Child Psychiatry Hum Dev (2011) 42:463481

DOI 10.1007/s10578-011-0229-2
ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Parenting and Late Adolescent Emotional Adjustment:

Mediating Effects of Discipline and Gender
Cliff McKinney Mary Catherine Milone Kimberly Renk

Published online: 9 April 2011

 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Abstract Research suggests that parenting styles are related to the types of discipline
parents utilize and that the coupling of parenting styles and discipline techniques are
related to child outcomes. Although extant research examines the effects of parenting
styles and discipline on child and early adolescent adjustment, less is known about
adjustment in late adolescents, also described as emerging adults. Thus, the current study
investigated the relationships among parenting styles (e.g., authoritative, authoritarian,
permissive), discipline strategies (e.g., non-violent discipline, psychological aggression,
physical assault), and emerging adult emotional adjustment (e.g., self-esteem, depression,
and anxiety). The sample consisted of 526 participants ranging in age from 18 to 22 years.
Results were analyzed with structural equation modeling and suggest that, although perceived parenting styles and discipline are both correlated with emerging adult emotional
adjustment, perceived parenting is associated with emerging adult emotional adjustment
for females but not males when examined simultaneously with perceived discipline. This
finding demonstrates the importance of examining the direct and indirect relationships in
the context of gender dyads.
Keywords

Parenting
Discipline
Gender
Late adolescents
Emotional adjustment

Introduction
For the past few decades, parenting styles and the type of discipline that parents utilize has
been researched extensively. Among the most robust findings in the literature is that
children and adolescents who have been raised in authoritative households (i.e., households
that are responsive but demanding) are more psychosocially competent, more successful in
C. McKinney (&)
M. C. Milone
Department of Psychology, Mississippi State University, P.O. Box 6161, Mississippi State,
MS 39762, USA
e-mail: cmckinney@psychology.msstate.edu
K. Renk
Department of Psychology, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA

123

464

Child Psychiatry Hum Dev (2011) 42:463481

school, and less prone to internalizing and externalizing problems than their peers who
have been raised in authoritarian (e.g., demanding but not responsive) and permissive (e.g.,
responsive but not demanding) households [1]. Further, nearly all studies have demonstrated that harsh discipline and/or corporal punishment is linked to behavior problems
(e.g., severe aggression and delinquency) at all ages [2]. Additionally, inconsistent discipline, relative to more consistent discipline, has been related to higher levels of childhood
depression [3]. Overall, harsh and inconsistent parenting styles and discipline have been
associated with problematic psychological adjustment of children and adolescents [3].
Further, recent research has suggested that the gender of the parent and child should be
investigated more closely as different gender dyads may vary in parenting and the
adjustment of sons and daughters [4]. Additionally, parents today are much more likely to
remain involved in the care of their emerging adult [5], even as emerging adults attend
college and/or begin their careers. Thus, the current study examines parenting style and
discipline strategies in the context of cross-gender models and emerging adulthood.
Parenting
One of the most debated issues in family-focused research today is how to achieve optimal
parenting. As such, researchers have studied extensively the relationships between different parenting styles and the adjustment of children and adolescents. Historically, parenting styles have been derived from the dimensions of demandingness and responsiveness
[1] or from support and control [6]. Using these dimensions, parenting styles may be
categorized as authoritative, authoritarian, or permissive [1]. When examining these categories, extant research suggests that parenting that is high in responsiveness and support
and that includes a moderate level of control (i.e., authoritative parenting) is the most
beneficial style for children and adolescents, as it is related to positive adjustment [79]. In
contrast, parenting that lacks support and responsiveness but that is extremely high or low
in control and high in rejection is related to less positive adjustment for children and
adolescents [1, 79]. It may be the case that the type of parenting styles adopted by parents
help guide the choices parents make in parenting their youth. For example, parents who
strive to be authoritative may exhibit specific behaviors, such as warmth and consistency,
while interacting with their youth. Similarly, parenting styles adopted by parents also may
influence behaviors related to discipline.
Discipline
Aside from varying in the aforementioned dimensions, parenting involves a complex array
of challenges and achievements. One such challenge is that of enforcing rules. When a
child disobeys, a parent may choose to discipline the child using a variety of strategies.
These strategies sometimes are categorized into different types of discipline, such as power
assertion, love withdrawal, and induction strategies [10, 11]. Power assertion strategies
involve the use of physical violence, removal of privileges, or threats to change the
behavior of the child. In contrast, love withdrawal strategies involve ignoring, isolating, or
stating a direct dislike for the child to bring about behavioral change. Lastly, induction
strategies involve the use of clear communication and reasoning to set standards that the
child must obey. These different strategies may involve physical assault (e.g., corporal
punishment), psychological aggression (e.g., parents belittling their children), and nonviolent discipline (e.g., democratic forms of discipline), respectively [3].

123

Child Psychiatry Hum Dev (2011) 42:463481

465

Nearly all studies researching the use of corporal punishment conclude that the use of
harsh punishment tactics is related to childrens display of higher levels of aggression [12].
Other negative effects of corporal punishment also have been documented. For instance,
individuals who have been punished physically by their parents during adolescence are
more likely to endorse depressive symptoms than those who are not punished in this way
[12]. Research also suggests that when parents used physical disciplinary tactics 30 or
more times with their adolescents, adolescents are more likely to report suicidal ideation
compared to those whose parents did not. Studies of the incidence and intensity of corporal
punishment suggest that 90% of parents in the United States reported having spanked their
children [13]. Overall, these studies indicate that more information is needed regarding the
outcomes that are related to the use of corporal punishment. Such information may assist
parents in adjusting their expectations regarding the utility of this discipline strategy
relative to the outcomes that they hope to achieve with their emerging adults, who have
been researched less extensively relative to this topic.
In addition to using corporal punishment to change unwanted behavior, parents may use
psychological control to change the behaviors of their children and adolescents. Research
examining the role of behavioral control (i.e., the use of rewards or punishments to acquire
a desired response) and psychological control (i.e., the use of expressed disapproval or
guilt by the parent to retain control) during emerging adulthood has found that moderate
levels of behavioral control are related to emerging adults positive emotional and
behavioral adjustment [14]. In contrast, high levels of psychological control are related to
emerging adults low self-esteem and social competence as well as high levels of
depression, anxiety, and externalizing problems. Research also examines the relationship
between parental psychological control and childrens use of relational aggression (i.e.,
behaviors that harm others by damaging or threatening to damage relationships, feelings of
acceptance, friendships, or group inclusion [15]), and it was found that maternal psychological control is related positively to childrens relational aggression at home 1 year later.
In contrast to these other types of discipline, parents use of inductive discipline is
designed to avoid power battles or other forms of physical interactions when disciplining
children. A study examining how this type of discipline may be related to childrens
abilities in school and social interactions found that childrens externalizing problems and
social skillfulness with peers are best predicted by parents calm discussion and proactive
teaching [16]. The study speculates that parents who rely on inductive approaches in
disciplinary encounters may be giving their children a sense of respect for contrasting
perspectives and a belief that disputes may be resolved through non-aversive means.
Similar results are found in a study examining the relationship between inductive discipline
and childrens formation of empathy and prosocial behavior [17]. This study finds that
parents who use inductive forms of discipline, as opposed to power assertion, have children
who are more empathetic and prosocial, with childrens empathy predicting prosocial
behavior. Another study [18] examines the connection between disciplinary techniques and
the formation of empathy. They concluded that inductive discipline is the most effective
form of evoking both empathy and guilt in children, thereby ensuring that children
internalize parental values.
The Relationship Between Parenting Styles and Discipline
Although it has not been examined systematically, there seems to be an obvious link
between parenting styles and discipline strategies. For example, one study describes the
relationship between parenting and discipline [19] and reports that parents who are

123

466

Child Psychiatry Hum Dev (2011) 42:463481

characterized by high levels of both demandingness and responsiveness (e.g., authoritative

parents) are less likely to use punitive and inconsistent discipline, that children are more
likely to adhere to the rules set by parents using this style, and that there is less need for
more reprimanding discipline. Authoritarian parents, on the other hand, use tactics that are
high in demandingness and low in responsiveness. This parenting style is related to
increased use of harsh discipline when dealing with negative behavior. In contrast, permissive parents use tactics that are low in demandingness but high in responsiveness.
These parents tend to use inconsistent discipline strategies due to their likelihood of
yielding to the demands of their children. Overall, a nurturing yet demanding parenting
style is suggested as the most ideal for childrens adjustment, as behavioral compliance and
psychological autonomy are viewed as interdependent objectives [19, 20].
Gender and Late Adolescent Considerations
Although much research in parenting examines parenting styles and discipline in general,
recent research suggests that maternal and paternal influences must be considered independently for male and female adolescents [4, 8, 2125], especially given increases in time spent
by fathers with their children and adolescents over the past few decades [25]. For example,
research demonstrates that mothers and fathers may adopt different parenting behaviors
based on the gender of their children and adolescents. Thus, gender-specific parenting and the
gender of adolescents may be related to adolescent adjustment [4, 8, 21, 22, 2427]. Further,
parents use of certain discipline strategies varies drastically with both the gender of the
parent and the child [2, 13, 28, 29]. For example, research suggests that mothers and fathers
use varying levels of support and corporal punishment (e.g., some studies find that mothers
use more corporal punishment than fathers, whereas other studies find the opposite effect
[2, 13, 25]), that mothers have more responsibility for disciplining their adolescents compared
to fathers [24], and that boys receive more physical and verbal punishments than girls [28].
In addition to gender, the age of the adolescent may be important. Research discusses
the psychological effects that differential discipline strategies have on children and early
adolescents. However, the functioning of emerging adults has been overlooked greatly.
Emerging adulthood includes individuals who range in age from 18- to 25-years who are
experiencing abundant changes in both physiological and social domains [5]. Given the
continued involvement of parents with their 18- to 25-year olds, the psychological functioning of these individuals needs to be investigated [5, 8]. In fact, research suggests that
parenting and family characteristics experienced during childhood and adolescence continue to share important relationships with a variety of outcomes for emerging adults [3, 5,
8, 22, 30]. It may be the case that earlier experiences with parents set up the foundation for
a continued relationship that influences emerging adults. As a result of the changes that
occur in this developmental period, emerging adults may experience a time of self
exploration and change rather than settling immediately into more adult roles [5]. Although
emerging adults may move away from home, continued parental relationships remain an
important influence that may contribute to both positive and negative adjustment [5, 8, 30].
The Current Study
Currently, much research focuses on the adjustment of children and early adolescents as a
result of different parenting styles and discipline strategies. Also, much research examines
these variables independent of each other, in isolation, and/or without considering
important participant characteristics, such as the gender of parents and the gender and age

123

Child Psychiatry Hum Dev (2011) 42:463481

467

of children. The current study focuses on the relationships among perceived parenting
styles, disciplinary strategies, and emerging adult emotional adjustment in the context of a
cross-gender model. Given the paucity of research examining collectively these variables
in emerging adult samples, the findings of the current study will foster a better understanding of the relationships among parenting styles, discipline strategies, and emerging
adult emotional adjustment.
Hypothesis 1 states that perceived authoritative parenting will be related inversely with
perceived harshness of discipline, whereas perceived authoritarian parenting will be related
directly with perceived harshness of discipline. Hypothesis 2 states that perceived authoritative parenting will be related inversely to poor emotional adjustment in emerging adults
and that perceived authoritarian parenting and perceived harshness of discipline will be
related directly to poor emotional adjustment in emerging adults. Using prior work [19, 20]
that examines the mediational effect of discipline as a building block, the current study also
explores whether discipline strategies act as mediators in the relationship between parenting
styles and emerging adult emotional adjustment. Thus, Hypothesis 3 states that perceived
discipline strategies will mediate the effect of perceived parenting styles and emerging adult
emotional adjustment. That is, perceived parenting styles will share a significant relationship with emerging adult emotional adjustment independently but that this effect will be
eliminated when examined in the context of perceived discipline strategies.

Method
Participants
The sample for the current study consisted of 163 males and 363 females who fell within
the developmental time frame of emerging adulthood (M = 19.22, SD = 1.39) and were
enrolled in an introductory psychology course. Individuals older than 25 years of age were
excluded from participating. A large proportion of the sample was Caucasian (76.2%), with
the rest of the sample varying in their ethnic background (i.e., 9.7% Hispanic, 6.5%
African American, 1.9% Asian, and 3.6% other). Participants varied in their socioeconomic status as well, with a majority of the sample reporting a total parental income
between $30,000 and $99,999 (63.0%), and a proportion reporting a total parental income
in excess of $100,000 (26.4%). Participants were treated in accordance with the Ethical
Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct.
Materials
Demographics Questionnaire
A demographics questionnaire was used to gain pertinent demographic information.
Variables assessed included participants age, gender, living situation, total family income,
parents education levels, and parents occupations.
Parental Bonding Instrument
The Parental Bonding Instrument (PBI [31]) is a 25-item scale designed to measure
parental behaviors and attitudes as perceived by adolescents. The measure has maternal

123

468

Child Psychiatry Hum Dev (2011) 42:463481

and paternal scales and includes two variables, caring (opposite extreme being indifference
or rejection; e.g., Speaks to me with a warm and friendly voice) and overprotection
(opposite extreme being encouragement of autonomy; e.g., Invades my privacy). The items
on these scales were rated on four-point Likert scales ranging from Very Like to Very
Unlike. Exhibiting good to excellent internal consistency, the PBI has split-half reliability
coefficients of .88 for care and .74 for overprotection in other studies. Showing good to
adequate stability, the PBI also has three-week testretest correlations of .76 for care and
.63 for overprotection. The PBI correlates significantly with independent rater judgments
of parental caring and overprotection, demonstrating good concurrent validity. In this
study, the items from the care and overprotection scale (alphas ranging from .79 to .89)
were scored and used as predictors of parenting styles.
Parental Authority Questionnaire
The Parental Authority Questionnaire (PAQ [32]) contains 30 questions, which assess
parents permissive (e.g., feels that what children need is to be free to make up their own
minds and to do what they want to do), authoritarian (e.g., feels that it is for our own
good if we are forced to conform to what she/he thinks is right), and authoritative (e.g.,
encourages verbal give-and-take whenever I feel that family rules and restrictions are
unreasonable) parenting styles (with 10 questions for each). Participants were instructed to
rate each statement according to a five-point Likert scale ranging from Strongly Disagree
to Strongly Agree. Participants rated each statement for both their mothers and fathers.
Testretest reliabilities range from .77 to .92, and internal consistency reliabilities range
from .74 to .87 on the subscales, demonstrating good reliability. The scale also has good
discriminant validity. Authoritarianism is related inversely to permissiveness and authoritativeness, whereas permissiveness is not related to authoritativeness. Criterion-related
validity is established, with parental warmth and authoritativeness being related positively,
authoritarianism being related negatively, and permissiveness being unrelated to parental
nurturance. In this study, the three subscales (alphas from .73 to .89) were used as predictors of parenting styles.
Conflict Tactics Scale: ParentChild Version
The Conflicts Tactics Scale: ParentChild Version (CTSPC [33]) is as 22-item scale used
to assess the amount of physical and psychological aggression used by parents. In this
study, it was used to measure discipline strategies that occurred within the past year, and
participants also indicated if the discipline strategy had ever been used before. Subscales
include nonviolent discipline (e.g., Explained why something was wrong), psychological
aggression (e.g., Shouted, yelled, or screamed at you), corporal punishment (e.g., Shook
you), and severe physical assault (e.g., Hit you with a fist or kicked you hard). Alphas in
previous studies for the various subscales range from -.02 to .60, with low internal
consistencies accounted for by the rare occurrences of strategies depicted in certain items
(e.g., a parent stabbing their child) and resulting in an extremely skewed distribution.
Although a high internal consistency is not a prerequisite of validity, testretest reliability
is. The scale has testretest reliabilities ranging from .49 to .80. Evidence of validity is
evident as the scale correlates in expected directions with various other measures and does
not correlate when it is not expected to. In this study, the subscale scores were calculated
by summing the respective items from each scale (alphas from .59 to .85). These scores
were used as predictors of discipline strategies.

123

Child Psychiatry Hum Dev (2011) 42:463481

469

Rosenberg Self-Esteem Inventory

The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Inventory (RSEI [34]) was used to assess self-esteem, conceptualized as a type of emotional adjustment for this study. The scale consists of 10 items
(e.g., I am satisfied with myself) that are rated on a four-point Likert scale with responses
ranging from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree. Internal consistencies range from .85 to
.88 in college student samples. Validity is demonstrated as this scale correlates positively
with other measures of self-esteem and correlates negatively with negative adjustment
(e.g., depression, anxiety). In this study, the overall score (alpha of .90) was calculated by
summing the items and used as a predictor of emotional adjustment.
Beck Depression Inventory
The Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II [35]) was used to measure depression. The
measure contains 21 items (e.g., I am so sad and unhappy that I cant stand it) which are
rated from 0 to 3, with higher ratings indicating more severe depression. In previous
studies, internal consistencies are .92 and .93 for outpatients and college students,
respectively. Validity for this measure is established as the BDI-II correlates positively
with other measures of depression and has high item-intercorrelations. In this study, the
overall score (alpha of .92) was calculated by summing the items and was used as a
predictor of emotional adjustment.
Manifest Anxiety Scale
The Manifest Anxiety Scale (MAS [36]) was used to measure anxiety. Items on this
50-item measure (e.g., I feel anxiety about something or someone almost all the time) were
taken from the MMPI and are rated as being True or False. The overall score indicates how
severely a participant is affected by anxiety. Previous studies have split-half reliabilities of
.92 and testretest reliabilities ranging from .81 to .89. Validity is established as studies
indicate that MAS scores agree with scores on other anxiety instruments. In this study, the
overall score (alpha of .91) was calculated by scoring the number of items endorsed as
characterizing anxiety and was used as an indicator of emotional adjustment.
Procedure
Upon approval of the study by the institutional review board, participants attended a data
collection session. During this session, participants reviewed and signed an informed
consent form, which stated that the study was about parent-adolescent characteristics and
current functioning, and completed the aforementioned questionnaires. Participants were
instructed to refer to their current relationships with their mothers and fathers when
responding to the questionnaires. Upon completion of the study, participants were
debriefed about the study and given extra credit toward a psychology course.

Results
Means, standard deviations, and correlations were calculated using SPSS for Windows
18.0, and structural equation modeling (SEM) analyses were performed using Statistica

123

470

Child Psychiatry Hum Dev (2011) 42:463481

SEPATH for Windows 5.1. Unless otherwise stated, an alpha level of .01 and listwise
deletion were used for analyses.
Mean Comparisons
Paired-samples t tests (i.e., ratings of mother and father means were compared within each
participant) were used to examine differences perceived parental gender differences.
Independent-samples t tests (i.e., ratings of mother and father means were compared
between male and female participants) were used to examine participant gender differences. Refer to Table 1 for means, standard deviations, and significant differences. Given
the differences described in Table 1, male and female data regarding mother and father
variables were analyzed separately. Thus, data for four models (male-father, male-mother,
female-father, and female-mother) were examined in later analyses of structural equation
models.
Correlations
Many scales obtained noteworthy correlations with emerging adults emotional adjustment. Refer to Tables 2 and 3. The correlations discussed here were correlated in the
hypothesized direction and obtained an absolute r [ .30 at the p \ .01 level. Emerging
adults self-esteem was correlated positively with the PBI care subscale in three of the dyad
sets (i.e., male-father, male-mother, and female-mother). Emerging adults depression was
correlated positively with the CTSPC corporal punishment scale for male-father and
Table 1 Means and standard deviations of male and female-mother and father scores
Indicator

Males

Females

Fathers
M

Mothers
SD

Fathers
SD

Mothers
SD

SD

PBI care

21.62

7.39

26.51

5.71

23.00

8.02

26.96

PBI overprotection

10.22

6.23

11.86

6.02

10.40

6.39

10.67

6.45
6.04

PAQ authoritative

33.74

6.45

36.11

5.63

34.18

7.30

36.60

6.39

PAQ authoritarian

32.42

7.51

29.16

7.04

31.27

8.54

28.73

7.48

PAQ permissive

33.17

6.50

35.97

5.73

34.42

7.06

37.08

5.78

CTSPC nonviolent discipline

18.52

19.71

25.24

19.76

16.42

17.28

25.95

21.38

CTSPC psychological aggression

18.11

25.68

20.26

24.15

11.19

19.23

19.11

24.03

CTSPC corporal punishment

7.61

16.79

13.13

24.07

5.11

15.23

7.50

17.85

CTSPC severe assault

4.90

15.36

3.85

10.12

1.56

6.83

1.60

7.01

RSEI

31.60

5.69

31.83

4.80

BDI

7.95

9.52

8.30

7.97

MAS

17.27

10.14

19.70

9.62

Indicates that a variable has a global mean instead of father/mother specific means. Within-participant
ratings of mothers and fathers differed significantly at the p \ .0005 level on all measures except the PAQ
permissiveness (p \ .02) and the CTSPC severe physical assault scales (p = NS). Between-participant
ratings of mothers and fathers differed significantly at the p \ .01 level in their ratings on the PAQ
permissiveness (mothers and fathers), PBI overprotection (mothers only), CTSPC psychological aggression
(fathers only), corporal punishment (mothers only), severe physical assault (mothers and fathers), and MAS
scales)

123

RSEI

BDI

MAS

10.

11.

12.

-.20

-.06

.30*

-.34*

-.16

-.32*

.04

.10

-.29*

.57*

-.60*

.67*

.24*

.17

-.12

-.16

-.23*

.04

-.28*

-.14

-.26*

.00

.18*

-.16

-.29*

3.

.31*

.26*

.35*

-.01

-.44*

.43*

-.36*

-.34*

2.

.22*

.06

-.13

.29*

.43*

.42*

.27*

-.38*

-.38*

.27*

-.35*

4.

.35*

.29*

-.28*

.48*

.63*

-.32*

-.28*

.29*

-.27*

.22*

-.34*

5.
.08

.25*

.20*

-.18*

.31*

.54*

.47*

-.16*

.29*

.16*

-.01

6.

*p \ .01

.35*

.29*

-.30*

.49*

.63*

.51*

-.20*

.28*

-.25*

.27*

-.32*

7.

Correlations for ratings of mothers are below, whereas ratings of fathers are above the diagonal. N = 163

CTSPC corp. pun.

CTSPC severe assault

8.

9.

CTSPC nonviol. disc.

CTSPC psych. aggr.

6.

7.

PAQ authoritarian

PAQ permissive

4.

PAQ authoritative

3.

5.

PBI care

PBI overprotection

1.

2.

1.

Table 2 Correlations among indicators for males

.33*

.33*

-.23*

.48*

.65*

.51*

-.22*

.27*

-.11

.21*

-.18

8.

.25*

.08

-.25*

.71*

.55*

.37*

-.07

.13

-.13

.07

-.16

9.

-.66*

-.61*

-.25*

-.26*

-.22*

-.14*

.07

-.14

.17

-.28*

.32*

10.

.69*

-.61*

.39*

.36*

.27*

.19*

-.03

.01

-.09

.00

-.22*

11.

.69*

-.66*

.30*

.35*

.27*

.21*

-.08

.23*

-.10

.22*

-.25*

12.

Child Psychiatry Hum Dev (2011) 42:463481

471

123

123

RSEI

BDI

MAS

10.

11.

12.

-.30*

-.29*

.32*

-.18*

-.16*

-.19*

-.10

.21*

-.44*

.68*

-.55*

.27*

.27*

-.33*

.05

.03

.11

.23*

-.43*

.54*

-.46*

-.40*

2.
.73*

-.23*

-.20*

.28*

-.18*

-.17*

-.20*

-.07

.22*

-.45*

-.38*

3.

.29*

.24*

-.25*

.17*

.18*

.19*

.25*

-.52*

-.52*

.55*

-.49*

4.

.26*

.34*

-.16*

.59*

.60*

-.20*

-.23*

.39*

-.37*

.40*

-.43*

5.
.03

.16*

.05

.23*

*p \ .01

.46*

.28*

.35*

.35*

-.25*

.22*

-.14*

.54*

1
.47*

.52*

.45*

-.28*

.39*

-.37*

.37*

-.43*

7.

.22*

-.23*

6.

Correlations for ratings of mothers are below, whereas ratings of fathers are above the diagonal. N = 363

CTSPC corp. pun.

CTSPC severe assault

8.

9.

CTSPC nonviol. disc.

CTSPC psych. aggr.

6.

7.

PAQ authoritarian

PAQ permissive

4.

PAQ authoritative

3.

5.

PBI care

PBI overprotection

1.

2.

1.

Table 3 Correlations among indicators for females

.18*

.23*

-.07

.80*

.60*

.33*

-.20*

.31*

-.32*

.19*

-.28*

8.

.16*

.23*

-.14*

.80*

.59*

.26*

-.16*

.26*

-.30*

.24*

-.31*

9.

-.57*

-.58*

-.05

-.07

-.16*

-.09

.13*

-.26*

.20*

-.27*

.25*

10.

.69*

-.58*

.23*

.23*

.34*

.23*

-.15*

.21*

-.15*

.29*

-.27*

11.

.69*

-.57*

.16*

.18*

.26*

.23*

-.09

.22*

-.15*

.21*

-.25*

12.

472
Child Psychiatry Hum Dev (2011) 42:463481

Child Psychiatry Hum Dev (2011) 42:463481

473

male-mother ratings. Emerging adults depression also was correlated positively with the
CTSPC psychological aggression scale for female-father and female-mother ratings.
Finally, emerging adults anxiety was correlated positively with the CTSPC corporal
punishment scale for male-father and male-mother ratings.
Latent Constructs and Their Indicators
The constructs for this study included perceived parenting styles, perceived discipline
strategies, and emerging adults emotional adjustment. Perceived parenting styles were
indicated by the two subscales of the PBI (i.e., care and overprotection) and the three
subscales of the PAQ (i.e., the authoritative, authoritarian, and permissive subscales). The
nonviolent discipline, psychological aggression, corporal punishment, and severe physical
assault subscales of the CTSPC indicated perceived discipline strategies. Emerging adults
emotional adjustment was indicated by the RSEI (self-esteem), BDI (depression), and
MAS (anxiety). Thus, perceived parenting styles has five indicators, perceived discipline
strategies has four indicators, and emerging adults emotional adjustment has three indicators, for a total of 12 indicators.
Model Analyses
For the purposes of SEM, a male sample size of 163 is considered fair, and a female sample
size of 363 is considered good [37]. The generalized least squares to maximum likelihood
(GLS-ML) method of covariance structure analysis was used. Overall model fit was
examined with the squared error of approximation (RMSEA), the comparative fit index
(CFI), and the parsimonious fit index (PFI). RMSEA values less than or equal to .10 [37]
and CFI values greater than or equal to .90 have been used to indicate acceptable model fit
[38]. More recently, however, the use of RMSEA values less than or equal to .08 and CFI
values greater than or equal to .95 also has been suggested to avoid accepting models that
do not adequately fit the data [39]. Thus, both sets of criteria were used to evaluate models
and models adhering to the more stringent values were noted. PFI values greater than or
equal to .60 signify that a model is sufficiently parsimonious [40]. Chi-square tests were
not used to assess overall model fit due to their sensitivity to sample size and other
biases [40].
Similar to other research, a two-stage modeling approach was taken [41, 42]. In stage
one, a measurement model that allowed all latent constructs to correlate freely was
developed and evaluated. In stage two, structural analysis designed to test relationships
among latent variables was conducted. This process allowed structural relationships to be
tested only after ensuring that latent variables were measured adequately. Exploratory
procedures were used initially to create a suitable measurement model, and confirmatory
procedures then were used to test relationships among latent variables. This approach
decreases the possibility that relationships among latent variables will be misinterpreted
solely due to poor construct measurement [42].
Measurement and Structural Models
All of the original measurement models using 12 indicators failed to adequately fit the data
(all RMSEA [ .10, all CFI \ .90), suggesting the need for respecification. The need to
respecify is common as initially specified measurement models almost invariably fail to

123

474

Child Psychiatry Hum Dev (2011) 42:463481

provide acceptable fit [41, p. 412]. Examination of the standardized residuals associated
with each model revealed several indicators that did not relate clearly to a latent construct.
As a result, these indicators were deleted from future analyses. The respecified male
measurement models, shown in Figs. 1 and 2, reproduced adequately the covariance matrix
as indicated by the RMSEA (all B .10), CFI (all C .90), and PFI (all C .60), whereas the
respecified female measurement models, also shown in Figs. 1 and 2, met the more
stringent values described above, RMSEA (all B .08), CFI (all C .95), and PFI (all C .60).
All factor loadings exceeded .60 (all ps \ .0005), indicating convergent validity.
Upon specifying appropriate measurement models, the hypothesized structural models
were tested. Male structural models reproduced adequately the covariance matrix as
indicated by the RMSEA (all B .10), CFI (all C .90), and PFI (all C .60) shown, whereas
female structural models met the more stringent values, RMSEA (all B .08), CFI
(all C .95), and PFI (all C .60). Intercorrelations of the latent constructs for males and
females are shown in Figs. 1 and 2, and model statistics for respecified measurement
models and hypothesized structural models are shown in Table 4. Figures 3 and 4 display
the structural models with path coefficients.
Hypotheses Revisited
Correlations among latent factors in the measurement model shown in Figs. 1 and 2 were
examined to test the hypotheses regarding the relationships among the variables.
Hypothesis 1 (i.e., perceived authoritative parenting will be related inversely with perceived harshness of discipline, whereas perceived authoritarian parenting will be related
directly with perceived harshness of discipline) and hypothesis 2 (i.e., perceived

Parenting
Styles

.788

.831

PAQ Authoritative

-.643

-.613

PAQ Authoritarian

.838

.861

PBI Care

.738

.691

CTSPC Psych. Aggr.

.921

.901

CTSCP Corp. Pun.

.772

-.866

CTSPC Severe Assault

-.758

-.705

RSEI

.795

.844

BDI

.866

.822

-.274 -.446

-.293 -.385

Discipline
Strategies

.483 .283

Emotional
Adjustment

MAS

Fig. 1 Male-father and female-father measurement model. Standardized factor loadings for males appear to
the left, whereas standardized factor loadings for females appear to the right. Standardized factor loadings
and intercorrelations (all ps \ .01) appear along arrows. Measurement errors have been omitted for clarity

123

Child Psychiatry Hum Dev (2011) 42:463481

Parenting
Styles

475
.671

.738

PAQ Authoritative

-.616

- .635

PAQ Authoritarian

.823

.797

PBI Care

.823

.931

CTSPC Psych. Aggr.

.761

.679

CTSCP Corp. Pun.

.629

.614

CTSPC Severe Assault

-.758

-.710

RSEI

.776

.832

BDI

.883

.831

-.506 -.541

-.295

Discipline
Strategies

-.473

.485 .435

Emotional
Adjustment

MAS

Fig. 2 Male-mother and female-mother measurement model. Standardized factor loadings for males appear
to the left, whereas standardized factor loadings for females appear to the right. Standardized factor loadings
and intercorrelations (all ps \ .01) appear along arrows. Measurement errors have been omitted for clarity

Table 4 Fit indices for covariance structure analyses

Test

Chi squared

df

RMSEA

CFI

PFI

Males rating fathers

55.78

24

.09

.94

.61

Males rating mothers

78.47

24

.09

.90

.61

Females rating fathers

86.93

24

.08

.95

.63

Females rating mothers

48.68

24

.06

.97

.63

Males rating fathers

63.39

30

.08

.94

.75

Males rating mothers

82.23

30

.09

.90

.70

Females rating fathers

86.93

30

.07

.96

.78

Females rating mothers

55.48

30

.05

.97

.79

Measurement models
1. Respecified model

Structural models
2. Hypothesized model

N = 163 for males; N = 363 for females

authoritative parenting will be related inversely to poor emotional adjustment in emerging

adults and that perceived authoritarian parenting and perceived harshness of discipline will
be related directly to poor emotional adjustment in emerging adults) both are supported by
the correlations among the latent constructs across all four measurement models.
Hypothesis 3 (i.e., perceived discipline would mediate the effects of perceived parenting
on emotional adjustment) was tested using nested model comparisons. First, both the

123

476

Child Psychiatry Hum Dev (2011) 42:463481

Parenting
Styles
-.184

-.321*

-.446*

-.323*

Discipline
Strategies
.431*

.139*

Emotional
Adjustment
Fig. 3 Male-father and female-father fitted covariance structure model. Standardized parameter estimates
for males appear to the left, whereas standardized parameter estimates for females appear to the right.
Asterisks label standardized parameter estimates for which p \ .05. Disturbances and measurement error
effects are omitted for clarity

Parenting
Styles
-.065

-.659*

-.554*

-.358*

Discipline
Strategies
.450*

.274*

Emotional
Adjustment
Fig. 4 Male-mother and female-mother fitted covariance structure model. Standardized parameter
estimates for males appear to the left, whereas standardized parameter estimates for females appear to
the right. Asterisks label standardized parameter estimates for which p \ .05. Disturbances and
measurement error effects are omitted for clarity

predictor construct and mediator construct must relate independently to the predicted
variable to test for mediation. Establishing this criteria, models testing the direct relationship between perceived parenting styles and emotional adjustment as well as models
testing the direct relationship between perceived discipline and emotional adjustment
adequately fit the data according to the more stringent criteria noted above. Second, a
nested model where the expected mediated path (i.e., the path between perceived parenting
and emotional adjustment) is set to zero is compared to an exact model where the expected
mediated path is allowed to vary. If the model with the path set to zero demonstrates
significant improvement in fit according to a chi-square difference test, then full mediation
is demonstrated. Failing to support this hypothesis, none of the nested models demonstrated statistically significant improved model fit according to chi-square difference tests.
Examination of the structural models indicates partial mediation in some cases, however,
providing some support for hypothesis 3. Specifically, both male structural models (i.e., for
male-father and male-mother dyads) demonstrated that the effect of perceived parenting
styles on emotional adjustment is smaller than the correlation obtained from the measurement models and is no longer statistically significant. This effect is not noted in either
the female-father or female-mother models, where the observed effect of perceived parenting styles on emotional adjustment appears to be stronger than the effect of perceived
discipline strategies.

123

Child Psychiatry Hum Dev (2011) 42:463481

477

Discussion
This study examines the relationships among mothers and fathers perceived parenting
styles, perceived discipline strategies, and emerging adults emotional adjustment. Consistent with previous research, results suggest that authoritative parenting is associated with
better emerging adult adjustment and that authoritarian parenting and harshness of discipline are associated with poorer emerging adult adjustment. Adding novel information to
the existing research, however, results indicate that, when analyzed simultaneously, perceived discipline strategies alter the relationship between perceived parenting styles and
emerging adult emotional adjustment, particularly for males. Specifically, the path of
parenting styles to perceived discipline strategies is significant across all structural models
(i.e., for male-father, male-mother, female-father, and female-mother dyads), and the path
of perceived discipline strategies to emerging adult emotional adjustment is significant
across all structural models. Further, although perceived parenting styles shares a significant correlation with emerging adult emotional adjustment in all the measurement models,
perceived parenting styles does not have a significant path to emerging adult emotional
adjustment in either of the male structural models.
In contrast, the path of perceived parenting styles to emerging adults emotional
adjustment is significant in both of the female structural models and also appears to be
stronger than the path from perceived discipline strategies to emerging adults emotional
adjustment. That is, although perceived discipline strategies are a significantly associated
with emerging adults emotional adjustment for both males and females, it appears to share
a stronger relationship for males than for females. Further, perceived parenting styles no
longer shares a significant relationship with emotional adjustment for males but appears to
be the strongest predictor for females. Overall, the results of the current study suggest that,
for females, perceived parenting styles and perceived discipline strategies are associated
with their emotional adjustment but that perceived parenting styles appear to be associated
more strongly than perceived discipline strategies. For males, perceived discipline strategies appear to be associated more strongly with their emotional adjustment than perceived
parenting styles, which is no longer associated significantly with their emotional adjustment when analyzed with SEM.
A final finding of interest is that the path coefficient between perceived discipline
strategies and emerging adults emotional adjustment in the female-father model appears
particularly weak relative to other path coefficients. This finding suggests that, for females,
fathers may influence their emotional adjustment more through their parenting style than
through fathers use of specific discipline strategies. In contrast, parenting styles and
discipline strategies appear to share similar path coefficients with emerging adults emotional adjustment in the female-mother model.
Implications for Research and Practice
The results presented in this study hold practical implications for researchers, mental
health professionals, and even parents, teachers, and/or other individuals interested in
adolescents outcomes. Researchers must understand the necessity of examining relationships in the context of other variables. For example, although research often demonstrates relationships among parenting and an abundance of other variables, researchers
must consider possible interactions with other variables that may lead to direct as well as
indirect effects related to child and adolescent adjustment. As demonstrated in the current
study, relationships observed in isolation may have different effects when observed in

123

478

Child Psychiatry Hum Dev (2011) 42:463481

conjunction with other variables. Additionally, researchers are urged to examine parenting
and other variables related to child and adolescent adjustment in the context of gender.
Given the differences among the gender dyads noted above, this study lends further evidence that the relationships among various parenting characteristics (e.g., parenting styles
and discipline strategies) and emerging adults adjustment need to be examined in the
context of the gender of both parents and their emerging adults (e.g., 4, 8, 21, 22, 24, 25,
26, 27). Thus, examining parenting as a global, overall variable may not best explain the
nuances of parenting that occurs in gender dyads.
Mental health professionals also may find the results of this study to be informative as
they examine variables that may be targeted to improve late adolescents outcomes. For
example, working with parents to increase effective parenting practices (e.g., encourage
warmth and demandingness) or effective discipline strategies (e.g., encourage consistency
and inductive techniques) may potentially lead to positive effects on late adolescents
adjustment. Further, this study emphasizes the importance of understanding the processes
that are active in parent-adolescent relationships. Specifically, mental health professionals
must consider how their interventions are working instead of merely being satisfied with a
positive effect. Knowing the reasons that interventions work will help in their generalizability across clients and populations. For example, the relationships found in this study
suggest that intervening with parenting style may be associated more directly to
improvements in adjustment when working with female emerging adults but that discipline
style may have a stronger influence when working with male emerging adults. Mental
health professionals should consider these indirect relationships when developing valid
case conceptualizations in the context of effective interventions.
Finally, many parents, teachers, and other caregivers search for resources in working
with children and adolescents. This study may help these individuals understand the
relationships among the variables discussed in this study. Further, parents and caregivers
may be able to understand their emerging adults in light of the information presented in
this study. For example, parents may be able to learn how they contribute to both positive
and negative adjustment with their children and begin to incorporate changes for both
themselves and their children in the context of their parenting.

Limitations
The findings of this study must be viewed in the context of its limitations. One limitation
may be the generalizability of the findings. The sample consisted of traditional-aged
college students, over three-fourths of whom were Caucasian. Additionally, very few
participants reported backgrounds of low socioeconomic status. As a result, it is recommended that future studies explore various ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds under
more rigorous methodological conditions. Another limitation of this study was that it relied
solely on the self-report of emerging adult participants. What emerging adults experience
and recall may differ from what mothers and fathers experience and recall. Further, source
bias may lead to inflated results. Also, information regarding participant living status (e.g.,
at home, on campus, etc.) and amount of contact with parents was not collected. It may be
the case that data for participants who had more contact or lived with their parents would
be different when compared to data for participants who had less contact or did not live
with their parents. Another limitation of this study was its design. Correlational in nature,
this study is unable to determine causation. Finally, many other factors not studied here
may influence emerging adults emotional adjustment as well.

123

Child Psychiatry Hum Dev (2011) 42:463481

479

In addition to the limitations above, limitations specific to the modeling procedures also
must be considered. First, the manifest variables used to measure the latent constructs
should be noted. Specifically, although the perceived parenting construct originally
included three subscales of the PAQ (i.e., authoritative, authoritarian, and permissive) and
two subscales of the PBI (i.e., warmth and overprotection), the permissive and overprotection subscales were dropped due to low factor loadings. This suggests that the perceived
parenting construct may be viewed best as indicating warmth, rejection, and flexibility
related to parenting. Further, the perceived discipline construct originally included four
subscales of the CTSPC (i.e., non-violent discipline, psychological aggression, corporal
punishment, severe physical assault), but the non-violent discipline subscale was dropped
due to low factor loadings. This suggests that the perceived discipline construct may be
viewed best as indicating harsh discipline practices only. Second, more confidence may be
placed in models examining females compared to models examining males. Although
models for both males and females meet earlier criteria established to indicate adequate
model fit, only female models meet more stringent criteria established more recently. This
indicates that models for both males and females are likely to fit the data adequately but
that more confidence may be placed in models for females.
Summary
Although parenting styles and discipline techniques and their effects on child and adolescent adjustment have been studied extensively, less research has examined these variables simultaneously or in the context of late adolescents, or emerging adults. Consistent
with past research, perceived paternal and maternal parenting styles and perceived paternal
and maternal discipline strategies are correlated with emerging adults emotional adjustment. When analyzed using SEM, however, perceived discipline strategies remain a significant predictor of emerging adults emotional adjustment across all models, whereas
perceived parenting styles remain a significant predictor for females only. Although full
mediation is not demonstrated, indirect effects and partial mediation may play a significant
role when analyzing parenting characteristics, suggesting the importance of examining
parenting characteristics in the context of other variables. Additionally, given the differences across the cross-gender models, the importance of exploring the effects of parents
and emerging adults gender in parent-emerging adult relationships [43] is demonstrated.

References
1. Baumrind D (1991) Effective parenting during the early adolescent transition. In: Cowan PA (ed)
Family transitions. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, pp 111163
2. Harper FWK, Brown AM, Arias I, Brody G (2006) Corporal punishment and kids: how do parent
support and gender influence child adjustment? J Fam Violence 2:197207
3. Renk K, McKinney C, Klein J, Oliveros A (2006) Childhood discipline, perceptions of parents, and
current functioning in female college students. J Adolesc 29:7888
4. McKinney C, Renk K (2008) Differential parenting between mothers and fathers: implications for late
adolescents. J Fam Issues 29:806827
5. Arnett JJ (2000) Emerging adulthood: a theory of development from the late teens through the twenties.
Am Psychol 55:469480
6. Maccoby EE, Martin JA (1983) Socialization in the context of the family: parentchild interaction. In:
Mussen PH, Hetherington EM (eds) Handbook of child psychology: socialization, personality, and
social development, vol 4. Wiley, New York, pp 1101

123

480

Child Psychiatry Hum Dev (2011) 42:463481

7. Henderson CE, Dakof GA, Schwartz SJ, Liddle HA (2006) Family functioning, self-concept, and
severity of adolescent externalizing problems. J Child Fam Stud 15:721731
8. McKinney C, Renk K (2008) Multivariate models of parent-late adolescent gender dyads: the importance of parenting processes in predicting adjustment. Child Psychiatry Hum Dev 39:147170
9. Paulussen-Hoogeboom MC, Stams GJJM, Hermanns JMA, Peetsma TTD, Wittenboer GLH (2008)
Parenting style as a mediator between childrens negative emotionality and problematic behavior in
early childhood. J Genet Psychol 169:209226
10. Barnett MA, Quackenbush SW, Sinisi CS (1996) Factors affecting childrens, adolescents, and young
adults perceptions of parental discipline. J Genet Psychol 157:411424
11. Hoffman ML (1963) Parent discipline and the childs consideration for others. Child Dev 34:573588
12. Straus MA (1994) Beating the devil out of them: corporal punishment in American families and its
effects on children. Lexington Books, New York
13. Day RD, Peterson GW, McCracken C (1998) Predicting spanking behavior of younger and older
children by mothers and fathers. J Marriage Fam 60:7994
14. Manzeske DP, Stright AD (2009) Parenting styles and emotion regulation: the roles of behavioral and
psychological control during young adulthood. J Adult Dev 16:223229
15. Kuppens S, Grietens H, Onghena P, Michiels D (2009) Relations between parental psychological
control and childhood relational aggression: reciprocal in nature? J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol
38:117131
16. Pettit GS, Bates J, Dodge KA (1997) Supportive parenting, ecological context, and the childrens
adjustment: a seven-year long longitudinal study. Child Dev 68:908923
17. Krevans J, Gibbs JC (1996) Parents use of inductive discipline: relations to childrens empathy and
prosocial behavior. Child Dev 67:32633277
18. Laible D, Eye J, Carlo G (2008) Dimensions of conscience in mid-adolescence: links with social
behavior, parenting, and temperament. J Youth Adolescence 37:875887
19. Fletcher AC, Walls JK, Cook E, Madison KJ, Bridges TH (2008) Parenting styles as a moderator of
associations between maternal disciplinary strategies and child well-being. J Fam Issues 29:17241742
20. Gfroerer K, Kern R, Curlette W (2004) Research support for individual psychologys parenting model.
J Individ Psychol 61:379388
21. Bosco GL, Renk K, Dinger TM, Epstein MK, Phares V (2003) The connections between adolescents
perceptions of parents, parental psychological symptoms, and adolescent functioning. J Appl Dev
Psychol 24:179200
22. McKinney C, Donnelly R, Renk K (2008) Perceived parenting, positive and negative perceptions of
parents, and late adolescent emotional adjustment. Child Adolesc Ment Health 13:6673
23. Paulson SE, Sputa CL (1996) Patterns of parenting during adolescence: perceptions of adolescents and
parents. J Adolesc 31:369381
24. Phares V, Fields S, Kamboukos D (2009) Fathers and mothers involvement with their adolescents.
J Child Fam Stud 18:19
25. Gryczkowski MR, Jordan SS, Mercer SH (2010) Differential relations between mothers and fathers
parenting practices and child externalizing behavior. J Child Fam Stud 19:539546
26. Conrade G, Ho R (2001) Differential parenting styles for fathers and mothers: differential treatment for
sons and daughters. Aust J Psychol 53:2935
27. Phares V (1999) Poppa psychology. Praeger Publishers, Westport
28. McKee L, Roland E, Coffelt N, Olsen A, Forehand R, Massari C et al (2007) Harsh discipline and child
problem behaviors: the roles of positive parenting and gender. J Fam Violence 22:187196
29. Milevsky A, Schlechter M, Netter S, Keehn D (2007) Maternal and paternal parenting styles in adolescents: associations with self-esteem, depression, and life satisfaction. J Fam Stud 16:3947
30. Agliata AK, Renk K (2008) College students adjustment: the role of parent-college student expectation
discrepancies and communication reciprocity. J Youth Adolesc 37:967982
31. Parker G, Tupling H, Brown LB (1979) A parental bonding instrument. Br J Med Psychol 52:110
32. Buri JR (1991) Parental Authority Questionnaire. J Pers Assess 57:110119
33. Straus MA, Hamby SL, Finkelhor D, Moore DW, Runyan D (1998) Identification of child maltreatment
with the parent-child conflict tactics scales: development and psychometric data for a national sample of
American parents. Child Abuse Negl 22:249270
34. Rosenberg M (1965) Society and the adolescent self image. Princeton University Press, Princeton
35. Beck AT, Steer RA, Brown GK (1996) Beck depression inventory: second edition manual. The Psychological Corporation, San Antonio
36. Taylor JA (1953) A personality scale of manifest anxiety. J Abnorm Soc Psych 48:285290
37. Kline RB (1998) Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. The Guilford Press, New York

123

Child Psychiatry Hum Dev (2011) 42:463481

481

38. Bentler PM (1992) On the fit of models to covariances and methodology to the bulletin. Psychol Bull
112:400404
39. Hu L, Bentler PM (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional
criteria versus new alternatives. Stuct Equ Model 6:155
40. James LR, Mulaik SS, Brett JM (1982) Causal analysis: assumptions, models, and data. Sage, Beverly
Hills
41. Anderson JC, Gerbing DW (1988) Structural equations modeling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach. Psychol Bull 103:411423
42. Barry B, Stewart GL (1997) Composition, process, and performance in self-managed groups: the role of
personality. J Appl Psychol 82:6278
43. Russell A, Saebel J (1997) Mother-son, mother-daughter, father-son, and father-daughter: are they
distinct relationships? Dev Rev 17:111147

123

Copyright of Child Psychiatry & Human Development is the property of Springer Science & Business Media
B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright
holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.