Big Parental Control May Stunt Kid Assertiveness
Young adults who’d had highly controlling parents were less able to stress their own viewpoints to a friend or partner in confident and productive ways. Daisy Yuhas reports
By Daisy Yuhas
SUBSCRIBE TO 60-Second Mind
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.
Domineering parents may keep kids under their thumb to try to protect the kids from the perils of peer pressure. But this approach may backfire and actually make kids more susceptible to going with the crowd. So finds a study in the journal Child Development. [Barbara A. Oudekerk et al, The Cascading Development of Autonomy and Relatedness From Adolescence to Adulthood]
Psychologists got baseline information through interviews with 184 13-year-olds. The researchers learned about their parents’ control tactics—such as using guilt to manipulate behavior—and watched how the kids dealt with a difference of opinion or argument with a friend.
Years passed. Then the researchers followed up with the study participants when they were 18 and again when they reached 21. Of particular interest were interactions with a peer or romantic partner.
The now young adults who’d had highly controlling parents were less able to stress their own viewpoints to a friend or partner in confident and productive ways. And the effects of that inability increased over time: poor relationship skills in an 18-year-old predicted further deficits at 21.
Seems that resisting parental control may be how kids learn to assert themselves, an important skill for healthy future relationships.
—Daisy Yuhas
[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]
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
