Cited by 121Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentPsychometric Methodologies and TestingParental Involvement in Education

Dimensionality of helicopter parenting and relations to emotional, decision-making, and academic functioning in emerging adults

Luebbe, Aaron M., Mancini, Kathryn J., Kiel, Elizabeth J., Spangler, Brooke R., Semlak, Julie L., Fussner, Lauren M.·2018·Assessment

Abstract

The current study tests the underlying structure of a multidimensional construct of helicopter parenting (HP), assesses reliability of the construct, replicates past relations of HP to poor emotional functioning, and expands the literature to investigate links of HP to emerging adults' decision-making and academic functioning. A sample of 377 emerging adults (66% female; ages 17-30; 88% European American) were administered several items assessing HP as well as measures of other parenting behaviors, depression, anxiety, decision-making style, grade point average, and academic functioning. Exploratory factor analysis results suggested a four-factor, 23-item measure that encompassed varying levels of parental involvement in the personal and professional lives of their children. A bifactor model was also fit to the data and suggested the presence of a reliable overarching HP factor in addition to three reliable subfactors. The fourth subfactor was not reliable and item variances were subsumed by the general HP factor. HP was found to be distinct from, but correlated in expected ways with, other reports of parenting behavior. HP was also associated with poorer functioning in emotional functioning, decision making, and academic functioning. Parents' information-seeking behaviors, when done in absences of other HP behaviors, were associated with better decision making and academic functioning.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1073191116665907

Cites

55 of 55 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.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Luebbe, A. M., Mancini, K. J., Kiel, E. J., Spangler, B. R., Semlak, J. L., & Fussner, L. M.
Affiliations
  • Miami University (US)
  • Clark State Community College (US)
Corresponding author
Luebbe, Aaron M.
Venue
Assessment
Published
2016-08-24
Volume
25
Issue
7
Pages
841-857
ISSN
  • 1073-1911 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-3489
OpenAlex
W2516884230
Cited by
121
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1
FWCI
6.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Assessment (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Education › Parental Involvement in Education
Keywords
helicopter parenting, emerging adults, emotional functioning, depression, anxiety, decision-making styles, academic functioning, grade point average, parental involvement, parental behavior, bifactor model, construct reliability, parental information seeking
MeSH terms
Academic Success, Adolescent, Adult, Anxiety, Decision Making, Depression, Emotions, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Human Development, Male, Reproducibility of Results, Parenting, Personal Autonomy, Young Adult

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