Kia Elham

(M A) general psychology Islamic Azad Univrersity zanjan Iran.

DOI : https://dx.doi.org/10.13005/bpj/1006

Abstract

The purpose of doing this research is to study the relation between identity styles and family cohesion with tendency to the aggressive behaviors in the students of boys high schools. The statistical population includes the boy students of high schools in Qazvin city (2 high schools) that were 1500 persons that from them, 306 persons were selected as the sample size by using of the stratified random sampling method with proportional allocation that with regard to the return of questionnaires, from the intended sample number, 282 persons were tested as the real number of sample. The methodology is in descriptive-survey form and the data collection tool is also the questionnaires of identity styles, family cohesion and Regression with determining reliability in order 0.768, 0.809 and 0.834. The analysis method is in two forms of descriptive statistic including study of the research variables status and inferential statistics including Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests, Pearson correlation coefficient and multiple regression with the help of SPSS22 software for studying the manner of distribution of the research variables and response to the research hypotheses. The result indicated that: 1.there is positive and meaningful relation between identity styles (informative, normative and commitment) and family cohesion and there is negative and meaningful relation between the diffuse/avoidant identity style and family cohesion. 2. There is negative and meaningful relation between identity styles (informative, normative and commitment) and tendency to the aggressive behaviors and there is negative and meaningful relation between diffuse/avoidant identity style and tendency to the aggressive behaviors. 3. There is negative and meaningful relation between the family cohesion and tendency to the aggressive behaviors. 4. There is relation between identity style and family cohesion with tendency to the aggressive behaviors.

Keywords

identity style; family cohesion; tendency to the aggressive behaviors; students; high school section

Download this article as: 

Copy the following to cite this article: Elham K. The Relation Between Identity Styles and Family Cohesion with Tendency to the Aggressive Behaviors in Students of Boys High School in Qazvin City. Biomed Pharmacol J 2016;9(2).

Copy the following to cite this URL: Elham K. The Relation Between Identity Styles and Family Cohesion with Tendency to the Aggressive Behaviors in Students of Boys High School in Qazvin City. Biomed Pharmacol J 2016;9(2). Available from: http://biomedpharmajournal.org/?p=7491

Introduction

Adolescence period is one of the most critical stages of each person^‘s life that even has been considered more difficult than childhood years; while in this period, adolescent should try to acquire an identity for himself. Therefore one of the significant duties of adolescent is identification (Behzadi and Sarvghad, 2015). With regard to his different and unique styles, he should be able to distinguish between himself and others (Hashemi and Razavi, 2008). Therefore he is always in circulation and suspension about the identification issue from identity diffusion to achieve the identity and from identity crisis to the stability and tranquility; although the identity growth is created in the final stages of adolescence, but during the life period, it is still ongoing (Mackinnon & Marcia, 2002).

One of the important and linkable elements with identification and its styles in adolescents is the family cohesion; undoubtedly the formation of identity and individuality of each adolescent is influence by inheritance and his life environment. An experience that adolescent has with his family and generally parent in early part of his life is as the important and determining factor of regulation and compatibility process during his maturity period and future life (Sharma, 2012).

Family is the first and most proper place of imprinting and it is the main focus of training and it acts like dynamic system that its members are interacting with each other constantly and they influence on each other reciprocally. Disorder in the performance of this system causes disorder in the behavior of its members so that existence of improper models in the family, incorrect relations of parents with adolescent in terms of love and emotions, incoherent and unstable familial relations and lack of cohesion between the family members leave destructive effects on his morale (Mirzaie Kutnaie, 2015). Adolescent in such environment becomes too irritable, anxious, distressed and self-reproach and the causes of development of hostile and aggressive behavioral models and tendency to aggression are provided in him (Nazir & et al, 2012).

In fact aggression is negative feeling indicated by a person that is in stressful conditions (Sing & et al, 2011) and among emotional reactions due to its individual and social consequences has attracted the attention of many psychologists and sociologists (Hedayati, 2011). It is one of the behavioral problems originated from unhealthy and troubled families (Ahangar Anzabi, 2011). Therefore cohesive family that there is deep emotional relation between its members plays important role as a protective and mediator factor in the healthy mental function of adolescents (Juang& Alvarez, 2010).

With regard to this issue that identity styles and family cohesion ae accounted as strong paradigms in formation of identity, behavioral action and reaction of students in the vicissitudinous and critical period of adolescence that in this path can contrive and develop stressful conditions and damaging behaviors (aggression) or perfectionism and lack of tendency to aggression in them and influence on their future and this important with considering the gender status (boy) of students and their talent in the path of dangerous rudeness behaviors has created this necessity so that with regard to this issue that no study has been done about mentioned issue, therefore a research is implemented with the purpose of studying the relation between identity styles and family cohesion with tendency to aggressive behaviors in students of boys high schools of Qazvin city so that with more cognition, proper solutions can be achieved.

The theoretical principles of the research

Identity style

From the view of Berzonsky (1992), identity style is this issue that how persons search, process, assess and use of the information related to themselves (Heather, 2001). Three styles that Berzonsky (1992) has studied are: informative, normative, avoidant/diffuse, that there is very high balance between diffuse/avoidant style and diffuse identity status, normative style and early identity status, informative style and successful and late identity status (Caputi & Oades, 2001). The persons with informative identity style search and assess the information consciously and actively and utilize of proper information. Diligence, self-regulation, high self-respect, internal control, introspection, self-awareness are as a part of these persons^,characteristics (Berzonsky& Adams, 2002). The persons with normative identity style in important decision-making and expressing the opinions conform to the orders and expectations of reference groups and important persons and they don’t search and assess the information actively, rather they attempt to reach to the commitment from existing identity structure that have obtained it without research and exploitation only through imitating from important power references and they defend from their commitment fanatically (Dolinger&Dolinger, 2002). These kinds of persons have specified job and educational purposes which are controlled from outside and aren’t flexible (Berzonsky&Kuk, 2000). The persons with avoidant/diffuse identity style don’t have decision-making power and their decision-making mainly is done with procrastination and negligence. The control source of these persons has been external and they have emotional and unstable behaviors (Adams & Shea, 2001). These persons have low self-respect, negative self-concept and defective self-regulation. Their performance on the duties has been weak and they usually leave the duties without completing them. They have been also less successful in the life and education and they have low independency and individuality (Dolinger & Dolinger 2002).

Family cohesion

Family is the most important social institute in the humans’ societies that genesis and training of the persons^, personality are formed in it. Family for performing its main functions well requires that security and tranquility to penetrate in it (Enayat and Aghapour, 2010). Olson (1999) with a systematic look to family introduces cohesion. Cohesion as one of the most penetrant structures of family is an important dimension for attempting for reciprocal understanding among family members (Hosseinkhanzadeh& et al, 2013), alliance feeling, emotional link and commitment that the members of a family have to each other (Olson, 1999). Two qualities related to the cohesion in family include commitment (tendency to spend time and energy in family activities and prevent from negative effect) and spending time with each other (Lingren, 2003). Emotional link and commitment, warmth of relations and emotions governed on cohesive families create this feeling in their children that are accepted by parents and the parents are sensitive and responsible to their demands (Victor & et al, 2007). Naturally an adolescent whom is grown in a cohesive family feels the warmth of relations, existing love and interest and responsibility feeling and members commitment to each other and consequently he also feels commitment for the demands of other members (Zare & Samani, 2008). Also supporter family can be the feedback source of cognitive, emotional and behavioral treasuries so that adolescents in different conditions can behave with an effective method (Sharma & Joshi, 2015).

Aggression and (tendency to the aggression behaviors)

Aggression has been defined a behavior that its purpose is to damage oneself or another person. What is important in this definition is the intent of behaver. Namely a damaging behavior will be accounted aggression if it is done intentionally in order to damage another one or oneself (Karimi, 2013). Aggression can be in the form of evident-physical and verbal behavior like hostile behaviors such as jostling or throwing the objects and etc., or it can be done in threat form verbally and hostilely which is harmful like blasphemy, annihilation, ridicule and scream that cause to annoy others directly. Also it can be appeared in two forms of reactive behaviors (invasive response to a threat or stimulation like retaliatory acts) and pre-active behaviors (predictor behavior of reward and benefits) (Mirzaie Kutnaie, 2015). Some scientists believe that girls can be much more aggressive, although they indicate physical aggression from themselves rarely (Card, 2008). Most of researches indicated that girls due to the earlier growth of intelligence and social skill and with regard to the relative physical weakness with more probably use of relational and verbal aggression in inter-individual relations (Dutt, 2013). Anyway, physical aggression by girls is being converted to a more prevalent issue in media, researches and special jurisdictions of adolescents. Girls for acquiring respect and power use of physical aggression. Despite of it, physical aggression of girl is still less than boys (Snethen&Puymbroeck, 2008).

The research backgrounds

Sharma and Joshi (2015) with studying the role of family environment and parenting style in compatibility of adolescents with regard to the cohesion and aggression have indicated that cohesion and supportive relations between the family members, better organization of family environment and correlation of members with keeping the individual independency have positive and meaningful relation withsocial compatibility and they have negative and meaningful relation with aggressive behaviors.

Tayler & et al (2014) with studying the relation between family cohesion and adolescents aggression concluded that there is negative and meaningful relation between adolescents aggression and family cohesion. Also family cohesion is the strong predictor of children aggression especially girls.

Jeoung Min (2013) with studying the moderator role of family cohesion in relation with social behaviors of parents and the importance of ethnic identity of adolescents in the immigrant families of China concluded that there is positive and meaningful correlation between family cohesion and the adolescents importance to the ethnic identity. Also the behavioral-social models of Chinese family and family cohesion predict the importance of ethnic identity for adolescents.

Sijsema (2013) with studying the determination of the family cohesion effect on aggressive behavior has concluded that low to middle effects of family cohesion have relation with higher levels of aggression, lawbreaking and lower levels of social behavior.

Walker-Barnes (2009) with studying the relations between ethnic identity and life and mental environment of family (cohesion) concluded that having a positive ethnic identity and cohesive familial environment is accompanied with mental regulation of adolescents severely and mentioned variables have meaningful relation.

Lucia & Beslau (2006) with studying the family cohesion and behavioral problems of children in a longitudinal study concluded that family cohesion and contradiction inside the family predict the behavioral problems of children such as aggression. Also high level of family cohesion protects the behavioral problems of children.

Behzadi and Sarvghad (2015) with studying the relation of cohesion and flexibility of family and identity styles with mediator role of metacognitive state in girl students concluded that family flexibility has direct effect on informative, normative, diffuse identity styles and metacognitive state. Cohesion has direct effect on the normative identity style and metacognitive state. Family cohesion and flexibility has indirect effect through metacognitive interference.

Mirzaie Kutnaie (2015) with studying the role of family cohesion in explaining the aggressive behaviors of children concluded that there is negative and meaningful correlation between family cohesion and dimensions of physical, relational and reactive aggression. Also about 17 percent of aggression variable variance can be predicted by family cohesion variable. According to it, family cohesion has meaningful relation with aggression and predicts it to some extent.

Salimi and Shavisizad (2015) with studying the relation of strict disciplinary models of parents and identity style with aggression in the high school students concluded that there is meaningful and negative relation between strict disciplinary models and normative and commitment identity style. There is positive and meaningful relation between strict disciplinary models and the amount of aggression in students. There is positive and meaningful relation between diffuse/normative identity style and the amount of aggression in students and there is negative and meaningful relation between commitment identity style and the amount of aggression in students but informative identity style has no relation with the amount of aggression in students. There isn’t meaningful difference between the strict disciplinary models of girls and boys students. There is meaningful difference between the amount of aggression in girl and boy students.

Hajizadeh Kasahamdani (2013) with studying the role of parents contradiction on behavioral disorders of primary school students with regard to the family cohesion and aggression concluded that there is positive and meaningful relation between parents contradiction which is one of the family cohesion dimensions and children aggression. In this manner that whatever matrimony relations are weaker, it influences on the parents relation with children and emotional relation becomes less and following it, children face with increasing of behavioral disorders like aggression.

Rezaie and Cheraghi (2011) with studying the role of family performance in aggression and respect of adolescents concluded that there is negative and meaningful relation between family cohesion and aggression.

According to the theoretical literature and above mentioned backgrounds, the conceptual model of the research is suggested as follows:

Diagram 1: Conceptual model of the research Click here to View Diagram

 

The research hypotheses

The main hypothesis

There is relation between identity style & family cohesion and tendency to the aggressive behaviors of students.

Subsidiary hypotheses

There is relation between identity style and family cohesion of students.

There is relation between identity style and tendency to aggressive behaviors of students.

There is relation between family cohesion and tendency to aggressive behaviors of students.

Methodology

Current research is an applicable kind and the methodology is descriptive-survey. The statistical population includes boy students of high schools in Qazvin city (2 high schools) that were 1500 persons and from them, 306 persons were selected as the sample size by using of stratified random sampling method with proportional allocation that with regard to the return of questionnaires, from the mentioned sample number, 282 persons as the real sample number were tested.

Data collection tool includes identity styles questionnaire of Berzonsky (1992) that in 40 questions with 5-option Likert spectrum (1=I disagree completely, 2=I disagree to some extent, 3=I am not sure, 4=I agree to some extent, 5=I agree completely) assesses the informative, normative, diffuse/avoidant and commitment styles (for secondary analysis).

Aggression questionnaire of Buss and Arnold (2000) assesses 29 questions in 5-option Likert spectrum (1=it is contradict with my characteristics completely, 2=It is contradict with my characteristics to some extent, 3=It indicates my characteristics just a little, 4=It indicates my characteristics to some extent, 5=It indicates my characteristics completely). The content validity of the questionnaire was confirmed with professors^, opinions and for determining the reliability, Cronbach^‘s Alpha coefficient was used by applying SPSS22 software and the reliability was announced for aggression, identity styles and family cohesion questionnaires in order 0.834, 0.768 and 0.809.

The research findings

Descriptive statistics

It includes study of the research variables

Table 1: The amounts of descriptive indexes of the research variables

Variable	Standard deviation±Mean	Test statisticsK-S	Meaningfulness level
Informative style	3.02±0.590	1.437	0.232
Normative style	3.31±0.461	1.299	0.068
Avoidant style	2.64±0.570	1.245	0.090
Commitment	3.29±0.602	1.168	0.112
Identity style	3.06±0.233	0.940	0.339
Aggression	2.66±0.504	0.908	0.382
Family cohesion	3.32±0.479	1.245	0.062

 

With regard to the table (1), the mean of informative style is equal to 3.02 with standard deviation of 0.590, normative style has a mean equal to 3.31 with standard deviation of 0.461, avoidant style has a mean equal to 2.64 with standard deviation of 0.570, commitment has a mean equal to 3.29 with standard deviation of 0.602 and identity style index has a mean equal to 3.06 with standard deviation n of 0.233. Aggression index has a mean equal to 2.66 with standard deviation of 0.504 and family cohesion index has a mean equal to 3.32 with standard deviation of 0.479. Also meaningfulness level of Kolmogorov-Smirnov test for all variables is larger than 0.05. Therefore all variables have normal distribution.

Inferential statistics

For studying the manner of distribution of the research variables and response to the research hypotheses, Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests, multiple correlation coefficient of Pearson and regression with the help of SPSS22 software will be used.

The first subsidiary hypothesis), there is relation between identity styles and family cohesion

For studying the first subsidiary hypothesis with regard to the results of Kolmogorov-Smirnov test and normality of data, Pearson correlation coefficient has been used. The results related to the correlation test have been brought in the following table.

Table 2: The results of correlation test between identity styles and family cohesion

Indexes	Informative style	Normative style	Avoidant style	Commitment	Identity style
Family cohesion	0.205**	0.306**	-0.347**	0.321**	0.274**

*correlation is meaningful at the level of 5%. **Correlation is meaningful at the level of 1%. ^ns correlation isn’t meaningful.

With regard to the table (2), there is positive and meaningful relation between family cohesion and informative style (r=0.205), normative style (r=0.306), commitment (r=0.321) and identity style index (r=0.274). Also there is negative and meaningful relation between family cohesion and avoidant style (r=-0.347).

The second subsidiary hypothesis), there is relation between identity styles and tendency to aggressive behaviors

Table 3:The results of correlation test between identity styles and tendency to aggressive behaviors

Indexes	Informative style	Normative style	Avoidant style	Commitment	Identity style
Tendency to aggressive behaviors	-0.353**	-0.543**	0.571**	-0.426**	-0.413**

*Correlation is meaningful at the level of 5%. **Correlation is meaningful at the level of 1%. ^ns correlation isn’t meaningful.

 

The third subsidiary hypothesis), there is relation between family cohesion and tendency to aggressive behaviors

Table 4: The results of correlation test between family cohesion and tendency to aggressive behaviors

Correlation amount	Meaningfulness level	Test result
-0.383	0.001	Negative and meaningful relation

 

With regard to the table 4, the meaningfulness level of the test has become less than 0.05. Therefore at the confidence level of 95%, it is concluded that there is negative and meaningful relation between family cohesion and tendency to aggressive behaviors.

Main hypothesis), there is relation between identity styles, family cohesion and tendency to aggressive behaviors in family.

For studying the relation of identity styles and family cohesion (independent variables) and tendency to aggressive behaviors (dependent variable), multiple regression has been used. The results related to this test have been given in the following tables.

Table 5: Summary of multi-variable regression model with simultaneous method of identity styles and family cohesion with tendency to aggressive behaviors

Correlation coefficient	Determination coefficient of R2	Adjusted determination coefficient of R2	Standard deviation error of estimate
0.499	0.249	0.244	0.438

 

The results of the above table indicate the correlation coefficient of identity styles and family cohesion with tendency to aggressive behaviors is 0.499. Also with regard to the amount of determination coefficient of R², it becomes clear that identity styles and family cohesion predict totally 24.9 percent of variance of tendency to aggressive behaviors.

Table 6: Table of variance analysis for studying the regression model sufficiency

Changes source	Total squares	Freedom degree	Mean squares	F-statistic amount	Meaningfulness level
Regression model	17.804	2	8.902	46.355	0.001
Remainder	53.581	279	0.192
Total	71.385	281

 

With regard to the data of table (6), the meaningfulness level of test is less than 0.05. Consequently the fitted regression model has proper sufficiency.

Table 7: Regressive paths coefficients and meaningfulness test of coefficients

Variable	Non-standard coefficients		Standard coefficient of B	t-statistics amount	Meaningfulness level
	B	Standard deviation
Fixed amount	5.889	0.356	—	16.544	0.001
Familial cohesion	-0.307	0.057	-0.291	-5.404	0.001
Identity styles	-0.722	0.117	-0.334	-6.185	0.001

 

As it is clear from data of table (7), meaningfulness level of identity styles and family cohesion is less than 0.05. It is concluded that identity styles and family cohesion are effective on aggressive behavior. With regard to the column of B coefficients, it is clear that the «identity styles» variable with coefficient of β=-0.334 in terms of effectiveness is in the first rank and «familial cohesion» variable with coefficient of β=-0.291 in terms of effectiveness is in the second rank.

Conclusion and suggestions

The purpose of current research has been the study of the relation between identity styles and family cohesion with tendency to aggressive behaviors in studied students; according to the obtained findings, it became clear that in the first subsidiary hypothesis, identity styles (informative, normative, commitment) have positive and meaningful relation with family cohesion and diffuse/avoidant identity style has negative and meaningful relation with family cohesion. According to it, it can be expressed that students in compatible, allied environment with high correlation have a strong identity, self-control, self-regulator, high self-respect, active, hardworking, committed and stable characteristics and they are defender of their commitments. While turbulent and unhealthy environment of family leads to create incoherence of students identity and fructifies them as a weak and diffused person. Therefore efficient identity style of students is realized with regard to the warm and healthy environment of family. The obtained result conforms to the findings of (Jeoung Min, 2013),( Walker- Barnes, 2009), (Walker-Barnes, 2009) and Behzadi and Sarvghad, 2015.

In the second subsidiary hypothesis, it became clear that identity styles (informative, normative and commitment) have negative and meaningful relation with tendency to aggressive behaviors of studied students and diffuse/avoidant identity style has positive and meaningful relation with tendency to aggressive behaviors. This means that students with nature of internal control source, their cognitive and metacognitive power are safe from tendency to aggressive behaviors, but students with avoidant/diffuse nature and identity and changed and critical morale are always seeking stressful behaviors which violate the environmental tranquility and inter-individual relations. Therefore, whatever the identity styles of students are informative, normative and commitment, tendency to aggressive behaviors will be also reduced, controlled and disappeared completely and whatever the identity style of students is diffuse/avoidant, tendency to the aggression behaviors in them will be also increased. The obtained result conforms to the finding of Salimi and Shavisizad (2015).

In the third subsidiary hypothesis, it became clear that there is negative and meaningful relation between family cohesion and tendency to aggressive behaviors of studied students; with this explanation that family as the first and most important focus of training the students whatever is more cohesive, emotional, committed and the persons spend time with each other in group form in it, neural impulses of students are controlled (increasing of self-control) and in this condition, they see their around issues with more tranquility and make connection with others in educational and non-educational environment and have no tendency toward problem maker behaviors like aggression. The obtained result conforms to the findings of Sharma & Joshi (2015), Tayler & et al (2014), Sijtsema (2013), Lucia &Besalu (2006), MirzaieKutnaie (2015), Hajizadeh Kasahamdani (2013), Rezaie and Cheraghi (2011).

In the main hypothesis, it became clear that there is relation between identity styles and family cohesion and tendency to aggressive behaviors of studied students; with this explanation, identity styles and family cohesion are accounted as fundamental components in formation of nature, personality and naturally the kind of behavior and performance of students in educational environment and society. Therefore, the manner of foundation of individual personality of students has allocated the parents^, attention to itself. Successful identity and healthy environment of family have foreclosed any kind of dangerous emotional behavior and reactions from students and will present tranquility, happiness, compatibility, life motivation, good nature, internal regulation and etc in them. While unsafe environment of family and incoherence of it constantly cause a diffuse identity, negative self-concept, low self-respect, mental and performance weakness, lack of stability in behavior and definitely they have the readiness of any kind of stressful behavior and cause to appear aggressive behaviors in verbal and behavioral form from themselves for discharging the neural impulses. The obtained result conforms to the findings of Sharma & Joshi (2015), Tayler & et al (2014), Sijtsema (2013), Jeoung Min (2013), Walker & Barnes (2009), Lucia & Beslau (2006), Behzadi and Sarvghad 92015), Salimi & Shavisizad (2015), MirzaieKutnaie (2015), HagizadehKasahamdani (2013), Rezaie and Cheraghi (2011).

Therefore, with regard to the current research, the following cases are suggested

Regulating a curriculum entitled life skills in all educational grades (levels) of high school section;

Holding the training courses of consultation for students

Holding the discussion rooms as the extracurricular activity in high school with presence of all students and psychology experts in order to find out the kind of morale and performance of students and following it presenting proper and efficient solutions.

Delegating the responsibilities of educational environment (responsibilities with executive capability by students) by manager and educational tutors in order to supply the self-cultivation of aggressive students and following it reducing and controlling the problem maker behaviors.

Regulated consultation with parents of aggressive students by psychology experts and school consultation in order to enrich the warm and healthy family environment.

References

1. Ahangar Anzabi, A & et al (2011). The relation of parenting styles of parents with aggression of adolescents in ShistarTownship. Researches of cognitive and behavioral sciences, 1, 1-8.
2. Behzadi, Behnaz; Sarvghad, Sirus (2015). The relation of family cohesion and flexibility and identity styles with mediator role of metacognitive state in girl students. Journal of new psychological researches, (38) 10, 49-74.
3. HajizadehKasahamdani, Marzieh (2013). Studying the role of parents contradiction on behavioral disorders of children in primary school section. MSc thesis. Islamic Azad University, Shahrood Branch. Faculty of literature and human sciences.
4. Rezaie, Azarmidokht and Cheraghi, Sanaz (2011), the role of family performance in aggression and respect of adolescents, in the second national conference of psychology- family psychology, Islamic Azad University, Marvdasht Branch.
5. Zare, Maryam and Samani, Siamak (2008). Studying the role of family flexibility and cohesion in goal-orientation of children, family-researching, 4, 17, 36.
6. Salimi, Leila and Shavisizad, Saeed (2015). The relation between strict disciplinary models of parents and identity style with aggression in high school students of Kermanshah city, in the first scientific-investigative cross-country conference of development and propagation of educational sciences and sociology psychology and cultural-social sciences of Iran.
7. Enayat, Halimeh and Aghapour, Eslam (2010), studying the social-cultural factors related to the quality of mental health of family (case study: families living in Shiraz city). Journal of women^‘s sociology (woman and society), 1(2), 27-46.
8. Karimi, Yousef (2013). Social psychology. Tehran: Payame Noor.
9. MirzaieKutnaie, Fereshteh (2015), the role of family cohesion in explaining the aggressive behaviors of children. Journal of psychological transformation of child, 1(3), 81-92.
10. Hashemi, Nezam and Razavi, Abbas (2008). Studying and comparing the identity styles and the factors related to it in adolescent students who are martyrs^, children. Psychological-educational journal, 4 (13), 45-69.
11. Hedayati, Mehrnoush (2011). Philosophy for children and controlling aggression. Thought and child, 2, 109-134.
12. Adams, G. R., & Shea, J. R. (2001).The structure of identity status in adolescence and youth. Journal of Adolescence, 24, 136-144.
13. Berzonsky, M.D., Adams, G.R.(2002). Revaluating the identity status paradigm: still useful after 35 years.Journal of Adolescence Research, 15, 91-98.
14. Berzonsky, M.D., Kuk, S. (2000). Identity processing orientation: cognitive and behavioral strategies and well-being. Journal of Development and Psychopathology, 4, 79-96.
15. Card, N. A., et al. (2008). Direct and indirect aggression during childhood and adolescence: A meta-analytic review of gender differences, inter-correlations, and relations to maladjustment. Child Development, 79, 1185-1229.
16. Caputi, P. A.,Oades, L. A. (2001). Epistemic assumptions. Journal of Social Psychology, 221, 87-96.
17. Dolinger, S.M., Dolinger, R.J. (2002). Developmental view toward identity formation. Journal of Personality, 143, 421-424.
18. Dutt, D., et al. (2013). Magnitude, types and sex differentials of aggressive behavior among school children in a rural area of West Bengal. IndianJournal of Community Medicine, 38, 109- 113.
19. Heather, J. B. (2001). Identity style, cognitive style and well-being.the rule of commitment. Journal of Adolescence Research, 8, 76-79.
20. Hosseinkhanzadeh, A. A., et al. (2013). A Study of The Family Cohesion in Families with Mentally Disable Children. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 84, 749-753.
21. Juang, L. P., Alvarez, A. A. (2010). Discrimination and adjustment among Chinese American adolescents: Family conflict and family cohesion as vulnerability and protective factors. American Journal of Public Health, 100, 2403-2409
22. JeoungMin, Lee.(2013). Family cohesion as a moderator of the relationship between parents’ socialization behaviors and adolescents’ ethnic identity importance in Chinese immigrant families.Michigan state university.
23. Lingren, H.G. (2003). Creating sustainable families.Published by cooperative extension Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources.University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Available on: www.ianr.unl.edu/pubs/family/
24. Lucia, V. C., Breslau, N. (2006). Family cohesion and children’s behaviorproblems: A longitudinal investigation. Psychiatry Research, 14, 141-149.
25. Mackinnon, Jane., et al. (2002). Concurring patterns of women’s identity status, attachment styles, and understanding of children’s development. International Journal of behavioral development, 25(1), 70-80.
26. Nazir, S., et al. (2012).Parental Conflict And Its Effects On Youth Self Esteem (A Study AtUniversity Of Punjab). International Journal of Asian Social Science, 9, 1392-1400.
27. Olson, D. H. (1999).Circumflex model of marital & family systems. Journal of Family Therapy, 22, 144-167.
28. Sharma, A. (2012). Aggressive Behavior in University Students: The Role of Family Environment. Advances in Asian Social Science, 3, 622-628.
29. Sijtsema, J. J., et al. (2013).Effects of family cohesion and heart rate reactivity on aggressive/lawbreakingbehavior and prosaically behavior in adolescence: The TrackingAdolescents’ Individual Lives Survey study. Development and Psychopathology,25, 699–712.
30. Singh, S., et al. (2011). Mexican immigrant families: Relating trauma and family cohesion. Journal of Poverty, 15, 427-443.
31. Sharma, M., Joshi, H. L. (2015).Role of Family Environment and Parenting Stylein Adjustment among Male Adolescents. International Journal of CurrentResearch and Academic, 3, 252-263.
32. Snethen, G., Puymbroeck, M. V. (2008). Girls and Physical Aggression: Causes, Trends, and Intervention Guided by Social Learning Theory. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 13, 346- 354.
33. Taylor, L. K., et al. (2014). Trajectories of Adolescent Aggression and Family Cohesion: Thetential to Perpetuate or Ameliorate Political Conflict. Journal of Clinical Childand Adolescent psychology, Published online, http://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/journal.
34. Victor, M., et al. (2007).Effects of parent and family characteristics on treatment outcome of anxious children. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 21, 835- 848.
35. Walker-Barnes,Chanequa. (2009).Examining relationships between ethnic identity, family environment, and psychological outcomes for African Americanadolescents. Journal, 18(4), 412-420.