Parents Children Decision-making
Parental supervision is very valuable in influencing the imminent of the child. Parents have been said to be the "architect" and "conductor" of the development of a child. It can boost the competence and strength of the child. They have always been vicariously liable for the promotion of education as well as extracurricular activities that contribute to mental, emotional, and psychological development. If parents do not pay enough attention to what their children need, they will eventually have to deal with negative consequences (Angeles, 2017). Parents should be providing the child with care and make the child feel valuable and highly regarded. Children need guidance and support to get a decent future for an excellent transition to adulthood.
Decision-making is one of the essential skills of children need to build up in exchange for becoming sustainable and mature adults. It is crucial because the decisions of children directly influence the journey they take in their way of life (Taylor, 2009). As Akrani (2011) states, decision-making is to choose a decision from two or more alternatives. On the other hand, self-regulation involves controlling one's behavior, emotions, and thoughts to pursue long-term goals (Cuncic, 2019). Positive emotional wellbeing is required (Stosny, 2011). It is also defined as the process by which people incorporate behavioral change into their everyday lives and involves: self-monitoring, goal-setting, reflective thinking, decision-making, planning, implementation of a plan, self-assessment and management of emotions resulting from behavioral change (Participatory health through social behavior, 2016).
As per the Health Office of the Adolescent (2019), the relationship between children and their parents or caregivers is one of the most important relationships in a child's life, often lasting well into adulthood. This relationship dramatically changes adolescence as young people seek greater independence from their families and begin to make their own decisions. For increased autonomy, the increased risk is probable, both positive and negative, and teenagers need parents or caregivers to help them overcome the difficulties of adolescence. Therefore, according to McCue (2018), children and adolescents become poor decision-makers if they feel under pressure, under stress, or are seeking peer recognition. Teenagers who belong to a broken family are vulnerable to more unpleasant situations and conditions than those who live with consistently married parents. It creates behavioral problems from a cognitive, social, and emotional point of view. Normally, things like a child's decision-making acts, and vocabulary will relate to how they look at their situation. (Magpantay, et.al, 2014).Therefore, according to Jomes (n.d), when teenagers lack parental guidance in their lives, it creates problems for them in many ways.
On the other hand, the absenteeism of parents can also have a positive impact on adolescent decision-making. Teenagers are more likely to experiment and make decisions in ways that require limited adult supervision. The increased time spent by teenagers without adult supervision creates new opportunities and threats (Kobak, Abbott, Zisk, &Bounoua, 2017). For such a reason, there is a clear indication that parents can and do influence children, both positive and negative. Thus the separation or absence of parents from the child may have a significant impact on children in decision-making. Adolescents that make decisions that are out of emotion or due to what they feel at the moment may lead to risky behavior or negative consequences that may result in adulthood.
For the decision-maker, this sense of command is precipitated by alterations in one's perception of successful and unsuccessful ways of decision-making. Also, the change in one's understanding of practical and inefficient decision-making forms hastened this sense of control (self-regulation) for the decision-maker. These improvements enable approaches to resolve the factors that lead to mistakes in decision-making (Miller & Byrnes, 2001). As adolescents who lack the skills to deal with their emotional experiences may be more likely to engage in risky behaviors (Hessler& Katz, 2010), a low degree of self-regulation may lead to a wrong decision that results in risky behavior. These self-regulatory decision-making skills may well provide a bridge between ambitions and actions.
Similarly, the effect of ego depletion on risk behavior can also be seen as an exceptional circumstance of choice between alternative actions. Risk behavior is, by definition, the choice of an option that will result in unfavorable results of a particular probability individual experiencing ego loss is expected to experience a lack of self-control to cope with these potential negative consequences and are therefore likely to avoid risky alternatives (Unger & Stahlberg, 2008). In line with this, there is a study in China, where 1 in 5 children live in villages without their parents who move to work. Research has shown that these "left-behind" children have significantly higher rates of anxiety and depression later in life. Other research has shown that separation leads to increased aggression, isolation, and mental problems (Wan, 2018).
Adolescents are chosen as the respondent of this study because they are the ones who have the constantly changing characteristics of discovering their independence and sense of self (Cherry, 2019). As nothing more than a developing individual, we tend to be curious about things around us, and this rapidly growing adulthood is best suited to this study. Another explanation is that children with insufficient parental guidance are more likely to be involved in risky behaviors, such as violent crime, suicide, out-of-home abortion, and HIV infection (Miller & Byrnes, 2001). This can lead to long-term consequences for what they have done. Lack of parental guidance can affect the child's self-regulation, which can lead to poor decision-making. It may also happen when parents are not around, or both parents are present. Still, both of them have limited time for their child to be guided so this study distinguishes those teenage children who live with both parents and those who live apart from their parents and determine the level of their decision-making and self-regulation, and to which group of individuals there is a low level of decision-making and self-regulation. In the survey of UNICEF Philippines, the number of poor decision among teenagers is increasing in our community, leading to risky behaviors such as early pregnancy, HIV infection, cigarettes, and alcohol consumption, which may be one of the reasons for weak parental guidance that this study wants to determine.
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
This chapter presents an overview of the explanation of articles and studies that has been reviewed by the researchers. Those that were included in this chapter helped in familiarizing information that was relevant and similar to the present study.
Self-regulation
Self-regulation can be described in various ways. In the most basic sense, it means regulating one's actions, feelings, and thoughts in the fulfillment of long-term goals (Cuncic, 2019). To render it much clearer, behaviorally, self-regulation is the ability to perform in your long-term best interest, consistent with your values. Emotionally, self-regulation is the ability to calm down when you're angry and cheer up when you're down (Stosny, 2011). However, as Cuncic (2019) said, our ability to self-regulate as an adult has origins in our childhood development. Understanding how to self-regulate is an essential skill that children learn for both emotional maturity and subsequent social interaction. This is how we cope with stressors, and as such, it lays the foundation for all other endeavors. As Andrea Bell (2016) once said, "Someone who has good emotional self-regulation will hold their emotions under control. They can avoid maladaptive behaviors that could make their situation worse, and they can cheer up when they feel sad. They have a versatile range of emotional and psychological responses that are well-tailored to the demands of their environment. Therefore, people may use a self-regulatory strategy to establish implementation intentions to make better consumer decisions and to promote the transcription of those decisions into practice (Gollwitzer&Sheeran 2009).
As cited in the study (Abun&Magallanes 2018), according to Cook & Cook (2009) stated that, by having self-regulation skills of self-regulation, one could regulate and control one's behavior, emotions, or thoughts, altering them in compliance with the regulations of the situation. This might improve a person's ability to suppress reactions, to avoid intervention from irrelevant stimuli, and to continue to perform related tasks even when one does not enjoy them. As just the theory of self-regulation (SRT) suggests, we are investing energy in regulating what we think, say and do to be the person we want to be, both in specific circumstances and in the longer term. There's a lot of self-regulation to keep us from doing things we know we're not supposed to do, for example, hindering us from telling other people that they're daft. Self-regulation is also applied to the creation of positive actions, such as the examination study. It is usually necessary when there is a motivational conflict, such as running away from a fire rather than helping to rescue fire victims. There are four components of self-regulation mentioned by Baumeister et al. (2007) which are: standards of desirable behavior, motivation to meet standards, supervising of situations and thoughts that immediately follow the breaking of rules, and the willpower of internal strength to control urges. (Changing Works, n.d)
In line with the above concept, some people believe that self-regulation must be taught in childhood, but it is not too late to make a difference in adolescents and young adults. Also, research has shown that significant changes in brain structure occur during adolescence, making interventions at this age-relevant and timely. In particular, brain systems that seek rewards and process emotions are more developed during early and mid-teen years (i.e., 11-15 years) than cognitive control systems responsible for ethical decision-making and future planning. This means that self-regulation is "out of control" at this age of growth. Considering that poor decision during adolescence can have long-term negative consequences, self-regulation during this period of development is crucial (Murray &Rosanbalm, 2017). Nonetheless, a student who can self-regulate needs better focus and problem-solving skills for cognitive functioning. (Parenting for the brain, 2019). As shown by Kalish (2018), this is one of the significant developmental tasks of childhood. Sometimes children naturally develop it by being around self-regulating adults by playing and exercising, by being in nature, by eating healthy food and getting plenty of sleep. Other times, however, children are over-stimulated, around adults who are stressed and dysregulated, not gaining enough exercise, free time, rest, hydration, and healthy eating.
According to Jackie (2012), as stated in the study of (Mercy &Adunola, n.d.), low self-esteem is one of the causes of adolescent pregnancy. With their peer group, children who do not show love and affection to their parents will seek it out.
Furthermore, according to DiClemente, Hansen, and Ponton (1995), parents and educators have become extremely concerned about adolescent decision-making due to the increase in this age group due to issues such as violent crime, suicide, out-of-wedlock teenage pregnancies and HIV infection as described in the study (Miller & Byrnes, 2001). Yes, teens who experience their parents ' love and support are less likely to engage in risky behaviors. Furthermore, those whose parents demonstrate clear expectations about the actions of their children and display consistent boundaries and supervision are less likely to engage in risky behaviors (Levy, 2019). Likewise, those lacking the ability to cope with their emotional experiences may be more likely to engage in risky behaviors to deal with adverse effects or block their feelings (Hessler & Katz, 2010).
Decision Making
Usually, individuals claim they find it challenging to make decisions. Unfortunately, we all have to make decisions for our whole life, ranging from insignificant issues such as what to eat, right up to life-changing decisions such as where and what to study, what job would fit, and whom to marry. Many people defer decision making by continually searching for more details or having the opinions of other people to make a choice.
Akrani (2011) has chosen to choose a course of action from two or more alternatives. Achieving a specific goal or solving a particular problem is completed. Identically, typically, decision-making encompasses selecting the option most likely to meet our objectives. Therefore, teaching children of all ages is an essential skill as parents want children to grow up to be healthy, responsible, happy adults. Some literature has shown that those who can assess a situation and make a decision in life are often more successful
(Welker, 2010).
We have to make decisions regularly for all ages, whether at work or in our personal lives. Some choices are going to be easier than others. Although success can require experience in some decision-making tasks, which increases with age. Moreover, according to
Dietrich (2010), several significant factors affect the decision-making process. Essential elements include past experiences, several cognitive biases, increased engagement and lowered results, individual differences, including age and socioeconomic status, and a belief in personal importance. All these things affect the decision-making process and the decisions that have been made. When individuals grow older, the multiple factors that influence them will alter the decision-making process. Age is only one difference that affects the decision-making process.
For example, it may be possible to differentiate the degree of independent decision-making from the underlying motives. Independent decisions, as such, often reflected unique relationships with more problematic behavior (Metzger, Babskie, Olson, & Romm, 2016). Achieving a specific goal or solving a particular problem is done. Identically, generally, decision-making requires choosing the option most likely to meet our objectives. We do this by looking through the options available and weighing all the pros and cons that need a certain level of cognitive effort (Ketchell, 2016).
Adolescence
Adolescence, the second decade of life, is, as Schvaneveldt and Adams (1983) said, a developing and maturing passage leading to maturity. Until full maturity, it is considered to be the transitional stage of life. Adolescents also differ in their behavior from adults, solve problems, and make decisions. For this difference, there is a biological explanation. Studies have shown that brains are maturing and developing well into early adulthood throughout childhood and adolescence (American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 2016).
In this research, Erik Erikson's concept of psychosocial growth was grounded in the age range as the foundation criterion. According to Cherry (2019), this period occurs between the ages of about 12 and 18 during adolescence. Adolescents are discovering their autonomy during this period and developing a sense of identity. As teens move from childhood to adulthood, they may start to feel confused or unsafe about themselves and how they fit into society. At the same time, they seek to create a sense of self, teenagers that experience different positions, activities, and behaviors.
In literature, Welker (2010) suggested that decision-making skills should start early with making small choices between two alternatives for young children. Nevertheless, as children turn into adults and gain autonomy, they will need to learn to make more choices. To accomplish this goal, understanding and using decision-making and problem-solving method can help teens develop. McCue (2018) believes that children can give clear reasons why certain behaviors are undesirable as language evolves. However, children and adolescents are poor decision-makers if they feel pressured, stressed, or seek peer attention. Environmental influences can affect how they make a decision. Children are most susceptible to peer pressure during adolescence and are drawn to experiment with resistance to parental control in all sorts of risky behaviors (Business Mirror, 2017). Also referred to as psychosocial maturity is the relationship between brain development and the risk of making poor choices, especially during hot situations. Research has shown that young people between the ages of 12 and 17 are significantly less psychosocially mature than those between the ages of 18 and 23 who are also less psychosocially mature than adults, 24 and older (Mccue, 2018).
For the decision-maker, shifts in one's perception of efficient and unsuccessful ways of decision-making precipitate this sense of control. In contrast, changes in one's understanding of successful and ineffective ways of decision-making hurried the decision-maker's sense of control (self-regulation). These improvements encourage methods for managing factors that lead to decision-making mistakes (Miller & Byrnes, 2001). As adolescents who lack the skills to deal with their emotional experiences may be more likely to engage in risky behaviors (Hessler & Katz, 2010), low self-regulation can make a wrong decision, leading to risky behavior. These decision-making skills in self-regulation may well provide a bridge between expectations and behavior.
Similarly, ego depletion's influence on risk behavior can be seen as a particular case of choice between alternative actions. Risky behavior is, by definition, the choice of an option that, with a certain likelihood, will result in an adverse outcome. It is assumed that people with ego loss experience a lack of self-control to cope with these potential negative consequences and will be likely to resist harmful alternatives (Unger & Stahlberg, 2008)
According to the World Health Organization (2019), adolescence is a crucial period for developing and maintaining active mental wellbeing in social and emotional behaviors. The more teenagers are exposed to risk factors, the higher the potential impact on their mental health. Throughout adolescence, factors that can lead to stress include a desire for greater autonomy, the pressure to conform with peers, sexual identity exploration, and increased access to and use of technology. The quality of their home life and their relationships with peers are other important determinants. Due to their living conditions, stigma, discrimination or exclusion, or lack of access to quality support and services, some adolescents are at higher risk of mental health conditions. Most health risk-taking habits, such as drug use or taking a sexual threat, start during adolescence. Risk-taking practices can both be an unhelpful strategy for dealing with poor mental health and can have a severe impact on the psychological and physical wellbeing of an individual. Dysfunctional feelings can lead to risky behaviors that can have long-term effects.
Left-behind Children
As described in the CRC, the "family environment in an atmosphere of joy, love, and understanding" is of primary importance for the full harmonious development of the personality of the child that each parent knows this and the dreams of living together in such circumstances. Nevertheless, working on a foreign country and the resulting remittances in a country where unemployment is a massive and continuing fact-of-life provides a way out of poverty. The classic example of the above occurs when one or both parents are working abroad (Iso, 2017).
Overseas Filipino Worker (OFW) is a term which is used to refer to Filipino migrant workers, citizens living in another country for a limited period of employment (Wikipedia, 2019). As of April 2019, it was estimated that the number of Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs) who worked abroad between April and September 2018 was 2.3 million. Overseas Contract Workers (OFWs) with existing work contracts accounted for 96.2% of the total OFWs between April and September 2018. The rest (3.8%) worked without a deal outside the country (Perez, 2019). According to the Philippine Statistical Authority, CALABARZON reported the largest share of OFWs with 17.9%, followed by Central Luzon with 14.3% and the National Capital Region and Ilocos Region, 9.7% share each. From these four regions, 50% of the total OFWs came for (Perez, 2019). Cavite Province as the area chosen for the research.
The 2016 report by the World Bank noted that remittances to the Philippines are encouraging domestic consumption, a key source of economic growth, and holding the current account in surplus. With an estimated $28 billion, the Philippines ranked third among the largest receiving nation in 2015. India's largest was $69 billion in 2015, followed by China ($64 billion). The United Nations survey estimated that overseas remittances ranged from P5,000 to P20,000 per month, quarterly, or as obliged. Payments were usually devoted to basic needs and education expenses; any additional money was set aside as savings (Business Mirror, 2017). Many OFW kids have become materialistic and, due to lack of direction, waste their parent's money on gadgets and Internet gaming (Iso, 2017). Parent labor migration also skews children's values as they view it only as "equivalent money." Without proper parent guidance, regular remittances lead to children's materialistic attitudes (Rufo, 2008). While they provide for their children, the psychological effect of the parent's absence on the child and its impact on the way the child handles financial resources is the primary concern (Business Mirror, 2017). Even in our financial support, we still have to determine how the money we have will be used properly.
OFW's children are prone to emotional, psychological, and behavioral issues, according to Iso (2017). It was also observed that many children from the OFW are becoming self-doubtful and drug dependent. The absence of the parent also makes them vulnerable to abuse and violence (Rufo, 2008). Also, the most affected in such dynamics are children who can deal either positively or negatively with the absence of one parent or both parents. Unicef data showed that 3 to 6 million Filipino children are left behind as parents seek work abroad. Based on their "cognitive development," children have a varying level of maturity or awareness of the situation. We see migration only as a form of parental abandonment for young children, while adolescents may be either receptive or resentful (Reyes, n.d.).
On the other hand, as a result of a study conducted by Goldberg and Carlson (2014) indicates a substantial correlation between the dyadic relationship performance of co-resident parents and the rate of behavioral problems of children. We found that parents with more cooperative relationships have fewer behavioral issues with boys. Environmental influences can affect how they make a decision. Furthermore, parental absence tends to increase children's risk of drinking and smoking before they become adolescents. They discovered in a study that children who had endured a parent's absence during their first seven years, whether as a result of death, separation or otherwise, were more than considerably more likely to have tried smoking, and almost 1.5 times as likely to have drunk alcohol by the age of 11. (Davis, 2016)
Since around 2016, UNICEF Philippines investigated that the Philippines is one of the world's fastest-growing HIV epidemics: diagnosed cases increased from 1 a day in 2008 to 26 a day in 2016 (29% among children and young people aged 15-24), and HIV infections increased by 230% among at-risk youth groups between 2011 and 2015. Also, teen fertility rates are rising: from 49 (in 1997) to 59.2 births per 1,000 females aged 15-19 in 2015 (Doyle, 2016). Additional concerns are the use of tobacco and cannabis. In 2016, it was estimated that 5.6 percent of 15–16-year-olds had used marijuana at least once in the previous year, based on data collected from 130 countries (2). Before the age of 18, most adult smokers have their first cigarette (World Health Organization, 2019). This shows that, as the years go by, the number of poor decision-making among teenagers is increasing in our community, leading to risky behaviors such as early pregnancy, HIV infection, cigarettes, and alcohol consumption, which may be one of the reasons for weak parental guidance.
Nonetheless, a study conducted by Espero (n.d), found that in making post-secondary career decisions, the majority of OFW's children who participated in their research showed autonomy. They chose a career path (i.e., pursuing college) that leads to white-collar jobs rather than blue-collar. The influence on their career decisions could have been accounted for by factors other than academic achievements such as migration plans, socioeconomic status, parental attachment, and parental expectations. This lifestyle could be a factor affecting the decision-making of the children of these OFWs to think independently.
A study by Bocuy (2013), showed that children from the OFWs believed they could live without their parents. They have been capable of dealing emotionally and physically. They have recognized that their condition is an inevitable reality, but there is a need to make their being worse and happy. There's a missing component that's been ripped or broken to satisfy the kids.
Researchers found that having Filipino Overseas Worker Parents had a significant effect on the children left behind in the research by Alegria et al. (2018). Positive and negative impacts; and mechanisms to cope with them. Many contributors said that both economic needs and wellbeing are the beneficial advantages of having OFW relatives. On the other hand, most respondents said their parents ' lack of presence is the negative effect of having OFW parents, while the least discussed are both emotional issues and vices. Researchers have found that the most responsive to coping mechanism is to communicate with their parents working abroad, while the least replied is to have vices and engage in relationships.
Guidance for parents is critical (Nauert, 2019). And as per the Office of Adolescent Health (2019), parents play a significant and vital role; they help shape the academic plans of teenagers, their moral and social beliefs, and their more comprehensive view of the world. Parents must combine protective concerns about the safety of adolescents with encouragement to improve the adolescent's capacity to make independent decisions. The amount of time teenagers spend without active parental supervision (Kobak, Abbott, Zisk, & Bounoua, 2017) complicates ensuring the safety of the child. Also, the willingness of parents to retain the knowledge of their thoughts and feelings and their adolescents can be a common element that promotes cooperative interaction and encourages the growing capacity of adolescents to self-regulate and make autonomous decisions. Moreover, there is a discovery that the new factor in child development theory is that the way a child turns out can be primarily dictated by the parents ' day-to-day decisions that guide the child's growth (Nauert, 2019).
Parents and relatives continue to shape how adolescents feel towards themselves, but during this period, external influences also become particularly important (Cherry, Erikson's Understanding of Psychosocial Development Theory, 2019).
Research Instruments
The following instruments were used for the researchers to gather all the necessary data needed for the study. They were making decisions in everyday life scale to determine the level of their decision-making skills and the Adolescent Self-Regulatory Inventory to ascertain their self-regulation capacity of adolescents' children of OFW and adolescents children living with both parents.
It is making Decisions in Everyday Life. Claudia Mincemoyer developed the scale, Ph.D., and Daniel Francis Perkins, Ph.D. (CYFAR, n.d). Making decisions in Everyday Life is a 20-item scale that measures an adolescent's (12 to 18 years old) decision-making skills. The instrument assesses adolescents' decision-making skill by analyzing the frequency of practice of the 38 following skills that are required to employ thorough decision-making: defining the problem (items 1 to 4), identifying alternatives (items 5 to 8), identifying risks and consequences (items 9 to 12), selecting an option (issues 13 to 16) and evaluation (articles 17 to 20).
Validity - The extent to which a measure captures what it is intended to measure. The Content or Face Validity, Criterion Validity, and Construct Validity have no information provided. However, the developer noted that "If the information on a particular psychometric was not found, it is indicated as "no information provided."This is not necessarily reflective of a lack of reliability or Validity within a given scale/instrument, but rather a lack of stringent testing by developers or other researchers for various reasons "(Mincemoyer & Perkins, 2001). Together with other life skills scales, "Making a Decision in Everyday Life" has shown moderate to strong positive associations that demonstrate parallel relevance (Duerden, Witt, Fernadez, Bryant, & Theriault, 2012).
Reliability- Enormous use of the scale with 4-H populations, has resulted in an average level of safety .74 (Mincemoyer & Perkins, 2009). The correlation of the ' Making Decisions in Everyday Life ' scale is suggested for at least one type of reliability as evidence. However, standards range from.5 to.9 depending on the intended use and context of the instrument. For the five variables in the scale range from.63 to.89, the internal consistency is Alpha's, and the inter-rater quality has no data as well as the test-retest.
Scoring and Interpretation. For the scoring of Making decisions in everyday life scale, each item is rated on a 5-point Likert-scale, namely:1= never, 2= rarely, 3=sometime, 4=often, and 5= always. Scores are range from 20 to 100. Results can be achieved by summing up all item ratings, and higher scores indicate more exceptional decision-making ability. Each item has a statement that describes how you might decide everyday life. It must be described in the last 30 days. Each level of decision making has its clarification.
Furthermore, the instrument does not have a standard measurement for determining the level of decision making. That is why the researchers categorized the data scores using mean and sample standard deviation. The researchers have come up with four categories: High average, above average, average, and low average, to categorize the raw scores of the respondents.
Below the average level are those individuals who have minimal foresight. They don't consider the outcomes of their activities before they accomplish something. Thus, they make snap judgments when it comes to making a decision. Also, according to Potton (2012), as cited in the (Baro&Paraon, 2017) report, individuals with a lower than average rate of decision-making appear to make poorly informed decisions. Gradually, they make snap judgments when it comes to making decisions. So the only thing that matters to them is short-term gratification.
Below average individuals who belong in this level have decision-making skills that are not fully matured yet. They are not objective enough, and they rely too much on luck, instinct, or timing to make reliable decisions. Those with a low level of decision-making skills, according to (MindTools, 2013), tend to focus excessively on chance, momentum, and timing to make rational decisions. Therefore, individuals with low average decision-making skills are not fair when it comes to making decisions.
Individuals that fall below the average level have a good understanding of the basis of the five steps in the decision-making process, namely: Define the problem, identify the alternatives, identify the risk and consequences, select an option, and the evaluation of the whole process.
Above-average are those who know how to set up the process and generate many potential solutions. From there, they analyze the option carefully and make the best decisions possible based on what they know. Individuals with an above-average level of decision-making skills know how to access the cycle and create a lot of potential solutions, according to MindTools (2013). We use that information to gain more and more experience to assess their decisions and build on their decision-making abilities.
Lastly, the High average level is those individuals who can retrieve courses of action based on the situation or action matching rules, self-diagnose their performance, identify weaknesses in their knowledge and processes, and correct them. According to Rosen, Salas, Lyons, and Fiore (2008), as discussed in the analysis of (Baro & Paraon, 2017), individuals with a high degree of decision-making skills obtain solutions to the problem based on circumstances or rules of action, diagnose their results, recognize and correct deficiencies in knowledge and processes. These often produce more comprehensive, more conceptual, more logical, and more abstract representations of circumstances. We also foresee what details the decision-making process would need. They then assess their data's accuracy, reliability, and completeness. They evaluate their condition comprehension.
Adolescent Self-Regulatory Inventory (ASRI).The scale was developed by Kristin L. Moilanen (Moilanen, 2006). The ASRI is a theoretically-based questionnaire that taps two temporal aspects of self-regulation of adolescents 11-16 years old. This is a 36 item measure that evaluates the degree to which adolescents can activate, monitor, maintain, inhibit, and adapt their emotions, thoughts, attention, and behavior. Respondents rate how exact each item is for them on a Likert-type response scale, ranging from 1 (not at all right for me) to 5 (really true for me).
Validity - The extent to which a measure captures what it is intended to measure. The Construct Validity and Predictive Validity have no information provided. However, the developer noted that "If the information on a particular psychometric was not found, it is indicated as "no information provided." It should be noted that this is not necessarily an indication of a lack of reliability or Validity within a particular scale/instrument, but rather a lack of rigorous testing, for various reasons, by the developers or other researchers." (Mincemoyer& Perkins, 2001). "The Adolescents Self-Regulatory Inventory" indicated r = [.68, 92] with the comparison self-regulation questionnaire, similarly to concurrent validity r = -.30 with psychological control; r = [-.46, -.34].
Reliability- Cronbach's Alpha provided internal consistency values of.72 in long term self-regulation and .84 in short term self-regulation.
Furthermore, to establish local reliability of this scale for the adolescents aged 12-18, the researchers conducted a pilot test with 70 adolescents in the province of Cavite. The results produced an internal consistency of .703 Cronbach's Alpha and were accepted by the researchers because it exceeded the minimum threshold of .70 Cronbach's Alpha. However, there is an item that outliers and needed to delete or remove to be this scale acceptable. This item was the question or issue 8.
Scoring and Interpretation. For the scoring of Adolescents Self-Regulatory Inventory, each item is rated on a 5-point Likert-scale, namely:1= not at all true for me, 2= not very true for me, 3= neither true nor untrue for me, 4- somewhat true for me, and 5= true for me. Reverse score items namely; 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21, 34, 35, (5= Not at all true for me, 4=Not very true for me, 3= Neither true nor untrue for me, 2= Somewhat true for me and 1= Really true for me). Add all the scores together. Higher scores indicate an ability to self-regulate.
Decision-making is one of the essential skills of children need to build up in exchange for becoming sustainable and mature adults. It is crucial because the decisions of children directly influence the journey they take in their way of life (Taylor, 2009). As Akrani (2011) states, decision-making is to choose a decision from two or more alternatives. On the other hand, self-regulation involves controlling one's behavior, emotions, and thoughts to pursue long-term goals (Cuncic, 2019). Positive emotional wellbeing is required (Stosny, 2011). It is also defined as the process by which people incorporate behavioral change into their everyday lives and involves: self-monitoring, goal-setting, reflective thinking, decision-making, planning, implementation of a plan, self-assessment and management of emotions resulting from behavioral change (Participatory health through social behavior, 2016).
As per the Health Office of the Adolescent (2019), the relationship between children and their parents or caregivers is one of the most important relationships in a child's life, often lasting well into adulthood. This relationship dramatically changes adolescence as young people seek greater independence from their families and begin to make their own decisions. For increased autonomy, the increased risk is probable, both positive and negative, and teenagers need parents or caregivers to help them overcome the difficulties of adolescence. Therefore, according to McCue (2018), children and adolescents become poor decision-makers if they feel under pressure, under stress, or are seeking peer recognition. Teenagers who belong to a broken family are vulnerable to more unpleasant situations and conditions than those who live with consistently married parents. It creates behavioral problems from a cognitive, social, and emotional point of view. Normally, things like a child's decision-making acts, and vocabulary will relate to how they look at their situation. (Magpantay, et.al, 2014).Therefore, according to Jomes (n.d), when teenagers lack parental guidance in their lives, it creates problems for them in many ways.
On the other hand, the absenteeism of parents can also have a positive impact on adolescent decision-making. Teenagers are more likely to experiment and make decisions in ways that require limited adult supervision. The increased time spent by teenagers without adult supervision creates new opportunities and threats (Kobak, Abbott, Zisk, &Bounoua, 2017). For such a reason, there is a clear indication that parents can and do influence children, both positive and negative. Thus the separation or absence of parents from the child may have a significant impact on children in decision-making. Adolescents that make decisions that are out of emotion or due to what they feel at the moment may lead to risky behavior or negative consequences that may result in adulthood.
For the decision-maker, this sense of command is precipitated by alterations in one's perception of successful and unsuccessful ways of decision-making. Also, the change in one's understanding of practical and inefficient decision-making forms hastened this sense of control (self-regulation) for the decision-maker. These improvements enable approaches to resolve the factors that lead to mistakes in decision-making (Miller & Byrnes, 2001). As adolescents who lack the skills to deal with their emotional experiences may be more likely to engage in risky behaviors (Hessler& Katz, 2010), a low degree of self-regulation may lead to a wrong decision that results in risky behavior. These self-regulatory decision-making skills may well provide a bridge between ambitions and actions.
Similarly, the effect of ego depletion on risk behavior can also be seen as an exceptional circumstance of choice between alternative actions. Risk behavior is, by definition, the choice of an option that will result in unfavorable results of a particular probability individual experiencing ego loss is expected to experience a lack of self-control to cope with these potential negative consequences and are therefore likely to avoid risky alternatives (Unger & Stahlberg, 2008). In line with this, there is a study in China, where 1 in 5 children live in villages without their parents who move to work. Research has shown that these "left-behind" children have significantly higher rates of anxiety and depression later in life. Other research has shown that separation leads to increased aggression, isolation, and mental problems (Wan, 2018).
Adolescents are chosen as the respondent of this study because they are the ones who have the constantly changing characteristics of discovering their independence and sense of self (Cherry, 2019). As nothing more than a developing individual, we tend to be curious about things around us, and this rapidly growing adulthood is best suited to this study. Another explanation is that children with insufficient parental guidance are more likely to be involved in risky behaviors, such as violent crime, suicide, out-of-home abortion, and HIV infection (Miller & Byrnes, 2001). This can lead to long-term consequences for what they have done. Lack of parental guidance can affect the child's self-regulation, which can lead to poor decision-making. It may also happen when parents are not around, or both parents are present. Still, both of them have limited time for their child to be guided so this study distinguishes those teenage children who live with both parents and those who live apart from their parents and determine the level of their decision-making and self-regulation, and to which group of individuals there is a low level of decision-making and self-regulation. In the survey of UNICEF Philippines, the number of poor decision among teenagers is increasing in our community, leading to risky behaviors such as early pregnancy, HIV infection, cigarettes, and alcohol consumption, which may be one of the reasons for weak parental guidance that this study wants to determine.
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
This chapter presents an overview of the explanation of articles and studies that has been reviewed by the researchers. Those that were included in this chapter helped in familiarizing information that was relevant and similar to the present study.
Self-regulation
Self-regulation can be described in various ways. In the most basic sense, it means regulating one's actions, feelings, and thoughts in the fulfillment of long-term goals (Cuncic, 2019). To render it much clearer, behaviorally, self-regulation is the ability to perform in your long-term best interest, consistent with your values. Emotionally, self-regulation is the ability to calm down when you're angry and cheer up when you're down (Stosny, 2011). However, as Cuncic (2019) said, our ability to self-regulate as an adult has origins in our childhood development. Understanding how to self-regulate is an essential skill that children learn for both emotional maturity and subsequent social interaction. This is how we cope with stressors, and as such, it lays the foundation for all other endeavors. As Andrea Bell (2016) once said, "Someone who has good emotional self-regulation will hold their emotions under control. They can avoid maladaptive behaviors that could make their situation worse, and they can cheer up when they feel sad. They have a versatile range of emotional and psychological responses that are well-tailored to the demands of their environment. Therefore, people may use a self-regulatory strategy to establish implementation intentions to make better consumer decisions and to promote the transcription of those decisions into practice (Gollwitzer&Sheeran 2009).
As cited in the study (Abun&Magallanes 2018), according to Cook & Cook (2009) stated that, by having self-regulation skills of self-regulation, one could regulate and control one's behavior, emotions, or thoughts, altering them in compliance with the regulations of the situation. This might improve a person's ability to suppress reactions, to avoid intervention from irrelevant stimuli, and to continue to perform related tasks even when one does not enjoy them. As just the theory of self-regulation (SRT) suggests, we are investing energy in regulating what we think, say and do to be the person we want to be, both in specific circumstances and in the longer term. There's a lot of self-regulation to keep us from doing things we know we're not supposed to do, for example, hindering us from telling other people that they're daft. Self-regulation is also applied to the creation of positive actions, such as the examination study. It is usually necessary when there is a motivational conflict, such as running away from a fire rather than helping to rescue fire victims. There are four components of self-regulation mentioned by Baumeister et al. (2007) which are: standards of desirable behavior, motivation to meet standards, supervising of situations and thoughts that immediately follow the breaking of rules, and the willpower of internal strength to control urges. (Changing Works, n.d)
In line with the above concept, some people believe that self-regulation must be taught in childhood, but it is not too late to make a difference in adolescents and young adults. Also, research has shown that significant changes in brain structure occur during adolescence, making interventions at this age-relevant and timely. In particular, brain systems that seek rewards and process emotions are more developed during early and mid-teen years (i.e., 11-15 years) than cognitive control systems responsible for ethical decision-making and future planning. This means that self-regulation is "out of control" at this age of growth. Considering that poor decision during adolescence can have long-term negative consequences, self-regulation during this period of development is crucial (Murray &Rosanbalm, 2017). Nonetheless, a student who can self-regulate needs better focus and problem-solving skills for cognitive functioning. (Parenting for the brain, 2019). As shown by Kalish (2018), this is one of the significant developmental tasks of childhood. Sometimes children naturally develop it by being around self-regulating adults by playing and exercising, by being in nature, by eating healthy food and getting plenty of sleep. Other times, however, children are over-stimulated, around adults who are stressed and dysregulated, not gaining enough exercise, free time, rest, hydration, and healthy eating.
According to Jackie (2012), as stated in the study of (Mercy &Adunola, n.d.), low self-esteem is one of the causes of adolescent pregnancy. With their peer group, children who do not show love and affection to their parents will seek it out.
Furthermore, according to DiClemente, Hansen, and Ponton (1995), parents and educators have become extremely concerned about adolescent decision-making due to the increase in this age group due to issues such as violent crime, suicide, out-of-wedlock teenage pregnancies and HIV infection as described in the study (Miller & Byrnes, 2001). Yes, teens who experience their parents ' love and support are less likely to engage in risky behaviors. Furthermore, those whose parents demonstrate clear expectations about the actions of their children and display consistent boundaries and supervision are less likely to engage in risky behaviors (Levy, 2019). Likewise, those lacking the ability to cope with their emotional experiences may be more likely to engage in risky behaviors to deal with adverse effects or block their feelings (Hessler & Katz, 2010).
Decision Making
Usually, individuals claim they find it challenging to make decisions. Unfortunately, we all have to make decisions for our whole life, ranging from insignificant issues such as what to eat, right up to life-changing decisions such as where and what to study, what job would fit, and whom to marry. Many people defer decision making by continually searching for more details or having the opinions of other people to make a choice.
Akrani (2011) has chosen to choose a course of action from two or more alternatives. Achieving a specific goal or solving a particular problem is completed. Identically, typically, decision-making encompasses selecting the option most likely to meet our objectives. Therefore, teaching children of all ages is an essential skill as parents want children to grow up to be healthy, responsible, happy adults. Some literature has shown that those who can assess a situation and make a decision in life are often more successful
(Welker, 2010).
We have to make decisions regularly for all ages, whether at work or in our personal lives. Some choices are going to be easier than others. Although success can require experience in some decision-making tasks, which increases with age. Moreover, according to
Dietrich (2010), several significant factors affect the decision-making process. Essential elements include past experiences, several cognitive biases, increased engagement and lowered results, individual differences, including age and socioeconomic status, and a belief in personal importance. All these things affect the decision-making process and the decisions that have been made. When individuals grow older, the multiple factors that influence them will alter the decision-making process. Age is only one difference that affects the decision-making process.
For example, it may be possible to differentiate the degree of independent decision-making from the underlying motives. Independent decisions, as such, often reflected unique relationships with more problematic behavior (Metzger, Babskie, Olson, & Romm, 2016). Achieving a specific goal or solving a particular problem is done. Identically, generally, decision-making requires choosing the option most likely to meet our objectives. We do this by looking through the options available and weighing all the pros and cons that need a certain level of cognitive effort (Ketchell, 2016).
Adolescence
Adolescence, the second decade of life, is, as Schvaneveldt and Adams (1983) said, a developing and maturing passage leading to maturity. Until full maturity, it is considered to be the transitional stage of life. Adolescents also differ in their behavior from adults, solve problems, and make decisions. For this difference, there is a biological explanation. Studies have shown that brains are maturing and developing well into early adulthood throughout childhood and adolescence (American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 2016).
In this research, Erik Erikson's concept of psychosocial growth was grounded in the age range as the foundation criterion. According to Cherry (2019), this period occurs between the ages of about 12 and 18 during adolescence. Adolescents are discovering their autonomy during this period and developing a sense of identity. As teens move from childhood to adulthood, they may start to feel confused or unsafe about themselves and how they fit into society. At the same time, they seek to create a sense of self, teenagers that experience different positions, activities, and behaviors.
In literature, Welker (2010) suggested that decision-making skills should start early with making small choices between two alternatives for young children. Nevertheless, as children turn into adults and gain autonomy, they will need to learn to make more choices. To accomplish this goal, understanding and using decision-making and problem-solving method can help teens develop. McCue (2018) believes that children can give clear reasons why certain behaviors are undesirable as language evolves. However, children and adolescents are poor decision-makers if they feel pressured, stressed, or seek peer attention. Environmental influences can affect how they make a decision. Children are most susceptible to peer pressure during adolescence and are drawn to experiment with resistance to parental control in all sorts of risky behaviors (Business Mirror, 2017). Also referred to as psychosocial maturity is the relationship between brain development and the risk of making poor choices, especially during hot situations. Research has shown that young people between the ages of 12 and 17 are significantly less psychosocially mature than those between the ages of 18 and 23 who are also less psychosocially mature than adults, 24 and older (Mccue, 2018).
For the decision-maker, shifts in one's perception of efficient and unsuccessful ways of decision-making precipitate this sense of control. In contrast, changes in one's understanding of successful and ineffective ways of decision-making hurried the decision-maker's sense of control (self-regulation). These improvements encourage methods for managing factors that lead to decision-making mistakes (Miller & Byrnes, 2001). As adolescents who lack the skills to deal with their emotional experiences may be more likely to engage in risky behaviors (Hessler & Katz, 2010), low self-regulation can make a wrong decision, leading to risky behavior. These decision-making skills in self-regulation may well provide a bridge between expectations and behavior.
Similarly, ego depletion's influence on risk behavior can be seen as a particular case of choice between alternative actions. Risky behavior is, by definition, the choice of an option that, with a certain likelihood, will result in an adverse outcome. It is assumed that people with ego loss experience a lack of self-control to cope with these potential negative consequences and will be likely to resist harmful alternatives (Unger & Stahlberg, 2008)
According to the World Health Organization (2019), adolescence is a crucial period for developing and maintaining active mental wellbeing in social and emotional behaviors. The more teenagers are exposed to risk factors, the higher the potential impact on their mental health. Throughout adolescence, factors that can lead to stress include a desire for greater autonomy, the pressure to conform with peers, sexual identity exploration, and increased access to and use of technology. The quality of their home life and their relationships with peers are other important determinants. Due to their living conditions, stigma, discrimination or exclusion, or lack of access to quality support and services, some adolescents are at higher risk of mental health conditions. Most health risk-taking habits, such as drug use or taking a sexual threat, start during adolescence. Risk-taking practices can both be an unhelpful strategy for dealing with poor mental health and can have a severe impact on the psychological and physical wellbeing of an individual. Dysfunctional feelings can lead to risky behaviors that can have long-term effects.
Left-behind Children
As described in the CRC, the "family environment in an atmosphere of joy, love, and understanding" is of primary importance for the full harmonious development of the personality of the child that each parent knows this and the dreams of living together in such circumstances. Nevertheless, working on a foreign country and the resulting remittances in a country where unemployment is a massive and continuing fact-of-life provides a way out of poverty. The classic example of the above occurs when one or both parents are working abroad (Iso, 2017).
Overseas Filipino Worker (OFW) is a term which is used to refer to Filipino migrant workers, citizens living in another country for a limited period of employment (Wikipedia, 2019). As of April 2019, it was estimated that the number of Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs) who worked abroad between April and September 2018 was 2.3 million. Overseas Contract Workers (OFWs) with existing work contracts accounted for 96.2% of the total OFWs between April and September 2018. The rest (3.8%) worked without a deal outside the country (Perez, 2019). According to the Philippine Statistical Authority, CALABARZON reported the largest share of OFWs with 17.9%, followed by Central Luzon with 14.3% and the National Capital Region and Ilocos Region, 9.7% share each. From these four regions, 50% of the total OFWs came for (Perez, 2019). Cavite Province as the area chosen for the research.
The 2016 report by the World Bank noted that remittances to the Philippines are encouraging domestic consumption, a key source of economic growth, and holding the current account in surplus. With an estimated $28 billion, the Philippines ranked third among the largest receiving nation in 2015. India's largest was $69 billion in 2015, followed by China ($64 billion). The United Nations survey estimated that overseas remittances ranged from P5,000 to P20,000 per month, quarterly, or as obliged. Payments were usually devoted to basic needs and education expenses; any additional money was set aside as savings (Business Mirror, 2017). Many OFW kids have become materialistic and, due to lack of direction, waste their parent's money on gadgets and Internet gaming (Iso, 2017). Parent labor migration also skews children's values as they view it only as "equivalent money." Without proper parent guidance, regular remittances lead to children's materialistic attitudes (Rufo, 2008). While they provide for their children, the psychological effect of the parent's absence on the child and its impact on the way the child handles financial resources is the primary concern (Business Mirror, 2017). Even in our financial support, we still have to determine how the money we have will be used properly.
OFW's children are prone to emotional, psychological, and behavioral issues, according to Iso (2017). It was also observed that many children from the OFW are becoming self-doubtful and drug dependent. The absence of the parent also makes them vulnerable to abuse and violence (Rufo, 2008). Also, the most affected in such dynamics are children who can deal either positively or negatively with the absence of one parent or both parents. Unicef data showed that 3 to 6 million Filipino children are left behind as parents seek work abroad. Based on their "cognitive development," children have a varying level of maturity or awareness of the situation. We see migration only as a form of parental abandonment for young children, while adolescents may be either receptive or resentful (Reyes, n.d.).
On the other hand, as a result of a study conducted by Goldberg and Carlson (2014) indicates a substantial correlation between the dyadic relationship performance of co-resident parents and the rate of behavioral problems of children. We found that parents with more cooperative relationships have fewer behavioral issues with boys. Environmental influences can affect how they make a decision. Furthermore, parental absence tends to increase children's risk of drinking and smoking before they become adolescents. They discovered in a study that children who had endured a parent's absence during their first seven years, whether as a result of death, separation or otherwise, were more than considerably more likely to have tried smoking, and almost 1.5 times as likely to have drunk alcohol by the age of 11. (Davis, 2016)
Since around 2016, UNICEF Philippines investigated that the Philippines is one of the world's fastest-growing HIV epidemics: diagnosed cases increased from 1 a day in 2008 to 26 a day in 2016 (29% among children and young people aged 15-24), and HIV infections increased by 230% among at-risk youth groups between 2011 and 2015. Also, teen fertility rates are rising: from 49 (in 1997) to 59.2 births per 1,000 females aged 15-19 in 2015 (Doyle, 2016). Additional concerns are the use of tobacco and cannabis. In 2016, it was estimated that 5.6 percent of 15–16-year-olds had used marijuana at least once in the previous year, based on data collected from 130 countries (2). Before the age of 18, most adult smokers have their first cigarette (World Health Organization, 2019). This shows that, as the years go by, the number of poor decision-making among teenagers is increasing in our community, leading to risky behaviors such as early pregnancy, HIV infection, cigarettes, and alcohol consumption, which may be one of the reasons for weak parental guidance.
Nonetheless, a study conducted by Espero (n.d), found that in making post-secondary career decisions, the majority of OFW's children who participated in their research showed autonomy. They chose a career path (i.e., pursuing college) that leads to white-collar jobs rather than blue-collar. The influence on their career decisions could have been accounted for by factors other than academic achievements such as migration plans, socioeconomic status, parental attachment, and parental expectations. This lifestyle could be a factor affecting the decision-making of the children of these OFWs to think independently.
A study by Bocuy (2013), showed that children from the OFWs believed they could live without their parents. They have been capable of dealing emotionally and physically. They have recognized that their condition is an inevitable reality, but there is a need to make their being worse and happy. There's a missing component that's been ripped or broken to satisfy the kids.
Researchers found that having Filipino Overseas Worker Parents had a significant effect on the children left behind in the research by Alegria et al. (2018). Positive and negative impacts; and mechanisms to cope with them. Many contributors said that both economic needs and wellbeing are the beneficial advantages of having OFW relatives. On the other hand, most respondents said their parents ' lack of presence is the negative effect of having OFW parents, while the least discussed are both emotional issues and vices. Researchers have found that the most responsive to coping mechanism is to communicate with their parents working abroad, while the least replied is to have vices and engage in relationships.
Guidance for parents is critical (Nauert, 2019). And as per the Office of Adolescent Health (2019), parents play a significant and vital role; they help shape the academic plans of teenagers, their moral and social beliefs, and their more comprehensive view of the world. Parents must combine protective concerns about the safety of adolescents with encouragement to improve the adolescent's capacity to make independent decisions. The amount of time teenagers spend without active parental supervision (Kobak, Abbott, Zisk, & Bounoua, 2017) complicates ensuring the safety of the child. Also, the willingness of parents to retain the knowledge of their thoughts and feelings and their adolescents can be a common element that promotes cooperative interaction and encourages the growing capacity of adolescents to self-regulate and make autonomous decisions. Moreover, there is a discovery that the new factor in child development theory is that the way a child turns out can be primarily dictated by the parents ' day-to-day decisions that guide the child's growth (Nauert, 2019).
Parents and relatives continue to shape how adolescents feel towards themselves, but during this period, external influences also become particularly important (Cherry, Erikson's Understanding of Psychosocial Development Theory, 2019).
Research Instruments
The following instruments were used for the researchers to gather all the necessary data needed for the study. They were making decisions in everyday life scale to determine the level of their decision-making skills and the Adolescent Self-Regulatory Inventory to ascertain their self-regulation capacity of adolescents' children of OFW and adolescents children living with both parents.
It is making Decisions in Everyday Life. Claudia Mincemoyer developed the scale, Ph.D., and Daniel Francis Perkins, Ph.D. (CYFAR, n.d). Making decisions in Everyday Life is a 20-item scale that measures an adolescent's (12 to 18 years old) decision-making skills. The instrument assesses adolescents' decision-making skill by analyzing the frequency of practice of the 38 following skills that are required to employ thorough decision-making: defining the problem (items 1 to 4), identifying alternatives (items 5 to 8), identifying risks and consequences (items 9 to 12), selecting an option (issues 13 to 16) and evaluation (articles 17 to 20).
Validity - The extent to which a measure captures what it is intended to measure. The Content or Face Validity, Criterion Validity, and Construct Validity have no information provided. However, the developer noted that "If the information on a particular psychometric was not found, it is indicated as "no information provided."This is not necessarily reflective of a lack of reliability or Validity within a given scale/instrument, but rather a lack of stringent testing by developers or other researchers for various reasons "(Mincemoyer & Perkins, 2001). Together with other life skills scales, "Making a Decision in Everyday Life" has shown moderate to strong positive associations that demonstrate parallel relevance (Duerden, Witt, Fernadez, Bryant, & Theriault, 2012).
Reliability- Enormous use of the scale with 4-H populations, has resulted in an average level of safety .74 (Mincemoyer & Perkins, 2009). The correlation of the ' Making Decisions in Everyday Life ' scale is suggested for at least one type of reliability as evidence. However, standards range from.5 to.9 depending on the intended use and context of the instrument. For the five variables in the scale range from.63 to.89, the internal consistency is Alpha's, and the inter-rater quality has no data as well as the test-retest.
Scoring and Interpretation. For the scoring of Making decisions in everyday life scale, each item is rated on a 5-point Likert-scale, namely:1= never, 2= rarely, 3=sometime, 4=often, and 5= always. Scores are range from 20 to 100. Results can be achieved by summing up all item ratings, and higher scores indicate more exceptional decision-making ability. Each item has a statement that describes how you might decide everyday life. It must be described in the last 30 days. Each level of decision making has its clarification.
Furthermore, the instrument does not have a standard measurement for determining the level of decision making. That is why the researchers categorized the data scores using mean and sample standard deviation. The researchers have come up with four categories: High average, above average, average, and low average, to categorize the raw scores of the respondents.
Below the average level are those individuals who have minimal foresight. They don't consider the outcomes of their activities before they accomplish something. Thus, they make snap judgments when it comes to making a decision. Also, according to Potton (2012), as cited in the (Baro&Paraon, 2017) report, individuals with a lower than average rate of decision-making appear to make poorly informed decisions. Gradually, they make snap judgments when it comes to making decisions. So the only thing that matters to them is short-term gratification.
Below average individuals who belong in this level have decision-making skills that are not fully matured yet. They are not objective enough, and they rely too much on luck, instinct, or timing to make reliable decisions. Those with a low level of decision-making skills, according to (MindTools, 2013), tend to focus excessively on chance, momentum, and timing to make rational decisions. Therefore, individuals with low average decision-making skills are not fair when it comes to making decisions.
Individuals that fall below the average level have a good understanding of the basis of the five steps in the decision-making process, namely: Define the problem, identify the alternatives, identify the risk and consequences, select an option, and the evaluation of the whole process.
Above-average are those who know how to set up the process and generate many potential solutions. From there, they analyze the option carefully and make the best decisions possible based on what they know. Individuals with an above-average level of decision-making skills know how to access the cycle and create a lot of potential solutions, according to MindTools (2013). We use that information to gain more and more experience to assess their decisions and build on their decision-making abilities.
Lastly, the High average level is those individuals who can retrieve courses of action based on the situation or action matching rules, self-diagnose their performance, identify weaknesses in their knowledge and processes, and correct them. According to Rosen, Salas, Lyons, and Fiore (2008), as discussed in the analysis of (Baro & Paraon, 2017), individuals with a high degree of decision-making skills obtain solutions to the problem based on circumstances or rules of action, diagnose their results, recognize and correct deficiencies in knowledge and processes. These often produce more comprehensive, more conceptual, more logical, and more abstract representations of circumstances. We also foresee what details the decision-making process would need. They then assess their data's accuracy, reliability, and completeness. They evaluate their condition comprehension.
Adolescent Self-Regulatory Inventory (ASRI).The scale was developed by Kristin L. Moilanen (Moilanen, 2006). The ASRI is a theoretically-based questionnaire that taps two temporal aspects of self-regulation of adolescents 11-16 years old. This is a 36 item measure that evaluates the degree to which adolescents can activate, monitor, maintain, inhibit, and adapt their emotions, thoughts, attention, and behavior. Respondents rate how exact each item is for them on a Likert-type response scale, ranging from 1 (not at all right for me) to 5 (really true for me).
Validity - The extent to which a measure captures what it is intended to measure. The Construct Validity and Predictive Validity have no information provided. However, the developer noted that "If the information on a particular psychometric was not found, it is indicated as "no information provided." It should be noted that this is not necessarily an indication of a lack of reliability or Validity within a particular scale/instrument, but rather a lack of rigorous testing, for various reasons, by the developers or other researchers." (Mincemoyer& Perkins, 2001). "The Adolescents Self-Regulatory Inventory" indicated r = [.68, 92] with the comparison self-regulation questionnaire, similarly to concurrent validity r = -.30 with psychological control; r = [-.46, -.34].
Reliability- Cronbach's Alpha provided internal consistency values of.72 in long term self-regulation and .84 in short term self-regulation.
Furthermore, to establish local reliability of this scale for the adolescents aged 12-18, the researchers conducted a pilot test with 70 adolescents in the province of Cavite. The results produced an internal consistency of .703 Cronbach's Alpha and were accepted by the researchers because it exceeded the minimum threshold of .70 Cronbach's Alpha. However, there is an item that outliers and needed to delete or remove to be this scale acceptable. This item was the question or issue 8.
Scoring and Interpretation. For the scoring of Adolescents Self-Regulatory Inventory, each item is rated on a 5-point Likert-scale, namely:1= not at all true for me, 2= not very true for me, 3= neither true nor untrue for me, 4- somewhat true for me, and 5= true for me. Reverse score items namely; 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21, 34, 35, (5= Not at all true for me, 4=Not very true for me, 3= Neither true nor untrue for me, 2= Somewhat true for me and 1= Really true for me). Add all the scores together. Higher scores indicate an ability to self-regulate.
Comments