Relationships between parents and children play a significant role in the development of infants, toddlers, children, and adolescents (Morris et al., 2021; Nomaguchi & Milkie, 2020; Sanders  & Turner, 2018). In fact, parenting is generally a lifelong process. As children mature, however, parent-child relationships naturally change. Preschool and grade-school children are more capable, have their own preferences, and sometimes refuse or seek to negotiate with parental expectations. This can lead to parent-child tension or conflict, and how that process is managed by parents further shapes the quality of parent-child relationships. 

Parenting Dimensions

Researchers often describe parenting according to dimensions or facets of the parent-child relationship. Many models of parenting have converged on three primary dimensions: (1) warmth vs. rejection, which includes love, affection, caring, involvement, enjoyment, and emotional availability; vs. coldness, lack of affection, harshness, criticism, and ridicule; (2) structure vs. chaos, which includes clear expectations and routines, firm guidance and limit setting, supervision, follow-through, and dependability; vs. unclear expectations, inconsistency, lax rules, lack of supervision and follow-through; and (3) autonomy support vs. coercion, which includes providing children the freedom to be their authentic selves, make their own choices and decisions, acceptance, encouragement, respect, deference, and trust vs. control, pressure, rigidity, and dismissing child’s perspective or emotions (Grolnick & Lerner, 2023; Skinner et al., 2005).

Research has examined each of these dimensions separately and shown that each predicts children’s and adolescents’ functioning and development (Grolnick & Lerner, 2023). Parental warmth, as you might imagine, is especially important for the development of attachment, self-esteem, and social and emotional competence (Cosso et al., 2022). However, it has also been shown to predict many other important outcomes, like cognitive (Lanjekar et al., 2022) and language development (Madigan et al., 2019), and school achievement (Kim. 2022). Provision of structure is especially important for the development of self-control, regulatory capacities, and responsibility (McClelland et al., 2015), but also plays a crucial role in many other aspects of children’s and adolescents’ healthy functioning (Grolnick et al., 2014). And parental autonomy support is especially important to the development of children’s self-concept, self-acceptance, and identity as well as their capacity to take ownership and internalize parental values (Joussemet & Grolnick, 2022), but also supports many other aspects of the healthy development of children and adolescents (Grolnick & Lerner, 2023).

Parenting Styles

Another branch of research on parenting examines parenting styles, which describe combinations of dimensions that characterize a caregiver’s general way of interacting with their child. For example, Baumrind (1971) identified a model of parenting that focuses on (1) warmth or how loving and responsive parents are; and (2) structure or the expectations and limitations they set. Depending whether parents are high or low on each dimension, this model results in four parenting styles. In general, this research highlights a style that is high on both dimensions, called authoritative, where parents are supportive and show interest in their kids’ activities but are not overbearing and allow them to make developmentally-appropriate decisions and constructive mistakes (Baumrind, 2013). Authoritative parents have high, but reasonable expectations for children’s behavior, communicate well with them, are warm, loving and responsive, and use reasoning, rather than coercion to set limitations on children’s misbehavior. Parents allow negotiation where appropriate, and consequently this type of parenting is considered more democratic.

Over time, many studies have provided evidence that an authoritative style of childrearing, and especially parental warmth, involvement, and high quality parent-child relationships, are associated with many positive outcomes for children and adolescents (Cosso et al., 2020; Morris et al., 2021), including cognitive (Lanjekar et al., 2022) and language development (Madigan et al., 2019), school achievement (Cosso et al., 2021; Kim. 2022; Tiwari, 2022), overall health (Frosch et al., 2021), and fewer behavioral problems (Cooke et al., 2022). Some studies have even found that the positive effects of this style of parenting extend across families of different races/ethnicities (Steinberg et al., 1992, 1995, 2006).

Authoritarian parenting reflects the traditional method of parenting in which parents make the rules and children are expected to be obedient. Baumrind suggests that authoritarian parents tend to place maturity demands on their children that are unreasonably high and tend to be aloof and distant. Consequently, children reared in this way may fear rather than respect their parents and, because their parents do not allow discussion, may take out their frustrations on safer targets– perhaps as bullies toward peers. 

Permissive or indulgent parenting involves holding expectations for children that are below what could be reasonably expected from them. Children are allowed to make their own rules and determine their own activities. Parents are warm and communicative but provide little structure for their children. Children fail to learn self-discipline and may feel somewhat insecure because they do not know the limits. 

Uninvolved or negligent parenting is seen when caregivers are disengaged from their children. They are low on both warmth and structure; they do not set high expectations for their children and are not responsive. These children can suffer in school and in their relationships with their peers (Gecas & Self, 1991). 

Keep in mind that most parents do not follow any model completely. Real people tend to fall somewhere in between these styles. Sometimes parenting styles change from one child to the next or in times when the parent has more or less time and energy for parenting. Parenting styles can also be affected by parents’ own capacity for emotion regulation (Zimmer-Gembeck et al., 2022) or by concerns and stresses the parent has in other areas of their life (Fang et al., 2024; Nomaguchi & Milkie, 2020). For example, parenting styles could become more authoritarian or permissive when parents are tired and perhaps more authoritative when they are more energetic. Sometimes mothers and fathers parent differently (Yaffee, 2023). Sometimes parents seem to change their parenting approach when others are around, maybe because they become more self-conscious as parents or are concerned with giving others the impression that they are a “tough” parent or an “easy-going” parent. Additionally, parenting styles may reflect the type of parenting someone saw modeled while growing up or the level of efficacy they feel in the parenting role (Fang et al., 2021).

Culture and Parenting

Parenting styles incorporate and reflect many elements of culture. The role of “parenting” is filled by many different people (i.e., parents, grandparents, siblings, extended family, communities) and in ways that are both similar and different across countries, cultures, subcultures within countries, and historical periods (Lansford, 2022). And people parent children and adolescents who come to them through many pathways, including biological, adopted, foster, nieces, nephews, grandchildren, and neighborhood children. Parenting also takes place in many different kinds of families (Imrie & Golombok, 2020; McHale & Sirotkin, 2019).

Many explanations have been suggested for cultural differences in childrearing styles (Lansford, 2022). For example, the model of parenting described above assumes that the authoritative style is the best because this style is designed to help the parent raise a child who is independent, self-reliant, and responsible. These are qualities favored in “individualistic” cultures such as the United States, particularly by the middle class. However, in “collectivistic” cultures such as China or Korea, being obedient and compliant are favored behaviors.

As another example, authoritarian parenting was more common in the past and may reflect a cultural need for children to do as they are told. African-American, Hispanic, and Asian heritage parents, as well as those who are working class or poor, tend to be more authoritarian than non-Hispanic middle class whites.

Early explanations for these differences were relatively mechanistic and focused on the kinds of job for which children from different classes, races, and ethnicities were being prepared. For example, in a study on social class and parenting styles, Kohn (1977) posited that parents tend to emphasize qualities that are needed for their own jobs. Working class parents are rewarded for being obedient, reliable, and honest in their jobs. Consequently, these parents reward honesty, dependability, and obedience in their children. Middle class parents who work as professionals are rewarded for taking initiative, being self-directed, and assertive in their jobs. These parents encourage their children to have those qualities as well by rewarding independence and self-reliance.

A More Inclusive Culturally-attuned Perspective on Parenting Styles

However, in recent decades, researchers have expanded their explanations to include a more agentic view of parents from low income, Black, Hispanic, Indigenous, and immigrant communities; as well as a more complex consideration of the often hazardous societal forces that parents are contending with, and also raising their children to deal with (Lenhardt, 2021; Manning, 2021). These researchers highlight culturally relevant parenting approaches that include resilient, strengths-based, trauma-informed practices (Smith et al., 2022). Such practices have also been included in evidence-based parenting programs (e.g., Barton et al., 2018; Lavner et al., 2020).

When studying parents and families, and especially when examining parenting practices that seem problematic, it is essential to view them in context. Some practices, for example, extremely strict parenting, are connected with authoritarian styles (a combination of high demands for obedience with low warmth and affection) and undesirable outcomes in white middle class children and youth. In other racial/ethnic groups, however, extremely strict parenting is often accompanied by high parental warmth and affection. This style, sometimes called protective parenting, combines the strict and demanding aspects of an authoritarian style with the warmth and affection of authoritative parenting (Lei et al., 2021). Children and adolescents may see their parents as demanding but fair, their behavior grounded in love and genuine concern for their welfare (Rious et al., 2019).

Another example can be found in an indigenous practice endorsed by native and immigrant Chinese parents called “training,” which is rooted in Confucian tradition and emphasizes strict parental control and guidance of children’s behaviors through parental devotion, involvement, and monitoring (Chao, 2000). These combinations did not appear in Baumrind’s studies but may be a good fit for some Black, Hispanic, immigrant, and low income families.

In these cases, “strict” parenting may have different consequences. Extrapolating from findings on these dimensions of parenting, this style may provide children and adolescents with the parental involvement and support they need for healthy functioning and development (e.g., a secure attachment, self-confidence, emotional maturity) at the same time instilling the self-regulation, compliance, and responsibility they will need to negotiate an often hostile world (e.g., neighborhood, school, criminal justice system).

Such parenting styles may also have different antecedents– within communities of color and immigrant communities, parents may prioritize keeping children safe under dangerous conditions where disobedience can have serious consequences. See Lansford’s (2022) research review for an overview of some key issues studied to better understand parenting across cultural contexts.

Parenting Programs: Developing Parents

As many of you know already, the role of parent (or caretaker) is one of the most challenging you will ever undertake (Nomaguchi, & Milkie, 2020). It is a place where we can really feel the impact we are having on other people’s development! No one can be a perfect parent, but everyone can become more knowledgeable and skilled. In fact, one of our jobs as adults is to learn how to parent well and become better and better as we develop our own skills and confidence (Fang et al., 2021).

One way all adults can improve their parenting is by attending parenting classes or enrolling in parenting programs. Because parenting is so important, many researchers and interventionists have developed programs to help people understand and learn how to parent and co-parent more effectively. Such programs are helpful for both parents and children. They represent a wide range of approaches. For example, they include programs that target children of specific ages (Jeong et al., 2021), particular dimensions of parenting (like parental involvement, Cosso et al., 2022), or mindfulness practices (Shorey & Ng, 2021). Some even target the process of co-parenting, which is when multiple people are involved in parenting a child (Eira Nunes et al., 2021), since there is much to be learned about jointly creating an approach to parenting that is consistent, coherent, and feels right for all the adults involved. In recent years, researchers have created and tested evidence-based programs organized around culturally relevant parenting approaches that include resilient, strengths-based, trauma-informed practices (Barton et al., 2018; Lavner et al., 2020).

Limit-setting, Discipline, and Spanking 

For many parents, one of the most challenging parts of parenting is setting limits. All of us know it is important but we haven’t necessarily had good limit-setting modeled in our own childhood. So we revert to culturally accepted practices like yelling or spanking. Spanking is often thought of as a rite of passage for children; many of the adults today experienced it as children; and this method of discipline continues to be endorsed by the majority of parents (Smith, 2012).

However, the research evidence about spanking (and other forms of discipline that include physical punishment) are becoming clear. Spanking is not effective as a disciplinary strategy and it appears to have unintended negative consequences for children’s development. Moreover, it can sometimes escalate to maltreatment. In general, hitting children (or causing them physical pain for any reason) is not good for their development, and there are always more skillful and effective alternatives.

If adults could have only one class on parenting, the most important would probably be on how to discipline children in ways that promote their development. For example, Dr. Jane Nelson has created a little summary of the basic principles of what she refers to as positive discipline. These are skills worth learning.

Scientific Research on Spanking and other Forms of Physical Punishment

What does the scientific evidence say? Just how effective is spanking and are there negative consequences?

After reviewing the research, Smith (2012) states “many studies have shown that physical punishment, including spanking, hitting and other means of causing pain, can lead to increased aggression, antisocial behavior, physical injury and mental health problems for children” (p. 60). Gershoff, (2008) reviewed decades of research and recommended that parents and caregivers make every effort to avoid physical punishment and called for the banning of physical discipline in all U.S. schools. In 2018, the American Academy of Pediatrics issued a policy statement recommending parents, caregivers, and other adults not use spanking and other forms of corporal punishment as unnecessary forms of discipline that can cause long-term harm to children. This statement also urged pediatricians and agencies offering family support to provide families with alternative practices that are effective in raising healthy children (see Effective Discipline to Raise Healthy Children; Sege et al., 2018).

Here is an example of the kind of research that contributed to these conclusions. In a longitudinal study that followed more than 1500 families from 20 U.S. cities, parents’ reports of spanking were assessed at ages three and five (MacKenzie, Nicklas, Waldfogel, & Brooks-Gunn, 2013). Measures of externalizing behavior and receptive vocabulary were assessed at age nine. Results indicated that those children who were spanked at least twice a week by their mothers scored 2.66 points higher on a measure of aggression and rule-breaking than those who were never spanked. Additionally, those who were spanked less, still scored 1.17 points higher than those never spanked. When fathers did the spanking, those spanked at least two times per week scored 5.7 points lower on a vocabulary test than those never spanked. This study revealed the negative cognitive effects of spanking in addition to the increase in aggressive behavior.

Internationally, physical discipline is increasingly being viewed as a violation of children’s human rights. According to Save the Children (2019), 46 countries have banned the use of physical punishment, and the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child (2014) called physical punishment “legalized violence against children” and advocated that physical punishment be eliminated in all settings. 

Many alternatives to spanking are advocated by child development specialists and include: 

• Praising and modeling appropriate behavior 
• Providing time-outs for inappropriate behavior 
• Giving choices 
• Helping the child identify emotions and learn to calm down 
• Ignoring small annoyances 
• Withdrawing privileges 

Sibling Relationships 

For many of us, the people with whom we have the longest relationships over our lifetimes are siblings. As children, siblings spend a considerable amount of time with each other and offer a unique relationship that is not found with same-age peers or with adults. Siblings play an important role in development (Campione-Barr et al., 2015; Gulløv et al., 2021; Jensen et al., 2023; Rawat et al., 2024). For example, siblings shape the development of social skills. Cooperative and pretend play interactions between younger and older siblings can teach empathy, sharing, and cooperation (Pike, Coldwell, & Dunn, 2005), as well as, negotiation and conflict resolution (Abuhatoum & Howe, 2013).

However, the quality of sibling relationships is often mediated by the quality of the parent-child relationship and the psychological adjustment of the child (Jensen et al., 2023b; Liu & Rahman, 2022; Pike et al., 2005). For instance, more negative interactions between siblings have been reported in families where parents had poor patterns of communication with their children (Brody, Stoneman, & McCoy, 1994). Children who have emotional and behavioral problems are also more likely to have negative interactions with their siblings. However, the psychological adjustment of the child can sometimes be a reflection of the parent-child relationship. Thus, when examining the quality of sibling interactions, it is often difficult to tease out the separate effect of adjustment from the effect of the parent-child relationship (Lawson & Robins, 2021). Because of the close connection between quality of parenting and sibling relationships, some programs to help improve parenting focus on how to support the development of positive relationship among siblings (Leijten et al., 2021).

Sibling relationships change with development and are different during early and middle childhood (Howe et al., 2022; Rawat et al., 2023; ) than during adolescence and adulthood (Jensen et al., 2023a). While parents want positive interactions between their children, conflicts are going to arise, and some confrontations can be the impetus for growth in children’s social and cognitive skills. The sources of conflict between siblings often depend on their respective ages. Dunn and Munn (1987) revealed that over half of all sibling conflicts in early childhood were disputes about property rights. By middle childhood this starts shifting toward control over social situations, such as what games to play, disagreements about facts or opinions, or rude behavior (Howe, Rinaldi, Jennings, & Petrakos, 2002).

Researchers have also found that the strategies children use to deal with conflict change with age, but this is also tempered by the nature of the conflict. Abuhatoum and Howe (2013) found that coercive strategies (e.g., threats) were more common when the dispute centered on property rights, while reasoning was more likely to be used by older siblings and in disputes regarding control over the social situation. However, younger siblings also use reasoning, frequently bringing up the concern of legitimacy (e.g., “You’re not the boss”) when in conflict with an older sibling. This is a very common strategy used by younger siblings and is possibly an adaptive strategy in order for younger siblings to assert their autonomy (Abuhatoum & Howe, 2013). A number of researchers have found that children who can use non-coercive strategies are more likely to have a successful resolution, whereby a compromise is reached and neither child feels slighted (Ram & Ross, 2008; Abuhatoum & Howe, 2013). Not surprisingly, friendly relationships with siblings often lead to more positive interactions with peers. The reverse is also true. A child can also learn to get along with a sibling, with, as the song says, “a little help from my friends” (Kramer & Gottman, 1992). 

Supplemental Materials

• This study explores how the typical parenting styles may not capture Latinx families well and underscores the importance of incorporating cultural context in any study of parenting.

Domenech Rodríguez, M. M., Donovick, M. R., & Crowley, S. L. (2009). Parenting styles in a cultural context: Observations of “protective parenting” in first-generation Latinos. Family Process, 48, 195-210.

• This episode of VICE takes a journey to Sweden and follows a gender non-conforming family to find out what it’s like to grow up without the gender binary.

References

Abuhatoum, S., & Howe, N. (2013). Power in sibling conflict during early and middle childhood. Social Development, 22, 738-754.

Barton, A. W., Beach, S. R. H., Wells, A. C., Ingels, J. B., Corso, P. S., Sperr, M. C., … Brody, G. H. (2018). The Protecting Strong African American Families program: A randomized controlled trial with rural African American couples. Prevention Science, 19, 904–913. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-018-0895-4

Baumrind, D. (1971). Current patterns of parental authority. Developmental Psychology Monograph, 4(1), part 2.

Baumrind, D. (2013). Authoritative parenting revisited: History and current status. In R. E. Larzelere, A. Sheffield, & A. W. Harrist (Eds.). Authoritative parenting: Synthesizing nurturance and discipline for optimal child development (pp. 11-34). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Bornstein, M. B. (Ed.) (2019). Handbook of Parenting (vols. 1-4). Routledge.

Campione-Barr, N., & Killoren, S. (2015). Sibling relationships and development. Emerging trends in the social and behavioral sciences: An interdisciplinary, searchable, and linkable resource, 1-15.

Cooke, J. E., Deneault, A. A., Devereux, C., Eirich, R., Fearon, R. P., & Madigan, S. (2022). Parental sensitivity and child behavioral problems: A meta‐analytic review. Child Development, 93(5), 1231-1248.

Cosso, J., von Suchodoletz, A., & Yoshikawa, H. (2022). Effects of parental involvement programs on young children’s academic and social–emotional outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Family Psychology, 36(8), 1329.

Dunn, J., & Munn, P. (1987). Development of justification in disputes with mother and sibling. Developmental Psychology, 23, 791-798.

Eira Nunes, C., De Roten, Y., El Ghaziri, N., Favez, N., & Darwiche, J. (2021). Co‐parenting programs: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. Family Relations, 70(3), 759-776.

Fang, Y., Luo, J., Boele, M., Windhorst, D., van Grieken, A., & Raat, H. (2024). Parent, child, and situational factors associated with parenting stress: A systematic review. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 33(6), 1687-1705.

Fang, Y., Boelens, M., Windhorst, D. A., Raat, H., & van Grieken, A. (2021). Factors associated with parenting self‐efficacy: A systematic review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 77(6), 2641-2661.

Frosch, C. A., Schoppe-Sullivan, S. J., & O’Banion, D. D. (2021). Parenting and child development: A relational health perspective. American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine, 15(1), 45-59.

Gecas, V., & Seff, M. (1991). Families and adolescents. In A. Booth (Ed.), Contemporary families: Looking forward, looking back. Minneapolis, MN: National Council on Family Relations.

Gershoff, E. T. (2008). Report on physical punishment in the United States: What research tell us about its effects on children. Columbus, OH: Center for Effective Discipline.

Grolnick, W. S., & Lerner, R. E. (2023). How parental autonomy support, structure, and involvement help children flourish: Considering interactions, context, and diversity. In R. W. Ryan (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Self-Determination Theory (pp. 491-508). Oxford, UK: Oxford Press.

Grolnick, W. S., Levitt, M. R., Caruso, A. J., & Lerner, R. E. (2021). Effectiveness of a brief preventive parenting intervention based in self-determination theory. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 30(4), 905-920.

Grolnick, W. S., Raftery-Helmer, J. N., Marbell, K. N., Flamm, E. S., Cardemil, E. V., & Sanchez, M. (2014). Parental provision of structure: Implementation and correlates in three domains. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 60(3), 355-384.

Gulløv, E., & Winther, I. W. (2021). Sibling relationships: Being connected and related. In The Palgrave handbook of family sociology in Europe (pp. 301-319). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

Howe, N., Paine, A. L., Ross, H. S., & Recchia, H. (2022). Sibling relations in early and middle childhood. The Wiley‐Blackwell handbook of childhood social development, 443-458.

Howe, N., Rinaldi, C. M., Jennings, M., & Petrakos, H. (2002). “No! The lambs can stay out because they got cozies”: Constructive and destructive sibling conflict, pretend play, and social understanding. Child Development, 73, 1406-1473.

Imrie, S., & Golombok, S. (2020). Impact of new family forms on parenting and child development. Annual Review of Developmental Psychology, 2(1), 295-316.

Jensen, A. C., Killoren, S. E., Campione-Barr, N., Padilla, J., & Chen, B. B. (2023a). Sibling relationships in adolescence and young adulthood in multiple contexts: A critical review. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 40(2), 384-419.

Jensen, A. C., Jorgensen-Wells, M. A., Andrus, L. E., Pickett, J. M., Leiter, V. K., Hadlock, M. E. B., & Dayley, J. C. (2023b). Sibling differences and parents’ differential treatment of siblings: A multilevel meta-analysis. Developmental Psychology, 59(4), 644-654.

Jeong, J., Franchett, E. E., Ramos de Oliveira, C. V., Rehmani, K., & Yousafzai, A. K. (2021). Parenting interventions to promote early child development in the first three years of life: A global systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS medicine, 18(5), e1003602.

Jensen, A. C., Killoren, S. E., Campione-Barr, N., Padilla, J., & Chen, B. B. (2023). Sibling relationships in adolescence and young adulthood in multiple contexts: A critical review. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 40(2), 384-419.

Joussemet, M., & Grolnick, W. S. (2022). Parental consideration of children’s experiences: A critical review of parenting constructs. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 14(4), 593-619.

Kohn, M. L. (1977). Class and conformity. (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Kramer, L., & Gottman, J. M. (1992). Becoming a sibling: “With a little help from my friends.” Developmental Psychology, 28, 685-699.

Kim, S. (2022). Fifty years of parental involvement and achievement research: A second-order meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 37, 100463.

Lanjekar, P. D., Joshi, S. H., Lanjekar, P. D., & Wagh, V. (2022). The effect of parenting and the parent-child relationship on a child’s cognitive development: A literature review. Cureus, 14(10).

Lansford, J. E. (2022). Annual research review: Cross‐cultural similarities and differences in parenting. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 63(4), 466-479.

Lavner, J. A., Barton, A. W., & Beach, S. R. H. (2020). Direct and indirect effects of a couple-focused preventive intervention on children’s outcomes: A randomized controlled trial with African American families. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 88, 696–707. https://doi.org/10.1037/ccp0000589

Lawson, K. M., & Robins, R. W. (2021). Sibling constructs: What are they, why do they matter, and how should you handle them?. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 25(4), 344-366.

Lei, M. K., Lavner, J. A., Carter, S. E., Hart, A. R., & Beach, S. R. (2021). Protective parenting behavior buffers the impact of racial discrimination on depression among Black youth. Journal of Family Psychology, 35(4), 457.

Leijten, P., Melendez-Torres, G. J., & Oliver, B. R. (2021). Parenting programs to improve sibling interactions: A meta-analysis. Journal of Family Psychology, 35(5), 703–708. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000833

Lenhardt, R. A. (2021). Parenting While Black. Fordham Law Review, 90, 2591.

MacKenzie, M. J., Nicklas, E., Waldfogel, J., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2013). Spanking and child development across the first decade of life. Pediatrics, 132(5), e1118-e1125.

Madigan, S., Prime, H., Graham, S. A., Rodrigues, M., Anderson, N., Khoury, J., & Jenkins, J. M. (2019). Parenting behavior and child language: A meta-analysis. Pediatrics, 144(4).

Manning, A. (2021). Racialized parenting in the United States. Sociology Compass, 15(8), e12910.

McClelland, M. M., Geldhof, G. J., Cameron, C. E., & Wanless, S. B. (2015). Development and self‐regulation. In R. M. Lerner (Series Ed.) & L. S. Liben, & U. Mueller, U. (Vol. Eds.), Handbook of child psychology and developmental science: Vol. 2. Cognitive processes (7th ed., pp. 1-43). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

McHale, J. P., & Sirotkin, Y. S. (2019). Coparenting in diverse family systems. In M. B. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of parenting (pp. 137-166). Routledge.

Morris, A. S., Ratliff, E. L., Cosgrove, K. T., & Steinberg, L. (2021). We know even more things: A decade review of parenting research. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 31(4), 870-888.

Nomaguchi, K., & Milkie, M. A. (2020). Parenthood and well‐being: A decade in review. Journal of Marriage and Family, 82(1), 198-223.

Ram, A., & Ross, H. (2008). “We got to figure it out”: Information-sharing and siblings’ negotiations of conflicts of interest. Social Development, 17, 512-527.

Rawat, D., Chaudhary, C., & Malik, P. (2024). Role of sibling relationships in human development: A comprehensive exploration. Journal of Emerging Technologies and Innovative Research, 11(2), a273-a287.

Rious, J. B., Cunningham, M., & Beale Spencer, M. (2019). Rethinking the notion of “hostility” in African American parenting styles. Research in Human Development, 16(1), 35–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/15427609.2018.1541377

Sanders, M. R., & Turner, K. M. (2018). The importance of parenting in influencing the lives of children. In Sanders, M. R., & Morawska, A. (Eds.), Handbook of parenting and child development across the lifespan (pp. 3-26). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

Save the Children. (2019). Child protection. Retrived from https://www.savethechildren.net/what-we-do/child-protection

Sege, R. D., Siegel, B. S., Council on Child Abuse and Neglect, & Committee on Psychosocial Aspects of Child and Family Health (2018). Effective discipline to raise healthy children. Pediatrics, 142(6), e20183112.

Shorey, S., & Ng, E. D. (2021). The efficacy of mindful parenting interventions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 121, 103996.

Skinner, E. A., Johnson, S. J., & Snyder, T. (2005). Six dimensions of parenting: A motivational model. Parenting: Science and Practice, 2, 175 – 235.

Smith, B. L. (2012). The case against spanking. Monitor on Psychology, 43(4), 60.

Smith, E. P., Yzaguirre, M. M., Dwanyen, L., & Wieling, E. (2022). Culturally relevant parenting approaches among African American and Latinx children and families: Toward resilient, strengths-based, trauma-informed practices. Adversity and Resilience Science, 3(3), 209-224.

Steinberg, L., Darling, N. E., & Fletcher, A. C. (1995). Authoritative parenting and adolescent adjustment: An ecological journey. In P. Moen, G. H. Elder, Jr., & K. Lüscher (Eds.), Examining lives in context: Perspectives on the ecology of human development (pp. 423–466). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10176-012

Steinberg, L., Lamborn, S. D., Dornbusch, S. M., & Darling, N. (1992). Impact of parenting practices on adolescent achievement: Authoritative parenting, school involvement, and encouragement to succeed. Child Development, 63(5), 1266-1281.

Steinberg, L., Blatt‐Eisengart, I., & Cauffman, E. (2006). Patterns of competence and adjustment among adolescents from authoritative, authoritarian, indulgent, and neglectful homes: A replication in a sample of serious juvenile offenders. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 16(1), 47-58.

Tiwari, A. P. (2022). Authoritative parenting: The best style in children’s learning. American Journal of Education and Technology, 1(3), 18-21.

United Nations. (2014). Committee on the rights of the child. Retrieved from http://tbinternet.ohchr.org/Treaties/CRC/Shared%20Documents/VAT/CRC_C_VAT_CO_2_16302_E.pdf

Yaffe, Y. (2023). Systematic review of the differences between mothers and fathers in parenting styles and practices. Current psychology, 42(19), 16011-16024.

Zimmer-Gembeck, M. J., Rudolph, J., Kerin, J., & Bohadana-Brown, G. (2022). Parent emotional regulation: A meta-analytic review of its association with parenting and child adjustment. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 46(1), 63-82.

OER Attribution:

“Lifespan Development: A Psychological Perspective, Second Edition” by Martha Lally and Suzanne Valentine-French is licensed under a CC-BY-NC-SA-3.0

Video Attribution:

Raised without gender by VICE is licensed All Rights Reserved and is embedded here according to YouTube terms of service.