Cited by 40Attachment and Relationship DynamicsFamily Dynamics and RelationshipsChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development

Why people helicopter parent? An actor–partner interdependence study of maternal and paternal prevention/promotion focus and interpersonal/self-regret

Rousseau, Sofie, Scharf, Miri·2018·Journal of Social and Personal Relationships

Abstract

Helicopter parenting among parents of young adults has risen in the last few decades, especially in middle-class families, and is identified as a risk factor for offspring’s maladaptive adjustment. Using actor–partner interdependence modeling, this study investigated why mothers and fathers use helicopter parenting. More specifically, the study investigated how mothers’ and fathers’ characteristics (prevention focus, promotion focus, interpersonal regret, and self-regret) work together to predict their helicopter parenting. Questionnaires were collected from 96 families (mother, father, and young adults). The results revealed that higher levels of maternal and paternal prevention focus were related to higher levels helicopter parenting by mothers and fathers, respectively. In addition, higher levels of paternal interpersonal regret were associated with lower levels of helicopter parenting by fathers. Maternal prevention focus, promotion focus, and interpersonal regret were (indirectly) associated with paternal helicopter parenting. The results indicate that parental prevention and promotion focus may play a role in the etiology of helicopter parenting and may therefore be taken into account when addressing such parenting behavior. Further research is needed to deepen our understanding of the processes that shape the tendency to helicopter parent.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0265407517700514

Cites

62 of 62 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Bernstein G., 2010, UC Davis Law Review, 44, 1221
  2. Costa P. T., 1992, Revised NEO personality inventory (NEO PI-R) and NEO five-factor inventory (NEO FFI): Professional manual
  3. Dar Y., 1991, Contemporary issues in cross-cultural psychology, 322
  4. Gibbs N., 2009, Time Magazine, 20
  5. Hoff E., 1995, Handbook of parenting, vol. 2: Biology and ecology of parenting, 161
  6. Muthén L. K., 1998, Mplus user’s guide. seventh edition
  7. Olson D., 2008, FACES IV manual

Cited by

Still being checked.

Authors
Rousseau, S., & Scharf, M.
Affiliations
University of Haifa (IL)
Corresponding author
Rousseau, Sofie
Venue
Journal of Social and Personal Relationships
Published
2017-04-10
Volume
35
Issue
7
Pages
919-935
ISSN
  • 0265-4075 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-3608
OpenAlex
W2607148119
Cited by
40
References
62
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1
FWCI
3.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Social and Personal Relationships (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Family Dynamics and Relationships
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Keywords
helicopter parenting, prevention focus, promotion focus, maternal care, fathering, young adults, parental motivation, actor-partner interdependence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review