tunkti Abdul Rahmanand Sunway University College, Malaysia. Bivariate correlation and linear regression were used toanalyse the relationships between the variables. T-test was also employed to in order to find out thedifferences between genders on the academic performance and self-esteem. The results revealed thatthere was a significant relationship between family functioning and social support on students' self-esteem. Nevertheless, no correlation was found between family functioning and social support on thestudents' academic performance. On the other hand, females outperformed their male counterpartsin their academic performance, but showed no significant differences in their self-esteem.

Keywords: Academic performance, family functioning, self-esteem, social support

ABBREVIATIONSB: Unstandardized CoefficientsB: Standardized CoefficientsF: F testN: Sample sizep: Probabilityr: Coefficient CorrelationSE B: Standard Error of Estimatet: t testR: Coefficient RegressionR^ : Adjusted R Squared: Level of gender differences

INTRODUCTIONIn recent years, the quality of family functioninghas been an interesting study of the society. Duringthe developing years of an individual, family playsa significant role in children's life. Children'slevel of self-esteem and academic performanceare mostly influenced by their family (Mclnerney,Dowson, Yeung and Nelson, 1998). In some ways.

family is an important source of social supportfor them, and likewise, the social support whichconsists of friends and classmates might also playa role in developing their self-esteem and thelevel of academic performance. Adolescentswho experience "unpleasant family interactionsand family stress" grow up to be incapable ofexpressing their thoughts effectively and morelikely to express the dissatisfaction of their familyinteractions when associating with their peers.In the long run, these children will grow intoadolescents who have negative views of themselves(Shagle and Barber, 1995). Similarly, this willbe reflected in their level of perceived socialsupport from their family, friends and significantothers. Cumsille and Epstein (1994) mentionedin their study that the perceived social supportfrom friends could serve as defence towards theprogress of depression, when support was failed tobe provided by the child's family. Before furtherdiscussion, the definition of variables and researchevidences should be reviewed.

Received: 22 May 2008Accepted: 18 August 2008

Tam Cai Lian

DEnNITIONEamily EunctioningIn this context, a good family functioning refers tofamily members who are willing to solve problemstogether, showing concern towards each other, andthere are fewer quarrels (Blake and Slate, 1993).According to Berg-Cross, Kidd and Carr (1990),cohesive families are characterized by a familyatmosphere of support and understanding. Shek(2002), on the other hand, defines family tnctioningas the "quality of family life at the systemic and dyadiclevels and concerns Wellness, competence, strengths,and weaknesses of a family".

Social SupportHouse (1981) defined social support as the nowof emotional concern, instrumental aid, and/orappraisal between people. According to Maher,Mora and Leventhal (2006), perceived support isthe subjective sense that people are available andwilling to satisfy a range of roles which includeemotional, friendship, and tangible needs. Inthe study by Malecki and Demaray (2006), socialsupport was conceptualized as the support whichstudents perceived as being available to them fromtheir parents, teachers, classmates, close friends,and their schools.

Academic PerformanceAcademic achievement, which is similar toacademic performance, has been defined broadly.Academic achievement is the inclusion of outcomeswhich are' related empirically or conceptuallyto school achievement. These include grades,academic motivation, and behaviour problems(Mandara, 2006). On the other hand, Maleckiand Demaray (2006) conceptualized academicachievement simply as the grade point average(GPA) in schools.Self-EsteemFreshbach and Weiner (1991) define self-esteemas the positive or negative value a person placeson his or her own attribute. Self-esteem alsomeans how a person feels about himself or herself.According to Cashwell (1995), an individual withhigh self-esteem considers himself/ herself aworthy person, while an individual with low self-esteem is often seen as one who engages in self-rejection, self-dissatisfaction, and self-contempt.Self-esteem is crucial in maintaining or restoringan individual's physical and mental health.

RESEARCH EVIDENCESEamily Eunctioning and Academic PerformanceAccording to Scott (2004), the quality offamily life, which is also a family functioning,is causally and indirectly related to academicperformance. Problems such as academic failureand underachievement have been linked tofamily functioning (family life-family conflict,communication and organization). Scott (2004)indicated in his study that children who came from"intact" homes were more advantaged in theiracademic achievement. In his study, parent-youthcommunication in early adolescence was a keyfactor in leading to good academic achievement.In addition, a study by Shek (2002) found thatfamily functioning had a strong connection withadolescents' adjustment (academic performance,satisfaction with academic performance andconduct).

A study carried out on the African-Americanfamilies revealed higher ovei;all GPAs, Mathand Science results, and verbal performanceswhen parents were actively involved in theirchildren academic pursue (Mandara, 2006). Inaddition, another study of Duchesne and Larose(2007) found that adolescents' attachment toboth parents was positively correlated with theiracademic motivation. They attained similar resultsin their study which showed that increased contactswith parents, in a positive nature, undoubtedlyincreased the students' achievement.

However, the study of Walker and Satterwhite(2002), on the academic performances amongAfrican American and Caucasian college students,suggested that the family has important but lesseffect at the college level. When comparing theWhite and African American families, in termsof adolescents' academic performance andfamily functioning, it was revealed that the familyrelationships between the two ethnic backgroundsdid not significantly differ, but the Whites wereindicated to have better academic performance.As a whole, the evidences gathered from a numberof research revealed that family functioning hada strong connection with adolescents' academicachievement. However, there were also studieswhich suggested that family functioning hadimportant but less effect at the college level.Social Support and Academic PerformancePrevious research discovered weak evidencebetween social support and academic performance.Malecki and Elliott (1999) investigated the

286 PertanikaJ. Soc. Sei. & Hum. Vol. 16 (2) 2008

Family Functioning, Perceived Social Support, Academic Performance and Self-Esteem

relationship between social support and grade pointaverage (GPA) in a sample of seventh thorough12* graders. They found a small but significantrelationship between the students' perceivedsupport and their overall GPA. Additionally, theyalso found a significant relationship betweenteachers' support and GPA. Similarly, Rosenfeld,Richman, and Bowen (2000) found that studentswith high social support from parents, teachers,and friends had better grades as compared withthose without such support.

To ftzrther sttpport this point, Malecki andDemaray (2006) reported that regardless of thestudents' socioeconomic status, higher socialsupport in terms of parental support and classmatesupport were related to a higher GPA. In the samevein, Levitt, Guacci-Franco and Levitt (1994) alsofottnd a significant relationship between socialsupport and standardized test scores in a sampleof multi-ethnic students; however, no relationshipwas found between social support and GPA.

A study conducted by Mclnerney, Dowson,Yeung and Nelson (1998) indicated that parent,teacher and peer support had a significant positiveimpact on the students' interest in schoolworkand their GPA. Additionally, a study conductedby Degarmo and Martinez (2006) revealedthat combined sources of social support wereimportant in contributing to the academic well-being of Latino youths.

On the other end of the continent, there arestttdies which have yielded a negative relationshipbetween peer social support and academicachievements. This means the lower tbe socialsupport that adolescent perceives form theirpeers, the higher their achievement outcomeswill be. This could be due to the fact adolescentsfelt challenged when they did not receive socialsupport, and therefore used this factor as theirmotivation to achieve academically (Cauce, Feinerand Primavera, 1882; Gottereil, 1992).

In sum, most sttidies found that studentswho received high social support from parents,teachers, and friends had better grades comparedto those without such support. On the otherhand, only few studies have shown the negativerelationships between the two variables.

Family Functioning and Self-EsteemFamily functioning was found to be linked withadolescents' self-esteem in a Chinese sample (Shek,2002). The participants in the current consisted

of 1519 secondary school students, ranging inthe age from 11 to 18 years old. The ChineseFamily Assessment Instrument and Self-EsteemScale were used to gather the necessary data.The findings of the current research indicatedthat family functioning was indeed associatedwith students' self-esteem. According to Mandaraand Murray (2000), family functioning has shownto have a positive effect on self-esteem. Bothresearchers conducted a study on 116 fifteen-year-old African Axnericans. The participants providedinformation on their perceptions of self-esteemand family functioning using the MDSEI (Multi-Dimensional Self-Esteem Inventory) and FES(Family Environment Scale). Indeed, the resultsrevealed tbat the optimal family functioning was astrong predictor. This implied that the better thefamily functioning, the higher the self-esteem ofthe African American adolescents. Shek (1998)also found that discrepancies in the adolescent'sperceptions of family functioning influenced thepsychological well-being (self-esteem, feelings ofhopelessness, life satisfaction, purpose in life andgeneral psychiatric morbidity) over time.

Brody and Flor (1997) found similar resultswhere self-esteem was linked with family routinesand the quality of mother-child relationship.Ind iv idua ls who viewed the i r p a r e n t s 'communication as supportive and open wouldmost probably have higher self-esteem than thosewho perceived their parents' communicationpatterns as controlling and unstipportive (Blakeand Slate, 1993). These results are consistentwith the findings of Rochelle's (2001) study,which found that there was a significant positivecorrelation between the perceived family supportand self-esteem. However, a study in which thesample was a group of Chinese adolescence fromthe Mainland China, found that parental supportwas not a distinct predictor of the adolescents'self-esteem (Bush, Peterson, Cobas and Supple,2002).

In sum, various research evidences revealedthat family functioning was associated with self-esteem, whereby the optimal family functioningwas a strong predictor. Limited research impliedthat family functioning was not a significantpredictor for higher self-esteem.

Social Support and Self-EsteemIt is suggested that individuals who perceive thepresence of supportive family and peers are morelikely to feel greater self-esteem (Pierce et al., 2000,

PertanikaJ. Soc. Sei. & Hum. Vol. 16 (2) 2008 287

Tam Cai Lian

as cited in Measelle, Stice and Springer, 2006).Their research revealed that more significantpositive effects of support were received from theirteachers and friends on adolescents' self-esteemover time as compared to the support from eitherthe mother or father.

Mclnerney, Dowson, Yeung and Nelson (1998)found similar findings that parent, teacher andpeer support had significantly positive impacts onstudents' self-esteem, in which the teachers playedthe strongest influential role on the self-esteem ofthe high-school sub-sample. Additionally, in thestudy by Shute, Blasio and Williamson (2002),self-esteeip was found to have a significantlypositive correlation with the overall social supportsatisfaction and the size of the support network.

In sut, previous research evidences revealedthat social support had a positive relationship withadolescents' self-esteem. This finding also suggeststhat the higher the level of perceived social support,the better the level of self-esteem will be.

Gender Differences in Academic PerformancePrior to 1970s, interest in gender differencesin academic performance revolved around thepossibility that girls were outperforming boysin reading during the elementary school years(Brophy, 1985, as cited in Wilkinson and Marrett,1988). Girls performed better in reading andother related subjects throughout elementaryschool and into the adolescent years (Dwyer andJohnson, 1997; Entwisle, 1997).

By the 1970s, attention was shifted to thepossibility that boys were outperforming girlsin Maths and Science, particularly duringadolescence. However, boys have rarely beenfound to outperform girls in terms of gradesin Mathematics and Science, even duringadolescence; in fact, girls have often been foundto outperform boys (Dwyer and Johnson, 1997;Kimball, 1989).

Gender Differences in Self-EsteemAs for self-esteem, many researchers found thatmales had higher levels of self-esteem as comparedto females (Allgood-Merten and Stockard, 1991;Feather, 1991; Fertman and Chubb, 1992).Quatman and Watson (2001) found similar results,which indicated a higher self-esteem for the malesas compared to females.

Whereas, Maccoby and Jacklin (1974)determined that the studies they reviewed were

too disparate to come to a conclusion aboutthe presence or absence of gender differences.Feingold (1994) reviewed gender differences inmultiple aspects of personality and found a smalldifference favouring males (d=.10), and thisfinding was compared to another analysis whichalso found a small difference favouring males(d=.12) (Hall, 1984). Gender differences in self-esteem conducted prior to the advent of meta-analysis (Maccoby and Jacklin, 1974; Wylie, 1979)suggested that there was no consistent genderdifference, yet they differed in their rationale.However, there were researchers who found thatthere were no gender differences related to self-esteem (Greene and Wheatley, 1992; Simpson,Gangestad and Lerma, 1990).

General IssueSince academic performance and the developmentof self-esteem in a person's life are important forthe individual's future and personal growth, it istherefore necessary to investigate the relationshipbetween these variables. In general, there aremeaningful relationships between the fourvariables, which include family functioning, socialsupport, academic performance and self-esteem.Previous research have proven that they areinterrelated, which means that family functioningand social support are related to self-esteemand academic performance. Aside from that,previous researches have also found significantgender differences in academic performanceand self-esteem. Generally, males were found tooutperform females in the academic performanceand they also had scored higher in self-esteemwhen compared to females.

The Aim of the Study and Research HypothesesAs for this research, the focus was given on theeffects of family functioning and the perceivedsocial support on the academic performanceand development of self-esteem among selecteduniversity students. In this research, it washypothesized that:1. Students who possessed good family

functioning and perceived more socialsupport would have a higher academicperformance.

2. Students who had good family functioningand perceived more social support wouldhave a better self-esteem.



3. There is a significant difference in theacademic performance of the male andfemale students.

4. There is a significant difference in the self-esteem ofthe male and femaleistudents.

Conceptual and Theoretical Framework;The present research was based on the EcologicalTheory by Bronfenbrenner (1975). The EcologicalTheory expounds the impacts of parentalrelationship on children's development. Infact, Bronfenbrenner's study demonstrated theimportant role of the environment on humandevelopment. Parents bring their own life history,their own personalities, and their relationship witheach other into the family dynamics. Significantparental conflict has a profound effect on the entirefamily system. Children are said to suffer frominsecure attachment under such a family situation.According to Baumrind (Bronfenbrenner andMahoney, 1975), the parent's own internalworking model of attachment seems to have a verystrong effect on the family system and thus on thechildren. This means that adults who themselvesare securely attached are much more likely to havea child who is also securely attached.

Bronfrenner (1975), in his area of study,emphasizes that each child grows up'in a complexsocial environment with a distinct cast of charactersuch as brothers, sisters, parents, teachers andfriends. This cast itself is embedded within a largersocial system. Bronfrenner's argument is thatresearchers must not only include descriptions ofthese more extended aspects ofthe environment.

but also consider the ways in which all thecomponents of this complex system interact withone another to affect the development of anindividual child.

With relevance to the literature relating to thisstudy, majority ofthe past research indicated thatboth family functioning and social support werepositively correlated with academic performance(Maleki and Elliot, 1999). In terms of familyfunctioning, parent-child relationship is said toplay a major role in inculcating good academicperformance (Scott, 2004). Similarly, most priorstudies have found a significant relationshipbetween family functioning, social support andself-esteem. In addition, previous researches havealso suggested that social support, especially fromparents, peers and teachers, are important incontributing to a better self-esteem. In summary,it was generally found that both family functioningand social support have a significant positiverelationship with academic performance and self-esteem (see Eig. 1). On a larger scale, based onthe same model, social support is seen to mediatebetter family functioning, and in turn, results inbetter academic outcomes (King et al., 2005).In most of the research evidences, females werefound to outperform their male counterparts intheir academic performance (D\vyer and Johnson,1997; Entwisle, 1997). However, males tend tohave a higher self-esteem as compared to femalesin most ofthe cases undertaken in various studies(Allgood-Merten and Stockard, 1991; Feather,1991; Fertman and Chubb, 1992).

Fatnily Functioning and ..^.Perceived Social Support

r

Impact on AcademicPerformanceAnalysis based ongender differencesPredicting - the better thefamily Functioning andPerceived Social Support,the better ofthe AcademicPerfomiance

\

r

Impact on Self-EsteemAnalysis hased on genderdifferencesPredicting the better thefamily Functioning andPerceived Social Support,the better ofthe level ofSelf-Esteem

* Research Outcome

Fig. 1: Significance relationship of family functioning and sodal support with academic performance and self-esteem

PertanikaJ. SOCSSCA& Hum. Vol. 16 (2). 2008 289

Tarn Cai Lian

, 1 METHODPilot Test Sampling The pilot test was conducted on 30 participants,with their ages ranging from 18 years to 23 yearsold. From the 30 participants, IV (56.7%) weremales, while 13 (43.3%) were females. Out of the 30participants, a rhajority (15) of them were Chinese(50%), followed by 8 (26.7%) Malays, and 7 (23.3%)Indians. In order to ascertain the validatioh locally,a reliability analysis was carried out to determinethe Cronbach alpha of all the three measurementinstruments. The Cronbach alpha for the 40items of th Family Functioning Scale (FFS) wasindicated as .842. Whereas, the Ccinbach alphafor the 40 items of the Self-Esteem Rating Scale(SERS) was .937, and finally, the Cronbach alphafor the 12 items of the Multidimensional Scale ofthe Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) was .893.

SampleThe total number of respondents for this studywas 378; they were undergraduates from UniversitiTunku Abdul Rahman and Sunway UniversityCollege. The sample was controlled for age, yearof course, race, anfd gender. The age of the subjectsranged from 18 to 26 years old, with the meanage of 21.1 years. In terms of their ethnic groups,the sample consisted of 126 (33.33%) Malays, 126(33.33%) Chinese, and 126 (33.33%) Indians.In terms of gender, the sample consisted of 189(50.0%) males and 189 (50.0%) females.

ProcedureThis survey was carried out in the Faculty ofArts and Social Science, Universiti Tunku AbdulRahman and the School of Health and NaturalSciences, Sunway University College, Selangor.Courses of students varied from the studies ofpsychology, communication, public relation,English and Chinese. The questionnaires weredistributed through a convenience sampling byfive research assistants to respondents who werewilling to participate in the survey. Firstly, non-probabilistic sampling was adopted. For this,600 respondents were involved in the first stageof survey. A brief introduction of the team wasdone, and this was followed by a briefing on thepurpose of the survey. The briefing was done inEnglish, unless requested by the participants tohave it in either Mandarin or Bahasa Malaysia.However, all respondents were students of higherinstitutions and were proficient in English. Most

of the respondents answered the questionnairesand returned the survey on the spot. Somerespondents wished to bring home the surveyand returned them the next day. In order to getthe equal numbers for both gender and ethnic,stratified sampling and quota were applied.Finally, a sample consisting of 378 respondents,with 198 males and 198 females respectively, wasdrawn for this study.

Instruments(i) Academic PerformanceThe respondents' academic performance wasmeasured by their Cumulative Grade PointAverage (CCPA). A 4-point grading system wasadopted for all the Bachelor courses, and theclassification of awards of Bachelor Degree wasbased on the CCPA achieved by these sttidents.Higher grade represents a better academicperformance. The award of horiours is as shownbelow: first class honours (CCPA 3.5000-4.0000),second class honours - upper division (CCPA3.0000-3.4999), second class honours - lowerdivision (CCPA 2.2000- 2.9999) and third classhonours (CCPA2.0000-2.1999).

(ii) Family Functioning ScaleFamily Functioning Scale is a 40-items instrumentwhich examines the general dimensions of familyfunctioning. Respondents were required to ratethemselves on a 7-point scale (i.e. Never = 1 ; Almostnever = 2, Rarely = 3, Sometimes = 4, Frequently= 5, Almost always = 6, and Always = 7). Items 4,21, and 38 were first reverse-scored, then simplysummed up for the total scale scores. Higherscores are indicative of better family functioning.The Family Functioning Scale (FFS) has a fairinternal consistency with alphas which range from.90 for the positive family effect subscale to .74 forthe conflicts subscale. The alpha of the total scalewas not reported or test-retested. The FFS has agood concurrent validity, as demonstrated by thecorrelations with the FACES III measure of thefamily functioning. The FFS has been validatedlocally with a high reliability of Cronbach alpha(.842).

(iii) Self-Esteem Rating ScaleSelf-Esteem Rating Scale is a 40-items instrumentwhich provides a clinical measure of self-esteem, inwhich respondents are required to rate themselveson a 7-point scale (i.e. Never = 1, Rarely = 2, Alittle of the time = 3, Some of'the time = 4, A


Family Funetioning, Pereeived Social Support, Academic Performance and Self-Esteem

good part of the time = 5, Most of the time = 6,and Always = 7). Positive scores indicate a morepositive self-esteem and negative scores indicate amore negative self-esteem. The Self-esteem RatingScale (SERS) has excellent internal consistency,with an alpha of .97. It has been reported to havegood content and factorial validity. The SERSalso has good construct validity, with significantcorrelations, with the Index of Self-esteem andthe Ceneralized Contentment Scale. The SERShas been validated locally with high reliability ofCronbach alpha (.937). , .

(iv) Multidimensional Scale of the PerceivedSocial SupportMultidimensional Scale of the Perceived SocialSupport is a 12-item instrument designed tomeasure the perceived social support from threedifferent sources: family, friends, and significantothers. The Multidimensional Scale of PerceivedSocial Support (MSPSS) assesses the extentto which respondents perceive social supportfrom each of these sources; the scale is dividedinto three sub-scales: family (items 3; 4, 8, 11);friends (items 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 9, 12); and significantothers (items 1, 2, 5, 10). The MSPSS is scoredby summing individual item scores for the totaland subscale scores and dividing by the numberof items. Higher scores refiect higher perceivedsupport. The MSPSS has an excellent internalconsistency and good test-retest reliability. TheMSPSS also has good factorial validity, concurrentvalidity, and good construct validity. The MSPSS

has been validated locally with high reliability ofCronbach alpha (.893). ., '

Data AnalysisIn this study, family functioning and social supportserved as independent variables while academicperformance and self-esteem served as dependentvariables. Data collected were analysed by using theSPSS; A bivariate correlation and linear regressionwere also used to analyse the relationships betweenthe family functioning, social support, academicperformance and self-esteem. Independentsample t-test was used to analyse gender differencesfor academic performance and self-esteern amongthe male and female students.

RESULTSIn addition, the relationship between familyfunctioning and academic performance wasexplored using the Pearson's product momentcorrelation. There was no relationship betweenthe two variables (r=.O46, p>.05), suggesting thatthe academic performance of the students werenot affected by the quality of family functioning(5e Table 1).

The relationship between social support andacademic perforniance was explored using thePearson's product moment correlation. Onceagain, no relationship was found between thetwo variables (r=.O68, p >.O5) and this findingsuggested that the academic performances ofstudents were not affected by their perceived socialsupport (see Table 2).

TABLE 1Correlation between family functioning and academic performance

Family functioning

.046

Academicperformance

TABLE 2Correlation between social support and academic performance

Social Support.068

AcademicPerformance

PertanikaJ. Soc. Soi. & Hum. Vol. 16 (2) 2008 291

Tam Cai Lian

The relationship between family functioningand self-esteem was explored using the Pearson'sproduct moment correlation. The result showedthat there was a positive correlation (r=.216,p .05.Therefore, regression coefficient is likely to havearisen by sampling error.

Based on the above coefficient table, familyfunctioning and perceived social support could beconcluded as playing important roles in affectingthe students' self-esteem. Between the two, socialsupport is shown to play more important role inaffecting students' self-esteem (ieeTable 5).

TABLE 3Correlation between family functioning and self-esteem

Family Functioning.216(**)

Self-esteem

*p


The mean differences of the respondents'academic performance and self-esteem wereassessed via Ttest. The mean score of the academicperformance for males (M=2.9065) was foundto be lower than the females (M= 3.0444).Meanwhile, male students were indicated to havelower academic performance as compared tofemale students [t (376) =-2.687, p< .01]. These

findings indicated that there were significantdifferences for the academic performance amongthe male and female students. In this study,the mean score of self-esteem for the males wasM=192.93 and females was M= 191.79. However,no significant differences were found for the self-esteem among the male and female students [t(376) = .369, p > .05] (see Table 6).

TABLE 6T-test of acadernic performance and self-esteem by gender status

GenderAcademic PerformanceSelf-esteem

Mean ScoresMale2.9065192.93

Female3.0444**191.79

DISCUSSIONThe main purpose of this study was to examinewhether there were relationships betweenfamily functioning, social support, academicperformance and self-esteem. Additionally,this study also sought to explore if there wasa significant difference between the male andfemale respondents in relation to academicperformance and self-esteem. In this study,family functioning and perceived social supportwere found to be not correlated with the students'academic performance. The first hypothesis, whichpredicted a positive relationship between familyfunctioning and perceived social support withacademic performance, was therefore rejected.However, the results of the current researchrevealed that there were positive relationshipsbetween family functioning, perceived socialsupport and self-esteem. The better the familyfunctioning and perceived social support of therespondents, the better the level of self-esteem willbe. Hence, the second hypothesis was accepted.Gender differences on academic performanceand self-esteem were assessed using t-test. Resultsgathered in this study revealed that the malestudents had a lower academic performance ascompared to the female students. However, therewas no significant difference when measured theself-esteem among the male a;nd female students.

Generally, the results of the present studysupported the Ecological Theory of Bronfrenner

(1975), whereby in his area of study, he emphasizedthat each child grew up in a complex socialenvironment, with a distinct cast of characterssuch as parents, brothers, sisters, teachers andfriends. This cast itself is embedded within alarger social system. The present study showedthat besides family functioning, social supportalso played a crucial role in determining theacademic performance and self-esteem of anindividual. ,This study supports the findingsof Ecological theory. However, it shows thatparental relationship is not the only contributoryfactor of self-esteem of the child; in fact, thereare other contributory factors. Bronfrenner'sargument is that researchers must not only includedescriptions of these more extended aspects of theenvironment, but also consider the ways in whichall the components of this complex system interactwith one another to affect the development of anindividual child.

Family Functioning and Academic PerformanceBased on the results of the present study, betterfamily functioning did not affect the students'academic performance. This result is incongruentwith the study of Euglini and Pedersen (2002) on745 American ethnically diverse individuals, whobegan to move from secondary school to youngadulthood. The researchers found that familyobligation was more important if the adolescentshad lower and moderate GPA.


Tarn Cai Lian

.Altholigh there is a number of researcheswhich disagree with the presetit findings, theresults of this study is in accordance with Walkerand Satterwhite (2002), whose sample comprisedof college students. It is assumed that college anduniversity level is similar, and thus this study agreesori their suggestion that family was important, butit had a less effect on the academic performanceat this stage. This is perhaps due to the fact thatthese university students were independentand not staying with their family. Moreover, alifetime of parental supports already allowed thestudents to acquire the necessary coping skillsand self-confidence so as to adapt to the newenvironment. At the university level, they are able ,to cope! effectively with the challenges imposeddeveloping adaptive attitudes, which is essentialfor excellent academic performance. Thus, thelevel of family functioning does not affect theiracademic performance, as they are not at hotneand not that attached to the family.

Social Support and Academic PerformanceThe findings of this study have contributed tothe collection of other researches which showedinconsistencies in the significance roles of socialsupport and academic performance. Otherprevious researches also found both weak andstrong evidences in the relationships of thesevariables. These inconsistencies were probably dueto the different types of social support receivedand the different ways the individuals respondto it.

A research conducted by Malecki and Elliott(1999) revealed that teachers' support was linkedto academic performance, while the research ofMalecki and Demaray (2006) discovered thatparental and classmates' supports were related tohigher CGPA. However, Ratelle, Larose, Guay andAcenecal (2005), who conducted a study on 729science students from Quebec, found that parentalsupport predicted better academic achievement.Thus, it is suggested that individuals respondeddifferently to the different types of supportreceived (e.g. supports from classmates, parents,teachers, siblings, friends, etc). Some might dpbetter academically with teachers' support, and atthe same time, some others might not be affectedby the support given by the teachers.

The present study found that perceived socialsupport did not affect the academic performanceof the students and this was congruent with the

study of Hershberger and D'Augelli (1992) whofound that perceived social support could not beused to judge the academic performance of theAfrican American students in a White community.These results seemed to apply to other immigrants,whereby they were mostly Asian students in theU.S. These Asian students reported that the socialsupport from peers did not affect their academicoutcomes and that there were no relationshipsbetween the two variables. The present sttidyalso revealed insignificant relationship betweensocial support and the academic performanceof the students, and hence supported the resultsgathered for the Asian students.

In studying the cultural differences and theeffect of social support on academic performatice,an important factor which needs to be consideredamong ethnic minorities is the adjustment to adifferent culture. Coleman, LaFromboise andSaner (1992) conducted a study on 88 ethnicminority freshmen (Hispanic, African American,Native American) and 30 Anglo freshmen. Theirstudy found that the ethnic minority freshmen andAnglo freshmen who were able to adapt, possessedbetter academic grades and they did not receive alot of social support.

Gender Differences for Academic Performance andSelf-esteemThe current research represents an importantstarting point for building models for theacademic performance and self-esteem ofgender differences among university students.Although female students were found to havethe edge over the rhale students in terms ofacademic performance, this edge was lost whenit came to the comparison of self-esteem. Thepattern of findings is consistent with severalother research evidences which identified thefactors causing females to perform better intheir studies. For example, females tend to bemore concerned than males in pleasing adults,such as parents and teachers, the reason whichmay underlie both gender differences (Higgins,1991; Hofffman, 1972; Pomerantz and Ruble,1998a, 1998b; Pomerants etal., 2001). In addition,females' concern may heighten their effort to dowell in the university, therefore enhancing theirperformance, whereas male's performance maydecline in comparison because they are not asconcerned as the females with pleasing adults.Moreover, given the fact that males are not as likely


Family Functioning, Perceived Social Support, Academic Performance and Self-Fsteem

to see their academic performance as reflectingtheir abilities, they may exert less effort. . .

The students' academic performance isperhaps not only affected by the different types ofsocial support groups, but it is also related acrosstime and age. Maybe, only a certain type of socialsupport would significantly affect the students'performance at a certain developmental stagein life. Therefore, this leaves space for futureresearch, particularly to investigate the specifictype of support, and its significant effect on theacademic performance, at a certain developmentalstage. :

Gender differences in the levels of self-esteemhave been widely investigated, with most studiesfound that girls have lower level of self-esteemthan boys in adolescence (Bryan and Petrangelo,1989; O'Mallery and Bachman, 1979). However,in the present study, no significant differencewas fotmd prior to the analysis, the result whichopposed the conclusions given by most of theother researchers.

Family Functioning, Social Support and Self-EsteemFamily ftmctioning and perceived social supportwere significantly correlated with the students' self-esteem. The main hypiothesis, which predicted apositive relationship between family functioningand perceived social support with self-esteem, wastherefore supported. This finding is in agreementwith the results of other researches which weredone in countries other than Malaysia. As otherstudies have shown, family functioning seemsto significantly predict students' self-esteem(Mandara and Murray, 2000). This suggests thatthe better the quality of family functioning, thehigher the self-esteem among students.

The present study proposed some degreeof relationship between family functioning andself-esteem and supported the research evidencesof other researchers (Scott et al, 1991, as citedin Cashwell) who discovered that there was ageneral uniformity across cultures regardingthe magnitude of the correlation betweenfamily functioning and self-esteem. This meansthat there are no significant differences acrosscultures in relation to the relationship betweenfamily functioning and self-esteem. Thus, familyftinctioning does play an important role inaffecting students' self-esteem, regardless of theculture.

On the other hand, greater social supportwill also result in higher self-esteem among thestudents. In fact, the results of the present studyindicated that among the two variables (familyfunctioning and social support), social support wasshown to be relatively more important than familyfunctioning in contributing towards students' self-esteem. These findings are congruent with thestudy of Shute, Blasio and Williamson (2002) whofound that social support satisfaction was positivelycorrelated with self-esteem.

Furthermore, perceived social support couldenhance self-esteem. The results of the presentstudy supported the study by Gavazzi (1994) whostudied on a clinical poptilation of adolescenceand found that adolescents who perceived highersocial support from family and friends had ahigher level of self-esteem. It is suggested thatdespite the different ethnic groups and culturein Malaysia, social support does play an importantpart in developing an individual's self-esteem.

Based on the results of the present study(linear regression), social support is indicatedto play a bigger role on self-esteem as comparedto family functioning. This is due to the factthat social support consists of parental stipport,i.e. the better the family functioning, the betterthe relationship among family members will be.Good relationships among siblings and parentswill indirectly provide a more perceived socialsupport. With this in mind, it can be assumed thatgood family functioning provides a better socialsupport. Thus, there is probably an over-lappingof the contribution of family functioning andsocial support on self-esteem.

Strengths of the StudyDespite some shortcomings, the present studyrevealed a number of strengths. Performingresearch on a sample of 378 respondents anddrawing inference from the results whichresembled the whole of the population wouldincrease the reliability of the estimate. In thiscase, a relatively large sample size allows theinvestigation on the effects of family functioningand social support on the academic performanceand self-esteem of university students. In terms ofcomparison between genders, an equal number ofmales and females provided a sensible comparisonof the variables. Another particular strengthof the present study is that the four constructs.

Fer t an ikaJ . Soc. Sei. & H u m . Vol. 16 (2).2008 295

Tam Cai Lian

used to measure the variables, have been provenhigh on reliability and validity, based on priorresearch. In addition, the pilot test demonstrateda high level of reliability for the local validation.In administering the questionnaire, consentform was attached to obtain approval fromthe respondents. This resembled an adoptionof proper;procedures for data collection andsafeguarded against any dispute from respondentspertaining; to confidentiality.

Limitations of the StudyThere are'some limitations in this study. Forexample, instead of relying on the self-report data,the researchers should have opted for the typologymethod which classified families accordingto different dimensions and investigated therelationships for each family type with othervariables (such as self-esteem and academicperformarice). This method would allow a bettercomparison between the family types and theinteraction within a particular family type. All thesubjects were drawn from higher institutions inSelangor. TThe high concentration of the subjectsin narrow localities might prevent the results frombeing reflective of the Malaysian population.Other than that, the study adopted a paper andpencil approach in collecting information fromthe respondents and problems might arise whenthe questionnaires were distributed to respondentswho were impatient in answering them as thismight affect the accuracy of the results.

Euture ResearchThe present study selected students from UniversitiTunku Abdul Rahman and Sunway UniversityCollege as its sample. Euture research shouldexamine the differences between ethnicities inrelation to how family functioning and socialsupport may influence the academic performanceand self-esteem in more universities located inboth the rural and urban areas. Taking intoaccount samples from rural areas may add avariety to samples as they come from differentbackgrounds, and environment, hence extendingthe ambit and applicability of the study to includea wider range of people. Aside from that, in thepresent study, the students' CGPAs were usedas the only method to measure their academicperformance. However, it is suggested that otherforms of valid and reliable measurements relatedto the academic performance should also beused.

CONCLUSIONSAs a whole, this research was done to investigatethe relationships between family functioning,and social support on academic performanceand self-esteem. The results of the present studyshowed that family functioning and social supportplayed significant roles on students' self-esteem,whereas family functioning and social support didnot affect their academic performance. Cenderdifferences have been seen to directly affect theacademic performance of the students, wherebyfemales have been found to outperform themales in their academic performance. Withfurther and deeper research on this issue in theMalaysian context, its results will surely contributeto the development of self-esteem and academicperformance of students.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSA number of people had encouraged theresearcher to work hard throughout the processof conducting this research. I would like toexpress my heartiest gratitude to my parents whohave always been caring and emphasizing theimportance of excellent academic performance.Their consistent support has spurred me toindulge in life-long learning and conduct thisresearch. Sincere appreciations also go to myother family members who had contributedinvaluable ideas to enable me'to complete thispiece of work. With the love and encouragementfrom them, doing psychological research hasbecome a pleasurable activity for me.

REFERENCESAI.LGOOD-MERTEN, B. and STOCKARD, J. (1991). Sex

role identity and self-esteem: A comparisonof children and adolescents. Sex Roles, 25,129-139.

BERG-CROSS, L., KIDD, F. and CARR, P. (1990). Cohesion,affect, and self-disclosure in African Americanadolescent families. Journal of Eamily Psychology,4,235-250. '

BtAKE, P.C. and SLATE, J.R. (1993). A preliminaryi n v e s t i g a t i o n i n t o t h e r e l a t i o n s h i pbetween adolescent self-esteem and parentalverbal interaction. The School Counsellor, 41,81-85.

BRYAN, A.J. and PETRANGELO, G.J. (1989). Self-conceptand sex role orientation in adolescence.of Sex Education f Therapy, 15, 17-19.

,.296 EertanikaJ. Soc.iSci.-* Hum.-Vol. 16 (2) 2008


BRODV, G . H . and FLOR, D . L . (1997). Maternalpsychological functioning, family processes, andchild adjustment in rural, single-parent, AfricanAmerican families. Developmental Psychology, 33,1000-1011.

BRAtJMRiND, D. (1975). Some thoughts aboutchildrearing. In U. Bronfenbrenner and M.A.Mahoney (Eds.), Influence on human development. Hinsdale Illinois: The Dryden Press.

BRONFENBRENNER, U . (1975). The Ecology of HumanDevelopment: Experiment by Nature and Design.Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press.

BROPHY, I. (1985). Interactions of males and femalestudents with male and female teachers. InL.C. Wilkinson and C.B. Marrett (Eds.) (1988),Gender influences in classroom interaction (pp. 115-143). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

BUSH, K.R., PETERSON, C.W., COBAS, J.A. and Suppt.E,A.J. (2002). Adolescents' perceptions of parentalbehaviours as predictors of adolescent self-esteem in Mainland China. Sociological Inquiry,72(4), 503-526.

CASHWELL, C.S. (1995). Family functioning and self-esteem of middle school students: A matter ofperspective?/owmaZ of Humanistic Education fDevelopment, 34, 83-91.

CAUCE, A.M., FELNER, R.D. and PRIMAVERA, J. (1982).Social support in high-risk adolescents:Structural components and adaptive impact.American Journal of Community Psychology, 10(4),417-428.

CoLEMAN, H.L.K., LAEROMBOISE, T .D . and SANER,H. (1992). Bicultural efficacy and collegeadjustment. Paper presented at the meeting ofthe American Educational Research Association, SanFrancisco, CA.

CoTTERELL,J.L. (1992). The relation of attachmentsand supports to adolescent well-being andschool adjustment./oMJTia/ of Adolescent Research,7(1), 28-42.

CROCKER,J., LUHTANEN, R., BLMNE, B. and BROADNAX, S.(1994). Collective self-esteem and psychologicalwell-being among White, Black, and Asiancollege students. In A.R. Fischer and K.B. Holz(2007). Perceived discrimination and women'spsychological distress: the role of collectiveand personal self-esteem./owrwa/ of CounsellingPsychology, 54, 154-164.

CUMSILLE, P.E. and EPSTEIN, N . (1994). Familycohesion, family adaptability, social support, andadolescent depression symptoms in outpatientclinic famiUes. Journal of Family Psychology, 8(2),202-214.

DEGARMO, D.S. and MARTINEZ, C.R. (2006). A culturallyinformed model of acadeinic well-being forLatino youth: The importance of discriminatoryexperiences and social support. Family Relations,55, 267-278.

DucHESNE, S. and LAROSE, S. (2007). Adolescentparental attachment and academic motivationand performance in early adolescence./owrnaZo/Applied Social Psychology, 37(1), 1501-1521.

DWYER, C . and JOHNSON, L . (1997). Crades,accomplishments, and correlates. In W.Willingham and N. Cole (Eds.), Gender andfair assessment (pp. 127-156). Mahwah, HJ:Erlbaum.

ENTWISLE, D.R. (1997). Children, Schools, and Inequality.Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

FEATHER, N.T. (1991). Human values, global self-esteem, and belief in a just world. Journal ofPersonality, 59, 83-107.

FEINGOLD, A. (1994). Cender differences inpersonality; A meta-analysis. PsychologicalBulletin, 116,429-456.

FERTMAN, C.I. and CHUBB, N . H . (1992). The effects ofa psychoeducational program on adolescents'activity involvement, self-esteem, and locus ofcontrol. Adolescence, 27, 517-526.

EuLiGNi, AJ. and PEDERSEN, S. (2002). Family obligationand the transition to young adul thood.Developmental Psychology, 38, 856-868.

EESHBACH, S. and WEINER, B. (1991). Personality. InJ. Mandara and C.B. Murray (2000). Effectsof parental marital status, income, and familyfunctioning on African American adolescentse\{-esteem. Journal of Family Psychology, 14, 475-490.

CREENE, A.L. and WHEATLEY, S.M. (1992). I'vegotalotto do and I don't think I'll have the time: Cenderdifferences in late adolescents' narratives ofthe future. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 21,667-686.

HALL, J.A. (1984). Non-verbal Sex Differences. Baltimore,MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

HERSHBERGER, S.L. and D'AUGELLI, A.R. (1992). Therelationship of academic performance andsocial support to graduation among African-American and White University students: A path-analytic model, fournal ofGommunity Psychology,20, 188-199.

HiCGiNS, E.T. (1991). Development of self-regulatoryand self-evalttadve processes Costs, benefits, andtrade-offs. In M.R. Cunnar and L.A. Sroufe(Eds.), Self processes and development: Twenty-Third


Tam Cai Lian

Minnesota Symposium on Child Psychology (pp.125-165). Minneapolis: tJniversity of MinnesotaPress.

HOFFMAN, L.W. (1972). Early childhood experiencesand women's achievement motives, yowrna/ ofSodal Issues, 28, 129-155.

HOUSE,J.S. (1981). Work, stress, and social support. InA.L. Day and H.A. Livingstone (2003). Genderdifferences in perceptions of Stressors andutilization of social support among universitystudents. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Sdence,35, 73-83.

KIMBALL, M.M. (1989). A new perspective on women'smath achievement. Psychological Bulletin, 105,198-214.

KING, G., MCDOUGALL,J., DEWIT, D., HONG, S., MILLER,L., OFFORD, D., MEYER, K. and LAPORTA,J. (2005).Pathways to children's academic performanceand prosocial behaviour: Roles of physical healthstatus, environmental, family, and child factors.International Journal of Disability, Development andEducation, 52(4), 313-344.

LEINONEN, J.A, SoLANTAUs, T.S. and PUNAMAKI, R.L.(2003). Social support and quality of parentingunder economic pressure and workload inFinland: the role of family structure andparental gender. Journal of Family Psychology, 17,409-417.

LEvrrr, MJ., GUACCI-FRANGO, N. and LEVITT,J.L. (1994).Social support and achievement in childhoodand early adolescence: A multicultural study.Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 15,207-222.

LuTHANAN, R. and CROGKER, J. (1992). A collectiveself-esteem scale: Self-evaluation of one'ssocial identity. In A.R. Fischer and K.B. Holz(2007). Perceived discrimination and women'spsychological distress: the role of collectiveand personal se\i-esleem. Journal of CounsellingPsychology, 54, 154-164.

MAGGOBY, E.E. and JACKLIN, G.N. (1974). The Psychologyof Sex Differences. Stanford, GA: StanfordtJniversity Press.

MAHER, MJ., MORA, P.A. and LEVENTHAL, H . (2006).Depression as a predictor of perceived socialsupport and demand: a componendal approachusing a prospective sample of older adults.Emotion, 6, 450-458.

MALEGKI, G.K. and DEMARAY, M.K. (2006). Socialsupport as a buffer in the relat ionshipbetween socioeconomic status and academicperformance. School Psychology Quarterly, 21(4),375-395.

MALEGKI, G.K. and ELLIOT, S.N. (1999). Adolescents'ratings of perceived social support and itsimportance: Validation of the Student SocialSupport Scale. Psychology in the Schools, 36, 473-483.

MANDARA,J. (2006). The impactof family functioningon African American Males' academicachievement: a review and clarification of theempirical literature. Teachers College Record,108(2), 20&-223.

MANDARA, J. and MURRAY, G.B. (2000). Effects ofparental marital status, income, and familyfunctioning on African American adolescentself-esteem. Journal of Family Psychology, 14,475-490.

MCINERNEY, D . M . , DOWSON, M. , YEUNG, A . S . and

NELSON, G.F. (1998). Self-esteem, academicinterest and academic performance: Theinfluence of significant others. 15, 300-315.

O'MALLEY, P.M. and BAGHMAN,J.G. (1979). Self-esteemand education: Sex and cohort comparisonsamong high school seniors. Journal of Personalityand Sodal Psychology, 37, 1153-01159.

PiERGE, R., FRONE, M., RUSSELL, M., GOOPER, M. andMUDAR, P. (2000). A longitudinal model of socialcontact, social support, depression, and alcoholuse. InJ.R. Measelle, E. Stice and D.W. Springer.(2006). A prospective test of the negative affectmodel of substance abuse: moderating effects ofsocial support. Psychology of Adaptive Behaviours,20, 225-233.

PROMERANTZ, E.M. and RUBLE, D . N . (1998a). Themultidimensional nature of control: Implicationsfor the development of sex difference in selfevaluation. In Heckhausen and G.S. Dweck(Eds.), Motivation and self-regulation across thelife-span (pp. 159-184). New York: GambridgeUniversity Press.

PoMERANTz, E.M. and RUBLE, D.N. (1998b). The roleof maternal control in the development of sexdifferences in child self-evaluative factors. ChildDevelopment, 69, 458-478.

PoMERANTZ, E.M., SAXON,J .L . and KENNY, G.A.(2001). Self-evaluation: The development of sexdifferences. In G.B. Moskowitz (Ed.), Cognitivesodal psychology: On the tenure of sodal cognition(pp. 59-74). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

PREEGHAWONG, S., ZAUSZNIEWASKI, J.A., HEINZER, M.V.,MusiL, G.M., KERCSMAR, G. and AISWINANONH, R.(2007). Relationships of family functioning,self-esteem, and resourceful coping of Thaiadolescents with asthma. Issues in Mental HealthNursing, 28, 21-36.



QuATMAN, T. and WATSON, C M . (2001). Genderdifferences in adolescent self-esteem: Anexploration of domains. The Journal of GeneticPsychology, 762,93-117.

RATELLE, CF., LAROSE, S., GUAY, F. and ACENECAL, C(2005). Perceptions of parental involvementand support as predictors of college students'persistence in a science curriculum. Journal ofEamily Psychology, 19(2), 286-293.

ROCHELLE,J. (2001). Correlation between adolescentself-esteem, religiosity, and perceived familysupport. 55(4), 320-340.

RosENEELD, L.B., RicHMAN, J.M. and BOWEN, G . L .(2000). Social support networks and schooloutcomes: The centrality of the teacher. Childand Adolescent Sodal Work Journal, 17, 205-226.

SHAGLE, S.C. and BARBER, B.K. (1995). A social-ecological analysis of adolescent suicidalideation. Amer.J. Orthopsychiatry, 65(1).

SHEK, D.T .L . (1998). A longitudinal study of HongKong adolescents' and parents' perceptions offamily functioning and well-being. The Journalof Genetic Psychology, 159(4), 389-403.

SHEK, D.T.L. (2002). Family funct ioning andpsychological well-being, school adjustment, andproblem behaviour in Chinese adolescents withand without economic disadvantage. Journal ofGenetic Psychology, 163(4), 497-502.

SCOTT, J. (2004). Family, gender, and educationalattainment in Britain: A longitudinal study.Journal of Comparative Eamily Studies, 35(4), 565-589.

SHUTE, R., BLASIO, T. and WILLIAMSON, P. (2002). Socialsupport satisfaction of Australian children.International fournal of Behavioural Development,26(4), 318-326.

SIMPSON, J.A., GANGESTAD, S.W. and LERMA, M .(1990). Perceptions of physical attractiveness:Mechanisms involved in the maintenance ofromantic relationships./owrrjai of Personality andSodal Psychology, 59, 1192-1201.

WALKER, K.L. and SATTERWHITE, T. (2002). Academicperformance among African American andCaucasian college students: Is the family stillimportant? College Student Journal, 26(3), 75-85.

WYLIE, R.C. (1979). The Self-concept (Vol. 2). Lincoln,NE: University of Nebraska Press.

ZiMET, CD., DAHLEM, N.W., ZIMET, S.G. and FARLEY,G.K. (1988). The multidirriensional scale ofperceived social support. / Personality Assess,52(1), 30-41.


39980801

Documents