The Relationship Between Family Function and Adolescent Autonomy in the Rural and Urban Area

This study aims to analyze the function of families in urban and rural areas as well as its relationship with adolescent autonomy by using cross sectional study method. The data collection time was conducted in September 2016. By proportional random sampling method, there were 72samples at SMPN 2 Bogor (representing urban area) and 72 people at SMPN 2 Parung (representing rural area). Research data includes family characteristics, family functions divided into 3 dimensions (10 sub-scales) and adolescent autonomy consisting of 3 dimensions (value, emotional and behavioral). To see the correlation, the Pearson Correlation test was used and to seedifferences in family function characteristics and gender-based autonomy was seen by the Independent T-test differential test. The results showed that the average score of family function in urban areas was 118.44, while in rural areas 121.12. This shows the function of families in ruralareas better than in urban areas. The average score of urban adolescent autonomy is 81.21, while in rural areas it is 77.29. This difference is significant at 99% confidence level. Adolescent autonomy is positively correlated with family function of personal growth dimension with correlation coefficient of 0.207 (at 95% confidence level). This shows that the better familyfunction then the better the adolescent autonomy.


Introduction
Adolescents are a group of individuals who are in the "vulnerable" phase. They are no longer a manageable kid but not a self-regulating adult. So that, a serious handling is necessary to prepare them to become self-sufficient human beings. According to Monks (1987), adolescence is often also referred to as a transitional period where at this time adolescents experience a turbulent time in search of identity. In search of identity this adolescent tends to let go from family ties and joins a wider scope, so that they will thicken new values, norms, ordinances and customs. Introducing with new things can cause shock and eventually adolescents will experience an identity crisis (Gunarsa S D & Gunarsa, 2003). Identity crises can cause adolescent problems, more commonly known as juvenile delinquency.
The development of autonomy in adolescents is one of the equally important and interesting issues to be studied seriously with issues of identity development. The importance of a serious review of the issue of adolescent development is based on the consideration that for adolescents the attainment of independence is the basis for becoming a perfect adult. Independence can underpin adults in determining attitudes, making decisions appropriately, and sharpness in determining and performing principles of truth and goodness (Budiman). Adolescent autonomy is not a single personality dimension that is consistently evident in every behavior (Hill & Holmbeck, 1986in Santrock, 2003. According to Steinberg (1993) autonomy is a state in which an individual has the ability to determine his or her desires, to overcome the social pressure, to think and act in a certain way and not be influenced by the views of others. The attainment of independence is very important for teenagers, as it is a sign of their readiness to enter the next phase with more diverse demands as adults. Failure to achieve independence can have a negative impact on adolescents. Dependence on others causes a teenager to always hesitate in making decisions alone, not confident, easily influenced by others until finally having difficulty to find identity. In an effort to achieve adolescent independence requires support from the people around them, especially from the family environment as the nearest environment (Rahmawati, 2005).
The family as the first and foremost environment known to the child, has a decisive role for the child in accomplishing its developmental tasks. According to Hoffman (2004) said that the treatment of parents in parenting will determine the behavior of children whether he will be a pro social or anti social person. Parents as family leaders have a responsibility to educate and help prepare the child to maturity and to be a good member of society (Soelaeman, 1994in Ruhidawati, 2005. According Hurlock (1999) one of the factors that affect self-reliance is parental care. Democratic parenting, where parents have a role as mentors who always pay attention to the needs of their children as well as support every activity of his son, very vital role in shaping independence. By action and by example, parents shape the lives of their children from birth through adulthood. In adolescence, the influence of friends and peers take on greater importance, but research clearly demonstrates the continued significance of parents in shaping the behaviors and choices of teens as they face the challenges of growing up. (Borkowsky et al, 2002) Close parent/adolescent relationships, good parenting skills, shared family activities and positive parent role modeling all have well-documented effects on adolescent health and development . These are also areas where parents can make choices to make positive changes for their children, and where social policy can help support parents in taking such steps (Resnick, et al, 2004)

Methods
The research design is cross sectional study. Selection of research location conducted by Purposive Sampling that is SMPN 2 Bogor and SMPN 2 Parung. The data collection time was conducted in September 2016. By proportional random sampling method, there were 72 samples at SMPN 2 Bogor (representing urban area) and 72 people at SMPN Parung (representing rural area). The types of data collected are: (1) family characteristics (age of parent, family size, parent income, parental education, parent work, (2) sample characteristics (age, gender, religion and family order); 3) characteristics of family function (4) adolescent autonomy (emotional, behavior, values).
Family function is defined as the interaction between parent and child as well as other family members measured through the perception of the child in the family using "Family Environment Scale" from Moos and Moos (2002) divided into 3 main dimensions and 10 sub components. Family function is measured using modifications from the Family Environment Scale (FES) instrument from Moos and Moos (2002) consisting of 40 question items with 3 dimensions and 10 sub dimensions. The dimension consists of Relationship, Personal Growth and System Maintenance. Adolescent autonomy is measured using 27 items of questions consisting of 3 types of autonomy (Steinberg, 1993), namely emotional autonomy (10 items of questions), behavior autonomy (10 items of questions) and autonomy values (7 items of questions).

Family and Sample Characteristics
Samples representing urban areas amounted to 72 people consisting of 33 men and 39 women, while samples representing rural areas amounted to 72 people consisting of 37 men and 35 women. Father's education in urban areas is mostly high school graduates of 43.06 percent. A total of 6.94 percent of junior high school graduated, 34.72 percent are undergraduated graduates, 9.72 percent of master program, and 5.56 doctoral program graduated. Similar to fathers education, maternal education in urban areas is dominated by high school graduates of 54.17 percent, the rest are undergraduated and only 8.33 percent are junior high school.
Parent education in rural areas is also dominated by high school graduates, which is 44.44 percent of fathers and 38.89 percent of mothers. The difference is that parents' education in urban areas does not have primary school graduates, but in rural areas, around 12.5 percent of primary school graduated and 19.45 percent are primary school graduated.

Family Function
Family function is defined as the interaction between parent and child as well as other family members measured through the perception of the child in the family. Family function divided into 3 main dimensions and 10 sub dimensions. The dimension consists of Relationship Dimension (cohession, expression and conflict), Personal Growth Dimension (independence, achievement, intelectual, active recreation and moral religion) amd System Maintenance Dimension (control and organization).

A. Relationship Dimension
Relationship dimension which is an evaluation of the family environment in terms of relationship (relationship) consisting of 3 sub-components, namely: (i) Cohesion (cohesion) which means obligation, support and support among family members; (ii) Expressiveness (expression) associated with the actions of family members to express their feelings directly; (iii) Conflict relates to the degree to which family members express openly their feelings of displeasure, anger and disagreement. The mean score of urban relationship dimensions (35.63) was lower than the mean score in rural areas (36.70), but this difference was not statistically significant. The highest average score in both urban and rural areas is seen in the feeling of togetherness in the family that is 3.49 (in urban) and 3.57 (in rural).

B. Personal Growth Dimension
Personal Growth dimension is an evaluation of the family function that consisting of five sub components, namely (i) Independence means the degree to which a family member has the desire, hope and ability to make one's own decisions; (ii) Achievement Orientation relates to activities in the family that lead to achievement or compete; (iii) Intellectual-Cultural Orientation relates to the many activities undertaken in political, social, cultural and intellectual activities; (iv) Active-Recreation Orientation relates to the level of participation in recreational activities; (v) Moral-Religion Orientation relates to values, morals and religion in the family. The mean score of urban personal growth dimensions (60,22) was lower than the mean score in rural areas (61.60), but this difference was not statistically significant. The highest average score in urban is seen in the important to always do the best (3.40) and the highest average score in rural area is rarely pray or worship (3.76).

C. System Maintenance Dimension
System Maintenance dimension relates to the family's maintenance system of values which consists of (i) Organization is the level of planning and arrangement of obligations in the family and (ii) Control is how many rules and procedures are used in family life. The mean score of urban system maintenance dimensions (22.60) was lower than the mean score in rural areas (22.88), but this difference was not statistically significant. The highest average score in both urban and rural areas is seen in the important to be on time that is 3.00 (in urban) and 3.51 (in rural).

Adolescent Autonomy
Adolescent autonomy is a condition in which an individual has the ability to determine his or her desires, is able to overcome the social pressure to think and act in a certain way and not be affected by the views of others against him (Steinberg). The average score of adolescent autonomy in urban areas in this study was 81.21 with standard deviation of 5.21, while in rural areas the average score of adolescent autonomy was 77.92 with a standard deviation of 4.86.

A. Emotional Autonomy
The relationship between parents and children will change very quickly especially when children enter the age of adolescence where at this age the child is able to take care of itself, so that the time spent parents to teenagers will be reduced due to the increasingly emotional autonomy of adolescent (Berk, 1994;Rice, 1996). The average score of adolescent emotional autonomy in urban areas (29.82) is higher than in rural areas (27.13) and this difference is statistically significant. The urban adolescent (3.60) and the rural (3.68) have the highest average score on the statement that parents' opinions are valuable because parents are more experienced.

B. Value Autonomy
Value autonomy is the ability of the individual to make decisions and set a choice. This means the individual has a set of principles about right and wrong and important and not important in looking at things viewed from the value side. The results showed that there is no significant differences in value adolescent autonomy between rural and urban. But there are significant differences in the value autonomy on confidence indicators to do the best and the beliefs held true indeed according to the respondents. Adolescents in rural areas have more confidence that what they do is the best thing. In this case, the average score of adolescents in rural areas is higher that is 3,15 compared to adolescents in urban area is 2,90. Conversely, urban adolescents have higher mean scores (3,44) than rural youth (3,17) in the statement that "my beliefs are true to me"

C. Behavior Autonomy
Autonomy in behavior is a dimension of autonomy in the form of an independent function of an active and tangible individual meaning an individual who has the freedom to act and act without having to rely on others (Sprinthall & Collins, 1994). Individuals who are autonomously behaviorally have the ability to make their own decisions and can carry out their decisions (Steinberg, 1993).

The Differences of Adolescent Autonomy in Urban and Rural Areas
The results showed significant differences (99% confidence level) on adolescent autonomy in urban and rural areas. The average score of adolescent autonomy in urban areas is 81.21, while in rural areas it is 77. 29. This shows that in general urban adolescents are more independent than rural adolescents.  This study shows a significant positive relationship between adolescent autonomy with dimension personal growth (in family function). It means that family interaction especially related to activities that foster self-confidence, the spirit of competition, the planting of moral values and also the positive interaction between family members will affect the formation of autonomy adolescent. The positive correlation with the correlation coefficient of 0,207 at 95% confidence level indicates that the higher the functioning of the family, especially the personal growth dimension, the higher autonomy adolescent.

Discussion
The family function in this study shows the interaction between parent and child as well as other family members as measured by the perception of the child in the family. Family function is seen in 3 dimensions of relationship, personal growth and system maintenance. In general or based on the total family function score, the research results do not show any differences in family function based on the typology of urban and rural areas. This means that in general the function of families viewed from 3 dimensions is relatively the same between in urban and rural.
The sub-dimension of cohesion indicates the magnitude of obligations, assistance and support among family members. Table 1 shows that the average score of families in rural areas is higher than in urban families on three indicators.
Families in rural areas have higher mean scores in terms of providing assistance to fellow family members, devoting their energy to home tasks and also having a sense of community, but the difference in average scores is not statistically significant.
The sub dimensions of expression relate to the actions of family members to be able to express their feelings directly. Significant differences (95% confidence level) are seen in the item "sometimes our complaints can offend a person in the family" where the family in the village (2,74) scores higher than the urban families (2,25).
The sub-dimension of conflict relates to the degree to which family members express openly their feelings of displeasure, anger and disagreement. Significant differences (at the 95% confidence level) seen in the item "sometimes we throw something when we are angry and family members often shout". In this case the average score of rural families for both items (3,39 and 3,14) is higher than in urban families (3,04 and 2,83). Nevertheless, from the test analysis of difference of mean score totally (dimension of relationship) there is no significant difference between family in urban and in rural. Or in other words, in this relationship dimension, the functioning of families in urban and rural areas is relatively no different.
The average score of personal growth dimension is an evaluation of the family environment in relation to personal growth and development consisting of 5 sub-dimensions. The subdivision of independence shows the degree to which family members have the desire, the hope and the ability to make their own decisions. In this sub dimension families in both regions have relatively similar characteristics, because there is no statistically significant difference and the average score is not too different in value.
Similarly in the sub-dimension of orientation for achievement, there is no significant difference between the two typology of the region. This subdimension, among others, describes all activities in the family that lead to achievement, such as important to do the best in any work done or progress in various fields becomes important for every member in the family.
In the sub-dimension of orientation on intellectual and cultural activities there is also no significant difference although there is a difference in the average score of each indicator. This sub-dimension describes all activities in the family that lead to social activities of society, culture and intellectual. Activities in question include doing art activities, talking about political and social issues, and also happy to do new things different from before.
Sub dimensions of active recreation orientation are related to the level of participation in recreation activities such as gathering with friends or family on weekends, active in organizational and sports activities or going to cinema or other recreation. Significant differences (at the 95% confidence level) are seen in the indicators of traveling to recreational areas, where families in urban areas do more often than families in rural areas. The average score of this indicator for families in urban areas is 2,69, while in rural areas it is 2,26.
The sub-dimension of the orientation of religious moral orientation relates to beliefs of moral and religious values. There are significant differences in families in urban and rural areas. Family members in rural areas visit more places of worship than urban families. The average score of families in rural areas was 3,58 whereas in urban 3,10 (significantly different at 99% confidence level). Furthermore, families in rural areas have more conviction that if we sin then we will get punishment. Average score in rural area was 3.60 while in urban area was 3.29 (significantly different at 95% confidence level). However, if the analysis is done totally on the personal growth dimension there is no significant difference between families in urban and rural areas. The dimension of system maintenance is related to the system of maintaining the values in the family which consists of supervision, namely how many rules are applied in the family and organizing the level of planning and arrangement in the family. In this dimension, there are several indicators that differ significantly between families in urban and rural areas.
In general, families in rural areas are more orderly and neat than urban families. The average score in rural areas is 3,389 while in urban areas it is 2,89 (significant at 99% confidence level). Families in rural areas appreciate the time because family members consider that timely becomes an important thing. The average score in rural areas is 3,51, while in urban areas it is 3,00 (significant at 99% confidence level).
However, from the analysis of the difference test the average score in total (relationship dimension) there is no significant difference between families in urban and in rural. Or in other words, on this relationship dimension, the functioning of families in urban and rural areas is relatively similar. So as on the personal growth dimensions, there is no significant difference between urban and rural fa milies.
In general, families in rural areas are more orderly and neat than urban families. The average score in rural areas is 3,39 whereas in urban areas it is 2,89 (significant at 99% confidence level). The family in the rural area more appreciate the time because family members consider that timely becomes an important thing. The average score in rural areas is 3,51, while in urban areas it is 3,00 (significant at 99% confidence level).
Sub dimensions of active recreation orientation are related to the level of participation in recreation activities such as gathering with friends or family on weekends, active in organizational and sports activities or going to cinema or other recreation. Significant differences (at the 95% confidence level) are seen in the indicators of traveling to recreational areas, where families in urban areas do more often than families in rural areas. The average score of this indicator for families in urban areas is 2,69, while in rural areas it is 2,26.
The results of this study are in line with the research conducted by Martiastuti (2012) which shows the differences seen in the sub-scale independence (p <0.10) and cultural orientation (p <0.05) between rural and urban samples. For example, urban adolesscent more often prefer to play a musical instrument and have one or two hobbies than teenagers in the countryside. This may also be related to the economic and social abilities of parents so as to support cultural-oriented activities undertaken by their children.
Autonomy is an important aspect of development for adolescents, because it is a sign of their readiness to enter the next phase with more diverse demands as adults. Failure to achieve independence can have a negative impact on adolescents. Dependence on others causes a teenager to always hesitate in making decisions alone, not confident, easily influenced by others until finally having difficulty to find identity. In an effort to achieve adolescent independence requires support from the people around him, especially from the family environment as the nearest environment (Rahmawati, 2005).
This study shows that the average score of total emotional autonomy for urban is 29,82, while in rural area is 27.13. This shows that urban adolescents are more emotionally autonoy than rural. This condition can be seen among other significant different indicators such as they assume that parents' opinion is not always true so that children also have the right to correct and give opinions. Significantly, urban adolescents claim that they can interact openly with parents and also not hesitate to exchange ideas about a problem with their parents. In all these indicators, the average score of adolescents in urban areas is higher than that of adolescents in rural areas.
This study shows the differences in adolescent behavior autonomy in urban and rural areas. The average score of total urban behavior autonomy in total was 28,53, while in rural areas it was 27.24 (significant at 95% confidence level). This means that adolescents in urban areas have higher levels of behavior autonomy than adolescents in rural areas. This can be seen based on existing indicators, such as urban adolescents better able to plan things related to their future, always trying to solve their own problems. Adolescents in urban areas also have more ability to take alternative paths to the problems they face and can reject everything that feels difficult for themselves.
The results showed a significant difference (99% confidence level) on autonomy adolescent in urban and rural areas. The average score of urban autonomy adolescent is 81.21, while in rural areas it is 77. 29. This shows that in general urban adolescents are more independent than rural adolescents.
Regarding achievement of autonomy, both male and female adolescents showed significant differences between the younger and older adolescents. Progress in autonomy was achieved by male adolescents more as a result of disobeying parents than was the cased with female adolescents. Narcissism, separation from family, and cognitive aspects were found to be important HOHPHQWV LQ DGROHVFHQW ¶V SHUFHSWLRQ RI DXWRQRP\ 'HVLUH IRU DXWRQRP\ ZDV present since the start of puberty, achievement lagged behind desire, and the capacity to fight for autonomy was a key mediator for the achievement of personal autonomy in the transition to adulthood (Fleming, 2005).
This study shows a significant positive relationship between adolescent autonomy with dimension personal growth (in family function). This means that the better the family function, especially in the personal growth dimension, the better the adolescent autonomy. Or the other side, if the family function does not work well then the development of autonomy also can not run well. This is in line with research conducted by Garber and Stephanie 2001. This study examined the relations among maternal depression, family dysfunction, emotional autonomy, and adolescent adjustment. Participants were 145 mothers and children who were assessed in eighth grade (mean age = 13.51, SD = .57) and again in ninth grade. Results indicated that maternal depression significantly moderated the relation between emotional autonomy and adolescent adjustment. Among offspring of depressed mothers, higher levels of emotional autonomy (detachment) significantly predicted increases in internalizing and externalizing problems, whereas among offspring of nondepressed mothers, higher levels of emotional DXWRQRP\ VLJQLILFDQWO\ SUHGLFWHG GHFUHDVHV LQ DGROHVFHQWV ¶ V\PSWRPV :LWKLQ families of depressed mothers, family dysfunction significantly predicted adolescent symptoms, and this relation was partially mediated through emotional autonomy. These results further highlight the importance of considering the family context in studies of adolescent autonomy. This is reinforced also by a study in Russia in 2013 about adolescent autonomy and the relationship of the child's parents indicating that the role and fuctions of the adolescent-parent relations are considered as characteristics of the social situation of development. The developmental process of the value, emotional, cognitive and behavioral components of autonomy in their heterochrony are discussed. The results of the research demonstrated complicated non-linear relationship between the level of personality autonomy and child-SDUHQW UHODWLRQ ¶V SDUDPHWHUV WKH OHYHO RI SDUHQW ¶V FRQWURO WKH DGROHVFHQW ¶V independence and self-management competence, communication and cooperation with parents). In the relationship with parents the awareness of the need for autonomy and its motivational objectification occur. The reflection of the position of the adolescent in the child-parent relationship, the awareness of nonequivalence in the field of own decision-making are the basis of the development of the autonomy motivation commitment to personal autonomy (Karabanova and Poskrebysheva, 2013)

Conclusion
The average score of family function in urban areas is 118.44, while in rural areas 121.13. This shows the functioning of rural families better than in urban areas, although it did not show statistically significant differences. The average score of adolescent autonomy in urban areas is 81.21, while in rural areas it is 77.29. This difference is significant at 99% confidence level.
Adolescent autonomy is positively correlated with family function of personal growth dimension with correlation coefficient of 0.207 (at 95% confidence level). This shows that the better the functioning of the family then the better the adolescent autonomy.

Recommendation
For the researchers, it is expected to conduct a more in-depth study of the functioning of families associated with other aspects of development in adolescents. For the parents should strengthen the relationship with their children, especially those that encourage the formation of autonomy adolescent. For the school and the community, it is expected to create an atmosphere conducive to the formation of autonomy adolescent.