Parental Expectations, Parenting Styles, and Adolescent Well-Being: A Narrative Synthesis ()
1. Introduction
Adolescence is an important stage of life marked by rapid physical, cognitive, and emotional development, in which school, family, and mental health often intersect, and finding balance can have a strong effect on how adolescents develop. Many students face academic pressure, and the role of parents—whether they amplify or help alleviate this pressure—is an important part of understanding adolescent well-being. Past studies have looked at how stress, parenting styles, and parental involvement affect outcomes including grades, anxiety, and depression. While some research shows that high expectations can motivate students, other work suggests that too much pressure can harm mental health. Collectively, these findings indicate that both the level of parental expectation and the emotional quality of parental support shape adolescents’ experiences of achievement and stress. Furthermore, cross-cultural studies suggest that parenting practices are also influenced by broader social norms and cultural values, which may moderate their effects on adolescents’ adjustment. Given these patterns, there is a need for an integrated understanding of how expectations, parenting style, and emotional support jointly influence adolescent development across contexts.
In this paper, parental expectations refer to the standards and performance goals that parents hold for their children’s academic or behavioral outcomes. Parenting styles describe the general emotional climate of parent–child interaction—typically categorized as authoritative (high warmth, high structure), authoritarian (low warmth, high control), permissive (high warmth, low control), or neglectful (low warmth, low control). Parental involvement captures the degree to which parents participate in their child’s educational and daily life activities, including supervision, communication, and emotional support. Clarifying these distinctions is crucial because they shape how pressure and warmth combine to influence adolescents’ well-being.
A theoretically informed lens helps to clarify why expectations and support matter. Ecological Systems Theory positions parents within the adolescent’s most proximal developmental context, where daily interactions shape academic and emotional adjustment (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). Complementing this, Self-Determination Theory proposes that adolescents thrive when the family environment supports three basic psychological needs—autonomy, competence, and relatedness—offering a mechanism for how parental warmth and structure can buffer stress linked to high expectations (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Cross-cultural work further indicates both commonalities and boundary conditions: meta-analytic evidence shows that the advantages of authoritative approaches are generally observed across cultural groups, though effect sizes vary with cultural value orientations (Pinquart & Kauser, 2018), and recent reviews emphasize how broader social norms shape the meaning of “support” and “control” in different societies (Lansford, 2022). Framing the literature within these models helps explain when parental aspirations align with adolescents’ needs and when pressure may increase risk.
The following sections synthesize empirical research through this framework, highlighting how different parenting dynamics influence stress, mental health, and academic outcomes across cultural settings.
This paper first reviews prior research on academic stress and parental expectations. Next, it examines how parental warmth and support influence mental health outcomes. Finally, it considers limitations in the current research and outlines future directions for study.
2. Methods
Peer-reviewed articles were identified through PsycINFO, PubMed, and Google Scholar. The search covered studies published in English between 2010 and 2024 and used search terms including “adolescent stress”, “parental expectations”, “parenting style”, “parental warmth”, “academic achievement”, and “cultural differences”. Studies were included if they examined adolescents ages 12 - 18, assessed outcomes such as stress, anxiety, depression, or academic performance, and addressed parental involvement, expectations, or parenting style. Both cross-sectional and longitudinal designs were included.
Although the primary focus was on recent literature, several seminal studies (Dornbusch et al., 1987) were retained because they introduced key typologies of parenting styles that remain foundational to contemporary frameworks. Including such classic sources ensured conceptual continuity with modern research and supported historical comparisons across decades.
In line with recommended practices for narrative reviews, we emphasized conceptual integration over quantitative aggregation, screening studies for clear operationalization, validated measures, and adequate demographic reporting (Baumeister & Leary, 1997; Snyder, 2019). The search window spanned 2000 to 2024 and English-language articles were prioritized to maintain construct consistency for terms such as authoritative and permissive. When multiple reports relied on the same cohort, we retained the most comprehensive analysis. This review followed a narrative synthesis approach, emphasizing patterns and theoretical interpretations rather than statistical effect sizes. Studies were evaluated in relation to sample context, cultural background, and socioeconomic characteristics, allowing for the identification of contextual moderators rather than meta-analytic estimates. To situate stress findings in the broader youth literature, we also considered high-quality meta-analyses linking stress exposures to adolescent depression, which contextualize risk pathways relevant to parenting and expectations (LeMoult et al., 2020).
For each study, key characteristics: including sample size, demographic composition, cultural context, and measurement approaches, were systematically extracted. Particular attention was paid to how parental expectations, involvement, and parenting styles were operationally defined across studies to ensure conceptual consistency. Findings were synthesized using a narrative, qualitative approach to identify patterns and divergences across the literature. Emphasis was placed on methodological strengths and limitations, as well as the extent to which findings could be generalized across different cultural and socioeconomic settings.
2.1. Academic Stress, Parental Influence, and Adolescent
Depression
Research on academic stress suggests that high achievement may come with the cost of a student’s well-being. Kapali et al. (2019) found that many students experience moderate to high levels of stress, and even strong parental relationships do little to lower this pressure. High achievers report feeling more stressed, most likely because of the constant expectations and pressure to maintain performance. Ma et al. (2018) also showed that high expectations encouraged better academic results, but these good outcomes often coincided with more depressive symptoms. More recently, Haspolat & Yalçın (2023) found that among high-achieving Turkish students, parental achievement pressure was significantly related to anxiety and depression, mediated by academic expectation stress and perfectionism. Similarly, in a Chinese sample, Wu et al. (2021) demonstrated that parents’ educational anxiety was linked to adolescents’ academic burnout through the mechanism of parental burnout and weakened family function. Together, these studies suggest that success can create environments that foster high stress when success is defined primarily by meeting parental expectations. A recent meta-analysis also found that lower parental educational involvement was linked to higher levels of depressive symptoms in adolescents (Liu et al., 2024).
Parenting styles shape how these pressures play out. Pinquart (2015) showed that authoritative parenting, which combines warmth and control, is linked to stronger academic performance, while harsh or neglectful parenting hinders a child’s achievement. Dornbusch et al. (1987) supported this finding through a study of over 8,000 high school students, showing that adolescents with authoritative parents consistently earned higher GPAs than peers with authoritarian or permissive parents. This large sample provides strong evidence that the style of parental involvement matters as much as the amount. One explanation for this pattern may be that authoritative parents provide structure and guidance while still allowing independence, enabling students to take responsibility for their work without feeling overwhelmed. In contrast, authoritarian parents may focus too heavily on discipline and control, which can increase pressure without providing the emotional support needed for resilience. Recent meta-analytic work (Goagoses et al., 2022) supports this pattern, showing that positive parenting dimensions (e.g., warmth and responsive structure) are associated with lower internalizing problems and higher academic resilience in adolescents.
Beyond immediate academic outcomes, these pressures have clear emotional consequences. Adolescents who perceive parental approval as contingent on performance often internalize high expectations, which can foster perfectionism and feelings of conditional self-worth (Soenens et al., 2010). Such psychological mechanisms help explain why high expectations, while motivating, can also heighten anxiety and depressive symptoms when success becomes tied to identity validation rather than personal growth. In this way, parental involvement has both motivational and emotional dimensions—its benefits depend on how expectations are expressed and whether they are accompanied by warmth and autonomy support.
Overall, the evidence suggests that balanced parental guidance—characterized by warmth, reasonable expectations, and support for autonomy—fosters academic motivation and emotional resilience. In contrast, excessive pressure or inconsistent parental control can elevate stress, diminish self-efficacy, and weaken emotional well-being.
2.2. Parenting Styles, Stress, and Anxiety
Anxiety outcomes provide another dimension of parenting effects. Yaffe (2021) suggested that exposure to harsh and overcontrolling parenting was associated with higher rates of anxiety, especially social anxiety, while the use of physical punishment further increased the risk of generalized anxiety disorders. In Yaffe’s study of over 1000 adolescents, teens who experienced frequent physical punishment were significantly more likely to meet diagnostic criteria for generalized anxiety disorder compared to peers whose parents used supportive yet structured approaches. These results underscore that when parents model fear or avoidance, adolescents may internalize and replicate these maladaptive coping patterns.
Arbel et al. (2020) added nuance to this picture by showing that the link between parenting stress and adolescent outcomes followed a U-shaped association: moderate stress could sometimes be beneficial if mothers were highly attuned to their children, while both very low and very high levels of stress were associated with greater emotional problems. This finding suggests that not all stress is inherently harmful; rather, its impact depends on how parents manage and communicate it.
Butterfield et al. (2021) extended these findings by showing that teens who perceived their mothers as warm exhibited calmer neural responses to criticism and demonstrated better emotional control two years later, along with fewer symptoms of anxiety and depression. Taken together, Yaffe’s evidence of heightened risk under harsh parenting, Arbel’s demonstration that moderate stress can be adaptive, and Butterfield’s longitudinal data on maternal warmth converge to suggest that adolescent anxiety is shaped less by the presence of stress itself and more by how parents balance control, attunement, and warmth.
Recent theoretical work further clarifies why these effects occur. According to self-determination and emotional-security models, parenting that is overly controlling or inconsistent undermines adolescents’ sense of autonomy and competence, whereas warmth and structure promote emotional regulation and self-efficacy. Bülow et al. (2022) found that parental warmth and autonomy support predicted better adolescent well-being across most families, underscoring that these dimensions function as universal ingredients of healthy parenting. Romero-Acosta et al. (2021) similarly reported that adolescents exposed to neglectful or authoritarian parenting showed significantly higher anxiety and depressive symptoms than those with authoritative parents, highlighting that emotional support is essential for mental health. Together, these findings suggest that the pathway from parenting style to adolescent anxiety operates through adolescents’ regulation of self-worth and emotional security. While warmth and structure generally promote resilience, their expression and impact may vary across cultural contexts that differ in norms around control and emotional expression.
2.3. Cultural Contexts
Cultural and socioeconomic factors jointly shape how parenting influences adolescent development. While cultural norms determine the meanings of parental warmth and control, socioeconomic status (SES) determines the resources and stressors that shape how these styles are expressed. According to the Family Stress and Family Investment Models (Conger & Donnellan, 2007; Roubinov & Boyce, 2017), lower SES constrains parental capacity to provide emotional and cognitive support, whereas higher SES allows for greater parental investment in enrichment activities and consistent warmth. These models suggest that SES does not simply co-occur with parenting style—it alters the mechanisms through which expectations and involvement affect adolescent outcomes.
Empirical work supports this theoretical view. Using data from over 7,000 Chinese adolescents, Yang, Hu, & Li (2022) found that higher family SES predicted better mental health through improved parent–child and peer relationships, while low SES families experienced greater psychological strain. Their findings highlight that structural resources and relational dynamics intersect in shaping well-being, indicating that socioeconomic context is an essential moderator in the parenting–outcome link. Similarly, Fiorini & Keane (2014) demonstrated that differences in parental investment partially explain socioeconomic disparities in cognitive and noncognitive development.
At the cultural level, cross-national studies show that although authoritative parenting generally promotes optimal outcomes, its expression and effectiveness depend on societal values. In collectivist cultures, parental control is often perceived as care and guidance rather than restriction, which may buffer some of the negative emotional effects associated with control in individualistic settings. Nonetheless, the benefits of warmth and autonomy support appear broadly universal across contexts.
Taken together, these findings suggest that parenting must be interpreted within its cultural and socioeconomic ecology. Authoritative practices—balancing warmth, structure, and autonomy—remain effective across societies, but their impact is shaped by the opportunities, constraints, and meanings afforded by cultural and economic environments.
3. Discussion
The studies reviewed collectively demonstrate that adolescent development is shaped by the ongoing tension between academic expectations and emotional support from parents. One possible reason high expectations often increase stress and depression is that adolescents may come to view achievement as a reflection of their self-worth, especially when success is strongly tied to parental approval. This relationship may be explained by psychological mechanisms such as perfectionism and contingent self-worth. Adolescents who internalize parental standards often tie their self-esteem to achievement outcomes, creating vulnerability to anxiety and depression when expectations are unmet. Recent evidence supports this mechanism: perfectionism has been identified as a key mediator between parental pressure and adolescent distress, particularly when reinforced by social comparison and achievement-oriented family environments (Livazović & Kuzmanović, 2022; Bien et al., 2025). Such patterns highlight how well-intentioned parental ambition can inadvertently foster maladaptive coping tendencies that undermine well-being. Meta-analytic data indicate that parenting warmth shows a medium positive association with adolescent academic achievement (r ≈ .25) and a comparable negative association with internalizing symptoms such as depression and anxiety (r ≈ −.22), underscoring that supportive parenting predicts both scholastic and emotional resilience (Pinquart, 2015; Pinquart, 2017). At the same time, authoritative parenting may lead to better outcomes because its combination of warmth and structure provides both external guidance and internal emotional regulation. This interpretation is supported by studies such as Butterfield et al. (2021), which showed that maternal warmth was associated with calmer neural responses to criticism, suggesting a potential biological mechanism through which warmth protects against anxiety and depression.
Although cultural differences shape how parenting practices are expressed, many core patterns appear consistent across groups. This likely reflects the fact that adolescents share fundamental psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Cultural norms may influence the expression of these needs—for example, in societies where respect for authority is emphasized, authoritarian behaviors may be perceived as care rather than control—but the underlying importance of emotional support and balanced structure remains universal. Although older foundational studies such as Dornbusch et al. (1987) are occasionally cited, they remain essential benchmarks for understanding how later work has replicated and extended these findings. Comparative evidence across regions—such as East Asian versus Western samples—suggests broadly consistent benefits of warmth and structure but varying tolerance for parental control. This contrast highlights that the same parenting dimensions may yield different outcomes depending on cultural emphasis on obedience or autonomy. Beyond parental influences, peer relationships also play a critical role in adolescent well-being. Supportive friendships and peer acceptance can buffer the effects of academic pressure and reduce symptoms of anxiety and depression (König et al., 2023; Alsarrani et al., 2022). Integrating peer and parental contexts in future analyses would provide a fuller understanding of how these social systems interact to shape adolescent adjustment.
Taken together, the evidence indicates that the mechanisms linking parenting to adolescent outcomes operate at both psychological and biological levels. Parental expectations influence how adolescents evaluate themselves and experience pressure, whereas warmth and structure provide protective frameworks that help regulate stress and foster resilience. Understanding this interplay between external expectations and internal coping capacities offers valuable insight into how families can promote both academic achievement and emotional well-being during adolescence.
4. Limitations
Several limitations exist in the current body of research. First, many studies rely on self-report data, which can be influenced by adolescents’ current emotional states and social desirability bias. Second, most research focuses on a single cultural or regional group, which limits the generalizability of findings to broader populations. Third, the evidence is largely correlational rather than causal, meaning it cannot be concluded that parenting style directly causes changes in adolescent behavior. It is equally plausible that adolescents’ behaviors influence parental responses, or that unmeasured contextual factors affect both. Finally, fathers and non-parental caregivers remain underrepresented in this literature, which constrains understanding of diverse family dynamics and caregiving roles.
5. Future Studies
Future research should explore the roles of fathers and other caregivers, as well as how parental influence evolves from early to late adolescence. Longitudinal and cross-cultural designs are needed to clarify whether parental warmth is universally protective or culturally moderated in its benefits for adolescents. Another important direction involves examining students in highly competitive academic settings, where school-based interventions that actively engage parents could be tested to assess how family support mitigates academic pressure. In addition, future studies should integrate biological and physiological indicators, such as stress hormone levels or neuroimaging measures, to connect parenting styles more directly with adolescents’ emotional regulation and stress response systems. Future studies should also incorporate adolescents’ own perspectives through qualitative interviews or mixed-method designs, capturing how teens interpret parental expectations and how these perceptions relate to their sense of autonomy and well-being.
6. Conclusion
Adolescence is a period during which school, family, and mental health interact in complex ways that shape long-term well-being. Across the reviewed research, it is clear that academic stress and parental expectations can motivate achievement but often at the cost of heightened stress and emotional strain. At the same time, studies show that parental warmth and genuine support serve as protective factors, buffering the negative effects of pressure and promoting better emotional control. Parenting styles play a critical role in this balance—authoritative parenting, with its blend of warmth and structure, consistently predicts the strongest academic and emotional outcomes, whereas harsh or neglectful styles are associated with greater risks for stress and anxiety. Finally, although cultural differences influence how parental involvement is expressed, the benefits of warmth, structure, and supportive engagement appear cross-culturally consistent. Taken together, these findings suggest that the way parents balance expectations and emotional support plays a decisive role in determining whether academic pressure fosters resilience and growth or undermines adolescents’ mental health. These findings underscore the importance of integrating parent-focused psychoeducation and school-based counseling programs that teach parents how to set supportive yet realistic expectations. Such interventions could help reduce achievement-related stress and promote healthier parent–child communication.