Parental Socialization Based on Warmth and Strictness Among Adolescents and Young Adults: Which Parenting Dimension is Related to Greater Adjustment?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study aims to examine parental socialization and adjustment in adolescents and adult children. Participants included 610 adolescents aged 12 to 18 years ( M = 16.56; SD = 1.69) and 608 young adults aged 19 to 35 years ( M = 23.60; SD = 3.72) from Spain. Parental socialization was assessed through warmth and strictness. Child adjustment was assessed though self-esteem, emotional self-concept, nervousness, and achievement values. Correlation and regression analyses were conducted. Results from predictive models revealed that warmth and strictness were significant predictors of child adjustment, although they showed different directionality. Parental warmth was always identified as a significant predictor: the higher the parental warmth, the higher the emotional self-concept, self-esteem, and achievement, and the lower the nervousness. On the contrary, parental strictness did not predict adjustment and was even a significantly negative predictor of self-esteem and emotional self-concept. In addition and contrary to classical findings from mostly European-American samples, the present findings seem to suggest that parental strictness is unnecessary or even detrimental, while parental warmth offers a significant and beneficial contribution to adjustment. Our findings suggest that even though family is considered less important in young adulthood because parenting has ended, the years of socialization may also explain the adjustment of the adult child.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".