case study on parenting styles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Parenting styles and parent–adolescent relationships: the mediating roles of behavioral autonomy and parental authority.

• 1 Department of Psychology, Shandong Normal University, Jinan, China
• 2 Department of Business, Shandong Normal University, Jinan, China
• 3 Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, United States

The parent–adolescent relationship has been a classic research topic, and researchers have found that parenting styles (e.g., authoritative, authoritarian) are closely related to various qualities of parent-adolescent relationships (e.g., cohesion, conflict). However, little empirical work has addressed how these variables correlate with each other in mainland China, nor has prior research addressed internal psychological mechanisms. The present study investigated the associations between parenting styles and parent–adolescent relationship factors, examined the mediating effects of adolescents’ expectations of behavioral autonomy and beliefs about parental authority, and explored whether adolescent gender moderated these effects. Results from a sample of 633 Chinese adolescents (7th grade: M age = 13.50 ± 0.62 years, 9th grade: M age = 15.45 ± 0.67 years, 11th grade: M age = 17.30 ± 0.75 years) suggested similar levels of parent–adolescent conflict frequency for all parenting styles. However, for parent–adolescent conflict intensity, youth of neglectful and authoritarian parents reported higher levels compared to those with indulgent parents. The highest levels of cohesion with both parents were reported by adolescents with authoritative parents, followed by indulgent, authoritarian and neglect parenting styles. Cohesion with mothers for youth with authoritative or indulgent mothers was higher for girls than boys. Adolescents’ expectation for behavioral autonomy mediated the links between parenting style and conflict, whereas adolescents’ beliefs about the legitimacy of parental authority mediated the links between parenting style and cohesion; some of these mediating effects differed by gender. Findings highlight the importance of studying potential effects of adolescents’ values and attitudes within the family system in specific cultural contexts.

Introduction

Variations in parenting styles and parent–child relationship qualities are long-standing research topics in developmental and family psychology. Previous research has shown that parenting styles are critical family context factors which are closely related to parent–adolescent relationships ( Shek, 2002 ). Despite the large number of studies on the associations between parenting styles and parent–adolescent relationships, existing research mainly has focused on the direct effects of parenting styles on parent-adolescent relationships, while the underlying mechanisms through which parenting styles are associated with parent–adolescent relationships have seldom been examined. The present study examined the possible mediating effects of adolescents’ expectations for behavioral autonomy and beliefs in the legitimacy of parental authority, on the link between parenting style differences and variability in relationship conflict and cohesion, in a sample of youth from mainland China. We also tested whether the direct and mediated effects differed for girls and boys.

Parenting Styles and Parent–Adolescent Relationships

Parenting style is defined as a constellation of parents’ attitudes and behaviors toward children and an emotional climate in which the parents’ behaviors are expressed ( Darling and Steinberg, 1993 ). In the field of parenting, Maccoby and Martin’s (1983) and Baumrind’s (1991) typological approach of conceptualizing parenting has had a tremendous impact. They classified parenting into four types based on responsiveness and demandingness ( Maccoby and Martin, 1983 ; Baumrind, 1991 ). Authoritative parenting style is characterized as high in responsiveness and demandingness. Authoritative parents provide not only support and warmth, but also clearly defined rules and consistent discipline ( Baumrind, 1991 ). Authoritarian parenting style is characterized as low in responsiveness but high in demandingness. Parents of this style tend to use hostile control or harsh punishment in an arbitrary way to gain compliance, but they seldom provide explanation or allow verbal give-and-take. Indulgent parenting style is characterized as low in demandingness but high in responsiveness. Indulgent parents are responsive to their children and satisfy children’s needs, but they fail to set proper disciplinary, exhibit behavioral control, or make demands for mature behaviors. Finally, neglectful parenting style is characterized as low in responsiveness and demandingness. Neglectful parents are parent-centered and they are seldom engaged in child rearing practices. They neither provide warmth nor set rules for their children.

Adolescence is a critical developmental period that requires parents and youth to renegotiate their relationships ( Laursen and Collins, 2009 ). Existing research has shown that variation in parenting styles is related to differences in parent-adolescent relationship features. Overall, most studies with Western samples have consistently found that authoritative parenting style is associated with higher levels of parent–adolescent cohesion ( Nelson et al., 2011 ) and lower levels of conflict frequency ( Smetana, 1995 ), conflict intensity ( Smetana, 1995 ), and total conflict ( McKinney and Renk, 2011 ). In contrast, an authoritarian parenting style is associated with lower cohesion ( McKinney and Renk, 2011 ) and higher conflict frequency ( Smetana, 1995 ; Sorkhabi and Middaugh, 2014 ), intensity ( Smetana, 1995 ), and total conflict ( McKinney and Renk, 2011 ). For instance, in a sample of American adolescents, Smetana (1995) found that more frequent and intense conflicts were predicted by more authoritarian parenting and less authoritative parenting. Similarly, Sorkhabi and Middaugh (2014) analyzed data from American adolescents who had Asian, Latino, Arab, European or other ethnic background. They found that adolescents of authoritative parents reported less conflict than those with authoritarian parents.

Most previous research on the associations between parenting styles and parent-adolescent conflict and cohesion focused on one or the other (e.g., Smetana, 1995 ; Nelson et al., 2011 ; Sorkhabi and Middaugh, 2014 ). However, conflict is not the opposite of cohesion, nor are increases over time in one necessarily associated with decreases in the other ( Zhang et al., 2006 ). To comprehensively understand the links between parenting styles and these two aspects of the parent-adolescent relationship, both should be examined. Also, most previous research seldom distinguished conflict frequency and intensity or examined them simultaneously. Conflict frequency refers to how often conflict occurs, whereas conflict intensity refers to the magnitude of emotional arousal that occurs during conflict. Prior research on these two aspects of conflict has yielded mixed results. For example, Smetana (1995) found that parenting styles’ links with conflict frequency and intensity were very similar. In contrast, Assadi et al. (2011) reported that frequency was lower for authoritative parents and higher for authoritarian parents—but only authoritative parenting was linked to intensity. Thus, conflict intensity and frequency both should be examined.

Another major gap in the literature is that few of the relevant prior studies examined all four parenting styles. We know of only one American study (of adolescent substance abusers) that examined conflict, cohesion, and all four parenting styles ( Smith and Hall, 2008 ). Actually, it’s also important to explore the relationships between indulgent and neglectful parenting style and parent–adolescent conflict and cohesion. Especially, neglectful parenting style which is characterized as disengaged from child rearing process may be destructive to parent–adolescent relationships. Thus, in light of the gaps in literature identified above, our first major aim was to explore the associations between all four parenting styles and parent–adolescent conflict (frequency and intensity) and cohesion. Based on prior evidence, we hypothesized that conflict (frequency and intensity) would be highest, and cohesion lowest, for youth with authoritarian parents—and conflict lowest and cohesion highest for adolescents with authoritative parents.

Adolescent Autonomy and Beliefs About Parental Authority

In spite of the numerous prior studies of the link between parenting style and parent–adolescent relationship features, there are surprisingly few that have tested mechanisms that might account for the link. We also addressed this gap in the current study. According to Darling and Steinberg’s (1993) integrative model, parenting styles affect adolescents’ outcomes by changing the degree to which adolescents accept their parents’ attempts to socialize them. When parents use specific styles to rear children, adolescents are not just passive social beings, but play an active role in shaping the parent–adolescent relationship and in interpreting parenting behavior, in ways that influence their own outcomes. Particularly important to this psychological process are adolescents’ attitudes about behavioral autonomy and the legitimacy of parental authority ( Darling et al., 2007 ).

Adolescents’ Expectation for Behavioral Autonomy

Autonomy, in contrast to forced behavior, reflects actions that arise from the agency of the self rather than others ( Chen et al., 2013 ). Variations in parenting style are associated with individual differences in adolescents’ autonomy beliefs. Authoritative parenting has been shown to be the most beneficial to youth, with regard to fostering healthy normative development of autonomy ( Baumrind, 1991 ). In contrast, authoritarian parents provided too much strictness and supervision for their children, while indulgent and neglectful parents provided insufficient monitoring and guidance. Adolescents with non-authoritative parents are more likely to desire for more behavioral autonomy which is not satisfied in an appropriate way ( Bush and Peterson, 2013 ). It is important to note, however, that not all studies find authoritative parenting to be optimal for youth autonomy—differences in findings that may be due to the sample characteristics or measures being used (e.g., Darling et al., 2005 ; Chan and Chan, 2009 ).

The development of adolescents’ autonomy, in turn, can have effects on parent–adolescent relationship features. Parents and adolescents expect increasing autonomy with age, but adolescents typically demand autonomy earlier than their parents are ready to grant it ( Jensen and Dost-Gözkan, 2015 ; Pérez et al., 2016 ). Adolescents’ desire for more autonomy than their parents wish to grant them prompts youth to exert more control of their own affairs, and to be more critical of their parents’ control behaviors—a pattern that causes conflict and reduces cohesion ( Fuligni, 1998 ; Zhang and Fuligni, 2006 ).

Adolescents’ Beliefs About Parental Authority

In addition to developmental changes in autonomy, adolescence also is a period of youths’ changes in attitudes about parental authority—specifically, the extent to which parental assertion of control is seen as an appropriate extension of their role ( Darling et al., 2008 ). Compared to other parenting styles, authoritative parents have children and adolescents who are more likely to endorse the legitimacy of parental authority ( Smetana, 1995 ; Darling et al., 2005 ; Trinkner et al., 2012 ). In contrast, authoritarian parents tend to define issues as falling into parental jurisdiction too rigidly, and indulgent and neglectful parents define these too permissively ( Smetana, 1995 ; Baumrind, 2005 ). In those cases, adolescents and parents may be deprived of opportunities to debate and negotiate appropriate boundaries, which in turn can lead youth to question and doubt the legitimacy of parental authority.

Attitudes about legitimacy of authority are also linked with parent–adolescent relationship features. Adolescents’ endorsement of parental authority is associated with greater cohesion and less conflict with parents ( Zhang et al., 2006 ; Jensen and Dost-Gözkan, 2015 )—in one study, a pattern found in Mexican, Chinese, Filipino, and European background families ( Fuligni, 1998 ).

In sum, there are well-established links between parenting style, adolescents’ beliefs (specifically, about autonomy and parental authority), and parent-adolescent relationship qualities. However, these different constructs have not been examined all together in one study. In addition, although previous studies have examined the associations between parenting styles and parent-adolescent relationships, there was no research that examined whether adolescents’ expectation for behavioral autonomy and endorsement of parental authority mediated these associations. Thus, our second aim was to test the hypothesis that expectations for behavioral autonomy and beliefs in the legitimacy of parental authority both would mediate the link between parenting styles and parent-adolescent conflict and cohesion.

The Role of Adolescent Gender

The third and final aim of the current study was to examine potential gender differences in the relationships between parenting styles, parent-adolescent conflict and cohesion, adolescents’ expectation for behavioral autonomy and endorsement of parental authority. There is reason to expect differences to be found, although results may differ depending on the parenting styles and parent-adolescent relationship features in question. For instance, Shek (2002) reported an association between parental negativity and greater parent-adolescent conflict, only for girls. These differences may reflect distinct socialization goals for boys and girls, with girls oriented more toward family relationships and compliance, and boys oriented toward autonomy and self-reliance ( Shek, 2002 ; Zhang et al., 2006 ). Based on previous research, we expected to find stronger associations between parenting style and parent–adolescent relationship features for girls compared to boys. However, given the lack of prior research on beliefs about autonomy and parental authority as mediators, we had no hypotheses regarding gender as moderator of those mediating effects.

Chinese Cultural Context

As a final point, another rationale for the current study was to address the dearth of research on mainland Chinese families published in the international literature. The existing evidence is almost completely dominated by studies of families from Western industrial nations, even though mainland China has the single largest population of children and adolescents in the world—in 2016, 13% or nearly one in eight of the globe’s 0–14-year-olds ( World Bank, 2017 ). We know of only one relevant published study of parenting styles and parent–adolescent relationships, which found that authoritative mothers exhibited the highest levels, and authoritarian mothers the lowest levels, of mother-adolescent cohesion ( Zhang et al., 2017 ). Adding to the literature base to include evidence from non-Western nations such as China, serves to extend and deepen knowledge of parent-adolescent relationship processes.

Studying mainland Chinese families also offers a unique opportunity for examining family processes because its culture is so distinct from Western contexts. Two features in particular stand out. First, China has been unique in the world in its “one child policy” implemented by the government from 1979 until 2016. This led to a significant change in the family, often described as the “4-2-1” family structure (four grandparents, two parents, and one child). In this context, the relationships between parenting styles and parent–adolescent conflict and cohesion in China may be different from those in Western cultures. Second, Chinese culture is rooted in Confucianism, which emphasizes collectivist values such as conforming to social norms, submission to authority, establishing strong relationships with others, and avoiding confrontation ( Peterson et al., 2005 ). In this strict hierarchical framework, individuals’ requests for autonomy and any behaviors that potentially threaten group harmony are discouraged, whereas great respect for parental authority is highly valued ( Fuligni, 1998 ). Furthermore, some research has shown that autonomy and authority beliefs among adolescents covary with family relationship features in different ways depending on cultural context. For example, one study reported that conflict intensity with mothers was greater for adolescents with lower respect for parental authority in African American and Latina, but not European American, families ( Dixon et al., 2008 ). Thus, there is a need to broaden the diversity of samples in this literature, to better understand which aspects of the relevant family processes operate similarity, or differently, in distinct cultural contexts.

In sum, the current study addressed three aims in a mainland China sample of families: (1) to explore the links between four parenting styles and parent-adolescent relationship conflict (frequency and intensity) and cohesion, including testing the hypothesis that conflict would be highest and cohesion lowest for authoritarian parents, conflict lowest and cohesion highest for authoritative parents; (2) to test the hypothesis that the links between parenting style and parent–adolescent relationship features would be statistically mediated by adolescents’ autonomy expectations and beliefs regarding parental authority; and (3) to test the hypothesis that the links between parenting style and relationship features (explored in Aim 1) would be stronger for girls than for boys—and to also explore gender differences in the mediating effects (hypothesized in Aim 2).

Materials and Methods

Participants and procedure.

A total of 633 students (48.5% females, in line with the proportion found in the Chinese population) in the 7th ( M age = 13.50 ± 0.62 years), 9th ( M age = 15.45 ± 0.67 years) and 11th ( M age = 17.30 ± 0.75 years) grades of four schools in Jinan, the capital of Shandong Province in Middle Eastern China, completed self-report questionnaires. Because of the implementation of one child policy in mainland China, 90 percent of them were only children.

Surveys were completed in class through group administration; students were asked not to communicate with each other while completing the survey. Research staff members administered the surveys to the class by introducing the purpose of this study and the voluntary nature of participation, reading instructions and answering any questions that arose during the data collection period. All participants gave written informed consent. Additionally, all parents of participants were notified about the research and were given the opportunity to withdraw their children from study participation. All parents gave written informed consent to allow their children to participate in this study. The Institutional Review Board of Shandong Normal University approved this study procedures.

Parenting Styles

Parenting styles were assessed using the Chinese version of Steinberg et al.’s (1994) parenting styles questionnaire ( Long et al., 2012 ). Two subscales comprise the measure of parenting: acceptance/involvement and strictness/supervision. The acceptance/involvement subscale (α = 0.84) was the average of 15 items that were used to assess responsive, loving and involved parenting (e.g., “I can count on my parents to help me out if I have some kind of problem.”). The strictness/supervision subscale (α = 0.78) was the average of 12 items that was used to assess monitoring and supervision (e.g., “How much do your parents try to know where you go out at night”). The adolescents were required to indicate the strength of endorsement using a 5-point scale ranging from 1 ( completely disagree ) to 5 ( completely agree ) for each item. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated that the measurement of parenting styles (as well as endorsement of parental authority, expectations for behavioral autonomy and parent-adolescent conflict and cohesion) had acceptable construct validity and strong measurement invariance across gender (see Online Supplementary Materials and Supplementary Table S1 ).

Endorsement of Parental Authority

Adolescents’ beliefs about the legitimacy of parental authority were assessed using Chinese version of Smetana’s (1988) questionnaire ( Zhang and Fuligni, 2006 ). Students were presented with a list of 13 topics as individual items such as curfew, choosing clothes, and choosing friends, and were asked whether father or mother could make a rule about each topic. Responses for each topic/item were coded on a 4-point scale ranging from 1 ( It’s not OK ) to 4 ( It’s completely OK ). These were averaged separately for mother (α = 0.84) and father (α = 0.86).

Expectations for Behavioral Autonomy

Adolescents’ expectation for behavioral autonomy was measured based on the questionnaire from Fuligni (1998) . Students were presented with a list of 12 behaviors (e.g., “watch as much TV as you want”). Adolescents then indicated the degree of expectation for each item using a 4-point scale ranging from 1 ( expect heavily ) and 4 ( not expect at all ) (α = 0.86). In order to achieve consistency across all instruments so that a high score would reflect a high level of the variable being measured, these entries were reversed score so that 1 was recoded as 4, 2 as 3, 3 as 2, and 4 as 1.

Parent–Adolescent Conflict

Adolescents’ perceptions of the incidence and intensity of conflict with their mothers and fathers were measured by the Chinese version of Issues Checklist ( Prinz et al., 1979 ; Zhang and Fuligni, 2006 ). Students indicated whether the 16 specific topics (e.g., chores, cursing) were discussed or not with their parents within the past 2 weeks (using a binary scale, yes or no ). Then, for each endorsed topic of discussion, adolescents reported the conflict intensity of the discussion of each topic, using a 5-point scale that varied from 1 ( very calm ) to 5 ( very angry ). To be consistent with previous research (e.g., Fuligni, 1998 ), conflict frequency was computed by summing the number of discussions rated as containing anger (2 or greater on the 5-point scale). Conflict intensity was obtained by averaging adolescents’ rating on those items that were discussed (mother: α = 0.72, father: α = 0.73).

Parent–Adolescent Cohesion

Adolescents completed the cohesion subscale of the Chinese version of Family Adaptation and Cohesion Evaluation Scales (FACES) II inventory separately for each parent ( Olson et al., 1979 ; Zhang and Fuligni, 2006 ). This scale included 10 items (e.g., “My mother [father] and I feel very close to each other”). Students’ perception of cohesion with parents was rated on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 ( almost never ) to 5 ( almost always ), separately for mother (α = 0.82) and father (α = 0.79).

Controlled Variables

Grade and socioeconomic status (SES) were controlled for this study. The SES score was computed by averaging the standardized education and occupation of both parents. Parents’ education was coded as 1 = equal to or below primary school, 2 = junior high school, 3 = senior high school, 4 = some college or above. The occupation was coded as 1 = peasant or jobless, 2 = blue collar, 3 = professional or semiprofessional. In terms of parents’ educational level, approximately 0.8% of the mothers and 0.3% of fathers had completed primary school education or less, and 38.5% of mothers and 57.1% of fathers had a college or university degree. The remainder had either a junior high school education (7.6% of mothers and 5.5% of fathers) or a senior high school education (48.2% of mothers and 31.5% of fathers). The occupational status of mothers and fathers, respectively, was as follows: 6.2 and 2.7% were peasants or jobless, 28.4 and 23.4% had blue collar position, and 64.9 and 73.6% held a professional or semiprofessional occupation.

Descriptive Statistics

We used Harman’s single factor test to check the common method bias. The results showed that 30 factors emerged with eigenvalues greater than 1.0 and the first factor accounted for only 16.53% of total variance. Since more than one factor emerged and the first factor did not account for the majority of the variance ( Podsakoff and Organ, 1986 ), common method bias was not a serious concern in the present study.

Cluster analysis with K-means method was used to identify the four parenting styles. Instead of defining parentings styles a priori based on subjective cut-off scores ( Steinberg et al., 1994 ), in cluster analysis families are grouped according to their scores on various parenting characteristics ( Henry et al., 2005 ). To validate the cluster solution, we reanalyzed the data with a different cluster method — a hierarchical cluster analysis ( Henry et al., 2005 ; Hoeve et al., 2007 ). We repeated the hierarchical cluster analysis ten times, applying the standardized Euclidian Distance method as a distance measure and using Ward’s algorithm. The cross validation procedure ( Mandara, 2003 ) result in moderate agreements ( k = 0.71, range: 0.67–0.75).

To label the four groups, we examined the parenting styles by computing a one-way ANOVA on the standardized scores of parenting dimensions with the clusters serving as the factors. The result revealed that the clustering variables significantly differed between the parenting dimensions [acceptance/involvement: F (3,608) = 472.58, p < 0.001, η 2 = 0.70; strictness/supervision: F (3,608) = 280.35, p < 0.001, η 2 = 0.58]. Authoritative parents were those who scored high on both dimensions (acceptance/involvement: z = 0.95, strictness/supervision: z = 0.76), whereas neglectful parents scored low on both dimensions (acceptance/involvement: z = -1.45, strictness/supervision: z = -1.06). Authoritarian parents scored low on acceptance/involvement ( z = -0.61) but high on strictness/supervision dimension ( z = 0.50), whereas indulgent parents scored high on acceptance/involvement ( z = 0.15) but low on strictness/supervision dimension ( z = -0.77).

Descriptive statistics for study variables are presented in Table 1 , and bivariate correlations are presented in Table 2 . Regarding descriptives, the following frequencies were found for the four parenting styles: 152 (24.0% of total sample) authoritarian; 200 (31.6%) authoritative; 83 (13.1%) neglectful; and 177 (28.0%) indulgent. The average scores of beliefs in parents’ authority and expectation for behavioral autonomy ranged from 2 to 3, which implied that adolescents reported medium level of endorsement of parental authority and autonomy expectations. The average scores of conflict frequency ranged from 2 to 4 and the average scores of conflict intensity ranged from 1 to 2, which suggested that adolescents reported low level of conflict frequency and intensity. Since the cohesion scored larger than 3 (except girls with neglectful parents), adolescents reported medium-high level of cohesion with parents.

TABLE 1. Means and standard deviations of all study variables except parenting styles.

TABLE 2. Correlations for all study variables except parenting styles.

Turning to correlations, although with a few exceptions, overall the adolescents’ higher expectation for behavioral autonomy was associated with greater frequency and intensity of conflict, and less cohesion. Adolescents’ stronger endorsement of the legitimacy of parental authority was associated with greater cohesion, but less frequent and intense conflict.

Links With Parenting Styles

A series of 4 (parenting styles) × 2 (child gender) analyses of covariance was conducted to explore the links between four parenting styles and parent–adolescent relationships. At the same time, we also explored if adolescents’ expectation for behavior autonomy and endorsement of parental authority differed as a function of adolescents’ gender and parenting styles. SES and grade served as covariables.

For adolescents’ expectation for behavior autonomy, the main effect of parenting styles was significant [ F (3,597) = 8.74, p < 0.001]. Bonferroni post hoc t -tests indicated that adolescents of authoritative parents reported the lower level of expectation for behavioral autonomy ( M = 2.18, SD = 0.60) than adolescents of neglectful [ M = 2.70, SD = 0.64, t (278) = 4.66, p < 0.001], indulgent [ M = 2.48, SD = 0.62, t (371) = 3.75, p < 0.01] and authoritarian parents [ M = 2.43, SD = 0.66, t (344) = 2.79, p < 0.05].

For legitimacy of parental authority, the main effect of parenting styles was significant [mother: F (3,597) = 30.26, father: F (3,597) = 29.62, p s < 0.001]. Adolescents of authoritative parents reported the highest endorsement of parental authority (mother: M = 2.73, SD = 0.53; father: M = 2.71, SD = 0.56), whereas adolescents of neglectful parents reported the lowest endorsement of parental authority (mother: M = 2.06, SD = 0.47; father: M = 1.98, SD = 0.54). Adolescents raised by authoritarian (mother: M = 2.42, SD = 0.59; father: M = 2.38, SD = 0.62) and indulgent parents (mother: M = 2.26, SD = 0.51; father: M = 2.25, SD = 0.55) reported endorsements of parental authority that were between the other two groups (mother: t > 2.86, p < 0.05; father: t > 3.52, p < 0.01). The interaction between gender and parenting styles also was significant [mother: F (3,597) = 2.53, p = 0.056; father: F (3,597) = 3.03, p < 0.05]. Post hoc probing revealed no gender difference for youth with authoritative, authoritarian and neglectful parents. In contrast, for youth with indulgent parents, boys reported greater endorsement of parental authority (mother: M = 2.37, SD = 0.56; father: M = 2.39, SD = 0.60) than did girls [mother: M = 2.16, SD = 0.44, t (171) = 2.62, p < 0.01; father: M = 2.12, SD = 0.46, t (171) = 3.52, p < 0.01].

Turning to intensity of conflict with parents, the main effect of parenting styles was significant [mother: F (3,595) = 7.49, p < 0.001; father: F (3,583) = 3.90, p < 0.01]. Adolescents of neglectful [mother: M = 1.74, SD = 0.62, t (253) = 3.99, p < 0.001; father: M = 1.73, SD = 0.81, t (245) = 2.58, p = 0.06] and authoritarian parents [mother: M = 1.63, SD = 0.54, t (320) = 3.01, p < 0.05; father: M = 1.63, SD = 0.75, t (313) = 2.49, p = 0.08] reported more intense conflict than those of indulgent parents (mother: M = 1.46, SD = 0.43; father: M = 1.45, SD = 0.46). In addition, adolescents of neglectful parenting also reported more intense conflict with mothers than those of authoritative parenting [ M = 1.49, SD = 0.47, t (276) = 3.61, p < 0.01]. As for the frequency of conflict with parents, none of the effects was significant.

For cohesion, gender was significantly related to mother–child cohesion [ F (1,597) = 9.07, p < 0.01], with greater cohesion found for daughters than sons (girls: M = 3.70, SD = 0.66; boys: M = 3.42, SD = 0.59). For mothers and fathers alike, there was a main effect of parenting styles [mother: F (3,597) = 37.53, father: F (3,597) = 26.49, p s < 0.001]. Adolescents of authoritative parents reported the highest level of cohesion (mother: M = 3.85, SD = 0.58; father: M = 3.77, SD = 0.63), followed by indulgent [mother: M = 3.59, SD = 0.52, t (371) = 4.20, p < 0.001; father: M = 3.55, SD = 0.63, t (371) = 3.15, p < 0.05], authoritarian [mother: M = 3.41, SD = 0.60, t (320) = 2.62, p = 0.05; father: M = 3.29, SD = 0.72, t (320) = 3.33, p < 0.01] and neglectful parents [mother: M = 3.05, SD = 0.67, t (227) = 4.78, p < 0.001; father: M = 3.02, SD = 0.75, t (227) = 2.94, p < 0.05]. Finally, the parenting style main effect for mothers was moderated by child gender [ F (3,597) = 1.34, p < 0.01]. Cohesion was higher for girls than boys, only in authoritative [girls: M = 4.03, SD = 0.55; boys: M = 3.64, SD = 0.56, t (195) = 4.77, p < 0.001] and indulgent homes [girls: M = 3.70, SD = 0.50; boys: M = 3.48, SD = 0.50, t (171) = 2.61, p < 0.01].

Mediating Effects

To test our second hypothesis that expectations for behavioral autonomy and beliefs in the legitimacy of parental authority would mediate the links between parenting style and parent-adolescent conflict and cohesion, we used structural equation modeling in Mplus 7.4 (Figures 1 – 3 , for the analyses of conflict frequency, conflict intensity, and cohesion, respectively). SES and grade were included as covariables. The categorical parenting style variable was represented as three dummy-coded variables with authoritative parenting as the reference category. Because the autonomy expectations scale had many items, we used a common parceling technique to estimate a highly reliable latent construct for that variable by randomly assigning items into four nearly equal-sized sets of indicators ( Little et al., 2002 ). Finally, latent variables were constructed (using mother and father scales as indicators) for the conflict and cohesion variables, as well as the attitudes about legitimate parental authority variable. All models showed good fit with the data [conflict frequency: χ 2 = 160.99, df = 56, CFI = 0.96, TLI = 0.95, RMSEA = 0.055; conflict intensity: χ 2 = 167.23, df = 56, CFI = 0.96, TLI = 0.94, RMSEA = 0.058; cohesion: χ 2 = 192.55, df = 56, CFI = 0.95, TLI = 0.93, RMSEA = 0.063).

FIGURE 1. Adolescents’ expectation for autonomy and beliefs about parental authority as mediators between parenting styles and the frequency of parent-adolescent conflict. Standardized path coefficients are presented in the model. ∗ p < 0.05; ∗∗ p < 0.01; ∗∗∗ p < 0.001.

In all three models, adolescents raised in neglectful, indulgent and authoritarian homes (compared to authoritative) reported lower level of beliefs about parental authority and higher expectations for behavior autonomy. Regarding frequency (Figure 1 ) and intensity (Figure 2 ) of conflict, greater expectation of autonomy was linked with more frequent and intense conflict, whereas regarding parent–adolescent cohesion (Figure 3 ), greater endorsement of authority was linked with greater relationship cohesion. Also, conflict intensity was lower for youth with indulgent parents and cohesion was lower for youth with neglectful, indulgent or authoritarian (compared to authoritative) parents.

FIGURE 2. Adolescents’ expectation for autonomy and beliefs about parental authority as mediators between parenting styles and the intensity of parent–adolescent conflict. Standardized path coefficients are presented in the model. ∗ p < 0.05; ∗∗ p < 0.01; ∗∗∗ p < 0.001.

FIGURE 3. Adolescents’ expectation for autonomy and beliefs about parental authority as mediators between parenting styles and parent-adolescent cohesion. Standardized path coefficients are presented in the model. ∗ p < 0.05; ∗∗ p < 0.01; ∗∗∗ p < 0.001.

Significance of indirect effects was computed using bootstrapping with 1000 resamples. A bias-corrected bootstrapped 95% confidence interval (CI) showed significant indirect effects from neglectful, indulgent and authoritarian parenting style to the frequency and the intensity of parent-adolescent conflict via adolescents’ expectation for behavior autonomy. For conflict frequency, 95% CIs were [0.033,0.126], [0.022,0.102], and [0.014,0.092] for neglectful, indulgent and authoritarian parents, respectively. For intensity of conflict, 95% CIs were [0.042,0.131] [0.027,0.105], and [0.019,0.097] for neglectful, indulgent and authoritarian parents, respectively. There also were significant indirect effects to cohesion via adolescents’ beliefs in the legitimacy of parental authority. The 95% CIs were [-0.202, -0.081], [-0.185, -0.071], and [-0.128, -0.0341] for neglectful, indulgent and authoritarian parents, respectively.

Moderating Effect of Adolescents’ Gender

Given possible gender differences in paths, we conducted multiple-group analyses. We had hypothesized that the links between parenting style and parent-adolescent conflict and cohesion would be stronger for girls than boys; we did not have hypotheses regarding the mediators however. Chi-square difference statistic (Δχ 2 ) were used to compare fit between models. All structural paths were constrained to be equal for boys and girls and the overall model fit was compared to a model without any constraint. For conflict frequency and intensity, the unconstrained and fully constrained models were not significantly different—suggesting no gender moderation [Δχ 2 (11) = 14.88, Δχ 2 (11) = 14.96, p s > 0.05]. In contrast, for cohesion, the unconstrained model provided a significantly better fit than the constrained model [Δχ 2 (11) = 23.45, p < 0.05]. To interpret this, we compared path coefficients for boys and girls one by one (see Figure 4 ). The negative prediction of cohesion from neglectful and authoritarian parenting (relative to authoritative parenting) was stronger for girls than boys; this was consistent with our hypothesis. As for the exploration of gender differences in the mediation paths, we found that the negative link between indulgent parenting style and parental authority was stronger for girls than boys, whereas the positive link between endorsement of parental authority and cohesion was stronger for boys than girls.

FIGURE 4. Results of multiple-group structural equation model evaluating the relationships of adolescents’ expectation for behavioral autonomy, their endorsement of parental authority and parent–adolescent cohesion across genders. Standardized path coefficients are presented in the model. Covariances, correlations and residuals are not shown. Solid lines indicate the pathway parameters are different between male sample and female sample. Dotted lines indicate the pathway parameters are similar between male sample and female sample. ∗ p < 0.05; ∗∗ p < 0.01; ∗∗∗ p < 0.001.

In the current study, we tested the associations between parenting styles and parent-adolescent relationships (Aim 1), examined the mediating effects of adolescents’ expectation for behavior autonomy and their endorsement of parental authority on these associations (Aim 2), and also explored the moderating effect of adolescents’ gender (Aim 3) in a sample of adolescents from mainland China.

Parenting Styles and Relationships With Adolescents

In studies of Western families, parenting styles are recognized as having predictable associations with parent-adolescent conflict and cohesion. Previous studies have reported that adolescents of authoritative parents have lower conflict frequency and intensity and higher cohesion than those of authoritarian parents ( Smetana, 1995 ; Assadi et al., 2011 ; Nelson et al., 2011 ; Sorkhabi and Middaugh, 2014 ). In contrast to previous research, the present study showed that adolescents reported similar levels of parent-adolescent conflict frequency regardless of parenting style. This result may be attributed to the traditional Chinese culture, which places emphasis on keeping harmonious relationships and avoiding confrontation ( Peterson et al., 2005 ). This unique cultural context may alleviate any links between parenting and frequency of conflict because Chinese adolescents may avoid conflict with their parents.

However, conflict intensity did show associations with parenting style. Compared with indulgent parenting styles, adolescents of neglectful and authoritarian parents experienced greater intensity of conflict. Indulgent parents place relatively few demands on the adolescents’ behavior, giving them high degree of freedom to act as they wish. In contrast, neglectful parents are characterized as lacking warmth and guidance, whereas authoritarian parents place a high value on obedience and conformity and allow less verbal give-and-take. Conflict may be more intense in neglectful parenting style because the adolescent is making demands on a parent who otherwise is withdrawn and minimizing of the youth’s needs. Also, adolescents may be dissatisfied with authoritarian parents’ setting broad rules without emotional support, which leads to more intense conflict when it occurs. Other variables might also explain the effect. For instance, adolescents with neglectful parents are more likely to engage in delinquent behaviors ( You and Lim, 2015 ), which itself may lead to more intense conflict.

In addition, the current study found that adolescents raised in authoritative and authoritarian parenting style reported similar levels of conflict intensity with parents. This is inconsistent with previous findings, which showed that Western adolescents raised in authoritarian parenting homes reported more intense parent–adolescent conflict than those raised in authoritative parenting homes ( Smetana, 1995 ). One explanation for this difference in results may be that in Chinese culture, similar to training and tiger parenting, the motivation and intention of authoritarian parenting is to supervise children and promote optimal development, instead of simply controlling them ( Chao, 1994 ; Kim et al., 2013 ). And Chinese adolescents may perceive positively the parents’ intention to supervise their development, resulting in no direct association between levels of parental control and conflict intensity.

With regard to parent–adolescent relationship cohesion, the current study showed that adolescents with authoritative parents reported the highest levels of cohesion. This result extends previously published work in various cultural groups showing greater cohesion for authoritative parenting (e.g., Nelson et al., 2011 ). Authoritative parenting is characterized by a high degree of warmth and acceptance as well as supervision, but also including the granting of adolescent autonomy ( Baumrind, 2005 ). In Chinese and Western cultures today, adolescents seek greater independence along with support (compared to children)—a balance of youth and parent goals that is best met in authoritative households that promote close relationships. In contrast, neglectful parents’ lack of warmth and supervision, which may be interpreted as irresponsibility, may hinder the establishment of cohesive relationships. Indulgent and authoritarian parents provided either limited guidelines or limited support for their children. All these characteristics were likely to reduce parent–adolescent cohesion.

Expectation for Behavioral Autonomy

Our second aim was, in part, to identify potential mediating effects of adolescents’ expectations for autonomy. Results showed that adolescents’ autonomy expectations mediated the links between parenting styles and both the frequency and intensity of parent–adolescent conflict. Specifically, compared to adolescents in authoritative homes, those in neglect, indulgent, and authoritarian homes reported stronger expectations for autonomy, which in turn were linked with more frequent and intense parent-adolescent conflict. This result was consistent with other studies which explored the relationships between parenting styles, adolescents’ expectation for behavioral autonomy and parent-adolescent conflict ( Baumrind, 1991 ; Bush and Peterson, 2013 ).

Adolescents in authoritative families reported the lowest expectation for behavioral autonomy. This result may be due to that adolescents with authoritative parents have achieved appropriate autonomy, therefore, their desire to acquire more autonomy is not so strong. The salutary effect of authoritative parenting style on adolescents’ behavioral autonomy likely reflects the successful attainment of a socialization goal among authoritative parents: to facilitate autonomy and promote self-reliance. This socialization goal is accomplished by respecting their children’s needs and recognizing that adolescents legitimately have the right to control some aspects of their lives ( Bush and Peterson, 2013 ).

Compared with authoritative parenting style, non-authoritative parenting styles have some characteristics that are thought to hinder the development of adolescents’ behavioral autonomy. Authoritarian parents are characterized as using hostile control or harsh punishment in an arbitrary manner to gain obedience and conformity ( Bush and Peterson, 2013 ). At the same time, authoritarian parents provide limited warmth and responsiveness. In that context, adolescents are more likely to seek greater behavioral autonomy because it is not available to them. Also, indulgent and neglect parents provide few if any rules or discipline. Without sufficient firm control in the form of parental monitoring and guidance, adolescents raised in indulgent and neglect parenting families are more likely to experience high levels of independence before they can manage it themselves ( Bush and Peterson, 2013 ). Also, adolescents in neglectful families lack parental supportiveness and those in indulgent homes are simply spoiled. Such adolescents may have high levels of autonomy, but it is not likely to have been developed through a healthy developmental process with their parents in a way that balances their growing self-determination and connectedness with their parents.

In agreement with previous research ( Laursen and Collins, 2009 ), the current results revealed that adolescents’ expectation for behavioral autonomy statistically predicted greater parent–adolescent conflict—perhaps because parents favor less autonomy than do their teenage children. This parent-youth discrepancy has been found in individualistic and collectivist cultural groups within the United States and in other countries ( Smetana, 1988 ; Pérez et al., 2016 ). Researchers have interpreted the discrepancy as a developmental phenomenon, in which adolescents’ need for autonomy exceeds parental concerns with maintaining order and protecting their children from harm ( Jensen and Dost-Gözkan, 2015 ).

Legitimacy of Parental Authority

The second mediating effect that was tested involved adolescents’ beliefs in the legitimacy of parental authority; results suggested some evidence for this effect. Compared with authoritative parenting, non-authoritative parenting was negatively associated with adolescents’ beliefs in the legitimacy of parental authority, which in turn were positively related to parent-adolescent cohesion. This finding is consistent with previous research ( Fuligni, 1998 ; Darling et al., 2005 ; Assadi et al., 2011 ; Trinkner et al., 2012 ). Our interpretation is that with increasingly adult-like social cognitions and relationships, adolescents increasing question parental authority as they shift from unquestioning compliance to rational assessment with conditional obedience. Compared to other types of parents, authoritative parents, are more successful with continually renegotiating parental authority as their children “grow up,” because they use reasoning and explanations and are responsive to adolescents’ perspectives. This ongoing negotiation provides a context for parents and children to articulate and discuss divergent perspectives, which helps legitimize the parents’ authority by rationally justifying the boundaries of adolescents’ personal jurisdiction.

In contrast, authoritarian parents exert strict and sometimes arbitrary punishment without explanation. Also, they construct the boundaries of parental authority much more broadly than authoritative parents, which promotes resistance in adolescence ( Smetana, 1995 ; Baumrind, 2005 ). In this context, adolescents struggle to internalize the legitimacy of parental authority. Also, in contrast to authoritative parents, indulgent and neglectful parents provide little information about boundaries or appropriate behavior. Such lax control can undermine parental authority, so that youth increasingly regard parents as not playing an authority role.

Parents who exercise their authority are satisfied when their adolescent children respect them, which helps maintain harmonious relationships in the family ( Zhang et al., 2006 ; Jensen and Dost-Gözkan, 2015 ). As child-rearing agents, providers of information and rules, and primary sources of support for their children, parents need to establish their authority to better play their parenting roles. However, this occurs in a relationship context with adolescent, and the teenager’s endorsement of parents’ authority helps the adults meet their psychological needs as well. In such families, parents and youth consider each other’s boundaries and areas of control through negotiation and mutual respect, which builds more cohesive relationships.

In the current study, although adolescents’ expectations for behavioral autonomy and beliefs in the legitimacy of parental authority are both critical attitude domains, their mediating effects were different: autonomy expectations mediated the effect of parenting style on parent-adolescent conflict, but authority legitimacy mediated the effect of parenting style on parent-adolescent cohesion. Certainly, although they are correlated, conflict and cohesion delineate different aspects of parent–adolescent relationships ( Zhang et al., 2006 )—and, each may be affected differently by levels of parental authority and adolescent autonomy. The distinction may be particularly strong in Chinese culture which emphasizes conformity and obedience ( Peterson et al., 2005 ). Parent-adolescent conflict was more likely to be linked with adolescents’ higher expectations for behavioral autonomy which runs against cultural norms, but cohesion was more likely to be linked with adolescents’ greater endorsement of parental authority which is consistent with cultural norms.

Adolescent Gender

Our final aim was to test the hypothesis that the direct link between parenting style and relationship qualities would be stronger for girls than boys—and, to also explore whether there were gender differences in the mediating effects via adolescent autonomy and authority attitudes. The results indicated only a few such effects. Briefly, girls in authoritative and indulgent homes reported more cohesion with mothers than boys, and girls of neglect and authoritarian parenting reported lower level of parent–adolescent cohesion than boys. This may be due to that girls are more responsive and sensitive to social bonds than boys, and that cohesion and parenting style both reflects emotional atmosphere. Therefore, the relationships between parenting styles and cohesion were stronger for girls. Besides, girls of indulgent parents were less likely to endorse parental authority than boys, while endorsement of parental authority had greater effect on parent-adolescent cohesion for boys than girls. To the extent that parents normally set more rules and expect greater obedience of parental authority for girls than boys ( Darling et al., 2005 ; Zhang and Fuligni, 2006 ), and consequently girls of indulgent parents may be more likely to feel that their parents did not shoulder the responsibility of cultivating them or establish the authority, given indulgent parents did not provide enough supervision and rules. Therefore, girls of indulgent parents endorsed lower level of parental authority. At the same time, since parents expected less conformity and obedience for boys, their endorsement of parental authority was more likely to live up to parents’ expectation, which may improve relationships with parents.

Although gender moderated a few paths in the direct and mediating models, overall, the majority of paths were not significantly different for boys and girls across all of the models that were tested. This may be due to that, with the implementation of the one child policy, Chinese parenting styles and socialization practices are becoming increasingly similar for their sole children ( Lu and Chang, 2013 ), resulting in more similar associations between parenting styles and parent–adolescent relationships and also the mediating effects of autonomy and authority for these relationships for boys and girls.

Limitations and Conclusions

Several limitations of this study should be noted. First, the participants were urban adolescents in mainland China which is characterized as collectivist culture, so generalizing the results to other cultures or groups should be done with caution. Second, the correlational design does not permit causal inferences. Longitudinal experimental data are necessary to identify causal relationships among the variables. Finally, we relied on adolescents’ self-reports. Previous research found that there were discrepancies between parents’ and youth’s perceptions on these variables (e.g., Jensen and Dost-Gözkan, 2015 ), so our findings may not represent what would be found using parents’ reports or observers’ ratings.

Despite these limitations, the current study has important implications. To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine the mediating effects of adolescents’ expectations for behavioral autonomy and beliefs in the legitimacy of parental authority, on the links between parenting styles and parent-adolescent conflict and cohesion. The findings of this study extend existing research and suggest that prevention and intervention efforts are needed to primarily target the reduction of non-authoritative parenting styles, and the promotion of acquiring appropriate levels of autonomy expectations and endorsement of parental authority. Future research should examine other possible mediating paths and sample a wider range of cultural contexts to explore adolescent development and family functioning.

Ethics Statement

This study was carried out in accordance with the recommendations of the Institutional Review Board of Shandong Normal University. All subjects gave written informed consent in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. The protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Shandong Normal University.

Author Contributions

XB conducted the analysis and drafted the manuscript. YY and HL helped in performing the statistical analysis. MW coordinated the data collection and helped in the statistical analysis. WZ conceived and coordinated the study and helped to draft the manuscript. KD-D helped to draft the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript and the byline order of authors.

This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (31671156).

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Supplementary Material

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02187/full#supplementary-material

Assadi, S. M., Smetana, J., Shahmansouri, N., and Mohammadi, M. (2011). Beliefs about parental authority, parenting styles, and parent-adolescent conflict among iranian mothers of middle adolescents. Int. J. Behav. Dev. 35, 424–431. doi: 10.1177/0165025411409121

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Baumrind, D. (1991). The influence of parenting style on adolescent competence and substance use. J. Early Adolesc. 11, 56–95. doi: 10.1177/0272431691111004

Baumrind, D. (2005). Patterns of parental authority and adolescent autonomy. New Dir. Child Adolesc. Dev. 2005, 61–69. doi: 10.1002/cd.128

Bush, K. R., and Peterson, G. W. (2013). “Parent-child relationships in diverse contexts,” in Handbook of Marriage and the Family , 3rd edn. Eds G. W. Peterson and K. R. Bush (New York, NY: Springer), 275–302. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4614-3987-5_13

Chan, K. W., and Chan, S. M. (2009). Emotional autonomy and perceived parenting styles: relational analysis in the Hong Kong cultural context. Asia Pac. Educ. Rev. 10, 433–443. doi: 10.1007/s12564-009-9050-z

Chao, R. K. (1994). Beyond parental control and authoritarian parenting style: understanding Chinese parenting through the cultural notion of training. Child Dev. 65, 1111–1119. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.1994.tb00806.x

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Chen, B., Vansteenkiste, M., Beyers, W., Soenens, B., and Petegem, S. V. (2013). Autonomy in family decision making for Chinese adolescents: disentangling the dual meaning of autonomy. J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 44, 1184–1209. doi: 10.1177/0022022113480038

Darling, N., Cumsille, P., and Martínez, M. L. (2007). Adolescents’ as active agents in the socialization process: legitimacy of parental authority and obligation to obey as predictors of obedience. J. Adolesc. 30, 297–311. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2006.03.003

Darling, N., Cumsille, P., and Martínez, M. L. (2008). Individual differences in adolescents’ beliefs about the legitimacy of parental authority and their own obligation to obey: a longitudinal investigation. Child Dev. 79, 1103–1118. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2008.01178.x

Darling, N., Cumsille, P., and Peña-Alampay, L. (2005). Rules, legitimacy of parental authority, and obligation to obey in chile, the philippines, and the United States. New Dir. Child Adolesc. Dev. 2005, 47–60. doi: 10.1002/cd.127

Darling, N., and Steinberg, L. (1993). Parenting style as context: an integrative model. Psychol. Bull. 113, 487–496. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.113.3.487

Dixon, S. V., Graber, J. A., and Brooks-Gunn, J. (2008). The roles of respect for parental authority and parenting practices in parent-child conflict among African American, Latino, and European American families. J. Fam. Psychol. 22, 1–10. doi: 10.1037/0893-3200.22.1.1

Fuligni, A. J. (1998). Authority, autonomy, and parent-adolescent conflict and cohesion: a study of adolescents from Mexican, Chinese, Filipino, and European backgrounds. Dev. Psychol. 34, 782–792. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.34.4.782

Henry, D. B., Tolan, P. H., and Gormansmith, D. (2005). Cluster analysis in family psychology research. J. Fam. Psychol. 19, 121–132. doi: 10.1037/0893-3200.19.1.121

Hoeve, M., Blokland, A. A. J., Semon-Dubas, J., Loeber, R., Gerris, J. R. M., and Van der Laan, P. (2007). Trajectories of delinquency and parenting styles. J. Abnorm. Child Psychol. 36, 223–235. doi: 10.1007/s10802-007-9172-x

Jensen, L. A., and Dost-Gözkan, A. (2015). Adolescent-parent relations in Asian Indian and Salvadoran immigrant families: a cultural-developmental analysis of autonomy, authority, conflict, and cohesion. J. Res. Adolesc. 25, 340–351. doi: 10.1111/jora.12116

Kim, S. Y., Wang, Y., Orozco-Lapray, D., Shen, Y., and Murtuza, M. (2013). Does “tiger parenting” exist? Parenting profiles of Chinese Americans and adolescent developmental outcomes. Asian Am. J. Psychol. 4, 7–18. doi: 10.1037/a0030612

Laursen, B., and Collins, W. A. (2009). “Parent-child relationships during adolescence,” in Handbook of Adolescent Psychology , eds R. M. Lerner and L. Steinberg (Hoboken, NJ: Wiley).

Google Scholar

Little, T. D., Cunningham, W. A., Shahar, G., and Widaman, K. F. (2002). To parcel or not to parcel: exploring the question, weighing the merits. Struct. Equ. Model. 9, 151–173. doi: 10.1207/S15328007SEM0902-1

Long, R. H., Huang, D., and Zhang. J. X. (2012). Evaluating on reliability and validity of steinberg scale, Chinese version. Chin. J. Public Health 28, 439–441.

Lu, H. J., and Chang, L. (2013). Parenting and socialization of only children in urban China: an example of authoritative parenting. J. Genet. Psychol. 174, 335–343. doi: 10.1080/00221325.2012.681325

Maccoby, E., and Martin, J. (1983). “Socialization in the context of the family: parent-child interaction”, in Handbook of Child Psychology Socialization, Personality, and Social Development , Vol. 4, eds. E. M. Hetherington and P. H. Mussen (New York, NY: Wiley), 1–101

Mandara, J. (2003). The typological approach in child and family psychology: a review of theory, methods, and research. Clin. Child Fam. Psychol. Rev. 6, 129–146. doi: 10.1023/A:1023734627624

McKinney, C., and Renk, K. (2011). A multivariate model of parent-adolescent relationship variables in early adolescence. Child Psychiatr. Hum. Dev. 42, 442–462. doi: 10.1007/s10578-011-0228-3

Nelson, L. J., Padilla-Walker, L. M., Christensen, K. J., Evans, C. A., and Carroll, J. S. (2011). Parenting in emerging adulthood: an examination of parenting clusters and correlates. J. Youth Adolesc. 40, 730–743. doi: 10.1007/s10964-010-9584-8

Olson, D. H., Sprenkle, D. H., and Russell, C. S. (1979). Circumplex model of marital and family systems: i. Cohesion and adaptability dimensions, family types, and clinical applications. Fam. Process 18, 3–28. doi: 10.1111/j.1545-5300.1979.00003.x

Pérez, J. C., Cumsille, P., and Martínez, M. L. (2016). Brief report: agreement between parent and adolescent autonomy expectations and its relationship to adolescent adjustment. J. Adolesc. 53, 10–15. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2016.08.010

Peterson, G. W., Steinmetz, S. K., and Wilson, S. M. (eds). (2005). Parent-Youth Relations: Cultural and Cross-Cultural Perspectives . New York, NY: Hawthorn Press.

Podsakoff, P. M., and Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: problems and prospects. J. Manag. 12, 531–544. doi: 10.1177/014920638601200408

Prinz, R. J., Foster, S., Kent, R. N., and O’Leary, K. D. (1979). Multivariate assessment of conflict in distressed and nondistressed mother-adolescent dyads. J. Appl. Behav. Anal. 12, 691–700. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1979.12-691

Shek, D. T. (2002). Parenting characteristics and parent-adolescent conflict: a longitudinal study in the Chinese culture. J. Fam. Issues 23, 189–208. doi: 10.1177/0192513X02023002002

Smetana, J. G. (1988). Adolescents’ and parents’ conceptions of parental authority. Child Dev. 59, 321–335. doi: 10.2307/1130313

Smetana, J. G. (1995). Parenting styles and conceptions of parental authority during adolescence. Child Dev. 66, 299–316. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.1995.tb00872.x

Smith, D. C., and Hall, J. A. (2008). Parenting style and adolescent clinical severity: findings from two substance abuse treatment studies. J. Soc. Work Pract. Addict. 8, 440–463. doi: 10.1080/15332560802341073

Sorkhabi, N., and Middaugh, E. (2014). How variations in parents’ use of confrontive and coercive control relate to variations in parent-adolescent conflict, adolescent disclosure, and parental knowledge: adolescents’ perspective. J. Child Fam. Stud. 23, 1227–1241. doi: 10.1007/s10826-013-9783-5

Steinberg, L., Lamborn, S. D., Darling, N., Mounts, N. S., and Dornbusch, S. M. (1994). Over-time changes in adjustment and competence among adolescents from authoritative, authoritarian, indulgent, and neglectful families. Child Dev. 65, 754–770.

PubMed Abstract | Google Scholar

Trinkner, R., Cohn, E. S., Rebellon, C. J., and Van Gundy, K. (2012). Don’t trust anyone over 30: parental legitimacy as a mediator between parenting style and changes in delinquent behavior over time. J. Adolesc. 35, 119–132. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2011.05.003

World Bank. (2017). Population, Ages 0-14, Total . Available at: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.0014.TO?end=2016andstart=1960andview=chart

You, S., and Lim, S. A. (2015). Development pathways from abusive parenting to delinquency: the mediating role of depression and aggression. Child Abuse Negl. 46, 152–162. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2015.05.009

Zhang, W. X., and Fuligni, A. J. (2006). Authority, autonomy, and family relationships among adolescents in urban and rural China. J. Res. Adolesc. 16, 527–537. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-7795.2006.00506.x

Zhang, W. X., Wang, M. P., and Fuligni, A. J. (2006). Expectations for autonomy, beliefs about parental authority, and parent-adolescent conflict and cohesion. Acta Psychol. Sin. 38, 868–876.

Zhang, W., Wei, X., Ji, L., Chen, L., and Deater-Deckard, K. (2017). Reconsidering parenting in Chinese culture: subtypes, stability, and change of maternal parenting style during early adolescence. J. Youth Adolesc. 46, 1117–1136. doi: 10.1007/s10964-017-0664-x

Keywords : parenting style, parent–adolescent relationship, behavioral autonomy, parental authority, gender

Citation: Bi X, Yang Y, Li H, Wang M, Zhang W and Deater-Deckard K (2018) Parenting Styles and Parent–Adolescent Relationships: The Mediating Roles of Behavioral Autonomy and Parental Authority. Front. Psychol. 9:2187. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02187

Received: 08 August 2018; Accepted: 23 October 2018; Published: 13 November 2018.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2018 Bi, Yang, Li, Wang, Zhang and Deater-Deckard. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Wenxin Zhang, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Parenting Styles

Reviewed by Psychology Today Staff

It is a stereotype that, in therapy, all of a person’s problems will be blamed on their parents. That is not the case. But decades of psychological research have suggested that the approach to parenting generally followed by an individual’s mother and/or father can influence the way they approach relationships, challenges, and opportunities. That doesn’t mean that an adult can’t change, of course, especially once they understand what may be influencing their behavior. And parents who become aware of the pitfalls of their own style and how it may affect their kids can also change.

For more on dysfunctional parenting, click here .

On This Page

• What are the four major parenting styles?
• How can a parent’s style predict a child’s future relationships?
• How can mothers and fathers tell what their parenting style is?
• How can parents become more authoritative?
• What is supportive parenting?
• What is attachment parenting?
• How can mothers and fathers transition away from attachment parenting?

Research begun by developmental psychologist Diana Baumrind in the 1960s identified three main parenting styles —authoritarian, indulgent, and authoritative. Later studies added a fourth—neglectful. Every parent does not neatly fit into one of these four categories but they describe the approaches of many.

• An authoritarian parent seeks to maintain a high level of control over their children. They may set and adhere to a strict set of rules, and are more likely to support and take part in corporal punishment such as spanking. Children of highly authoritarian parents may struggle socially and may be likely to become authoritarian parents themselves.
• Neglectful parents (also known as uninvolved or disengaged) take on a limited parenting role. They may not spend as much time as other parents in conversation, play, or other activities, and may not bother to set many house rules. Some children of neglectful parents may resist rules outside of the home and struggle with self-control.
• Indulgent (or permissive) parents may be attentive and warm, but may not set many rules for their children. They may prioritize being their child’s friend over being their parent. Research suggests that the children of permissive parents may show higher levels of creativity but may also feel entitled, and be more interested in taking rather than giving in their own relationships.
• Authoritative parents follow what is widely understood as the preferred approach. Such parents are more pragmatic and flexible. They set clear boundaries but also encourage children’s independence within those limits. Discipline in such families may be more supportive than punitive, and as children get older, their independence increases. Children of authoritative parents may have more highly developed self-control and self-reliance.

Recent research suggests that, in some families, a parent’s style, especially as it relates to maintaining control over their children, could leave their kids vulnerable to emotional abuse from future partners, employers, and and others. Researchers found that people raised with a parent who maintained strict psychological control over them grew to be especially vulnerable to emotionally abusive partners. The effect appeared to be offset, though, by experiencing emotional warmth from the other parent. Research continues to explore the effect of differing parenting styles in the same family, and whether it matters if a mother or father is the authoritarian.

Much research of parenting styles has examined how the styles affect children as they grow up, and how negative effects could be tempered. But other studies have focused on helping parents become more self-aware and change their styles to develop healthier relationships with their kids . Some researchers have developed analytical scales in which parents indicate how they would respond to certain scenarios with an eye toward helping them shift, perhaps through therapy, to a more moderate approach.

In practical terms, most parents do not think of themselves as authoritarian, authoritative, or otherwise, and many mothers and fathers are self-aware enough to know that they may not be consistent with their kids at all times. Experts suggest that attention to some general guidelines can help parents develop a healthier style—for example, being consciously warm and loving toward children, setting age-appropriate limits, actively listening to children’s concerns, gently but firmly asking to be treated with respect, and “catching” kids being good , while making sure they know they’ve been seen and acknowledged.

Supportive parenting describes an approach to authoritative parenting in which mothers and fathers are conscious of how often they say no to children (as they often must, especially when kids are young) so that they can seek more opportunities to say yes to them in encouraging ways that help kids develop confidence and self-esteem. When children are mostly told what they cannot do, they can feel rejected by a parent, even a well-meaning one, with potentially negative emotional outcomes. Being consciously supportive and selfless with children can help them internalize belief in themselves.

Attachment parenting , a term coined by pediatrician William Sears, describes an approach to parenting in which mothers and fathers are physically and emotionally close to their children, especially at an early age, and is characterized in practice by extended periods of breastfeeding and co-sleeping. Sears referred to it as “what mothers and fathers would do instinctively if they were raising their baby on a desert island.” There is little evidence, however, that this approach leads to more positive psychological outcomes for children and many experts reject attachment parenting as unnecessarily demanding of parents and potentially creating conflict and division between new parents.

Parents who commit themselves to attachment parenting and have the time and temperament to maintain the approach throughout early childhood may then be faced with the challenge of weaning their children from the approach. These mothers and fathers may need to consciously practice “ detachment parenting ” so that children entering early adolescence can develop independence and healthy friendships, while resisting feeling rejected themselves as kids begin to resist a parent’s efforts to hold onto their previous level of connection.

Modern parents and childrearing institutions discourage boredom by structuring activities for children. Would it be better if we let them structure activities themselves?

For an LGBTQ person, heteronormativity is like humidity: It’s not always something we consciously register, but it’s something we can feel.

Tips for fostering parent-provider communication to develop feelings of safety and trust in the hospital and hope for the future.

Identifying shame as a monster is not only helpful for managing stress and setting boundaries, but can improve your fertility journey,

Exploring the hazards of parental perfectionism and what it means to be "good enough."

Personal Perspective: A missed diagnosis is the worst of all, because the child will miss out on early education.

A cluttered house can cause a spike in the stress hormone cortisol, and this effect is more pronounced in women than men. Why is this so, and what can be done about it?

Many adult children harbor unexpected struggles that parents often overlook—here’s what they need from you to thrive emotionally.

Common stressors with being the mother of an adult child with bipolar, schizophrenia, or major depression.

Labeling kids as young as 3 as "bullies" becomes a life sentence that limits the chance they will get the help they need to learn to be kind. This is a loss for all.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Self Tests NEW
• Therapy Center
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

It’s increasingly common for someone to be diagnosed with a condition such as ADHD or autism as an adult. A diagnosis often brings relief, but it can also come with as many questions as answers.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Sweepstakes
• Guided Meditations
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2024 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

Why Parenting Styles Matter When Raising Children

Verywell / Laura Porter

• Limitations

Parenting styles are constructs used to describe the different strategies parents tend to utilize when raising children. These styles encompass parents' behaviors and attitudes and the emotional environment in which they raise their children.

Developmental psychologists have long been interested in how parents affect child development . However, finding actual cause-and-effect links between specific actions of parents and the later behavior of children is very difficult.

Some children raised in dramatically different environments can grow up to have remarkably similar personalities. Conversely, children who share a home and are raised in the same environment can grow up to have very different personalities.

Despite these challenges, researchers have posited that there are links between parenting styles and the effects these styles have on children. And some suggest these effects carry over into adult behavior.

The Four Parenting Styles

In the 1960s, psychologist Diana Baumrind conducted a study on more than 100 preschool-age children. Using naturalistic observation , parental interviews, and other research methods , she identified important dimensions of parenting.

These dimensions include disciplinary strategies, warmth and nurturing, communication styles, and expectations of maturity and control. Based on these dimensions, Baumrind suggested that the majority of parents display one of three different parenting styles. Later research by Maccoby and Martin suggested adding a fourth parenting style. Each of these has different effects on children's behavior.

The four parenting styles identified by Baumrind and other researchers are:

• Authoritarian parenting style
• Authoritative parenting style
• Permissive parenting style
• Uninvolved parenting style

Authoritarian Parenting

In this style of parenting, children are expected to follow strict rules established by the parents. Failure to do so usually results in punishment. Authoritarian parents don't explain the reasoning behind these rules, either. If asked to explain, the parent might simply reply, "Because I said so."

Other common characteristics include:

• While these parents have high demands, they are not very responsive to their children.
• They expect their children to behave exceptionally and not make errors, yet they provide little direction about what they should do or avoid in the future.
• Mistakes are punished , often quite harshly, yet their children are often left wondering exactly what they did wrong.

Baumrind says these parents "are obedience- and status-oriented, and expect their orders to be obeyed without explanation." They are often described as domineering and dictatorial. Their approach is "spare the rod, spoil the child." They expect children to obey without question.

Effects of Authoritarian Parenting

Authoritarian parenting styles generally lead to obedient and proficient children but can also lead to increased anxiety , lower self-reliance, and reduced intrinsic motivation . Children may also be more likely to lie to avoid punishment.

Authoritative Parenting

Like authoritarian parents, those with an authoritative parenting style establish rules and guidelines that their children are expected to follow. However, this parenting style is much more democratic.

Here are a few common characteristics of the authoritative parenting style:

• Authoritative parents are responsive to their children and willing to listen to questions.
• These parents expect a lot of their children but also provide warmth, feedback, and adequate support.
• When children fail to meet expectations , these parents are more nurturing and forgiving than punishing.

According to Baumrind, authoritative parents are good at setting standards and monitoring their children's behavior. Their disciplinary methods are assertive and supportive rather than intrusive, restrictive, or punitive.

For authoritative parents, the goal is to raise children who are socially responsible, cooperative, and self-regulated. The combination of expectation and support helps children of authoritative parents develop skills such as independence, self-control, and self-regulation. 

Effects of Authoritative Parenting

Authoritative parenting styles tend to result in happy, capable, and successful children. Studies also show that these children often have higher levels of life satisfaction when they get older.

Permissive Parenting

Permissive parents , sometimes referred to as indulgent parents, make very few demands of their children. These parents rarely discipline their children because they have relatively low expectations of maturity and self-control.​

Other common characteristics of permissive parenting are:

• Permissive parents prioritize being their child's friend rather than being a parent.
• They are warm and attentive but tend to set few rules, rarely enforce rules, and have few expectations.
• They allow their children to make their own decisions. 

According to Baumrind, permissive parents are responsive to their children but not demanding. Because they do not expect mature behavior from their children, kids may struggle to set limits for themselves.

Permissive parents are generally nurturing and communicative with their children, often taking on the status of a friend more than a parent. On the positive side, this can help kids become more self-sufficient and independent. On the downside, it can contribute to poor self-regulation .

Effects of Permissive Parenting

Permissive parenting often results in children who rank low in happiness and self-regulation. These children are more likely to engage in high-risk behaviors and tend to perform poorly in school.

Uninvolved Parenting

In addition to the three major styles introduced by Baumrind, psychologists Eleanor Maccoby and John Martin proposed a fourth style: uninvolved or neglectful parenting. An uninvolved parenting style is characterized by few demands, low responsiveness, and very little communication.

Other characteristics of the uninvolved parenting style include:

• While these parents fulfill the child's basic needs, they are generally detached from their child's life.
• They might ensure that their kids are fed and have shelter but offer little to nothing in the way of guidance, structure, rules, or even support.
• These parents may seem indifferent, unresponsive, and dismissive.
• In some cases, these parents may reject or neglect the needs of their children. They may also be physically or emotionally abusive .

A 2019 study found that children raised by neglectful parents tend to struggle in school, experience more depression, have worse social relationships, have difficulty controlling their emotions, and experience more anxiety.

Effects of Uninvolved Parenting

Uninvolved parenting styles rank lowest across all life domains. These children tend to lack self-control , have higher rates of delinquency, and poorer self-reliance.

What's Your Parenting Style?

This fast and free parenting style quiz can help you analyze the methods you're using to parent your kids and whether or not it may be a good idea to learn some new parenting behaviors:

The Impact of Parenting Styles

Research suggests that parenting styles can have a range of effects on children. Some areas of a child's life that may be affected, whether in the present or the future, include:

• Academics : Parenting styles can play a part in academic achievement and motivation.
• Mental health : Parenting styles can also influence children's mental well-being . Kids raised by authoritarian, permissive, or uninvolved parents tend to experience more anxiety, depression, and other mental health problems.
• Self-esteem : Kids raised by parents with an authoritative style tend to have stronger self-esteem than kids raised by parents with other styles.
• Social relationships : Parenting styles can impact how kids relate to other people. For example, kids raised by permissive parents are more likely to be bullied, while kids raised by authoritarian parents are more likely to bully others .
• Adult relationships : Researchers have also found that kids raised by strict, authoritarian parents may be more likely to experience emotional abuse in adult romantic relationships .

Mixing Parenting Styles

The parenting styles of individual parents also combine to create a unique blend in each family. For example, the mother may display an authoritative style, while the father favors a more permissive approach. This can sometimes lead to mixed signals.

To create a cohesive approach to parenting, parents must learn to cooperate and combine their unique parenting styles.

Advantages of Authoritative Parenting

Because authoritative parents are more likely to be viewed as reasonable, fair, and just, their children are more likely to comply with their parents' requests. Also, because these parents provide rules as well as explanations for these rules, children are much more likely to internalize these lessons.

Rather than simply following the rules because they fear punishment (as they might with authoritarian parents), the children of authoritative parents are able to see why the rules exist, understand that they are fair and acceptable, and strive to follow these rules to meet their own internalized sense of what is right and wrong.

Get Advice From The Verywell Mind Podcast

Hosted by therapist Amy Morin, LCSW, this episode of The Verywell Mind Podcast shares what mentally strong parents do.

Follow Now : Apple Podcasts / Spotify / Google Podcasts

Can You Change Your Parenting Style?

If you notice that you tend to be more authoritarian, permissive, or uninvolved, there are steps you can take to adopt a more authoritative parenting style. Strategies that may help include:

• Listen : Spend time listening to what your child has to say. Let them share their opinions, ideas, and worries with you. 
• Establish rules : Create a clear set of rules for your household and communicate your expectations to your child. In addition to telling your child what the rules are, explain why these rules exist.
• Consider your child's input : Authoritative parents set the rules but are also willing to listen to their child's feelings and consider them when making decisions.
• Be consistent : Enforce rules consistently, but be sure to provide consequences that are fair, proportionate, and educational. 

Developing a more authoritative parenting style takes time. With practice and consistent effort, however, you will find that your approach to parenting gradually shifts to a more supportive, involved approach that can lead to better developmental outcomes.

Limitations of Parenting Style Research

Links between parenting styles and behavior are based on correlational research , which is helpful for finding relationships between variables . However, such research cannot establish definitive cause-and-effect relationships.

While there is evidence that a particular parenting style is linked to a specific pattern of behavior, other variables, such as a child's temperament, can also play a significant role.

Children May Affect Their Parents' Styles

There is also evidence that a child's behavior can impact parenting styles. One study found that when a child misbehaves, a parent's response tends to be more variable. An interpretation of this result is that kids might misbehave not because their parents were too permissive but because parents of difficult or aggressive children gave up on trying to control their kids.

Outcomes Vary

The correlations between parenting styles and behaviors are sometimes weak, so the expected child outcomes do not materialize. For example, parents with authoritative styles may have children who are defiant or engage in delinquent behavior. Parents with permissive styles may also ave self-confident and academically successful children.

Cultural Factors Play a Role

Cultural factors also play a significant role in parenting styles and child outcomes. There isn't a universal style of parenting that is always best. For example, while authoritarian parenting is associated with poorer academic achievement, this effect is less pronounced in Hispanic families.

Final Thoughts

Parenting styles are associated with different child outcomes, and the authoritative style is generally linked to positive behaviors such as strong self-esteem and self-competence. However, other important factors—including culture, children's temperament , children's perceptions of parental treatment, and social influences—also play an important role in children's behavior.

Understanding more about your parenting style can help you explore different approaches to parenting your children. If you notice that you tend to have a more strict, indulgent, or dismissive approach, there are steps that you can take to become more involved and authoritative in how you relate to your children.

Baumrind D. Child care practices anteceding three patterns of preschool behavior . Genet Psychol Monogr. 1967;75(1):43-88.

Louis JP. The Young Parenting Inventory (YPI-R3), and the Baumrind, Maccoby and Martin parenting model: Finding common ground . Children . 2022;9(2):159. doi:10.3390/children9020159

Arafat Y, Akter H, Islam A, Ali Shah M, Kabir R. Parenting: Types, effects and cultural variation . Asian J Ped Res . 2020;3(3):32-36. doi:10.9734/AJPR/2020/v3i330130

Lavrič M, Naterer A. The power of authoritative parenting: A cross-national study of effects of exposure to different parenting styles on life satisfaction . Child Youth Serv Rev . 2020;116:105274. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105274

Jinnah HA, Stoneman Z. Influence of permissive parenting on youth farm risk behaviors . J Agromed . 2016;21(3):244-252. doi:10.1080/1059924X.2016.1179610

Pinquart M. Associations of parenting styles and dimensions with academic achievement in children and adolescents: a meta-analysis . Ed Psychol Rev . 2016;28:475-493. doi:10.1007/s10648-015-9338-y

Kuppens S, Ceulemans E. Parenting styles: A closer look at a well-known concept .  J Child Fam Stud . 2019;28(1):168-181. doi:10.1007/s10826-018-1242-x

Power TG. Parenting dimensions and styles: a brief history and recommendations for future research .  Child Obes . 2013;9 Suppl(Suppl 1):S14–S21. doi:10.1089/chi.2013.0034

Alizadeh Maralani F, Mirnasab M, Hashemi T. The predictive role of maternal parenting and stress on pupils' bullying involvement .  J Interpers Violence . 2019;34(17):3691-3710. doi:10.1177/0886260516672053

Beyarslan SD, Uzer T. Psychological control and indulgent parenting predict emotional-abuse victimization in romantic relationships . Curr Psychol . 2022;41(8):5532-5545. doi:10.1007/s12144-020-01072-w

Bi X, Yang Y, Li H, Wang M, Zhang W, Deater-deckard K. Parenting styles and parent-adolescent relationships: the mediating roles of behavioral autonomy and parental authority . Front Psychol . 2018;9:2187. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02187

Lunkenheimer E, Lichtwarck-Aschoff A, Hollenstein T, Kemp CJ, Granic I. Breaking down the coercive cycle: How parent and child risk factors influence real-time variability in parental responses to child misbehavior . Parenting . 2016;16(4):237-256. doi:10.1080/15295192.2016.1184925

Pinquart M, Kauser R. Do the associations of parenting styles with behavior problems and academic achievement vary by culture? Results from a meta-analysis . Cult Div Ethnic Minor Psychol . 2018;24(1):75-100. doi:10.1037/cdp0000149

Benson JB, Haith MM. Social and Emotional Development in Infancy and Early Childhood .

Macklem GL. Practitioner's Guide to Emotion Regulation in School-Aged Children .

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Parenting Styles: Types, Examples, And Consequences

When you think of how your parent raised you, much of what you remember might be related to their parenting style. Once you become a parent yourself, you develop your style, and this will be a part of what your children will remember, too. Understanding parenting styles and their results can help you become more self-aware and better prepared to be the kind of parent you want to be.

What is a parenting style?

Each parent develops their way of dealing with their child. There are four recognized styles, but because parents often use different parenting styles at various times, each parent has their unique blend of styles. So, what is a style of parenting?

Parenting style: Definition

A style of parenting is a set of strategies you use to raise your child. Researchers have come up with four basic parenting style categories called the Baumrind parenting styles. Each style has its unique characteristics.

Types of parenting styles

The four Baumrind parenting styles are:

Authoritative

Permissive/Indulgent

Uninvolved/Neglectful

Authoritarian/Disciplinarian

Authoritative parenting style

The  authoritative parenting  style is usually considered the most helpful for children in most instances. It is also known as the most effective and  positive parenting  style. When parents are acting in the authoritative style, they focus on nurturing their children. Authoritative parents support their children and respond readily to their needs.

When parents use an authoritative style, they explain things to their children and take the time to listen to them. Authoritative parents reason with their children, although they may not agree with them on all points. Authoritative parents are their children's leaders and guides, as well as the ones who set important rules. The rules they set aren't excessive, but they're clear and consistent.

Authoritative parents expect much of their children, but they allow them to help set their own goals. Rather than pushing their children beyond what they can reasonably do, authoritative parents communicate with them often to help them achieve.

Imagine that a parent would like a child to get involved in after-school activities. If the parent is acting in an authoritative mode, they talk to the child about what kind of activity they would like to do. After listening to the child's opinion, the parent decides whether it is a good option for their child. They tell their child their decision and explain why they chose that option, and make sure that the child genuinely understands. 

The authoritative parent might ask the child how they can help them get started. Authoritative parents make sure the child has what they need for the activity and talks to them frequently about their progress after they begin.

In this example, a teenager has secretly skipped school. The authoritative parent finds out about it and goes to the teen to talk about what happened and why they made that choice. The parent listens to the teen but also explains why they're disappointed and need to set limits.

Earlier in the teen's life, the parent has already let their child know that they always need to go to school unless they have permission to be absent. So, the teen isn't surprised when the parent explains the consequences of their actions. The parent then makes sure the child faces the consequences.

Consequences of authoritative parenting

Children whose parents have mostly used authoritative parenting tend to be healthy and well-adjusted. These children often have the following characteristics:

Independent

Self-controlled

Interested in finding out about their world

Cooperative

Focused on achievement

Permissive or indulgent parenting style

Someone who parents in the permissive style is typically warm and kind to them. However, they don't set limits for them or have any firm expectations for good behavior. They may not know what their child is doing and may not know whether they are displaying maturity appropriate to their age. The parent and the child seem more like friends.

The school year starts, and the child comes home with a form to fill out to choose after-school activities. The permissive parent might look over the sheet and tell the child how fun an activity would be.

However, if the child says they don't want to do any, the parent says it's okay. If they don't want to do it, they don't have to. The parent doesn't try to find out why or talk to the child about why it's a good idea to get involved. The parent drops the subject. 

This is the situation where the teenager skips school. The parent finds out. They might or might not let the teen know that they've discovered they weren't at school. If the parent does ask them about it, they let the child control the conversation. They might tell them what they did was wrong, but even if they do, they don't stand their ground.

A permissive parent doesn't impose punishments or consequences. They don't take any actions to keep the child from skipping again or even show it if they think it's important. A permissive parent tends to want their child to like them, so they don't push.

Consequences of permissive parenting

When a mostly permissive parent raises a child, they don't learn to set their limits. They might act impulsively and show little self-control. At the same time, they may seek to control others. They're typically aimless and don't usually focus on achievement. They're often rebellious.

Uninvolved or neglectful parenting style

People with an uninvolved style of parenting don't respond to their child's needs. They don't make themselves available when their child needs them. They may even seem to reject their child. An uninvolved style of parenting is similar to being neglectful.

If the school sends home information about activities, the uninvolved parent probably won't even look at the sheet. They don't ask the child if they want to do an activity or pay enough attention to notice the child's need to do it.

If the child decides to do the activity, the parent doesn't make sure they have the supplies they need or transportation to get home. Either the child can't keep up, or someone else steps in to provide these things. If someone does take on those parental responsibilities, the child might bond to them and view them as a role model, whether that's a good idea or not.

If the child of an uninvolved parent skips school, the parent typically won't respond at all. The only exception would be if the child's actions had consequences for the parent.

Consequences of uninvolved parenting 

When children have received mostly  neglectful parenting , they tend to think there's something wrong with them. Their self-esteem is low, and they have little self-confidence.

Disciplinarian or authoritarian parenting style

A parent acting in the authoritarian style is a strict disciplinarian. They rarely explain why they make the rules they make, but they expect the child to follow their rules explicitly. They expect their child to do what they want and to do it perfectly. When the child doesn't manage to satisfy them, they punish them.

When the child brings home their list of activities to choose from, the authoritarian parent tells them which one they must do. They don't listen to find out what the child wants. They also set rules about attendance and participation in the activity. They expect the child to excel in the activity, even though they don't nurture them with understanding or support.

If the teenager of an authoritarian parent skips school, the parent immediately goes straight to punishment. They might lecture them about it. Even if they ask them why they skipped, they probably don't want to know. They don't listen or negotiate, regardless of what the teen's reason might be. They aren't interested.

Consequences of authoritarian parenting

Children raised by authoritarian parents tend to be fearful. They usually have low self-esteem. They may be shy and have poor social skills. If the child wants to show someone they love them, their go-to response is obedience. When they're away from the authoritarian parent, they risk them misbehaving in rebellion or never truly expressing themselves.

Using a combined parenting style

As mentioned earlier here, most parents use a combination of styles. This can be helpful to deal with different situations in ways that are appropriate.

For example, if a child could do an afterschool activity, they'll probably have the best outcome if their parent uses an authoritative parenting style, allowing them to have input before the parent makes the final decision. However, in the second scenario, the parent might do the most good for their child by using an authoritarian approach, but with better communication.

Although it can be healthy to use different parenting styles, you must make sure your child knows what to expect from you as much as possible. They need consistent rules and consequences. They also need to be nurtured and supported. It's even okay to indulge your child on rare occasions.

While being a 'helicopter parent' may be harmful, there is little place for uninvolved parenting styles in healthy parenting. Instead, it's best to allow independence when possible, without abandoning or neglecting your child.

What to do if you're concerned about your parenting style

What type of parenting style do you usually use? If you aren't sure, think about how you communicate with and correct your child. You might feel that you could do a better job if you understood parenting better. You might even be worried about what could happen if you continue along on your present course.

Changing to a healthier parenting style might be very helpful for your child and your relationship with them. Making that change is rarely easy. Talking to a therapist can help you learn parenting skills like communication, negotiation, and self-control. When you talk to a licensed counselor at Regain for online therapy, they can help you identify your unique parenting style and refine it to give the child what they need when they need it. You might have been on the wrong track before, but with help, you can parent your child to be a strong, independent, and caring adult.

Understanding parenting style: Frequently asked questions (FAQs)

What are the 4 types of parenting styles.

The four types of parenting styles are:

Authoritarian parenting 

Uninvolved parenting , permissive parenting , authoritative parenting .

Authoritarian parenting, also called disciplinarian style, is a type of parenting that involves setting many rules and demanding perfect adherence to them. The goal is for the parent to be in complete control of their child's behavior (this is a similarity to helicopter parents). With authoritarian parenting, when a child misbehaves, they're punished, and the punishments are often severe. The child is not allowed to question their parents' decisions or make many of their own decision. The parents rule, and the children obey, or they face the consequence that their parents set. Parenting practices of authoritarian parents can often be harsh and feel cold and unloving to the child. 

The uninvolved parenting style, also called neglectful parenting, refers to a parenting style that allows the child to do whatever they want without interference from their parents. They have no one to teach them the best ways to do things, and they often end up being physically hurt because there's no one watching out for them. Their parents don't take care of their needs or teach them what they need to survive when they grow up. The goal of an uninvolved parent is not to be bothered by their children.

The permissive parenting style is similar to uninvolved parenting only because it allows the child to do anything they like. However, in terms of the goal of parenting, the permissive style is different. The permissive parent wants their child to like them, and their parenting reflects that. They set no expectations or limits on their child's behavior at all. In terms of attitude in parenting, permissive parents are happy to do whatever it takes for their child to get what they want at the moment.

Consider all the parenting styles: authoritative, authoritarian, permissive, and uninvolved. Of these, authoritative parents tend to be the most rational. Authoritative parents are the authorities, or experts, on life, but they are not the absolute rulers like authoritarians. Authoritative parents allow their children to have a genuine say, but in the end, they make decisions based on what benefits their child and their family most, both in the short run and in the long-term. Being an authoritative parent means addressing your child's needs and having positive expectations of them. Yet, at the same time, an authoritative parent does set limits. Authoritative parents have rational discussions with their child about the child's goals and needs, listening and explaining so that everyone is on the same page. Read here for more authoritative parenting examples.

Although many experts have described these four parenting styles, another parenting style has been developed in recent years. It's called free-range parenting. Free-range parenting means giving your child freedom to explore their neighborhood, try new things, and have new experiences on their own. The parent's role is to prepare them for these experiences by teaching them the skills they need. Rather than overloading them with tons of structured activities, free-range parents allow their children lots of time for unstructured play. They encourage them to be independent and play outdoors as much as possible. They may have some rules, especially for safety issues, but their main goal is to allow their kids to be kids while developing the skills they need for later life. However, as mentioned above, strong evidence indicates that authoritative parents tend to raise the healthiest, most capable children. 

What is the most effective parenting style?

The link between parenting styles and outcomes for children is undeniable. And each parenting style might be appropriate in specific cases. Yet, of all the parenting styles, authoritative parents seem to get the best results.

In most instances, authoritative parenting is the most effective of all the types of parenting styles. Because their parents listen to them and explain what they need to know about their rules and decisions, the children feel understood and valued. They are more likely to follow the rules and pursue the set goals when they understand them. This is especially true if they had a voice in making those rules or setting those goals. Children learn from their parents how the world works and what they need to do to thrive. They tend to have positive attitudes, rational ways of thinking, and good social skills.

The permissive style of parenting has many drawbacks. The children are in control even though they aren't mature enough to know what's best for them. No one questions their poor decisions or expects them to do anything they aren't eager to do. This sets them up for disappointment and failure later in life. They don't have the skills they need to thrive unless they just happened to want to learn them. When they can't get what they want, the children of permissive parents don't know what to do about it. So, they act out in anger, quit trying, or get into bad habits.

The link between parenting and outcomes couldn't be more evident than with neglectful, uninvolved parenting. The children of uninvolved parents typically have very low self-esteem. After all, their parents showed no signs that they cared anything about them. Because an uninvolved parent's parenting practices are so lacking, the children grow up without any guidance or instruction in life. Thus, they may find it hard to build a life for themselves when they grow up.

As for the authoritarian parenting style, understanding what can happen if you stick to this style alone is critical. The influence of parenting like your child's ruler can show up later when they rebel against society or adopt extreme conformity. They tend to be filled with fear and anxiety and have low self-worth. With the authoritative parents around, the child might be quick to obey, but as soon as they are away from their parents, they tend to do the opposite of what their parents want.

How do I fix bad parenting?

The best way to fix bad parenting is to talk to a therapist about it. Maybe you were the victim of too much of the least helpful parenting styles—authoritarian, neglectful, or indulgent. Or maybe you've used these parenting styles too often, and now your children are behaving in unhealthy ways. Perhaps you would like to be a better parent and do what's most helpful for your children and your family. Maybe you learned about parenting through cultural influences like TV and movies, but now you want to learn more about the best parenting styles from an expert. In any of these cases, a therapist can help you heal the damage from bad parenting and set you on a better path for yourself and your children. Be on the lookout for bad parenting examples such as physical, emotional, and sexual abuse.

So, what can you do to help yourself? First, you can look at your parenting practices and determine what types of parenting styles you've been using. Next, try learning more about authoritative parenting. Put the parenting practices of an authoritative parent to work with your children. You can still use other styles at times if they are more appropriate to the situation. However, remember the relationships between parenting styles and children's behavior. Vary parenting styles as needed but avoid constantly switching from one style to another. Your child needs to know what to expect from you as much as possible.

Your children may need therapy as well, especially if your bad parenting has put them in danger or failed to meet their needs. If you've been a harsh disciplinarian, your child may need some therapy for their anxiety. And if you went through childhood with a bad parent, a therapist can help you understand what happened to you better and guide you as you learn to be a good parent for yourself and your children. If you have survived authoritarian, indulgent, or neglectful parents yourself, it's important to heal from your childhood. 

Can a parent yelling at a child be harmful?

Yes.  As a parent, yelling at your child can have severe consequences. Yelling is verbal abuse, and it can:

Affect the development of a child’s brain

Cause a child to become depressed

Cause medical conditions related to stress

Lead to chronic pain

Increase a child’s bad behavior

Raising children can be frustrating for anyone. That's why even the best parents may want to yell at their kids once in a while. But giving in to that impulse can be harmful to your child, no matter what parenting style you usually use. So, unless the yelling is to warn them of immediate danger, it's best to put a check on those parenting practices and find another way to communicate your message.

Why is authoritative parenting best?

Authoritative parenting has many advantages and benefits. Here are a few benefits that authoritative parents offer:

Children feel loved and valued and learn to value themselves as well

Children tend to behave appropriately

Children have a more positive attitude

Children become good at setting goals and working towards success

Family conflicts tend to be resolved without resorting to verbal or physical abuse

Children have limits as well as opportunities

In the long-term, children of authoritative parents tend to be more successful and happier

What are the 3 basic parenting styles? What is the hardest stage of parenting? What are the hardest parts of parenting? What is unhealthy parenting? What is emotionally abusive parenting?

Parenting styles: Related articles

https://www.regain.us/advice/parenting/what-is-authoritative-parenting-and-how-does-it-affect-children/

https://www.regain.us/advice/parenting/how-to-balance-parenting-marriage/

https://www.regain.us/advice/parenting/the-best-parenting-style-for-you-and-your-kids/

https://www.regain.us/advice/parenting/dealing-with-codependent-parents-how-to-help-them-and-how-to-heal/

https://www.regain.us/advice/parenting/the-top-parenting-fails-and-how-to-avoid-them/

https://www.regain.us/advice/parenting/examples-of-bad-parenting-what-to-do-about-it/

https://www.regain.us/advice/parenting/what-is-positive-parenting-and-how-does-it-work/

Uninvolved Parenting

https://www.regain.us/advice/parenting/the-dangers-of-indulgent-parenting/

https://www.regain.us/advice/parenting/raising-a-child-alone-how-to-win-at-single-parenting/

https://www.regain.us/advice/parenting/parenting-skills-that-every-parent-should-have/

• Does Helicopter Parenting Hurt Your Child’s Future?

4 Types of Parenting Styles

Parenting styles are the practices, behaviors, and attitudes parents use when responding to or interacting with children . Parenting styles include how parents discipline, communicate, make decisions, and socialize children. The 4 types of parenting styles used in studies are authoritative, authoritarian, permissive, and uninvolved .

The first three parenting styles were identified by developmental psychologist Diana Baumrind at the University of California, Berkeley, in her 1967 study, “Child Care Practices Anteceding Three Patterns of Preschool Behavior.” The fourth parenting style, uninvolved or neglectful, was added by Eleanor Maccoby and John Martin at Stanford University in 1983. Maccoby and Martin also identified a conceptual structure combining different levels of demandingness and responsiveness to distinguish the 4 parenting styles in their 1983 book chapter “Socialization in the Context of the Family: Parent-Child Interaction” inside “Handbook of Child Psychology: Socialization, Personality and Social Development” (4th edition), edited by P.H. Mussen.

Baumrind is considered a pioneer of research into parenting styles. Her initial parenting typology and extensive parenting styles psychology studies laid the foundation for later research, according to a 2018 Belgium study, “Parenting Styles: A Closer Look at a Well-Known Concept,” conducted by Sofie Kuppens & Eva Ceulemans at KU Leuven and published in the Journal of Child and Family Studies. The 4 types of parenting styles classified by different levels of demandingness and responsiveness are commonly called the Baumrind parenting styles due to her contribution.

What is the Importance of understanding parenting styles for the development of children?  

The importance of understanding parenting styles for the development of children lies in recognizing how parents’ discipline and interaction with children affect their development and outcomes, including self-esteem, health, risky behavior, school performance, and well-being. Numerous studies have found these findings, including a 2011 UK study, “Parenting Style and Youth Outcomes in the UK,” by Tak Wing Chan and Anita Koo at Oxford University, published in European Sociological Review.

Recognizing the different parenting styles allows parents to make informed decisions when raising a child and avoid ineffective parenting. The parenting style framework enables policymakers to predict child outcomes, design interventions, and allocate resources to help parents.

Table of Contents

1. Authoritative Parenting

Authoritative parenting uses high levels of control or demandingness . Authoritative parenting has high levels of warmth or responsiveness . Authoritative parents have high expectations of their children’s maturity. Parents set clear boundaries and explain the reasons behind family rules. Authoritative parents use positive discipline to teach values and independence rather than to punish.

Authoritative parents are warm, nurturing, and supportive. Parents encourage open communication, listen to children’s perspectives, offer praise, and promote prosocial behavior.

The authoritative parenting style is considered the most effective parenting style by psychologists. The biggest advantage of authoritative parenting is that children have the best outcomes, including adjustment, performance, and mental health. The biggest disadvantage of authoritative parenting is that significant time and energy are needed for parents to be consistently responsive, set clear expectations, and engage in open communication.

The effects of authoritative parenting on children include better self-esteem, emotional regulation, academic success, social competence, and problem-solving.

The authoritative parenting style impacts children’s well-being positively due to how parents assert the power to control children’s behavior, according to Baumrind’s 2012 study “Differentiating between Confrontive and Coercive Kinds of Parental Power-Assertive Disciplinary Practices”, published in Human Development. Baumrind believed that authoritative parents’ confrontive power assertion behavior was associated with competence and mental health in children.

2. Authoritarian Parenting

Authoritarian parenting uses high levels of control or demandingness . Authoritarian parenting involves low levels of warmth or responsiveness . Authoritarian parents have high expectations of conformity. They are highly controlling and intolerant of misbehavior. Authoritarian parents expect children to comply with strict rules without questions. Parents ignore children’s feedback and rely on “because I said so” to substantiate rules. Authoritarian parents use harsh punishment to discipline when children do not meet the “absolute standard” of conduct set by the “authority figure.” Authoritarian parents are cold and insensitive, not nurturing and unsupportive. Authoritarian parents tend to show little affection to their children and often equate children’s fear of punishment with respect.

The biggest advantage of the authoritarian parenting style is that parents often achieve immediate behavioral control in their presence, creating the illusion that their children are always well-behaved. The biggest disadvantage of the authoritarian parenting style is that children often suffer mentally. Children with authoritarian parents tend to have lower self-esteem and life satisfaction and grow up with inferior outcomes, according to a 2007 study, “Maternal and Paternal Parenting Styles in Adolescents: Associations with Self-Esteem, Depression and Life-Satisfaction,” by Avidan Milevsky et al., published in the Journal of Child and Family Studies.

The effects of authoritarian parenting on children include low self-esteem, emotional regulation difficulty, behavioral issues, academic failure, and mental health issues.

Baumrind believed that verbal hostility and psychological control were among the most damaging aspects of authoritarian behaviors, leading to incompetence and maladjustment in adolescents, as detailed in her 2010 study, “Effects of Preschool Parents’ Power Assertive Patterns and Practices on Adolescent Development,” published in Science and Practice.

3. Permissive Parenting

Permissive parenting (indulgent parenting) involves low levels of control or demandingness and high levels of warmth or responsiveness . Permissive parents have minimal expectations of children’s behavior and set few rules. Permissive parents are reluctant to punish when boundaries are crossed. Indulgent parents are warm, open, and nurturing. Indulgent parents promote open communication and children are free to explore and express opinions.

The biggest advantage of the permissive parenting style is that children have high self-confidence, according to a 1991 study, “Patterns of competence and adjustment among adolescents from authoritative, authoritarian, indulgent, and neglectful families,” published in Child Development. The biggest disadvantage of permissive parenting is that children have lower self-control and are more prone to drug abuse.

The effects of permissive parenting on children include impulsivity, lack of self-discipline, poor decision-making, academic underachievement, and entitlement.

Baumrind’s research shows that permissive parents are low on behavioral control and household management, two kinds of demanding practices expected to have beneficial effects on children. Baumrind believes that unconstrained freedom of choice results in indeterminacy and groundlessness rather than empowerment and self-sufficiency. Adolescents from permissive families had significantly lower cognitive competence than those from either authoritative or democratic families, according to Baumrind’s 2010 study, “Effects of Preschool Parents’ Power Assertive Patterns and Practices on Adolescent Development,” published in Parenting: Science and Practice.

4. Uninvolved Parenting

Uninvolved parenting (neglectful parenting) involves low levels of control or demandingness and low levels of warmth or responsiveness . Uninvolved parents are minimally involved in their children’s lives. Parents rarely communicate with children and provide little physical or emotional needs, guidance, or discipline. Children are expected to raise themselves. Uninvolved parents are neglectful, cold, and uncaring and do not respond to their children’s needs.

The biggest advantage of uninvolved parenting is that it requires little effort and allows parents to focus on their needs. The biggest disadvantage of uninvolved parenting is that children have the worst outcomes in self-regulation, achievement, and psychological well-being.

The effects of uninvolved parenting on children include low self-esteem, emotional detachment, difficulty with emotional regulation, poor social skills, and mental health disorders.

Baumrind believes that uninvolved parents are disengaged parents who are not committed. Baumrind expects children from uninvolved families to have the worst outcomes and lowest competence among the four parenting types.

What is a Parenting Style?

Parenting style is a consistent set of strategies for raising children. Parenting style defines a global climate in the home and influences children’s development and well-being . 

The styles of parenting are categorized differently by different researchers, often into three, four, or five types. The construct most often used in psychology research is the four parenting styles proposed by Diana Baumrind at the University of California, Berkeley, and refined by Eleanor Maccoby and John Martin at Stanford University. The four types of parenting styles are authoritative, authoritarian, permissive, and uninvolved.

What is Parenting?

Parenting is the process of raising and nurturing children from infancy to adulthood . Parenting involves providing emotional, social, and physical support to ensure a child’s well-being and development. Parenting activities include teaching, disciplining, and caring for children.

What are the Factors Affecting Parenting Styles?

Factors influencing parenting styles include family upbringing, parenting knowledge, cultural background, socio-economic status, personal characteristics, psychological factors, stress, goals, and expectations . The factors affecting parenting styles are listed below.

• Family Upbringing : The way a parent was brought up in their childhood affects their parenting styles, according to a 2015 study in Canada titled, “Parenting begets parenting: A neurobiological perspective on early adversity and the transmission of parenting styles across generations,” by Clyde Hertzman, Alison S. Fleming et al., published in Neuroscience. The study details how one generation’s parenting styles are neurobiologically transmitted to the next generation through life experiences. For example, a child raised by an authoritarian parenting style tends to become an authoritarian parent.
• Parenting Knowledge : When parents lack accurate information on child development, effective parenting, and family dynamics, they adopt familiar parenting styles. For most parents, this familiar style is the one they experienced during their upbringing. For example, parents raised by authoritarian parents may not realize that being firm and kind is possible. Their experience is limited to a firm and harsh parenting style, leaving them unaware of alternative approaches.
• Cultural Backgrounds : Parenting styles are influenced by cultural backgrounds that share specific values, beliefs, customs, and practices. For example, in collectivist cultures emphasizing obedience and conformity, parents tend to adopt a more authoritarian parenting style.
• Socio-economic Status (SES) : Socio-economic status varies in income, education, occupation, and social status. SES significantly affects parenting style by affecting family resources and opportunities. For example, limited resources in lower-income families experience more stress, resulting in more authoritarian or neglectful parenting styles.
• Personal Characteristics : Individual personality traits, behaviors, and temperaments define a parent’s characteristics. These characteristics influence the parent’s actions and decisions. For example, agreeable parents are more supportive. Agreeable parents tend to be authoritative, according to a 2010 research in the Netherlands titled “Personality and parenting style in parents of adolescents,” by Rutger CME Engels et al., published in the Journal of Adolescence.
• Psychological Factors : Parents and children’s mental and emotional states influence their interactions. For example, parents with low self-efficacy tend to give up easily when faced with parental difficulties and, therefore, adopt an authoritarian style to control using harsh discipline, according to a 2022 study in China titled “Impact of Parenting Style on Early Childhood Learning: Mediating Role of Parental Self-Efficacy” by Kong, Chuibin and Fakhra Yasmin, published in Frontiers in Psychology.
• Parenting Stress : Parental stress affects parenting style by impacting how parents interact with their children and manage daily challenges. Elevated stress levels lead to less patience, irritability, and inconsistent disciplinary practices. A stressed parent often reacts more harshly to minor misbehavior or struggles to provide the emotional support their child needs.
• Parental Goals and Expectations : Parental goals and expectations shape parents’ strategies and behaviors. For example, some parents with high academic expectations adopt a more authoritative or structured parenting style, emphasizing discipline and routine to ensure academic success.

What Are The Signs During Pregnancy That Might Suggest A Future Parenting Style?

Signs during pregnancy that might suggest a future parenting style include a mother’s emotional responses, preparation, childhood experiences, and relationship with her partner . Signs during pregnancy that indicate a future parenting style are listed below.

• Sensitivity : Being empathetic and responsive to the baby’s movements or kicks suggests a nurturing and attentive parenting style.
• Anxiety : Experiencing heightened anxiety or worry about the baby’s well-being indicates a protective or overprotective parenting style.
• Stress Management : How one deals with pregnancy-related stress reflects future stress management in parenting situations.
• Research : Researching different styles and theories suggests you are invested in understanding and preparing for your role as a parent. Active seeking information on child development and parenting techniques suggests an authoritative or involved parenting style.
• Preparation level : Meticulously planning for the baby’s arrival (e.g., setting up nurseries and attending classes) suggests a more structured parenting approach.
• Upbringing : A mother’s upbringing and childhood experiences often affect her parenting style.
• Family Influences : Opinions and advice from parents and family members sometimes affect one’s parenting style.
• Shared Values : Aligned views on parenting in a couple set the foundation for a consistent and harmonious parenting approach.
• Communication : Open and effective communication between partners about parenting expectations and concerns contributes to a positive and supportive parenting dynamic.
• Pregnancy decisions and plans : Willingness to adapt pregnancy and birth plans suggests flexibility in future parenting decisions.
• Attitude towards advice : Openness to or rejection of unsolicited advice reflects how receptive a mother is to parenting suggestions later.

Some behaviors and attitudes during pregnancy offer insights into potential parenting approaches, but they are not definitive predictors because parenting styles evolve and change over time. Parenting styles often change in response to the experience of raising a child and the child’s unique temperament and needs.

What are the Impacts of Parenting Styles on Children?

Impacts of parenting styles on children include the child’s academic success, mental well-being, self-esteem, behavior, emotional intelligence, parent-child relationship, social skills, and future relationships . Below are 8 key impacts of parenting styles on child development .

• Academics : Parenting style affects children’s school performance and overall learning through the level of support provided. For example, authoritative parents, who are supportive and set high expectations, tend to have children who achieve higher academically.
• Mental Health : Parenting style influences the mental well-being of children by creating an emotional climate at home. For example, nurturing authoritative parents raise kids with better mental health, while harsh authoritarian parents create a hostile environment, leading to anxiety in children.
• Self-Esteem : Parenting style shapes a child’s sense of self-worth and confidence through daily interactions. Warm and nurturing parents foster higher self-confidence in their children, whereas neglectful and uninvolved parents can cause children to feel unworthy of love, resulting in low self-esteem.
• Behavioral Outcomes : Parenting style affects children’s behavior through the standards set for conduct and the discipline and guidance provided. For example, permissive parenting may result in behavioral issues due to a lack of boundaries.
• Emotional Intelligence : Parenting style can influence a child’s ability to understand and manage emotions. For example, authoritative parenting enhances emotional intelligence by modeling and teaching empathy and emotional regulation.
• Parent-Child Relationships : Parenting style directly impacts the parent-child relationship. For example, authoritative parenting fosters strong, positive relationships through open communication and mutual respect, while authoritarian parenting can strain relationships due to fear and lack of trust.
• Social Skills : Different parenting styles affect children’s social skills by modeling human interactions and helping them develop emotional regulation. For example, permissive parenting may lead to difficulties in peer interactions due to a lack of discipline and regulation. In contrast, authoritative parenting promotes healthy social relationships by teaching social skills and empathy.
• Adult Relationships : Parenting style models interaction and communication with others, preparing children for adult relationships. For example, authoritarian parenting may result in difficulties due to poor conflict resolution skills, whereas adults raised by authoritative parents often form more stable and satisfying relationships.

Is the Authoritative Parenting Style Considered the Best Parenting Style in Child Psychology?

Yes, the authoritative parenting style is considered the best parenting style in child psychology. Authoritative parenting is consistently associated with the best outcomes in children’s outcomes, including social competence, academic achievement, mental health, physical health, behavior, and adjustment, according to a 2014 study, “Consequences of Parenting on Adolescent Outcomes,” conducted by Donna Hancock Hoskins of Bridgewater College and published in Societies.

What is the Unhealthiest Parenting Style for a Child?

The unhealthiest parenting style for a child is generally considered to be the uninvolved parenting style because it leaves the child without the basic necessities and emotional support they need to develop into healthy adults . Uninvolved or neglectful parenting style is linked most frequently to more serious delinquency trajectories in adolescent boys, according to a 2008 study, “Trajectories of Delinquency and Parenting Styles,” by Machteld Hoeve, Judith Semon Dubas, Rolf Loeber, et al., published in the Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology.

However, other studies have found that the authoritarian parenting style is just as detrimental as the uninvolved parenting style in some aspects. For example, both authoritarian parenting and uninvolved parenting are associated with the lowest levels of self-esteem and psychosocial maturity and the highest levels of emotional maladjustment, according to a 2019 study titled “Raising Children with Poor School Performance: Parenting Styles and Short- and Long-Term Consequences for Adolescent and Adult Development,” by Oscar F. Garcia and Emilia Serra of the University of Valencia, published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.

Can Two Parents Have Different Parenting Styles?

Yes, it is common for two parents to have different parenting styles , according to a 2020 systematic review of 31 studies from more than 15 countries with a total 20,359 sample size. This study, titled “Systematic review of the differences between mothers and fathers in parenting styles and practices,” is conducted by Yosi Yaffe in the Faculty of Education, Ohalo Academic College, and published in Current Psychology. The findings reveal that the children perceive mothers to be more accepting, responsive, supportive, and more behaviorally controlling, demanding, and autonomy-granting than fathers. Mothers are more authoritative than fathers, and fathers are more authoritarian than mothers, according to parents and children in the studies.

Can a Parent Change their Parenting Style?

Yes, parents can change their parenting style over time. Over half (53.6%) of adolescents experienced shifts in parenting styles in a 2014 Denmark study, “Parenting Style Transitions and Delinquency,” by Ryan D. Schroeder and Thomas J. Mowen, published in Youth & Society. The most common shift was from authoritative to permissive parenting. The shifts were likely driven by a combination of factors, including parents’ ongoing personal development, stressful life events (such as divorce or job loss), the child’s evolving behavior and needs, the inherently tumultuous nature of adolescence, and normal developmental processes as children age and require different levels of parental supervision and control.

Is Mixing Parenting Style a Good Idea?

Yes, mixing parenting styles is a good idea if at least one of the styles is the authoritative type. Multiple studies have shown that families with at least one authoritative parent have better outcomes than those without authoritative parents. Having two authoritative parents is optimal, while having two neglectful parents leads to the worst consequences, according to a 2011 study in the Netherlands titled “Maternal and Paternal Parenting Styles: Unique and Combined Links to Adolescent and Early Adult Delinquency” by Hoeve, Machteld, Judith Semon Dubas, et al., published in the Journal of Adolescence. Therefore, mixing parenting styles is beneficial when one or both styles are authoritative.

Can Narcissistic Parenting Have a Negative Impact on Child Development?

Yes, narcissistic parenting can negatively impact child development. Children of narcissistic parents tend to suffer from developmental trauma in adulthood, according to a 2016 study, “Narcissism, Parenting, Complex Trauma: The Emotional Consequences Created for Children by Narcissistic Parents,” conducted by Donna M. Mahoney at the Illinois School of Professional Psychology/Schaumburg, and published in The Practitioner Scholar: Journal of the International Trauma Training Institute.

Narcissistic people are characterized by grandiosity, self-centeredness, and a lack of empathy, resulting in troubled interpersonal relationships with partners and children. Narcissistic parenting is a non-authoritative parenting style, according to a 2017 UK study, “The children of narcissus: Insights into narcissists’ parenting styles.” by Hart, Claire M. et al. of the University of Southampton and the University of Surrey, published in Personality and Individual Differences. The study has found that narcissists’ low empathy predicts unresponsive caregiving towards children, resulting in a non-optimal (authoritative) parenting style.

What are other Factors that Affect Child Growth and Development?

Other factors that affect child growth and development include genetics, attachment styles, family dynamics, nutrition, socioeconomic status, environment, and culture . Seven factors that affect children’s growth and development are listed below.

• Genetics : Genetics influences a child’s physical attributes, susceptibility to certain diseases, and potential for cognitive abilities. Genetics also affect a child’s temperament and interactions with the environment.
• Attachment Style : A secure attachment fosters emotional stability and confidence, while an insecure attachment can lead to emotional and social difficulties.
• Family Dynamics : Positive family dynamics provide emotional support and stability, whereas negative dynamics can lead to stress and behavioral issues.
• Nutrition : Proper nutrition is crucial for physical growth, brain development, and overall health; malnutrition can lead to developmental delays and health problems.
• Socioeconomic status (SES) : Higher SES often provides better access to education, healthcare, and enrichment activities, whereas lower SES can limit these opportunities and increase stress.
• Environment : A stimulating and safe environment encourages exploration and learning, while a deprived or unsafe environment can hinder development.
• Culture : Cultural values and practices shape social behaviors, learning styles, and developmental expectations, influencing a child’s growth and development trajectory.

How Does Parenting Style Influence Attachment Style in Children?

Parenting style influences children’s attachment styles by shaping their perceptions of themselves, the world, and their relationships. Through parenting practices and interactions, children form attachment styles that reflect their self-worth. Responsive parenting causes secure attachment, while unresponsive parenting leads to insecure attachment, according to a 2006 study, “Responsive Parenting: Establishing Early Foundations for Social, Communication, and Independent Problem-Solving Skills,” by Susan H. Landry et al., published in Developmental Psychology.

Authoritative and permissive parents are responsive, warm, and nurturing. Therefore, authoritative and permissive parenting styles tend to result in secure attachment styles in children. Authoritarian and uninvolved parents are unresponsive, cold, and distant. Authoritarian and uninvolved parenting styles likely result in insecure attachment styles, such as ambivalent, avoidant, and disorganized attachment styles.

Disclaimer: The content of this article is intended for informational purposes only and should not be considered medical advice. Always consult your healthcare provider for medical concerns.

Personalize Your Experience

Log in or create an account for a personalized experience based on your selected interests.

Already have an account? Log In

Free standard shipping is valid on orders of $45 or more (after promotions and discounts are applied, regular shipping rates do not qualify as part of the $45 or more) shipped to US addresses only. Not valid on previous purchases or when combined with any other promotional offers.

Register for an enhanced, personalized experience.

Receive free access to exclusive content, a personalized homepage based on your interests, and a weekly newsletter with topics of your choice.

Home / Parenting, Kids & Teens / The 4 types of parenting styles: What style is right for you?

The 4 types of parenting styles: What style is right for you?

Please login to bookmark.

Username or Email Address

Remember Me

A parent’s job is to prepare their children to be adults who are capable of taking care of themselves and overcoming difficulties. It’s not an easy job. Parents have to set appropriate limits, watch their children fail and let them feel the consequences of their actions. Sometimes parents even endure the harsh screams of “I hate you!” or other painful words.

“I tell parents that it’s OK for your kids to be mad at you and not like you because of the limit you set,” said Hannah L. Mulholland, LICSW, MSW, a Mayo Clinic pediatric social worker. “You’re the best person in the world for them not to like and be mad at because you’re the one person who’s not going to desert them. You’re still going to love them, even when they’re mad at you. But for many parents, the reason they don’t set limits is because they want to be liked.”

Parenting is about supporting children while they make their own mistakes, take on age-appropriate responsibilities, think for themselves and solve their own problems. How you do that is up to you.

For example, you can let your kids choose how and when to do their homework — but also let them know that if they don’t do it, there may be consequences at school. “Let your kid be distressed. Let your kid make mistakes,” Mulholland says. “That’s how they learn.”

Kids who don’t learn might enter the adult world woefully unprepared or even afraid because they don’t know how to have relationships, do their laundry or manage their money. “They get in over their heads because they don’t really know what their own capacity is,” Mulholland says.

4 parenting styles

There are four main parenting styles: authoritarian, authoritative, permissive and neglectful. You don’t have to commit to one style. It’s natural to use different styles in different situations. When safety is at stake, a parent might use a firm authoritarian style that leaves no room for negotiation. But a parent might put consequences on hold and lean into a permissive approach to encourage a teenager to call for help if they put themselves in a dangerous situation.

“As parents, we are all doing the best we can each day,” Mulholland says. “Our intentions are always good, but we struggle to execute depending on our own capacity in the moment. Give yourself a break as a parent and recognize your own limits. All of the advice in this article is for when you are your very best self, not necessarily something you can implement all the time.”

Here’s a look at each of the four styles.

Authoritative parenting style

Authoritative parenting is often considered the ideal style for its combination of warmth and flexibility while still making it clear that the parents are in charge. (3) Children of authoritative parents know what is expected of them. Their parents explain reasons for the rules and consequences for breaking them. Parents also listen to their child’s opinions, but the parent remains the ultimate decision maker.

Authoritative parents develop close, nurturing relationships with their children. Children with authoritative parents tend to grow up confident, responsible and capable of managing their emotions. They are also friendly, curious and achievement-oriented.

What is an example of authoritative parenting style?

One place where parenting style shows is at mealtimes. Authoritative parents have more family meals where the parents model eating behaviors — rather than imposing strict restrictions. The parents will include the children in meal preparation. Perhaps the child will choose what’s for dinner one night a week or choose the side dish. Research shows that children of authoritative mothers have a high quality of diet and eat more fruit than children from different parenting styles.

Permissive parenting style

Permissive parents might pride themselves on being their child’s best friend. These parents are warm and nurturing with open communication. They are actively involved in their children’s emotional well-being. They also have low expectations and use discipline sparingly. Permissive parents let children make their own choices, but also bail them out if it doesn’t go well.

Children of permissive parents have the freedom to make decisions like what to eat, when to go to bed and whether to do their homework. These children tend to have good self-esteem and social skills. But they can be impulsive, demanding and lack the ability to self-regulate. (1) Permissive parents often try to control their child’s environment, so the child doesn’t have to experience rejection or failure. This means the child might enter adulthood unprepared.

What is an example of permissive parenting style?

When it comes to food, permissive parents might have lax rules. They allow the children to choose what they want, even if that means the parents make a special meal. This could lead to picky eating and unhealthy diet choices. Permissive parenting is associated with lower fruit and vegetable intake. It may also result in inexperience in trying new things or going with the flow and difficulty in social settings involving food.

Authoritarian parenting style

Authoritarian parenting uses strict rules, high standards and punishment to regulate the child’s behavior. Authoritarian parents have high expectations and are not flexible on them. The children might not even know a rule is in place until they’re punished for breaking it.

Children of authoritarian parents are good at following instructions and behave well. However, these children might grow up with a fear of punishment and lack experience making their own decisions. As a result, some might become aggressively rebellious, lack social skills and may have difficulty making sound decisions on their own.

What is an example of authoritarian parenting style? 

At mealtimes, authoritarian parents might enforce rules, such as the children eat the same meal as everyone else or finish everything on their plate. However, the family is unlikely to discuss why they eat certain foods and how they fit into their culture or affect a child’s health.

Neglectful parenting style

Neglectful parents fulfill the child’s basic needs, but then pay little attention to the child. These parents tend to offer minimal nurturing and have few expectations or limitations for their child. It’s not always a conscious choice parents make, but can be forced by circumstance, such as the need to work late shifts, single parenting, mental health concerns or overall family troubles.

Children of neglectful parents usually grow up to be resilient and self-sufficient out of necessity. They might have trouble controlling emotions, don’t develop effective coping strategies and they have difficulty maintaining social relationships. They tend to have low self-esteem and might seek out inappropriate role models.

What is an example of neglectful parenting style?

Parents who are uninvolved might not buy groceries or plan meals consistently. That could leave the child concerned about when they will next eat. It can lead them to become preoccupied with food. Children who had neglectful parents often overeat when food is available and may become overweight. But these children often have an easier time leaving home when it’s time.

How do I make sure I don’t mess up my child?

There’s no parenting style that is guaranteed to produce perfectly adjusted children. Nobody’s child is going to go through life universally liked and immune to failure or disappointment. Mulholland says everyone experiences difficulties. “It’s just unrealistic to say that a parenting decision is the reason for that.”

Since children will inevitably go through difficult moments, it’s best to equip them with the ability to bounce back. It helps if kids have had some practice from being allowed to try and fail in a safe environment.

For example, if a child played video games instead of studying, they might do poorly on the test. That’s how they learn that they need to manage their time better. But if you let them stay home “sick” to get an extra day to study, they won’t have learned a lesson.

A lot of parents see their child’s successes or failures as a reflection of themselves as a parent. But it’s the parent’s job to give the child the tools they need, not to control the situation.

“I’m always reminding parents that those aren’t your grades,” Mulholland says. “That’s not your college that they end up going to. That’s on them. You shouldn’t measure your worth as a parent on how successful your children are.”

How can parents change their parenting style?

If you find that your child is having some behavior issues, you might decide you need to adjust your parenting style. Behavior change can be as difficult for parents as it is for kids.

Mulholland recommends thinking back to your own childhood and what worked for you and what didn’t. Some people had parents who were very strict. The child wasn’t allowed to talk at the table and was punished severely. As a result, when they became a parent, they went the other way and became permissive. But perhaps a middle ground would work better. As you reflect on your own parenting, think about why you react the way you do.

If you want to change your parenting style, look into parenting workshops. Many schools or early childhood centers offer classes or can refer you to one. Mulholland also recommends the book, How to Talk So Kids Will Listen & Listen So Kids Will Talk . A mental health therapist can also help you work through issues from your own childhood and find a parenting approach that will work for your family.

Which parenting style is most encouraged?

Authoritative parenting is the most recommended parenting style . The combination of clear communication and age-appropriate standards can lead to emotionally stable adults who can handle themselves in social situations and set goals for themselves.

To take an authoritative approach, parents can:

• Set clear boundaries and communicate them to children.
• Offer children choices and have discussions about what’s appropriate. For example, you can choose which pajamas you want to wear to bed. You cannot wear your winter coat to bed because it will be too warm.
• Listen to and explore their children’s emotional health concerns.
• Frequently express love and affection.

A helpful approach can be to use praise and positive reinforcement to encourage desired behavior. Ignore annoying, but not dangerous, attempts at getting attention, such as banging on a wall or whining. You also can tell children, “I’ll wait and respond to you when you stop whining.”

Another approach is to reward children with something they want. For example, instead of taking away their tablet until they do their homework, use it as a reward. “I’m going to give you your tablet as soon as you’re done with your homework.” That way the tablet is a reinforcer instead of a consequence.

How to set limits for children

A big part of parenting is setting rules and limits for your children. A metaphor from Russell A. Barkley, Ph.D. , suggests thinking of parenting like enclosing a pasture for your sheep. You build a fence and put things the sheep need in the pasture — plus some fun things to play with. Then let the sheep roam around within their limits.

“You don’t tell the sheep ‘You need to only be in this corner.’ Or ‘You need to only eat that type of flower,'” Mulholland explains. “They’re likely to run into the good flowers and eat the good stuff. But you’re also going to have the fence around them. So there’s a limit as to how far they can go.”

The same with children. As the parents, you set the limits and provide children with food to eat and toys to play with. As the children show they’re being responsible and can handle more, you can expand their boundaries.

Setting limits together

As much as you can, decide with your child what your limits are ahead of time. For example, before the start of a new school year, decide on your limits for weekday screen time, after-school snacks or homework rules.

If you’re trying to make rules on the fly, you’re more likely to be inconsistent from day to day. If you decide that the kids get 90 minutes of screen time on a school night, then you can always hold to that, and the kids know what to expect.

If you have a spouse or co-parent, discuss limits together. It’s common for two parents to have different ideas of what’s appropriate, so it’s helpful to set the boundaries together. And whether you live in the same house or not, try to maintain the same basic limits.

“The most important thing is — in front of the child — you 100% have your partner’s back, even if you disagree wholeheartedly with how they approached it. In front of the child, you have to have their back,” Mulholland says. “In the moment you say, ‘Yep. Dad said eat your broccoli. ‘” If you would have done things differently, talk to your partner about it away from the kids.

Your relationship with a grown child

Parenting style also plays a role in the relationship between parents and their children when they become adults. Kids who had strict, inflexible parents might not have a close relationship as adults. Kids of permissive parents might come back for help frequently when they are in a bind. Kids who grew up with encouraging, supportive parents tend to have close relationships with their parents. They will be independent, but still go to their parents for advice.

“The best-case scenario is they’re still keeping you involved in their life,” Mulholland says. “They’re telling you about the hardships and maybe even seeking advice, but they’re also not expecting you to fix everything.”

Relevant reading

My Life Beyond Vaccines

While Grace waits to see her doctor, she finds an old book that transports her to “once upon a time …” In the old kingdom, four dragons are making people sick. One young warrior sets out to gather each of the dragons’ stones, which hold the key to protection. The…

Discover more Parenting, Kids & Teens content from articles, podcasts, to videos.

Want more children’s health and parenting information? Sign up for free to our email list.

Children’s health information and parenting tips to your inbox.

Sign-up to get Mayo Clinic’s trusted health content sent to your email. Receive a bonus guide on ways to manage your child’s health just for subscribing.

You May Also Enjoy

by Matthew D. Dacy

Privacy Policy

We've made some updates to our Privacy Policy. Please take a moment to review.

Our systems are now restored following recent technical disruption, and we’re working hard to catch up on publishing. We apologise for the inconvenience caused. Find out more: https://www.cambridge.org/universitypress/about-us/news-and-blogs/cambridge-university-press-publishing-update-following-technical-disruption

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings .

Login Alert

• > The Cambridge Handbook of Parenting
• > Parenting From a Cultural and Global Perspective: A Review of Theoretical Models and Parenting Research in Diverse Cultural Contexts

Book contents

• The Cambridge Handbook of Parenting
• Cambridge Handbooks in Psychology
• Copyright page
• Contributors
• Introduction
• Part I Foundations of Parenting
• 1 Foundational Theories and the Establishment of Parenting Science Research
• 2 Parenting, Challenges, Brain Development, and Attachment Strategies
• 3 Parenting and Brain Development
• 4 Parenting and Children’s Social and Emotional Development: Emotion Socialization across Childhood and Adolescence
• 5 Parents Matter: The Cornerstone for Children’s Cognitive and Language Development
• 6 Discipline and Punishment in Child Development
• 7 Parenting From a Cultural and Global Perspective: A Review of Theoretical Models and Parenting Research in Diverse Cultural Contexts
• Part II Parenting across Development: Social, Emotional, and Cognitive Influences
• Part III Parental Factors That Impact Parenting
• Part IV Child Factors that Impact Parenting
• Part V Parent Education, Intervention and Policy

7 - Parenting From a Cultural and Global Perspective: A Review of Theoretical Models and Parenting Research in Diverse Cultural Contexts

from Part I - Foundations of Parenting

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 December 2022

In this chapter, we begin with the definition of culture and a discussion of theoretical frameworks for understanding the influences of culture on parenting. We discuss the meta-analysis studies examining the links of parenting styles and child outcomes across culture groups. We then provide a qualitative review of selected empirical studies on parenting in four cultural contexts: (1) low- to middle-income countries of sub-Saharan Africa, (2) Southeast Asian countries, (3) refugee families from sub-Saharan Africa and Southeast Asia, and (4) refugee and immigrant families in Western destination countries. These four cultural contexts were selected because: (1) parenting practices in these cultural contexts have been understudied, despite the strong need for research-based interventions to prevent/reduce risks and promote resilience in children living in those communities; and (2) the unique sociocultural characteristics or processes of these contexts create several new directions for parenting research. Implications of the research findings for policy and intervention are also discussed. We conclude the chapter with a summary of new themes in the research on culture and parenting.

Access options

Save book to kindle.

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle .

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service .

• Parenting From a Cultural and Global Perspective: A Review of Theoretical Models and Parenting Research in Diverse Cultural Contexts
• By Qing Zhou , Sara Chung
• Edited by Amanda Sheffield Morris , Oklahoma State University , Julia Mendez Smith , University of North Carolina, Greensboro
• Book: The Cambridge Handbook of Parenting
• Online publication: 01 December 2022
• Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108891400.009

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox .

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive .

Advertisement

Parenting Styles: A Closer Look at a Well-Known Concept

• Original Paper
• Open access
• Published: 18 September 2018
• Volume 28 , pages 168–181, ( 2019 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Sofie Kuppens   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-3433-0465 1 , 2 &
• Eva Ceulemans 3  

163k Accesses

144 Citations

323 Altmetric

53 Mentions

Explore all metrics

Although parenting styles constitute a well-known concept in parenting research, two issues have largely been overlooked in existing studies. In particular, the psychological control dimension has rarely been explicitly modelled and there is limited insight into joint parenting styles that simultaneously characterize maternal and paternal practices and their impact on child development. Using data from a sample of 600 Flemish families raising an 8-to-10 year old child, we identified naturally occurring joint parenting styles. A cluster analysis based on two parenting dimensions (parental support and behavioral control) revealed four congruent parenting styles: an authoritative, positive authoritative, authoritarian and uninvolved parenting style. A subsequent cluster analysis comprising three parenting dimensions (parental support, behavioral and psychological control) yielded similar cluster profiles for the congruent (positive) authoritative and authoritarian parenting styles, while the fourth parenting style was relabeled as a congruent intrusive parenting style. ANOVAs demonstrated that having (positive) authoritative parents associated with the most favorable outcomes, while having authoritarian parents coincided with the least favorable outcomes. Although less pronounced than for the authoritarian style, having intrusive parents also associated with poorer child outcomes. Results demonstrated that accounting for parental psychological control did not yield additional parenting styles, but enhanced our understanding of the pattern among the three parenting dimensions within each parenting style and their association with child outcomes. More similarities than dissimilarities in the parenting of both parents emerged, although adding psychological control slightly enlarged the differences between the scores of mothers and fathers.

Similar content being viewed by others

Parenting Styles and Child Well-Being

Intensive Parenting and the Expansion of Parenting

Facets of Adult Social Competence as Predictors of Parenting Style

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Parenting has gained ample research attention from various scientific disciplines. Many theoretical frameworks emphasize that parenting plays a vital role in child development, which has fueled research investigating the impact of parenting on child development for over 75 years. When studying parenting, researchers can take various strategies by considering parenting practices, parenting dimensions or parenting styles. Parenting practices can be defined as directly observable specific behaviors that parents use to socialize their children (Darling and Steinberg 1993 ). For example, parenting practices intended to promote academic achievement are showing involvement by attending parent–teacher meetings or regular supervision of children’s homework. Other parenting practices pertain to positive reinforcement, discipline, or problem solving.

Rather than focusing on specific parenting practices, other researchers have identified overarching parenting dimensions that reflect similar parenting practices, mostly by modeling the relationships among these parenting practices using factor analytic techniques. There is consensus among scientists about the existence of at least two broad dimensions of parenting, labeled parental support and parental control. Parental support pertains to the affective nature of the parent-child relationship, indicated by showing involvement, acceptance, emotional availability, warmth, and responsivity (Cummings et al. 2000 ). Support has been related to positive development outcomes in children, such as the prevention of alcohol abuse and deviance (Barnes and Farrell 1992 ), depression and delinquency (Bean et al. 2006 ) and externalizing problem behavior (Shaw et al. 1994 ).

The control dimension has been subdivided into psychological and behavioral control (Barber 1996 ; Schaefer 1965 ; Steinberg 1990 ). Parental behavioral control consists of parenting behavior that attempts to control, manage or regulate child behavior, either through enforcing demands and rules, disciplinary strategies, control of rewards and punishment, or through supervisory functions (Barber 2002 ; Maccoby 1990 ; Steinberg 1990 ). An appropriate amount of behavioral control has been considered to positively affect child development, whereas insufficient (e.g., poor parental monitoring) or excessive behavioral control (e.g., parental physical punishment) has been commonly associated with negative child developmental outcomes, such as deviant behavior, misconduct, depression and anxious affect (e.g., Barnes and Farrell 1992 ; Coie and Dodge 1998 ; Galambos et al. 2003 ; Patterson et al. 1984 ). While parental behavioral control refers to control over the child’s behavior, parental psychological control pertains to an intrusive type of control in which parents attempt to manipulate children’s thoughts, emotions, and feelings (Barber 1996 ; Barber et al. 2005 ). Due to its manipulative and intrusive nature, psychological control has almost exclusively been associated with negative developmental outcomes in children and adolescents, such as depression, antisocial behaviour and relational regression (e.g., Barber and Harmon 2002 ; Barber et al. 2005 ; Kuppens et al. 2013 ). The three parenting dimensions (support, psychological control, and behavioral control) have been labelled conceptually distinct, although they are related to some extent (Barber et al. 2005 ; Soenens et al. 2012 ).

Other authors have taken yet a different approach to studying parenting by emphasizing that specific combinations of parenting practices within a parent particularly impact child development rather than separate parenting practices or dimensions (e.g., Baumrind 1991 ; Maccoby and Martin 1983 ). Within such a configurational approach, one examines which patterns of parenting practices occur within the same parent and how these patterns—commonly labelled as parenting styles— are related to children’s development. Such parenting styles have the clear advantage of accounting for different parenting practices at the same time within the same person. As such, it comprises a person–centered approach that focuses on configurations within individuals rather than a variable–centered approach that focuses on relationships among variables across individuals as has been used to identify parenting dimensions (Magnusson 1998 ).

Baumrind ( 1966 , 1967 , 1971 ) is commonly considered a pioneer of research into parenting styles. She introduced a typology with three parenting styles to describe differences in normal parenting behaviors: the authoritarian, authoritative and permissive parenting style. Baumrind ( 1971 ) suggested that authoritarian parents try to shape, control, and evaluate their children’s behavior based on the absolute set of standards; whereas permissive parents are warmer and more autonomy granting than controlling. She considered an authoritative parenting style to fall between those two extremes. Later on in the 1980s, Maccoby and Martin ( 1983 ) attempted to bridge Baumrind’s typology and parenting dimensions. Based on the combination of two dimensions – demandingness and responsiveness – they defined four parenting styles: authoritative (i.e., high demandingness and high responsiveness); authoritarian (i.e., high demandingness and low responsiveness); indulgent (i.e., low demandingness and high responsiveness); and neglectful (i.e., low demandingness and low responsiveness). These two parenting dimensions are similar, yet not identical to the dimensions ‘parental support’ and ‘parental behavioral control’. Based on Maccoby and Martin’s work, Baumrind ( 1989 , 1991 ) expanded her typology with a fourth parenting style, namely the ‘neglectful’ parenting style.

Maccoby and Martin ( 1983 ) research efforts primarily focused on the configuration of the parenting styles and to a lesser extent on their association with children’s development. Baumrind, in contrast, has also extensively studied the association between parenting styles and child development (1967, 1971, 1989, 1991). This work consistently demonstrated that youth of authoritative parents had the most favorable development outcomes; authoritarian and permissive parenting were associated with negative developmental outcomes; while outcomes for children of neglectful parents were poorest. These aforementioned associations have also been replicated by other researchers. An authoritative parenting style has consistently been associated with positive developmental outcomes in youth, such as psychosocial competence (e.g., maturation, resilience, optimism, self-reliance, social competence, self-esteem) and academic achievement (e.g., Baumrind 1991 ; Lamborn et al. 1991 ; Steinberg et al. 1994 ). Findings regarding permissive/indulgent parenting have been inconsistent yielding associations with internalizing (i.e., anxiety, depression, withdrawn behavior, somatic complaints) and externalizing problem behavior (i.e., school misconduct, delinquency), but also with social skills, self–confidence, self–understanding and active problem coping (e.g., Lamborn et al. 1991 ; Steinberg et al. 1994 ; Williams et al. 2009 ; Wolfradt et al. 2003 ). An authoritarian parenting style has consistently been associated with negative developmental outcomes, such as aggression, delinquent behaviors, somatic complaints, depersonalisation and anxiety (e.g., Hoeve et al. 2008 ; Steinberg et al. 1994 ; Williams et al. 2009 ; Wolfradt et al. 2003 ). Children of neglectful parents have shown the least favorable outcomes on multiple domains, such as lacking self-regulation and social responsibility, poor self-reliance and social competence, poor school competence, antisocial behavior and delinquency, anxiety, depression and somatic complaints (e.g., Baumrind 1991 ; Hoeve et al. 2008 ; Lamborn et al. 1991 ; Steinberg et al. 1994 ).

Baumrind’s typology (1966) was initially determined on theoretical grounds, although with time she did conduct empirical validation research (1967, 1971, 1989, 1991). Nonetheless, the empirical studies always started with parenting styles that were predefined in a prototypical score profile in terms of minimum or maximum limit scores (e.g., scores above or below the median) on the different parenting practices; thus parents were first classified using cut–off scores for these predefined parenting styles and afterwards associations with child developmental outcomes were examined. However, such a confirmatory approach is not preferred to investigate parenting styles types (Mandara 2003 ) as it does not allow the identification of the naturally occurring typology, because people are actually forced into some predefined category defined on theoretical grounds. To empirically identify typologies in a certain population an exploratory clustering approach is needed (Everitt et al. 2001 ; Mandara 2003 ). Such clustering methods entail that persons are assessed on different variables (e.g., parenting practices) and patterns that naturally occur in the data are identified. Persons with a similar score profile are classified in the same cluster and those with distinctly different profile scores are classified into other clusters; with the number of clusters and associated score profiles being unknown a priori. The literature shows that researchers started to adopt such clustering methods in research into parenting styles about 15 to 20 years ago (Aunola et al. 2000 ; Beato et al. 2016 ; Brenner andand Fox 1999 ; Carlson and Tanner 2006 ; Chaudhuri et al. 2009 ; Dwairy et al. 2006 ; Gorman-Smith et al. 2000 ; Heberle et al. 2015 ; Hoeve et al. 2008 ; Lee et al. 2006 ; Mandara and Murray 2002 ; Martin et al. 2007 ; McGroder 2000 ; McKinney and Renk 2008 ; Meteyer and Perry-Jenkins 2009 ; Metsäpelto and Pulkkinen 2003 ; Pereira et al. 2008 ; Russell et al. 1998 ; Shucksmith et al. 1995 ; Tam and Lam 2004 ; van der Horst and Sleddens 2017 ; Wolfradt et al. 2003 ). These studies have generally identified three or four parenting styles that resemble the initial theoretical parenting styles.

Although Baumrind’s typology has greatly influenced parenting research, two issues have largely been overlooked in the existing knowledge. A first issue relates to the psychological control dimension which is currently considered the third parenting dimension. Initially, Baumrind paid little attention to the role of psychological control because her control dimension solely referred to parental socializing practices aimed at integrating the child in the family and society (Darling and Steinberg 1993 ). In her later work (1971, 1989, 1991), Baumrind did incorporate aspects of psychological control but the confirmatory nature of that research (cf. using predefined clusters) makes it impossible to determine which parenting styles would naturally evolve when psychological control would be taken into account. Empirical studies have also rarely explicitly included parental psychological control when modeling parenting styles. So far, the limited research including psychological control indices (e.g., Pereira et al. 2008 ; Wolfradt et al. 2003 ) has mostly identified four parenting styles that match the theoretically distinct styles. Within these parenting styles psychological control coincided with behavioral control levels in the authoritarian parenting style, yet cumulative knowledge remains too limited to draw firm conclusions.

A second issue is that existing research provides little insight into the coexistence of maternal and paternal parenting styles and their joint impact on child development. Although Baumrind included both parents in her studies, she assigned a (pre-defined) parenting style to each one separately. In some studies (1991), data was limited to mothers if both parents were assigned a different parenting style; in others (1971) families were entirely excluded in such instances. Not only Baumrind, but research on parenting styles in general has paid less attention to the impact of joint parenting styles on child development (Martin et al. 2007 ; McKinney and Renk 2008 ; Simons and Conger 2007 ), but has mainly focused on the unique, differential or interaction effects of maternal and paternal parenting styles adopting a variable-oriented perspective (e.g., Beato et al. 2016 ; Miranda et al. 2016 ). Children in two-parent households are influenced by the combined practices of both parents (Martin et al. 2007 ); and some studies have clearly shown that mothers and fathers can differ in their parenting style (Conrade and Ho 2001 ; McKinney and Renk 2008 ; Russell et al. 1998 ). Considering how the parenting styles of both parents cluster together, therefore, aligns more closely with the real experiences of children growing up in two-parent households. Only such an approach can shed light onto possible additive and compensatory effects (Martin et al. 2007 ). For example, Simons and Conger ( 2007 ) found evidence for an additive effect as having two authoritative parents was associated with the most favorable outcomes in adolescents, as well as a compensatory effect where one parent’s authoritative parenting style generally buffered the less effective parenting style of the other parent. Similarly, McKinney and Renk ( 2008 ) suggested that in late adolescence perceiving one parent as authoritative while the other parent has a different parenting style, partly buffered for emotional adjustment problems.

Only two studies have simultaneously clustered maternal and paternal practices into joint parenting styles and examined how they are associated with child development (for other approaches, see Martin et al. 2007 ; Simons and Conger 2007 ; Steinberg et al. 1994 ). Meteyer and Perry-Jenkins ( 2009 ) modeled the warmth and dysfunctional discipline practices of both parents resulting in three parenting styles that aligned with Baumrind’s typology, namely supportive parents (i.e., similar to Baumrind’s authoritative style), mixed–supportive parents (i.e., mother’s parenting style is similar to Baumrind’s ‘good enough parenting’–style and father’s to Baumrind’s authoritarian style) and non–supportive parents (i.e., similar to Baumrinds’ authoritarian style). Although insightful, this study did not incorporate aspects of psychological control; was limited to early elementary school children (6– to 7– year olds); and was based on a rather small sample size (85 families). McKinney and Renk ( 2008 ) identified four joint parenting styles in their cluster analyses using late adolescents’ (18–22 years) reports of authoritative, authoritarian, and permissive parenting: congruent authoritative (i.e., an authoritative parenting style by both parents), congruent authoritarian (i.e., an authoritarian parenting style by both parents), an authoritarian father–authoritative mother combination, and a permissive father–authoritarian mother combination. This study used ratings of parenting styles as input for cluster analysis leaving the role of separate parenting dimensions unclear.

We aimed to extend the existing research on the well-known parenting styles concept by identifying joint parenting styles in an exploratory manner using data on three major parenting dimensions (i.e., support, behavioral control and psychological control) and their associations with child behavioral outcomes in a large sample of mothers and fathers raising elementary school children. In particular, we first examined whether the configuration of exploratory identified parenting styles differed when the – often neglected – psychological control dimension was considered in addition to the support and behavioral control dimensions. Secondly, we identified how parenting practices of mothers and fathers clustered together into joint parenting styles. We were particularly interested in exploring whether similarity or dissimilarity would depict the joint parenting styles. Incongruence could be expected from attachment or gender theories that particularly stress differences between parents’ roles, while assortative or socialization processes could result in highly congruent parenting styles. Thirdly, we associated these joint parenting styles to child behavioral outcomes. For incongruent parenting styles, we particularly examined whether the different parenting styles may buffer each other’s impact on child outcomes. For congruent parenting styles, we looked at additive effects in which parents’ (very) similar styles may reinforce each other’s impact on child outcomes.

Participants

Participants were 600 Flemish families with an elementary-school child (301 boys; 299 girls). The children’s age ranged from 8 to 10 years ( M =  9.27, SD  = 0.83). For 556 children both parents participated, while for the remaining children only the mother ( n  = 40) or father ( n  = 4) took part in the study. The participating mothers and fathers were on average 38.09 ( SD  = 4.00) and 40.39 years old ( SD  = 4.85), respectively. Most parents received 12 to 15 years of education. The vast majority of children (92%) were of Belgian origin (i.e., children and both parents born in Belgium). The remaining children mostly originated from another European country ( n =  28); a limited number had an African ( n  = 7), US ( n  = 4), Middle East ( n =  1), Asian ( n =  1) or unknown origin ( n  = 7). Most children (84%) lived in traditional two-parent families with married biological parents; others belonged to a blended family (5%), a household with shared custody (2%), or a single-parent household (9%). In this study, we focused on the subsample of families for which both parents consented to participate. Of the initial 556 families, data were available for a final sample of 527 families due to some non-response.

We used data on parenting collected in a Flemish large-scale study on social determinants of child psychosocial functioning including three cohorts: 8–, 9– and 10– year olds. To safeguard representativeness, a two-stage proportional stratified random sample of elementary school children enrolled in mainstream Flemish schools was drawn. In a first stage, 195 Flemish schools were randomly selected taking into account the distribution of schools across the five Flemish provinces and the Brussels region of which 55 schools agreed to participate. In a second stage, 913 children (2nd to 4th grade) were randomly selected within the participating schools. Parents received an introductory letter and consent form via the teachers. Informed consent to participate in the study was obtained for 600 families with both parents participating for 556 children. We used information on parenting practices collected from both parents. The parents received their questionnaires via the teacher during the second trimester and were asked to complete them individually and independently of each other. Given that 583 mothers (98%), and 538 fathers (96%) actually completed the questionnaire, non-response was fairly low.

Parental behavioral control

Parental behavioral control was operationalized via 19 items of the subscales Rules (8 items; α mother  = 0.79; α father  = 0.82)), Discipline (6 items; α mother  = 0.78; α father  = 0.80) and Harsh Punishment (5 items; α mother  = 0.76; α father  = 0.80) of the Ghent Parental Behavior Scale (Van Leeuwen and Vermulst 2004 ). Each item was scored on a 5–point Likert scale from 1 = never true to 5 = always true. The subscale Rules reflects the extent to which parents provide rules for their children’s behavior (e.g., “I teach my child that it is important to behave properly”; “I teach my child to obey rules”). The subscale Discipline pertains to effective punishments after unwanted behavior (e.g., ‘…taking away something nice’; ‘… give him/her a chore for punishment); whereas the subscale Harsh Punishment points towards parental physical punishment when children misbehave (e.g., “I slap my child in the face when he/she misbehaves”; “I spank my child when he/she doesn’t obey rules”; “I shake my child when we have a fight”). We included multiple subscales to represent the multidimensional nature of the behavioral control dimension, as demonstrated by others (Van Leeuwen and Vermulst 2004 ). In addition, we consider aspects of adequate (i.e., subscales Rules and Discipline) and inadequate behavioral control (i.e., subscale Harsh Punishment) in this study, given the differential association with child outcomes. While the first has been linked to positive child development, the latter has commonly been associated with negative child outcomes. Correlations between maternal and paternal reports were moderate for the subscales Rules ( r  = .31; p <  .001) and Discipline ( r  = 0.47; p <  0.001), but strong for the subscale Harsh Punishment ( r  = 0.52; p <  0.001). Within each parent, weak-to-moderate positive correlations were found between the subscales Rules and Discipline ( r mother  = 0.32; r father  = 0.26; p <  0.001); weak positive correlations between the subscales Discipline and Harsh Punishment ( r mother  = 0.22; r father  = 0.22; p <  0.001); and small negative correlations between the subscales Rules and Harsh Punishment ( r mother  = −0.14, p  = 0.009; r father  = −0.11; p =  0.001).

Parental support

Parental support was operationalized by 11 items (1 = never true to 5 = always true) of the subscale Positive Parenting of the Ghent Parental Behavior Scale (Van Leeuwen and Vermulst 2004 ). This subscale (α mother  = 0.85; α father  = 0.88) pertains to parental involvement, positive reinforcement and problem solving (e.g., “I make time to listen to my child, when he/she wants to tell me something”; “I give my child a compliment, hug, or a tap on the shoulder as a reward for good behavior”). Maternal and paternal reports were moderately correlated ( r  = 0.35, p <  0.001).

Parental psychological control

Parents assessed their own psychologically controlling behavior by means of a Dutch version of the Psychological Control Scale (Barber 1996 ; Kuppens et al. 2009a ) via a 5–point Likert scale from 1 = never true to 5 = always true. This scale (α mother  = 0.70; α father =  0.71) included 8 items pertaining to invalidating feelings, constraining verbal expressions, personal attack, and love withdrawal (e.g., “I am less friendly with my child when (s)he doesn’t see things my way”; “If my child has hurt my feelings, I don’t speak to him/her until (s)he pleases me again”; “I change the subject when my child has something to say”). Correlations between maternal and paternal reports were moderate ( r  = 0.32, p <  0.001).

Child behavioral outcomes

Both parents completed the 20-item Dutch Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ; van Widenfelt et al. 2003 ) using a 3–point scale in order to assess child psychosocial behavior (0 = not true to 2 = certainly true). Externalizing problems were operationalized via the subscales Conduct Problems (5 items; α mother  = .60; α father  = 0.61) and Hyperactivity (5 items; α mother =  0.80; α father  = 0.76), while internalizing problems were reflected by the subscale Emotional Symptoms (5 items; α mother =  0.73; α father  = 0.72). We also included the subscale on Prosocial Behavior (5 items; α mother =  0.67; α father  = 0.64). Because high correlations ( r =  0.54–0.71; p <  0.001) between mother and father reports was obtained, an average parental score was created for each subscale.

Data Analyses

To identify joint parenting styles, we conducted cluster analysis in MATLAB. Cluster analysis is an overarching term for procedures used to identify groups or clusters of individuals based on their scores on a number of variables (Everitt et al. 2001 ). Greater similarity emerges between individuals of the same cluster (or who lie geometrically closer according to some distance measure) than between individuals from different clusters (Steinly and Brusco 2011 ). We first ran a cluster analysis based on the four parenting subscales of mothers and fathers (i.e., eight variables as input) that reflect parental support and parental behavioral control to identify joint parenting styles based on these two parenting dimensions (i.e., without considering parental psychological control). To gain insight into the role of parental psychological control in identifying joint parenting styles, we subsequently conducted a cluster analysis on all five parenting subscales of mothers and fathers (i.e., ten variables as input) representing the three parenting dimensions.

We used the conceptual framework of Milligan for a stepwise implementation of cluster analysis (Steinly & Brusco 2011 ) by (1) determining the observations to be clustered; (2) selecting the variables to be included in the clustering procedure; (3) determining whether and how the selected variables should be standardized; (4) selecting a cluster algorithm and association measure (e.g., a distance measure); (5) determining the number of clusters; and (6) validating clustering (i.e., interpretation, testing, and replication). During steps 1 through 3, we performed analyses on the sum scores of the different parenting subscales which were standardized to give each variable equal weight in the analysis. In step 4, we chose Mac Queens K–means cluster algorithm which aims to identify K –clusters with the largest possible between–cluster differences and the smallest possible within–cluster differences (Everitt et al. 2001 ), while the value of K is specified by the user. K-means consists of a reallocation procedure by which persons, starting from an initial random or rational clustering, are reallocated in clusters as long as this yields a decrease in the loss function (i.e., sum of squared Euclidean distance from the corresponding cluster mean). Because the resulting clustering strongly depends on the initial clustering (Steinley 2003 ), we used 1000 random starts and retained the clustering with the lowest loss function value. To determine the optimal number of clusters in step 5, or in other words to define the value of K , we used the CHull procedure (Ceulemans and Kiers 2006 ; Wilderjans et al. 2013 ). CHull is an automated model selection procedure that scans a complexity versus fit plot to find the model with the best complexity versus fit balance. Applied to K-means clustering, this means that we look for the model after which allowing for additional clusters does not substantially decrease the loss function. To interpret the resulting clusters (step 6), we visually inspected the pattern emerging in the cluster profile plots. When comparing the cluster-specific profile scores between parents, we focused on the position of the corresponding profile scores compared to zero (i.e., the standardized mean of the sample) and differences in its substantial interpretation. For example, the terms above and below average mean that a parent scores higher or lower than the standardized mean of the sample.

To assess the validity of the empirically identified joint parenting styles representing all parenting dimensions, we examined their association with child behavioral outcomes via four analyses of variance (ANOVA) using SPSS Version 23 with the SDQ-subscales as dependent variables and the identified joint parenting styles based on the three parenting dimensions as the independent variable. Analyses of residuals did not reveal meaningful violations of model assumptions.

In the following sections, the empirically identified joint parenting styles based on the four subscales reflecting the two parenting dimensions ‘support’ and ‘behavioral control’ are first presented; followed by the results of analyses also considering ‘parental psychological control’ as input behavior. We end with linking the identified joint parenting styles based on three parenting dimensions to child behavioral outcomes.

Clusters with Two Parenting Dimensions

In a first step, we conducted a K –means cluster analysis on the maternal and paternal ratings only using the four parental support and behavioral support subscales for each parent (i.e., eight variables) as input, representing the two parenting dimensions. The analysis was conducted for 1 to 8 clusters each with a 1000 random starts. The corresponding number of clusters versus loss function plot is shown in Fig. 1 . Applying the CHull procedure to this plot pointed towards a solution with four clusters.

Number of clusters vs. loss function plots for the cluster analyses based on the two parenting dimensions (left) and on the three parenting dimensions (right)

Parents belonging to the first cluster (Fig. 2 ) scored above average on positive parenting, rules and discipline; and scored below average on harsh punishment. A visual inspection of the cluster plot did not reveal notable differences between mothers and fathers. These parents show warmth and involvement in their interaction with their child, but at the same time set clear rules and expectations for children’s behavior. They also discipline the child’s undesirable behavior, but rarely use strict physical punishment when doing so. Because these parents demonstrate elevated support and (adequate) behavioral control levels, we labeled this parenting style as the congruent authoritative parenting style.

Cluster profiles of the analysis based on two parenting dimensions

Parents belonging to the second cluster (Fig. 2 ) also scored above average on positive parenting and rules, but clearly below average on effective (subscale Discipline) and harsh disciplining (subscale Harsh Punishment). Based on a visual inspection, levels of positive parenting and providing rules of mothers seemed somewhat higher, while effective discipline was somewhat lower compared to fathers, but the substantive interpretation was similar across parents. These parents show warmth and involvement in their parenting while also setting clear rules for children’s behavior, yet they hardly discipline their child in any manner after showing unwanted behavior. Because these parents showed elevated support levels combined with aspects of behavioral control that focus on promoting desired behavior (instead of discouraging unwanted behavior), we labeled this cluster as the congruent positive authoritative parenting style.

The third cluster (Fig. 2 ) included parents who scored clearly above average on harsh punishment, above average on discipline, and below average on positive parenting and rules; without any notable visual differences between mothers and fathers. These parents are therefore less warm and involved in the relationship with their child. Their parenting is particularly characterized by strict physical punishment following unwanted behavior, without setting clear rules for their children’s behavior. This cluster reflected the congruent authoritarian parenting style .

A fourth cluster (Fig. 2 ) was identified that yielded below average scores for both parents on all subscales; without salient visual differences between mothers and fathers. These parents do not show marked warmth and involvement with their child, and also do not prominently provide rules or discipline unwanted behavior. Because these parents demonstrated below average scores on both dimensions, we labeled this cluster as a congruent uninvolved parenting style.

Clusters with Three Parenting Dimensions

In a second step, we performed the same K –means cluster analysis, but now psychological control was included as a third parenting dimension. The analysis was again conducted for 1 to 8 clusters each time using 1000 random starts. Applying the CHull procedure to the number of clusters versus loss function plot (Fig. 1 ) pointed toward a solution with 2 or 3 clusters. However, to enable comparisons between the cluster solution based on the two parenting dimensions, we again selected the solution with four clusters of which the cluster profiles are visualized in Fig. 3 .

Cluster profiles of the analysis based on three parenting dimensions

When comparing both cluster solutions, a remarkable similarity in the cluster profiles was observed with the cluster scores on parental psychological control for the congruent authoritative, congruent positive authoritative and congruent authoritarian parenting styles covarying with scores on harsh punishment. These three clusters could thus be interpreted and labeled in a similar manner as earlier. For the congruent uninvolved parenting styles, the pattern for parental support and behavioral control remained fairly unchanged, but both showed slightly above-average psychological control scores. It seems that these parents are thus less supportive and behavioral controlling, yet showing somewhat elevated levels of psychologically intrusive practices. As such, we relabeled the congruent uninvolved cluster as a congruent intrusive parenting style. Adding the psychological control dimension slightly enlarged the differences between the scores of mothers and fathers within each parenting style, but the substantive interpretation remained similar across parents

Given the substantial similarity in emerging parenting styles after including two or three parenting dimensions, we computed the agreement in classification of the corresponding parents. Analyses revealed that parents were generally assigned to the same parenting style if psychological control was taken into account, (Cramer’s V  = .87). Note that the agreement was substantial regardless of the retained number of clusters (2 clusters: V =  .77; 3 clusters: V =  .86; 5 clusters: V =  .83; 6 clusters: V =  .69; 7 clusters: V =  .68; 8 clusters: V =  .65).

Parenting Styles and Child Behavioral Outcomes

The four joint parenting styles were associated to significantly different behavioral outcomes: Prosocial Behavior [ F (3, 520) = 20.15, p <  0.001, R 2 = 0.10]; Hyperactivity [ F (3, 520) = 12.98, p <  0.001, R 2 =  0.07]; Emotional Symptoms [ F (3, 520) = 3.77, p =  .011, R 2 = 0.02]; and Conduct Problems [ F (3, 520) = 20.15, p <  0.001, R 2 = 0.10]. The mean subscale score per joint parenting style are presented in Fig. 4 . To gain more insight into the nature of the differences, pairwise contrasts (Tukey–Kramer) were computed for each ANOVA.

Mean subscale scores on child behavioral outcomes per parenting style

For each child behavioral outcome, a significant difference ( p  < 0.05) was established between the congruent authoritarian parenting style and at least one other parenting style. Children of authoritarian parents demonstrated more negative (i.e., hyperactivity, conduct problems, emotional symptoms) and less positive (i.e., prosocial behavior) child outcomes compared to children whose parents belonged to another parenting style. For conduct problems, the associated standardized mean difference involving authoritarian parents was most pronounced compared to positive authoritative parents ( d =  1.06, p <  0.001), whereas a medium difference (range d =  0.67 – 0.73, p <  .001) with the authoritative and intrusive parenting styles was found. Similarly, for hyperactivity standardized mean differences involving authoritarian parents were large ( d =  0.85, p <  0.001) compared to positive authoritative parents; and medium (range d =  0.60 – 0.63, p <  0.001) compared to authoritative and intrusive parents. Standardized mean differences involving authoritarian parents were large (range d =  0.83–0.93, p <  0.001) for prosocial behavior, but only a small difference ( d =  0.37, p =  0.031) with the intrusive parenting style emerged. Standardized mean differences for emotional symptoms between the authoritarian parenting style were small in magnitude (range d =  0.40 – 0.43, p <  0.05), except for a non-significant ( d =  0.28, p =  0.159) difference with the intrusive parenting style.

In addition, the congruent positive authoritative parenting style yielded significantly lower conduct problem levels in children (range d =  0.33 – 0.39, p <  0.05) compared to authoritative and intrusive parents. In contrast, significantly less prosocial child behavior (range d =  0.46–0.56, p ≤  0.001) was found for the congruent intrusive parenting style compared to (positive) authoritative parents.

With this study, we aimed to add to the parenting styles literature by identifying empirically derived joint parenting styles based on data regarding the three major parenting dimensions as perceived by both mothers and fathers raising elementary school children. These resulting joint parenting styles were subsequently associated with child behavioral outcomes. As highlighted in the introduction, the commonly used parenting typologies have a theoretical underpinning, although empirical studies have generally identified three or four similar parenting styles. Our empirically derived parenting styles based on the two parenting dimensions Support and Behavioral Control bear resemblance to the initial authoritative, authoritarian, and neglectful parenting styles, yet some differences also emerged.

The authoritative parenting style was further broken down into a disciplinary and non-disciplinary subtype. Similarly, although differences between parents within each parenting style were minor, they were more pronounced for the non-disciplinary than for the disciplinary control strategies. These findings highlight that all parenting practices aimed at controlling, managing or regulating child behavior are not necessarily simultaneously used by the same parent, suggesting that considering a variety of parenting practices is crucial to identifying naturally occurring parenting substyles. Some parents seem to provide clear rules, guidelines and expectations for child behavior, but hardly have deviant child behavior followed by an effective disciplinary strategy. One subgroup appears to reflect parents that mostly adopt positive parenting practices (i.e., high support, high rule setting), whereas another subgroup uses a combination of positive (i.e., high support, high rule setting) and negative (i.e., high effective discipline) parenting practices. The latter closely resembles the authoritative parenting style as originally defined (Baumrind 1966 , 1967 , 1971 ), while the former clustering aligns more with a second–order positive dimension obtained in research adopting a variable–oriented approach (Van Leeuwen et al. 2004 ).

In this study, the positive dimension tapped into parenting practices such as parental involvement, positive reinforcement, rule setting, and autonomy–stimulating behavior, while the negative dimensions pertained to negatively controlling efforts such as effective discipline, ignoring or harsh punishment following children’s unwanted behavior. In the uninvolved parenting style, parenting practices bear a resemblance to the neglectful parenting style given the below average scores on all subscales suggesting that parents show less warmth, place fewer restraints on and display little monitoring of children’s behavior. However, we did not identify extreme low scores on parenting dimensions that would suggest a truly neglectful parenting style as originally defined; thus an uninvolved parenting style seems a more appropriate label. Although parent self-reports could overestimate scores of positive parenting and underestimate scores of negative parenting due to social desirability bias, it should be noted that a previous study using adolescent reports also did not find extreme scores for the parenting style clusters (McKinney and Renk 2008 ).

We were not able to empirically identify the originally proposed permissive parenting style reflecting parents that are very loving, warm and involved (high support), yet have relatively few rules for children’s behavior and hardly discipline (low behavioral control). This finding diverges from some previous empirical studies in which the latter parenting style did emerge using an a theoretical (Aunola et al. 2000 ; Carlson and Tanner 2006 ; Shucksmith et al. 1995 ; Wolfradt et al. 2003 ) or empirical clustering approach (McKinney and Renk 2008 ). Our operationalization of the support dimension via the positive parenting subscale of the Ghent Parental Behavior Scale could underlie this divergent finding, because the subscale does not only pertain to warm and responsive parenting practices, but also includes items on problem solving. In contrast to other studies tapping only into warmth and responsiveness, lower scores on solving problems together with the child can attenuate overall scores on parental support. As a result, the pronounced scores on parental support which typify a permissive parenting style may have been somewhat masked in the present study. Alternatively, the parent self-reports may not accurately reflect their actual parenting practices due to a social desirability bias, hampering the identification of the permissive parenting style.

Regarding the role of psychological control in empirically deriving parenting styles, cluster analyses revealed a very similar configuration with four parenting styles when parental psychological control was taken into account. Thus, its addition did not lead to the identification of additional parenting styles, but the third parenting dimension did enhance our understanding. Results clearly pointed toward a substantial overlap between parental psychological control and parental harsh punishment for the congruent authoritarian, authoritative and positive authoritative parenting styles. This finding coincides with research suggesting that inadequate behavior control (e.g., physical punishment) and psychological control by parents are correlated, whereas parental psychological control and adequate behavioral control are considered orthogonal dimensions (Barber 1996 ; Gray andand Steinberg 1999 ; Steinberg 1990 ). For example, Pettit et al. ( 2001 ) found that parental psychological control was preceded in adolescence by harsh, restrictive disciplinary parenting during childhood. Barber and Harmon ( 2002 ) have further argued that parental psychological control may be a marker of a hostile and dysfunctional parent – child relationship, including the use of harsh disciplinary parenting practices.

For the congruent uninvolved parenting style, including parental psychological control actually led to an improved understanding of the previously considered uninvolved parents. As it turned out these parents did use psychologically controlling strategies to some extent, regardless of their lower levels on the other parenting dimension. This pattern could mean that in the parents–child relationship these parents are not so much concerned with the child and their behavior, but with manipulating children’s thoughts, emotions, and feelings to fit their own. It is commonly recognized that by using psychologically controlling strategies, parents intrude into children’s ‘psychological world’, exert parental authority over the children’s own life, and intervene in the individuation process (Barber and Xia 2013 ; Steinberg 2005 ). A recent study by Zhang et al. ( 2015 ) also demonstrated that parental psychological control indeed positively correlated with parent–centered intentions, implying that parents intend to satisfy their own needs by applying controlling behaviors with their children.

Several theories point towards differences in parenting between mother and father (McKinney and Renk 2008 ). For example, psychoanalytic theory argues that mothers are children’s primary attachment figure whereas a greater distance between fathers and their children occurs; the gender and role theory link differences in child rearing to male and female characteristics (e.g., expressiveness and instrumentality) with the traditional mother role as caring figures and fathers taking on the role of authority figure and family provider. The literature also indicates that differences in parenting between mothers and fathers may arise if one parent wants to compensate for the other parent (Meteyer and Perry-Jenkins 2009 ; Simons and Conger 2007 ). Nonetheless, our results revealed more similarities than dissimilarities in the parenting styles of both parents, despite small-to-moderate correlations between mother and father reports. These similarities may reflect an assortative process when choosing a partner, meaning that people tend to look for a partner with similar characteristics (Botwin et al. 1997 ; Buss 1984 , 1985 ; Larsen and Buss 2010 ). Similarity in parenting could also result from socialization processes (Simons and Conger 2007 ); through a process of mutual influence or reciprocity partners gradually form similar views and beliefs on parenting. The slight differences that emerged pertained particularly to a dissimilar position on positive parenting and rule setting. Although less pronounced, this finding aligns with the study by Meteyer and Perry-Jenkins ( 2009 ) that yielded congruent parenting styles for mothers and fathers of 7-year old children, except for a dissimilar position on self-reported parental warmth. Another study using adolescent reports of parenting (McKinney and Renk 2008 ) found more pronounced sex differences. Perhaps sex differences in parenting styles become more apparent as children grow older or when children’s perspectives are considered.

Results on associations between the joint parenting styles and child behavioral outcomes indicated that children of two authoritarian parents showed the poorest behavioral outcomes. These children were perceived as showing significantly more internalizing and externalizing problem behavior and less prosocial behavior compared to children of parents adopting other parenting styles. In contrast, children of two positive authoritative parents demonstrated the lowest levels of conduct problems. These findings could suggest an additive effect in which the impact of similar parenting styles is reinforced as having two authoritarian and two positive authoritative parents was associated with the least and most favorable child behavioral outcomes, respectively.

The obtained associations between parenting styles and child behavioral outcomes partially align with previous research. Firstly, it has repeatedly been demonstrated that an authoritative parenting style coincides most with positive developmental outcomes in children (e.g., Aunola et al. 2000 ; Baumrind 1967 , 1971 , 1989 , 1991 , Darling and Steinberg 1993 ; Dornbusch et al. 1987 ; Lamborn et al. 1991 ; Querido et al. 2002 ; Shucksmith et al. 1995 ; Steinberg et al. 1994 ; Steinberg et al. 1992 ). Our findings confirm this pattern for the children having parents who employ an authoritative parenting style, but children with parents both using a positive authoritative parenting style even showed less conduct problems. This finding could point towards the value of rule setting – in contrast to disciplinary strategies – in preventing behavioral problems. However, as parenting is a reciprocal process with children and parents mutually influencing each other, it is equally likely that parents show less disciplinary strategies simply because their children pose fewer behavior problems as demonstrated by others (Kerr et al. 2012 ; Kuppens et al. 2009b ; Laird et al. 2003 ).

Secondly, previous research has repeatedly linked an authoritarian parenting style with externalizing and internalizing behavior problems in children (e.g., Hoeve et al. 2008 ; Lamborn et al. 1991 ; Steinberg et al. 1994 ; Williams et al. 2009 ; Wolfradt et al. 2003 ). The present findings extend this body of research, although the association was most pronounced for externalizing behavior problems which may be due to children’s age (8 to 10 year olds). In younger children, having authoritarian parents may be more strongly associated with externalizing problem behavior, whereas the association with internalizing problems only emerges as children grow older. The shift in the nature of behavior problems as children age has been linked to the physical, cognitive and social maturation of children and the associated changes in social demands and expectations.

Thirdly, the neglectful parenting style has been associated with the poorest developmental outcomes in children (Baumrind 1991 ; Lamborn et al. 1991 ; Mandara and Murray 2002 ; Shucksmith et al. 1995 ; Steinberg et al. 1994 ). As this parenting style did not emerge in the present study, we were not able to model its association with child outcomes. Even children having parents who were less involved, but intrusive, were doing better than children having authoritarian parents. Findings did reveal that prosocial behavior and conduct problems were significantly lower for children having parents who adopted an intrusive parenting style compared to children of (positive) authoritarian parents. This findings coincides with a growing body of evidence on the deleterious of impact of psychologically controlling parenting in children and adolescents adopting a variable approach (Barber et al. 2005 ; Kuppens et al. 2013 ; Soenens et al. 2012 ), but likewise extends this evidence-base with person-oriented findings on the impact of an intrusive parenting style on child development.

Limitations and Future Research

Although the present study has several merits, it falls short in that only parent self-reports were used to assess parenting and child behavioral outcomes; children’s perspective on their parenting practices may be quite different. For example, Smetana ( 1995 ) found that adolescents perceived their parents as being more permissive and authoritarian compared to parents’ own view on the matter, whereas parents perceived themselves as being more authoritative than their adolescent children. Although a significant convergence between child and parent reports on parenting dimensions has been established in elementary school (Kuppens et al. 2009a ), future research should explicitly take a multiple informant approach when identifying parenting styles as informant perspectives on parenting styles in this age period may differ. In a related vein, multiple informant assessments of child behavioral problems have been shown to be context–specific with differences occurring according to the context (e.g., home, school) that forms the basis for informant’s assessment (Achenbach et al. 1987 ). Involving informants other than parents in the assessment of child behavioral outcomes therefore seems particularly interesting in future research on parenting styles.

Furthermore, inspecting a normally developing sample generally results into a low occurrence of inadequate parenting practices and child behavioral problems. Studying parenting styles in a clinical sample could certainly supplement this view because more variation in parenting practices may yield more or different parenting styles. Hoeve et al. ( 2008 ) have conducted one of the few studies using a sample of children with a high or low risk of antisocial and behavioral problems; and they were able to identify a neglectful parenting style. In addition, the role of parental psychological control in identifying parenting styles may be more pronounced in a clinical sample; an issue that to date remains unresolved.

The present sample closely resembled the population distribution with regard to family composition and paternal educational level, but it was rather homogeneous for ethnicity and mothers were more highly educated. As such, the present findings may not generalize to minority groups or families with less educated mothers; an issue that should be resolved by future studies. For example, previous research has demonstrated that harsh punishment and psychological control are more common among lower SES parents (e.g., Eamon 2001 ; El‐Sheikh et al. 2010 ) and that Caucasian caregivers were more prevalent in an authoritative parenting style cluster (van der Horst and Sleddens 2017 ). The present study clearly complements the scarce body of research on naturally occurring joint parenting styles conducted in US samples, but additional research is needed to replicate these findings. Moreover, as parenting occurs within a cultural belief system that influences attitudes towards particular parenting practices (Durrant et al. 2003 ), cross-cultural research could further clarify the role of culture in identifying naturally occurring (joint) parenting styles incorporating three parenting dimensions. Finally, the cross-sectional associations among joint parenting styles and child outcomes should be complemented by longitudinal research to gain more insight into the directionality of these associations. Longitudinal research covering the entire childhood and adolescence period could also increase our understanding of age-of-child and sex-of parent differences in naturally occurring parenting styles.

Despite these limitations, this study adds to the literature by further empirically validating well-known parenting styles and by increasing our understanding of the role of parental psychological control and joint parenting. The overlap between harsh punishment and parental psychological control in congruent parenting styles and its unique role in the uninvolved parenting style suggests that this intrusive parenting dimension should be routinely considered in practice settings. We also found that adequate behavior controlling practices may be particularly interesting in preventing behavioral problems; and that not only an authoritarian but also a (psychologically) intrusive parenting style can impede upon child development.

Achenbach, T. M., McConaughy, S. H., & Howell, C. T. (1987). Child/adolescent behavioral and emotional problems: implications of cross-informant correlations for situational specificity. Psychological Bulletin , 101 , 213–232.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Aunola, K., Stattin, H., & Nurmi, J. E. (2000). Parenting styles and adolescents’ achievement strategies. Journal of Adolescence , 23 , 205–222.

Barber, B. K. (1996). Parental psychological control: revisiting a neglected construct. Child Development , 67 , 3296–3319.

Barber, B. K. (2002). Reintroducing parental psychological control. In B. K. Barber (Ed.), Intrusive parenting: How psychological control affects children and adolescents (pp. 3–11). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Barber, B. K., & Harmon, E. L. (2002). Violating the self: Parental psychological control of children and adolescents. In B. K. Barber (Ed.), Intrusive parenting: How psychological control affects children and adolescents (pp. 15–52). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Barber, B. K., Stolz, H. E., Olsen, J. A., Collins, W. A., & Burchinal, M. (2005). Parental support, psychological control, and behavioral control: Assessing relevance across time, culture, and method. Monographs of the society for research in child development , 70 , i -147.

Barber, B. K., & Xia, M. (2013). The centrality of control to parenting and its effects. In R. E. Larzelere, A. S. Morris & A. W. Harrist (Eds), Authoritative parenting: Synthesizing nurturance and discipline for optimal child development (pp. 61–87). Washington: APA.

Barnes, G. M., & Farrell, M. P. (1992). Parental support and control as predictors of adolescent drinking, delinquency, and related problem behaviors. Journal of Marriage and the Family , 54 , 763–776.

Article   Google Scholar  

Baumrind, D. (1966). Effects of authoritative parental control on child behavior. Child Development , 37 , 887–907.

Baumrind, D. (1967). Child care practices anteceding three patterns of preschool behaviour. Genetic Psychology Monographs , 75 , 43–88.

Baumrind, D. (1971). Current patterns of parental authority. Developmental Psychology , 4 , 1–103.

Baumrind, D. (1989). Rearing competent children. In W. Damon (Ed.), Child Development Today and Tomorrow (pp. 349–378). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Google Scholar  

Baumrind, D. (1991). The influence of parenting style on adolescent competence and substance abuse. Journal of Early Adolescence , 11 , 56–95.

Bean, R. A., Barber, B. K., & Crane, D. R. (2006). Parental support, behavioral control, and psychological control among African American youth: The relationships to academic grades, delinquency, and depression. Journal of Family Issues , 27 , 1335–1355.

Beato, A., Pereira, A. I., Barros, L., & Muris, P. (2016). The relationship between different parenting typologies in fathers and mothers and children’s anxiety. Journal of Child and Family Studies , 25 , 1691–1701.

Botwin, M. D., Buss, D. M., & Shackelford, T. K. (1997). Personality and mate preferences: five factors in mate selection and marital satisfaction. Journal of Personality , 65 , 107–136.

Brenner, V., & Fox, R. A. (1999). An empirically derived classification of parenting practices. The Journal of Genetic Psychology , 160 , 343–356.

Buss, D. M. (1984). Toward a psychology of Person-Environment (PE) correlation: the role of spouse selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 47 , 361–377.

Buss, D. M. (1985). Human mate selection: Opposites are sometimes said to attract, but in fact we are likely to marry someone who is similar to us in almost every variable. American Scientist , 73 , 47–51.

Carlson, L., & Tanner, J. F. (2006). Understanding parental beliefs and attitudes about children: Insights from parental style. Journal of Consumer Affairs , 40 , 144–162.

Ceulemans, E., & Kiers, H. A. L. (2006). Selecting among three-mode principal component models of different types and complexities: A numerical convex hull based method. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology , 59 , 133–150.

Chaudhuri, J. H., Easterbrooks, M. A., & Davis, C. R. (2009). The relation between emotional availability and parenting style: cultural and economic factors in a diverse sample of young mothers. Parenting: Science and Practice , 9 , 277–299.

Coie, J. D., & Dodge, K. A. (1998). Aggression and antisocial behavior. In W. Damon & N. Eisenberg (Eds.), Handbook of Child Psychology. 3: Social, Emotional and Personality Development (pp. 779–862). New York, NY: Wiley & Sons.

Conrade, G., & Ho, R. (2001). Differential parenting styles for fathers and mothers. Australian Journal of Psychology , 53 , 29–35.

Cummings, E. M., Davies, P. T., & Campbell, S. B. (2000). Developmental Psychopathology and Family Process. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

Darling, N., & Steinberg, L. (1993). Parenting style as context: an integrative model. Psychological Bulletin , 113 , 487–496.

Dornbusch, S. M., Ritter, P. L., Liederman, P. H., Roberts, D. F., & Fraleigh, M. J. (1987). The relation of parenting style to adolescent school performance. Child Development , 58 , 1244–1257.

Durrant, J. E., Rose-Krasnor, L., & Broberg, A. G. (2003). Physical punishment and maternal beliefs in Sweden and Canada. Journal of Comparative Family Studies , 34 , 585–604.

Dwairy, M., Achoui, M., Abouserie, R., Farah, A., Sakhleh, A. A., Fayad, M., & Khan, H. K. (2006). Parenting styles in Arab societies: a first cross-regional research study. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology , 37 , 230–247.

Eamon, M. K. (2001). Antecedents and socioemotional consequences of physical punishment on children in two-parent families. Child Abuse & Neglect , 25 (6), 787–802.

El‐Sheikh, M., Hinnant, J. B., Kelly, R. J., & Erath, S. (2010). Maternal psychological control and child internalizing symptoms: vulnerability and protective factors across bioregulatory and ecological domains. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry , 51 (2), 188–198.

Everitt, B. S., Landau, S., & Leese, M. (2001). Cluster analyses . 4th Ed. London: Hodder Arnold.

Galambos, N. L., Barker, E. T., & Almeida, D. M. (2003). Parents do matter: trajectories of change in externalizing and internalizing problems in early adolescence. Child Development , 74 , 578–594.

Heberle, A. E., Briggs‐Gowan, M. J., & Carter, A. S. (2015). A person‐oriented approach to identifying parenting styles in mothers of early school‐age children. Infant and Child Development , 24 , 130–156.

Gorman-Smith, D., Tolan, P. H., & Henry, D. B. (2000). A developmental-ecological model of the relation of family functioning to patterns of delinquency. Journal of Quantitative Criminology , 16 , 169–198.

Gray, M. R., & Steinberg, L. (1999). Unpacking authoritative parenting: Reassessing a multidimensional construct. Journal of Marriage and the Family , 61 , 574–587.

Hoeve, M., Blokland, A., Dubas, J. S., Loeber, R., Gerris, J. R. M., & van der Laan, P. H. (2008). Trajectories of delinquency and parenting styles. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology , 36 , 223–235.

Kerr, M., Stattin, H., & Özdemir, M. (2012). Perceived parenting style and adolescent adjustment: revisiting directions of effects and the role of parental knowledge. Developmental Psychology , 48 , 1540.

Kuppens, S., Grietens, H., Onghena, P., & Michiels, D. (2009a). Measuring parenting dimensions in middle childhood: multitrait-multimethod analysis of child, mother, and father ratings. European Journal of Psychological Assessment , 25 , 133–140.

Kuppens, S., Grietens, H., Onghena, P., & Michiels, D. (2009b). Relations between parental psychological control and childhood relational aggression: reciprocal in nature? Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology , 38 , 117–131.

Kuppens, S., Laurent, L., Heyvaert, M., & Onghena, P. (2013). Associations between parental psychological control and relational aggression in children and adolescents: A multilevel and sequential meta-analysis. Developmental Psychology , 49 , 1697–1712.

Laird, R. D., Pettit, G. S., Bates, J. E., & Dodge, K. A. (2003). Parents’ monitoring-relevant knowledge and adolescents’ delinquent behavior: Evidence of correlated developmental changes and reciprocal influences. Child Development , 74 , 752–768.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Lamborn, S. D., Mounts, N. S., Steinberg, L., & Dornbusch, S. M. (1991). Patterns of competence and adjustment among adolescents from authoritative, authoritarian, indulgent, and neglectful families. Child Development , 62 , 1049–1065.

Larsen, R. J., & Buss, D. M. (2010). Personality and Social Interaction. In R. J. Larsen & D. M. Buss (Eds.), Personality Psychology. Domains of Knowledge about Human Nature . 4th Ed. (pp. 464–491). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Lee, S. M., Daniels, M. H., & Kissinger, D. B. (2006). Parental influences on adolescent adjustment: Parenting styles versus parenting practices. The Family Journal , 14 , 253–259.

Maccoby, E. M. (1990). Social Development: Psychological Growth and the Parent–child Relationship. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Maccoby, E. E., & Martin, J. A. (1983). Socialization in the context of the family: Parent-child interaction. In P. H. Mussen (Series Ed.) & E. M. Hetheringtono(Vol. Ed.), Handbook of Child Psychology: Vol . IV . Socialization, Personality and Social Development (4 th Ed., pp. 1-101). New York: Wilepy.

Magnusson, D. (1998). The logic and implications of a person-oriented approach. In R. B. Cairns, L. R. Bergman & J. Kagan (Eds.), Methods and Models for Studying the Individual (pp. 33–63). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Mandara, J. (2003). The typological approach in child and family psychology: a review of theory, methods, and research. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review , 6 , 129–146.

Mandara, J., & Murray, C. B. (2002). Development of an empirical typology of African American family functioning. Journal of Family Psychology , 16 , 318–337.

Martin, A., Ryan, R. M., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2007). The joint influence of mother and father parenting on child cognitive outcomes at age 5. Early Childhood Research Quarterly , 22 , 423–439.

McGroder, S. H. (2000). Parenting among low-income, African-American single mothers with preschool-age children: patterns, predictors, and developmental correlates. Child Development , 71 , 752–771.

McKinney, C., & Renk, K. (2008). Differential parenting between mothers and fathers. implications for late adolescents. Journal of Family Issues , 29 (6), 806–827.

Meteyer, K. B., & Perry-Jenkins, M. (2009). Dyadic parenting and children’s externalizing symptoms. Family Relations , 58 , 289–302.

Metsäpelto, R. L., & Pulkkinen, L. (2003). Personality traits and parenting: neuroticism, extraversion, and openness to experience as discriminative factors. European Journal of Personality , 17 , 59–78.

Miranda, M. C., Affuso, G., Esposito, C., & Bacchini, D. (2016). Parental acceptance–rejection and adolescent maladjustment: mothers’ and fathers’ combined roles. Journal of Child and Family Studies , 25 (4), 1352–1362.

Patterson, G. R., Dishion, T. J., & Bank, L. (1984). Family interaction: a process model of deviancy training. Aggressive Behavior , 10 , 253–267.

Pereira, A. I., Canavarro, C., Cardoso, M. F., & Mendonça, D. (2008). Patterns of parental rearing styles and child behaviour problems among Portuguese school-aged children. Journal of Child and Family Studies , 18 , 454–464.

Pettit, G. S., Laird, R. D., Dodge, K. A., Bates, J. E., & Criss, M. M. (2001). Antecedents and behavior-problem outcomes of parental monitoring and psychological control in early adolescence. Child Development , 72 (2), 583–598.

Querido, J. G., Warner, T. D., & Eyberg, S. M. (2002). Parenting styles and child behavior in African American families of preschool children. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology , 31 , 272–277.

Russell, A., Aloa, V., Feder, T., Glover, A., Miller, H., & Palmer, G. (1998). Sex-based differences in parenting styles in a sample with preschool children. Australian Journal of Psychology , 50 , 89–99.

Schaefer, E. S. (1965). Children’s reports of parental behavior: an inventory. Child Development , 36 , 413–424.

Shaw, D. S., Keenan, K., & Vondra, J. I. (1994). Developmental precursors of externalizing behavior: ages 1 to 3. Developmental Psychology , 30 , 355–364.

Shucksmith, J., Hendry, L. B., & Glendinning, A. (1995). Models of parenting: Implications for adolescent well-being within different types of family contexts. Journal of Adolescence , 18 , 253–270.

Simons, L. G., & Conger, R. D. (2007). Linking mother-father differences in parenting to a typology of family parenting styles and adolescent outcomes. Journal of Family Issues , 28 , 212–241.

Soenens, B., Park, S. Y., Vansteenkiste, M., & Mouratidis, A. (2012). Perceived parental psychological control and adolescent depressive experiences: A cross-cultural study with Belgian and South-Korean adolescents. Journal of Adolescence , 35 , 261–272.

Smetana, J. G. (1995). Parenting styles and conceptions of parental authority during adolescence. Child Development , 66 , 299–316.

Steinberg, L. (1990). Autonomy, conflict, and harmony in the family relationship. In S. S. Feldman & G. R. Elliot (Eds.), At the Threshold: The developing Adolescent (pp. 255–276). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Steinberg, L. (2005). Psychological control: Style or substance? New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development , 108 , 71–78.

Steinberg, L., Lamborn, S. D., Darling, N., Mounts, N. S., & Dornbusch, S. M. (1994). Over-time changes in adjustment and competence among adolescents from authoritative, authoritarian, indulgent, and neglectful families. Child Development , 65 , 754–770.

Steinberg, L., Lamborn, S. D., Dornbusch, S. M., & Darling, N. (1992). Impact of parenting practices on adolescent achievement: authoritative parenting, school involvement and encouragement to succeed. Child Development , 63 , 1266–1281.

Steinley, D. (2003). Local Optima in K-Means Clustering: what you don’t know may hurt you. Psychological Methods , 8 , 294–304.

Steinly, D., & Brusco, M. J. (2011). Choosing the number of clusters in K-means clustering. Psychological Methods , 16 (3), 285–297.

Tam, V. C., & Lam, R. S. (2004). A cultural exploration based on structured observational methods in Hong Kong. Marriage & Family Review , 35 , 45–61.

van der Horst, K., & Sleddens, E. F. (2017). Parenting styles, feeding styles and food-related parenting practices in relation to toddlers’ eating styles: a cluster-analytic approach. PloS One , 12 (5), e0178149.

Van Leeuwen, K. G., Mervielde, I., Braet, C., & Bosmans, G. (2004). Child personality and parental behavior as moderators of problem behavior: variable-and person-centered approaches. Developmental Psychology , 40 , 1028–1046.

Van Leeuwen, K. G., & Vermulst, A. (2004). Some psychometric properties of the Ghent Parental Behavior Scale. European Journal of Psychological Assessment , 20 , 283–298.

van Widenfelt, B. M., Goedhart, A. W., Treffers, P. D., & Goodman, R. (2003). Dutch version of the strengths and difficulties questionnaire (SDQ). European Child and Adolescent Psychiatry , 12 , 281–289.

Wilderjans, T. F., Ceulemans, E., & Meers, K. (2013). CHull: a generic convex hull based model selection method. Behavior Research Methods , 45 , 1–15.

Williams, L. R., Degnan, K. A., Perez-Edgar, K. E., Henderson, H. A., Rubin, K. H., Pine, D. S., & Fox, N. A. (2009). Impact of behavioral inhibition and parenting style on internalizing and externalizing problems from early childhood through adolescence. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology , 37 , 1063–1075.

Wolfradt, U., Hempel, S., & Miles, J. N. (2003). Perceived parenting styles, depersonalisation, anxiety and coping behaviour in adolescents. Personality and Individual differences , 34 (3), 521–532.

Zhang, L., Wan, W. W., Tam, V. C., Wu, P., & Luk, C. L. (2015). An exploratory study on school children’s intent attributions for parental structuring behaviors. Psychological Reports , 116 , 249–273.

Download references

Author Contributions

SK: designed and executed the study, conducted part of the data-analysis, and wrote the paper. EC: conducted the cluster analyses, and collaborated in the writing and editing of the final manuscript.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

Sofie Kuppens

Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

Eva Ceulemans

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sofie Kuppens .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in this study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the KU Leuven (University of Leuven) and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits use, duplication, adaptation, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Kuppens, S., Ceulemans, E. Parenting Styles: A Closer Look at a Well-Known Concept. J Child Fam Stud 28 , 168–181 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-018-1242-x

Download citation

Published : 18 September 2018

Issue Date : 15 January 2019

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-018-1242-x

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Parenting styles
• Cluster analysis
• Psychological control
• Psychosocial outcomes
• School-aged children
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Overindulgent Parenting Style and Its Harm to Children Words: 3134
• Parenting Styles’ Impact on Children Words: 941
• Parenting Styles’ Impact on Child’s Development Words: 1420
• Personal Experience of Child: Parenting Styles Words: 613
• Parenting Style Comparison: Positive and Negative Impacts Words: 589
• Parenting and Choice of Child-Rearing Style Words: 650
• Childhood Attachment and Parenting Styles Words: 1766
• Bullying and Parenting Styles Words: 1484
• Parenting Styles Exemplified by the Molly Family Words: 1053
• Parenting Style and Bullying Among Children Words: 899

Parenting Styles – Case Study Analysis

• At the family dinner Jake’s father said: “It is you who shall decide if you want to leave college or keep studying. Either way, I will accept your choice.” In this case, Jake’s father acts like an affectionate parent who lets his son make his own decisions. This interaction seems positive because a child will learn how to be independent and rely upon his choices knowing he is still loved.
• The mother at the toy store could not say now to her son who cried because he wanted a robot. The mother’s reluctance to say no demonstrates a permissive parenting style. However, not being able to refuse may result in further manipulation from a child’s position (Morin). Moreover, growing up they will realize the necessity to ask their parents for permission.
• A 16-year-old Katie just experienced a breakup, and her father encouraged her to tell him about her feelings. This is an example of a permissive parenting style because adults tend to act like friends with their children (Morin). The effect of such interaction will be positive because teenagers can be sure someone can listen to them in such a situation.
• 15-year-old Jack first tried marijuana with his father. His father explained, “You’d better try it with your parent, not on the street.” This parental behavior is permissible because the parent does not forbid their child to try something limited. However, this may have negative consequences since the child may violate the father’s permission and use prohibited substances.
• Jenny was skipping classes stating: “My parents would not know, they trust me, and they are spending much time at work.” A trustful relationship guarantees adults’ permission and approval in most cases (Morin). However, children who lack parents’ attention tend to have low self-esteem and academic issues.

Authoritative Styles

• Walking down the street, 10-year-old Mike threw a can of Coca-Cola on the sidewalk, and his father said to him: “Son, let me show you where the waste bins are, please take this can and throw it in the right place.” Authoritative parents try to demonstrate to their children that there are rules behind the behavior (Morin). The impact of such conduct will be positive because a kid will know their limits.
• The Johnsons decided to go on a vacation to New York and asked their 14-year-old daughter Mary if she wanted to go elsewhere. Authoritative parents tend to ask for their children’s opinions and take them into account. Listening to their kids, they express respect and care, giving them a chance to be heard.
• A 12-year old Peter is slow at getting ready for school each morning. Therefore, his parent set a timer every day, and if he manages to pack on time, he receives the opportunity to play on the computer in the evening (Morin). It is also an example of authoritative parents because they offer an incentive or reward. As a result, such a parenting style will help motivate a child.
• Kate returns home by 9 PM because her parents have set such a rule for her. Thus, imposing rules of behavior on Kate demonstrates an authoritarian parenting style, since such parents tend to use restrictions so that the child learns discipline. The impact of such a relationship should be beneficial because Kate will know her limits and become responsible.
• Parent marks encouraged him to study better, and sometimes rewarded him with expensive gifts. As a result, mark successfully graduated from the University and received a grant to enter any University in the country. Being authoritative, his parent motivated him to achieve great results, so he excelled in his studies. If they continue to urge him to work harder, he will achieve even greater goals.

Morin, Amy. “4 Types of Parenting Styles and Their Effect on Kids.” verywellfamily , Web.

Cite this paper

• Chicago (N-B)
• Chicago (A-D)

StudyCorgi. (2022, August 19). Parenting Styles – Case Study Analysis. https://studycorgi.com/parenting-styles-case-study-analysis/

"Parenting Styles – Case Study Analysis." StudyCorgi , 19 Aug. 2022, studycorgi.com/parenting-styles-case-study-analysis/.

StudyCorgi . (2022) 'Parenting Styles – Case Study Analysis'. 19 August.

1. StudyCorgi . "Parenting Styles – Case Study Analysis." August 19, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/parenting-styles-case-study-analysis/.

Bibliography

StudyCorgi . "Parenting Styles – Case Study Analysis." August 19, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/parenting-styles-case-study-analysis/.

StudyCorgi . 2022. "Parenting Styles – Case Study Analysis." August 19, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/parenting-styles-case-study-analysis/.

This paper, “Parenting Styles – Case Study Analysis”, was written and voluntary submitted to our free essay database by a straight-A student. Please ensure you properly reference the paper if you're using it to write your assignment.

Before publication, the StudyCorgi editorial team proofread and checked the paper to make sure it meets the highest standards in terms of grammar, punctuation, style, fact accuracy, copyright issues, and inclusive language. Last updated: August 19, 2022 .

If you are the author of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyCorgi, request the removal . Please use the “ Donate your paper ” form to submit an essay.

• Interview With Surbhi Mahobia
• Interview With Keyur Seta
• 6 Time Management Tips For Stay-At-Home Moms
• Interview With Manas Mukul
• Interview With Deepa Gandhi

Fastest Growing Parenting Community in India

Parenting Case Study

Since the last 6 months, I am observing two sets of families very closely. The reason for doing so? Well, they are our friends and they both have a lot of similarities.

Both are proud parents of 5-year-old daughters. Both set of parents dote on their daughters, in fact the daughters are the ‘large’ apples of their eyes. Both have exactly the same parenting style.

And what’s their parenting style? To put it simply, in their respective families, the child is the boss.

Yes, it is true. Both the parents do exactly what the child tells them to do.

On different occasions that we have met them at our place or theirs (separately), the girls never allowed us to talk uninterrupted even for 2 minutes. They’d come in with one demand after the other and the parents gladly gave in to whatever their child wanted at that point of time. The best was that the parents did it with a smile, all the time. Seeing them behave this way, irked us, but not them.

Ok, a bit of background… In family A, the daughter was born after 14 years of marriage. Their mantra of parenting, “Nobody will say anything to the child, let her do whatever she wants”.

Family B went through a turbulent time for a year or so, due to illness of a maternal grandparent and she is no more now. So, according to them their child is the only bright spot in their lives. They too believe in the same mantra, “She is just a child, let her do whatever she wants”.

So, because of this parenting style, how do these http://www.texasgoldengirl.com/celexa/ little kids behave?

Well, they have no manners, are rude, like to boss around with other kids (and adults too), talk a lot (are too mature in language), hit or spit on people, if anybody (other than the family) does not agree to their demands, they can’t take a ‘No’ for an answer… There are no rules or guidelines for these kids.

Their eating habits… they just don’t eat anything other than a chapati . And that too without any dal or vegetable. The chapati has to be fed by either of the parents while the child jumps up and down the sofa or simply runs around. In family A, the parents feed her milk with a spoon. (That’s because she hates milk and the parents believe that “Milk is very important”. So, if their 5-year-old daughter has 10 spoons of milk in a day, it is a celebration in the family).

On every trip with the kid in the market, a toy is bought, simply because the child asked for it. The result, there are hundreds of toys lying around and all battered and uncared for.

Incidentally, both the girls are good at studies.

So, what do you think of this parenting style? How will this impact the child’s growth and development, both physical as well as emotional? Will the child be able to ‘behave’ well and change her habits in the later years? When will the child learn about value systems? Is this parenting style good for the child?

A former pharmaceutical professional-turned-soft-skills facilitator for corporates and mother of  a 11 year old, Shilpa Garg blogs at  http://shilpaagarg.blogspot.in/

Share this:

• What you don’t treat in Infancy?
• Surviving Motherhood

You May Also Like

Explaining children about people with special needs, how to raise a desi-bully.

Extra curricular classes – boon or a bane?