New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Harsh, Critical Parenting May Lead to Anxiety Disorder Symptoms

“Tiger” parents may drive kids’ brains to overreact to errors

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

In an age when the formula for success seems infinitely regressive—when having a good career means going to a good college, which requires acing your way through a top high school, middle school and even preschool—the onus is on the parent to push, push, push. We want our children to get a foot in the door before they even know how to tie the shoe that's on it. But should we encourage our children through tender praise, or do we embrace the “tiger mom” strategy of punishment and criticism?

New research suggests that parents who stoke their children with harsh scolding may also be saddling them with anxieties that last a lifetime. In a survey published last November, researchers collected childhood memories from more than 4,000 adults of all ages and correlated them with the participants' self-reported mental health. The findings suggest that children with authoritarian parents will have a harder time adapting to adversity later in life.

According to recent work by Greg Hajcak Proudfit, a clinical psychologist at Stony Brook University, punitive parenting has such a powerful and persistent effect because it trains a child's brain to overly emphasize mistakes.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


When we goof up, our medial prefrontal cortex—just behind the center of the forehead—produces a predictable electrical pattern called the error-related negativity, or ERN. The ERN is thought to be the brain's way of pulling us back on track so that we won't make further careless mistakes. Evidence suggests that genetics can account for variations in the strength of the ERN among individuals, but Proudfit's work indicates that exposure to harsh criticism also comes into play.

In a study co-authored by his graduate student Alex Meyer, Proudfit measured the ERN of nearly 300 children at age three and again at age six while giving them puzzles to work on in the company of their parents. The interactions that he observed varied greatly on a scale that most would consider normal; none of the parents were abusive. The parents were rated on how controlling they were (for example, stepping in immediately if a child made a mistake) and how warm they were when they gave feedback.

Proudfit also asked the parents to describe their feedback strategies, whether they were more likely to offer encouragement when the child made a mistake or to come down hard. A group of punitive parents emerged who were high in control and low in warmth—a critical, hostile style.

Both the self-reported and observed critical, hostile parenting predicted larger ERNs three years later. Furthermore, the children with punitive parents and high ERNs were more likely to show signs of anxiety disorders on their second visit.

According to Proudfit, children who are exposed to harsh criticism learn to internalize parental feedback until the ERN, normally a convenient caution sign, instead becomes a trigger for anxiety.

“Of course, everybody makes mistakes,” Proudfit says. “But if you're punishing yourself more or responding to your mistakes more than the next kid, then that may be the trajectory of risk that leads you into an anxiety disorder.”

SA Mind Vol 26 Issue 3This article was published with the title “Tiger Parents Rear Anxious Cubs” in SA Mind Vol. 26 No. 3 (), p. 16
doi:10.1038/scientificamericanmind0515-16b

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe