literature review on parenting styles and academic performance

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Academic performance in adolescent students: the role of parenting styles and socio-demographic factors – a cross sectional study from peshawar, pakistan.

• 1 Institute of Public Health & Social Sciences, Khyber Medical University, Peshawar, Pakistan
• 2 Department of Medicine, Aga Khan University Hospital, Karachi, Pakistan

Academic performance is among the several components of academic success. Many factors, including socioeconomic status, student temperament and motivation, peer, and parental support influence academic performance. Our study aims to investigate the determinants of academic performance with emphasis on the role of parental styles in adolescent students in Peshawar, Pakistan. A total of 456 students from 4 public and 4 private schools were interviewed. Academic performance was assessed based on self-reported grades in the latest internal examinations. Parenting styles were assessed through the administration of the Parental Bonding Instrument (PBI). Regression analysis was conducted to assess the influence of socio-demographic factors and parenting styles on academic performance. Factors associated with and differences between “care” and “overprotection” scores of fathers and mothers were analyzed. Higher socio-economic status, father’s education level, and higher care scores were independently associated with better academic performance in adolescent students. Affectionless control was the most common parenting style for fathers and mothers. When adapted by the father, it was also the only parenting style independently improving academic performance. Overall, mean “care” scores were higher for mothers and mean “overprotection” scores were higher for fathers. Parenting workshops and school activities emphasizing the involvement of mothers and fathers in the parenting of adolescent students might have a positive influence on their academic performance. Affectionless control may be associated with improved academics but the emotional and psychosocial effects of this style of parenting need to be investigated before recommendations are made.

Introduction

Despite residual ambiguity in the term, definitions over time have identified several elements of “academic success” ( Kuh et al., 2006 ; York et al., 2015 ). Used interchangeably with “student success,” it encompasses academic achievement, attainment of learning objectives, acquisition of desired skills and competencies, satisfaction, persistence, and post-college performance ( Kuh et al., 2006 ; York et al., 2015 ). Linked to happiness in undergraduate students ( Flynn and MacLeod, 2015 ) and low health risk behavior in adolescents ( Hawkins, 1997 ), a vast amount of literature is available on the determinants of academic success. Studies have shown socioeconomic characteristics ( Vacha and McLaughlin, 1992 ; Ginsburg and Bronstein, 1993 ; Chow, 2000 ; McClelland et al., 2000 ; Tomul and Savasci, 2012 ), student characteristics including temperament, motivation and resilience ( Ginsburg and Bronstein, 1993 ; Linnenbrink and Pintrich, 2002 ; Farsides and Woodfield, 2003 ; Valiente et al., 2007 ; Beauvais et al., 2014 ) and peer ( Dennis et al., 2005 ), and parental support ( Cutrona et al., 1994 ; Sanders, 1998 ; Dennis et al., 2005 ; Bean et al., 2006 ) to have a bearing on academic performance in students.

The influence of parenting styles and parental involvement is particularly in focus when assessing determinants of academic success in adolescent children ( Shute et al., 2011 ; Rahimpour et al., 2015 ; Weis et al., 2016 ; Checa and Abundis-Gutierrez, 2017 ; Zhang et al., 2019 ). The influence may be of significance from infancy through adulthood ( Steinberg et al., 1989 ; Weiss and Schwarz, 1996 ; Zahedani et al., 2016 ) and can be appreciated across a range of ethnicities ( Desimone, 1999 ; Battle, 2002 ; Jeynes, 2007 ). Previously, the authoritative parenting style has been most frequently associated with better academic performance among adolescent students ( Steinberg et al., 1989 , 1992 ; Deslandes et al., 1997 , 1998 ; Aunola et al., 2000 ; Adeyemo, 2005 ; Checa et al., 2019 ), while purely restrictive and negligent styles have shown to have a negative influence on academic performance ( Hillstrom, 2009 ; Parsasirat et al., 2013 ; Osorio and González-Cámara, 2016 ). Parenting styles have also been linked to academic performance indirectly through regulation of emotion, self-expression ( Deslandes et al., 1997 ; Weis et al., 2016 ), and self-esteem ( Zakeri and Karimpour, 2011 ).

Significant efforts have been made to explore and integrate factors which influence parenting stress and behaviors ( Belsky, 1984 ; Abidin, 1992 ; Östberg and Hagekull, 2000 ). A number of factors, including parent personality and psychopathology (in terms of extraversion, neuroticism, agreeableness, depression and emotional stability), parenting beliefs, parent-child relationship, marital satisfaction, parenting style of spouse, work stress, child characteristics, education level, and socioeconomic status have been highlighted for their role in determining parenting styles ( Belsky, 1984 ; Simons et al., 1990 , 1993 ; Bluestone and Tamis-LeMonda, 1999 ; Huver et al., 2010 ; Smith, 2010 ; McCabe, 2014 ). Studies have also highlighted differences between fathers and mothers in how these factors influence them ( Simons et al., 1990 ; Ponnet et al., 2013 ).

Insight into determinants of academic success and the role of parenting styles can have significant impact on policy recommendations. However, most existing data comes from western cultures where individualistic themes predominate. While some studies highlight differences between the two ( Wang and Leichtman, 2000 ), evidence from eastern collectivist cultures, including Pakistan, is scarce ( Masud et al., 2015 ; Khalid et al., 2018 ).

The aim of this study is to identify the determinants of academic performance, including the influence of parenting styles, in adolescent students in Peshawar, Pakistan. We also aim to investigate the factors affecting parenting styles and the differences between parenting behaviors of father and mothers.

Materials and Methods

The manuscript has been reported in concordance with the STROBE checklist ( Vandenbroucke et al., 2014 ).

Study Design

A cross sectional study was conducted by interviewing school-going students (grades 8, 9, and 10) to assess determinants of academic grades including the influence of parenting styles.

The study took place in the city of Peshawar in Pakistan at eight schools, four from the public sector and four from the private sector. The data collection process began in January 2017 concluded in December 2017.

The prevalence of high grades (A and A plus) among adolescent students was between 42.6 and 57.4% in a previous study ( Cohen and Rice, 1997 #248). Based on this, a sample size of 376 students was calculated to study the determinants of high grades in adolescent students with a confidence level of 95%. Assuming a non-response rate of approximately 20%, we decided to target 500 students from four public and four private schools. A total of 456 students participated in our study.

Participants

Inclusion criteria.

From the eight schools which provided admin consent to conduct the study, students enrolled in grade 8, 9, or 10 were invited to take part in the study. Following consent from the parents and assent from the student, he or she was included in the study.

Exclusion Criteria

Any student unable to understand or fill out the interview pro forma or questionnaire independently.

Data Sources and Measurement

Data was collected through a one on one interaction between each student and the data collector individually. The following tools were used.

Demographic pro forma ( Supplementary Datasheet 1 )

A brief and simple pro forma was structured to address all demographic related variables needed for the study.

Parental Bonding Instrument (PBI) ( Supplementary Datasheet 2 )

The original version of the Parental Bonding Instrument ( Parker et al., 1979 ), previously validated for internal consistency, convergent validity, satisfactory construct, and independence from mood effects in several different populations, including Turkish and Chinese ( Parker et al., 1979 ; Parker, 1983 , 1990 ; Cavedo and Parker, 1994 ; Dudley and Wisbey, 2000 ; Wilhelm et al., 2005 ; Murphy et al., 2010 ; Liu et al., 2011 ; Behzadi and Parker, 2015 ), was employed in our study. This tool, composed of 25 questions, assesses parenting styles as two independent measures of “care” and “control” as perceived by the child. It is filled out separately for the father and the mother. It is available online for use without copyright. The use of PBI has been validated for British Pakistanis ( Mujtaba and Furnham, 2001 ) and Pakistani women ( Qadir et al., 2005 ). A paper by Qadir et al. on the validity of PBI for Pakistani women, reports the Cronbach alpha scores to be 0.91 and 0.80 for the “care” and “overprotection” scales, respectively ( Qadir et al., 2005 ).

The demographic pro forma and the parental bonding index were translated into Urdu by an individual fluent in both languages and validated with the help of an epidemiologist and two experts in the field ( Supplementary Datasheet 3 ). Pilot testing of translated versions was done with 20 students to ensure clarity and assess understanding and comprehension by the students. Both versions for the two tools were provided in hard copy to each student to fill out whichever one he/she preferred. The data collector first verbally explained the items on the demographic pro forma and the PBI to the student following which the student was allowed to fill it out independently.

Using the data sources mentioned above, data was collected for the following variables.

Student Related

Gender, type of school (public or private), class grade (8th, 9th, and 10th) and academic performance.

In Pakistan, public and private schools may differ in several aspects including fee structures, class strength and difficulty levels of internal examinations, with private schools being more expensive, with fewer students per classroom, and subjectively tougher internal examinations.

The academic performance was judged as the overall grade (a combination of all subjects including English, Mathematics and Science) in the latest internal examinations sat by the student as A+, A, B, C, or D.

Family Related

Family structure and type of accommodation (rented or owned).

Parent Related

Information on living status, education level, employment status, employment type and parenting styles was obtained from the student separately for the father and mother.

Quantitative Variables

Academic performance.

The grades A+, A were categorized as “high” grades and grades B, C, and D were categorized as “low” grades.

Socio-Economic Status

We used variables which adolescent students are expected to have knowledge of to calculate a score which categorized students as belonging to either a high or low socioeconomic status. The points assigned to each variable are show in Table 1 .

Table 1. Calculation of an estimated socioeconomic status.

Parenting Styles

The PBI is a 25 item questionnaire, with 12 items measuring “care” and 13 items measuring “overprotection.” All responses have a 4 point Likert scale ranging from 0 (very unlikely) to 3 (very likely). The responses are summed up to categorize each parent to exhibit low or high “care” and low or high “overprotection.” Based on these findings, each parent can then be put into one of the 4 quadrants representing parenting styles including “affectionate constraint,” “affectionless control,” “optimal parenting,” and “neglectful parenting.” This computation is explained in Figure 1 obtained from the information provided with the PBI ( Parker et al., 1979 ).

Figure 1. Assigining parenting styles using the PBI ( Parker, 1979 #192).

Students were allowed to fill in the pro forma and questionnaire independently to avoid bias during the data collection process. However, self-reporting of grades in latest examination may be subject to recall bias.

Statistical Methods

Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS v.23 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, United States). Descriptive analyses were conducted on all study variables including socio-demographic factors and parenting styles. Categorical variables were reported as proportions and continuous variables as measures of central tendency. All continuous variables were subjected to a normality test. Mean and median values were reported for variables with normally distributed and skewed data, respectively.

The summary t -test was used to study the differences between mean “care” and “overprotection” scores of fathers and mothers. The independent sample t -test was used to study the factors associated with “care” and “overprotection” scores of fathers and mothers. Threshold for significance was p = 0.05.

The determinants of high grades including the influence of parenting styles were assessed using regression analysis. The outcome variable, student grades, was treated as binary (high grades and low grades). The threshold for statistical significance was p = 0.05. Crude Odds Ratios were adjusted for gender, school type, socioeconomic status, family structure, class grade, parents’ employments and education status.

Ethics Statement

The study was approved by the Ethical Committee of the Khyber Medical University, Advance Studies and Research Board (KMU-AS&RB) in August 2016. Identifying information of students was not obtained. Permissions were obtained from the relevant authorities in the school administration before approaching the students and their parents. Written consent was obtained from the parents through the home-work diary of the students and verbal assent of each student was obtained.

Participants and Descriptive Data

A total of 456 students were interviewed, with 249 (54.6%) males and 207 (45.4%) females. The majority (52.5%) were students of grade 8. Despite including an equal number of public and private schools, 63.6% of the students belonged to a public sector school. The reason may be due to the larger class strength in public schools in comparison to private schools. The nuclear family structure was dominant (64.3%), with most students living in rented accommodation (70.4%) with 42.8% reporting to have obtained high grades (A plus or A) in their latest internal examinations ( Table 2 ).

Table 2. Participant and descriptive data.

Majority of the students had both parents alive at the time of the interview. While all students’ mothers were alive, 14 students reported their father to have passed away. Surprisingly, only 46% of the students were able to report their father’s level of education compared to 99.5% for their mother. 9.2% of students reported their father to have an education level of grade 12 or above compared to 26% regarding their mother’s qualification. This was in contrast to 90% of the fathers being employed compared to only 11% of the mothers ( Table 2 ).

A Total of 257 (56%) students reported their mother to exhibit a high level of “care” vs. only 9 (2%) students reporting the same for their father. In terms of “overprotection,” 343 (75%) and 296 (65%) students reported a high level for their father and mother, respectively. Based on combinations of these measures, the most common parenting style for both fathers (73%) and mothers (35%) was affectionless control and the least common for fathers was optimal parenting (0%) and neglectful parenting for mothers (9%). 121 (26%) students had both parents with the same parenting style, with 23% students having both parents show affectionless control and not a single student with both parents showing optimal parenting ( Figure 2 ).

Figure 2. “Care,” “overprotection” and parenting styles for fathers and mothers as reported by students ( n = 456). Green circles represent students with both parents showing the same parenting style – none of the students received “Optimal parenting” from both parents while 106 students received affectionless control from both parents.

Determinants of High Grades

Our results show that high socioeconomic status [adjusted OR 2.78 (1.03, 7.52)], father’s education level till undergrad or above [adjusted OR 4.58 (1.49, 14.09)], father’s high “care” [adjusted OR 1.09 (1.01, 1.18)] and father’s affectionless control style of parenting [adjusted OR 3.23 (1.30, 8.03)] are significant factors contributing to high grades ( Table 3 ).

Table 3. Academic performance: Determinants of “high” grades in the latest internal examinations.

Differences in “Care” and “Overprotection” Between Fathers and Mothers

The mean “care” score for mothers were significantly higher than fathers overall. The difference remained significant for male and female students, public and private schools, joint and nuclear family structures and low and high socioeconomic statuses ( Table 4 ).

Table 4. Differences between mean “care” and “overprotection” scores between fathers and mothers.

Overprotection

The mean “overprotection” score was significantly higher for fathers overall. The difference remained significant for female students, private schools, nuclear family structure, and low socioeconomic status. However, there was no significant difference in mean “overprotection” scores between fathers and mothers for male students, public schools, joint family structures and high socioeconomic status ( Table 4 ).

Factors Associated With “Care” and “Overprotection” in Fathers and Mothers

The mean “care” score was significantly higher for fathers as reported by children in public schools and with higher grades. There was no significant difference in mean care scores based on student gender, socioeconomic status or family structure ( Table 5 ).

Table 5. Factors associated with “care” and “overprotection” for mothers and fathers.

For “overprotection” the only factor associated with a significantly higher mean score was “high” grades ( Table 5 ).

A significantly higher mean “care” score for mothers was reported by female students and students in public schools. No significant differences were observed for the other factors ( Table 5 ).

A significantly higher mean “overprotection” score was reported by male students, students in public schools and those with “high” grades for mothers ( Table 5 ).

Summary of Findings

Results of regression analysis show that socioeconomic status, father’s education level and fathers’ care scores have a significantly positive influence on the academic performance of adolescent students in Peshawar, Pakistan. The most common parenting style for both fathers and mothers was affectionless control. However, affectionless control exhibited by the father was the only parenting style significantly contributing to improved academic performance.

Overall, the mean “care” score was higher for mothers and the mean “overprotection” score was higher for fathers. However, differences in “overprotection” were eliminated for male students, public schooling, joint family structures and high socioeconomic status.

Public schooling was associated with a significantly higher mean “care” score for both fathers and mothers and a significantly higher mean “overprotection” score for mothers. High grades were associated with a significantly higher mean “overprotection” score for both fathers and mothers and a significantly higher mean “care” score for fathers. For mothers, female students reported a significantly higher mean care score and male students reported a significantly higher mean “overprotection” score.

An additional interesting finding from the results of the study was that only about half the students were able to report their father’s level of education compared to almost a 100% for their mother. From amongst those who did report, less than 10% of the father’s had an education level equal or above grade 12 compared to a quarter of the mothers. However, only 11% of the mothers were employed in contrast to 90% of the fathers.

Previous Literature and Comparison of Main Findings

The results of our study have identified socioeconomic status, father’s education level and high care scores for fathers to be significant predictors of academic success in adolescent students. Previous literature has shown socioeconomic status to be a predictor of academic success ( Gamoran, 1996 ; Sander, 1999 ; Lubienski and Lubienski, 2006 ).

Parental education has been frequently associated with improved academic performance ( Dumka et al., 2008 ; Dubow et al., 2009 ; Masud et al., 2015 ). In 2011, a study by Farooq et al. described the factors affecting academic performance in 600 students at the secondary school level in a public school in Lahore, Pakistan. Results of their study also associate parental education level with academic success in students. However, their results are significant for the education level of the mother as well as the father. Additionally, they also reported significantly higher academic performance in females and in students belonging to a higher socioeconomic status, factors not significant in our study ( Farooq et al., 2011 ). Differences may be explained by cultural variations in Lahore and Peshawar within Pakistan, which should be explored further.

The description of parenting styles and behaviors has evolved over the years. With some variation in terminologies, the essence lies in a few common principles. Diana Baumrind initially described three main parenting styles based on variations in normal parenting behaviors: authoritative, authoritarian and permissive ( Baumrind, 1966 , 1967 ). Building on the concepts put forth by Baumrind, Maccoby and Martin identified two dimensions, “responsiveness” and “demandingness,” which could classify parenting styles into 4 types, three of those described by Baumrind with the addition of neglectful parenting ( Maccoby et al., 1983 ). The two dimensions, “responsiveness” and “demandingness,” often referred to as “warmth” and “control” in literature ( Lamborn et al., 1991 ; Tagliabue et al., 2014 ), are similar to the two measures, “care” and “overprotection” assessed by the parental bonding instrument ( Parker et al., 1979 ; Parker, 1989 ; Dudley and Wisbey, 2000 ). Based on this, the authoritative, authoritarian, permissive and neglectful parenting styles described by Baumrind and Maccoby are similar to the affectionate constraint, affectionless control, optimal, and neglectful styles as classified by the parental bonding instrument, respectively ( Baumrind, 1991 ; Cavedo and Parker, 1994 ).

Results of our study show that affectionless control, similar to the authoritarian style of parenting, adapted by the father is significantly associated with improved academic performance. This differs from the popularity of the authoritative parenting style, similar to affectionate constraint, in determining academic success in literature from western cultures ( Steinberg et al., 1989 , 1992 ; Deslandes et al., 1998 ; Aunola et al., 2000 ; Adeyemo, 2005 ; Masud et al., 2015 ; Pinquart, 2016 ; Checa et al., 2019 ). Evidence from societies with cultural similarities with Pakistan presents varied findings. A study from Iran shows support for the authoritarian parenting style similar to our study ( Rahimpour et al., 2015 ). A review of 39 studies published by Masud et al. (2015) in 2015 assesses the effect of parenting styles on academic performance ( Masud et al., 2015 #205). The review very aptly described how the authoritative parenting style is the dominant and most effective style in terms of determining academic performance in the West and European countries while Asian cultures show more promising results for academic success for the authoritarian style ( Dornbusch et al., 1987 ; Lin and Fu, 1990 ; Masud et al., 2015 ). The results of our study are in synchrony with these findings. However, our results also show that high father’s “care” scores are significant contributors to higher academic grades. Since no father showed optimal parenting and only 9 fathers had affectionate constraint, both parenting styles with high care scores, these results may be a reflection of the importance of father’s role in determining academic performance in Asian cultures. Findings supporting the authoritarian/affectionless control style may be due to the abundance of this parenting style. Perhaps a fairer comparison may be possible with a larger sample population with fathers showing all types of parenting styles equally.

Interpretation and Explanation of Other Findings

Observations of factors associated with and differences in “care” and “overprotection” between fathers and mothers may be attributed to reverse causality and should be used as hypothesis generating.

Our results show that mothers have higher mean “care” score and fathers have a higher mean “overprotection” score. Since these scores are based on perceptions of the child, part of these observations may be explained by the cultural norms of expression of love and concern by fathers and mothers. With the difference in “overprotection” being eliminated for male and female children, it is possible that mothers are more overprotective of their sons. Male gender preference in Pakistan may be an explanation for this ( Qadir et al., 2011 ).

Our results show lower employment rates for women despite higher education levels. The finding of higher education levels for females compared to males does not agree with national data, which reports findings from rural areas as well where education opportunities are limited for females ( Hussain, 2005 ; Chaudhry and Rahman, 2009 ). Our results provide a zoomed in look at an urban population, which may have progressed enough to improve women’s education but cultural norms, gender discrimination and lack of opportunity still prevent women from stepping into the workface ( Chaudhry, 2007 ; Begum and Sheikh, 2011 ).

Implications and Future Direction

The findings of our study may have implications for future research and policy making.

Affectionless control is associated with improved academic performance but further research investigating the effects of this style on other aspects of child development, particularly emotional and psychological health, is needed. Factors affecting care and overprotection need to be studied in more detail so that parenting workshops and interventions are tailored to our population. Results also suggest that fathers should play a stronger role in parenting of adolescent students. School policies should make it mandatory for both parents to attend parent-teacher meetings and assigned home activities should include both parents.

Limitations

Since the study is based on the urban population of Peshawar, results may not be generalizable to the adolescent students of the country which includes large rural populations. Academic performance was judged on latest internal examinations, the marking criteria for which may vary across schools. The use of external examinations would have standardized grades across schools but limited the sample to students of grade 9 and 10.

Our study concludes that socioeconomic status, father’s level of education and high care scores for fathers are associated with improved academic outcomes in adolescent students in Peshawar, Pakistan. Affectionless control is the most common parenting style as perceived by the students and when adapted by the father, contributes to better grades. Further research investigating the effects of demonstrating affectionless control on the emotional and psychological health of students needs to be conducted. Parenting workshops and school policies should include recommendations to increase involvement of fathers in the parenting of adolescent children.

Data Availability Statement

Data collected and stored as part of this study is available upon reasonable request.

The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by the Khyber Medical University. Written informed consent to participate in this study was provided by the participants’ legal guardian/next of kin.

Author Contributions

SM contributed in conceiving, designing, data acquisition, grant submission, and manuscript review. SHM involved in data analysis and manuscript writing. NQ involved in manuscript writing. MK was the principal investigator and supervisor for the project. FK and SK contributed in literature review and data management. All authors proofread and agreed on the final draft and accept responsibility for the work.

This project was graciously funded by the Research Promotion and Development World Health Organization Regional Office for the Eastern Mediterranean (RPPH Grant 2016-2017, TSA reference: 2017/719467-0).

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Dr. Nazish Masud (King Saud bin Abdulaziz University), and Dr. Khabir Ahmad and Dr. Bilal Ahmad (The Aga Khan University) for their contributions to the project.

Supplementary Material

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02497/full#supplementary-material

Abidin, R. R. (1992). The determinants of parenting behavior. J. Clin. Child Psychol. 21, 407–412. doi: 10.1207/s15374424jccp2104_12

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Adeyemo, D. A. (2005). Parental involvement, interest in schooling and school environment as predictors of academic self-efficacy among fresh secondary school students in Oyo State, Nigeria. Electron. J. Res. Educ. Psychol. 3, 163–180.

Google Scholar

Aunola, K., Stattin, H., and Nurmi, J.-E. (2000). Parenting styles and adolescents’ achievement strategies. J. Adolesc. 23, 205–222. doi: 10.1006/jado.2000.0308

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Battle, J. (2002). Longitudinal analysis of academic achievement amonga nationwide sample of hispanic students in one-versus dual-parent households. Hisp. J. Behav. Sci. 24, 430–447. doi: 10.1177/0739986302238213

Baumrind, D. (1966). Effects of authoritative parental control on child behavior. Child Dev. 37, 887–907. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.1966.tb05416.x

Baumrind, D. (1967). Child care practices anteceding three patterns of preschool behavior. Genet. Psychol. Monogr. 75, 43–88.

Baumrind, D. (1991). The influence of parenting style on adolescent competence and substance use. J. Early Adolesc. 11, 56–95. doi: 10.1177/0272431691111004

Bean, R. A., Barber, B. K., and Crane, D. R. (2006). Parental support, behavioral control, and psychological control among African American youth: the relationships to academic grades, delinquency, and depression. J. Fam. Issues 27, 1335–1355. doi: 10.1177/0192513X06289649

Beauvais, A. M., Stewart, J. G., DeNisco, S., and Beauvais, J. E. (2014). Factors related to academic success among nursing students: a descriptive correlational research study. Nurse Educ. Today 34, 918–923. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2013.12.005

Begum, M. S., and Sheikh, Q. A. (2011). Employment situation of women in Pakistan. Int. J. Soc. Econ. 38, 98–113. doi: 10.1108/03068291111091981

Behzadi, B., and Parker, G. (2015). A Persian version of the parental bonding instrument: factor structure and psychometric properties. Psychiatry Res. 225, 580–587. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2014.11.042

Belsky, J. (1984). The determinants of parenting: a process model. Child Dev. 55, 83–96. doi: 10.2307/1129836

Bluestone, C., and Tamis-LeMonda, C. S. (1999). Correlates of parenting styles in predominantly working- and middle-class African American mothers. J. Marriage Fam. 61, 881–893. doi: 10.2307/354010

Cavedo, L., and Parker, G. (1994). Parental bonding instrument. Soc. Psychiatr. Psychiatr. Epidemiol. 29, 78–82.

PubMed Abstract | Google Scholar

Chaudhry, I. S. (2007). Gender inequality in education and economic growth: case study of Pakistan. Pakistan Horizon 60, 81–91.

Chaudhry, I. S., and Rahman, S. (2009). The impact of gender inequality in education on rural poverty in Pakistan: an empirical analysis. Eur. J. Econ. Finance Adm. Sci. 15, 174–188.

Checa, P., and Abundis-Gutierrez, A. (2017). Parenting and temperament influence on school success in 9–13 year olds. Front. Psychol. 8:543. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00543

Checa, P., Abundis-Gutierrez, A., Pérez-Dueñas, C., and Fernández-Parra, A. (2019). Influence of maternal and paternal parenting style and behavior problems on academic outcomes in primary school. Front. Psychol. 10:378. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00378

Chow, H. P. (2000). The determinants of academic performance: Hong Kong immigrant students in Canadian schools. Can. Ethn. Stud. J. 32, 105–105.

Cohen, D. A., and Rice, J. (1997). Parenting styles, adolescent substance use, and academic achievement. J. Drug Educ. 27, 199–211. doi: 10.2190/QPQQ-6Q1GUF7D-5UTJ

Cutrona, C. E., Cole, V., Colangelo, N., Assouline, S. G., and Russell, D. W. (1994). Perceived parental social support and academic achievement: an attachment theory perspective. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 66, 369–378. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.66.2.369

Dennis, J. M., Phinney, J. S., and Chuateco, L. I. (2005). The role of motivation, parental support, and peer support in the academic success of ethnic minority first-generation college students. J. Coll. Stud. Dev. 46, 223–236. doi: 10.1353/csd.2005.0023

Desimone, L. (1999). Linking parent involvement with student achievement: do race and income matter? J. Educ. Res. 93, 11–30. doi: 10.1080/00220679909597625

Deslandes, R., Bouchard, P., and St-Amant, J.-C. (1998). Family variables as predictors of school achievement: sex differences in Quebec adolescents. Can. J. Educ. 23, 390–404.

Deslandes, R., Royer, E., Turcotte, D., and Bertrand, R. (1997). School achievement at the secondary level: influence of parenting style and parent involvement in schooling. McGill J. Educ. 32

Dornbusch, S. M., Ritter, P. L., Leiderman, P. H., Roberts, D. F., and Fraleigh, M. J. (1987). The relation of parenting style to adolescent school performance. Child Dev. 58, 1244–1257. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.1987.tb01455.x

Dubow, E. F., Boxer, P., and Huesmann, L. R. (2009). Long-term effects of parents’ education on children’s educational and occupational success: mediation by family interactions, child aggression, and teenage aspirations. Merrill Palmer Q. 55, 224–249. doi: 10.1353/mpq.0.0030

Dudley, R. L., and Wisbey, R. L. (2000). The relationship of parenting styles to commitment to the church among young adults. Relig. Educ. 95, 38–50. doi: 10.1080/0034408000950105

Dumka, L. E., Gonzales, N. A., Bonds, D. D., and Millsap, R. E. (2008). Academic success of Mexican origin adolescent boys and girls: the role of mothers’ and fathers’ parenting and cultural orientation. Sex Roles 60, 588–599. doi: 10.1007/s11199-008-9518-z

Farooq, M. S., Chaudhry, A. H., Shafiq, M., and Berhanu, G. (2011). Factors affecting students’ quality of academic performance: a case of secondary school level. J. Qual. Technol. Manag. 7, 1–14.

Farsides, T., and Woodfield, R. (2003). Individual differences and undergraduate academic success: the roles of personality, intelligence, and application. Pers. Individ. Differ. 34, 1225–1243. doi: 10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00111-3

Flynn, D. M., and MacLeod, S. (2015). Determinants of Happiness in Undergraduate University Students. Coll. Stud. J. 49, 452–460.

Gamoran, A. (1996). Student achievement in public magnet, public comprehensive, and private city high schools. Educ. Eval. Policy Anal. 18, 1–18. doi: 10.3102/01623737018001001

Ginsburg, G. S., and Bronstein, P. (1993). Family factors related to children’s intrinsic/extrinsic motivational orientation and academic performance. Child Dev. 64, 1461–1474. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.1993.tb02964.x

Hawkins, J. D. (1997). “Academic performance and school success: sources and consequences,” in Healthy Children 2010: Enhancing Children’s Wellness , eds R. P. Weissberg, T. P. Gullotta, R. L. Hampton, B. A. Ryan, and G. R. Adams, (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc), 278–305.

Hillstrom, K. A. (2009). Are Acculturation and Parenting Styles Related to Academic Achievement Among Latino students? dissertation, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.

Hussain, I. (2005). “Education, employment and economic development in Pakistan,” in Education Reform in Pakistan: Building for the Future , ed. R. M. Hathaway, (Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars), 33–45.

Huver, R. M. E., Otten, R., de Vries, H., and Engels, R. C. (2010). Personality and parenting style in parents of adolescents. J. Adolesc. 33, 395–402. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2009.07.012

Jeynes, W. H. (2007). The relationship between parental involvement and urban secondary school student academic achievement: a meta-analysis. Urban Educ. 42, 82–110. doi: 10.1177/0042085906293818

Khalid, A., Qadir, F., Chan, S. W., and Schwannauer, M. (2018). Parental bonding and adolescents’ depressive and anxious symptoms in Pakistan. J. Affect. Disord. 228, 60–67. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2017.11.050

Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J. L., Buckley, J. A., Bridges, B. K., and Hayek, J. C. (2006). What Matters to Student Success: A Review of the Literature. Washington, DC: National Postsecondary Education Cooperative.

Lamborn, S. D., Mounts, N. S., Steinberg, L., and Dornbusch, S. M. (1991). Patterns of competence and adjustment among adolescents from authoritative, authoritarian, indulgent, and neglectful families. Child Dev. 62, 1049–1065. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.1991.tb01588.x

Lin, C. Y. C., and Fu, V. R. (1990). A comparison of child-rearing practices among Chinese, immigrant Chinese, and Caucasian-American parents. Child Dev. 61, 429–433. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.1990.tb02789.x

Linnenbrink, E. A., and Pintrich, P. R. (2002). Motivation as an enabler for academic success. Sch. Psychol. Rev. 31, 313–327. doi: 10.1080/17483107.2018.1471169

Liu, J., Li, L., and Fang, F. (2011). Psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the Parental Bonding Instrument. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 48, 582–589. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2010.10.008

Lubienski, C., and Lubienski, S. (2006). Charter, Private, Public Schools and Academic Achievement: New Evidence from NAEP Mathematics Data. New York, NY: Columbia University.

Maccoby, E., Martin, J., Hetherington, E., and Mussen, P. (1983). “Socialization in the context of the family: Parent-child interaction,” in Handbook of Child Psychology: Socialization, Personality, and Social Development , 4th Edn, Vol. 4, ed. E. M. Hetherington, (Hoboken. NJ: John Wiley & Sons), 101.

Masud, H., Thurasamy, R., and Ahmad, M. S. (2015). Parenting styles and academic achievement of young adolescents: a systematic literature review. Qual. Quant. 49, 2411–2433. doi: 10.1007/s11135-014-0120-x

McCabe, J. E. (2014). Maternal personality and psychopathology as determinants of parenting behavior: a quantitative integration of two parenting literatures. Psychol. Bull. 140, 722–750. doi: 10.1037/a0034835

McClelland, M. M., Morrison, F. J., and Holmes, D. L. (2000). Children at risk for early academic problems: the role of learning-related social skills. Early Child. Res. Q. 15, 307–329. doi: 10.1016/S0885-2006(00)00069-7

Mujtaba, T., and Furnham, A. (2001). A cross-cultural study of parental conflict and eating disorders in a non-clinical sample. Int. J. Soc. Psychiatry 47, 24–35. doi: 10.1177/002076400104700103

Murphy, E., Wickramaratne, P., and Weissman, M. (2010). The stability of parental bonding reports: a 20-year follow-up. J. Affect. Disord. 125, 307–315. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2010.01.003

Osorio, A., and González-Cámara, M. (2016). Testing the alleged superiority of the indulgent parenting style among Spanish adolescents. Psicothema 28, 414–420.

Östberg, M., and Hagekull, B. (2000). A structural modeling approach to the understanding of parenting stress. J. Clin. Child Psychol. 29, 615–625. doi: 10.1207/S15374424JCCP2904_13

Parker, G. (1979). Reported parental characteristics in relation to trait depression and anxiety levels in a non-clinical group. Aust. N. Z. J. Psychiatry 13, 260–264. doi: 10.3109/00048677909159146

Parker, G. (1983). Parental Overprotection: A Risk Factor in Psychosocial Development. New York, NY: Grune & Stratton.

Parker, G. (1989). The parental bonding instrument: psychometric properties reviewed. Psychiatr. Dev. 7, 317–335.

Parker, G. (1990). The parental bonding instrument. Soc. Psychiatr. Psychiatr. Epidemiol. 25, 281–282.

Parker, G., Tupling, H., and Brown, L. B. (1979). A parental bonding instrument. Br. J. Med. Psychol. 52, 1–10.

Parsasirat, Z., Montazeri, M., Yusooff, F., Subhi, N., and Nen, S. (2013). The most effective kinds of parents on children’s academic achievement. Asian Soc. Sci. 9, 229–242.

Pinquart, M. (2016). Associations of parenting styles and dimensions with academic achievement in children and adolescents: a meta-analysis. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 28, 475–493. doi: 10.1007/s10648-015-9338-y

Ponnet, K., Mortelmans, D., Wouters, E., Van Leeuwen, K., Bastaits, K., and Pasteels, I. (2013). Parenting stress and marital relationship as determinants of mothers’ and fathers’ parenting. Pers. Relat. 20, 259–276. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6811.2012.01404.x

Qadir, F., Khan, M. M., Medhin, G., and Prince, M. (2011). Male gender preference, female gender disadvantage as risk factors for psychological morbidity in Pakistani women of childbearing age - a life course perspective. BMC Public Health 11:745. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-11-745

Qadir, F., Stewart, R., Khan, M., and Prince, M. (2005). The validity of the Parental Bonding Instrument as a measure of maternal bonding among young Pakistani women. Soc. Psychiatr. Psychiatr. Epidemiol. 40, 276–282. doi: 10.1007/s00127-005-0887-0

Rahimpour, P., Direkvand-Moghadam, A., Direkvand-Moghadam, A., and Hashemian, A. (2015). Relationship between the parenting styles and students’ educational performance among Iranian girl high school students, a cross- sectional study. J. Clin. Diagn. Res. 9:JC05–JC07. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2015/15981.6914

Sander, W. (1999). Private schools and public school achievement. J. Hum. Resour. 34, 697–709. doi: 10.2307/146413

Sanders, M. G. (1998). The effects of school, family, and community support on the academic achievement of African American adolescents. Urban Educ. 33, 385–409. doi: 10.1177/0042085998033003005

Shute, V. J., Hansen, E. G., Underwood, J. S., and Razzouk, R. (2011). A review of the relationship between parental involvement and secondary school students’ academic achievement. Educ. Res. Int. 2011:915326.

Simons, R. L., Beaman, J., Conger, R. D., and Chao, W. (1993). Childhood experience, conceptions of parenting, and attitudes of spouse as determinants of parental behavior. J. Marriage Fam. 55, 91–106. doi: 10.2307/352961

Simons, R. L., Whitbeck, L. B., Conger, R. D., and Melby, J. N. (1990). Husband and wife differences in determinants of parenting: a social learning and exchange model of parental behavior. J. Marriage Fam. 52, 375–392. doi: 10.2307/353033

Smith, C. L. (2010). Multiple determinants of parenting: predicting individual differences in maternal parenting behavior with toddlers. Parenting 10, 1–17. doi: 10.1080/15295190903014588

Steinberg, L., Elmen, J. D., and Mounts, N. S. (1989). Authoritative parenting, psychosocial maturity, and academic success among adolescents. Child Dev. 60, 1424–1436. doi: 10.2307/1130932

Steinberg, L., Lamborn, S. D., Dornbusch, S. M., and Darling, N. (1992). Impact of parenting practices on adolescent achievement: authoritative parenting, school involvement, and encouragement to succeed. Child Dev. 63, 1266–1281. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.1992.tb01694.x

Tagliabue, S., Olivari, M. G., Bacchini, D., Affuso, G., and Confalonieri, E. (2014). Measuring adolescents’ perceptions of parenting style during childhood: psychometric properties of the parenting styles and dimensions questionnaire. Psicol. Teoria e Pesquisa 30, 251–258. doi: 10.1590/s0102-37722014000300002

Tomul, E., and Savasci, H. S. (2012). Socioeconomic determinants of academic achievement. Educ. Assess. Eval. Account. 24, 175–187. doi: 10.1007/s11092-012-9149-9143

Vacha, E. F., and McLaughlin, T. F. (1992). The social structural, family, school, and personal characteristics of at-risk students: policy recommendations for school personnel. J. Educ. 174, 9–25. doi: 10.1177/002205749217400303

Valiente, C., Lemery-Chalfant, K., and Castro, K. S. (2007). Children’s effortful control and academic competence: mediation through school liking. Merrill Palmer Q. 53, 1–25. doi: 10.1353/mpq.2007.0006

Vandenbroucke, J. P., von Elm, E., Altman, D. G., Gøtzsche, P. C., Mulrow, C. D., Pocock, S. J., et al. (2014). Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration. Int. J. Surg. 12, 1500–1524.

Wang, Q., and Leichtman, M. D. (2000). Same beginnings, different stories: a comparison of American and Chinese children’s narratives. Child Dev. 71, 1329–1346. doi: 10.1111/1467-8624.00231

Weis, M., Trommsdorff, G., and Muñoz, L. (2016). Children’s self-regulation and school achievement in cultural contexts: the role of maternal restrictive control. Front. Psychol. 7:722. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00722

Weiss, L. H., and Schwarz, J. C. (1996). The relationship between parenting types and older adolescents’ personality, academic achievement, adjustment, and substance use. Child Dev. 67, 2101–2114. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.1996.tb01846.x

Wilhelm, K., Niven, H., Parker, G., and Hadzi-Pavlovic, D. (2005). The stability of the parental bonding instrument over a 20-year period. Psychol. Med. 35, 387–393. doi: 10.1017/s0033291704003538

York, T., Gibson, C., and Rankin, S. (2015). Defining and measuring academic success. Pract. Assess. Res. Eval. 20, 1–20.

Zahedani, Z. Z., Rezaee, R., Yazdani, Z., Bagheri, S., and Nabeiei, P. (2016). The influence of parenting style on academic achievement and career path. J. Adv. Med. Educ. Prof. 4, 130–134.

Zakeri, H., and Karimpour, M. (2011). Parenting styles and self-esteem. Proc. Soc. Behav. Sci. 29, 758–761. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.302

Zhang, X., Hu, B. Y., Ren, L., Huo, S., and Wang, M. (2019). Young Chinese children’s academic skill development: identifying child-, family-, and school-level factors. New Dir. Child Adolesc. Dev. 2019, 9–37. doi: 10.1002/cad.20271

Keywords : parenting styles, academic performance, adolescent students, Pakistan, care, overprotection, parental bonding instrument

Citation: Masud S, Mufarrih SH, Qureshi NQ, Khan F, Khan S and Khan MN (2019) Academic Performance in Adolescent Students: The Role of Parenting Styles and Socio-Demographic Factors – A Cross Sectional Study From Peshawar, Pakistan. Front. Psychol. 10:2497. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02497

Received: 16 May 2019; Accepted: 22 October 2019; Published: 08 November 2019.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2019 Masud, Mufarrih, Qureshi, Khan, Khan and Khan. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Sarwat Masud, [email protected] ; Muhammad Naseem Khan, [email protected] ; [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here .

Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Academic performance of children in relation to gender, parenting styles, and socioeconomic status: What attributes are important

Roles Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

* E-mail: [email protected]

Affiliation Department of Sociology, Kohat University of Science and Technology, Kohat, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan

Roles Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Methodology, Supervision, Writing – review & editing

Affiliation Department of Rural Sociology, The University of Agriculture, Peshawar, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan

Roles Methodology, Writing – original draft

Affiliation Department of Sociology & Psychology, University of Swabi, Swabi, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan

Roles Data curation

Affiliation Head of Department of Pakistan Studies, Islamia College, Peshawar, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan

Affiliation Department of Social Work, Kohat University of Science and Technology, Kohat, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan

Roles Conceptualization

Affiliation Department of Sociology, The Women University, Multan, Punjab, Pakistan

Roles Methodology

Affiliation University of Malakand Women Campus, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan

Affiliation Department of Tourism & Hotel Management, University of Swabi, Swabi, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan

Roles Writing – review & editing

Affiliation Department of Business Administration, ILMA University, Karachi, Pakistan

Affiliation Department of Law, Kohat University of Science and Technology, Kohat, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan

Roles Project administration

Roles Investigation

• Nayab Ali, 
• Asad Ullah, 
• Abdul Majid Khan, 
• Yunas Khan, 
• Sajid Ali, 
• Aisha Khan, 
• Bakhtawar, 
• Asad Khan, 
• Maaz Ud Din, 

• Published: November 15, 2023
• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0286823
• Peer Review
• Reader Comments

What are the effects of parenting styles on academic performance and how unequal are these effects on secondary school students from different gender and socioeconomic status families constitute the theme of this paper. A cross-sectional and purposive sampling technique was adopted to gather information from a sample of 448 students on a Likert scale. Chi-square, Kendall’s Tau-c tests and hierarchical multiple regression analyses were used to determine the extent of the relationship among the variables. Chi-square and Kendall’s Tau-c (T c ) test results established that the socioeconomic status of the respondent’s family explained variation in children’s academic performance due to parenting style; however, no significant difference was observed in the academic performance of students based on gender. Furthermore, hierarchal multiple regression analysis established that the family’s socioeconomic status, authoritative parenting, permissive parenting, the interaction of socioeconomic status and authoritative parenting, and the interaction of socioeconomic status and permissive parenting were significant predictors (P<0.05) of students’ academic performance. These predictor variables explained 59.3 percent variation in the academic performance of children (R2 = 0.593). Results of hierarchal multiple regression analysis in this study ranked ordered the most significant predictors of the academic performance of children in the following order. Family socioeconomic status alone was the strongest predictor (β = 18.25), interaction of socioeconomic status and authoritative parenting was the second important predictor (β = 14.18), authoritative parenting alone was third in importance (β = 13.38), the interaction of socioeconomic status and permissive parenting stood at fourth place in importance (β = 11.46), and permissive parenting was fifth (β = 9.2) in influencing academic performance of children in the study area. Children who experienced authoritative parenting and were from higher socioeconomic status families perform better as compared to children who experienced authoritarian and permissive parenting and were from low socioeconomic status families.

Citation: Ali N, Ullah A, Khan AM, Khan Y, Ali S, Khan A, et al. (2023) Academic performance of children in relation to gender, parenting styles, and socioeconomic status: What attributes are important. PLoS ONE 18(11): e0286823. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0286823

Editor: Ikram Shah, COMSATS University Islamabad, PAKISTAN

Received: September 9, 2022; Accepted: May 24, 2023; Published: November 15, 2023

Copyright: © 2023 Ali et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: All relevant data are within the manuscript.

Funding: The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

Academic performance is the process of acquiring knowledge and skills that provide the foundation for development [ 1 ]. Academic performance refers to the “achievement of educational benchmarks”, therefore, most of the educational efforts of students, teachers, parents and educational institutions revolve around achieving these educational goals to provide a sound foundation for national development and meet the challenges of the modern world [ 2 – 4 ]. Measurement of academic performance via standardized tests and examinations and its verification in a system of grade marks or percentage points is a universally accepted norm [ 5 , 6 ]. Good academic performance has been related to successful development trajectories and better life performance for the persons possessing it as well as for national development. On the contrary, poor academic behavior is linked to academic failure, maladjustment, poor access to services and opportunities or alternatively access to low-paying and less rewarding jobs and low productivity in later life. Also, when a state has a larger population of people with inferior academic credentials, it is less able to implement productivity-boosting technology and innovative working methods, which ultimately causes the nation to fall in the international rankings for its socioeconomic standing [ 7 ]. The reasons for the poor academic achievements of students in poor and developing countries are almost similar. Several factors are associated with the academic performance of students. These factors include individual, social, economic and institutional. Some of the most important predictors of child academic achievements include school attendance, student’s interest in the study, hard work, dedication, self-confidence, family support, parenting style, family socioeconomic status, school environment and neighborhood facilities [ 8 – 10 ], peer influence and parent involvement in children education [ 11 , 12 ]. Similarly, Radhika found that classroom size, teaching methodology, teachers’ capabilities, facilities and learning environment at school affect the academic performance of students [ 13 ].

This study is designed in light of Bronfenbrenner’s socio-ecological model. Bronfenbrenner’s socio-ecological framework provides a theoretical foundation to connect multi-layered patterns of interaction of personal relationships and social settings in institutions that shape students’ behaviour, learning motivation and academic performance. Thus, the academic performance of children from the study area is supposedly having links with some micro-, meso-, exo- and macro-level systems that are explained under Bronfenbrenner socio-ecological model. However, due to time and financial constraints, as well as the direct influence of the two levels (Micro and Meso levels) of Bronfenbrenner’s socio-ecological model, the current study focused only on these two levels. This research study has three main objectives: (1) to examine the association between parenting style and academic performance of children, (2) to know about the variation in academic performance of children with respect to parenting style on the basis of student gender and family socioeconomic status, and (3) to measure the relationship between parenting style and family socioeconomic status on the academic performance in isolation and interaction with each other.

National and international scenario

According to the Global Human Capital ranking of 130 countries, the less-developed and developing countries like African and South Asian countries lack behind the developed countries and make up the lower end of the regional rankings due to poor investment in education, low-skilled workforce, poor utilization of skills and little know-how of utilization of skills. Moreover, out of 214 million children in Sub-Saharan Africa and the Central and Southern Asia states do not achieve minimum proficiency levels in reading and mathematics and 81% of these children have ages of 6 to 14 years [ 14 ]. According to the Global Human Capital ranking of 130 countries, Pakistan stands at 125 th , which is well below the neighboring countries in South Asia such as Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bangladesh and India which ranks 70, 98, 111 and 103 respectively [ 15 ]. Pakistan, the 5 th most populous country in the world, has a population of more than 200 million. More than two third of its population live in rural areas. Between urban and rural populations, there are substantial disparities. For instance, the literacy rate is 53% in rural areas whereas 76% in urban ones. Urban areas (18% rural compared to 74% urban) have approximately four times the likelihood of having access to vital developmental services [ 16 ]. According to UNICEF in addition to the 40 million that are enrolled in school, there are presently 22.8 million more Pakistani children not in school. Following Nigeria, this country has the second-highest proportion of out-of-school children worldwide. 5.3 million of the 22.8 million children in this group are dropouts, and 17.5 million have never attended school [ 17 ]. The average percentage of students who passed all subjects in the science and arts groups in 2019 was 68.24% and 36.83% respectively. In 2018, the scientific group had a cumulative average pass percentage of 54.99%, while the arts group had a pass percentage of 38.99%. In 2017, the science group had a cumulative average pass percentage of 60.05%, while the arts group had a pass percentage of 42.29%. In 2016, the science group’s cumulative average pass rate was 54.11%, while the arts group was 44.95%. In 2015, the science group’s cumulative average pass rate was 46.92%, while the arts group was 34.22%. In the same way, a high number of students took the exams in 2018, 2017, 2016, and 2015, but fewer students passed with low marks, which was an alarming situation in secondary education in Pakistan [ 18 , 19 ]. On a regional basis in the country, District Malakand is on top as per the last report of Alif Ailaan and SDPI on education scores. However, the last result of passing students in the Secondary Schools Certificate (SSC) examination is 69.73 percent and 30.27 percent of students remained unsuccessful [ 20 ].

Theoretical background

From long ago educationists and researchers are interested in exploring various determinants of students’ academic performance ranging from child personal factors to contextual factors. Some of the most echoed theories are achievement goal theory, self-determination theory, social learning theory, and socio-ecological model. The achievement goal theory explains that students’ academic achievements are associated with students’ personal factors i.e. their personal goal orientations and self-determination. The theory bifurcates the personal goal into two main categories namely mastery goal (goals for personal improvement and gaining knowledge for one’s own sake) and performance goals (to perform to supersede others in terms of academic output). These two types of goals help children in their development and learning (understanding and performing hard tasks) and keep them from failing through performance (to outperform and beat others) respectively [ 21 – 24 ]. Empirical research based on achievement goal theory made it evident that mastery goal improved students’ interest in learning, and enhanced their self-efficacy, self-determination and cognitive skills, whereas performance goal focused on the exercise of abilities for success [ 25 – 27 ]. A combination of mastery and performance goals contributes towards overall academic achievements [ 28 ]. The achievement goal theory was criticized for its broader applicability as its main focuses are on interpersonal predictors of achievements at individuals’ personal or at a very micro level [ 29 ]. Other researchers found some conflicting outcomes that were associated with performance goal orientations. Furthermore, some of the students, despite their maladaptive behavior towards performance and goal orientations, secured better grades which are inconsistent with the achievement goal literature [ 30 ]. Moreover, this theory could not take into consideration multiple dimensions at broader levels to explain the academic performance of children holistically [ 31 ].

Self-determination theory (SDT) is another theory to explain students’ classroom performance and is based on the premise of motivation. The theory assumes that all students possess innate tendencies for growth (intrinsic motivation) which is the motivational foundation for better classroom engagement and appropriate school functioning [ 32 – 37 ]. The theory further explains that motivation from teachers and enabling facilities at school (extrinsic motivation) provide a further boost to the inner motivational resources of students in facilitating their high-quality engagement, therefore, the academic achievements of students are reliant on intrinsic and extrinsic motivations [ 38 ]. This motivational phenomenon presented and explained self-determination theory along with its associated five other theories i.e. basic needs theory, organismic integration theory, goal contents theory, cognitive evaluation theory and causality orientations theory.

The basic needs theory focuses on psychological needs (autonomy, competence, and relatedness) and magnifies the importance of intrinsic motivation, positive engagement, effective functioning and psychological well-being [ 39 ]. Organismic integration theory explains extrinsic motivation and its relationship with students’ academic socialization [ 40 , 41 ]. Goal contents theory compares intrinsic goals and extrinsic goals to elucidate how intrinsic goals support psychological well-being, whereas, extrinsic goals poster psychological ill-being [ 42 , 43 ]. Cognitive evaluation theory is another micro theory that emerged from SDT that was developed to predict the positive and negative effects of extrinsic goals on intrinsic motivation Causality orientation theory is the fifth offshoot of SDT that identifies individual differences among students in terms of their motivation and engagement. It also reflects on the fact that some students prefer autonomy, whereas others perform better in a controlled environment [ 44 ].

The SDT theory, however, is criticized on its conceptual grounds as empirical studies have revealed some adverse effects of rewards on motivation. Moreover, the application of this theory to real life is considered doubtful due to complex social events. Furthermore, the motivation that is generated by rewards, in the context of complex tasks that make up most of the human lives in their profession, is short-term and shallow. Excessive focus on rewards is also found detrimental to creativity and true engagement. The critique of SDT, therefore, rightly says that the creation of an atmosphere in which people feel free to act independently and creatively towards shared goals is much harder. Other social psychologists say that self-determination theory (SDT) is still under development and searching for new avenues in social psychology to explore [ 45 ].

Social learning theory is based on Banduras’ Bobo Doll experiments during the 1960s. This theory tries to establish that social learning is the outcome of observing and interacting with others. The theory was later on named “social cognitive theory” according to which learning occurs when there is reciprocal interaction of person between environments which results in a specific behavior. The interaction of a person with the environment stimulates behavior which in turn affects the person and the environment. Therefore, the learning process is a complex interplay of these factors which is termed by Banduras’ as reciprocal determinism [ 46 , 47 ]. Therefore, it is not only the students’ belief in their abilities that shape their academic achievements, rather, the social environment at family, school, neighborhood, peers and mass media are also important in shaping the learning outcomes of children [ 48 ].

The social learning theory is criticized for disregarding the emotional or motivational basis of learning behavior. Moreover, the operationalization of this theory in its entirety is also questioned. Some of the assumptions of the theory are disproved through empirical research for example the assumption that “the environment will bring changes in the person automatically”, does not always stand true. In addition, the extent to which the factors of person, environment and behavior influence the actual learning behavior is not clear. The theory has also overlooked the biological determinism and maturation effect on the learning process [ 49 ].

After discussing the major theme and criticisms on the above theories, there emerges a desire to focus on such a model that can help understand the multiple layers of youth ecology that promote academic growth and limit negative educational outcomes in the children.

One of the most widely used models in this regard is Bronfenbrenner’s socio-ecological model which explains various factors of child development at different levels [ 50 – 53 ]. This model visualizes the environment of each individual residing in society into individually observable distinct patterns of layers. The multi-layered pattern of interaction of personal relationships, social settings and institutions shapes students’ behaviour, learning motivation and academic performance [ 54 – 56 ]. This theory divides these patterns of interaction into a system of four levels i.e. micro-level systems, meso-level systems, exo-level systems and macro-level systems. The micro-level system is the closest environment in which a student lives and interacts; it includes home, neighbourhood, and school. The meso-level system includes the interaction of two micro-level systems such as the interaction between parents and teachers and between parents and neighbours. The micro- and meso-level systems have a direct influence on child learning and performance. The other two levels, exo-level (parents, workplace and their association) and macro-level (culture, policies) system have no direct effect on the children and the children are not directly involved in that [ 57 – 59 ].

Empirical studies have also identified multiple determinants of children’s academic performance that are systematically framed in Bronfenbrenner’s socio-ecological model [ 60 – 62 ]. However, parenting style (a micro-level factor refers to specific behaviours and strategies used by parents to control, socialize and establish an emotional relationship with their children) and family socioeconomic standing seems to be the most emphasized factors [ 63 – 66 ]. Numerous studies show overwhelming evidence of the important role played by parenting style in influencing the academic performance of children [ 67 , 68 ]. Based on various dimensions and characteristics of parenting, Baumrind identified three types of parenting styles that had profound effects on behaviour of children. The typology of parenting style included authoritative, authoritarian and permissive parenting. This typology of parenting style is based on responsiveness (warmth, clarity of communication, acceptance and involvement) and demandingness (control, supervision and maturity demands) as valued by parents [ 69 ]. Authoritative parenting is linked with a high level of both responsiveness and positive demandingness, the authoritarian parenting style is characterized by low responsiveness and high demandingness, and the permissive parenting style is based on high responsiveness and low demandingness [ 70 ]. Specific parental behaviour that influences the academic performance of children via authoritative parenting includes warmth and a democratic environment in the family, under which children openly participate in decision-making, discuss their concerns and have a positive relationship with their parents. From the parental side, authoritative parents enforce rules and norms, provide guidance and impose sanctions when necessary. Authoritarian parents are strict to the extent of harshness that limits child’s participation in family discussions and sharing problems with parents. On the other extreme, permissive parents provide limitless freedom to the children and ignore their deviance with no or very low guidance to discipline the children [ 71 ].

Parenting style is an important predictor of the academic performance of children to the extent that in some cases it may even offset the negative effects of socioeconomic status and poor neighbourhood in achieving better academic grades. However, Sirin reported based on a meta-analysis of 58 studies that parental socioeconomic status (education, occupation and income) is the strongest predictor of academic achievements and that low socioeconomic status leads to lower academic achievements of students [ 72 , 73 ]. For some researchers, a secured socioeconomic status is at par with other micro-level variables such as parenting style, home, school and neighbourhood. in shaping the academic achievements of the children, and for others, the effect of socioeconomic status was merely like a catalyst that boosted the academic performance of children when combined with appropriate parenting, positive peers, secure living and conducive school environment. The home locality, access to health and access to educational and recreational services are the functions of high socioeconomic status. Whereas, low enrolment and low academic performance are common in families with low socioeconomic status [ 74 , 75 ]. Gender is another dividing line that distinguishes the academic performance of male and female children. In egalitarian societies, the gender-based distinction is not as wider as compared to that in a patriarchal society where males are preferred over females [ 76 , 77 ]. Furthermore, some aspects of academic learning like engagement with school, self-esteem and enthusiasm for studies were excelled more by girls than boys, however, the socioeconomic system in patriarchal families was more favourable to boys than girls to support them in achieving higher academic grades [ 78 ].

Literature review

Biological determinists lay huge emphasis on hereditary and biological factors in understanding behaviour-related problems in children. At the same time, certain social factors may also prove deterministic in putting youth in a disadvantaged position in an unequal society, as the benefits of some interventions may yield different consequences for youth from different socioeconomic groups. Therefore, the stories of psychological stresses, mental illnesses, academic failures and unsuccessful life are more pronounced in the poor segment of society [ 79 ]. A review of international and national literature discloses a gradual decrease in school dropout rates during past decades. However, a major chunk of educated folk did not acquire appropriate academic grades. As a result, most of them remain unemployed because they barely manage to enter the labour force [ 80 , 81 ].

The global picture of human capital ranking shows that the poor and developing countries of South Asia and Africa including Pakistan are placed near the bottom of this ranking due to poor investment in education, low-skilled workforce, poor utilization of skills and little know-how of utilization of skills. The government in Central and Southern Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa invested heavily in the education sector to achieve the Millennium Development Goal of universal primary education for all children by 2015. This investment resulted in an increase in the net enrolment rate. However, these countries are still faced with the challenges of retention rate and quality education [ 82 ]. World Bank carried out a survey and reported that worldwide 617 million children and adolescents are not been able to achieve minimum proficiency levels in reading and mathematics. Among these children, next to Sub-Saharan Africa are the Central and Southern Asia states where 81% of children and adolescents are not achieving proficiency outcomes [ 83 ]. The literacy percentage in Pakistan, at 57%, is significantly lower than that of its neighbouring countries. Given that primary school is where formative learning occurs, the dropout rate of 22.7 Percent (third highest in the region after Bangladesh and Nepal) is a grave issue. According to the 2016 Global Education Monitoring Report of the United Nations, Pakistan is 60 years behind in secondary education and 50 years behind in basic education in terms of meeting international educational standards. The children not attending school at the elementary, secondary, and upper secondary are 5.6, 5.5, and 10.4 million in numbers respectively. This results in an alarming and mind-boggling situation for the whole nation [ 84 , 85 ].

It has been highlighted by a meta-analysis that the reasons for poor educational outcomes in developing and poor countries are almost the same. It has been observed that poor educational outcomes in South Africa are attributable to certain factors ranging from students’ personal factors to school and home-related factors [ 86 ]. For instance, home-related factors include a lack of parental support towards child education, a non-conducive learning environment at home and poor socioeconomic status of parents. All these home factors lead to poor academic performance in children [ 87 ]. A study carried out by Jekonia in Finland concluded that school performance has a positive correlation with an authoritative parenting style. While, it was discovered that children’s academic achievement and authoritarian and permissive had a negative correlation [ 88 ]. The author assessed the academic performance of 345 students with respect to parenting styles in Lebanon and found that adolescents who believe their parents as authoritative are more likely to form strong efficacy convictions and greater intention, and as a result, they are more likely to perform well in school than their peers with authoritarian and negligent parents [ 89 ]. However, the study also revealed that the impact of parenting on academic success was not moderated by socio-demographic factors. Similarly, a study conducted a study in Sirjan, Iran, the sample comprised 82 high school students, including 251 females and 131 males and concluded that having a supportive parenting style was very significant for children’s educational success and goal orientation [ 90 ]. A research study in Indonesia assessed the impact of parenting style, age and size of the family on students’ academic performance. It was illustrated that at the adolescence stage, the students spend most of their time in extra-curricular activities paying little attention to their studies and consequently their parents have to adopt an authoritarian parenting style. Moreover, in a family of large size, the parents are likely to adopt strictness and punitive techniques for socializing their children which results in poor academic achievements [ 91 ]. According to a research study by Farid et al. in Pakistan, parental practices have a significant influence on teens’ personalities. This study found a strong correlation between parental responsiveness and teenage personality development. Adolescents’ personality development is also impacted by parental influence over them. Adolescents’ personalities will develop attributes of confidence if their parents adopt an authoritative parenting style to properly manage their children’s expectations and attentiveness [ 92 ]. A wide range of studies established that, despite variations from culture to culture, a balance of responsiveness and positive demandingness in parenting style is related to higher academic performance [ 93 – 97 ]. The authors declared that the achievements of the student are associated with tangible and non-tangible resources both at school and home. Therefore, parenting style is one of the non-tangible assets that influenced the academic achievements of the students [ 98 ]. Similarly, in a meta-analysis by Bernstein, several parenting styles being important in affecting the academic achievement of students were compared. Authoritative parenting style, despite its variation from culture to culture, is a strong predictor of higher academic achievement in children [ 99 ]. Despite dilution of the positive effects of authoritative parenting style in autocratic society (such as in Asia and Africa), such parenting style shows consistently promising results in terms of the academic achievements of children. The effect of authoritarian parenting on positive educational outcomes in children was somewhat more promising in autocratic cultures (Asia and Africa) than in democratic cultures (America and Europe). However, the results of permissive parenting in this regard remained at the bottom in most cultures. Pinquart and Kauser in their analysis of 428 published studies, throughout the world, in 2017 and concluded that the authoritative parenting style was associated with positive academic outcomes as compared to authoritarian and permissive parenting, therefore, the authoritative approach is worth recommending all over the world [ 100 ]. Furthermore, while analysing the relationship of parental educational status with the academic achievements of the students, the authors reported that as compared to students whose parents are qualified below 12 grade, those students performed 20 points higher than whom parents are qualified above grade 12. Similarly, the availability of assets at the home is also directly associated with the achievements of the students in a science subject [ 101 ].

The socioeconomic status is the combination of a variety of factors out of which monthly family income, literacy levels of parent and their occupation or sources of income are the most important indicators of academic achievements. The family socioeconomic status can facilitate the academic achievements of the students in three important ways i.e. provision of financial and material support, timely and appropriate guidance from paid sources and safer and elevated social status than that is possessed by the rest of the society [ 102 , 103 ]. The authors assessed the South African learners’ performance in mathematics and found that not only the availability of facilities at the school but also parental educational level is one of the strongest predictors of students’ academic achievements. However, it was found that the majority of the students perform academically averagely irrespective of the socioeconomic standings of the family [ 104 ]. One of the studies from Nigeria highlighted that students from low socioeconomic status usually perform lower academically as compared to those from higher socioeconomic status families [ 105 ]. Similarly, another study in Nigeria reported that parental deprivation caused poor provision of learning materials and a poor learning environment to children resulting in their poor academic performance [ 106 ]. Children from low socioeconomic status families struggle hard in achieving their developmental goals. A child from low socioeconomic status, despite of their high capabilities, are more likely to secure low grades than a child of the same capabilities but from a higher socioeconomic background. Socioeconomic status is also influential in raising the mental and emotional well-being of children which positively affects their academic performance [ 107 ].

In most of the patriarchal societies in developing nations, gender is also an important predictor of family interest in spending on children’s education. For instance, boys are preferred over girls in education in male-led societies. Due to this differential care of males in terms of positive attitude towards their education and high educational spending on them, the literacy levels and grades may vary on the basis of the gender of the students [ 108 , 109 ]. Gender-based variation in the educational performance of children may vary according to parenting style, parental involvement and other micro and meso-level systems due to varying socio-cultural reasons [ 110 , 111 ], some factor (variables) are more favorable to boys and other to girls [ 112 , 113 ]. Experiments on the psychological ground, however, consistently show little significance of gender differences in the cognitive abilities of children. Therefore, in egalitarian societies, cognitive abilities are an important interpersonal character that is obviously linked to the academic achievement of children. However, in other societies, socioeconomic and cultural factors are more important in bringing variations in the academic performance of children based on their gender [ 114 ].

Study methodology

Study design.

The research design for this study was a “Cross-Sectional” or one-shot or status design based on both times of exploration and study population. This study design is most appropriate for knowing the existing phenomenon, problem, attitude, perception, or issue, by taking a cross-section of the population [ 115 ].

Sample size and sampling

The study was carried out in District Malakand, a rural district in Malakand Division of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province (Pakistan). The District comprises of two Tehsils and 28 Union Councils (UCs) with a total area of 952 square km. According to 2017 population census the total population of the district was 717806 (90.57% rural and 9.43% urban population) with a population density of 750/square km. Pushto is the main language of the 98.2% residents of the District. The District was formed as a Provincially Administered Tribal Area (PATA) in 1970, earlier to which it was a tribal area known as Malakand protected area since the British rule. For selecting a representative sample, purposive sampling method with specific criteria for selection was adopted in the following manner [ 116 ].

District Malakand and its two Tehsils were purposively selected at the first and second stages. The two tehsils, comprising 28 union councils (UCs), included five urban and 23 rural union councils with a ratio of 1:5. Using this logic, two urban and ten rural union councils were randomly selected at third stage. Out of each selected UC one government boy’s school, one government girl’s school and one private school were randomly selected to collect information at the fourth stage.

• PPT PowerPoint slide
• PNG larger image
• TIFF original image

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0286823.t001

Where n h is the sample size for stratum h , N h is the population size for stratum h , and N is total population size, and n is the total sample size

To meet the study objectives students of 9th and 10th classes of the age group 15–18 years, including boys and girls, were randomly selected from government and private schools as study respondents.

The current study comprises of three independent variables namely (1) parenting style (authoritative, authoritarian and permissive), (2) student’s gender and (3) family’s socioeconomic status (low and high socioeconomic status). The dependent variable was the children’s academic performance ( Table 2 ).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0286823.t002

Measurement of variables

Measurement of parenting style was based on the methodology developed by Robinson et al. (1995). The parenting style scale consisted of three subscales i.e. authoritative parenting (eight items), authoritarian parenting (six items) and permissive parenting (four items). All three parenting style variables scales were internally consistent and exhibited Cronbach‘s alpha coefficient value of 0.76, 0.72 and 0.78 respectively [ 119 ], therefore, the variables were indexed and correlated with each other to ascertain correlation among the parenting styles subscales. As all three subscales of parenting styles were found negatively correlated so for the current study all three subscales were considered as a single parenting style scale ( Table 3 ). Each respondent was ranked into a specific parenting style category based on their highest average score [ 120 ].

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0286823.t003

The measurement scale for family socioeconomic status (SES) of the students was designed by following Kuppuswamy’s modified socioeconomic (SES) scale which is based on the composite score of the three important variables that are parental education, family monthly income and occupation/income source. The SES scale was internally consistent and suitable for indexation with Cronbach’s alpha value of 0.79. The domain of parent education was scored on seven levels (1 = illiterate, 2 = primary (five years of education), 3 = middle (eight years of education), 4 = secondary/matriculate (ten years of education), 5 = intermediate (twelve years of education), 6 = bachelor degree (fourteen years of education), and 7 = masters and above (sixteen years of education and above)). The domain of family monthly income was scored on three levels (1 = monthly income Up to PKRs. 250000, 2 = monthly income PKRs. 260000 to 50000and 3 = monthly income PKRs. 510000 and above). The domain of occupation/major income source was measured on four levels scale (1 = private job/business, 2 = agriculture, 3 = remittances and 4 = government job). Based on the scores level, the highest possible score of the three mentioned domains measuring socioeconomic status (SES) of the family became 14. Thus respondents with a score of 7 or below on the socioeconomic status scale were ranked into Low Socioeconomic status families and those scoring above 7 on the scale were considered as from High Socioeconomic status families [ 121 ].

Students’ academic performance was based on percent marks in the last exam. For hierarchical multiple regression analysis, the academic score of respondents in percentages was considered. Whereas, for the application of non-parametric tests (chi-square and Kendall’s Tau-c tests) the variable of the academic score was divided into four categories: (1) A1 grade (80% and above marks), (2) 1st division (60% to below 80% marks), (3) 2nd division (45% to below 60% marks) and (4) 3rd division and below (below 45% marks). These categories cross-tabulated with parenting style to test the association of academic performance of children with parenting style.

Dummy coding of the variables

Dummy coding of variables for multivariate analysis is given as follows. Moreover, the actual percentage score of the students during the last exam was used in Hierarchical multiple regression as a measure of the academic performance of students (dependent variable).

The categorical variables of the study were dummy coded in the following fashion.

        Socioeconomic status (SES)                                        0 if low SES, 1 otherwise

        Parenting Style                                                                        0 if authoritarian, 1 if permissive, 2 if authoritative

Data analysis

The collected data was coded and entered in SPSS software for its analysis. The chi-square test and Kendall’s Tau-c tests were applied to test the strength and direction of the association of parenting style with the academic performance of children while keeping student gender and family socioeconomic status as a control variable. Moreover, Fisher’s Exact test was introduced as an alternative to the Chi-square test where the condition of the Chi-square test (sufficiently large sample size that no expected frequency is less than five) was violated [ 122 ].

Hierarchical multiple regression

Theoretical foundations for conducting hierarchal multiple regression analysis are provided by Chiu & Chow and Masud and his colleagues who envisaged that prediction of academic performance of children based on parenting style may vary significantly with the socioeconomic status of child’s family. These theoretical grounds were used in hierarchical multiple regression analysis to determine how much the parenting style and its interaction with family socioeconomic status account for the academic performance of the children [ 123 , 124 ].

Assumptions testing for hierarchical multiple regression

Using the statistical procedures, the basic assumptions such as sufficiency of required sample size, normality, linearity, multicollinearity of variables and homoscedasticity were tested and confirmed for the robustness of the models for running hierarchal multiple regression.

Variables selection

A stepwise method was used for the selection and ordering of variables in the hierarchical regression model [ 125 , 126 ]. It helped to determine the most important predictors of the academic performance of children and the ordering of the variables for entry in the hierarchical regression model based on their standardized Beta (β) coefficients without significantly reducing the R-square (R 2 ) coefficient of the model. The stepwise variable selection technique also helped to validate the theory put forward by Beauvais and his colleagues and Tomul regarding the strength and level of the importance of the child’s background (socioeconomic status) and micro level predictor (parenting style) in relation to the academic achievements of a child [ 127 , 128 ].

Statistical significance of the Hierarchical regression model at each stage (stages 1–5) and of the full model (stage 5) was tested by using F-test. Statistical significance of independent variables in predicting dependent variables was tested by using a t-test.

Ethical approval statement

This research study followed the APA standards of ethical considerations for conducting research which emphasizes preserving the dignity and humanity of respondents, avoiding harm, anxiety, distress, pain, or any negative feeling of the research subjects. The study proposal was approved by the Advanced Studies & Research Board of the university. And before going to data collection the interview schedule was pretested to double-check the instrument for ethical issues and the problems were removed. Also, the research was conducted under the authority letter from the university clearly explaining that the information collected will be used for research and academic purpose only. Similarly, an authority letter was signed by District education departments (both male and female) before starting data collection from secondary school students. Written informed consent was obtained from schools head by providing the signed authority letter from district education departments (Male and Female) prior to data collection.

An interview protocol was devised to assist getting answers on questions asked from the respondents. Besides questions on main study variables, the interview protocol included the script of introductory para before interview, explanatory para for each study variable, and a script for concluding interview. For this purpose, after formal permission from school heads, an informed verbal consent was obtained from secondary school students in presence of their teachers. The students who were willing were interviewed in the presence of their teachers and in the interview schedule only questions were included related to the study variables and no such questions were included that were related to the students identity and they were satisfied of their confidentiality before providing their responses. The respondents were free to terminate their interview at any stage. The students were briefed about parenting styles beforehand asking questions on the variables. In addition, keeping into consideration the cultural reasons, the data from female respondents were collected through a trained female investigator under the guidance of the researcher.

Limitations of the study

The study was limited to only two levels, Micro- and Meso-levels, of Bronfenbrenner’s socio-ecological model and focused on the influence of students’ gender, parenting style and family’s socioeconomic status on the academic performance of secondary school students.

Association between parenting style and children academic performance

Results in Table 3 unveil that the association of authoritative parenting style with children’s academic performance was highly significant (P = 0.000) and positive (T c = 0.500). While the association of authoritarian parenting style with children’s academic performance was highly significant (P = 0.000) and negative (T c = -0.0.369). Similarly, the association between permissive parenting style and children’s academic performance was found highly significant and negative (P = 0.000, T c = -0.030).

Association between parenting style and children’s academic performance (after controlling for the family socioeconomic status of the respondents)

Results in Table 4 show that the influence of parenting style on the academic performance of children in the context of respondents’ socioeconomic status was positive (T c = 0.689) and highly significant (P = 0.000) among the above-mentioned variables for respondents from high socioeconomic status. The association of the above-said variables was also positive (T c = 0.218) and significant (P = 0.009) for respondents from low socioeconomic status. The value of significance and T c for the entire table show a highly significant and positive association (P = 0.000 & T c = 0.487) between parenting style and academic performance for respondents from both high and low socioeconomic statuses.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0286823.t004

Association between parenting style and children’s academic performance (after controlling for the gender of the respondents)

Results in Table 5 showed that the influence of parenting style on the academic performance of children in the context of respondents’ gender was positive (T c = 0.129) and significant association (P = 0.002) in the above-mentioned variables for males. The association of the above-said variables was also positive (T c = 0.139) and significant (P = 0.008) for female respondents. The value of significance and T c for the entire table show a highly significant and positive association (P = 0.003 & T c = 0.123) between parenting style and academic performance for both genders. The similar T c chi-square values indicate that the effects of parenting style on the academic performance of children were almost identical for both genders. Therefore, parenting style emerged as a universal factor in influencing the academic performance of children irrespective of the gender of the respondents.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0286823.t005

Hierarchical multiple regression analysis

Preceding the statistical procedure for hierarchical multiple regression, the sufficiency of the required sample size was determined. In addition, four basic assumptions (normality, linearity, multicollinearity and homoscedasticity) of the linear regression model were tested.

Assumptions testing for hierarchical regression analysis

Sufficiency of required sample size..

To determine whether the sample size of 448 is sufficient for five variables that were subjected to test their ratios that came out as 1:64 which fulfilled the minimum required ratio of 1:20. Thus, the condition of the sufficiency of sample size was satisfied [ 129 ]. Therefore, the sample size was sufficient for running Hierarchical multiple regression.

Normality diagnostics.

Results of the normality test in Table 6 highlight that the values for skewness (0.059) and kurtosis (-0.041) satisfy the minimum requirements of +/-0.5 [ 130 ]. Furthermore, the assumption of normality was satisfied at a P = 0.05 level of significance, as the significance values for both of the Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Shapiro-Wilk tests were (0.2000 and 0.883) respectively (P>0.05) as presented in Table 6 . Thus, the hypothesis of abnormal distribution of data was rejected and the normal distribution of academic scores of students was confirmed.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0286823.t006

The P-P Plot ( Fig 1 ) represents the relationship between the independent variables and dependent variable (academic performance). The P-P Plot looks pretty linear with only a few points positioned below or above the (imaginary) straight line standing out a perfect linear relationship, so the condition of linearity was also satisfied [ 131 ].

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0286823.g001

Multicollinearity diagnostics.

The bivariate correlation Table 7 shows that the correlation between all the predictors’ variables (1) family socioeconomic status (SES) (2) interaction of socioeconomic status & authoritative parenting (3) authoritative parenting (4) interaction of socioeconomic status and permissive parenting, and (5) permissive parenting were statistically significant as (P < 0.05) and their values range between r = -0.381 and r = 0.695 which were below the permissible limit of r = 0.7. Moreover, the VIF values for all of the predictor variables are smaller than 10, and also, all tolerance values were higher than 0.10 ( Table 10 ). These results illustrate that there was a lesser chance of multicollinearity between the predictor variables so the condition of multicollinearity was satisfied [ 132 , 133 ].

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0286823.t007

Homoscedasticity.

The scatterplot ( Fig 2 ) represents the dependent variable (academic score) with regression standards residuals. The scatterplot shows that none of the points of the Scatterplot falls outside of -3 and to 3 on X-axis or Y-axis. Therefore, the condition homoscedasticity was also satisfied and the data is suitable for Hierarchical multiple regression [ 134 ].

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0286823.g002

Since all four assumptions (multicollinearity, normality, linearity, and homoscedasticity) along with the sufficiency of the required sample size have been satisfied, the dependent and independent variables are adequate for performing hierarchical multiple regression analysis.

Hierarchical multiple regression analysis results

Variable selection.

All of the five predictor variables (family socioeconomic status, authoritative parenting, permissive parenting, the interaction of socioeconomic status and authoritative parenting, and interaction of socioeconomic status and permissive parenting) proved significant (P<0.05) in the Hierarchical multiple regression model to explain variation in the dependent variable. Hence, all of the five variables were introduced in the hierarchical regression model.

Analysis of variance (ANOVA)

Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to test the statistical significance of the overall model. The Analysis of variance (ANOVA) results in ( Table 8 ) show that the models as a whole (which includes all the five models or blocks of variables) is statistically significant (P<0.05, F (df 7 = 5, 442 = 128.848)) which illustrate that the independent variables significantly predict the dependent variable (Academic performance of children). Hence, the hierarchical regression model was a good fit for the data.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0286823.t008

Model summary results

A five-stage Hierarchical Multiple Regression was conducted to test the relationship between the set of independent variables (family socioeconomic status, authoritative parenting, permissive parenting, the interaction of socioeconomic status and authoritative parenting, and the interaction of socioeconomic status and permissive parenting) and the dependent variable (academic performance of children) ( Table 9 ).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0286823.t009

The family socioeconomic status (SES) was entered at stage one, the interaction effect of socioeconomic status & authoritative parenting in the second stage, authoritative parenting at the third stage, the interaction of socioeconomic status & permissive parenting at the fourth stage and permissive parenting at the fifth stage. Stepwise and sequential inclusion of the above variables in hierarchical regression models was based on theoretical grounds proposed by Pant and Mwariri and colleagues [ 135 , 136 ]. Furthermore, the weighted importance of each variable in influencing the academic performance of children, as determined through the standardized Beta coefficient (β) values ( Table 10 ) also validated the above sequence for entry of variables in hierarchical regression models.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0286823.t010

The hierarchical multiple regression model summary ( Table 9 ) reveals that at stage one (model-1), family socioeconomic status (SES) significantly contributed to the regression model (P<0.05) and accounted for 46.4% (R2 = 0.464) of the variance in children’s academic performance.

Introducing the interaction of socioeconomic status & authoritative parenting at the second stage (model-2) explained 54.8% variance in the academic performance of children (R 2 = 0.548) and significantly contributed to the regression model (P<0.05). The R 2 change in model-2 indicates that the additional 8.4 percent variance in the academic performance of children is explained by the interaction of socioeconomic status & authoritative parenting as compared to that was explained (46.4%) by only family socioeconomic status in model-1.

The addition of authoritative parenting to the regression model at the third stage (model-3), significantly contributed (P<0.05) and accounted for 56.1 percent variance in children’s academic performance (R2 = 0.561). Moreover, the R 2 change highlighted that the additional 1.3% variance is explained by authoritative parenting in the academic performance of children which was accounted for by the variables in model-2 (family socioeconomic status and interaction of socioeconomic status & authoritative parenting).

Adding interaction of socioeconomic status and permissive parenting at the fourth stage (model-4) significantly contributed (P<0.05) and accounted for a 58.9% variance in children’s academic performance (R2 = 0.589). The R 2 change showed that the additional 2.8% variance is explained by the introduction of the interaction of socioeconomic status and permissive parenting to the variables entered in model-3 (family socioeconomic status, interaction of socioeconomic status & authoritative parenting, and authoritative parenting).

Finally, the addition of permissive parenting at the fifth stage (model-5), significantly contributed (P<0.05) and explained 59.3% variance (R 2 = 0.593) in children’s academic performance. R 2 change depicts that the additional 0.4% variance is explained by the introduction of permissive parenting to the variables entered in model-4 (family socioeconomic status, interaction of socioeconomic status & authoritative parenting, authoritative parenting and interaction of socioeconomic status & permissive parenting).

All of the above five regression models are statistically significant (P < 0.05), meaning that the introduction of an additional variable(s) at each step/block produces a statistically significant increase in variance accounting for the dependent variable i.e. (academic performance of children).

Coefficient

Results in Table 10 show that all the five predictor variables introduced in the models (socioeconomic status (SES), authoritative parenting, permissive parenting, interaction between socioeconomic status and authoritative parenting and interaction between socioeconomic status and permissive parenting) have statistically significant (P<0.05) impact on academic performance of children.

Furthermore, values of unstandardized coefficients ( Table 10 ) indicate that by keeping all variables constant, a student is expected to secure 36.31% (β = 36.31) marks in exams as indicated by the constant value of the coefficient. Moreover, children from higher socioeconomic status (SES) families secure 18.25% higher marks (β = 18.25) compared to children from low socioeconomic status (SES) families. In addition, the interaction of socioeconomic status and authoritative parenting have a significant effect on the academic performance of children for a unit change (low to high) in socioeconomic status 14.18% increase occurs in the academic score of children under the authoritative parenting style compared to authoritarian parenting (β = 14.18). Moreover, authoritative parenting independently increases the academic score of children by 13.38% relative to authoritarian parenting (β = 13.38). Likewise, the interaction of socioeconomic status and permissive parenting have a significant effect on the academic performance of children as a unit change (low to high) in socioeconomic status 11.46% increase occurs in marks of children under permissive parenting compared to authoritarian parenting (β = 11.46). Similarly, permissive parenting independently increased the academic score of children by 9.27% relative to authoritarian parenting (β = 9.27).

The hierarchical regression model specification for this study is given as follows: Y (Academic performance of children) = 36.31 + 18.25 (socioeconomic status) + 14.18 (socioeconomic status *authoritative parenting) + 13.38 (authoritative parenting) + 11.46 (socioeconomic status *permissive parenting) + 9.27 (permissive parenting).

The current study was conducted for three basic purposes. The first purpose of the present study was to investigate the association of parenting style with children’s academic performance. Secondly, to examine the association of parenting style with children’s academic performance on the basis of their gender and family socioeconomic status and thirdly, to assess the level of the effects of the group variables (parenting style and family socioeconomic status) on children’s academic performance independently and in interaction with each other.

The association of parenting style with children’s academic performance ( Table 3 ) indicates that the authoritative parenting style is significantly and positively associated with the academic performance of children compared to permissive and authoritarian parenting. Authoritative parenting is characterized by high responsiveness and high demandingness. These parents are more responsive towards their children give high value to warm and timely guidance to their children when needed. The authoritative parents are warmer and less demanding, and show more responsiveness towards children which leads to more confidence and higher engagement in their academic tasks ultimately resulting in higher academic achievements. Children of such parents are found regular in their school attendance, do timely homework and are found responsible for preparing themselves for their exams. Thus, the democratic culture promotes an authoritative parenting habits among parents, that groom children to become responsive to their work and ensures their better academic performance in a positively competitive educational environment. Similar findings are concluded by Grant & Ray and Steinberg that authoritative parents keep a keen eye on their children’s deviant behaviour and bring them to conformity while emphasizing responsiveness and seldom punitive remedies. Such a positive parent-child relationship is based on trust, understanding and caring which enhance the motivational level of the child with better academic achievements [ 137 , 138 ]. Checa maintained that authoritative parents keep an adequate balance of autonomy and responsibility for their children according to the situational requirements [ 139 ]. Children from such families are provided with opportunities to share their views on family issues through participation in family decisions, discuss their concerns and develop a positive relationship with parents and other family elders. The children also develop a sense of being valuable member of the family and that their views are important for family decisions. In addition, the children also know the rules and values established at their family that delineate the limits of their behaviour which may result in imposing sanctions on them in case of crossing the limits. The author added that authoritative parenting is stimulating to the child’s self-efficacy, which has a significant contribution to their academic performance. Thus, the extent to which authoritative parents encouraged children’s autonomy and responsibility were important predictors of academic achievements. The strength of such prediction further increases when the authoritative parents were generous in spending on children’s needs and regularly contacted teachers to get feedback from them regarding children’s education and their overall development [ 140 ].

The authoritarian parenting style is more focused on disciplining children with less heed to the child’s participation and social needs. The parents adopt psychological and physical punishments to discipline their children ranging from mild punishments (taking away privileges from children and reminding parental efforts for child welfare) to moderate and even extremely harsh punishments (yelling, threatening, open criticism and spanking). Mild punishments have a weak negative influence on the academic performance of children. However, harsh and violent physical and psychological punishments exhibit strong negative impacts and are thus linked with poor academic performance of children. The gravity of harsh punishments and their regular occurrence overburden the child psychologically resulting in their lowered learning abilities, loss of interest in educational and other normal life activities and overall poor academic performance in them. The authoritarian parenting style is linked to high demandingness and low responsiveness because such parents control the behaviour of their children through an absolute set of principles with little value for responsiveness, and warm and timely guidance. These parents lay high emphasis on bringing conformity in their children by using a variety of extreme disciplinary measures ranging from simple disapproval to psychological and physical punishment and torture. Thus, fear of punishment is a more important reason to direct children towards a particular goal than other positive motivational reasons. Authoritarian parents try to control the behaviour of their children with greater emphasis on punitive strategies including physical, psychological and socioeconomic punishments. The authoritarian parenting style is characteristic of patriarchal societies where parenting is strict and deviation from rules and regulations is unbearable. Any mistake or failure of the children is treated with disciplinary measures with little provision of guidance or counseling from parents [ 141 , 142 ]. The negative and positive influences of authoritarian parenting vary across cultures. In societies with strong cultural holds of patriarchy and with more emphasis on subordination and obedience, authoritarian parenting is correlated with some moderate level of promising educational outcomes in children. However, despite their better academic grades, children from authoritarian families exhibit low communication skills and low capabilities of self-expression than those children from authoritative families [ 143 , 144 ].

The permissive parents ignored the minor mischiefs and misbehaviour of their children, however, the negative effects of ignoring petty mischiefs of children on their academic performance was non-significant. In some extreme cases, the parents lose their control over children which makes it difficult for them to discipline their children. Such children, at some point, start to realize that their parents, due to their lenient behaviour, have spoiled them. This aggravated situation adversely affects the academic performance of children in connection with permissive parenting. In the permissive parenting style presented by Baurmind, the parents exhibit a warm response to their children in a way that they permit their children whatever they want to do with little or no control over them. The above-mentioned three parenting style typology devised by Burmind and explained by Maccoby and Martin is adopted for this study. In permissive parenting, the parents have at least one common characteristic that they are low demanding from their children and literally overlook any disciplinary measure required to bring their children to conformity. However, within permissive parenting, the parents may vary on the basis of the degree of responsiveness (high to low responsiveness). Thus, children from permissive families lack guidance from their parents. Most of these children are spoiled due to limitless freedom and insufficient guidance [ 145 ]. Empirical studies have negatively linked the academic performance of children to permissive parenting with some variations according to the culture and interpersonal traits of the child [ 146 ].

Similarly, Cherry carried out a research study in South Africa which indicated a significant association between parenting style and the academic performance of students [ 147 ]. Also, parenting style as one of the correlates of academic performance [ 148 ]. Moreover, Tilahun revealed a negative association between permissive parenting and students’ academic performance in Nigeria [ 149 ].

Furthermore, the association between parenting style and children’s academic performance is spurious on the basis of respondents’ socioeconomic status ( Table 4 ). Respondents from high socioeconomic statuses, when exposed to a similar parenting style, secured better school grades than children from low socioeconomic groups. The probable reason for these findings is that the complementary effect of socioeconomic status in terms of meeting the basic life and educational needs of the children. In this way, children from high socioeconomic status and appropriate parenting are in a better position to secure better grades than children with similar parenting but a low socioeconomic group. Therefore, a combination of favourable parenting with high socioeconomic status is a better predictor of academic performance than better parenting alone. Ashiona and Teresa in their research in Kenya reported the association between family socioeconomic status and admission in schools and colleges. The authors reported that children from well-off families secured admission in high-quality educational institutions and ultimately performed better in exams [ 150 ]. Parental education, occupation and income are important determinants of socioeconomic status. Due to better education and high income, parents in high socioeconomic groups are in a good position to protect their children from risks [ 151 ]. Parents’ good educational background and high socioeconomic status are fruitful for the educational guidance of their children. Moreover, their sound income standing helps children in availing better educational facilities [ 152 ]. Conversely, positive parenting may not be that beneficial when financial support becomes a limiting factor for children’s education. Similarly, the illiteracy of a caring parent become a constraint to correctly understand the educational need of a child. Thus, the socioeconomic status of parents affects the parenting style that subsequently affects the education of the children [ 153 ].

Gender is an important divide that influences life achievements among male and female children. Children, based on their gender, receive varying treatment in patriarchal societies. This also stands true for cross-gender attachment between parents and children where the mother offers great care to their sons while, the father gives due attention to their daughters. Therefore, discriminatory exposure of children based on their genders to different parenting styles may lead to their varying academic performance [ 154 ]. However, exposure of children to a similar parenting style without gender-based discrimination is likely to result in almost similar academic performance of the children irrespective of their gender [ 155 ]. A shift in mindset of parents towards a more egalitarian treatment to children, especially with respect to their education, is the important reason to explain a balance in educational performance of children from both genders, irrespective of their parenting style.

A series of studies linked the academic performance of children with family socioeconomic status (SES) and parenting style [ 156 , 157 ]. In the hierarchical multiple regression analyses in the family, socioeconomic status emerged as the most important factor in the academic performance of children as reported by several researchers [ 158 , 159 ]. This important variable touches on each and every aspect of education and learning to bring substantial variation in the academic performance of children. The high socioeconomic status of the family ensures quality child care, safety and spending on their basic and educational needs which have a direct relationship with the academic performance of children. The provision of these facilities can help the children to catch up with the high capability of children from low socioeconomic background [ 160 ]. The positive effects of high socioeconomic status are so vital that it masks the negative influences of inappropriate parenting and the same is evident from the interaction effect of socioeconomic status with permissive parenting in the current study. The socioeconomic status also accounts for cultural differences in parenting style. Thus, some parents with permissive or authoritarian styles manage to adopt positive parenting traits due to high socioeconomic status that promote better academic performance in children [ 161 ]. Therefore, high socioeconomic status and positive parenting is the best combination to ensure better academic grades in children [ 162 – 164 ].

This research adds that the strength of variables (parenting styles) to predict the academic performance of children is enhanced when they are applied in interaction with the socioeconomic status of the families. Thus, an improved socioeconomic status (high income, high parental education and highly prestigious occupation) in combination with a highly responsive and positively demanding parenting style (authoritative parenting) make the combination that promotes better academic performance in children. The academic performance of children is faced with the highest setback due to the interactive effect of low socioeconomic status and inappropriate parenting (authoritarian and permissive parenting).

It is concluded that children whose parents adopt authoritative parenting practices perform better academically. These parental attributes included responsiveness towards their children in terms of providing them with basic educational needs such as books, school uniforms, stationery items, taking care of the child’s wishes while assigning them any task, encouraging the child to talk about their problems and giving due consideration to child preferences while making plans for the family. However, children experiencing authoritarian parenting (punishing children by taking privileges away from them, yelling, threatening, criticizing, spanking and reminding them of things parents do for children) and permissive parenting practices (ignoring children’s deviant behaviour, rarely guiding or disciplining children, and spoiling children) exhibit low academic performance.

Moreover, the socioeconomic status of the child’s family explains variation in his academic performance within a specific parenting style. Children from high socioeconomic status families are more likely to score high grades as compared to children from low socioeconomic families while experiencing the same parenting style. While there is no variation found in the academic performance of students based on their gender.

In addition, the study variables explained the academic performance of children in following order. Family socioeconomic status alone was the strongest predictor of academic performance of children, interaction of socioeconomic status and authoritative parenting was the second important predictor, authoritative parenting alone was third in importance, the interaction of socioeconomic status and permissive parenting stood at fourth place in importance, and permissive parenting ranked fifth in influencing academic performance of children in the study area.

Based on these conclusions, parenting style and socioeconomic status have important educational and economic policy implications regarding the formation of a positive attitude towards education among secondary school children and improving their academic performance, as highlighted in recommendations.

Recommendations

Based on the findings of the study, the following recommendations are put forward:

The educational policy should include appropriate initiatives to enable and motivate parents through awareness and training programs for adopting appropriate parenting styles, with a special focus on parents from low socioeconomic status groups, to take care of the learning, educational and recreational needs of their children at home and provide them with the psychological and physical protection. The conducive learning environment so created will ensure better academic achievements in children.

The is a need to update federal policy for poverty eradication for its better implementation in letter and spirit to support low socioeconomic groups (having low income, unemployed and illiterate) for the quality school education of their children. Low socioeconomic standing of child’s family was important determinants of unsatisfactory academic performance of children. These findings call for mobilization of the charitable resources like "Zakat" (religious binding on rich Muslims to distribute 2.5% of their financial resources like gold, silver and /or money among needy poor on annual basis) and "Ushr" (religious binding on Muslim farmers to distribute 1/10th to 1/20th of their agriculture produce among needy poor on each crop) for supporting educational and other financial needs of families with low socioeconomic status. These social security measures are easy to enact due to strong religious endorsements.

Similarly, the government should provide scholarships to poor deserving children covering their educational and living expenses to overcome economic inequality as a cause of low school enrolment and performance. Such children would be able to spend maximum energy on their education and avoid child labour. Future studies are recommended on the effects of school type and the other two levels (Macro and Exo levels) of Bronfenbrenner’s Socioecological model on academic performance.

• View Article
• PubMed/NCBI
• Google Scholar
• 5. Santrock JW. Educational Psychology. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. 2006.
• 6. York Travis, Gibson Charles, Rankin Susan. Defining and Measuring Academic Success. Practice Assessment, Research & Evaluation. 2015; 20–29.
• 8. Jesus ED, Yoshikawa H. McLoyd VC. Job quality among low-income mothers: Experiences and associations with children’s development. In Yoshikawa H, Weisner T, and Lowe E (Eds.), Making It Work: Low-Wage Employment, Family Life, and Child Development. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. 2009; 75–96.
• 24. Maehr ML, Zusho A. Achievement goal theory: Past, present, and future. In Wentzel K. & Miele D. Eds., Handbook of Motivation at School. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis. 2009; 1: 77–104.
• 26. Pintrich PR. The Role of Goal Orientation in Self-Regulated Learning. In Boekaerts M, Pintrich P. R., & Zeidner M (Eds.), Handbook of Self-Regulation: Theory, Research, and Applications. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. 2000; 451–502 https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50043-3
• 35. Ryan RM, Deci EL. An overview of self-determination theory: An organismic-dialectical perspective. In Deci E. L. & Ryan R. M. Eds., Handbook of self-determination research. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press. 2002;. 3–33.
• 41. Ryan RM. Agency and organization: Intrinsic motivation, autonomy and the self in psychological development. In Jacobs J. Ed., Nebraska symposium on motivation: Developmental perspectives on motivation. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press. 1993; Vol. 40: 1–56.
• 42. Ryan RM, Sheldon KM, Kasser T, Deci EL. All goals are not created equal: An organismic perspective on the nature of goals and their regulation. In Gollwitzer P. M & Bargh J. A. Eds., The psychology of action: Linking cognition and motivation to behavior. New York: Guilford Press. 1996; 7–26.
• 45. Locke EA, Latham GP. A theory of goal setting and task performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. 1990.
• 46. Bandura A. Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. 1977. https://doi.org/10.1177/105960117700200317 .
• 51. Bronfenbrenner U. Ecological systems theory. In Vasta R (ed). Six theories of child development: Revised formulations and current issues. Washington, DC: Jessica Kingsley. 1992.
• 52. Bronfenbrenner U. The bio ecological model from a life course perspective: Reflections of a participant observer. In Moen P, Elder GH & Luscher K (eds). Examining lives in context: Perspectives on the ecology of human development. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. 1995a.
• 53. Bronfenbrenner U. Developmental ecology through space and time: a future perspective. In Moen P, Elder GH & Luscher K (eds). ¨Examining lives in context: Perspectives on the ecology of human development. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. 1995b.
• 57. Rathus SA. Childhood: Voyages in Development, California: Thomson Wads worth. 2006.
• 58. Donald D, Lazarus S & Lolwana P. Educational Psychology in social context: Ecosystem applications in Southern Africa. Cape Town: Oxford University Press. 2010. [10/04/2018]. http://resjournals.com/journals/educational-research-journal/2017%20E/DU/July/ Kudzai%20and%20Moses.pdf.
• 61. Maina MJ. Strategies Employed by Secondary School Principals to Improve Academic Performance in Embu West District. Kenya: Kenyatta University. 2010. [5/42019]. https://irbrary.ku.ac.ke/bitstream/handle/123456789/930/Mwaura ,+James+Maina.pdf?sequence=3.
• 67. Dearing E, Sibley E, Nguyen HN. Achievement Mediators of Family Engagement in Children’s Education: A Family–School–Community Systems Model. In Sheridan SM & Kim EM (eds). Research on family-school partnerships. Processes and pathways of family-school partnerships across development. Washington, DC: Springer International Publishing. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16931-6_2 .
• 70. Maccoby E, Martin J. Socialization in the context of the family: Parent-child interaction. In Mussen PH (ed). Handbook of Child Psychology. New York, NY: Wiley. 1983.
• 75. Wamichwe JM. Socio-economic Factors Affecting Enrolment of Male Students in Public Secondary Schools in Kirinyaga County. Nairobi, Kenya: University of Nairobi. 2017.
• 79. Mash EJ, Barkley RA. Child psychopathology (3rd ed). Washington, DC: The Guilford Press. 2014.
• 83. World Bank. World Development Report: Learning to Realize Education’s Promise. Washington, DC: World Bank. 2018. [cited 5/6/2020]. http://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/wdr2018 . Accessed 14 March 2019.
• 84. Global Education Monitoring Report, 2016. UNESCO, [cited 12/10/2019]. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000243713 .
• 88. Jekonia J E. The relationship between parenting styles, parental involvement and children’s academic performance in Namibian senior primary schools. The University of Eastern Finland. Humanities, and Theology, 2021. No 176. [cited 3/7/2022]. https://erepo.uef.fi/bitstream/handle/123456789/26103/urn_isbn_978-952-61-4279-1.pdf
• 105. Shittu MR. “Socio-economic determinants of academic performance of secondary school students in Nigeria”, University of Ilorin: An unpublished B. Ed project. 2004.
• 112. Bundesamt S. Fachserie, Bildung und Kultur, Reihe: Allgemeinbildende Schulen [Technical series 11: Education and culture, Volume 1]. Wiesbaden, Germany: Statistisches Bundesamt. 2011. [cited 10/10/2019]. https://www.destatis.de/DE/Publikationen/Thematisch/BildungForschungKultur/Schulen/AllgemeinbildendeSchulen.html .
• 113. Stanat P, Pant HA, Böhme K, Richter D. Competencies of girls and boys at the end of 4th school grade in the subjects German and mathematics: Results of the IQB-comparison of German Federal States 2011. Münster: Waxmann. 2012.
• 115. Babie E. The Practice of Social Research (5th ed). Belmont, CA: Wades worth Publishing Company. 1989.
• 116. Creswell WJ. Research design, quantitative, qualtative and mixed methods approaches, 4th edition, SAGE Publications, Inc, New Delhi India. 2014. ISBN 978-1-4522-2609-5, ISBN 978-1-4522-2610-1.
• 117. Chaudhry SM. Introduction to statistical theory (8th ed). Lahore, Pakistan: Ilmi Kitab Khana. 2009.
• 119. Nachmias D, Chava N. Research method in the social sciences (3rd ed). New York, NY: St. Martin’s press. Inc. 1992.
• 120. Robinson C.C. Barbara M., Susanne F.O., Craig H.H. Authoritative, authoritarian, and permissive parenting practices: development of a new measure. Brigham Young University 1995. [cited 12/10/2019]. https://www.researchgate.net .
• 121. Rubin KH, Bukowski WM, Parker JG, Bowker JC. Peer interactions, relationships, and groups. In Damon W& Lerner R. M(Eds.), Child and adolescent development: An advanced course Hoboken: Wiley. 2008; 141–80.
• 123. Baily KD. Methods of Social Research (2nd ed). New York, NY; Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc. 1982.
• 127. Weisberg S. Applied Linear Regression (3 rd ed). New York, NY: Wiley. 2005. https://doi.org/10.1002/0471704091 .
• 130. Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using multivariate statistics (4th ed). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. 2001.
• 131. Hair JF, Anderson RE, Tatham RL, Black WC. Multivariate Data Analysis (5 th ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. 1998.
• 133. Stephen S & Karen GM. Data Analysis with SPSS (4th ed). United States: Pearson Education (US). 2010.
• 134. Bowerman BL & Connell RT. Linear Statistical Models–an applied approach (2nd ed). Boston, MA: WS-KentP Publishing Co. 1990.
• 135. Myers. Classical and modern regression with applications. Boston: PWS-Kent. 1990.
• 138. Grant KB & Ray JA. Home school and community collaboration: culturally responsive family involvement. Washington, DC: Sage. 2010.
• 145. Susskind J. Social Development. Encyclopedia of Human Development. Sage Publications. 2005. [cited 22/2/2018]. http://sage-ereference.com/humandevelopment/article_n574.html .
• 149. Tilahun C. Interrelationships between Permissive parenting style, psychosocial adjustment and academic achievement in Secondary schools in Nigeria. PhD dissertation. Nigeria: University of Lagos. 2012.
• 153. Deckers T, Falk A, Kosse F, Schildberg-Horisch. How Does Socio-Economic Status Shape a Child’s Personality? (IZA Discussion Papers 8977). Bonn: Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA). 2015. [cited 3/5/2019]. https://ideas.repec.org/p/iza/izadps/dp8977.html .

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List

Authoritative parenting stimulates academic achievement, also partly via self-efficacy and intention towards getting good grades

Joyce hayek.

1 School for Public Health and Primary Care (CAPHRI), Department of Health Promotion, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands

2 Department of Nutrition and Dietetics, Faculty of Sciences II, Lebanese University, Fanar, Lebanon

Francine Schneider

Nathalie lahoud.

3 National Institute of Public Health, Clinical Epidemiology & Toxicology (INSPECT-LB), Beirut, Lebanon

4 Faculty of Public Health, Lebanese University, Fanar, Lebanon

Hein de Vries

Associated data.

All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting information files.

The aim of this prospective study is to examine how parenting style relates to academic achievement of Lebanese adolescents and test the mediating effect of self-efficacy and intention towards getting good grades. Potential moderation by demographic factors (age, gender, school type, religion and parents’ education) was also examined.

Students (n = 345) from private and public schools in Mount Lebanon and Beirut area, aged between 15 and 18, participated in a two-wave longitudinal study and completed a self-administered questionnaire based on the I-Change Model assessing socio-demographics (age, gender, school type, parents’ education, family structure, religion), socio-cognitive factors (attitude, social norms, self-efficacy, intention), parenting styles and academic achievement. Adolescent were surveyed at two time points, six months apart. A multiple linear regression was carried out to identify baseline factors independently associated with academic achievement 6 months later. Moderation was examined using Hayes’s SPSS macro PROCESS. A serial mediation model was employed to test for the sequential mediating effect of self-efficacy and intention between parenting style and academic achievement.

Authoritative parenting was prospectively associated with better academic achievement and higher self-efficacy and intention at 6 months follow up. In addition, self-efficacy and intention towards getting good grades were found to mediate the relationship of parenting style to academic achievement. Adolescents who perceive their parents as authoritative are more likely to develop high efficacy beliefs and higher intention and subsequently are more likely to achieve better in school compared to peers of neglectful parents. Socio-demographics did not moderate the effect of parenting on academic achievement.

Authoritative parenting influenced both directly and indirectly the academic achievement of their children. Interventions aiming at improving academic performance of adolescents should also encompass positive parenting style strategies.

Introduction

Good academic achievement increases the chances for a successful future for both individuals and societies [ 1 , 2 ]. Addressing key factors that influence academic performance would help in creating better opportunities for youth and securing a better future in terms of better health and higher quality of life [ 3 ]. According to Bronfenbrenner ecological model, adolescents’ behaviors and outcomes are influenced by various levels of environment [ 4 ]. The microenvironment is the most immediate environment in which adolescents live, such as the school or home environment, and is considered to have the strongest impact on adolescent development [ 5 ]. Parents who are part of the home environment may have a direct and indirect influence on their children’s outcomes via their parenting styles [ 6 ]. Parenting style is the emotional context in which parents’ behaviors are expressed in the effort to socialize their child [ 7 ]. Four parenting styles can be defined based on the combination of two dimensions of parenting behavior—demandingness and responsiveness: authoritative parenting (high on demandingness and responsiveness), authoritarian (high on demandingness and low on responsiveness), permissive (high on responsiveness and low on demandingness) and neglectful (low on demandingness and responsiveness) [ 8 , 9 ].

Parenting style influence on academic achievement and the role of social cognitions-literature review

Parenting styles have been found to significantly influence several child outcomes among which eating behaviors [ 10 ], substance use [ 11 ], psychological outcome [ 12 ] and educational outcome [ 13 ]. In regard to academic performance, and while findings may vary across cultures and social groups [ 14 , 15 ], authoritative parenting has been generally found to have the most positive outcomes and promote higher academic achievement [ 16 – 18 ] while neglectful parenting has been consistently linked with the poorest outcomes and lower grades [ 19 ]. Evidence also exists on the indirect effect of parenting on adolescent’s achievement [ 20 , 21 ] pointing to a dual influence of parents both direct and indirect. The family environment is assumed to influence behavior both directly as well as indirectly through mediating variables such as cognitive mediators reflecting a dual process view [ 22 – 24 ]. The dual process suggests that environmental factors, in this case parents, can have a direct automatic influence on behavior and an indirect mediated effect via behavior-specific cognition [ 24 ]. According to social cognitions theories, attitude, subjective norm and perceived self-efficacy are the central cognitions that are believed to influence behavioral intention which is considered the primary determinant of behavior [ 25 , 26 ]. Intention reflects the motivation and intent to perform a given behavior and is determined by three constructs; Attitude refers to the perceived pros and cons of a certain behavior, social norms indicates the perceived social pressure to engage or not in a given behavior and self-efficacy refers to the belief in one’s capabilities to execute specific behaviors to produce positive outcomes [ 25 , 27 ]. The more favorable the attitude, perceived social norms and efficacy beliefs, the strongest the intention to engage in the behavior in question [ 25 ]. Another construct that is believed to influence intentional behavior is motivation [ 28 ]. Motivation explains why individuals decide to do something, how hard they would work to achieve it and how long they would persevere to sustain it [ 29 ]. According to the Self-Determination Theory, motivation which can be intrinsic (emerging from personal interest) or extrinsic (prompted by external force and social values) can determine the strength of intentional behavior [ 29 , 30 ]. Autonomous intentions that are driven by intrinsic motivation are more likely to be translated into behavior and more likely to be sustained than controlled intentions [ 28 ]. Parenting style can impact academic performance through its influence on social-cognitive factors. For instance, a certain parenting style may promote positive attitudes toward education or a higher academic self-efficacy which will influence the intention to obtain good grades and subsequently impact academic outcome. Indeed, many studies have demonstrated that parenting styles can help foster the development of healthy psychosocial competencies which in turn affect scholastic performance [ 17 , 31 , 32 ]. Adolescents from authoritative parents were found to have higher self-efficacy beliefs compared to adolescents from authoritarian and permissive parents [ 18 , 33 ]. Adolescents’ achievement beliefs can influence their achievement-related behaviors [ 34 ], adolescent with high beliefs are more motivated, set higher challenging academic goals, put more effort working towards those goals and are more resilient in the face of difficulties and subsequently perform higher [ 35 – 37 ].

Gap-building on previous research

Several studies describe the relation of parenting on academic outcome of their offspring [ 15 , 17 , 38 , 39 ], including the role of socio-cognitive factors on academic performance [ 40 , 41 ]. Even though there are many studies on the dual influence of the environment on general behaviors such as health behaviors [ 42 ], research examining the dual effect of parenting, the direct and indirect effect through the mediating effect of cognitive factors on academic performance is limited. Hence, our study aims to further elucidate the mechanism by which parenting influence adolescent’s achievement using an integrated approach. Gaining insight into the direct relation of parenting to academic achievement and how cognitions may mediate this relation is highly relevant in order to inform targeted intervention development. In addition, there is a need to study the influence of parenting styles in different cultures such as the MENA region and specifically in the Lebanese context where empirical evidence of this kind is lacking. The latter will add to the existing literature and expand our knowledge on parenting socialization in different cultural context. On the other hand, student performance in Lebanon, as measured by international assessments such as the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) has been shown to be significantly lower than other countries and point to a learning gap [ 43 ]. Lebanese were on average three to four years of school behind peers from other countries. Results also showed that 60% of Lebanese students did not achieve basic proficiency in math, 62% in science and 68% in reading, placing them at high risk of exclusion from secondary school [ 43 ]. Understanding how parenting style may influence academic achievement of Lebanese adolescents will help practitioners and policymakers understand how to capacitate Lebanese adolescent reach their full academic potential.

Study objectives

Hence, the first objective of this study is to examine if parenting style prospectively influences academic performance of Lebanese adolescents. The second objective is to explore which social-cognitive factor mediates the influence of parenting on academic achievement. In addition, since it has been postulated that parenting may have a differential impact on adolescent outcome depending on socio-demographic characteristics [ 44 ], the third objective is to investigate whether adolescent age, gender, religion, the type of school they are enrolled in as well as their parent’s education might moderate the influence of parenting style on academic achievement of Lebanese adolescents.

Materials and methods

This prospective study was based on a secondary analysis of data from a larger three-wave longitudinal research project investigating the predictors of academic achievement in Lebanese adolescents [ 45 ]. As part of this project, adolescents aged 15 to 18 from private and public schools completed a survey assessing socio-demographics, lifestyle factors and motivational factors. The students were surveyed at three-point time: time 1 (t1), after six months (t2) and after 12 months (t3). For the present study data from the second (t2) and third wave (t3) of the survey were utilized as parenting style was not assessed at baseline. The predictor variable parenting style was taken at t2, the control variables socio-demographics and the potential mediators socio-cognitive variables were also taken at t2 and the outcome variable academic achievement was taken at t3.

Participants

The baseline sample was a total of 600 adolescents out of which 563 (94%) with valid data, aged 15 to 18, from public and private schools across Beirut and Mount Lebanon area. Participating schools were randomly selected form the Ministry of Education’s list. The directors of these schools were approached face-to-face and provided with the study questionnaire and seven (four private and three public) agreed to partake in the study. From these schools, all students enrolled in grade 10 and 11 were invited to participate in the survey. For the current study only participants with complete data set at t2 and t3 were included resulting in a total sample of 345 adolescents (61.27%).

After obtaining the school director’s consent to conduct the study, trained dietitians visited the schools that agreed to participate and distributed pen-paper survey to all students. The trained dietitians were present at all time in the classroom and read aloud each question with the corresponding answers and were available for any help or clarification. The survey took approximately one hour to be completed. The study questionnaire was reviewed and approved by the Lebanese Ministry of Education and Higher Education and the study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki [ 46 ]. Written informed consent was obtained from all students and their parents prior to participating in the study and ethical approval was obtained from Al Hayat Hospital ethical committee.

Measurements

Demographic factors (t2).

Socio-demographic variables included students’ sex (1 = male; 2 = female), age (1 = 15; 2 = 16; 3 = 17; 4 = 18), type of school (1 = public; 2 = private), educational level of parents (1 = low: never went to school & primary school; 2 = medium: complementary & secondary school; 3 = high: technical school & university), family structure (1 = living with both parents; 2 = other arrangements) and religion (0 = Non-Christian, 1 = Christian).

Parenting style (t2)

The Authoritative Parenting Index (API) was used to assess parenting styles [ 47 ]. The API measures the responsive and demanding dimensions of parenting behavior as perceived by the adolescents. Nine items measured responsiveness (e.g. “She/he listens to what I have to say”) and seven items measured demandingness (e.g.” She/he has rules that I must follow”). In this study the items were presented once in reference for both parents (e.g. “They make sure I go to bed on time”). Students used a four-point response scale (1 = Not like them, 2 = Sort of like them, 3 = A lot like them and 4 = Just like them) to indicate how well the statements describe their parents’ parenting styles with higher scores indicating higher levels of responsiveness and demandingness. The latter yielded two separate scores for each participant, namely responsiveness and demandingness. The final scale scores could range from 9–36 for responsiveness (Cronbach’s α = 0.80) and 7–28 for demandingness (Cronbach’s α = 0.70). Parenting styles were created using median splits on demandingness and responsiveness. A parent who was rated high on both responsiveness and demandingness (above the median 30 for responsiveness, 16 for demandingness) was categorized as authoritative (N = 107). A parent who was rated low on both responsiveness and demandingness (below the median) was categorized as neglectful (N = 66). A parent who was rated high in responsiveness and low in demandingness was categorized as permissive (N = 68). A parent rated as low on responsiveness and low in demandingness was categorized as authoritarian (N = 100).

Socio-cognitive factors (t2)

The I-Change model [ 26 ] was used as a framework for including socio-cognitive variables as determinants and potential mediators for academic achievement. Attitude was measured with four questions assessing the pros and cons of getting good grades. Two questions measured positive attitudes “Getting good academic grades is a good help for getting a good job/will get me compliment from my parents”. The responses were coded from– 2 (strongly disagree) to +2 (strongly agree). Two questions measured negative attitudes “Getting good academic grades means that I have to work too hard/will cause disapproval among my friends” using the same scale reverse coded from +2 (strongly agree) to -2 (strongly disagree) so that higher scores reflect a more positive attitude towards getting good grade.

Social norms were measured using the responses to three questions asking if parents or teacher expect adolescents to get good academic grades “My father/my mother/my teacher expects me to get good academic grades” on a five-point Likert scale ranging from +2 (strongly agree) to -2 (strongly disagree).

Self-efficacy was assessed using responses to five questions “I find it easy to get good academic grades/to concentrate at school for getting good academic grades/to master the skills that are taught in class this year/to concentrate on school work when I am at home/to finish all my school work” on a scale ranging from +2 (strongly agree) to -2 (strongly disagree). A mean score for self-efficacy was composed (Cronbach’s α = 0.68).

Intention to get good academic grades was measured by using the response to one statement as it is done with most studies [ 10 , 48 ], ‘I intend to get good academic grades’ on a five-point Likert scale from +2 (strongly agree) to -2 (strongly disagree).

Academic performance (t3)

Academic achievement was measured using student’s general average of the student’s self-reported performance in all school subjects during a specific semester. The general average is the standard instrument for the assessment of the academic achievement of students in Lebanese schools [ 49 ]. All participating schools use a 0–20 scale where the passing grade is 10 out of 20.

Statistical analysis

All analyses were done using SPSS, version 23 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, Illinois) and statistical significance was set at a p value < 0.05. Data management and cleaning was carried out prior to analysis and revealed that less than 1% of values were missing. Data were presented as means and standard deviations for continuous variables whereas, categorical data were presented as frequencies and percentages.

In order to analyze the first objective, to examine whether parenting style is associated with academic achievement of Lebanese adolescents, bivariate and multivariate analysis were conducted. Bivariate analyses examining the association between academic performance and other continuous variables were carried out using Pearson or Spearman correlation tests. ANOVA test was used for the association between academic achievement and polytomous variables (i.e. parents’ educational level and parenting style). Independent T-test was run to determine if there were differences in academic achievement between males and females, Christians and non- Christians, adolescents living with both parents or not, and adolescents from private schools versus public schools. A multivariate linear regression was carried out to identify which factors were independently associated with academic achievement using the Enter method. Variables which obtained p < 0.1 in the bivariate analysis were entered in the model [ 50 ]. Independent variables were introduced by blocks: Model 1 included parenting styles. Model 2 also contained socio-demographic variables. In model 3 the socio-cognitive variables attitude, social norm-teacher and self-efficacy were added. Finally, in model 4, the variable intention was added. Unstandardized Beta coefficients were then reported with their 95% confidence intervals (CI).

In order to analyze the second objective, to examine whether socio-cognitive factors mediate the effect of parenting style on academic achievement, we conducted the mediation analysis using Hayes’s (2013) SPSS macro PROCESS with 95% bias corrected confidence interval (CI) based on 5000 bootstrap samples [ 51 ]. The indirect effect is considered statistically significant if the CI does not include 0. We first started with a simple mediation model using SPSS macro PROCESS (model 4), evaluating one mediator at a time. Among the four socio-cognitive variables (attitude, social norm, self-efficacy and intention) we only obtained significant mediation for self-efficacy and intention. Significant mediators were then entered into a serial mediation model (SPSS macro PROCESS, model 6) to check for significant sequential mediation. We hypothesized a serial mediation model where parenting style influences self-efficacy which in turn influences intention which impacts on academic achievement ( Fig 1 ). In all Hayes models, adjustment was made for the following variables: age, type of school, religion, father and mother education. Confounders were chosen based on the results of the multivariate analysis and the models’ adequacy or goodness of fit. Unstandardized coefficients and standard errors (SE) of the final model were reported alongside their CIs. Direct and indirect effects (DE and IE) were also shown for the final mediation model.

In order to analyze the third objective, to investigate whether adolescent age, gender, school type, religion and parent’s education might moderate the influence of parenting style on academic achievement of Lebanese adolescents, SPSS macro PROCESS model 1 was used. For each potential moderator, four interactions were tested: 1) an interaction with parenting style on academic achievement, 2) an interaction with parenting style on the mediator (socio-cognitive factor), 3) an interaction with the mediator on parenting style, 4) an interaction with the mediator on the sequential mediator. There was no significant interaction with any of the chosen demographic variables.

Description of sample

The study sample consisted of 345 adolescents with a mean age of 16.57± 0.76 years. Of the study participants 53.3% were girls and 65.8% attended private school. The majority of adolescents reported an authoritative (31.4%) or authoritarian parenting style (29.3%), followed by permissive (19.9%) and neglectful (19.4%) ( Table 1 ).

Correlations between academic achievement and parenting styles and socio-demographics: Bivariate analysis

As shown in Table 2 , a significantly better academic achievement at t3 was reported for younger adolescents (p = 0.003), those living with both parents (p = 0.035), and adolescents from private schools (p< 0.001). Adolescents whose father (p = 0.001) and mother (p< 0.001) had a high level of education were also significantly more likely to have higher academic achievement at t3. Adolescents with higher reported self-efficacy and with stronger intention at t2 were significantly more likely to have greater academic achievement at t3 (p< 0.001). No significant association of academic achievement with attitude and social norm were found.

a p-value for the Independent Samples T-test,

b p-value for the Spearman correlation,

c p-value for ANOVA,

d p-value for the Pearson correlation.

Associations between academic achievement and parenting styles and demographics: Multivariate analysis

In model 1, consisting of parenting styles and academic achievement, the results show that parenting style significantly predicted academic achievement of adolescents six months later. Adolescents whose parents are authoritative were significantly more likely to achieve higher academic achievement six months later compared to adolescents of neglectful (β: -0.87; 95% CI -1.55, -0.19), and authoritarian parents (β: -0.62; 95% CI -1.23, -0.01). Model 2, including model 1 and adding demographic variables, showed that age and type of school were statistically significantly associated with academic achievement at t3. Younger adolescents (p = 0.010) and students from private schools (p< 0.001) were significantly more likely to achieve higher. Parenting remained statistically significantly associated with academic performance at t3. Adolescents of authoritative parents were significantly more likely to have higher academic achievement at six months follow-up compared to adolescents of neglectful (β: -1.07; 95% CI -1.69, -0.45), permissive (β: -0.68; 95% CI -1.29, -0.07) and authoritarian parents (β: -0.83; 95% CI -1.39, -0.27). In model 3, adding the socio-cognitive variables attitude, social norm-teacher and self-efficacy to model 2 resulted in the same significant effect of parenting, age and type of school. It also showed that self-efficacy was positively significantly associated with academic achievement at t3 (p< 0.001). Adolescent with higher self-efficacy had an average grade higher by 0.72 relatively to adolescents with lower self-efficacy. In the last model 4, adding the variable intention to model 3, parenting style, age, school type and self-efficacy remained significant and adding intention as a statistically positively significant predictor of achievement six months later (p<0.001) ( Table 3 ).

β = Unstandardized Coefficient; CI = confidence interval. Dependent variable: Academic Achievement.

Model 1 : Variables entered: Parenting style (Permissive, authoritarian, neglectful).

Association was significant: p < 0.05

Model 2 : Variables entered: Variables in Model 1 + Age, Type of school, Religion, Father’s educational level Mother’s educational level, Family structure.

Model 3 : Variables entered: Variables in Model 2 + Attitude, Social norm-teacher, Self-efficacy.

Model 4 : Variables entered: Variables in Model 3+ Intention

Serial mediation analysis

In the serial mediation model, we postulated that our predictor variable parenting style (X) influences academic achievement (Y) six months later via two mediators: self-efficacy (M1) and intention (M2) sequentially. To demonstrate this, parenting style (Y) should be significantly associated with the first mediator (M1) self-efficacy. In turn, self-efficacy (M1) should be significantly associated with the second mediator (M2) intention and finally intention (M2) should be significantly related to academic achievement (Y). Table 4 shows a series of three regression analysis. In the first regression the goal was to examine if our independent variable parenting style (X) measured at t2 is associated with the first mediator (M1) self-efficacy (t2). The results show that parenting style was statistically significantly associated with self-efficacy. Adolescents of neglectful parents were significantly less likely to have high self-efficacy compared to the reference style authoritative (p = 0.022). The second regression, regressed intention (M2) on both self-efficacy (M1) and parenting style (X). The results show that the first mediator M1 (self-efficacy) was statistically significantly associated with the second mediator M2 (intention), with higher efficacy beliefs predicting higher intention (p <0.001). Additionally, parenting was also statistically significantly associated with intention; adolescents of neglectful parents were significantly less likely to report strong intentions (p = 0.006). The last regression analysis regressed academic achievement (Y) on all antecedent variables: intention (M2), self-efficacy (M1) and parenting (X). The goal was to explore if intention (M2) is associated with academic achievement (Y) six months later. The results show that intention (M2) was significantly associated with achievement (Y). Adolescents with greater intention were significantly more likely to have higher achievement (p< 0.001).

Serial mediation model taking parenting style as X, academic achievement as Y, and self-efficacy and intention as mediators 1 and 2.

†All models adjusted for age, type of school, religion, father education and mother education. Models using Process Macro model #6 (Hayes, 2013).

The last Table 5 , shows the direct effect of parenting style on academic achievement and the three indirect effects: (i) the indirect effect of parenting on achievement through the first mediator self-efficacy (M1), (ii) the indirect effect of parenting on achievement through the second mediator intention (M2) and (iii) the indirect effect of parenting on achievement through the sequence of self-efficacy (M1) and intention (M2). The direct effect of parenting style on the outcome academic achievement is statistically significant (neglectful vs authoritative: DE = -0.73; p = 0.016). In addition, the indirect effect of parenting style (neglectful vs authoritative) on academic performance through the mediator self-efficacy (M1) alone is statistically significant (IE = -0.16; CI = -0.37, -0.002). The second indirect effect of parenting style (neglectful vs authoritative) on academic performance via the second mediator intention (M2) is also statistically significant (IE = -0.18; CI = -0.39, -0.04). Finally, the last indirect effect of parenting style (neglectful vs authoritative) via the sequence of self-efficacy (M1) and intention (M2) leading to academic achievement is statistically significant (IE = -0.04; CI = -0.11, -0.003). Thus, the relationship between parenting style (neglectful vs authoritative) and academic achievement is partially mediated by self-efficacy and intention, sequentially.

The first goal of our study was to examine the longitudinal influence of parenting style on academic achievement of adolescents in Lebanon. Secondly, we examined the theoretical mediating role of social cognitive factors in the relationship between parenting style and academic achievement. Thirdly, we examined whether the association between parenting and academic achievement was moderated by age, gender, religion, school type and parents’ education. Our findings indicate that parenting styles was prospectively associated with academic achievement of Lebanese adolescents six month later, this influence was partly mediated by self-efficacy and intention to get good grades. Demographic variables did not moderate the effect of parenting style on academic achievement.

The findings of the present research both support and extend those of previous studies. Our results indicate that authoritative parenting promotes higher academic achievement in adolescents compared to neglectful parenting. The positive influence of authoritative parenting is both direct as well as mediated in part through the effect of self-efficacy and intention. The findings are consistent with other studies showing that self-efficacy act as a mediator between parenting and academic achievement [ 18 , 32 , 52 ]. In addition, this study brings new insight into the literature by suggesting the sequential and causal pathway of self-efficacy and intention in explaining the relation between parenting and achievement which has not been studied before. The association between parenting style and adolescents’ academic achievement was not moderated by age, religion, school type, parents’ education or gender of the adolescents. This is in line with previous research indicating that the influence of parenting on school achievement does not depend on parents’ educational level [ 53 ] and that for the most part the influence of parenting styles does not differ across demographic groups [ 54 – 56 ].

Our results from the serial mediation model supports that parenting style significantly influences academic achievement of adolescents both directly and indirectly through proximal cognitive variables. These findings support the dual-process view assumption that the environment-in our case the home environment- may influence behavior directly as well as indirectly through cognitions [ 24 ]. Our results show that parenting style influences self-efficacy, which in turn influences intention which subsequently influences academic achievement.

When looking at the direct association of parenting on academic performance, our results show that authoritative parenting had the most positive influence on academic achievement compared to all the other styles. This in line with previous research, even though there are some discrepancies in the findings, the majority of studies report a beneficial effect of authoritative parenting on academic outcome of adolescents [ 57 , 58 ] and a negative effect of neglectful parenting [ 19 ]. Our results indicate that this association is also true for the Lebanese context. Adolescents of neglectful parents were significantly less likely to have high academic achievement than adolescents whose parents are authoritative. Importantly, this association held even after adjusting for socio-demographic and socio-cognitive factors suggesting an independent direct effect of parenting style. The latter implies that parenting programs and interventions aimed at fostering effective and positive parenting is worthwhile considering for improving adolescents’ academic achievement regardless the socio-economical background. Moreover, our findings are also in line with previous studies documenting a positive effect of authoritative parenting on school outcomes among younger children [ 59 , 60 ]. Hence, even though with age there may be other social influences such as peer relations, parents continue to largely impact their children’s outcomes across adolescence.

Further to the direct effect, our results revealed the indirect mediated effect of parenting on achievement via socio-cognitive factors. Firstly, parenting style was found to significantly directly predict socio-cognitive factors. Adolescents from authoritative parents were more likely to have high academic efficacy beliefs and more likely to have strong intentions towards getting good grades compared to adolescents of neglectful parents. This is in line with previous research showing that authoritative parenting fosters the highest levels of self- efficacy beliefs compared to non-authoritative parenting [ 18 , 61 ]. This positive influence can be explained by the favorable characteristics of the authoritative style that are assumed to contribute to healthy psychosocial development [ 20 , 62 ]. Authoritative parents are supportive and responsive towards their children’s need, they foster self-reliance, critical thinking and more positive attitudes towards school [ 62 , 63 ]. Hence adolescents who describe their parents as being authoritative are more likely to develop positive beliefs about their achievement and be successful in their academic life [ 64 ]. Whereas adolescents from neglectful families were found to adopt maladaptive behaviors and task avoidant strategies which inhibit academic achievement [ 52 ].

Moreover, socio-cognitive factors were in turn found to be significantly associated with academic achievement. Adolescents with high self-efficacy were more likely to have stronger intention and consequently more likely to perform better compared to their counterparts with lower efficacy beliefs. The latter corroborates previous findings indicating that social cognitive factors are strong determinants of academic success [ 65 , 66 ]. Adolescents who have strong beliefs in their academic capabilities are more motivated, work harder and with greater persistence even in the face of difficulties and consequently are more likely to set higher goals and develop stronger intention to achieve these goals [ 67 , 68 ]. On another note, research also suggests that the more students achieve well academically the more they feel confident and the greater their efficacy beliefs [ 69 ]. Hence the need for interventions targeting both psychosocial cognitions and academic performance for they are a product of each other. In fact, one of the most influential sources of self-efficacy is mastery experience, past successes enhance efficacy beliefs while experiencing failure lowers it [ 27 ]. Interventions that induced successful performances were effective in strengthening adolescents’ self-efficacy and eventually led to academic improvements [ 70 ].

In conclusion, our results indicate that authoritative parenting may have a direct positive influence on academic achievement of adolescent as well as indirect influence through psychosocial competencies, namely higher self-efficacy, which influence intention which most likely translate into direct action to get good academic achievement. Our findings suggest the need for interventions aiming at encouraging positive parenting styles and promoting positive relationship with adolescent for enhancing efficacy beliefs which may subsequently result in improved academic achievement. Parenting interventions are considered a promising approach and the recommended strategy for enhancing parent-child relationship [ 71 , 72 ]. Several parenting training programs exist today such as the Triple P-Positive Parenting Program [ 73 ] and Parent Management Training [ 74 ]. Those programs are aimed at empowering parents and supporting them to adopt positive parenting techniques, reduce parental stress and strengthen parent-child relationship [ 75 ]. Consequently, good parent-child relationship and competent parenting may positively influence several child emotional and behavioral outcomes [ 76 , 77 ] among which academic outcomes [ 78 ].

It is important to note that the association between parenting and achievement was partly mediated by cognitions which implies the presence of other potential mediators, such as context-specific parenting practices which have been found to be significantly linked to academic achievement [ 15 , 79 ]. Positive parenting practices aimed at improving school success such as parental involvement, have been suggested to positively influence academic outcome when occurring under a positive parenting style such as an authoritative home environment [ 80 ]. Therefore, specific parenting practices may mediate the influence of general parenting style on academic achievement and should be included when examining the relation of general parenting to student’s achievement. Another important factor to consider is motivation, prior work has found that motivation prospectively influence academic achievement [ 81 ] and is influenced by parenting style [ 82 ]. Hence the importance of examining the moderating or mediating role of motivation in the relation of parenting to intention and academic achievement in future research.

Strength & limitations

To the best of our knowledge this is the first study to prospectively examine the direct and indirect influence of parenting style on academic achievement of Lebanese adolescents. The current research presents new evidence on parenting socialization in the Lebanese culture and highlights the importance of the home environment in influencing Lebanese adolescents school outcomes. In addition, testing both the direct and indirect effect of parenting styles brings new insight in understanding the potential mechanisms by which the family environment influences adolescent academic achievement. An important contribution of this study is the sequential pathway of self-efficacy and intention, as examined by the serial mediation model, that provides a new explanation into the direct and indirect link between parenting style and academic achievement through the mediator effect of self-efficacy and intention. An additional strength of this study is the methodological approach used to test mediation using Hayes’s macro PROCESS based on bootstrapping which bypasses the problem of distributional assumption and provides more power in detecting indirect effect even in small samples [ 83 ].

Nonetheless, a number of limitations of this study need attention. First, due to the fact that grades were self-reported, common response bias cannot be ruled out. However, previous research indicate that self-reported grades are accurate indicators of actual grades and are comparable to academic transcript [ 84 , 85 ]. In addition, our sample was taken from two areas in Lebanon, Beirut the Capital city and Mount Lebanon are. These two regions concentrate the majority of the Lebanese population, including approximately half of the Lebanese students, and are representative of the various religious and socio-demographic societies in Lebanon. However, the sample is not at a national level and, consequently, the findings cannot be generalized to the whole adolescent population in Lebanon. Furthermore, our study examines parenting style in relation to both parents rather than individually and thus we were unable to explore the ways in which mothers and fathers differed in their parenting styles. Future studies examining the parenting styles of the mother and father separately are recommended as the cultural socializing pattern might differ. Finally, our research focused on the more global aspect of parental behavior that is parenting style and did not include behavior-specific parenting practices aimed at directly promoting school achievement. The inclusion of parenting practices is recommended in future research as domain-specific parenting behaviors (such as monitoring school activities) might produce larger effects than general parenting. In addition, examining both parenting styles and parenting practices will enable us to examine how general parenting may moderate the influence of specific parenting practices on academic achievement.

Our findings extend previous evidence on the positive influence of authoritative parenting on academic achievement both directly and indirectly through the mediating effect of self-efficacy and intention and highlight the importance of promoting this style for enhancing academic performances as well as psychosocial well-being among Lebanese adolescents. Future research may incorporate, motivation, peer relations and parenting practices as additional potential mediators as they have been found to be influenced by parenting style and significantly relate to school achievement.

Supporting information

Funding statement.

The authors received no specific funding for this work.

Data Availability

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Parenting styles and academic achievement of young adolescents: A systematic literature review

Literature accords the importance of parenting style and their impact on young adolescent’s behavior. There are many factors that affect the academic performance of children and parenting styles is one of the significant factors of academic performance. But there is lack of research that integrates and systemizes the relationship between parenting styles and academic performance especially in Pakistan. The unit of analysis of this research was studies that were previously conducted on parenting styles and academic performance of young children. Main focus of search was to availability of data that is most recent and relevant, so this research paper focuses on 39 studies. Articles from seven databases (Google Scholar, Science Direct, Taylor and Francis Journals,Web of Science, JSTOR, Springer link and SAGE Journals) were identified related to the topic using a pre-established set of terms that included both parenting styles and academic performance. All the studies highlighted that parenting styles affect the academic achievement of adolescents. It was analyzed that authoritative parenting style is the most effective parenting style in enhancing the academic performance of young children. More research is needed on parenting styles in different continents to have an understanding of the cultural effect of parenting styles on the academic performance of adolescents. Implications for parents and policy makers are discussed.

Related Papers

Hamid Masud , Muhammad Shakil Ahmad , Dr. Farzand Ali Jan , Ahmad Jamil

The literature supports the importance of parenting styles that are necessary to fulfill the developmental needs of the children and eventually improve their quality of life. Baumrind’s typology of parenting styles was used. There are many studies that examined the relationship of parenting styles (authoritative, authoritarian and permissive parenting styles) and academic performance, but there is lack of measurement of the relationship with respect to Pakistan. Current study analyzed the relationship of parenting styles and academic performance along with selfefficacy as mediating variable. Sample of the study consists of 313 university students from four academic departments. Measures included the parenting styles and self-efficacy. GPA was taken as a measure of academic performance of adolescents. Self-reported questionnaire was used to take the response from students. With the help of structural equation modeling, structural model was tested. Results of the study indicate that parenting styles individually have no significant relationship with the academic performance. In addition to this, self-efficacy only mediates the relationship of authoritative parenting style and academic performance. It can be concluded that self-efficacy in individuals is an important attribute necessary for the psychological development of the adolescents. Self-efficacy enhances the & Hamid Masud [email protected] & Muhammad Shakil Ahmad [email protected] 1 2 Department of Management Sciences, COMSATS Institute of Information Technology, Kamra Road, Attock 43600, Pakistan National College for Business Administration and Economics, Rahim Yar Khan Campus, Pakistan Author's personal copy 1 • Ahmad Jamil 2 individual’s confidence to progress. There is a need to conduct more research on the relationship of parenting styles and academic performance in Pakistan. Implications for parents, teachers, are discussed.

Heike A Schänzel

The significant issue of parental influence on a child’s development is still an undeveloped area of study in tourism. The purpose of this study is to investigate whether perceived parenting styles have an influence on adolescents’ motivations. Adolescents completed a self-administered questionnaire on the perceived parenting style of their parents and the adolescents visiting motivations based on the Parental Authority Questionnaire and Self-Determination Theory. The survey was conducted with 100 respondents (50 girls, 50 boys) who visited the Iran National Museum in September, 2016. Data were analyzed by using descriptive statistics, Pearson’s correlation analysis and multiple linear regression analysis. Firstly, the adolescents perceived their parents influence on them as more authoritative rather than authoritarian and permissive. Secondly, the more restrictive parenting style, namely authoritarian, was tied to less self-determined motivation including amotivation and external regulation whereas, authoritative parenting was found to be related to intrinsic motivation as a higher self-determined motivation. Finally, the permissive parenting style was a good predictor for introjected motivation which is known as an external motivation.

IOSR Journals

Asian Social …

Mansor Abu Talib

Remya Urath

Chihtsan Wang , Ping-Yin Kuan

The present research used data gathered by Taiwan Education Panel Survey (TEPS) in 2001 and 2003 to explore how fathers’ and mothers’ parenting styles jointly influenced their children’s academic achievement in junior high. Using latent class analysis (LCA), the research uncovered the same four parenting styles for both Taiwanese fathers and mothers. These four parenting styles are consistent with parenting typology often discussed in the literature and can be labeled as authoritarian, authoritative, permissive, and neglectful. Contrary to the expectation, the present research showed that when one of the parents was permissive, the children performed the best. The research further found that if paternal parenting was authoritative and maternal parenting was neglectful, this type of joint parenting style would have the most negative impact on their children’s academic achievement.

Linda Hoxha

David R. Hibbard , Akiko Watabe

This study examined the influence of parenting on academic achievement motivation among elementary school children in the United States and Japan based on Baumrind's parenting typology. Previous works have shown that authoritative parenting (parenting that encourages children to be independent but still places limits and controls on their actions) tends to yield positive academic outcomes for Western children. Conversely, Asian children are likely to attain better academic goals with authoritarian parenting (restrictive and punitive styles in which parents exhort children to follow their directions and respect their work and effort). Recently, cultural changes have been observed in both countries, but the parenting styles that characterize each culture may still remain. Thus, it was predicted that (a) authoritative parenting will be associated with higher academic achievement motivation among modern American children, and (b) authoritarian parenting will be associated with higher academic achievement motivation among modern Japanese children. Two hundred eight students from an American elementary school and 312 from a Japanese elementary school completed measures of achievement goal orientations and parental attitudes. Results indicated that American children acquire the benefit of academic achievement motivation with both authoritative and authoritarian parenting styles today. There was no support for the prediction that contemporary Japanese children obtain higher academic achievement motivation with authoritarian parenting style. Parenting processes in Asian cultures and their influences on child outcomes remain a central focus of inquiry in the child development literature. However, much of that research has tended to generalize the findings on child socialization dynamics and child academic outcomes across Asian societies. The pertinent literature has often neglected to

Dencio De Guzman

Onyango Okoth

ABSTRACT This study set to investigate the Effects of Parenting Styles on Career Choice Os Secondary School Students in Kapsabet Division, Nandi Central District, Nandi County, Kenya. The researcher set objectives, which will seek to determine the effects of parenting styles on career choice of secondary school students in Kapsabet division, Nandi Central District, Nandi County, Kenya. The researcher will use the descriptive survey design to carry out the research. The respondents for this study will be 302 of which 155 will be students and 147 will be parents, representing 24.6% of target population. A pilot study will be carried out to test the validity and reliability of the instruments. SPSS version 20 will be used to analyze the data collected. Data will be analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics where regression and correlation coefficients will be determined. The results are expected to provide a way forward on ht effects of parenting styles on career choice of students. Findings and conclusions will be deduced from the results and practical recommendations will be made from the conclusions.

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Journal of Adolescence

Håkan Stattin

Journal of Cross- …

Adnan Farah , Reda Abouserie

Practice in Clinical Psycholoy (JPCP)

Research Proposal on Parenting Style vs Adolescents Drug Using Habit

Tesfaye Estifanos

Mental Health, Religion & Culture

Sahithya BR

Nooshin Sabour Esmaeili

Panayiotis Stavrinides

Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 2008; 34; 451

Joseph Ciarrochi

adeyemi olatunji

Ebabush Y E R D A W Kassa

PROF. DR. AYSE DILEK OGRETIR OZCELIK

Nutrition Reviews

Moria Golan

Helen J . Boon

Victor Tochukwu Nwankwo

International Journal of Psychological Studies

Rozumah Baharudin

Timothy B. Smith

Monika Dominiak

Dr. Russell Kabir

Tina M Taylor

Lau Yaayuen

caesargeorge manxiwa

International Education Studies

Roslee Ahmad

sandeep jaiswal

Journal of youth and adolescence, 2012, Volume 41, Issue 8, pp. 1053 -­‐ 1066

Journal of Family Psychology

Prof. Marwan Dwairy

Fe Competente

Psychological Reports

Sandee McClowry

atanda ademola

Francesca Cuzzocrea

Editon Consortium Journal of Psychology, Guidance, and Counseling (SSN: 2664-0112)

EDITON C O N S O R T I U M PUBLISHING

Dr. Mohammad Sayid

Educational Psychology Review

SCHOLAR Ikhatalor

Leiry Ann Rapanan

Jeremiah Acharibasam

Arielle Bonneville-Roussy , Therese Bouffard

EVETTA S LEMA

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Parenting Styles and Children’s Academic Performance

• First Online: 01 January 2013

Cite this chapter

• Kingsley Nyarko 3  

Part of the book series: Science Across Cultures: The History of Non-Western Science ((SACH,volume 7))

6892 Accesses

This study examines the effect of parenting styles on the academic performance of children. It looks at parenting styles and children’s outcome, ethnic groups and parenting styles, family structure and parenting styles, and parenting styles and academic performance. However, the findings suggest inconsistencies regarding the effects of parenting styles on children’s academic performance. Whereas some studies show a positive and significant effect between authoritative parenting and children’s school achievement, others show that there is no effect of parenting styles on the academic achievement of children. Again, it further indicates that single mothers use the permissive parenting style, which might be the reason for the poor academic performance of their children as compared with those from families with both parents. The study therefore underscores the significance of analyzing parenting styles within one’s cultural milieu. While this chapter focuses on Ghana, it can be generalized to other cultures as well.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Associations of Parenting Styles and Dimensions with Academic Achievement in Children and Adolescents: A Meta-analysis

Parenting styles and academic achievement of young adolescents: a systematic literature review, the moderating role of emotional intelligence in the association between parenting practices and academic achievement among adolescents.

Akyeampong, A. K., Pryor, J., & Ampiah, J. G. (2006). A vision of successful schooling: Ghanaian teachers’ understandings of learning, learning and assessment. Comparative Education, 42 (2), 155–176.

Article   Google Scholar  

Amato, P. R., & Gilbreth, J. G. (1999). Nonresident fathers and children’s well-being: A meta-analysis. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61 , 557–573.

Amoo, S. (2011). The difference in the self esteem levels of children living with single parents and intact parents . Thesis submitted to the Department of Psychology, University of Ghana.

Google Scholar  

Asamoah, A. Y. (2011). The effect of parenting styles on self esteem and peer relationship in children . Thesis submitted to the Department of Psychology, University of Ghana.

Baumrind, D. (1971). Current patterns of parental authority. Developmental Psychology Monograph, 4 (1), 1–103.

Baumrind, D. (1973). The development of instrumental competence through socialization. In A. D. Pick (Ed.), Minnesota symposium on child psychology (Vol. 7, pp. 3–46). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Baumrind, D. (1991). Parenting styles and adolescent development. In R. M. Lerner, A. C. Peterson, & J. Brooks-Gunn (Eds.), Encyclopedia of adolescence (pp. 746–758). New York: Garland Publishing, Inc.

Bronfenbrenner, U., & Ceci, S. J. (1994). Nature-nurture reconceptualized in developmental perspective: A bioecological model. Psychological Review, 101 , 568–586.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Darling, N. (1999). Parenting style and its correlates . Champaign: ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education, University of Illinois (ERIC Digest ED427896).

Dogbatse, E. D. (2012). The effects of parenting styles on the academic performance and self-esteem of children in upper primary school . Unpublished thesis submitted to the Department of Psychology, University of Ghana.

Dornbusch, S. M., Ritter, P. L., Leidermann, P. H., Roberts, D. F., & Fraleigh, M. J. (1987). The relation of parenting style to adolescent school performance. Child Development, 58 , 1244–1257.

Glasgow, K. L., Dornbusch, S. M., Troyer, L., Steinberg, L., & Ritter, P. L. (1997). Parenting styles, adolescents’ attributions, and educational outcomes in nine heterogeneous high schools. Child Development, 68 , 507–529.

Jackson, C., Henriksen, L., & Foshee, U. A. (1998). The authoritative parenting index: Predicting health risk behaviors among children and adolescents. Health Education and Behavior, 25 (3), 319–337.

Lumor, F. (2011). The influence of single parenting on an adolescents’ academic performance . Unpublished thesis submitted to the Department of Psychology, University of Ghana.

Maccoby, E., & Martin, J. (1983). Socialization in the context of the family: Parent–child interaction. In P. H. Mussen (Series Ed.),& E. M. Hetherington (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology : Vol. 4. Socialization, personality, and social development (pp. 1–101). New York: Wiley.

Parenting. (2011, April 29). New world encyclopedia . Retrieved October 6, 2013, from http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/p/index.php?title=Parenting&oldid=951065

Nunoofio, P. M. (2011). The effect of single parenting on the academic performance of primary school children in Accra . Accra: Department of Psychology, University of Ghana.

Nyarko, K. (2007). Parental involvement: A sine qua non in adolescents’ educational achievement . A dissertation submitted to the University of Munich. www.uni-muenchen.de

Patterson, G., DeBarsyshe, B., & Ramsey, E. (1989). A developmental perspective on antisocial behavior. American Psychologist, 44 , 329–335.

Peprah, J. (2012). The influence of parenting styles on university students’ perception of their academic achievement . Unpublished thesis submitted to the Department of Psychology, University of Ghana.

Sameroff, A. (1994). Developmental systems and family functioning. In R. D. Parke & S. G. Kellam (Eds.), Exploring family relationships with other social contexts (pp. 199–214). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

Seho, H. K. (2012). Effects of parental efficacy on adolescents’ academic performance . Unpublished thesis submitted to the Department of Psychology, University of Ghana.

Slicker, E. K. (1998). Relationship of parenting style to behavior adjustment in graduating high school seniors. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 27 (3), 345–372.

Steinberg, L., Dornbusch, S. M., & Brown, B. B. (1992). Ethnic differences in adolescent achievement: An ecological perspective. American Psychologist, 47 , 723–729.

Steinberg, L., Lamborn, S., Darling, N., Mounts, N., & Dornbusch, S. (1994). Over-time changes in adjustment and competence among adolescents from authoritative, authoritarian, indulgent, and neglectful families. Child Development, 65 , 754–770.

Weiss, L. H., & Schwarz, J. C. (1996). The relationships between parenting types and older adolescents’ personality, academic achievement, adjustment and substance use. Child Development, 67 , 2101–2114.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Psychology Department, University of Ghana, Accra, Ghana

Kingsley Nyarko

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kingsley Nyarko .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Hampshire College, Amherst, Massachusetts, USA

Helaine Selin

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Nyarko, K. (2014). Parenting Styles and Children’s Academic Performance. In: Selin, H. (eds) Parenting Across Cultures. Science Across Cultures: The History of Non-Western Science, vol 7. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7503-9_30

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7503-9_30

Published : 28 September 2013

Publisher Name : Springer, Dordrecht

Print ISBN : 978-94-007-7502-2

Online ISBN : 978-94-007-7503-9

eBook Packages : Medicine Medicine (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 02 September 2024

Influence of parental attitudes and coping styles on mental health during online teaching in the COVID-19 pandemic

• Fang Cheng 1   na1 ,
• Lixian Chen 2   na1 ,
• Huabing Xie 3 ,
• Chenglan Wang 4 ,
• Ruonan Duan 4 ,
• Dihui Chen 5 ,
• Jincheng Li 1 ,
• Hongying Yang 1 &
• Lingjiang Liu 1  

Scientific Reports volume  14 , Article number:  20375 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

42 Accesses

Metrics details

• Lifestyle modification
• Public health

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the online delivery model became the primary mode of education. With multiple pressures on society and families, mental health issues for parents have become particularly pronounced. Most of the current research has focused on the psychological state of education practitioners and children, with little attention to parents’ mental health issues. Therefore, this study explored the attitudes and coping styles of parents who experienced the process of their children being taught online over a long period and the factors influencing their mental health. This cross-sectional study was conducted between November 2021 and January 2022, using an anonymous online questionnaire to survey 1500 parents with children aged 6–13 years. The Chinese versions of the Patient Health Questionnaire Depression Scale (PHQ-9), the Parenting Stress Scale (PSS), the General Mental Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12), and the Brief Coping Style Scale (SCSQ), and a related factors questionnaire were used to survey the subjects. The normal distribution of the data was examined using the Shapiro–Wilk method. A multivariate regression analysis was conducted to identify factors significantly associated with parental mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic. Only 30.24% of parents agreed with online classes during the pandemic, and 52.28% used positive coping methods during stressful situations. Multivariate regression models identified significant factors associated with parental mental health: parent’s gender, child’s grade level, perceived stress about online classes, whether the child has ADHD, positive or negative coping styles, and subjective attitudes of support for online classes or not. The results of the study suggest that as online classes become more socially acceptable, it is necessary to be concerned about the risk of mental illness for parents and develop policies and interventions, especially for parents who adopt negative coping styles and endorse online classes. The focus should be on the stress of online classes on parents, improving the acceptance of online classes and psychological well-being, regulating the way parents deal with their children, and targeting subgroups of children with ADHD symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Similar content being viewed by others

Online education and the mental health of faculty during the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan

The association between psychosocial factors, protective factors, and its associated triggers with psychological distress among Bolivian adolescents

Online positive parenting programme for promoting parenting competencies and skills: randomised controlled trial

Introduction.

Neoconiosis is a serious respiratory disease caused by infection with the novel coronavirus SARS-COV-2, known as COVID-19. Since 2019, COVID-19 has created a global pandemic, posing a significant threat to global public health 1 . Although the case fatality rate of COVID-19 has been estimated at 2–3%, which is considerably lower than that of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndromes (SARS) (approximately 10%) and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) (approximately 40%) 2 , 3 , 4 , its impact has been profound. The virus has an extremely high transmission rate through the respiratory tract and close contact. As of 15 March 2020, COVID-19 has spread rapidly to 34 provinces and cities in China, while 144 countries/regions in five continents worldwide have reported cases of infection to varying degrees 5 . Thus, the COVID-19 pandemic in recent years has posed a significant challenge to the entire society and every individual’s life.

With the global spread of COVID-19, education in China and worldwide is facing a considerable challenge. Anticipating the high transmission rate of the virus, the crowded nature of public places such as campuses, and the low immunity profile of adolescents, the Chinese government enacted a series of responses, of which the use of online learning became a typical result of the COVID-19 pandemic 6 , 7 . While such initiatives have played a large part in preventing and controlling the pandemic, the impact on the parent and child side of the online delivery context is currently varied. Means et al. argue that online learning is an educational tool based on technological devices and the Internet in an era of rapid development 8 . Tallent-Runnels et al. are similarly optimistic that technological innovations and the continued growth of Internet accessibility can increase the motivation to learn online 9 . By contrast, however, Joshi et al. found that the pedagogical outcomes of online learning are controversial and that online learning directly contributes to the lack of face-to-face interaction between students and teachers 10 . Research has shown that effective online education requires high-quality means for designing and assessing online courses and that the operators, the teachers who deliver the courses online, are equally required in terms of proficiency in the use of Internet equipment, etc 11 , 12 . Unfortunately, many educational institutions lack a careful design and development process for the transition of teaching models 13 , and the online education experience during the pandemic has suffered from varying degrees of skepticism and rejection 14 .

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the conflict between the educational format and the students translated in different ways and to varying degrees into multifaceted stress and family conflicts for parents. On the one hand, online instruction placed greater demands on the technology of connecting to the Internet, as a great challenge for many economically disadvantaged households, especially with the economic depression induced by the pandemic. Students from different family backgrounds faced different feedback on their online learning, even with the same willingness to learn. In particular, younger students 15 , 16 , students from immigrant backgrounds 17 , and students from families with a low socioeconomic status 18 encountered more difficulties with distance learning. At the same time, the prolonged online mode of delivery poses a risk of increased exposure of learners to screens, impacting young people’s visual health. The lack of teacher and parental supervision is another challenge, especially for young learners. The disadvantaged, weaker learners, requiring more supervision and guidance from their elders, face significant difficulties in this learning environment. Beyond China, the pandemic and the closure of schools have profoundly affected the mental health of students worldwide 19 . Empirical studies in Bangladesh, China, France, Greece, the UK, and the USA have found that a large proportion of students suffer from varying degrees of mental disorders 20 , 21 , 22 . Many students experiencing the online delivery model over a long period report suffering from depression, anxiety, distress, and even suicidal thoughts 23 , 24 . Interestingly, this academic mental health problem of adolescents is, to some extent, transferred to their parents. Due to multiple issues, such as the inadaptability of the online mode of delivery and socioeconomic pressures, the academic burden of the children leads to different aspects of psychological feedback and coping for the parents.

Apart from the financial pressures on some families, parents and children in the context of their different formative years show very different attitudes and behavioral patterns toward the use and efficacy of electronic devices. This phenomenon has been particularly notable in online education during the COVID-19 pandemic. According to Soykan, parents emphasize the expected dangers of using technology for academic performance 25 . The epidemic forced parents to take on an additional task: supervising children during class, especially at basic and primary levels. Research on emergency distance learning during the COVID-19 pandemic has shown reduced interactions between teachers and students 26 , with the ability of students to learn independently and actively being crucial to students’ academic performance 27 . Hale, Troxel, and Buysse surveyed online teaching and concluded that parents were disappointed in helping their children focus and participate in virtual classrooms 28 . The study reported emotional and behavioral problems (i.e., anxiety, irritability, and distraction) observed by parents in their children and adolescents due to the epidemic 29 . These phenomena are particularly significant in adolescents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Some relevant studies have shown that adolescents with ADHD find it more difficult to adapt to the online teaching mode compared to their peers and often exhibit problems such as motivation problems and executive dysfunction 30 . ADHD children face significant challenges in online learning environments, including attention, task organization, and completion difficulties. The lack of face-to-face supervision and structure can make it harder for them to adapt and participate in learning activities. Additionally, the demands for self-discipline and time management in online learning pose further obstacles for these children 31 . Parents often bear different levels of pressure and mental health problems due to the problems associated with electronic equipment, anxiety about performance under online learning, and comprehensive social pressure during the COVID-19 pandemic. Research has shown that parents have greater responsibility and participation in their children’s learning in a distance learning environment than in regular classroom teaching 32 . This is a vicious circle of contradictions, wherein the various forms of pressure on parents may affect how students experience a new learning environment: the greater the pressure their parents feel, the more negative their views of distance learning become.

Under enormous social and economic pressure, the threat of COVID-19 infection, and the anxiety about children’s academic performance, parents experience mental health problems to varying degrees, which impact their social development. Studies have shown that home isolation, economic hardship, despair, and loneliness during the COVID-19 pandemic also increased the risk of mental illness and suicide 33 , 34 . Social isolation is usually closely related to physical and mental health issues 35 . Such mental health problems often have an inseparable relationship with the parents’ attitudes toward online teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic and the measures taken, which are often unavoidable. However, no scholars have yet reported on this phenomenon.

Therefore, this study investigated the parents’ sociodemographic information and mental health scoring variables (depression level, parenting stress, general psychological state, and coping style) to analyze differences in parental mental health and their related factors under different coping styles and attitudes toward online courses and explore how factors such as children’s ADHD symptoms, parents’ attitudes toward online courses, and parents’ coping styles affect parents’ mental health, in an attempt to provide effective guidance on parental mental health issues in the post-pandemic era and the emerging wave of online education.

Study design

This cross-sectional study surveyed the parents of young children. In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and the prevalence of online classes, parents’ mental health variables, including depression levels, parental stress, general psychological status, and coping styles, were measured using an anonymous online survey, and their children’s ADHD symptoms were measured through parent ratings. Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the Ethics Committee of Kangning Hospital, Ningbo, Zhejiang Province, China (No. NBKNYY-2021-LC-1). A random sample of six primary schools in Ningbo, Zhejiang Province and Yuhuan County, Zhejiang Province were selected for data collection from November 2021 to January 2022. The purpose and content of the survey were explained to each respondent, and a digital informed consent form was provided for the study. All the respondents completed the questionnaire anonymously.

During this period, China adopted strict measures to control the spread of the COVID-19 36 . Especially in Zhejiang Province, including Ningbo City and Yuhuan County, the government and education departments quickly adapted to the changing situation, ensuring the continuity of education while prioritizing public health. Therefore, many schools in China still used online learning modes due to the ongoing impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. In primary schools in Ningbo City and Yuhuan County, Zhejiang Province, these regions benefited from relatively developed digital infrastructure. Schools were equipped with the necessary technology, allowing students to access the internet and use digital devices, although there were still differences. Platforms such as DingTalk, WeChat, and specialized educational applications were widely used for teaching and maintaining communication between teachers, students, and parents 37 , 38 . Concurrently, teachers received training on effectively using online teaching tools and methods. Additionally, a support system was established to assist parents and students in coping with the new educational model.

Participants

The questionnaires were completed anonymously in online class groups, and the participants were selected from different regions. The inclusion criteria were: (i) parents of children studying in Ningbo or Yuhuan County, Zhejiang Province, China, before the COVID-19 outbreak and currently, including primary school students and junior high school students; (ii) a child age of 6–13 years. Only parents participated in this survey; children did not directly participate.

Our study’s sample size was determined based on established principles in international questionnaire design. These guidelines suggest that the sample size should be approximately 5 to 20 times the number of items in the questionnaire to ensure adequate data representation and reliability 39 , 40 . Anticipating the possibility of non-responses or invalid questionnaires, which typically account for about 10% of the total surveys distributed 41 , we increased our target sample size by 10%. Therefore, the final sample size was set at 5.5 times the number of questionnaire items, ensuring that even with the anticipated rate of non-response or invalidity, we would still have a sufficiently large sample to maintain the robustness of our study’s findings. Given that our study comprised 153 items, the minimum sample size was calculated at 842 (153 items × 5.5).

In the end, 1500 questionnaires were distributed, and 1454 questionnaires were returned, yielding a response rate of 96.93%. Among these questionnaires, 138 had more than 30% missing data and logical errors and were thus recorded as invalid. There were 1,316 valid questionnaires, resulting in an effective completion rate of 90.51%.

Survey content

The general questionnaire comprised two main sections. The first part of the survey concerned sociodemographic information such as child grade, parent gender, parent education, online class approval or not, online class pressure, children’s ADHD type, and parents’ perceived source of their emotional impact (i.e., whether they believed their emotional impact was due to the pandemic or their child’s online classes). The specific question was: “If you feel that your emotions are affected, do you think it is due to the pandemic, your child’s online learning, or both?” Children’s ADHD type was rated by the parent version of the SNAP-IV rating scale 42 . The categories were as follows: attention deficit dominant (≥ 6 items on the Attention Deficit Subscale 2 or 3 only), hyperactivity/impulsivity dominant (≥ 6 items on the Hyperactivity/Impulsivity Subscale 2 or 3 only), and ADHD-C (≥ 6 items on both the Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity/Impulsivity Subscale 2 or 3).

The second part concerned the mental health rating variables, including depression level, parental stress, general psychological state, and coping styles, measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire Depression Scale (PHQ-9) (0–27), the Parental Stress Scale (PSS), the General Mental Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12) (0–12), and the Brief Coping Style Scale (SCSQ). These scales have exhibited good reliability and validity in previous studies 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 . These scales are classified as follows: PHQ-9: normal (0–4), mild (5–9), moderate to severe (10–14), and severe (20–27); PSS: normal (< 86), critical high (86–90), high (91–98), and very high (> 98); GHQ-12: high risk (98); GHQ-12 high (86o–3), and low risk (0–1); SCSQ: positive coping (coping tendency > 0), negative coping (coping tendency < 0), where coping tendency = positive coping standard score (Z score)—negative coping standard score (Z score), and the standard score is Z-transformed using the mean and standard deviation of positive coping style and negative coping style.

To ensure the reliability and consistency of the questionnaire results, psychiatrists explained the purpose of the survey and administered it to participants. A pre-test was conducted before the main survey to explore the questionnaire’s psychometric properties, such as reliability and validity. The pre-test involved a small group of participants similar to the main study’s target population. After completing the pre-test questionnaire, the researchers collected the responses, entered the data, and performed an initial analysis to identify any issues with the questionnaire items. This process helped refine the questionnaire and ensure the quality of the answers in the main survey.

Data analysis methods

After logic checking and proofreading, we used R-4.2.1 (an open-source programming language) and Rstudio for Windows (an open-source IDE) to process and analyze the data. We first conducted a descriptive analysis of the social demographic characteristics of the participants (Table 1 ) and a descriptive analysis of the continuous variables (PSS, PHQ-9, GHQ-12, and SCSQ) (Table 2 ).

The Shapiro–Wilk test 47 was used to test the normality of each variable. In addition, Spearman’s rank correlation analysis 48 was used to investigate the correlations between the variables (Table 3 ). Spearman’s rank correlation analysis was adopted because it is applicable to data with non-normal distribution and can effectively evaluate the monotonic relationship between two variables. Its results are more reliable than the chi-squared test, especially when the data are skewed. Ultimately, this study conducted a univariate intergroup analysis on each variable based on whether the parents agreed to online classes and the parents’ coping styles (Table 4 ). The purpose was to explore the differences in parental mental health and related factors among different groups and determine possible influencing factors.

In the multiple regression analysis, we examined the impact of various independent variables on the psychological health of parents (i.e., PSS, PHQ, and GHQ) under different coping styles and attitudes toward online courses. Specifically, we studied the effects of different coping styles (negative or positive) on parental mental health and related factors (Table 5 ). Additionally, we explored how different attitudes toward online courses (disapproving vs. approving) influenced parental mental health and related factors (Table 6 ). The purpose of the multiple regression analysis was to reveal the impact of each variable on the parents’ mental health and related factors and provide a basis for interventive measures.

The main objectives of this study were to analyze the differences in parental mental health and its associated factors across coping styles and attitudes toward online classes, as well as to explore how factors such as children with ADHD symptoms, parental attitudes toward online classes, and parental coping styles affect parental mental health. We hope to provide strong references and recommendations for improving parental mental health through these analyses.

It is particularly noteworthy that this work considered p -values of < 0.05 statistically significant.

Sociodemographic characteristics

The survey, which included 1316 participants, revealed that only a minority of parents supported online classes during the pandemic. The majority adopted positive coping methods during stressful situations. Table 1 presents detailed demographic information about the parents and their children, including grade levels, gender distribution, age ranges, and educational attainment. Additionally, Table 1 outlines the parents’ perceptions of online classes, their levels of stress, sources of emotional stress, and the types of ADHD diagnosed in their children.

The distribution and correlations among variables

Table 2 presents the distribution characteristics of scores on the PSS, PHQ-9, GHQ-12, and SCSQ scales, indicating that the scores did not conform to a normal distribution regarding skewness, kurtosis, and extreme value distribution ratios.

Table 3 details the correlations between sociodemographic characteristics and mental health variables, highlighting several significant associations. Key findings include: (1) Parental stress correlated significantly with the child’s grade and parent’s gender, educational level, approval of online classes, stress due to online classes, and sources of emotional stress; (2) PHQ-9 scores showed significant associations with the child’s grade and parental age, education, approval of online classes, online class stress, and sources of emotional stress; (3) GHQ-12 scores were significantly linked to the child’s grade and parental age, education, online class recognition, online class stress, and emotional sources; (4) SCSQ scores correlated with parental gender, approval of online classes, and stress from online classes; (5) ADHD was significantly associated with the child’s achievements and parental gender, recognition of online classes, stress from online classes, and emotional sources.

These correlations provided the basis for the subsequent analysis and are comprehensively detailed in Table 3 .

The severity of measurements and associated factors

Table 4 shows the results of single-factor analyses of survey data, highlighting significant differences based on parental approval of online classes and the type of coping strategy adopted. The key findings are: (1) Parental approval of online classes: Significant differences were observed between parents who disapproved and those who approved of online classes in terms of online class pressure, emotional sources, and scores on the PSS, PHQ-9, and GHQ-12 scales ( p  < 0.001 for all); (2) Coping strategies: Parents adopting positive coping strategies (SCSQ > 0) showed significant differences in PSS, PHQ-9, and GHQ-12 scores compared to those using negative coping strategies (SCSQ < 0), with p < 0.001 for all comparisons. No significant differences were found in terms of sociodemographic characteristics or other factors. These analyses underscore the impact of online class approval and coping strategies on parental stress and mental health, as detailed in Table 4 .

The study used multiple regression to analyze parental coping styles, attitudes toward online courses, and their impact on mental health, including the PSS, PHQ-9, and GHQ-12 dimensions, as detailed in Tables 5 and 6 . The findings are summarized below.

The results from Table 5 are as follows: For negative coping, PSS scores were significantly associated with parental gender, online classroom stress, and ADHD type. Female parents and parents experiencing lower stress levels in online classrooms had lower PSS scores. Parents of children without ADHD symptoms also had lower PSS scores compared to those with the combined ADHD type; PHQ-9 scores were significantly associated with the child’s grade and parental education, online classroom agreement, and emotional source. Higher PHQ-9 scores were noted among parents of older children, parents with higher education, those agreeing to online classes, and those influenced by both COVID-19 and online learning. GHQ-12 scores were significantly associated with the child’s grade and parental education, online classroom agreement, and emotional source. Higher GHQ-12 scores were found among parents of older children, parents with higher education, those agreeing to online classes, and those influenced by both COVID-19 and online learning. For positive coping, PSS scores were associated with parental education and online classroom stress. Parents with higher education and those with lower online classroom stress had lower PSS scores. PHQ-9 scores correlated with the child’s grade, online classroom stress, and ADHD type. Parents of older children, those with lower online classroom stress, and those with children without ADHD symptoms had lower PHQ-9 scores. GHQ-12 scores correlated with online classroom stress and ADHD type. Parents with lower online classroom stress and those with children without ADHD symptoms had lower GHQ-12 scores.

Table 6 further compares the results of multiple regressions under different attitudes toward coping with online classes.

Concerning PSS scores, among parents disapproving of online classes, those aged 38–45 had higher scores, while college-educated parents had lower scores. Among approving parents, moderate online classroom stress and higher SCSQ scores were associated with lower PSS scores. Concerning PHQ-9 scores, among disapproving parents, those with a postgraduate degree had higher scores. Among approving parents, higher scores were noted for parents of older children and those with high online classroom stress, while higher SCSQ scores were linked to lower PHQ-9 scores. Regarding GHQ-12 scores, among disapproving parents, those with children having attention deficit ADHD had higher scores. Among approving parents, higher scores were observed for parents of older children and those with high online classroom stress, while higher SCSQ scores correlated with lower GHQ-12 scores.

These analyses illustrate the complex relationships between parental coping styles, attitudes toward online classes, and various mental health dimensions. Detailed results are presented in Tables 5 and 6 .

Since the gradual outbreak of COVID-19 in late 2019, the virus has exhibited an unimaginably high level of infectiousness 49 . As of 3 April 2020, there had been at least 52,869 deaths and 10,066 confirmed cases of COVID-19 infection; by 18 May 2020, the number of confirmed cases had increased to 4,679,511, with 315,005 deaths. Frighteningly, these numbers rapidly increased, with many people having secondary infections 50 . The rapid spread of COVID-19 worldwide posed a serious challenge to the entire human population on many fronts: health, economic, environmental, and social. The impact on the education sector has been particularly significant: to avoid the mass gathering of young students, most schools were forced to opt out of the face-to-face mode of delivery and instead turn to online learning. Although online learning is not new, this massive, long-term paradigm shift presented significant challenges for children and parents alike 51 . Sun et al. indicated that students subjected to the online delivery mode for a long time since the spread of COVID-19 were more likely to fall behind in their grades and be affected by various aspects of psychological stress 52 . The impact on pupils can easily be passed on to parents to varying degrees, becoming a psychological burden and challenge. However, much of the current research is based on the perspective of educators and children, often ignoring the attitudes and mental health factors of the parents.

In a multifactorial study of the impact of parental attitudes and coping styles on mental health in the context of online delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic, parents’ agreement with online delivery was only 30.24%, and 52.28% adopted positive coping styles in times of stress. We found that the significant factors for parental mental health (measured as PSS, PHQ-9, and GHQ-12 quantitative values) were parental gender, the child’s grade, perceived stress about online classes, whether the child has ADHD, positive or negative coping styles, and subjective attitudes toward supporting online classes. This study separately examined the influence of individual child characteristics and subjective parental attitudes and behavioral patterns on their mental health.

Individual child characteristics

The analysis of children’s ADHD subtypes revealed that the regression coefficients for the quantified values of parental psychological problems were significantly lower for parents of children without ADHD compared to parents of children with mixed ADHD symptoms (Tables 5 and 6 ). However, it is noteworthy that the regression coefficient was positive when parents disagreed with online classes, which might be due to subjective negative parental attitudes masking the impact of the child with ADHD on the parent’s mental health. ADHD, whose main symptoms are inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity, is one of the most common psychiatric disorders, with a prevalence of 4‒6% in children and adolescents 53 , 54 and 5.6% in this study (Table 1 ). Interestingly, the mental health impact of children with ADHD on their parents was similar across time. One study on the parents of children with ADHD found that such parents were at greater risk of developing psychopathology 55 . This type of phenomenon showed a more pronounced trend during the COVID-19 pandemic in the context of a long-term home isolation policy and multiple social pressures. The unfamiliarity with electronic devices, concerns about performance in online classes, and the hyperactivity and inattention of children with ADHD symptoms continue to impact parents’ psychological defenses, ultimately leading to a range of mental health problems. Research has shown that the majority of children with ADHD (40‒60%) exhibit both oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) and/or conduct disorder 56 . This oppositional psychology or behavior toward elders was often amplified in the online mode of instruction during the COVID-19 pandemic due to the long hours spent together.

In addition, this study found significant effects on parents’ mental health when their children were in the middle and upper grades. Interestingly, the higher grades did not increase parental stress but instead increased parental depression and reduced the general psychological state of GHQ-12 scores of the parents (Tables 5 and 6 ). In a study on the consistency of parental anxiety with children, it was reported that in 76% of the parents in the sample who suffered from depressive psychological problems, the children tended also to have some mental health problems. This was often an indirect link, and this effect was not found in younger children 57 . In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, the online mode of delivery led to varying degrees of adaptation and concerns about academic performance, often creating a state of stress and anxiety among students, particularly in the context of the long-term home isolation policy. Often, as students progress through the grades, the burden of schoolwork and the pressure to progress to higher education intensifies this phenomenon. Parents who either respond positively or negatively to online classes, with some threat to employment, salary packages, etc., all expressed concerns about online classes, especially when their children were at some critical point in their senior years. Several studies have found that the correlation between psychological problems such as parental and child depression increases with the child’s age 58 , 59 . Even parents who have some reservations about the online mode of instruction for their younger children show some tolerance and emotion compared to their attitudes toward the online instruction of their middle and upper school children, contributing to a relatively relaxed state of mind and psychological situation. Although parents who experience depression and other psychological states in the face of heavy academic pressure on their children in the upper grades are often less able to cope with the difficulties of the upper grades and the gradual expression of their children’s sense of autonomy, the parental pressure in this situation is not significant 60 , 61 .

Parents’ willingness to respond in a subjective way

This study focused on the impact of long-term online teaching of children on parental mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic, specifically regarding parents adopting two distinctly different behavioral approaches, negative or positive. The univariate group comparisons in Table 4 show that parental adoption of positive coping resulted in significantly lower mean scores on the PSS, PHQ-9, and GHQ-12 (109.37–98.66, 11.33–10.11, and 3.17–2.57). During the global spread of the virus, the fear of getting sick inspired more negative emotions dominated by stress, anxiety, and other psychological disorders 62 . A study in Iran showed that 34.8%, 32.2%, and 29% of the adult population in the Yazd region had negative psychological symptoms such as stress, anxiety, and depression, respectively, during the COVID-19 pandemic 63 . Health concerns, accompanied by economic stagnation and various aspects of the child’s schooling, have resulted in strong negative psychological feedback from parents during the COVID-19 period, especially in a negative way. With this negative behavioral approach, accompanied by a distrust of electronic devices and online delivery modes, parents often voice doubts about the effectiveness of their children’s lessons. However, the parental pressure and anxiety brought about by this pandemic can easily demotivate students and discourage them from learning 64 . Children who lose interest in learning will eventually regress in the long-term online mode, and this vicious circle will further feed parents’ frustration with the online mode. As shown in Table 5 , in the multiple regression results for parental mental health and its correlates under different coping styles, we found an interesting phenomenon: among parents who maintained a negative coping style, men tended to show high levels of parental stress significance (i.e., a decrease of 2.03 for women compared to men), and the parents with a positive coping style did not show significant gender-differentiated behavior. In addition, the lower the level of stress parents experienced from online classes was, the lower the regression coefficients were for the quantitative values of parental psychological problems. Furthermore, parents who maintained a positive coping style had higher regression coefficients compared to those with negative coping styles (Table 5 ). Active parental involvement in family education is crucial to the child’s development 65 , and it is relatively easier to maintain a healthy psychological level in such a benign parenting relationship. Pratama et al. showed through a study of parental feedback in the face of home-based online classes during the pandemic 66 that positive parental coping in the face of a long-term online delivery model is an effective safeguard for advancing children’s learning progress, which forms, to some degree, a virtuous cycle.

It is also worth noting, as shown in Table 4 , that subjective parental disapproval of online instruction resulted in significantly lower means scores on the PSS, PHQ-9, and GHQ-12 (108.85–102.27, 11.45–10.45, and 3.41–2.66). Thus, in addition to the differential impact of how parents respond to long-term online classes, the subjective willingness or unwillingness to support online classes showed a similarly significant impact. Although some have argued that parental involvement in the child’s learning experience during COVID-19 is unprecedented, the fact is that parental behavioral interference and even subjective attitudes have a profound impact on the child’s learning and have done so for decades 67 , 68 , 69 . Plowman et al. showed that children’s online learning requires more subjective support and assistance from parents than formal supervision 70 . Our analysis revealed that when parents reported subjective agreement with online classes, their perception of low stress associated with these classes was more negatively correlated with levels of psychological well-being than when they disagreed with online classes (as rated by the PSS, PHQ, and GHQ) (Table 6 ). A 2019 study found that parents’ attitudes toward their children’s online learning affected the quality of their children’s learning 71 and that children’s learning often feeds back to some extent on the parents’ mental health state. The above phenomenon may be because the expectations of these parents are more aligned with reality. They may have a negative perception of online delivery, so their expectations of its effectiveness are lower. As a result, they may feel less stress and disappointment when reality meets their expectations. Conversely, parents who identify with online delivery may have higher expectations and feel more stress and disappointment when reality does not meet those expectations.

Finally, parents should show a more tolerant and supportive attitude to the online teaching model for students during COVID-19, even in the face of the many stressors that arise at home. With the rapid development of technology and the spread of new electronic devices in modern society, this online mode of delivery will not just be a significant feature of the COVID-19 period but will gradually become more common in the future. A range of theories derived from motivation research, such as self-determination theory 72 , expectancy-value theory 73 , and achievement goal theory 74 , suggest that active involvement in children’s learning processes, with the intervention of a facilitator and the provision of some external motivators, can effectively address the psychological factors that influence learner motivation, engagement, and learning. Therefore, it is only by being more optimistic and accepting of new things and by motivating their children to varying degrees that parents can guide their children to adjust to their mental health.

Strengths & limitations

We analyzed the differences in parental mental health and its correlates across coping styles and attitudes toward online classes and explored how factors such as children with ADHD symptoms, parental attitudes toward online classes, and parental coping styles all affect parental mental health. The results suggest that, at a time when online delivery is becoming socially acceptable, attention must be paid to the risk of mental illness it poses to parents. In addition, policies and interventions need to be developed to increase parental acceptance of online delivery. It is hoped that this study can provide effective guidance on parental mental health issues in the post-pandemic era and the emerging wave of online education. In addition, the results of this study are based on a relatively large sample drawn from a randomized whole group and may partially reflect the mental health characteristics of parents of school-aged children aged 6‒13 years in China between pandemics and, to some extent, represent the sociological characteristics of parents suffering from mental health problems under the pressure of online delivery. The present results may serve as a reference for countries with similar cultural backgrounds.

However, our study has several limitations. First, this study is a cross-sectional survey limited in its ability to provide longitudinal judgments of the development of parental mental disorder characteristics, and longitudinal prospective observations may be considered in the future. In addition, the parenting stress, general mental health, and depression scales included in the survey contain a wide range of behaviors of varying clinical relevance, and some atypical behaviors may not be captured by these scales. Furthermore, there is a significant imbalance in group sizes between children with normal ADHD and those with other types of ADHD, which might affect the generalizability and precision of our findings. This imbalance highlights the need for larger sample sizes for each ADHD subtype in future research. Despite combining all other types of ADHD into one group for analysis, the imbalance remains, and this issue should be addressed in future studies.

Few reports are available on parents’ mental health factors against the background of long-term online teaching during COVID-19. Therefore, in this study, we conducted a multifactorial survey on the impact of parents’ attitudes and coping styles on their mental health in this context. The results showed that during the COVID-19 pandemic in China, facing the long-term online teaching mode, parents of senior children and children with ADHD showed a higher risk of depression and other psychological disorders due to excessive worry and anxiety. In addition, there was a close relationship between parents’ subjective attitudes and behavioral patterns and their mental health status: parents who adopted a positive coping style were relatively less susceptible to the negative impact of both the pandemic and online teaching, so they gradually adapted to their children’s online teaching mode and provided guidance to varying degrees. Subjectively, parents who did not agree with online teaching had a better mental health status compared to parents who agreed with online courses. The findings of this work can provide practical guidance on parental mental health issues in the post-pandemic era and the emerging wave of online education, with a focus on the stresses that online classes induce in parents, improving parental acceptance of online classes and their mental health, and providing further psychological relief measures and health programs for different groups of students and parents.

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author, [Liu], upon reasonable request.

Zhu, N. et al. A novel corona-virus from patients with pneumonia in China, 2019. N. Engl. J. Med. 382 (8), 727–733. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2001017 (2020).

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Drosten, C. et al. Identification of a novel coronavirus in patients with severe acute respir-atory syndrome. N. Engl. J. Med. 348 (20), 1967–1976. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa030747 (2003).

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Ksiazek, T. G. et al. A novel coronavirus associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome. N. Engl. J. Med. 348 (20), 1953–1966. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa030781 (2003).

Zaki, A. M. et al. Isola-tion of a novel coronavirus from a man with pneumonia in Saudi Arabia. N. Engl. J. Med. 367 (19), 1814–1820. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1211721 (2012).

World Health Organization, 2020. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Situation Report-55. World Health Organ-ization. https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel - coronavirus-2019/situation-reports [Accessed on Mar. 16, 2020].

Fry, K. E-learning markets and providers: Some issues and prospects. Educ. Train. 43 (4/5), 233–239. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000005484 (2001).

Article   Google Scholar  

Hrastinski, S. Asynchronous and synchronous e-learning. Educ. Quart. 31 (4), 51–55 (2008).

Google Scholar  

Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2009). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies.

Tallent-Runnels, M. K. et al. Teaching courses online: A review of the research. Rev. Educ. Res. 76 (1), 93–135. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543076001093 (2006).

Joshi, O. et al. Benefits and challenges of online instruction in agriculture and natural resource education. Interact. Learn. Environ. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1725896 (2020).

Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. Educause Review, ( March 27, 2020).

Bozkurt, A. & Sharma, R. C. Emergency remote teaching in a time of global crisis due to Corona Virus pandemic. Asian J. Dist. Educ. 15 (1), i–iv (2020).

Branch, R. M. & Dousay, T. A. Survey of instructional development models 5th edn. (Association for Educational Communications and Technology, UK, 2015).

Vlachopoulos, D. COVID-19: Threat or opportunity for online education. High. Learn. Res. Commun. 10 (1), 2 (2020).

Tomasik, M. J., Helbling, L. A. & Moser, U. Educational gains of in-person vs. distance learning in primary and secondary schools: A natural experiment during the COVID-19 pandemic school closures in Switzerland. Int. J. Psychol. 56 , 566–576. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12728 (2020).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Blume, F., Schmidt, A., Kramer, A. C., Schmiedek, F. & Neubauer, A. B. Homeschooling during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: the role of students’ trait self-regulation and task attributes of daily learning tasks for students’ daily self-regulation. Z. Erzieh. 24 , 367–391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11618-021-01011-w (2021).

Manca, S. & Delfino, M. Adapting educational practices in emergency remote education: continuity and change from a student perspective. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 2021 , 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13098 (2021).

Bonal, X. & González, S. The impact of lockdown on the learning gap: Family and school divisions in times of crisis. Int. Rev. Educ. 66 , 635–655. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11159-020-09860-z (2020).

Savage, M. J. et al. Mental health and movement behaviour during the COVID-19 pandemic in UKuniversity students: Pro-spective cohort study. Ment. Health Phys. Act. 19 , 100357 (2020).

Khan, A. H. et al. The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on mentalhealth & wellbeing among home-quarantined Bangladeshi students: Across-sectional pilot study. J. Affect. Disord. 277 , 121–128 (2020).

Jiang, R. Knowledge, attitudes and mental health of university stu-dents during the COVID-19 pandemic in China. Child. Youth Serv. Rev. 119 , 105494 (2020).

Essadek, A. & Rabeyron, T. Mental health of French students during the Covid-19 pandemic. J. Affect. Disord. 277 , 392–393 (2020).

Kaparounaki, C. K. et al. University students’mental health amidst the COVID-19 quarantine in Greece. Psychiatry Res. 290 , 113111 (2020).

Copeland, W. E. et al. Impact of COVID on collegestudent mental health and wellness. J. Am. Acad. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry 60 (1), 134–141 (2020).

Soykan, E. Views of students’, teachers’ and parents on the tablet computer usage in education. Cypriot J. Educ. Sci. 10 (3), 228–228 (2015).

Wößmann, L. et al. Bildung in der Coronakrise: Wie haben die Schulkinder Die Zeit der Schulschließungen Verbracht, und welche Bildungsmaßnahmen Befürworten die Deutschen?. Ifo Schnelldienst 73 , 25–39 (2020).

Pelikan, E. R. et al. Learning during COVID-19: the role of self-regulated learning, motivation, and procrastination for perceived competence. Z. Erzieh. 24 , 393–418. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11618-021-01002-x (2021).

Hale, L., Troxel, W. & Buysse, D. J. Sleep health: An opportunity for public health to address health equity. Annu. Rev. Public Health 41 (1), 81–99 (2020).

Jiao, W. Y. et al. Behavioral and emotional disorders in children during the COVID-19 epidemic. J. Pediatr. 221 , 264–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2020.03.013 (2020).

Hai, T., Swansburg, R., MacMaster, F. P. & Lemay, J. F. Impact of COVID-19 on educational services in Canadian children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Front. Educ. 6 , 614181. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.614181 (2021).

Tessarollo, V. et al. Distance learning in children with and without ADHD: A case-control study during the COVID-19 pandemic. J. Attent. Disord. 26 , 902–914. https://doi.org/10.1177/10870547211027640 (2022).

Hasler-Waters, L., Menchaca, M. P. & Borup, J. Parental Involvement in K-12 Online and Blended Learning. In Handbook of Research on K-12 Online and Blended Learning (eds Kennedy, K. & Ferdig, R. E.) 303–324 (ETC Press, 2014).

Killgore, W. D. S., Cloonan, S. A., Taylor, E. C. & Dailey, N. S. Loneliness: A signature mental health concern in the era of COVID-19. Psychiatry Res. 290 , 113117 (2020).

Xin, M. et al. Negative cognitive and psychological correlates of mandatory quarantine during the initial COVID-19 outbreak in China. Am. Psychol. 75 (5), 607–617 (2020).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Holt-Lunstad, J., Smith, T. B., Baker, M., Harris, T. & Stephenson, D. Loneliness and social isolation as risk factors for mortality: A meta-analytic review. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 10 (2), 227–237 (2015).

Tian, H. et al. An investigation of transmission control measures during the first 50 days of the COVID-19 epidemic in China. Science 368 (6491), 638–642 (2020).

Article   ADS   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Xie Z, Yang J. Autonomous learning of elementary students at home during the COVID-19 epidemic: A case study of the second elementary school in Daxie, Ningbo, Zhejiang Province, China. Ningbo, Zhejiang Province, China (March 15, 2020), 2020.

Zhang, W. et al. Suspending classes without stopping learning: China’s education emergency management policy in the COVID-19 outbreak. J. Risk Financ. Manag. 13 (3), 55 (2020).

Hair, J. F. et al. Multivariate Data Analysis 7th edn. (Pearson Prentice Hall, 2010).

Nunnally, J. C. & Bernstein, I. H. The assessment of reliability. Psychometric Theory 3 , 248–292 (1994).

Bartlett, J. E., Kotrlik, J. W. & Higgins, C. C. Organizational research: Determining appropriate sample size in survey research. Inf. Technol. Learn. Perform. J. 19 , 43–50 (2001).

Gau, S. S. F. et al. Psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the Swanson, Nolan, and Pelham, version IV scale–parent form. Int. J. Methods Psychiatric Res. 17 (1), 35–44. https://doi.org/10.1002/mpr.237 (2008).

Qin, Z. et al. Research and analysis on the optimal cutoff value of Chinese version PHQ-9 for screening depression in different populations. J. Clin. Digest. Dis. 31 (5), 4 (2019).

Wang, W. et al. The optimal cutoff values and screening characteristics of different scoring methods in 12 general health questionnaires. Chin. J. Psychiatry 45 (6), 5 (2012).

Qin, X. et al. A study on parental stress and related factors in mothers of children with autism. Chin. J. Ment. Health 23 (009), 629–633 (2009).

Wang, C. et al. A longitudinal study on the mental health of general population during the COVID-19 epidemic in China. Brain Behav. Immun. 87 , 40–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbi.2020.04.028 (2020).

González-Estrada, E. & Cosmes, W. Shapiro–Wilk test for skew normal distributions based on data transformations. J. Statist. Comput. Simul. 89 (17), 3258–3272 (2019).

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Lyerly, S. B. The average Spearman rank correlation coefficient. Psychometrika 17 (4), 421–428 (1952).

Kumari, T. & Shukla, V. Covid-19: Towards confronting an unprecedented pandemic. Int. J. Biol. Innov. 2 (1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.46505/IJBI.2020.2101 (2020).

Chakraborty, I. & Maity, P. COVID-19 outbreak: Migration, effects on society, global environment and prevention. Sci. Total Environ. 728 , 138882 (2020).

Adedoyin, O. B. & Soykan, E. Covid-19 pandemic and online learning: the challenges and opportunities. Interact. Learn. Environ. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1813180 (2020).

Sun, S. (2020, August 22). Rural primary education in Cambodia during the pandemic: Challenges and solutions. Cambodian Education Forum. https://cefcambodia.com/2020/08/22/rural-primary-education-in-cambodia-during-the-pandemic-challenges-and-solutions/ .

Brown, R. T. et al. Prevalence and assessment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in primary settings. Pediatrics. 107 , 43 (2001).

Scahill, L. & Schwab-Stone, M. Epidemiology of ADHD in school-age children. Child. Adolesc. Psychiatr Clin. N. Am. 9 , 541–555 (2000).

Agha, S. S., Zammit, S., Thapar, A. & Langley, K. Maternal psychopathology and offspring clinical outcome: A four-year follow-up of boys with ADHD. Eur. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-016-0873-y (2016).

August, G. J., Realmunto, G. M., MacDonald, A. W. III., Nugent, S. M. & Crosby, R. Prevalence of ADHD and comorbid disorders among elementary school children screened for disruptive behavior. J. Abnormal Child. Psychol. 24 , 571–595 (1996).

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Frick, P. J., Silverthorn, P. & Evans, C. Assessment of child-hood anxiety using structured interviews: Patterns of agreementamong informants and association with maternal anxiety. Psychol. Assess. 6 , 372–379 (1994).

Edelbrock, C., Costello, A. J., Dulcan, M. K., Conover, N. C. & Kala, R. Parent–child agreement on child psychiatricsymptoms via structured interview. J. Child. Psychol. Psychiatry 27 , 181–190 (1986).

Verhulst, F. C., Althaus, M. & Berden, F. M. G. The child assessment schedule: Parent child agreement and validity measures. J. Child. Psychol. Psychiatry 28 , 455–466 (1987).

Nye, C., Turner, H. & Schwartz, J. Approaches to parent involvement for improving the academic performance of elementary school age children. Campbell Syst. Rev. 2 (1), 1–49. https://doi.org/10.4073/csr.2006.4 (2006).

Eccles, J. S. & Harold, R. D. Parent-school involvement during the early adolescent years. Teach. Coll. Record 94 (3), 568–658 (1993).

Liu, Y., Gayle, A. A., Wilder-Smith, A. & Rocklöv, J. The reproductive number of COVID-19 is higher compared to SARS coronavirus. J. Travel Med. 76 , 71–76 (2020).

Mirzaei, M., Yasini Ardekani, S. M., Mirzaei, M. & Dehghani, A. Prevalence of depression, anxiety and stress among adult population: Results of Yazd health study. Iran. J. Psychiatry 14 (2), 137–146 (2019).

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Pekrun, R., Lichtenfeld, S., Marsh, H. W., Murayama, K. & Goetz, T. Achievement emotions and academic performance: Longitudinal models of reciprocal effects. Child Dev. 88 (5), 1653–1670 (2017).

Kellaghan, T., Sloane, K., Alvarez, B. & Bloom, B. S. The Home Environment and School Learning: Promoting Parental Involvement in the Education of Children (Jossey-Bass, 1993).

Pratama, A. R. & Firmansyah, F. M. Disengaged, positive, or negative: Parents’ attitudes toward learning from home amid COVID-19 pandemic. J. Child. Fam. Stud. 30 (7), 1803–1812 (2021).

Fishel, M. & Ramirez, L. Evidence-based parent involvement interventions with school-aged children. School Psychol. Quart. 20 (4), 371. https://doi.org/10.1521/scpq.2005.20.4.371 (2005).

Gross, D. et al. What is parent engagement in early learning? Depends who you ask. J. Child. Fam. Stud. 29 (3), 747–760. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-019-01680-6 (2020).

Topor, D. R., Keane, S. P., Shelton, T. L. & Calkins, S. D. Parent involvement and student academic performance: a multiple mediational analysis. J. Prevent. Intervent. Commun. 38 (3), 183–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/10852352.2010.486297 (2010).

Plowman, L. & Stephen, C. Children, play, and computers in pre-school education. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 36 (2), 145–157. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2005.00449.x (2005).

Erdogan, N. I., Johnson, J. E., Dong, P. I. & Qiu, Z. Do parents prefer digital play? Examination of parental preferences and beliefs in four nations. Early Childh. Educ. J. 47 , 131–142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-018-0901-2 (2019).

Ryan, R. M. & Deci, E. L. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101860 (2020).

Wigfield, A. & Eccles, J. S. Expectancy–value theory of achievement motivation. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 25 (1), 68–81 (2000).

Senko, C., Hulleman, C. S. & Harackiewicz, J. M. Achievement goal theory at the crossroads: Old controversies, current challenges, and new directions. Educ. Psychol. 46 (1), 26–47 (2011).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We gratefully acknowledge the support of the Medical Science and Technology Plan Project in Ningbo, Zhejiang Province, China (2020Y22), as well as supports from the Medical and Health Technology of Zhejiang Province, China (2021KY330) and the Ningbo Natural Science Foundation, Zhejiang Province, China (202003N4262).

Author information

These authors contributed equally: Fang Cheng and Lixian Chen.

Authors and Affiliations

Department of Pediatric Psychology, Ningbo Kangning Hospital, Ningbo, 315201, Zhejiang, China

Fang Cheng, Jincheng Li, Hongying Yang & Lingjiang Liu

The Second People’s Hospital of Yuhuan, Zhejiang, China

Lixian Chen

Department of General Medicine, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430060, Hubei, China

Huabing Xie

Huizhen Academy, NingBo, Zhejiang, China

Chenglan Wang & Ruonan Duan

Gaoqiao Central Primary School, Haishu, Ningbo, Zhejiang, China

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

F.C., L.C., and H.X. conceived and designed the experiments. C.W. and R.D. performed the experiments and collected data. D.C. and J.L. analyzed the data. H.Y. and L.L. contributed to the writing of the manuscript and provided critical revisions that addressed important intellectual content. All authors discussed the results and implications and commented on the manuscript at all stages. *H.Y. and L.L. also served as corresponding authors, overseeing the project coordination and ensuring the integrity of the work from inception to published article. F.C. and L.C. contributed equally to this work due to L.C. significant contributions in completing the revisions.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Hongying Yang or Lingjiang Liu .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This survey was conducted following the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. The following information was supplied relating to ethical approvals (i.e., approving body and any reference numbers): The Ningbo Kangning Hospital granted Ethical approval to carry out the study within its facilities (Ethical Application Ref. No.: NBKNYY-2021-LC-1, 2021.3.15–2024.3.14).

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Cheng, F., Chen, L., Xie, H. et al. Influence of parental attitudes and coping styles on mental health during online teaching in the COVID-19 pandemic. Sci Rep 14 , 20375 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-71314-5

Download citation

Received : 28 February 2024

Accepted : 27 August 2024

Published : 02 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-71314-5

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Online delivery
• Parenting stress
• Coronavirus,
• Coping styles
• Parental mental health

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines . If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.