Parenting Styles and Their Effectsq

Danielle Dalimonte-Merckling and Jessica M Williams, Department of Human Development and Family Studies, Michigan State
University, East Lansing, MI, United States
© 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Parenting Styles 1
Measurement of Parenting Styles 2
Parenting Style Typology 2
The Authoritative Parenting Style 2
The Authoritarian Parenting Style 2
The Permissive Parenting Style 3
The Indifferent Parenting Style 3
Effects of Parenting Styles on Children 3
Effects of Authoritative Parenting Style 3
Effects of Authoritarian Parenting Style 4
Effects of Permissive Parenting Style 4
Effects of Indifferent Parenting Style 4
Parents in the Same Family Who Differ in Parenting Style 5
Approaches to Parenting Infants and Young Children 5
Infants 5
Toddlers 6
Relationships of Parent-Child Dynamics Over Time 6
Factors Influencing Parenting Styles and Moderating Their Effect on Development 6
Goodness of Fit: Parent Personality and Child Temperament 7
Cultural Variations 7
Cultural Effects: Asian American 8
Cultural Effects: African American 8
Cultural Effects: Latin American 9
Emerging Research 9
Emerging Research: American Indian/Alaskan Native Families 9
Emerging Research: Same-Sex Parents 9
Summary 10
References 10
Relevant Websites 11

Parenting Styles

A parenting style consists of several elements that combine to create the emotional climate in which parents communicate their
attitudes and practices about childrearing with their child. Parents’ styles reflect attitudes toward discipline and parental responsi-
bilities, as well as establish expectations for children. These are conveyed through parental body language, tone of voice, emotional
displays, and quality of attention, in addition to the content of what parents say to their children and their overall behavior toward
them. Tracing the conceptual development of parenting styles research, Darling and Steinberg (1993) suggest that parenting styles
ought to be considered within the context of how parents’ behaviors and practices impact child development. Such impact is a func-
tion of parents’ values and socialization goals, their attitudes toward children, and their specific parenting practices. Although not
typically described using the framework of parent-child relationships, clearly parenting styles have a direct impact on such relation-
ships as illustrated by the following descriptions of parenting styles and their effects on child behavior.
Research generally takes a typological approach to parenting styles. We will begin by discussing the original delineation of these
typologies as first described by Diana Baumrind in the 1960s. In the intervening decades, parenting styles research continued to
reflect the dominant cultural Eurocentric lens that characterized idealized parenting at the time. More recently, studies of

q
Change History: February 2019. D. Dalimonte-Merckling and J. Williams updated the Abstract, Introduction, and Parenting Styles, removed Fig. 1., added
Table 1, updated the Summary and keywords, and added the References section.
This article is an update of M.H. Bornstein, D. Zlotnik, Parenting Styles and their Effects, Editor(s): Marshall M. Haith, Janette B. Benson, Encyclopedia of
Infant and Early Childhood Development, Academic Press, 2008, Pages 496–509.

Reference Module in Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Psychology https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-809324-5.23611-0 1

2 Parenting Styles and Their Effects

underrepresented populations have provided additional information about the extent to which dominant culture parenting styles
may or may not apply to African American, Latinx, Asian American, or American Indian/Alaska Native families.
Baumrind’s research into the antecedents of child behavior led to the description of three distinct styles of parenting: authori-
tative, authoritarian, and permissive, which reflected qualitative differences in the manner in which parents demanded and facili-
tated behavioral control based on their beliefs about their role and their expectations of children (Baumrind, 1967). Building on
Baumrind’s typologies, Eleanor Maccoby, in collaboration with John Martin, tested the generalizability of Baumrind’s typologies
across families experiencing a broader range of socioeconomic conditions (Maccoby and Martin, 1983) and subsequently distin-
guished a fourth parenting style, indifferent. Rather than qualitatively distinct categories, they conceptualized parenting styles as
being measurable along two orthogonal dimensions, responsiveness and demandingness. Responsiveness in the context of
parenting styles, promotes the child’s individuality and is exhibited in behaviors that are sensitive, supportive, and receptive to
the child’s individual needs and demands. It is distinguished from traditional definitions of parental sensitivity by its intentional
focus on recognizing the child’s individuality. Demandingness refers to the nature and level of parents’ maturity demands as well as
the degree to which they are willing and the manner in which they choose to act as socializing agents in their children’s develop-
ment. For example, demandingness is expressed in terms of parental supervision, disciplinary efforts, and willingness to respond to
the child if he or she disobeys. Maccoby and Martin found that authoritative parents score high in demandingness and responsive-
ness, authoritarian parents are high in demandingness but low in responsiveness, permissive parents score high in responsiveness
but low in demandingness, and indifferent parents score low in responsiveness and demandingness.

Measurement of Parenting Styles

While Maccoby and Martin’s four parenting style dimensions tend to be the most frequently used framework today, the approach
used to measure these dimensions varies. Parenting styles can be measured using direct observation as well as via interviews or ques-
tionnaires completed either by parents or children. Each has advantages and disadvantages and should be employed and interpreted
based on careful attention to the type of information captured.
Direct observational techniques can provide information about observable parenting behavior that is known to correspond with
particular parenting styles. They are limited to a specific observational period. Although employing outside observers increases
objectivity, this type of assessment is unable to capture the parent’s beliefs or attitudes about parenting or the child’s subjective expe-
rience of the parents’ behaviors.
Asking parents to report on their own parenting styles in an interview or using questionnaires is a technique well-placed to
provide information regarding parent’s beliefs, attitudes, and intentions regarding parenting practice. However, such reports may
not accurately reflect actual behavior. Additionally, participants beliefs about social desirability may influence their responses.
Reports from children capture the child’s subjective experience, which may or may not be an accurate representation of parents’
intentions, attitudes, or behavior. Some researchers prefer child report, either because it is believed to be less influenced by social
desirability, or because it is the child’s subjective experience that may be most salient to children’s outcomes. When contemplating
parenting styles research, it is important to consider what type of information a particular measure is capturing based on who is
providing that information.

Parenting Style Typology

Different parenting styles construct different emotional climates in the home. We now explore the type of emotional climate each of
the four originally defined parenting styles creates, the styles of behaviors and characteristics parents exhibit, and the outcomes each
parenting style likely facilitates based largely on work drawn from dominant culture families. We will then turn our discussion to
possible cultural variations.

The Authoritative Parenting Style

Authoritative parents show warmth and acceptance for their child, encouraging the child to be independent, autonomous, and
assert individuality. Another important characteristic of authoritative parenting is parent–child verbal give-and-take which helps
facilitate open communication between children and their parents. This reciprocal dialogue consists of parents being open to
the opinions of the child but at the same time not failing to express their own perspectives. Authoritative parents make disciplinary
decisions by integrating the point of view of the child. Authoritative parents utilize reason and control when disciplining the child
and are careful not to use harsh forms of punishment or restrict their child’s autonomy. Authoritative parenting is like a democracy
in which the feelings and ideas of both the parents and the children are recognized and supported.

The Authoritarian Parenting Style

An authoritarian parent stresses the importance of compliance, conformity, parental control, respect for authority, and maintaining
order. Such parents exercise high degrees of control on and maturity demands from their children; however, this is coupled with low
 Parenting Styles and Their Effects 3

amounts of nurturance and clarity of communication. Complete obedience is expected from children, and authoritarian parents
will put a stop to any action the child takes to defy them. When children deviate from the strict standards set for them, the author-
itarian parent favors the use of harsher forms of punishment than are used by authoritative parents. The authoritarian parent often
limits the child’s autonomy and instead attempts to shape the child to exhibit behaviors and attitudes the parent deems to be desir-
able or necessary. This strategy could hinder the child’s maturation by not allowing the child adequate experience making decisions
and taking responsibility for his or her own actions. Unlike authoritative parenting, where open discussion is encouraged, in author-
itarian parenting, reciprocal dialogue and verbal give-and-take between parent and child is discouraged. Authoritarian parents do
not discuss thought processes behind their rules. Instead, the authoritarian parent holds the belief that the parent’s word is consid-
ered final.

The Permissive Parenting Style

A permissive parent is described as having a high level of nurturance and clarity of communication, paired with low levels of control
or expectation of self-reliance. The permissive parent makes few demands of the child, instead allowing the child the freedom to act
and choose activities as he or she pleases. Furthermore, the permissive parent rarely imposes restrictions or governs the child’s time
schedule; allowing children to determine their own bedtime, mealtime, and time spent watching television. Additionally, the
permissive parent tends to be extremely accepting and supportive of all the child’s behavior and actions including aggressive
impulses. In some cases, the permissive parent is described as holding the belief that restricting the child’s actions in any way might
infringe on the child’s autonomy, in turn hindering normative child development. As a result of this philosophy, the permissive
parent rarely implements rules or guidelines for the child’s behavior. In other cases, the permissive parent is seen as indulgent
derived from an unwillingness or inability to parent the child. Permissive parenting behavior may be an intentional manifestation
of childrearing beliefs or a result of insecurity or prior ineffectiveness in their role as a parent.

The Indifferent Parenting Style

An indifferent parent is characterized as being neither demanding nor responsive to the child. In contrast to a possible intentional
philosophy of permissiveness, the indifferent parent is not dedicated to the parenting role or is disinterested in helping foster
optimal development of the child. The indifferent parent intentionally or circumstantially limits time and energy dedicated to
the child and may place their personal needs and interests first rather than concerning themselves with what is best for the child.
Moreover, the indifferent parent is characterized by having little knowledge or involvement in the child’s personal life, may seldom
show concern for what goes on at school or with the child’s friends, and rarely factors the child’s opinion in decision making
processes. If viewed in terms of beliefs and intentions, indifferent parents are those too preoccupied with their own lives to concern
themselves with implementing rules for their children. In extreme cases, indifferent parents could be considered negligent. It is rele-
vant to consider that, if measured solely on behavior, parents classified as indifferent may also be those whose life circumstances
present barriers to optimal caregiving. Other factors that could lead to the appearance of indifferent parenting include poverty,
mental illness, unemployment, marital distress, or other stressors causing parents to be too overwhelmed to be engaged in
parenting.

Effects of Parenting Styles on Children

Each parenting style has a more or less unique set of effects on a child’s development. Research indicates, however, that the effects of
parenting styles on child outcomes are not always consistent because the effect of parents on children cannot be examined in isola-
tion. It is important to recognize the influences of additional factors such as culture, neighborhood, historical trauma, and socio-
economic status have on parenting behaviors and childrearing. Moreover, little is known about the stability of variation in parenting
styles in multi-child families. In the following section, we will provide generalizations of the typical child outcomes associated with
each parenting style. It is important to note that most of our understanding of these associations comes from studies of children in
late childhood or adolescence. A description of the distinct parenting contexts associated with infancy and early childhood will
follow, after which we will discuss factors that may contribute to both parents’ exhibited style and its impact on children’s
development.

Effects of Authoritative Parenting Style

Research consistently shows positive outcomes for children with authoritative parents. In infancy, authoritative parents are likely to
be sensitive to their child’s developmental progress and tailor their caregiving to match their infants’ developmental needs. In addi-
tion, authoritative parents provide guidelines and explanations which help to facilitate a child’s understanding of the consequences
of behavior and foster the intrinsic motivation necessary to enhance regulation and self-reliance.
Authoritative parents tend to rear children who are socially responsible, competent, self-assured, adaptive, creative, curious,
independent, assertive, successful in school, friendly, cooperative with peers and parents, and generally happy. Furthermore, the
authoritative parenting style leads to the development of moral reasoning, prosocial behavior, and high self-esteem (Maccoby
4 Parenting Styles and Their Effects

and Martin, 1983). Children of authoritative parents exhibit low amounts of internalizing behaviors such as depression and anxiety,
and externalizing behaviors such as antisocial behavior and substance use (Pinquart and Kauser, 2018). Authoritative parents help
the child to develop these skills by providing necessary controls that a developing child needs while still granting the child appro-
priate amounts of autonomy.
An important aspect of authoritative families is that they incorporate the opinions of both children and parents during family
discussions. Authoritative parents explain decisions, rules, or expectations they have to the child, enhancing the child’s under-
standing of social systems and social relationships. This has positive effects on socialization and friendship formation for the child
(Lamborn et al., 1991).
Authoritative parenting has proven advantageous for children’s academic achievement (Lamborn et al., 1991; Pinquart, 2016).
European American children reared in authoritative homes perform better in school, attend classes more regularly, are more
engaged in the classroom, have higher expectations, and profess more positive academic self-concepts. Authoritative parents are
successful at helping to improve their children’s academic performance even if children initially struggle academically.

Effects of Authoritarian Parenting Style

The effects of authoritarian parenting are generally less positive than an authoritative upbringing. While authoritarian parents and
authoritative parents have similar levels of demandingness, authoritarian parents differ the manner in which they exert parental
control. This is coupled with a lower level of responsiveness to their children. For example, in infancy, authoritarian parents
tend to be less responsive to their infant’s crying believing this will discourage future crying.
Children reared by authoritarian families tend to depend more heavily on their parents (especially girls), be more submissive,
less socially adept, less confident, less intellectually curious, and less committed to achievement in comparison with children reared
in authoritative homes. Furthermore, children reared by authoritarian parents often exhibit hostility and shyness toward peers and
show higher levels of aggression (Casas et al., 2006). At the same time, children of authoritarian parents often score reasonably well
on school achievement and low on deviance measures perhaps as a result of their parents heightened demandingness (Lamborn
et al., 1991).
It is important to note that there can be advantages of authoritarian parenting styles in some cultural and socioeconomic
contexts and for certain outcomes. For example, authoritarian parenting can play an adaptive and protective role for children
growing up in unsafe neighborhoods, as more restrictive parenting can keep children safe and away from harm. Research focusing
specifically on academic outcomes tends to show positive associations between authoritarian parenting and children’s academic
performance. In addition, the impact of parenting style on children’s developmental outcomes may depend in part on the child’s
subjective experience of parenting practices. In African American families, authoritarian parenting characteristics such as firm
control and discipline (so called ‘no nonsense parenting’) are not perceived negatively, instead they are seen as signs of love,
concern, and affection from caregivers. Advantages to authoritarian parenting are sometimes seen in Asian American families.
For example, strict control is thought of as an indication of a parent’s dedication and concern for children and leads to traditionally
desirable traits for children such as self-control, diligence, and self-confidence.

Effects of Permissive Parenting Style

The developmental outcomes for children reared in permissive homes are also generally more negative compared to those reared in
authoritative homes. Permissive parents are low in demandingness and high in responsiveness. The quality of responsiveness often
present in permissive parenting can facilitate higher positive self-perceptions in children (Lamborn et al., 1991). However, a lack of
demandingness may mean permissive parents provide fewer opportunities for their children to develop self-reliance. Despite the
appearance that permissive and authoritarian parenting styles are opposites to each other, in actuality they share the common
outcome of minimizing opportunities for children to learn to cope with stress effectively. Authoritarian parents accomplish this
by limiting autonomous decisions made by their child. Permissive parents do this by failing to implement standards for appropriate
behavior, thereby granting their children freedom to behave in any manner they please. Consequently, children of permissive
parents tend to be limited in their capacity to deal with difficult circumstances and may be unprepared to cope successfully with
problems that arise normally in life.
Children reared in permissive families often fail to control their impulses and lack self-reliance (Lamborn et al., 1991). Children
of permissive parents generally experience less academic success (Baumrind and Black, 1967), in part due to a lack of self-reliance
and reduced persistence on tasks (Ginsburg and Bronstein, 1993).

Effects of Indifferent Parenting Style

A consistent finding is that indifferent parenting has the most detrimental long-term outcomes on children especially in the case of
neglect and abuse. Research shows that by the age of 2 years, children of indifferent mothers already show clear signs of problematic
attachment relationships and overall deficiencies in psychological, cognitive, and social development. Children reared by indif-
ferent parents tend to be immature, irresponsible, impulsive, ineffective leaders, and also susceptible to peer pressure. Furthermore,
they are more prone to exhibit internalizing and externalizing problems, and additionally may use alcohol and drugs at younger
ages (Baumrind, 1991). Additionally, these children have difficulty achieving academically and fail to demonstrate social
 Parenting Styles and Their Effects 5

responsibility and social assertiveness (Baumrind, 1966). Indifferent parents do not provide children with adequate guidance;
consequently, children fail to acquire knowledge about appropriate ways to behave. The detrimental effects of indifferent parenting
continue to accumulate throughout life and are evident all the way through young adulthood. For example, young adults from
indifferent families are more likely to be hedonistic, lack tolerance to frustration, and poorly control their emotions. Additionally,
these young adults lack long-term goals, drink excessively (Baumrind, 1991), and engage in delinquent behaviors (Hoeve et al.,
2008).

Parents in the Same Family Who Differ in Parenting Style

In some families, the two parents may differ in their approach and attitudes toward parenting. What effect might two differing
parenting styles have on the child’s development? One potential issue with having parents differ in parenting style is that it may
lead to difficulty in coordination and cooperation in the childrearing process. For example, one parent could actively undermine
and disparage the other parent. Also, one parent could become overly involved in the child’s life causing the other parent to with-
draw and feel disconnected from the child. All of these conditions can engender disharmony and stress in a child’s environment
potentially leading to developmental problems. Such discordance may be especially impactful for boys (Panetta et al., 2014).
Having parents with the same parenting style may only be beneficial when the type of parenting exhibited is authoritative. If
parents agree on the same style but are authoritarian, permissive, or indifferent, the child’s developmental outcomes tend to be
less positive than they would be if at least one parent favors an authoritative style (Panetta et al., 2014; Rinaldi and Howe,
2012; Simons and Conger, 2007). While more work is necessary to adequately describe the distinct contributions of fathers,
evidence suggests that fathers’ parenting styles uniquely contribute to children’s social-emotional outcomes in early childhood
such that having an authoritative father, in particular, may decrease toddler’s externalizing and increase their adaptive behaviors
(Rinaldi and Howe, 2012).

Approaches to Parenting Infants and Young Children

Although the majority of parenting styles research has focused on developmental outcomes in childhood and adolescence,
parenting styles influence the child’s development during the infancy and toddler periods as well. Parents play an extremely influ-
ential role in early development, and parents are unambiguously responsible for their child’s initial adaptation to the world. As of
yet, we don’t have specific infant/toddler research to draw on specifically connecting parenting styles with early child outcomes.
Because parenting styles and behaviors must appropriately coincide with the differential tasks and demands of the infancy and
toddler periods, we present descriptions of such caregiving in early childhood.

Infants
During infancy, the majority of babies’ experiences stem from interactions they have within the family. Researchers have established
a taxonomy identifying four fundamental types of parental caregiving during infancy; these include: nurturant, social, didactic, and
material (Bornstein, 2005). Together, these modes are perhaps universal, even if their emphasis, frequencies, and durations vary
across cultures. Nurturant caregiving meets the physical needs of the infant. Infant mortality is a perpetual parenting concern,
and from the moment of conception parents are predominantly responsible for promoting infants’ wellness and preventing their
illness. Parents nurture offspring by providing sustenance, protection, supervision, and grooming to their infants, in addition to
shielding infants from risks and stressors.
Social caregiving includes various visual, verbal, affective, and physical behaviors parents use in engaging infants in interpersonal
exchanges (kissing, tactile comforting, smiling, socializing, and playful face-to-face contact). Parental displays of warmth and phys-
ical expressions of affection toward their offspring peak during infancy. Furthermore, social caregiving influences the regulation of
infant affect as well as managing infant social relationships with others, including relatives and kinship networks (e.g., godparents),
non-familial caregivers, and peers.
Didactic caregiving consists of parental efforts used to stimulate infant’s engagement and understanding of the environment
outside the dyad. Didactics include focusing the baby’s attention on properties, objects, or events in the baby’s surrounding; intro-
ducing, mediating, and interpreting the external world; describing and demonstrating; as well as provoking or providing opportu-
nities to observe, to imitate, and to learn. Normally, didactics increase over the course of infancy, as family size, social networks, and
parenting roles change.
Material caregiving includes the ways in which parents provide and organize their infant’s physical world. Adults are responsible
for the number and variety of inanimate objects (toys, books) available to the infant, the level of stimulation, the limits on physical
freedom, and the overall physical dimension of babies’ experiences.
Caregiving in infancy contributes to the quality of parent-child attachment relationships, an essential component of infant devel-
opment (Ainsworth, 1985). Child attachment to their primary caregiver is assessed using the Strange Situation paradigm and chil-
dren are divided into four categories: avoidant, resistant, secure, or disorganized attachment. While there is no direct evidence of
a connection between parenting styles strictly defined and children’s attachment styles, because most work has been done with older
children, the secure behavior pattern is viewed as an indicator of healthy caregiver–infant interaction and emotional growth.
6 Parenting Styles and Their Effects

Intrusive, overstimulating, and rejecting parenting is associated with insecure-avoidant attachment in infants, whereas
insecure-resistant attachments are linked to inconsistent, unresponsive parenting, very characteristic of the indifferent
parenting style.
Recent research points to parental mind-mindedness as a key contributor to parenting behavior and child outcomes (Brophy-
Herb et al., 2012; Meins et al., 2013) including attachment security (Miller et al., 2019). Mind-mindedness refers to a parent’s
tendency to view children as individual psychological agents with their own internal states. The respect for children’s autonomy
and agency inherent in mind-mindedness could lead parents to adopt particular styles of parenting associated with recognition
and acceptance of children’s emotional states and promotion of children’s agency which becomes increasingly important in
toddlerhood.

Toddlers
Parenting styles, parental support, guidance, and structure play a pivotal role in navigating the toddler period. During this
period, parents are vital in mediating toddlers’ entry into a wider social realm and influencing the affective responses, commu-
nicative styles, and social repertories that their children bring to forming meaningful and sustainable relationships and
associations.
An additional developmental challenge of toddlers is for them to develop empathy and organize their emotional sensitivity
(Edwards and Liu, 2005). It is important for toddlers to learn this through parental modeling, as parents’ sensitivity and reasoning
have been found to relate positively to empathic, prosocial response during the child’s second year of life. As children age parenting
strategies may involve different disciplinary practices than those of earlier childhood, more extensive shared regulation of children’s
behavior, and altered patterns for effective control. For example, Paquette and Dumont (2013) have developed a different research
approach, called the Risky Situation, to study how fathers play a key role in encouraging toddlers risk taking and confidence through
effective use of discipline and control, particularly in boys. Boys have much higher rates of disorganized attachments than do girls as
indicated by their behavior in the Strange Situation, but these same boys often are rated as activated in the Risky Situation, suggest-
ing that they have strong self-control and confidence during interactions with their fathers.

Relationships of Parent-Child Dynamics Over Time

Table 1 summarizes various terms used within different approaches to the study of parent-child relationships from infancy through
adolescence. Although several comparisons across terms and age periods are suggested in the literature, the bottom line is that little
research has been conducted to investigate clear linkages between attachment relationships, activation relationships, and parenting
styles. Although one can speculate about such relationships from cross-sectional studies, the key to how relationship dynamics form
and change over time can only be clearly answered through longitudinal research.

Factors Influencing Parenting Styles and Moderating Their Effect on Development

Biology, personality, and perceptions of role responsibilities constitute factors that influence parenting from the start. However,
societal factors condition and channel beliefs and behaviors of parents as well. Family situation, social status, and culture, for
example, encourage diverse patterns of parenting goals, styles, and practices which are often intergenerationally transmitted. In
addition, the individual characteristics of both parents and children also contribute to the likelihood of adopting a particular
parenting style as well as influence how parenting practices affect children’s development.

Table 1 Types of relationships studied at different age periods from infancy to adolescence and primary parent studied in the literature

Infancy and early childhood Childhood and adolescence

Infant Attachment Parental Toddler Activation Parenting Styles: Mothers, Promoting Individuality and
Relationships to Mothers: Caregiving Relationships to Fathers: occasionally also Fathers Engagement in Socialization
Secure Base during Infancy Risk Taking & Control and Mothers, Approaches
to Parenting their Children
A. Avoidant Nurturant-mother Underactivated-inhibited Authoritative Responsiveness &
Demandingness
B. Secure Social-mother, Activated-confident Authoritarian Responsiveness &
father Demandingness
C. Resistant Didactic-mother Overactivated-externalizing Permissive Responsiveness &
Demandingness
D. Disorganized Material-father Indifferent Responsiveness &
Demandingness
 Parenting Styles and Their Effects 7

Goodness of Fit: Parent Personality and Child Temperament

It is commonly assumed that the overall level of parental involvement or stimulation affects the infant’s overall level of develop-
ment. However, increasing evidence shows that characteristics of individuals shape their experiences and reciprocally those experi-
ences shape the characteristics of individuals through time (Porges and Furman, 2011; Schore, 2012, 2001; Siegel, 2001). Therefore,
through infants’ interactions with their parents they actively contribute toward their own development by virtue of their unique
characteristics, expressivity, and temperament. Thus, infant temperament and maternal personality operate in tandem to affect child
development and the parent–child relationship. Additionally, parents’ attitudes about their infants and the activities they engage
them in are each meaningful to the development of infants.
Parental personality likely affects a person’s attitudes and abilities as a parent. Features of a personality favorable to child-
centered parenting might include empathic awareness, predictability, non-intrusiveness, and emotional availability. Additionally,
adult adaptability can be critical in the first few months when infants are less ‘readable’, for example, their activities are more erratic
and disorganized, and their cues less distinct and well differentiated. Being a self-centered parent can cause difficulties when parents
put their own needs first and are not sensitive toward their infants’ needs.
Beginning shortly after birth, a child’s individuality is manifested primarily in temperament, biologically based individual differ-
ences in behavioral characteristics that are relatively consistent across situations and over time (Rothbart et al., 2000). A child’s
dominant mood, adaptability, activity level, persistence, threshold for and intensity of distress (or happiness), and other character-
istics are important because of the influence they have on others and because they constitute the foundations of personality. In some
cases, mothers of children with so-called “difficult” temperaments, characterized by heightened reactivity and intensity of emotional
response, tend to have more authoritarian characteristics, for example, they are often more controlling and less guiding in style
(Clark et al., 2000). Parents who respond to a highly reactive child with high levels of punitive behavior set into motion a potentially
devastating ‘cycle of coercion’ in parent–child relationships. In other instances, highly reactive children have been known to elicit
greater responsiveness from parents (Bates et al., 2012) by way of both their greater demand for it and their parents’ capacity to
provide it. Perhaps, in interaction with a “good fit” in terms of parental characteristics or acceptance, children with more reactive
temperaments could positively influence the quantity and quality of their care.
In addition, temperamental reactivity represents a biological predisposition to be more sensitive to one’s environment,
including the effects of parenting (Belsky et al., 2007). Research has shown that the impact of parenting style on children’s social,
academic, and relational outcomes is stronger for highly reactive children (Stright et al., 2008). In accordance with the theory of
differential susceptibility (Belsky and Pluess, 2009), the types of parenting behaviors associated with the authoritative parenting
style led to positive outcomes for highly reactive children beyond those of their less reactive peers. Experiencing intense emotional
reactions repeatedly without assistance or available coping strategies could be self-perpetuating. In contrast, an early need to
develop self-regulation strategies in order to handle situations in which other children may have little trouble could provide reactive
children with skills that can be generalized to new and varied situations as development proceeds. The quality of both the respon-
siveness and demandingness associated with authoritative parenting be particularly impactful in building this needed regulatory
capacity. If these children experience particularly supportive parenting, that relationship may assist them in developing strategies
for managing emotion (Bocknek et al., 2009).

Cultural Variations
Virtually all aspects of parenting are informed by culture. Culture influences parenting behaviors and child development from early
in infancy through such factors as when and how parents care for infants, the extent to which parents permit infants freedom to
explore, how nurturant or restrictive parents are, and which behaviors parents emphasize and encourage. It is important to be aware
that each culture has unique socialization patterns and traditions to achieve the childrearing goals of that culture. Parenting behav-
iors should be viewed in terms of the specific goals they are intended to achieve.
Generally, authoritative parenting contributes to positive outcomes for all youth regardless of SES, ethnicity, or culture.
However, some research shows authoritative parenting is less common among African American, Asian American, or Latin Amer-
ican families than European American ones in favor of a more authoritarian style, but authoritarian within a cultural context. It is
difficult to disentangle the relative impact of culture and socioeconomic disadvantage in much of the work on cultural differences in
parenting styles. In some areas, authoritarian parenting does not appear to have the same adverse effects on children of ethnic
minority backgrounds. This is particularly true in the case of low-income families and may have more to do with the characteristic
features of poverty. In neighborhoods that are less safe, have higher levels of poverty, and more frequent levels of antisocial activ-
ities, more restrictive parenting may serve an adaptive strategy by providing a high level of supervision and support. A systematic
literature review (Mesman et al., 2012) suggests that the lower levels of responsiveness seen in ethnic minority families are primarily
attributable to socioeconomic disadvantage. For many populations, present day socioeconomic disadvantage correlates with
historic trauma, oppression, and abuse by the dominant culture, which would also have contributed to the development of
parenting styles within these groups over generations.
Another important consideration is that the features that distinguish authoritative from authoritarian parenting for European
Americans may not be relevant in other cultural contexts. For example, in many ethnic minority families a high level of control
may be combined with warmth. This does not fit the European American derived definition of authoritarian, nor does it fit
most general definitions of authoritative parenting where a level of autonomy-granting is inherent in the conceptualization of
8 Parenting Styles and Their Effects

demandingness. If researchers look solely at the parent’s use of control, families of different cultures may be mislabeled as author-
itarian when in fact they do not possess other negative aspects of authoritarian parenting.
We now turn to explore in more depth how parenting styles appear in Asian, African, and Latin American cultures and their
respective impacts on children’s social-emotional development and academic achievement. Pinquart and Kauser (2018) recently
conducted an extensive meta-analysis over 400 published studies on ethnic differences in the associations between parenting styles
and children’s academic and socioemotional outcomes. Their analysis revealed authoritative parenting is associated with better
outcomes for children in general, regardless of ethnic background, and indifferent parenting was consistently negative associated
with optimal development. We include additional culture-specific results from their meta-analysis at the end of each respective
section.

Cultural Effects: Asian American

Parenting styles may have different effects on Asian families as a result of differing values, attitudes, and traditions from those of
Western families. For example, equality, self-determination, individualism, and competition are ideals associated with Western
culture. This differs dramatically from Eastern ideals of collectivism, harmony, and purity. These disparities lead to different
approaches to parenting that each culture considers appropriate and desirable. Although one cannot generalize how all Asians
parent, some particular themes have emerged in the literature. For example, research shows that Asian families stress the importance
of parental control and restrictiveness (Chao and Tseng, 2002) and that Asian parents are less likely to express affection or show
reciprocity (Wu and Chao, 2005). Additionally, Asian parents often place more emphasis on their child’s academic success than
are European American parents (Chao and Tseng, 2002).
Some researchers argue that traditional parenting style assessments are not culturally relevant for Asian families because of the
different meanings Asians place on responsiveness and parental control (Chao, 1994). Generally, researchers assess parental respon-
siveness from parents’ emotional and physical expressions and affections toward their children. However, many Asian parents
exhibit responsiveness in a manner different from most European Americans (Chao and Tseng, 2002). For example, in Asian
cultures responsiveness is expressed in a parent’s involvement, support, and prioritizing the caregiving and education of their chil-
dren rather than emotional and physical demonstrativeness. Therefore, responsiveness cannot be measured accurately given the
strict European American definition. Additionally, parental control also holds different meanings for Asian vs. European American
cultures. For Asian families, strict control over the child generally occurs in conjunction with positive characteristics such as parental
care, concern, and involvement (Chao, 1994). Furthermore, parental control is linked to traditionally desirable traits for children in
Asian cultures, for instance, self-control, tolerance of frustration, diligence, self-confidence, positive attitudes toward others, and it
can be beneficial to gaining high levels of achievement. Parents who fail to exhibit characteristics of control and restrictiveness are
often seen as negligent and uncaring by others within Asian culture. However, from the viewpoint of someone from another culture,
these restrictive and controlling parental practices may appear authoritarian and be considered undesirable. Therefore, research cat-
egorizing Asian parents based strictly on Eurocentric measurement tools may be problematic because it may not accurately represent
the manner that responsiveness, control, and warmth are expressed and interpreted by Asian families.
Consideration of the full constellation of parenting practices and the meaning associated with them in Asian cultures may help
explain the apparent paradox that Asian parents are more likely to demonstrate authoritarian parenting characteristics thought to
have negative consequences, yet Asian American students consistently outperform European Americans academically. In many
cases, studies of Asian American parenting focus on academic achievement, excluding consideration of children’s psychological
and social well-being (Juang et al., 2013). Recent work challenges this idea by suggesting that studies of academic achievement
in isolation may mask detrimental effects of parenting on socioemotional outcomes (Qin, 2008). Use of a person-centered
approach in order to capture natural occurring patterns of parenting behavior in Asian American parents (rather than Eurocentric
measurement tools) shows positive academic and social outcomes for Asian American children who experience the type of support
associated with authoritative parenting (Kim et al., 2013).
Pinquart and Kauser’s (2018) meta-analysis indicates that in Western countries, authoritative parenting style is consistently asso-
ciated with positive socioemotional and academic outcomes for Asian children. However, the strength of associations is weaker for
academic performance than in non-Hispanic Whites. Authoritarian parenting is consistently associated with more negative
outcomes. Permissive parenting was only significantly associated with an increased risk of externalizing problems, and indifferent
parenting had a consistently negative impact on all outcomes.

Cultural Effects: African American

Research indicates that having authoritarian parents may not adversely affect African American children in the same way as Euro-
pean American children. Different cultures attribute disparate meaning to the same parenting behavior. For example, strict parental
control and discipline may have different meanings for African American compared to European American children. The effects of
harsh disciplinary practices vary depending on how children perceive those practices (Lee et al., 2016). For example, if children in
a community view a practice such as physical or verbal punishment as normative, they may not be adversely affected by the practice
(Gershoff et al., 2010). However, there remains considerable uncertainty around whether there are differences in the use and impact
of various discipline techniques that can genuinely be attributed to culture with studies showing African American parents are no
more likely to use harsh forms of punishment than European Americans (Lansford et al., 2012).
For African American children growing up in a high risk context, authoritarian parenting attitudes can have a positive impact on
parenting behavior (Valentino et al., 2012). The context surrounding a parent’s action is important in determining how it will affect
 Parenting Styles and Their Effects 9

the child. Researchers speculate that for children growing up in low-income and unsafe neighborhoods, authoritarian parenting
could play an adaptive and protective role. Much of this research exists at the intersection of race and poverty and should be consid-
ered in light of complex interactions between current and historical experiences of discrimination. When controlling for contextual
factors such as SES, many studies suggest the qualities associated with authoritative parenting are beneficial for African American
children (Watkins-Lewis and Hamre, 2012).
Pinquart and Kauser’s (2018) meta-analysis indicates that in Western countries, authoritative parenting style is consistently asso-
ciated with positive socioemotional and academic outcomes for individuals with an African ethnic background. There were neither
negative nor positive associations between authoritarian or permissive parenting and the assessed outcomes for these children.
Indifferent parenting had a consistently negative impact on all outcomes.

Cultural Effects: Latin American

For Latinx communities, there has been less research indicating differences in the effects of parenting styles compared to African
American and Asian families. However, there are some unique characteristics to take note of for Latinx families. One distinctive
characteristic of Latinx families is the concept of ‘respeto’ which means proper demeanor. Latinx families emphasize the importance
of being respectful and obedient and exercise greater levels of control over children’s’ behavior than European American families.
Another consistent theme in Latinx communities is that they are generally more family oriented than European Americans.
The term familismo refers to thinking of the family as an extension of the self in addition to feelings of loyalty, reciprocity,
and family cohesion. Furthermore, in times of trouble or transition, Latinx families tend to rely on their extended family and to
utilize family resources to resolve the problem at hand and cope with stress. Research indicates that Latinx youth tend to seek advice
from family members (Calzada et al., 2013), have positive attitudes toward parents, feel more satisfied by family life (Edwards and
Lopez, 2006), and feel more obligated to respect and help their parents than European American children (Halgunseth et al., 2006).
Research indicates that ‘familismo’ leads to positive effects for Latinx youth such favorable academic (Niemeyer et al., 2009) and
social outcomes (Kennedy and Ceballo, 2013).
Latinx youth have an increased likelihood to dropout of high school (Corry et al., 2017). Researchers debate whether Latinx
families place less emphasis on educational achievement. It may be that Latinx parents have different perspectives on what it means
to be involved in their children’s education. Latinx parents are willing and likely to assist their children with homework and
encourage scholastic endeavors but avoid formal participation at school (Auerbach, 2007). In general, researchers feel that issues
confronting Latin Americans academically are not related to culture or parental socialization, but instead have to do with the
poverty, segregation, and discrimination that are negative consequences of immigration, resettlement, and resulting minority status.
Pinquart and Kauser’s (2018) meta-analysis indicates that in Western countries, authoritative parenting style is consistently asso-
ciated with positive socioemotional and academic outcomes for with a Hispanic background. Authoritarian parenting was associ-
ated with worse socioemotional outcomes and not associated with academic performance for these children. As in Asian children,
permissive parenting was only significantly associated with an increased risk of externalizing problems. Indifferent parenting had
a consistently negative impact on all outcomes.

Emerging Research
There remain parenting contexts we are only beginning to adequately study and understand. Emerging research on American
Indian/Alaskan Native families and on same-sex parenting reveals additional contexts in which traditional Eurocentric definitions
of parenting styles may not properly apply or may not produce the expected effects. As with the previously discussed cultural
contexts, this is likely the result of multiple layers of complexity involving historic and contemporary experiences of discrimination
intertwined with context-specific patterns of belief and behavior.

Emerging Research: American Indian/Alaskan Native Families

Parenting in AI/AN families is not easy to generalize as it can vary as a function of heterogeneity in beliefs and practices across
communities and depending on current living situations. Generally speaking, AI/AN parents emphasize respect for elders, confor-
mity over autonomy, and employ an extended family or community approach to child-rearing (Glover, 2001). Based on the limited
available research, it appears that AI/AN families may not fall easily into any one of the four parenting styles as originally defined
(Administration for Native Americans, 2009). Some AI/AN parents demonstrate qualities associated with the permissive parenting
style, but such behaviors are intentionally employed out of respect for the child’s agency in shaping their own world and a philos-
ophy of non-interference (Bigfoot and Funderburk, 2011; Glover, 2001). Other research characterizes AI/AN families as having an
‘active’ style, which emphasizes mutual respect, trust, and teamwork (Kemble and Inciarte, 2015). Our growing understanding of
parenting, including parenting styles, in AI/AN families must be informed by proper sampling including concerted efforts to ensure
AI/AN families are included from both urban and reservation communities.

Emerging Research: Same-Sex Parents

While there has been little specific research on parenting styles within same-sex couples, there have been ongoing investigations of
same-sex parenting and child outcomes. When compared to peers with heterosexual parents, children of same-sex parents consis-
tently show similar outcomes (Fond et al., 2012; Goldberg and Smith, 2013). Any differences appear to be related to stigmatization
by the outside world rather than family structure (Boertien and Bernardi, 2019; Golombok et al., 2018). Additional work is needed
10 Parenting Styles and Their Effects

to explore whether parenting styles are more or less likely to be congruent among same-sex couples, but thus far, there may not be
reason to expect substantial differences in the respective effects of those styles on children’s outcomes.

Summary

Authoritative, authoritarian, permissive, and indifferent parenting styles have varying effects on child development. The majority of
research indicates that authoritative parenting leads to the most beneficial child outcomes. In addition, an abundance of culturally
sensitive research shows that parenting practices and behaviors carry different meanings in different cultures. Therefore, care must be
exercised in drawing implications of different parenting styles based on narrow typological definitions whose impacts have been
assessed primarily in older children. As work continues, the goal will be to integrate early childhood outcomes, different cultural
contexts, and broader variations in family structure into our understanding of parenting styles.

References

Administration for Native Americans, 2009. Reference Guide for Native American Family Preservation Programs. Administration for Children and Families, Washington, DC.
Ainsworth, M.D., 1985. Patterns of attachment. Clin. Psychol. 38, 27–29.
Auerbach, S., 2007. From moral supporters to struggling advocates: reconceptualizing parent roles in education through the experience of working-class families of color. Urban Ed.
42, 250–283. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085907300433.
Bates, J.E., Schermerhorn, A.C., Petersen, I.T., 2012. Temperament and parenting in developmental perspective. In: Zentner, M., Shiner, R.L. (Eds.), Handbook of Temperament.
Guilford Press, New York, NY, pp. 425–441.
Baumrind, D., 1991. The influence of parenting style on adolescent competence and substance use. J. Early Adolesc. 11, 56–95. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431691111004.
Baumrind, D., 1967. Child care practices anteceding three patterns of preschool behavior. Genet. Psychol. Monogr. 75, 43–88.
Baumrind, D., 1966. Effects of authoritative parental control on child behavior. Child Dev. 37, 887–907. https://doi.org/10.2307/1126611.
Baumrind, D., Black, A.E., 1967. Socialization practices associated with dimensions of competence in preschool boys and girls. Child Dev. 38, 291–327. https://doi.org/10.2307/
1127295.
Belsky, J., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M.J., van IJzendoorn, M.H., 2007. For better and for worse: differential susceptibility to environmental influences. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 16,
300–304. https://doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu.proxy1.cl.msu.edu/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2007.00525.x.
Belsky, J., Pluess, M., 2009. The nature (and nurture?) of plasticity in early human development. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 4, 345–351. https://doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu.proxy1.cl.
msu.edu/10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01136.x.
Bigfoot, D.S., Funderburk, B.W., 2011. Honoring children, making relatives: the cultural translation of parent-child interaction therapy for American Indian and Alaska Native families.
J. Psychoact. Drugs 43, 309–318. https://doi.org/10.1080/02791072.2011.628924.
Bocknek, E.L., Brophy-Herb, H.E., Banerjee, M., 2009. Effects of parental supportiveness on toddlers’ emotion regulation over the first three years of life in a low-income African
American sample. Infant Ment. Health J 30, 452–476. https://doi.org/10.1002/imhj.20224.
Boertien, D., Bernardi, F., 2019. Same-sex parents and children’s school progress: an association that disappeared over time. Demography 56, 477–501. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s13524-018-0759-3.
Bornstein, M.H., 2005. Parenting infants. In: Bornstein, M.H. (Ed.), Handbook of Parenting: Volume I: Children and Parenting. Psychology Press, pp. 3–43.
Brophy-Herb, H.E., Stansbury, K., Bocknek, E., Horodynski, M.A., 2012. Modeling maternal emotion-related socialization behaviors in a low-income sample: relations with toddlers’
self-regulation. Early Child. Res. Q. 27, 352–364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2011.11.005.
Calzada, E.J., Tamis-LeMonda, C.S., Yoshikawa, H., 2013. Familismo in Mexican and Dominican families from low-income, urban communities. J. Fam. Issues 34, 1696–1724.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X12460218.
Casas, J.F., Weigel, S.M., Crick, N.R., Ostrov, J.M., Woods, K.E., Yeh, E.A.J., Huddleston-Casas, C.A., 2006. Early parenting and children’s relational and physical aggression in the
preschool and home contexts. J. Appl. Dev. Psychol. 27, 209–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2006.02.003.
Chao, R.K., 1994. Beyond parental control and authoritarian parenting style: understanding Chinese parenting through the cultural notion of training. Child Dev. 65, 1111–1119.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1131308.
Chao, R.K., Tseng, V., 2002. Parenting of Asians. In: Bornstein, M.H. (Ed.), Handbook of Parenting. Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 59–93.
Clark, A.L., Kochanska, G., Ready, R., 2000. Mothers’ personality and its interaction with child temperament as predictors of parenting behavior. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 79,
274–285.
Corry, M., Dardick, W., Stella, J., 2017. An examination of dropout rates for Hispanic or Latino students enrolled in online K-12 schools. Educ. Inf. Technol. N. Y. 22, 2001–2012.
https://doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1007/s10639-016-9530-9.
Darling, N., Steinberg, L., 1993. Parenting style as context: an integrative model. Psychol. Bull. 487–496.
Edwards, C.P., Liu, W.-L., 2005. Parenting toddlers. In: Bornstein, M.H. (Ed.), Handbook of Parenting: Volume I: Children and Parenting. Psychology Press, pp. 45–71.
Edwards, L.M., Lopez, S.J., 2006. Perceived family support, acculturation, and life satisfaction in mexican american youth: a mixed-methods exploration. J. Couns. Psychol. 53,
279–287. https://doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1037/0022-0167.53.3.279.
Fond, G., Franc, N., Purper-Ouakil, D., 2012. Homosexual parenthood and child development: present data. L’Encephale 38, 10–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.encep.2011.05.005.
Gershoff, E.T., Grogan-Kaylor, A., Lansford, J.E., Chang, L., Zelli, A., Deater-Deckard, K., Dodge, K.A., 2010. Parent discipline practices in an international sample: associations with
child behaviors and moderation by perceived normativeness. Child Dev. 81, 487–502. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01409.x.
Ginsburg, G.S., Bronstein, P., 1993. Family factors related to children’s intrinsic/extrinsic motivational orientation and academic performance. Child Dev. 64, 1461–1474.
Glover, G., 2001. Parenting in native American families. In: Culturally Diverse Parent–Child and Family Relationships: A Guide for Social Workers and Other Practitioners. Columbia
University Press, New York, NY, USA, pp. 205–231.
Goldberg, A.E., Smith, J.Z., 2013. Predictors of psychological adjustment in early placed adopted children with lesbian, gay, and heterosexual parents. J. Fam. Psychol. 43 (27),
431–442. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032911.
Golombok, S., Blake, L., Slutsky, J., Raffanello, E., Roman, G.D., Ehrhardt, A., 2018. Parenting and the adjustment of children born to gay fathers through surrogacy. Child Dev. 89,
1223–1233. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12728.
Halgunseth, L.C., Ispa, J.M., Rudy, D., 2006. Parental control in latino families: an integrated review of the literature. Child Dev. 77, 1282–1297.
Hoeve, M., Blokland, A., Dubas, J.S., Loeber, R., Gerris, J.R.M., van der Laan, P.H., 2008. Trajectories of delinquency and parenting styles. J. Abnorm. Child Psychol. 36, 223–
235. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-007-9172-x.
Juang, L.P., Qin, D.B., Park, I.J.K., 2013. Deconstructing the myth of the “tiger mother”: an introduction to the special issue on tiger parenting, Asian-heritage families, and child/
adolescent well-being. Asian Am. J. Psychol. 4, 1–6. https://doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1037/a0032136.
 Parenting Styles and Their Effects 11

Kemble, C., Inciarte, J., 2015. American Indian Parenting: Assessing the Teachings. White Eagle Health Center Behavioral Health, p. 10.
Kennedy, T.M., Ceballo, R., 2013. Latino adolescents’ community violence exposure: after-school activities and familismo as risk and protective factors. Soc. Dev. 22, 663–682.
https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12030.
Kim, S.Y., Wang, Y., Orozco-Lapray, D., Shen, Y., Murtuza, M., 2013. Does “tiger parenting” exist? Parenting profiles of Chinese Americans and adolescent developmental
outcomes. Asian Am. J. Psychol. 4, 7–18. https://doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1037/a0030612.
Lamborn, S.D., Mounts, N.S., Steinberg, L., Dornbusch, S.M., 1991. Patterns of competence and adjustment among adolescents from authoritative, authoritarian, indulgent, and
neglectful families. Child Dev. 62, 1049–1065. https://doi.org/10.2307/1131151.
Lansford, J.E., Wager, L.B., Bates, J.E., Dodge, K.A., Pettit, G.S., 2012. Parental reasoning, denying privileges, yelling, and spanking: ethnic differences and associations with child
externalizing behavior. Parenting 12, 42–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/15295192.2011.613727.
Lee, Y.-E., Brophy-Herb, H.E., Vallotton, C.D., Griffore, R.J., Carlson, J.S., Robinson, J.L., 2016. Do young children’s representations of discipline and empathy moderate the effects
of punishment on emotion regulation? Soc. Dev. 25, 120–138. https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12141.
Maccoby, E.E., Martin, J.A., 1983. Socialization in the context of the family: parent-child interaction. In: Hetherington, E.M. (Ed.), Handbook of Child Psychology. Wiley, New York,
pp. 1–101.
Meins, E., Centifanti, L.C.M., Fernyhough, C., Fishburn, S., 2013. Maternal mind-mindedness and children’s behavioral difficulties: mitigating the impact of low socioeconomic
status. J. Abnorm. Child Psychol. 41, 543–553. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-012-9699-3.
Mesman, J., van IJzendoorn, M.H., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M.J., 2012. Unequal in opportunity, equal in process: parental sensitivity promotes positive child development in ethnic
minority families. Child Dev. Perspect. 6, 239–250. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-8606.2011.00223.x.
Miller, J.E., Kim, S., Boldt, L.J., Goffin, K.C., Kochanska, G., 2019. Long-term sequelae of mothers’ and fathers’ mind-mindedness in infancy: a developmental path to children’s
attachment at age 10. Dev. Psychol. 55, 675–686. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000660.
Niemeyer, A.E., Wong, M.M., Westerhaus, K.J., 2009. Parental involvement, familismo, and academic performance in Hispanic and Caucasian adolescents. N. Am. J. Psychol.
11, 613.
Panetta, S.M., Somers, C.L., Ceresnie, A.R., Hillman, S.B., Partridge, R.T., 2014. Maternal and paternal parenting style patterns and adolescent emotional and behavioral outcomes.
Marriage Fam. Rev. 50, 342–359. https://doi.org/10.1080/01494929.2013.879557.
Paquette, D., Dumont, C., 2013. The father-child activation relationship, sex differences, and attachment disorganization in toddlerhood. Child Dev. Res. https://doi.org/10.1155/
2013/102860.
Pinquart, M., 2016. Associations of parenting styles and dimensions with academic achievement in children and adolescents: a meta-analysis. Educ. Psychol. Rev. N. Y. 28, 475–
493. https://doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu.proxy1.cl.msu.edu/10.1007/s10648-015-9338-y.
Pinquart, M., Kauser, R., 2018. Do the associations of parenting styles with behavior problems and academic achievement vary by culture? Results from a meta-analysis. Cult.
Divers. Ethn. Minor. Psychol. 24, 75–100. https://doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1037/cdp0000149.
Porges, S.W., Furman, S.A., 2011. The early development of the autonomic nervous system provides a neural platform for social behaviour: a polyvagal perspective. Infant Child Dev.
20, 106–118. https://doi.org/10.1002/icd.688.
Qin, D.B., 2008. Doing well vs. Feeling well: understanding family dynamics and the psychological adjustment of Chinese immigrant adolescents. J. Youth Adolesc. 37, 22–35.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-007-9220-4.
Rinaldi, C.M., Howe, N., 2012. Mothers’ and fathers’ parenting styles and associations with toddlers’ externalizing, internalizing, and adaptive behaviors. Early Child. Res. Q. 27,
266–273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2011.08.001.
Rothbart, M.K., Ahadi, S.A., Evans, D.E., 2000. Temperament and personality: origins and outcomes. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 78, 122–135. https://doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/
10.1037/0022-3514.78.1.122.
Schore, A.N., 2012. Bowlby’s “environment of evolutionary adaptedness”. In: Narvaez, D., Panksepp, J., Schore, A.N., Gleason, T.R. (Eds.), Evolution, Early Experience and Human
Development. Oxford University Press, pp. 31–67.
Schore, A.N., 2001. Effects of a secure attachment relationship on right brain development, affect regulation, and infant mental health. Infant Ment. Health J. 22, 7–66. https://
doi.org/10.1002/1097-0355(200101/04)22:1<7::AID-IMHJ2>3.0.CO;2-N.
Siegel, D.J., 2001. Toward an interpersonal neurobiology of the developing mind: attachment relationships, “mindsight,” and neural integration. Infant Ment. Health J. 22, 67–94.
https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0355(200101/04)22:1<67::AID-IMHJ3>3.0.CO;2-G.
Simons, L.G., Conger, R.D., 2007. Linking mother–father differences in parenting to a Typology of family parenting styles and adolescent outcomes. J. Fam. Issues 28, 212–241.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X06294593.
Stright, A.D., Gallagher, K.C., Kelley, K., 2008. Infant temperament moderates relations between maternal parenting in early childhood and children’s adjustment in first grade. Child
Dev. 79, 186–200.
Valentino, K., Nuttall, A.K., Comas, M., Borkowski, J.G., Akai, C.E., 2012. Intergenerational continuity of child abuse among adolescent mothers: authoritarian parenting, community
violence, and race. Child. Maltreat. 17, 172–181. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077559511434945.
Watkins-Lewis, K.M., Hamre, B.K., 2012. African-American parenting characteristics and their association with children’s cognitive and academic school readiness. J. Afr. Am.
Stud. 16, 390–405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12111-011-9195-9.
Wu, C., Chao, R.K., 2005. Intergenerational cultural conflicts in norms of parental warmth among Chinese American immigrants. Int. J. Behav. Dev. 29, 516–523. https://doi.org/
10.1177/01650250500147444.

Relevant Websites

Pew Research Center: Parenting Approaches and Concerns. https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2015/12/17/3-parenting-approaches-and-concerns/.

The Center for Parenting Education: Understanding Goodness of Fit. https://centerforparentingeducation.org/library-of-articles/child-development/understanding-goodness-of-fit/.
Zero-to-Three: Positive Parenting Approaches. https://www.zerotothree.org/parenting/positive-parenting-approaches.