ORIGINAL RESEARCH

published: 13 November 2018

doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02187

Parenting Styles and

Parent–Adolescent Relationships:
The Mediating Roles of Behavioral
Autonomy and Parental Authority
Xinwen Bi 1 , Yiqun Yang 1 , Hailei Li 2 , Meiping Wang 1 , Wenxin Zhang 1* and
Kirby Deater-Deckard 3
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
Edited by:
Claudio Longobardi, whether adolescent gender moderated these effects. Results from a sample of
Università degli Studi di Torino, Italy 633 Chinese adolescents (7th grade: Mage = 13.50 ± 0.62 years, 9th grade:
Reviewed by: Mage = 15.45 ± 0.67 years, 11th grade: Mage = 17.30 ± 0.75 years) suggested
Lei Chang,
University of Macau, China similar levels of parent–adolescent conflict frequency for all parenting styles. However,
Nicola Carone, for parent–adolescent conflict intensity, youth of neglectful and authoritarian parents
La Sapienza University of Rome, Italy
reported higher levels compared to those with indulgent parents. The highest levels
*Correspondence:
of cohesion with both parents were reported by adolescents with authoritative parents,
Wenxin Zhang
zhangwenxin@sdnu.edu.cn followed by indulgent, authoritarian and neglect parenting styles. Cohesion with mothers
for youth with authoritative or indulgent mothers was higher for girls than boys.
Specialty section:
This article was submitted to
Adolescents’ expectation for behavioral autonomy mediated the links between parenting
Developmental Psychology, style and conflict, whereas adolescents’ beliefs about the legitimacy of parental authority
a section of the journal mediated the links between parenting style and cohesion; some of these mediating
Frontiers in Psychology
effects differed by gender. Findings highlight the importance of studying potential effects
Received: 08 August 2018
Accepted: 23 October 2018 of adolescents’ values and attitudes within the family system in specific cultural contexts.
Published: 13 November 2018
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
INTRODUCTION
and Parent–Adolescent Relationships:
The Mediating Roles of Behavioral
Variations in parenting styles and parent–child relationship qualities are long-standing research
Autonomy and Parental Authority. topics in developmental and family psychology. Previous research has shown that parenting styles
Front. Psychol. 9:2187. are critical family context factors which are closely related to parent–adolescent relationships
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02187 (Shek, 2002). Despite the large number of studies on the associations between parenting styles

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 1 November 2018 | Volume 9 | Article 2187

Bi et al. Parenting Styles and Parent–Adolescent Relationships

and parent–adolescent relationships, existing research mainly predicted by more authoritarian parenting and less authoritative
has focused on the direct effects of parenting styles on parent- parenting. Similarly, Sorkhabi and Middaugh (2014) analyzed
adolescent relationships, while the underlying mechanisms data from American adolescents who had Asian, Latino,
through which parenting styles are associated with parent– Arab, European or other ethnic background. They found that
adolescent relationships have seldom been examined. The adolescents of authoritative parents reported less conflict than
present study examined the possible mediating effects of those with authoritarian parents.
adolescents’ expectations for behavioral autonomy and beliefs Most previous research on the associations between parenting
in the legitimacy of parental authority, on the link between styles and parent-adolescent conflict and cohesion focused on
parenting style differences and variability in relationship conflict one or the other (e.g., Smetana, 1995; Nelson et al., 2011; Sorkhabi
and cohesion, in a sample of youth from mainland China. We and Middaugh, 2014). However, conflict is not the opposite
also tested whether the direct and mediated effects differed for of cohesion, nor are increases over time in one necessarily
girls and boys. associated with decreases in the other (Zhang et al., 2006). To
comprehensively understand the links between parenting styles
Parenting Styles and Parent–Adolescent and these two aspects of the parent-adolescent relationship,
Relationships both should be examined. Also, most previous research seldom
Parenting style is defined as a constellation of parents’ attitudes distinguished conflict frequency and intensity or examined them
and behaviors toward children and an emotional climate simultaneously. Conflict frequency refers to how often conflict
in which the parents’ behaviors are expressed (Darling and occurs, whereas conflict intensity refers to the magnitude of
Steinberg, 1993). In the field of parenting, Maccoby and emotional arousal that occurs during conflict. Prior research
Martin’s (1983) and Baumrind’s (1991) typological approach of on these two aspects of conflict has yielded mixed results. For
conceptualizing parenting has had a tremendous impact. They example, Smetana (1995) found that parenting styles’ links with
classified parenting into four types based on responsiveness conflict frequency and intensity were very similar. In contrast,
and demandingness (Maccoby and Martin, 1983; Baumrind, Assadi et al. (2011) reported that frequency was lower for
1991). Authoritative parenting style is characterized as high authoritative parents and higher for authoritarian parents—
in responsiveness and demandingness. Authoritative parents but only authoritative parenting was linked to intensity. Thus,
provide not only support and warmth, but also clearly conflict intensity and frequency both should be examined.
defined rules and consistent discipline (Baumrind, 1991). Another major gap in the literature is that few of the
Authoritarian parenting style is characterized as low in relevant prior studies examined all four parenting styles. We
responsiveness but high in demandingness. Parents of this know of only one American study (of adolescent substance
style tend to use hostile control or harsh punishment in an abusers) that examined conflict, cohesion, and all four parenting
arbitrary way to gain compliance, but they seldom provide styles (Smith and Hall, 2008). Actually, it’s also important
explanation or allow verbal give-and-take. Indulgent parenting to explore the relationships between indulgent and neglectful
style is characterized as low in demandingness but high parenting style and parent–adolescent conflict and cohesion.
in responsiveness. Indulgent parents are responsive to their Especially, neglectful parenting style which is characterized as
children and satisfy children’s needs, but they fail to set disengaged from child rearing process may be destructive to
proper disciplinary, exhibit behavioral control, or make demands parent–adolescent relationships. Thus, in light of the gaps in
for mature behaviors. Finally, neglectful parenting style is literature identified above, our first major aim was to explore
characterized as low in responsiveness and demandingness. the associations between all four parenting styles and parent–
Neglectful parents are parent-centered and they are seldom adolescent conflict (frequency and intensity) and cohesion. Based
engaged in child rearing practices. They neither provide warmth on prior evidence, we hypothesized that conflict (frequency and
nor set rules for their children. intensity) would be highest, and cohesion lowest, for youth with
Adolescence is a critical developmental period that requires authoritarian parents—and conflict lowest and cohesion highest
parents and youth to renegotiate their relationships (Laursen for adolescents with authoritative parents.
and Collins, 2009). Existing research has shown that variation
in parenting styles is related to differences in parent-adolescent Adolescent Autonomy and Beliefs About
relationship features. Overall, most studies with Western Parental Authority
samples have consistently found that authoritative parenting In spite of the numerous prior studies of the link between
style is associated with higher levels of parent–adolescent parenting style and parent–adolescent relationship features,
cohesion (Nelson et al., 2011) and lower levels of conflict there are surprisingly few that have tested mechanisms that
frequency (Smetana, 1995), conflict intensity (Smetana, 1995), might account for the link. We also addressed this gap in
and total conflict (McKinney and Renk, 2011). In contrast, an the current study. According to Darling and Steinberg’s (1993)
authoritarian parenting style is associated with lower cohesion integrative model, parenting styles affect adolescents’ outcomes
(McKinney and Renk, 2011) and higher conflict frequency by changing the degree to which adolescents accept their
(Smetana, 1995; Sorkhabi and Middaugh, 2014), intensity parents’ attempts to socialize them. When parents use specific
(Smetana, 1995), and total conflict (McKinney and Renk, 2011). styles to rear children, adolescents are not just passive social
For instance, in a sample of American adolescents, Smetana beings, but play an active role in shaping the parent–adolescent
(1995) found that more frequent and intense conflicts were relationship and in interpreting parenting behavior, in ways that

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 2 November 2018 | Volume 9 | Article 2187

Bi et al. Parenting Styles and Parent–Adolescent Relationships

influence their own outcomes. Particularly important to this Jensen and Dost-Gözkan, 2015)—in one study, a pattern found
psychological process are adolescents’ attitudes about behavioral in Mexican, Chinese, Filipino, and European background
autonomy and the legitimacy of parental authority (Darling et al., families (Fuligni, 1998).
2007). In sum, there are well-established links between parenting
style, adolescents’ beliefs (specifically, about autonomy and
Adolescents’ Expectation for Behavioral parental authority), and parent-adolescent relationship qualities.
However, these different constructs have not been examined all
Autonomy
together in one study. In addition, although previous studies have
Autonomy, in contrast to forced behavior, reflects actions
examined the associations between parenting styles and parent-
that arise from the agency of the self rather than others
adolescent relationships, there was no research that examined
(Chen et al., 2013). Variations in parenting style are associated
whether adolescents’ expectation for behavioral autonomy and
with individual differences in adolescents’ autonomy beliefs.
endorsement of parental authority mediated these associations.
Authoritative parenting has been shown to be the most beneficial
Thus, our second aim was to test the hypothesis that expectations
to youth, with regard to fostering healthy normative development
for behavioral autonomy and beliefs in the legitimacy of parental
of autonomy (Baumrind, 1991). In contrast, authoritarian
authority both would mediate the link between parenting styles
parents provided too much strictness and supervision for
and parent-adolescent conflict and cohesion.
their children, while indulgent and neglectful parents provided
insufficient monitoring and guidance. Adolescents with non-
The Role of Adolescent Gender
authoritative parents are more likely to desire for more behavioral
The third and final aim of the current study was to examine
autonomy which is not satisfied in an appropriate way (Bush
potential gender differences in the relationships between
and Peterson, 2013). It is important to note, however, that not
parenting styles, parent-adolescent conflict and cohesion,
all studies find authoritative parenting to be optimal for youth
adolescents’ expectation for behavioral autonomy and
autonomy—differences in findings that may be due to the sample
endorsement of parental authority. There is reason to expect
characteristics or measures being used (e.g., Darling et al., 2005;
differences to be found, although results may differ depending on
Chan and Chan, 2009).
the parenting styles and parent-adolescent relationship features
The development of adolescents’ autonomy, in turn, can have
in question. For instance, Shek (2002) reported an association
effects on parent–adolescent relationship features. Parents and
between parental negativity and greater parent-adolescent
adolescents expect increasing autonomy with age, but adolescents
conflict, only for girls. These differences may reflect distinct
typically demand autonomy earlier than their parents are ready
socialization goals for boys and girls, with girls oriented more
to grant it (Jensen and Dost-Gözkan, 2015; Pérez et al., 2016).
toward family relationships and compliance, and boys oriented
Adolescents’ desire for more autonomy than their parents wish
toward autonomy and self-reliance (Shek, 2002; Zhang et al.,
to grant them prompts youth to exert more control of their
2006). Based on previous research, we expected to find stronger
own affairs, and to be more critical of their parents’ control
associations between parenting style and parent–adolescent
behaviors—a pattern that causes conflict and reduces cohesion
relationship features for girls compared to boys. However, given
(Fuligni, 1998; Zhang and Fuligni, 2006).
the lack of prior research on beliefs about autonomy and parental
authority as mediators, we had no hypotheses regarding gender
Adolescents’ Beliefs About Parental as moderator of those mediating effects.
Authority
In addition to developmental changes in autonomy, adolescence Chinese Cultural Context
also is a period of youths’ changes in attitudes about parental As a final point, another rationale for the current study was
authority—specifically, the extent to which parental assertion to address the dearth of research on mainland Chinese families
of control is seen as an appropriate extension of their role published in the international literature. The existing evidence is
(Darling et al., 2008). Compared to other parenting styles, almost completely dominated by studies of families from Western
authoritative parents have children and adolescents who are more industrial nations, even though mainland China has the single
likely to endorse the legitimacy of parental authority (Smetana, largest population of children and adolescents in the world—in
1995; Darling et al., 2005; Trinkner et al., 2012). In contrast, 2016, 13% or nearly one in eight of the globe’s 0–14-year-olds
authoritarian parents tend to define issues as falling into parental (World Bank, 2017). We know of only one relevant published
jurisdiction too rigidly, and indulgent and neglectful parents study of parenting styles and parent–adolescent relationships,
define these too permissively (Smetana, 1995; Baumrind, 2005). which found that authoritative mothers exhibited the highest
In those cases, adolescents and parents may be deprived of levels, and authoritarian mothers the lowest levels, of mother-
opportunities to debate and negotiate appropriate boundaries, adolescent cohesion (Zhang et al., 2017). Adding to the literature
which in turn can lead youth to question and doubt the legitimacy base to include evidence from non-Western nations such as
of parental authority. China, serves to extend and deepen knowledge of parent-
Attitudes about legitimacy of authority are also linked adolescent relationship processes.
with parent–adolescent relationship features. Adolescents’ Studying mainland Chinese families also offers a unique
endorsement of parental authority is associated with greater opportunity for examining family processes because its culture
cohesion and less conflict with parents (Zhang et al., 2006; is so distinct from Western contexts. Two features in particular

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 3 November 2018 | Volume 9 | Article 2187

Bi et al. Parenting Styles and Parent–Adolescent Relationships

stand out. First, China has been unique in the world in its instructions and answering any questions that arose during the
“one child policy” implemented by the government from 1979 data collection period. All participants gave written informed
until 2016. This led to a significant change in the family, often consent. Additionally, all parents of participants were notified
described as the “4-2-1” family structure (four grandparents, about the research and were given the opportunity to withdraw
two parents, and one child). In this context, the relationships their children from study participation. All parents gave written
between parenting styles and parent–adolescent conflict and informed consent to allow their children to participate in this
cohesion in China may be different from those in Western study. The Institutional Review Board of Shandong Normal
cultures. Second, Chinese culture is rooted in Confucianism, University approved this study procedures.
which emphasizes collectivist values such as conforming to social
norms, submission to authority, establishing strong relationships Measures
with others, and avoiding confrontation (Peterson et al., 2005). Parenting Styles
In this strict hierarchical framework, individuals’ requests for Parenting styles were assessed using the Chinese version
autonomy and any behaviors that potentially threaten group of Steinberg et al.’s (1994) parenting styles questionnaire
harmony are discouraged, whereas great respect for parental (Long et al., 2012). Two subscales comprise the measure of
authority is highly valued (Fuligni, 1998). Furthermore, some parenting: acceptance/involvement and strictness/supervision.
research has shown that autonomy and authority beliefs among The acceptance/involvement subscale (α = 0.84) was the average
adolescents covary with family relationship features in different of 15 items that were used to assess responsive, loving and
ways depending on cultural context. For example, one study involved parenting (e.g., “I can count on my parents to help me
reported that conflict intensity with mothers was greater for out if I have some kind of problem.”). The strictness/supervision
adolescents with lower respect for parental authority in African subscale (α = 0.78) was the average of 12 items that was used
American and Latina, but not European American, families to assess monitoring and supervision (e.g., “How much do your
(Dixon et al., 2008). Thus, there is a need to broaden the diversity parents try to know where you go out at night”). The adolescents
of samples in this literature, to better understand which aspects were required to indicate the strength of endorsement using
of the relevant family processes operate similarity, or differently, a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 5
in distinct cultural contexts. (completely agree) for each item. Confirmatory factor analysis
In sum, the current study addressed three aims in a mainland indicated that the measurement of parenting styles (as well as
China sample of families: (1) to explore the links between endorsement of parental authority, expectations for behavioral
four parenting styles and parent-adolescent relationship conflict autonomy and parent-adolescent conflict and cohesion) had
(frequency and intensity) and cohesion, including testing the acceptable construct validity and strong measurement invariance
hypothesis that conflict would be highest and cohesion lowest across gender (see Online Supplementary Materials and
for authoritarian parents, conflict lowest and cohesion highest Supplementary Table S1).
for authoritative parents; (2) to test the hypothesis that the
links between parenting style and parent–adolescent relationship Endorsement of Parental Authority
features would be statistically mediated by adolescents’ autonomy Adolescents’ beliefs about the legitimacy of parental authority
expectations and beliefs regarding parental authority; and (3) to were assessed using Chinese version of Smetana’s (1988)
test the hypothesis that the links between parenting style and questionnaire (Zhang and Fuligni, 2006). Students were
relationship features (explored in Aim 1) would be stronger for presented with a list of 13 topics as individual items such as
girls than for boys—and to also explore gender differences in the curfew, choosing clothes, and choosing friends, and were asked
mediating effects (hypothesized in Aim 2). 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
MATERIALS AND METHODS averaged separately for mother (α = 0.84) and father (α = 0.86).

Participants and Procedure Expectations for Behavioral Autonomy

A total of 633 students (48.5% females, in line with the Adolescents’ expectation for behavioral autonomy was measured
proportion found in the Chinese population) in the 7th based on the questionnaire from Fuligni (1998). Students were
(M age = 13.50 ± 0.62 years), 9th (M age = 15.45 ± 0.67 years) presented with a list of 12 behaviors (e.g., “watch as much TV as
and 11th (M age = 17.30 ± 0.75 years) grades of four schools you want”). Adolescents then indicated the degree of expectation
in Jinan, the capital of Shandong Province in Middle Eastern for each item using a 4-point scale ranging from 1 (expect heavily)
China, completed self-report questionnaires. Because of the and 4 (not expect at all) (α = 0.86). In order to achieve consistency
implementation of one child policy in mainland China, 90 across all instruments so that a high score would reflect a high
percent of them were only children. level of the variable being measured, these entries were reversed
Surveys were completed in class through group score so that 1 was recoded as 4, 2 as 3, 3 as 2, and 4 as 1.
administration; students were asked not to communicate with
each other while completing the survey. Research staff members Parent–Adolescent Conflict
administered the surveys to the class by introducing the purpose Adolescents’ perceptions of the incidence and intensity of conflict
of this study and the voluntary nature of participation, reading with their mothers and fathers were measured by the Chinese

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 4 November 2018 | Volume 9 | Article 2187

Bi et al. Parenting Styles and Parent–Adolescent Relationships

version of Issues Checklist (Prinz et al., 1979; Zhang and Fuligni, various parenting characteristics (Henry et al., 2005). To validate
2006). Students indicated whether the 16 specific topics (e.g., the cluster solution, we reanalyzed the data with a different
chores, cursing) were discussed or not with their parents within cluster method — a hierarchical cluster analysis (Henry et al.,
the past 2 weeks (using a binary scale, yes or no). Then, for each 2005; Hoeve et al., 2007). We repeated the hierarchical cluster
endorsed topic of discussion, adolescents reported the conflict analysis ten times, applying the standardized Euclidian Distance
intensity of the discussion of each topic, using a 5-point scale method as a distance measure and using Ward’s algorithm. The
that varied from 1 (very calm) to 5 (very angry). To be consistent cross validation procedure (Mandara, 2003) result in moderate
with previous research (e.g., Fuligni, 1998), conflict frequency agreements (k = 0.71, range: 0.67–0.75).
was computed by summing the number of discussions rated as To label the four groups, we examined the parenting
containing anger (2 or greater on the 5-point scale). Conflict styles by computing a one-way ANOVA on the standardized
intensity was obtained by averaging adolescents’ rating on those scores of parenting dimensions with the clusters serving as
items that were discussed (mother: α = 0.72, father: α = 0.73). the factors. The result revealed that the clustering variables
significantly differed between the parenting dimensions
Parent–Adolescent Cohesion [acceptance/involvement: F(3,608) = 472.58, p < 0.001,
Adolescents completed the cohesion subscale of the Chinese η2 = 0.70; strictness/supervision: F(3,608) = 280.35, p < 0.001,
version of Family Adaptation and Cohesion Evaluation Scales η2 = 0.58]. Authoritative parents were those who scored
(FACES) II inventory separately for each parent (Olson et al., high on both dimensions (acceptance/involvement: z = 0.95,
1979; Zhang and Fuligni, 2006). This scale included 10 items strictness/supervision: z = 0.76), whereas neglectful parents
(e.g., “My mother [father] and I feel very close to each other”). scored low on both dimensions (acceptance/involvement:
Students’ perception of cohesion with parents was rated on a 5- z = −1.45, strictness/supervision: z = −1.06). Authoritarian
point scale ranging from 1 (almost never) to 5 (almost always), parents scored low on acceptance/involvement (z = −0.61) but
separately for mother (α = 0.82) and father (α = 0.79). high on strictness/supervision dimension (z = 0.50), whereas
indulgent parents scored high on acceptance/involvement
Controlled Variables (z = 0.15) but low on strictness/supervision dimension
Grade and socioeconomic status (SES) were controlled for (z = −0.77).
this study. The SES score was computed by averaging the Descriptive statistics for study variables are presented in
standardized education and occupation of both parents. Parents’ Table 1, and bivariate correlations are presented in Table 2.
education was coded as 1 = equal to or below primary school, Regarding descriptives, the following frequencies were found
2 = junior high school, 3 = senior high school, 4 = some college for the four parenting styles: 152 (24.0% of total sample)
or above. The occupation was coded as 1 = peasant or jobless, authoritarian; 200 (31.6%) authoritative; 83 (13.1%) neglectful;
2 = blue collar, 3 = professional or semiprofessional. In terms and 177 (28.0%) indulgent. The average scores of beliefs in
of parents’ educational level, approximately 0.8% of the mothers parents’ authority and expectation for behavioral autonomy
and 0.3% of fathers had completed primary school education or ranged from 2 to 3, which implied that adolescents reported
less, and 38.5% of mothers and 57.1% of fathers had a college or medium level of endorsement of parental authority and
university degree. The remainder had either a junior high school autonomy expectations. The average scores of conflict frequency
education (7.6% of mothers and 5.5% of fathers) or a senior high ranged from 2 to 4 and the average scores of conflict
school education (48.2% of mothers and 31.5% of fathers). The intensity ranged from 1 to 2, which suggested that adolescents
occupational status of mothers and fathers, respectively, was as reported low level of conflict frequency and intensity. Since
follows: 6.2 and 2.7% were peasants or jobless, 28.4 and 23.4% the cohesion scored larger than 3 (except girls with neglectful
had blue collar position, and 64.9 and 73.6% held a professional parents), adolescents reported medium-high level of cohesion
or semiprofessional occupation. with parents.
Turning to correlations, although with a few exceptions,
overall the adolescents’ higher expectation for behavioral
RESULTS autonomy was associated with greater frequency and intensity of
conflict, and less cohesion. Adolescents’ stronger endorsement of
Descriptive Statistics the legitimacy of parental authority was associated with greater
We used Harman’s single factor test to check the common cohesion, but less frequent and intense conflict.
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 Links With Parenting Styles
the first factor did not account for the majority of the variance A series of 4 (parenting styles) × 2 (child gender) analyses of
(Podsakoff and Organ, 1986), common method bias was not a covariance was conducted to explore the links between four
serious concern in the present study. parenting styles and parent–adolescent relationships. At the same
Cluster analysis with K-means method was used to identify the time, we also explored if adolescents’ expectation for behavior
four parenting styles. Instead of defining parentings styles a priori autonomy and endorsement of parental authority differed as a
based on subjective cut-off scores (Steinberg et al., 1994), in function of adolescents’ gender and parenting styles. SES and
cluster analysis families are grouped according to their scores on grade served as covariables.

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 5 November 2018 | Volume 9 | Article 2187

Bi et al. Parenting Styles and Parent–Adolescent Relationships

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

Indulgent Neglectful Authoritarian Authoritative Group differences

Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female

Beliefs about mother’s authority 2.37 2.16 2.09 1.99 2.37 2.48 2.75 2.71 Aut > Aun & Ind > Neg;
(0.56) (0.44) (0.48) (0.44) (0.59) (0.58) (0.54) (0.52) Ind: M > F
Beliefs about father’s authority 2.39 2.12 2.00 1.94 2.34 2.43 2.73 2.70 Aut > Aun & Ind > Neg;
(0.60) (0.46) (0.56) (0.53) (0.62) (0.61) (0.59) (0.55) Ind: M > F
Expectation for behavioral autonomy 2.52 2.45 2.71 2.67 2.50 2.34 2.24 2.14 Neg & Ind & Aun > Aut
(0.68) (0.57) (0.67) (0.59) (0.66) (0.66) (0.69) (0.52)
Frequency of conflict with mother 3.18 3.52 3.93 4.33 3.63 4.33 3.63 3.05 No significant difference
(3.18) (2.86) (2.86) (3.65) (3.06) (3.02) (3.25) (2.88)
Frequency of conflict with father 2.20 2.50 2.63 2.44 2.63 3.00 2.87 2.37 No significant difference
(2.70) (2.57) (2.35) (2.49) (3.02) (2.72) (2.98) (2.69)
Intensity of conflict with mother 1.45 1.47 1.74 1.75 1.62 1.64 1.55 1.43 Neg & Aun > Ind;
(0.43) (0.42) (0.61) (0.65) (0.55) (0.52) (0.53) (0.40) Neg > Aut
Intensity of conflict with father 1.42 1.47 1.79 1.59 1.65 1.61 1.54 1.42 Neg & Aun > Ind
(0.42) (0.49) (0.88) (0.66) (0.82) (0.67) (0.61) (0.44)
Cohesion with mother 3.48 3.70 3.10 2.94 3.34 3.48 3.64 4.03 Aut > Ind > Aun > Neg;
(0.50) (0.51) (0.65) (0.70) (0.54) (0.67) (0.56) (0.55) Ind & Aut: F > M
Cohesion with father 3.53 3.56 3.05 2.95 3.25 3.33 3.76 3.78 Aut > Ind > Aun > Neg
(0.57) (0.68) (0.72) (0.81) (0.72) (0.72) (0.63) (0.64)

Aut, authoritative parenting style; Aun, authoritarian parenting style; Neg, neglect parenting style; Ind, indulgent parenting style. M, male adolescents; F, female adolescents.
Bonferroni post hoc tests were used.

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

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

(1) Beliefs about mother’s authority – 0.91∗∗∗ −0.45∗∗∗ −0.19∗∗∗ −0.11 −0.19∗∗ −0.10 0.32∗∗∗ 0.23∗∗∗
(2) Beliefs about father’s authority 0.89∗∗∗ – −0.44∗∗∗ −0.14∗ −0.08 −0.14∗ −0.11 0.28∗∗∗ 0.26∗∗∗
(3) Expectation for behavior autonomy −0.62∗∗∗ −0.56∗∗∗ – 0.30∗∗∗ 0.23∗∗∗ 0.31∗∗∗ 0.22∗∗∗ −0.27∗∗∗ −0.24∗∗∗
(4) Frequency of conflict with mother −0.21∗∗∗ −0.19∗∗∗ 0.25∗∗∗ – 0.73∗∗∗ 0.81∗∗∗ 0.58∗∗ −0.24∗∗∗ −0.06
(5) Frequency of conflict with father −0.14∗ −0.14∗ 0.19∗∗ 0.70∗∗∗ – 0.60∗∗∗ 0.74∗∗ −0.09 −0.10
(6) Intensity of conflict with mother −0.29∗∗ −0.31∗∗∗ 0.31∗∗∗ 0.75∗∗∗ 0.46∗∗∗ – 0.72∗∗∗ −0.35∗∗ −0.11
(7) Intensity of conflict with father −0.23∗∗ −0.30∗∗∗ 0.24∗∗ 0.37∗∗∗ 0.54∗∗∗ 0.52∗∗∗ – −0.16∗∗ −0.20∗∗
(8) Cohesion with mother 0.42∗∗∗ 0.37∗∗∗ −0.22∗∗∗ −0.19∗∗ −0.15∗∗ −0.26∗∗∗ −0.18∗∗ – 0.40∗∗∗
(9) Cohesion with father 0.30∗∗∗ 0.41∗∗∗ −0.15∗∗ −0.14∗ −0.15∗∗ −0.26∗∗∗ −0.35∗∗∗ 0.45∗∗∗ –
∗p < 0.05; ∗∗ p < 0.01; ∗∗∗ p < 0.001. Numbers above the diagonal refer to girls, and numbers below the diagonal refer to boys.

For adolescents’ expectation for behavior autonomy, the father: M = 1.98, SD = 0.54). Adolescents raised by authoritarian
main effect of parenting styles was significant [F(3,597) = 8.74, (mother: M = 2.42, SD = 0.59; father: M = 2.38, SD = 0.62) and
p < 0.001]. Bonferroni post hoc t-tests indicated that adolescents indulgent parents (mother: M = 2.26, SD = 0.51; father: M = 2.25,
of authoritative parents reported the lower level of expectation SD = 0.55) reported endorsements of parental authority that were
for behavioral autonomy (M = 2.18, SD = 0.60) than adolescents between the other two groups (mother: t > 2.86, p < 0.05; father:
of neglectful [M = 2.70, SD = 0.64, t(278) = 4.66, p < 0.001], t > 3.52, p < 0.01). The interaction between gender and parenting
indulgent [M = 2.48, SD = 0.62, t(371) = 3.75, p < 0.01] and styles also was significant [mother: F(3,597) = 2.53, p = 0.056;
authoritarian parents [M = 2.43, SD = 0.66, t(344) = 2.79, father: F(3,597) = 3.03, p < 0.05]. Post hoc probing revealed
p < 0.05]. no gender difference for youth with authoritative, authoritarian
For legitimacy of parental authority, the main effect of and neglectful parents. In contrast, for youth with indulgent
parenting styles was significant [mother: F(3,597) = 30.26, father: parents, boys reported greater endorsement of parental authority
F(3,597) = 29.62, ps < 0.001]. Adolescents of authoritative (mother: M = 2.37, SD = 0.56; father: M = 2.39, SD = 0.60) than
parents reported the highest endorsement of parental authority did girls [mother: M = 2.16, SD = 0.44, t(171) = 2.62, p < 0.01;
(mother: M = 2.73, SD = 0.53; father: M = 2.71, SD = 0.56), father: M = 2.12, SD = 0.46, t(171) = 3.52, p < 0.01].
whereas adolescents of neglectful parents reported the lowest Turning to intensity of conflict with parents, the main effect
endorsement of parental authority (mother: M = 2.06, SD = 0.47; of parenting styles was significant [mother: F(3,595) = 7.49,

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 6 November 2018 | Volume 9 | Article 2187

Bi et al. Parenting Styles and Parent–Adolescent Relationships

p < 0.001; father: F(3,583) = 3.90, p < 0.01]. Adolescents of homes [girls: M = 3.70, SD = 0.50; boys: M = 3.48, SD = 0.50,
neglectful [mother: M = 1.74, SD = 0.62, t(253) = 3.99, p < 0.001; t(171) = 2.61, p < 0.01].
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, Mediating Effects
p < 0.05; father: M = 1.63, SD = 0.75, t(313) = 2.49, p = 0.08] To test our second hypothesis that expectations for behavioral
reported more intense conflict than those of indulgent parents autonomy and beliefs in the legitimacy of parental authority
(mother: M = 1.46, SD = 0.43; father: M = 1.45, SD = 0.46). would mediate the links between parenting style and parent-
In addition, adolescents of neglectful parenting also reported adolescent conflict and cohesion, we used structural equation
more intense conflict with mothers than those of authoritative modeling in Mplus 7.4 (Figures 1–3, for the analyses of conflict
parenting [M = 1.49, SD = 0.47, t(276) = 3.61, p < 0.01]. As for frequency, conflict intensity, and cohesion, respectively). SES and
the frequency of conflict with parents, none of the effects was grade were included as covariables. The categorical parenting
significant. style variable was represented as three dummy-coded variables
For cohesion, gender was significantly related to mother– with authoritative parenting as the reference category. Because
child cohesion [F(1,597) = 9.07, p < 0.01], with greater cohesion the autonomy expectations scale had many items, we used a
found for daughters than sons (girls: M = 3.70, SD = 0.66; boys: common parceling technique to estimate a highly reliable latent
M = 3.42, SD = 0.59). For mothers and fathers alike, there construct for that variable by randomly assigning items into four
was a main effect of parenting styles [mother: F(3,597) = 37.53, nearly equal-sized sets of indicators (Little et al., 2002). Finally,
father: F(3,597) = 26.49, ps < 0.001]. Adolescents of authoritative latent variables were constructed (using mother and father scales
parents reported the highest level of cohesion (mother: M = 3.85, as indicators) for the conflict and cohesion variables, as well
SD = 0.58; father: M = 3.77, SD = 0.63), followed by indulgent as the attitudes about legitimate parental authority variable.
[mother: M = 3.59, SD = 0.52, t(371) = 4.20, p < 0.001; father: All models showed good fit with the data [conflict frequency:
M = 3.55, SD = 0.63, t(371) = 3.15, p < 0.05], authoritarian χ2 = 160.99, df = 56, CFI = 0.96, TLI = 0.95, RMSEA = 0.055;
[mother: M = 3.41, SD = 0.60, t(320) = 2.62, p = 0.05; father: conflict intensity: χ2 = 167.23, df = 56, CFI = 0.96, TLI = 0.94,
M = 3.29, SD = 0.72, t(320) = 3.33, p < 0.01] and neglectful RMSEA = 0.058; cohesion: χ2 = 192.55, df = 56, CFI = 0.95,
parents [mother: M = 3.05, SD = 0.67, t(227) = 4.78, p < 0.001; TLI = 0.93, RMSEA = 0.063).
father: M = 3.02, SD = 0.75, t(227) = 2.94, p < 0.05]. Finally, the In all three models, adolescents raised in neglectful,
parenting style main effect for mothers was moderated by child indulgent and authoritarian homes (compared to authoritative)
gender [F(3,597) = 1.34, p < 0.01]. Cohesion was higher for girls reported lower level of beliefs about parental authority and
than boys, only in authoritative [girls: M = 4.03, SD = 0.55; boys: higher expectations for behavior autonomy. Regarding
M = 3.64, SD = 0.56, t(195) = 4.77, p < 0.001] and indulgent frequency (Figure 1) and intensity (Figure 2) of conflict,

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.

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 7 November 2018 | Volume 9 | Article 2187

Bi et al. Parenting Styles and Parent–Adolescent Relationships

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.

greater expectation of autonomy was linked with more Also, conflict intensity was lower for youth with indulgent
frequent and intense conflict, whereas regarding parent– parents and cohesion was lower for youth with neglectful,
adolescent cohesion (Figure 3), greater endorsement of indulgent or authoritarian (compared to authoritative)
authority was linked with greater relationship cohesion. parents.

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 8 November 2018 | Volume 9 | Article 2187

Bi et al. Parenting Styles and Parent–Adolescent Relationships

Significance of indirect effects was computed using [1χ2 (11) = 14.88, 1χ2 (11) = 14.96, ps > 0.05]. In contrast,
bootstrapping with 1000 resamples. A bias-corrected for cohesion, the unconstrained model provided a significantly
bootstrapped 95% confidence interval (CI) showed significant better fit than the constrained model [1χ2 (11) = 23.45, p < 0.05].
indirect effects from neglectful, indulgent and authoritarian To interpret this, we compared path coefficients for boys and
parenting style to the frequency and the intensity of parent- girls one by one (see Figure 4). The negative prediction of
adolescent conflict via adolescents’ expectation for behavior cohesion from neglectful and authoritarian parenting (relative to
autonomy. For conflict frequency, 95% CIs were [0.033,0.126], authoritative parenting) was stronger for girls than boys; this was
[0.022,0.102], and [0.014,0.092] for neglectful, indulgent and consistent with our hypothesis. As for the exploration of gender
authoritarian parents, respectively. For intensity of conflict, differences in the mediation paths, we found that the negative
95% CIs were [0.042,0.131] [0.027,0.105], and [0.019,0.097] for link between indulgent parenting style and parental authority was
neglectful, indulgent and authoritarian parents, respectively. stronger for girls than boys, whereas the positive link between
There also were significant indirect effects to cohesion via endorsement of parental authority and cohesion was stronger for
adolescents’ beliefs in the legitimacy of parental authority. The boys than girls.
95% CIs were [−0.202, −0.081], [−0.185, −0.071], and [−0.128,
−0.0341] for neglectful, indulgent and authoritarian parents,
respectively. DISCUSSION
Moderating Effect of Adolescents’ In the current study, we tested the associations between parenting
styles and parent-adolescent relationships (Aim 1), examined
Gender
the mediating effects of adolescents’ expectation for behavior
Given possible gender differences in paths, we conducted
autonomy and their endorsement of parental authority on these
multiple-group analyses. We had hypothesized that the links
associations (Aim 2), and also explored the moderating effect
between parenting style and parent-adolescent conflict and
of adolescents’ gender (Aim 3) in a sample of adolescents from
cohesion would be stronger for girls than boys; we did not
mainland China.
have hypotheses regarding the mediators however. Chi-square
difference statistic (1χ2 ) were used to compare fit between
models. All structural paths were constrained to be equal for Parenting Styles and Relationships With
boys and girls and the overall model fit was compared to Adolescents
a model without any constraint. For conflict frequency and In studies of Western families, parenting styles are recognized
intensity, the unconstrained and fully constrained models were as having predictable associations with parent-adolescent conflict
not significantly different—suggesting no gender moderation and cohesion. Previous studies have reported that adolescents

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.

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 9 November 2018 | Volume 9 | Article 2187

Bi et al. Parenting Styles and Parent–Adolescent Relationships

of authoritative parents have lower conflict frequency and contrast, neglectful parents’ lack of warmth and supervision,
intensity and higher cohesion than those of authoritarian parents which may be interpreted as irresponsibility, may hinder
(Smetana, 1995; Assadi et al., 2011; Nelson et al., 2011; Sorkhabi the establishment of cohesive relationships. Indulgent and
and Middaugh, 2014). In contrast to previous research, the authoritarian parents provided either limited guidelines or
present study showed that adolescents reported similar levels of limited support for their children. All these characteristics were
parent-adolescent conflict frequency regardless of parenting style. likely to reduce parent–adolescent cohesion.
This result may be attributed to the traditional Chinese culture,
which places emphasis on keeping harmonious relationships Expectation for Behavioral Autonomy
and avoiding confrontation (Peterson et al., 2005). This unique Our second aim was, in part, to identify potential mediating
cultural context may alleviate any links between parenting and effects of adolescents’ expectations for autonomy. Results
frequency of conflict because Chinese adolescents may avoid showed that adolescents’ autonomy expectations mediated the
conflict with their parents. links between parenting styles and both the frequency and
However, conflict intensity did show associations with intensity of parent–adolescent conflict. Specifically, compared to
parenting style. Compared with indulgent parenting styles, adolescents in authoritative homes, those in neglect, indulgent,
adolescents of neglectful and authoritarian parents experienced and authoritarian homes reported stronger expectations for
greater intensity of conflict. Indulgent parents place relatively autonomy, which in turn were linked with more frequent and
few demands on the adolescents’ behavior, giving them high intense parent-adolescent conflict. This result was consistent with
degree of freedom to act as they wish. In contrast, neglectful other studies which explored the relationships between parenting
parents are characterized as lacking warmth and guidance, styles, adolescents’ expectation for behavioral autonomy and
whereas authoritarian parents place a high value on obedience parent-adolescent conflict (Baumrind, 1991; Bush and Peterson,
and conformity and allow less verbal give-and-take. Conflict 2013).
may be more intense in neglectful parenting style because the Adolescents in authoritative families reported the lowest
adolescent is making demands on a parent who otherwise is expectation for behavioral autonomy. This result may be due
withdrawn and minimizing of the youth’s needs. Also, adolescents to that adolescents with authoritative parents have achieved
may be dissatisfied with authoritarian parents’ setting broad rules appropriate autonomy, therefore, their desire to acquire more
without emotional support, which leads to more intense conflict autonomy is not so strong. The salutary effect of authoritative
when it occurs. Other variables might also explain the effect. For parenting style on adolescents’ behavioral autonomy likely
instance, adolescents with neglectful parents are more likely to reflects the successful attainment of a socialization goal
engage in delinquent behaviors (You and Lim, 2015), which itself among authoritative parents: to facilitate autonomy and
may lead to more intense conflict. promote self-reliance. This socialization goal is accomplished by
In addition, the current study found that adolescents raised in respecting their children’s needs and recognizing that adolescents
authoritative and authoritarian parenting style reported similar legitimately have the right to control some aspects of their lives
levels of conflict intensity with parents. This is inconsistent (Bush and Peterson, 2013).
with previous findings, which showed that Western adolescents Compared with authoritative parenting style, non-
raised in authoritarian parenting homes reported more intense authoritative parenting styles have some characteristics that
parent–adolescent conflict than those raised in authoritative are thought to hinder the development of adolescents’ behavioral
parenting homes (Smetana, 1995). One explanation for this autonomy. Authoritarian parents are characterized as using
difference in results may be that in Chinese culture, similar to hostile control or harsh punishment in an arbitrary manner to
training and tiger parenting, the motivation and intention of gain obedience and conformity (Bush and Peterson, 2013). At
authoritarian parenting is to supervise children and promote the same time, authoritarian parents provide limited warmth
optimal development, instead of simply controlling them (Chao, and responsiveness. In that context, adolescents are more likely
1994; Kim et al., 2013). And Chinese adolescents may perceive to seek greater behavioral autonomy because it is not available
positively the parents’ intention to supervise their development, to them. Also, indulgent and neglect parents provide few if
resulting in no direct association between levels of parental any rules or discipline. Without sufficient firm control in the
control and conflict intensity. form of parental monitoring and guidance, adolescents raised
With regard to parent–adolescent relationship cohesion, the in indulgent and neglect parenting families are more likely to
current study showed that adolescents with authoritative parents experience high levels of independence before they can manage
reported the highest levels of cohesion. This result extends it themselves (Bush and Peterson, 2013). Also, adolescents in
previously published work in various cultural groups showing neglectful families lack parental supportiveness and those in
greater cohesion for authoritative parenting (e.g., Nelson et al., indulgent homes are simply spoiled. Such adolescents may
2011). Authoritative parenting is characterized by a high degree have high levels of autonomy, but it is not likely to have been
of warmth and acceptance as well as supervision, but also developed through a healthy developmental process with their
including the granting of adolescent autonomy (Baumrind, parents in a way that balances their growing self-determination
2005). In Chinese and Western cultures today, adolescents and connectedness with their parents.
seek greater independence along with support (compared to In agreement with previous research (Laursen and Collins,
children)—a balance of youth and parent goals that is best met 2009), the current results revealed that adolescents’ expectation
in authoritative households that promote close relationships. In for behavioral autonomy statistically predicted greater

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 10 November 2018 | Volume 9 | Article 2187

Bi et al. Parenting Styles and Parent–Adolescent Relationships

parent–adolescent conflict—perhaps because parents favor authority are both critical attitude domains, their mediating
less autonomy than do their teenage children. This parent-youth effects were different: autonomy expectations mediated the effect
discrepancy has been found in individualistic and collectivist of parenting style on parent-adolescent conflict, but authority
cultural groups within the United States and in other countries legitimacy mediated the effect of parenting style on parent-
(Smetana, 1988; Pérez et al., 2016). Researchers have interpreted adolescent cohesion. Certainly, although they are correlated,
the discrepancy as a developmental phenomenon, in which conflict and cohesion delineate different aspects of parent–
adolescents’ need for autonomy exceeds parental concerns with adolescent relationships (Zhang et al., 2006)—and, each may
maintaining order and protecting their children from harm be affected differently by levels of parental authority and
(Jensen and Dost-Gözkan, 2015). adolescent autonomy. The distinction may be particularly strong
in Chinese culture which emphasizes conformity and obedience
Legitimacy of Parental Authority (Peterson et al., 2005). Parent-adolescent conflict was more
The second mediating effect that was tested involved adolescents’ likely to be linked with adolescents’ higher expectations for
beliefs in the legitimacy of parental authority; results suggested behavioral autonomy which runs against cultural norms, but
some evidence for this effect. Compared with authoritative cohesion was more likely to be linked with adolescents’ greater
parenting, non-authoritative parenting was negatively associated endorsement of parental authority which is consistent with
with adolescents’ beliefs in the legitimacy of parental authority, cultural norms.
which in turn were positively related to parent-adolescent
cohesion. This finding is consistent with previous research Adolescent Gender
(Fuligni, 1998; Darling et al., 2005; Assadi et al., 2011; Trinkner Our final aim was to test the hypothesis that the direct link
et al., 2012). Our interpretation is that with increasingly adult- between parenting style and relationship qualities would be
like social cognitions and relationships, adolescents increasing stronger for girls than boys—and, to also explore whether there
question parental authority as they shift from unquestioning were gender differences in the mediating effects via adolescent
compliance to rational assessment with conditional obedience. autonomy and authority attitudes. The results indicated only
Compared to other types of parents, authoritative parents, a few such effects. Briefly, girls in authoritative and indulgent
are more successful with continually renegotiating parental homes reported more cohesion with mothers than boys, and
authority as their children “grow up,” because they use girls of neglect and authoritarian parenting reported lower
reasoning and explanations and are responsive to adolescents’ level of parent–adolescent cohesion than boys. This may be
perspectives. This ongoing negotiation provides a context due to that girls are more responsive and sensitive to social
for parents and children to articulate and discuss divergent bonds than boys, and that cohesion and parenting style both
perspectives, which helps legitimize the parents’ authority by reflects emotional atmosphere. Therefore, the relationships
rationally justifying the boundaries of adolescents’ personal between parenting styles and cohesion were stronger for girls.
jurisdiction. Besides, girls of indulgent parents were less likely to endorse
In contrast, authoritarian parents exert strict and sometimes parental authority than boys, while endorsement of parental
arbitrary punishment without explanation. Also, they construct authority had greater effect on parent-adolescent cohesion for
the boundaries of parental authority much more broadly than boys than girls. To the extent that parents normally set more
authoritative parents, which promotes resistance in adolescence rules and expect greater obedience of parental authority for
(Smetana, 1995; Baumrind, 2005). In this context, adolescents girls than boys (Darling et al., 2005; Zhang and Fuligni,
struggle to internalize the legitimacy of parental authority. 2006), and consequently girls of indulgent parents may be
Also, in contrast to authoritative parents, indulgent and more likely to feel that their parents did not shoulder the
neglectful parents provide little information about boundaries or responsibility of cultivating them or establish the authority,
appropriate behavior. Such lax control can undermine parental given indulgent parents did not provide enough supervision
authority, so that youth increasingly regard parents as not playing and rules. Therefore, girls of indulgent parents endorsed
an authority role. lower level of parental authority. At the same time, since
Parents who exercise their authority are satisfied when parents expected less conformity and obedience for boys, their
their adolescent children respect them, which helps maintain endorsement of parental authority was more likely to live up
harmonious relationships in the family (Zhang et al., 2006; Jensen to parents’ expectation, which may improve relationships with
and Dost-Gözkan, 2015). As child-rearing agents, providers of parents.
information and rules, and primary sources of support for their Although gender moderated a few paths in the direct and
children, parents need to establish their authority to better play mediating models, overall, the majority of paths were not
their parenting roles. However, this occurs in a relationship significantly different for boys and girls across all of the
context with adolescent, and the teenager’s endorsement of models that were tested. This may be due to that, with the
parents’ authority helps the adults meet their psychological needs implementation of the one child policy, Chinese parenting
as well. In such families, parents and youth consider each other’s styles and socialization practices are becoming increasingly
boundaries and areas of control through negotiation and mutual similar for their sole children (Lu and Chang, 2013), resulting
respect, which builds more cohesive relationships. in more similar associations between parenting styles and
In the current study, although adolescents’ expectations for parent–adolescent relationships and also the mediating effects of
behavioral autonomy and beliefs in the legitimacy of parental autonomy and authority for these relationships for boys and girls.

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 11 November 2018 | Volume 9 | Article 2187

Bi et al. Parenting Styles and Parent–Adolescent Relationships

Limitations and Conclusions of Shandong Normal University. All subjects gave

Several limitations of this study should be noted. First, the written informed consent in accordance with the
participants were urban adolescents in mainland China which Declaration of Helsinki. The protocol was approved by
is characterized as collectivist culture, so generalizing the the Institutional Review Board of Shandong Normal
results to other cultures or groups should be done with University.
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
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
that there were discrepancies between parents’ and youth’s XB conducted the analysis and drafted the manuscript.
perceptions on these variables (e.g., Jensen and Dost-Gözkan, YY and HL helped in performing the statistical analysis.
2015), so our findings may not represent what would be found MW coordinated the data collection and helped in
using parents’ reports or observers’ ratings. the statistical analysis. WZ conceived and coordinated
Despite these limitations, the current study has important the study and helped to draft the manuscript. KD-D
implications. To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine helped to draft the manuscript. All authors read and
the mediating effects of adolescents’ expectations for behavioral approved the final manuscript and the byline order of
autonomy and beliefs in the legitimacy of parental authority, on authors.
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 FUNDING
styles, and the promotion of acquiring appropriate levels of
autonomy expectations and endorsement of parental authority. This research was supported by the National Natural Science
Future research should examine other possible mediating paths Foundation of China (31671156).
and sample a wider range of cultural contexts to explore
adolescent development and family functioning.
SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL
ETHICS STATEMENT
The Supplementary Material for this article can be found
This study was carried out in accordance with the online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.
recommendations of the Institutional Review Board 2018.02187/full#supplementary-material

REFERENCES Darling, N., Cumsille, P., and Martínez, M. L. (2008). Individual differences in
adolescents’ beliefs about the legitimacy of parental authority and their own
Assadi, S. M., Smetana, J., Shahmansouri, N., and Mohammadi, M. (2011). obligation to obey: a longitudinal investigation. Child Dev. 79, 1103–1118.
Beliefs about parental authority, parenting styles, and parent-adolescent conflict doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2008.01178.x
among iranian mothers of middle adolescents. Int. J. Behav. Dev. 35, 424–431. Darling, N., Cumsille, P., and Peña-Alampay, L. (2005). Rules, legitimacy of
doi: 10.1177/0165025411409121 parental authority, and obligation to obey in chile, the philippines, and
Baumrind, D. (1991). The influence of parenting style on adolescent competence the United States. New Dir. Child Adolesc. Dev. 2005, 47–60. doi: 10.1002/
and substance use. J. Early Adolesc. 11, 56–95. doi: 10.1177/0272431691111004 cd.127
Baumrind, D. (2005). Patterns of parental authority and adolescent autonomy. New Darling, N., and Steinberg, L. (1993). Parenting style as context: an integrative
Dir. Child Adolesc. Dev. 2005, 61–69. doi: 10.1002/cd.128 model. Psychol. Bull. 113, 487–496. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.113.3.487
Bush, K. R., and Peterson, G. W. (2013). “Parent-child relationships in diverse Dixon, S. V., Graber, J. A., and Brooks-Gunn, J. (2008). The roles of respect
contexts,” in Handbook of Marriage and the Family, 3rd edn. Eds G. W. Peterson for parental authority and parenting practices in parent-child conflict among
and K. R. Bush (New York, NY: Springer), 275–302. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4614- African American, Latino, and European American families. J. Fam. Psychol.
3987-5_13 22, 1–10. doi: 10.1037/0893-3200.22.1.1
Chan, K. W., and Chan, S. M. (2009). Emotional autonomy and perceived Fuligni, A. J. (1998). Authority, autonomy, and parent-adolescent conflict and
parenting styles: relational analysis in the Hong Kong cultural context. Asia Pac. cohesion: a study of adolescents from Mexican, Chinese, Filipino, and
Educ. Rev. 10, 433–443. doi: 10.1007/s12564-009-9050-z European backgrounds. Dev. Psychol. 34, 782–792. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.
Chao, R. K. (1994). Beyond parental control and authoritarian parenting style: 34.4.782
understanding Chinese parenting through the cultural notion of training. Child Henry, D. B., Tolan, P. H., and Gormansmith, D. (2005). Cluster analysis in family
Dev. 65, 1111–1119. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.1994.tb00806.x psychology research. J. Fam. Psychol. 19, 121–132. doi: 10.1037/0893-3200.19.1.
Chen, B., Vansteenkiste, M., Beyers, W., Soenens, B., and Petegem, S. V. (2013). 121
Autonomy in family decision making for Chinese adolescents: disentangling Hoeve, M., Blokland, A. A. J., Semon-Dubas, J., Loeber, R., Gerris, J. R. M., and Van
the dual meaning of autonomy. J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 44, 1184–1209. doi: der Laan, P. (2007). Trajectories of delinquency and parenting styles. J. Abnorm.
10.1177/0022022113480038 Child Psychol. 36, 223–235. doi: 10.1007/s10802-007-9172-x
Darling, N., Cumsille, P., and Martínez, M. L. (2007). Adolescents’ as active agents Jensen, L. A., and Dost-Gözkan, A. (2015). Adolescent-parent relations in Asian
in the socialization process: legitimacy of parental authority and obligation Indian and Salvadoran immigrant families: a cultural-developmental analysis
to obey as predictors of obedience. J. Adolesc. 30, 297–311. doi: 10.1016/j. of autonomy, authority, conflict, and cohesion. J. Res. Adolesc. 25, 340–351.
adolescence.2006.03.003 doi: 10.1111/jora.12116

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 12 November 2018 | Volume 9 | Article 2187

Bi et al. Parenting Styles and Parent–Adolescent Relationships

Kim, S. Y., Wang, Y., Orozco-Lapray, D., Shen, Y., and Murtuza, M. (2013). Does Smetana, J. G. (1988). Adolescents’ and parents’ conceptions of parental authority.
“tiger parenting” exist? Parenting profiles of Chinese Americans and adolescent Child Dev. 59, 321–335. doi: 10.2307/1130313
developmental outcomes. Asian Am. J. Psychol. 4, 7–18. doi: 10.1037/a0030612 Smetana, J. G. (1995). Parenting styles and conceptions of parental authority during
Laursen, B., and Collins, W. A. (2009). “Parent-child relationships during adolescence. Child Dev. 66, 299–316. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.1995.tb00872.x
adolescence,” in Handbook of Adolescent Psychology, eds R. M. Lerner and L. Smith, D. C., and Hall, J. A. (2008). Parenting style and adolescent clinical severity:
Steinberg (Hoboken, NJ: Wiley). findings from two substance abuse treatment studies. J. Soc. Work Pract. Addict.
Little, T. D., Cunningham, W. A., Shahar, G., and Widaman, K. F. (2002). To parcel 8, 440–463. doi: 10.1080/15332560802341073
or not to parcel: exploring the question, weighing the merits. Struct. Equ. Model. Sorkhabi, N., and Middaugh, E. (2014). How variations in parents’ use of
9, 151–173. doi: 10.1207/S15328007SEM0902-1 confrontive and coercive control relate to variations in parent-adolescent
Long, R. H., Huang, D., and Zhang. J. X. (2012). Evaluating on reliability and conflict, adolescent disclosure, and parental knowledge: adolescents’
validity of steinberg scale, Chinese version. Chin. J. Public Health 28, 439–441. perspective. J. Child Fam. Stud. 23, 1227–1241. doi: 10.1007/s10826-013-9783-5
Lu, H. J., and Chang, L. (2013). Parenting and socialization of only children in Steinberg, L., Lamborn, S. D., Darling, N., Mounts, N. S., and Dornbusch, S. M.
urban China: an example of authoritative parenting. J. Genet. Psychol. 174, (1994). Over-time changes in adjustment and competence among adolescents
335–343. doi: 10.1080/00221325.2012.681325 from authoritative, authoritarian, indulgent, and neglectful families. Child Dev.
Maccoby, E., and Martin, J. (1983). “Socialization in the context of the family: 65, 754–770.
parent-child interaction”, in Handbook of Child Psychology Socialization, Trinkner, R., Cohn, E. S., Rebellon, C. J., and Van Gundy, K. (2012). Don’t trust
Personality, and Social Development, Vol. 4, eds. E. M. Hetherington and P. H. anyone over 30: parental legitimacy as a mediator between parenting style
Mussen (New York, NY: Wiley), 1–101 and changes in delinquent behavior over time. J. Adolesc. 35, 119–132. doi:
Mandara, J. (2003). The typological approach in child and family psychology: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2011.05.003
a review of theory, methods, and research. Clin. Child Fam. Psychol. Rev. 6, World Bank. (2017). Population, Ages 0-14, Total. Available at: https://data.
129–146. doi: 10.1023/A:1023734627624 worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.0014.TO?end=2016andstart=1960andview=
McKinney, C., and Renk, K. (2011). A multivariate model of parent-adolescent chart
relationship variables in early adolescence. Child Psychiatr. Hum. Dev. 42, You, S., and Lim, S. A. (2015). Development pathways from abusive parenting to
442–462. doi: 10.1007/s10578-011-0228-3 delinquency: the mediating role of depression and aggression. Child Abuse Negl.
Nelson, L. J., Padilla-Walker, L. M., Christensen, K. J., Evans, C. A., and Carroll, J. S. 46, 152–162. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2015.05.009
(2011). Parenting in emerging adulthood: an examination of parenting clusters Zhang, W. X., and Fuligni, A. J. (2006). Authority, autonomy, and family
and correlates. J. Youth Adolesc. 40, 730–743. doi: 10.1007/s10964-010-9584-8 relationships among adolescents in urban and rural China. J. Res. Adolesc. 16,
Olson, D. H., Sprenkle, D. H., and Russell, C. S. (1979). Circumplex model of 527–537. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-7795.2006.00506.x
marital and family systems: i. Cohesion and adaptability dimensions, family Zhang, W. X., Wang, M. P., and Fuligni, A. J. (2006). Expectations for autonomy,
types, and clinical applications. Fam. Process 18, 3–28. doi: 10.1111/j.1545-5300. beliefs about parental authority, and parent-adolescent conflict and cohesion.
1979.00003.x Acta Psychol. Sin. 38, 868–876.
Pérez, J. C., Cumsille, P., and Martínez, M. L. (2016). Brief report: agreement Zhang, W., Wei, X., Ji, L., Chen, L., and Deater-Deckard, K. (2017). Reconsidering
between parent and adolescent autonomy expectations and its relationship to parenting in Chinese culture: subtypes, stability, and change of maternal
adolescent adjustment. J. Adolesc. 53, 10–15. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2016. parenting style during early adolescence. J. Youth Adolesc. 46, 1117–1136. doi:
08.010 10.1007/s10964-017-0664-x
Peterson, G. W., Steinmetz, S. K., and Wilson, S. M. (eds). (2005). Parent-Youth
Relations: Cultural and Cross-Cultural Perspectives. New York, NY: Hawthorn Conflict of Interest Statement: The authors declare that the research was
Press. conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could
Podsakoff, P. M., and Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
research: problems and prospects. J. Manag. 12, 531–544. doi: 10.1177/
014920638601200408 Copyright © 2018 Bi, Yang, Li, Wang, Zhang and Deater-Deckard. This is an open-
Prinz, R. J., Foster, S., Kent, R. N., and O’Leary, K. D. (1979). Multivariate access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
assessment of conflict in distressed and nondistressed mother-adolescent dyads. License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted,
J. Appl. Behav. Anal. 12, 691–700. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1979.12-691 provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the
Shek, D. T. (2002). Parenting characteristics and parent-adolescent conflict: original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic
a longitudinal study in the Chinese culture. J. Fam. Issues 23, 189–208. practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply
doi: 10.1177/0192513X02023002002 with these terms.

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 13 November 2018 | Volume 9 | Article 2187