Helicopter parenting during emerging adulthood: Consequences for career identity and adaptability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explores the relationship between parental over involvement and the career development of emerging adults. Specifically, it investigates how emerging adults' career meta competencies of vocational identity formation and career adaptability relate to perceived helicopter parenting. Participants included 491 emerging adults studying in a Canadian University (74.1% female, average age = 20.4 years old). We begin by reviewing the commonalities between helicopter parenting and other parenting constructs and styles. Next, using structural equation modeling, we explore the relationships between perceived helicopter parenting and the components of vocational identity (exploration: in depth exploration, in breadth; commitment: career commitment, identification with commitment; and reconsideration: career self doubt, career flexibility) and career adaptability, as well as the relationships between identity components and career adaptability. Third, we explore the association between perceived helicopter parenting and identity status progress (i.e., achievement, foreclosure, moratorium, undifferentiated, and searching moratorium). Results indicate that individuals reporting higher levels of perceived helicopter parenting experience significantly lower levels of career adaptability and in-depth exploration. Furthermore, these individuals report higher levels of career self doubt and are more likely to be in the vocational identity status of searching moratorium. Limitations and future research directions are discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".