Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Wiley Open Access Collection logoLink to Wiley Open Access Collection
. 2026 Jun 3;39(3):e70060. doi: 10.1111/jcap.70060

Step by Step Into Adulthood: Predictors of Psychological Maturity in Adolescents

Ali Eryılmaz 1, Düşüm Başar‐Gençer 1,✉
PMCID: PMC13377656  PMID: 42233356

ABSTRACT

Background

Psychological maturity represents the evolution of meaning‐making systems from impulsive to self‐authoring minds. In the Turkish cultural context, understanding how internal regulatory mechanisms and paternal influences foster this developmental transition is crucial for adolescent mental health.

Methods

This correlational study included 271 high school students in Istanbul, Türkiye. Data were collected using the Psychological Maturity Scale, Adolescent–Parent Conflict Scale, Emotion Regulation Scale, and Positive Father Scale. Multiple linear regression was employed to analyze relationships.

Results

The regression model was statistically significant (F(3, 267) = 22.33, p < 0.001), explaining 20.1% of the variance in psychological maturity. Internal functional emotion regulation emerged as the strongest predictor (β = 0.326, p < 0.001), followed by adolescent–parent conflict (β = −0.197, p = 0.001) and positive father (β = 0.131, p = 0.020).

Findings

Psychological maturity is an interactive process where internal regulation serves as the important developmental architecture. While paternal support and internal regulation function as independent pathways to maturity, positive fathering provides a vital secure base that buffers the negative impact of conflict. Clinical interventions should prioritize both paternal engagement and adolescent regulatory skills to facilitate the transition to adult‐level maturity.

Keywords: adolescent–parent conflict, emotion regulation, positive father, psychological maturity

1. Introduction

Psychological maturity, conceptualized in literature as a mental organizational structure encompassing meaning and wisdom, refers to a multidimensional developmental process spanning an individual's lifespan (Bauger et al. 2021; Staudinger and Kunzmann 2005). This concept characterizes a broad theoretical spectrum ranging from the humanistic approaches to personality development of Maslow (1968, 1970) and Rogers (1961) to Erikson's (1982) psychosocial development theory, Loevinger's (1976) ego development, Kohlberg and Kramer's (1969) moral reasoning, and Kegan's (1982, 1994) meaning‐making system. According to Fossas (2019), the structural affinity between these various developmental theories points to a latent maturation process that is a synthesis of cognitive ability, deep reflection, and personality traits. From the perspective of adolescence and emerging adulthood, psychological maturity is represented by the competence to act independently in the face of internal and external challenges, to take responsibility, and to demonstrate functional skills even under the most destructive circumstances (Manukyan et al. 2015; Sen and Banerjee 2024). In this context, maturity signifies not only cognitive depth but also a moral and intellectual development embodying virtues such as emotional satisfaction, reflectivity, discernment, and dignity (Dermanova and Manukyan 2010).

Psychological maturation during the transition from adolescence to adulthood can be considered within the framework of Kegan's (1982) Subject–Object Theory as qualitative and structural changes in an individual's capacity to make meaning of the world. According to Kegan's model, adolescents generally progress from the Instrumental Mind (Stage 2), focused on their own needs, to the Socialized Mind (Stage 3), where the expectations of others and societal values are internalized, and finally to the Self‐Authoring Mind (Stage 4), where they construct their own value systems. The fundamental criterion of maturation in this process is the individual's ability to turn their emotions and impulses which they were previously subject to into objects and position themselves as the subject. That is, they develop an internal authority capable of evaluating and managing these impulses from an external perspective. Therefore, the adolescent's ability to utilize internal functional emotion regulation strategies and the quality of the relationship established with parents emerge as important determinants in attaining these levels of cognitive and emotional complexity, in other words, in maturing psychologically.

Kegan (1994) argued that psychological maturity is defined not by age, but by how individuals make meaning of the world and relate to themselves and others. From this perspective, the quality of adolescents' relationships with their parents is directly linked to their psychological maturity. In Kegan's framework, development is driven by subject–object transformation: things once taken as subject become object, thereby becoming open to reflection and critique. This shift allows adolescents to question and evaluate parental expectations, which naturally can lead to conflict.

Although nearly half of Turkish youth aged 12–18 report experiencing no conflict with family members (APT 2013), the topics of adolescent–parent conflicts include academic behaviors and success, disrespectful behavior, hairstyle and clothing style, dating/peer relationships, leisure activities, sibling relationships, and violations of family rules (Dost‐Gözkan and Bingöl 2014; Sayil and Devrimci‐Ozguven 2002); these topics are consistent with those found in other cultures (Smetana and Rote 2019). As observed, these conflicts fluctuate between the concepts of autonomy and relatedness. Although Kağıtçıbaşı (2017) stated that granting autonomy and maintaining relatedness are not opposite dimensions in family relationships, Fişek (2005) emphasized that creating a synthesis between autonomy and relatedness in changing societies is a challenging task for youth. This situation is particularly evident in families where the parents' pace of change is slower than that of the adolescents, making the emergence of conflict understandable. Parents promoting autonomy is a way of expressing their recognition that the child has their own will worthy of respect. Parents who accept their children's will and encourage autonomy exhibit parenting behaviors such as acknowledging the child's perspective and providing logical justifications while communicating rules and boundaries; this differs from promoting self‐sufficiency without relatedness (Dost‐Gözkan 2020).

While the literature explains that adolescents experience conflict more frequently with their mothers (Uçanok and Güre 2014) and tend to show more compliance toward their fathers as a cultural expectation, the possibility of perceiving the father as a positive source of support beyond an authoritarian figure has often been neglected. While the mother–child relationship has long been the focus of traditional psychology literature, the unique contributions of fathers to children's psychological development, identity construction, and well‐being have received increasing attention in recent years (Flouri and Buchanan 2003; McWayne et al. 2013). The concept of the Positive Father, rooted in positive psychology principles, defines the father's role in the child's life not only through discipline and economic provision but through happiness, well‐being, and potential development (Eryılmaz et al. 2024). According to this conceptualization, informed by Diener's (1984) theory of subjective well‐being, a positive father is a figure who increases positive emotions in the child, reduces negative emotions, and supports their life satisfaction and capacity development. Positive fathers support adolescent children in four ways: the first, autonomy support, is of critical developmental importance in adolescence (Sessa and Steinberg 1991) and is facilitated by the father opening space for the adolescent to make their own decisions and write their own self‐script. Positive fathers with the trait of conscientiousness are consistent, accessible figures who take active responsibility in caregiving processes, strengthening the adolescent's psychological resilience by reducing stress in the family climate (Eryılmaz et al. 2024). A conscientious father facilitates the adolescent's transition to adult roles by serving as a role model (Arnett 1994). By shifting from the traditional breadwinner role to the intimate father model (Dermott 2003), positive fathers who spend quality time and establish emotional bonds with their adolescent children increase the adolescent's self‐esteem while reducing levels of depression and anxiety (T. Field et al. 1995). Consistent with Fredrickson's (2009) Broaden‐and‐Build theory, a positive father enriches the child's cognitive and social resources by fostering emotions such as joy, hope, and inspiration.

Behavioral closeness, conceptualized as positive fathers exhibiting close behaviors toward their adolescent children, is a fundamental indicator of the father–child bond and plays a critical role in children's social development and general health (Moss and Schwebel 1993; Prager 1997). Especially during adolescence, such closeness nurtures developmental support and leads to positive outcomes (Oliphant and Kuczynski 2011). Positive fathers also contribute indirectly to the acquisition of independence (Roth 2008) and the demonstration of maturity by granting autonomy and providing encouragement. This, in turn, positively affects adolescents' transition into adulthood.

Although empathy levels may be high, one of the challenges created by conflicts with parents is emotion regulation (Van Lissa et al. 2017). Emotion regulation is a critical aspect of development in adolescence and is considered a developmental task (Eisenberg et al. 2000). During this stage, adolescents face challenges and intense emotions in both parent and peer relationships; therefore, developing the necessary skills to effectively manage and cope with these emotions is of vital importance (Silk et al. 2003). Adolescents caught in intense emotions following conflicts with their parents may choose to suppress their feelings; however, the suppression of emotions has been associated with pathology since the psychoanalytic tradition. According to current approaches, an important function of emotions is to provide useful information about situations and to increase the individual's capacity to cope with them. Fulfilling the function of emotions is categorized under functional emotion regulation, while strategies that block or reject emotions are addressed under dysfunctional emotion regulation (Phillips and Power 2007). Individual differences in the ability to regulate emotions are related to internal factors such as self, identity, and moral development (Garrigan et al. 2018) or external factors such as developing relatedness (Panfile and Laible 2012).

In adolescence, the development of adaptive emotion regulation strategies may stem from secure relationships established with both parents and peers (Gorrese and Ruggieri 2012). For instance, positive fathers exhibit a more moderate attitude in conflicts with their adolescent children by supporting their autonomy, establishing behavioral closeness, and possessing high mindfulness and extraversion traits. This allows the adolescent to express rather than suppress their emotions. Consequently, when adolescents do not suppress their emotions, the path to learning to cope with them in a functional way opens, as the ability to cope with and regulate intense emotions is not innate (Garber and Dodge 1991). Adolescents make many attempts while developing internal emotion regulation skills. Some of these attempts may result positively and some negatively; they are linked to psychological maturation and progressing toward adulthood. The beginning of the development of internal emotion regulation skills during adolescence forms the basis for a more balanced, happy, and effective adult life.

To date, studies investigating the maturation that brings adolescents to adulthood have been limited to cognitive and behavioral dimensions (Ballard et al. 2022; Blakemore and Robbins 2012; Dumontheil 2015; Forbes and Dahl 2010; Laube et al. 2020; Leung and Shek 2019). Furthermore, the concentration of research on maturity in Western cultures and already individualistic societies (Ballard et al. 2022; Morales‐Vives et al. 2024) necessitates investigating the reflection of this concept in collectivist societies like Türkiye (Hofstede 2016). In Hofstede's model, Türkiye is classified as a collectivist culture where the self is defined through group membership, relationships involving relatedness are encouraged, and overt conflicts are discouraged (Hofstede 2016). Children's relationships with their fathers are typically more distant than those with their mothers, and more autonomy is granted to boys than to girls (Sunar and Fisek 2005). Experiencing social transformation due to urbanization and globalization, Turkish society exhibits a heterogeneous structure where traditional and modern values coexist in family relationships (Ataca 2009). According to the theory of family change proposed by Kağıtçıbaşı (2017), while material and hierarchical dependency between generations decreases with socioeconomic development, psychological interdependence continues to be maintained; this brings about an autonomous‐related family model in particularly urban middle‐class samples, where autonomy and relatedness are synthesized. Considering the critical importance of meeting both autonomy and relatedness needs for the successful completion of developmental tasks during adolescence, balancing these two dimensions forms the most suitable ground for adolescent development.

The primary purpose of this research is to address the neglected dimension of psychological maturity which has a significant impact on adolescents' processes of autonomy and adulthood within Turkish society, in the context of its relationship with relational factors such as positive fathering and adolescent–parent conflict, and internal factors such as internal functional emotion regulation. In this regard, an answer to the following research question is sought:

Is the variance in adolescents' psychological maturity levels significantly explained by the variables of positive father, adolescent–parent conflict, and internal functional emotion regulation?

2. Methods

2.1. Research Design

The research employed a correlational survey design to identify the existence and magnitude of associations between variables, further testing the predictive relationships among them. This approach was chosen because the research focuses on describing the existing situation without any intervention and examines the extent to which independent variables account for the variance in the dependent variable (Büyüköztürk et al. 2013).

2.2. Participants and Procedure

A total of 271 middle adolescents (M age = 14.91, SD age = 1.208) enrolled in a public high school in the Kadikoy district of Istanbul, Türkiye, participated in the study. Participants were selected using criterion sampling. The inclusion criteria were being a Turkish middle adolescent (between 14 and 18 years of age) and voluntarily agreeing to participate. The demographic characteristics of the participants are presented in Table 1.

Table 1.

Demographic characteristics.

n %
Gender
Female 199 73.43%
Male 72 26.57%
Classroom groups
1st grade 76 28.04%
2nd grade 70 25.83%
3rd grade 45 16.61%
4th grade 80 29.52%
Parental status
Together 227 83.8%
Divorced 44 16.2%
Open in a new tab

Note: N = 271.

The study was approved by Yildiz Technical University's Ethics Committee (Report No: 20250304377), and necessary permissions for data collection were obtained from the relevant authorities at the participating public school. In addition to obtaining verbal and written informed consent from the participants, parental consent forms were secured as the participants were minors. Participation was offered to the entire student body on a voluntary basis, and the sample consisted of those who chose to participate. The entire data collection process was conducted during guidance hours at the participants' school. The data collection phase of the study was conducted over a 2‐week period in March 2024. The survey instruments were administered in a paper‐and‐pencil format by the second researcher. Two students withdrew during the data collection process and were subsequently excluded from the analyses. All questions raised by the participants during the data collection process were addressed by the researcher.

2.3. Measurements

2.3.1. Psychological Maturity Scale (PMS)

Developed by Eryılmaz and Uzun (2024), the PMS consists of 21 items and 4 subscales: awareness (Cronbach's α = 0.886), autonomy (α = 0.778), flexibility (α = 0.774), and ego resilience (α = 0.930), along with a total score (α = 0.916). In the current study, the total Cronbach's α reliability coefficient for the PMS was found to be 0.91. Higher scores on the scale indicate higher levels of psychological maturity. The scale is a 5‐point Likert‐type self‐report measure.

2.3.2. Adolescent–Parent Conflict Scale (APCS)

Developed by Eryılmaz and Mammadov (2016), the APCS consists of 12 items and has a unidimensional structure. The internal consistency coefficient was calculated as 0.88. Item–total correlations ranged from 0.63 to 0.74. The scale scores range from 12 to 48, with higher scores indicating more intense conflicts between adolescents and their parents. In this study, the total Cronbach's α reliability coefficient was calculated as 0.80. The APCS is a 5‐point Likert‐type adolescent self‐report measure.

2.3.3. Emotion Regulation Scale (ERS)

Originally developed by Phillips and Power (2007) and adapted into Turkish by Duy and Yıldız and Duy (2014), the ERS aims to identify adolescents' emotion regulation strategies. ERS showed a four‐factor structure consistent with the original version: external dysfunctional, internal dysfunctional, internal functional, and external functional emotion regulation. Internal consistency coefficients were 0.74 for internal functional, 0.76 for external dysfunctional, 0.68 for internal dysfunctional, and 0.57 for external functional subscales. In the current study, Cronbach's α coefficients were 0.76 (internal functional), 0.75 (internal dysfunctional), 0.79 (external functional), and 0.67 (external dysfunctional). No total score is calculated for the scale; rather, each subscale measures a unique facet of emotion regulation. Scores obtained from individual subscales indicate the extent to which that particular strategy is employed. The scale is a 5‐point Likert‐type adolescent self‐report measure.

2.3.4. Positive Father Scale (PFS)

Developed by Eryılmaz et al. (2024), the PFS includes 24 items across 4 subscales: behavioral closeness (α = 0.963), autonomy support (α = 0.945), extraversion (α = 0.895), and responsibility (α = 0.896), with a total scale reliability of α = 0.985. In this study, the total Cronbach's α for the PFS was calculated as 0.95. Higher scores on the scale indicate higher levels of positive father. The scale is a 5‐point Likert‐type self‐report measure.

2.4. Data Analysis

This study examined the variables of psychological maturity, positive father, parent–adolescent conflict, and internal functional emotion regulation. In addition, the relationships among these variables were investigated. As a first step, descriptive statistics were calculated, normality assumptions were examined, and bivariate correlations among the variables were analyzed.

Subsequently, a multiple regression analysis was conducted to explore the predictive roles of parent–adolescent conflict, internal functional emotion regulation, and positive father in relation to psychological maturity.

Before performing the regression analysis, all relevant assumptions were tested. Normality values were found to range between −0.605 and 1.21, which is within the acceptable range recommended by Tabachnick et al. (2013). Tolerance values ranged from 0.93 to 0.97, and variance inflation factor (VIF) values ranged from 1.04 to 1.07. The Durbin–Watson statistics were calculated as 1.99. Based on these results, there was no indication of multicollinearity, in line with the guidelines proposed by A. Field and Miles (2010). Therefore, all assumptions required for multiple regression analysis were met.

3. Results

3.1. Preliminary Analyses

Table 2 presents the means, standard deviations, reliability estimates, and intercorrelations among the variables.

Table 2.

Descriptive statistics for the study variables.

Variables Mean SD Skewness Kurtosis α
1. Psychological Maturity 77.86 13.90 −0.565 0.826 0.91
2. Adolescent–Parent Conflict 21.09 6.22 1.007 1.215 0.80
3. Internal Functional Emotional Regulation 15.19 2.96 −0.502 0.280 0.76
4. Positive Father 84.90 22.61 −0.605 −0.154 0.95
Open in a new tab

A negative correlation was found between psychological maturity and adolescent–parent conflict (r = −0.280, p < 0.001). It was found to have a positive correlation between psychological maturity and internal functional emotion regulation (r = 0.368, p < 0.001), as well as between psychological maturity and positive father (r = 0.194, p < 0.001). Furthermore, adolescent–parent conflict was negatively correlated with internal functional emotion regulation (r = –0.168, p < 0.001), and positive father (r = −0.210, p = < 0.001). No significant correlation was found between positive father and internal functional emotion regulation (r = 0.067, p = < 0.001). Correlation results are presented in Table 3.

Table 3.

Correlations for the study variables.

Variables 1 2 3 4
1. Psychological Maturity —
2. Adolescent–Parent Conflict −0.280* —
3. Internal Functional Emotional Regulation 0.368* −0.168* —
4. Positive Father 0.194* −0.210* 0.067 —
Open in a new tab
*

p < 0.05.

3.2. Regression

A multiple linear regression analysis was conducted to examine the associations between adolescent–parent conflict, internal functional emotion regulation, positive father, and adolescents' psychological maturity. Prior to the analysis, the assumptions of multiple regression were verified. The Durbin–Watson statistic (1.993) indicated that the residuals were independent. Multicollinearity was not a concern, as tolerance values ranged from 0.932 to 0.971 and VIF values ranged from 1.030 to 1.073. The results revealed that the regression model was statistically significant, F(3, 267) = 22.330, p < 0.001, and explained approximately 20.1% of the total variance in psychological maturity (R 2 = 0.201, adjusted R 2 = 0.192).

As shown in Table 4, all three variables exhibited significant associations with psychological maturity based on the standardized coefficients (β). Internal functional emotion regulation demonstrated the strongest positive link with psychological maturity (β = 0.326, t = 5.868, p < 0.001), suggesting that higher levels of functional emotion regulation are associated with increased maturity levels. This was followed by adolescent–parent conflict, which showed a significant negative association (β = −0.197, t = −3.484, p = 0.001), indicating that higher conflict levels are linked to lower psychological maturity. Finally, positive father was found to have a significant positive association with psychological maturity (β = 0.131, t = 2.342, p = 0.020).

Table 4.

Multiple regression analysis results for the prediction of psychological maturity.

Variables B SE β t p Tolerance VIF
57.141 6.129 — 9.323 0.000 — —
Internal Functional Emotion Regulation 1.526 0.260 0.326 5.868 0.001 971 1.030
Adolescent–Parent Conflict −0.441 0.127 −0.197 −3.484 0.020 932 1.073
Positive Father 0.081 0.034 0.131 2.342 0.000 955 1.047
Open in a new tab

Note: Dependent variable: Psychological Maturity. Model Statistics: R = 0.448, R 2 = 0.201, adjusted R 2 = 0.192, F(3, 267) = 22.330, p < 0.001.

4. Discussion

This study investigated the extent to which the psychological maturity levels of high school adolescents are explained by internal functional emotion regulation, adolescent–parent conflict, and positive father. The resulting regression model demonstrated that these three variables together significantly account for 20.1% of the variance in adolescents' psychological maturity. The primary finding indicates that internal functional emotion regulation and positive father perception are positively associated with psychological maturity, while adolescent–parent conflict is negatively associated. These results suggest that psychological maturation during the transition from adolescence to adulthood is not merely an individual skill, but an interactional process nurtured by parental relationships. This finding addresses the research question and is discussed below in conjunction with other results.

The most striking finding of the research is that internal functional emotion regulation emerged as the strongest predictor of psychological maturity. This result aligns with the functional approach of Phillips and Power (2007), who define emotion regulation as processing and holding emotions rather than rejecting them. When viewed through the lens of Kegan's (1982) Subject–Object Theory, the ability to regulate emotions functionally indicates that the adolescent has progressed from being a subject to their emotions (the impulsive mind) to a position where they can manage them as objects (the self‐authoring mind).

In other words, this regulatory capacity, developed within the adolescent's internal world, allows them to exercise the agency emphasized in Kağıtçıbaşı's (2017) autonomous‐related model rather than resorting to impulsive reactions during crises. Navigating the complex balance between autonomy and relatedness—concepts often misconstrued as mutually exclusive—adolescents exhibit autonomy by exercising agency in their decision‐making while sustaining familial ties, consistent with Kağıtçıbaşı's (1996) autonomous‐related self model. This theoretical framework posits that, in the family model of emotional interdependence, marked by declining material reliance but sustained emotional bonds, individuals can successfully integrate autonomy with close interpersonal relationships. Thus, cultivating an autonomous identity does not require adolescents to sever ties with or rebel against their parents. Ultimately, the psychological flexibility (Aldao et al. 2016) fostered during this process enables adolescents to reframe stressful life events and familial crises not as destructive experiences but as developmental windows of opportunity.

Another significant finding is that adolescent–parent conflict is the second strongest variable negatively associated with psychological maturity. This result is consistent with the pattern of relatedness in Turkish culture (Kağıtçıbaşı 2017). According to the autonomous‐related self‐model, for an adolescent to successfully transition into a healthy adulthood, their demands for autonomy must be supported within a framework of connectedness. Our findings suggest that intense and chronic conflicts with parents weaken this secure base, causing autonomy to be experienced as a rupture or isolation rather than agency.

From the perspective of Kegan's theory, conflict can theoretically provide a developmental space for adolescents to question parental values and turn them into objects. However, the results of the current study indicate that when the intensity or nature of the conflict increases, this process is hindered. A high‐conflict environment may keep the adolescents in a defensive or reactive position, causing them to remain stuck in Kegan's second stage, the Instrumental Mind. Consequently, instead of constructing their own internal values (Self‐Authoring Mind), the adolescent's energy is consumed by power struggles with parents.

As highlighted by Dost‐Gözkan (2020), in societies with strong collectivist tendencies like Türkiye, overt and intense conflicts are generally experienced as a source of maladjustment rather than a successful marker of independence, unlike in Western individualistic cultures. Therefore, intense parental conflict drives the adolescent away from the internal functional emotion regulation strategies emphasized in our first finding. Instead of processing and making sense of their emotions, the adolescent resorts to dysfunctional paths such as withdrawal or conflict engagement, which ultimately lower their level of psychological maturity.

Another significant finding is that adolescent–parent conflict is the second strongest variable negatively associated with psychological maturity. This result is consistent with the pattern of relatedness in Turkish culture (Kağıtçıbaşı 2017). According to the autonomous‐related self‐model, for an adolescent to successfully transition into a healthy adulthood, their demands for autonomy must be supported within a framework of connectedness. Our findings suggest that intense and chronic conflicts with parents weaken this secure base, causing autonomy to be experienced as a rupture or isolation rather than agency.

From the perspective of Kegan's theory, conflict can theoretically provide a developmental space for adolescents to question parental values and turn them into objects. However, the results of the current study indicate that when the intensity or nature of the conflict increases, this process is hindered. A high‐conflict environment may keep the adolescents in a defensive or reactive position, causing them to remain stuck in Kegan's second stage, the Instrumental Mind. Consequently, instead of constructing their own internal values (Self‐Authoring Mind), the adolescent's energy is consumed by power struggles with parents.

As highlighted by Dost‐Gözkan (2020), in societies with strong collectivist tendencies like Türkiye, overt and intense conflicts are generally experienced as a source of maladjustment rather than a successful marker of independence, unlike in Western individualistic cultures. Therefore, intense parental conflict drives the adolescent away from the internal functional emotion regulation strategies emphasized in our first finding. Instead of processing and making sense of their emotions, the adolescent resorts to dysfunctional paths such as withdrawal or conflict engagement, which ultimately lower their level of psychological maturity.

4.1. Implications

The findings of this study offer critical intervention strategies at both relational and internal levels for child and adolescent psychiatric nursing practice. Given that internal functional emotion regulation is the most strongly variable which is associated with psychological maturity, clinical interventions should focus on equipping adolescents with skills to manage their emotions as objects rather than suppressing them. This can be achieved through mindfulness (Semple and Burke 2012), cognitive reappraisal, cognitive defusion from Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT; Halliburton and Cooper 2015), and externalizing the problem from Narrative Therapy (Jagatdeb et al. 2024).

In terms of clinical practice, the findings of this research emphasize the critical importance of involving fathers in the fields of adolescent psychiatry and counseling. Developing intervention programs based on ACT or Narrative Therapy aimed at increasing fathers' autonomy support and behavioral closeness skills may bolster adolescents' internal emotion regulation capacities. In particular, the impact of psychoeducational efforts that strengthen the safe zone role of fathers during moments of conflict on adolescents' psychological maturity levels should be tested through experimental studies. Such holistic interventions could provide a healthier foundation for adolescents transitioning from impulsive reactivity to the adult‐level self‐authoring mind stage.

Furthermore, psychiatric nurses must consider that high levels of adolescent–parent conflict serve as a developmental barrier in relational and collectivist cultures like Türkiye. Consequently, nurses should promote conflict resolution skills during family sessions and actively strengthen the father's role as a secure base. Ultimately, family‐based programs led by psychiatric nurses can more effectively facilitate the transition to adult‐level psychological maturity (the self‐authoring mind; Kegan 1982) by simultaneously targeting positive paternal support and internal regulation competence.

4.2. Limitations and Future Directions

The current study was conducted using a cross‐sectional correlational survey design to determine the magnitude of relationships between variables; this design limits the definitive interpretation of the identified associations in terms of causality. Furthermore, because the participant group was selected via criterion sampling from a single public high school in the Kadıköy district of Istanbul, generalizing the results to the entire adolescent population across different socioeconomic and geographic regions of Türkiye is difficult. Future research employing longitudinal designs covering the transition from adolescence to adulthood, along with expanding the sample to include youth from diverse sociocultural backgrounds, would more clearly reveal the developmental trajectory of psychological maturity.

The fact that data were collected through paper‐and‐pencil self‐report scales introduces the possibility that participants may have exhibited social desirability bias, particularly regarding socially sensitive issues such as adolescent–parent conflict and relationships with fathers. Additionally, since the study relied solely on adolescent perceptions, the data remains one‐sided; discrepancies may exist between fathers' actual parenting attitudes and the adolescents' perceptions of them. Future studies are encouraged to utilize multi‐informant data sources involving both adolescent and father perspectives. To account for approximately 80% of unexplained variance in the regression model, incorporating other variables such as the relationship with the mother, peer interactions, and temperament is also recommended.

5. Conclusions

This research reveals that psychological maturation during adolescence is grounded in a dynamic and multidimensional balance between an individual's internal emotion regulation capacity and the relational support provided by the father. The 20.1% variance explained in the regression model confirms the complexity of the maturation process; specifically, internal functional emotion regulation emerged as the strongest predictor, emphasizing the central role of an adolescent's ability to manage their own emotional processes in the transition to Kegan's (1982) self‐authoring mind stage. The negative association of adolescent–parent conflict underscores that within the relatedness texture of Turkish culture (Kağıtçıbaşı 2017), intense tensions constitute a significant obstacle that hinders developmental pace.

The most distinctive finding of this study is the lack of a significant correlation between positive father support and internal functional emotion regulation (r = 0.067). This suggests that while the safe haven provided by the father serves as a protective shield against external stressors, the actual internal architecture of psychological maturity is constructed through the regulatory skills developed by the adolescent's own agency. Consequently, this study provides a holistic and original perspective to the literature by demonstrating that psychological maturity in the transition to adulthood is not merely the absence of conflict, but rather the result of both the autonomy support offered by the father and the internal regulation competence rising upon that foundation as independent yet complementary components.

Author Contributions

Ali Eryılmaz designed the model and the computational framework. Düşüm Başar‐Gençer collect and analyzed the data. Ali Eryılmaz and Düşüm Başar‐Gençer, wrote the manuscript with input from all authors. Ali Eryılmaz and Düşüm Başar‐Gençer conceived the study and were in charge of overall direction and planning.

Funding

The authors have nothing to report.

Ethics Statement

The research followed the principles outlined in the Helsinki Declaration. Before initiating data collection, the authors obtained approval from the Ethical Board of Yildiz Technical University (Report Number: 20231202501). The study was conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments. Ethical approval was obtained from the Yildiz University Ethics Committee.

Consent

Participants read an informed consent form and voluntarily agreed to participate before completing the survey. All participants provided informed consent to participate in the study and were assured that they could choose to withdraw from the study at any time.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgments

No artificial intelligence (AI) tools or Large Language Models (LLMs) were used in the writing, editing, or creation of the scientific content of this manuscript. All text and analyses are the sole intellectual contribution of the authors.

Data Availability Statement

The data used to support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.

References

  1. Aldao, A. , Gee D. G., De Los Reyes A., and Seager I.. 2016. “Emotion Regulation as a Transdiagnostic Factor in the Development of Internalizing and Externalizing Psychopathology: Current and Future Directions.” Development and Psychopathology 28, no. 4pt1: 927–946. 10.1017/S0954579416000638. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. APT . 2013. Adolescent Profiles in Turkey. Turkish Republic Ministry of Family and Social Policy. https://www.aile.gov.tr/media/50221/tepa2013-teksf.pdf.
  3. Arnett, J. J. 1994. “Are College Students Adults? Their Conceptions of the Transition to Adulthood.” Journal of Adult Development 1, no. 4: 213–224. 10.1007/BF02277582. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  4. Ataca, B. 2009. “Turkish Family Structure and Functioning.” In Perspectives on Human Development, Family, and Culture, edited by Bekman S. and Aksu‐Koç A., 108–125. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511720437.010. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  5. Ballard, P. J. , Hoyt L. T., and Johnson J.. 2022. “Opportunities, Challenges, and Contextual Supports to Promote Enacting Maturing During Adolescence.” Frontiers in Psychology 13: 954860. 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.954860. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Bauger, L. , Bongaardt R., and Bauer J. J.. 2021. “Maturity and Well‐Being: The Development of Self‐Authorship, Eudaimonic Motives, Age, and Subjective Well‐Being.” Journal of Happiness Studies 22: 1313–1340. 10.1007/s10902-020-00274-0. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  7. Blakemore, S. J. , and Robbins T. W.. 2012. “Decision‐Making in the Adolescent Brain.” Nature Neuroscience 15, no. 9: 1184–1191. 10.1038/nn.3177. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Büyüköztürk, Ş. , Çakmak‐Kılıç E., Akgün Ö. E., Karadeniz Ş., and ve Demirel F.. 2013. Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. “Scientific Research Methods. Pegem Academy.” Pegem Akademi. [Google Scholar]
  9. Dermanova, I. B. , and Manukyan V. R.. 2010. “Personality Maturity: To Description of Psychological Phenomenon.” Saint Petersburg University Bulletin 4, no. 12: 68–73. [Google Scholar]
  10. Dermott, E. 2003. “The ‘Intimate Father’: Defining Paternal Involvement.” Sociological Research Online 8, no. 4: 28–38. 10.5153/sro.859. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  11. Diener, E. 1984. “Subjective Well‐being.” Psychological Bulletin 95, no. 3: 542–575. 10.1037/0033-2909.95.3.542. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Dost‐Gözkan, A. 2020. “The Gratification of Psychological Needs and Well‐Being Among Turkish Adolescents: An Examination of Direct and Indirect Links.” Journal of Research on Adolescence 31, no. 1: 52–70. 10.1111/jora.12582Crossref. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Dost‐Gözkan, A. , and Bingöl B.. 2014. “Cohesion and Conflict in the Eyes of Adolescents and Parents.” Paper presented at 14th Biennial Conference of the European Association for Research on Adolescence, Izmir, Turkey.
  14. Dumontheil, I. 2015. “Development of the Social Brain During Adolescence.” Psicología Educativa 21: 117–124. 10.1016/j.pse.2015.08.001. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  15. Eisenberg, N. , Fabes R. A., Guthrie I. K., and Reiser M.. 2000. “Dispositional Emotionality and Regulation: Their Role in Predicting Quality of Social Functioning.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 78, no. 1: 136–157. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Erikson, E. H. 1982. The Life Cycle Completed: A Review. W.W. Norton. [Google Scholar]
  17. Eryılmaz, A. , and Mammadov S.. 2016. “Examination of the Psychometric Properties of the Adolescent‐Parent Conflict Scale.” Journal of Child & Adolescent Mental Health 23: 201–210. [Google Scholar]
  18. Eryılmaz, A. , and Uzun A. E.. 2024. “Embarking on the SAFE Route: Exploring the Psychological Maturity Scale.” Alpha Psychiatry 25, no. 1: 101–110. 10.5152/alphapsychiatry.2024.231453. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Eryılmaz, A. , Uzun A. E., and Basal A.. 2024. “The Development of Positive Father Scale: A Tool for Enhancing Family Dynamics.” Marriage & Family Review 60, no. 2: 49–75. 10.1080/01494929.2024.2306526. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  20. Field, A. , Miles J., and Field Z.. 2012. “Discovering Statistics Using SAS.” SAGE. [Google Scholar]
  21. Field, T. , Lang C., Yando R., and Bendell D.. 1995. “Adolescents' Intimacy With Parents and Friends.” Adolescence 30, no. 117: 133. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Fişek, G. O. 2005. “From Tradition to Change: Family and Children in Turkey.” In Istanbul University Cerrahpaşa Faculty of Medicine, Continuing Medical Education Activities: Adolescent Health Symposium Series, Vol. 43, 39–49. [Google Scholar]
  23. Flouri, E. , and Buchanan A.. 2003. “What Predicts Fathers' Involvement With Their Children? A Prospective Study of Intact Families.” British Journal of Developmental Psychology 21, no. 1: 81–97. 10.1348/026151003321164636. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  24. Forbes, E. E. , and Dahl R. E.. 2010. “Pubertal Development and Behavior: Hormonal Activation of Social and Motivational Tendencies.” Brain and Cognition 72, no. 1: 66–72. 10.1016/j.bandc.2009.10.007. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Fossas, A. 2019. “Psychological Maturity Predicts Different Forms of Happiness.” Journal of Happiness Studies 20, no. 6: 1933–1952. 10.1007/s10902-018-0033-9. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  26. Fredrickson, B. 2009. Positivity: Groundbreaking Research Reveals How to Embrace the Hidden Strength of Positive Emotions, Overcome Negativity, and Thrive. Crown Publishers/Random House. [Google Scholar]
  27. Garber, J. and Dodge, K. A. , eds. 1991. The Development of Emotion Regulation and Dysregulation. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
  28. Garrigan, B. , Adlam A. L. R., and Langdon P. E.. 2018. “Moral Decision‐Making and Moral Development: Toward an Integrative Framework.” Developmental Review 49: 80–100. 10.1016/j.dr.2018.06.001. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  29. Gorrese, A. , and Ruggieri R.. 2012. “Peer Attachment: A Meta‐Analytic Review of Gender and Age Differences and Associations With Parent Attachment.” Journal of Youth and Adolescence 41, no. 5: 650–672. 10.1007/s10964-012-9759-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Halliburton, A. E. , and Cooper L. D.. 2015. “Applications and Adaptations of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) for Adolescents.” Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science 4, no. 1: 1–11. 10.1016/j.jcbs.2015.01.002. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  31. Hofstede, G. 2016. “Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations.” Collegiate Aviation Review 34, no. 2: 108. www.geert-hofstede.com/countries.html. [Google Scholar]
  32. Jagatdeb, S. , Mishra S., Bajpai T., and Sen S.. 2024. ““Externalizing the Internalized:” Exploring Externalizing Conversations in Narrative Therapy With Adolescents and Young Adults in the Indian Context.” Journal of Indian Association for Child and Adolescent Mental Health 20, no. 2: 153–160. 10.1177/09731342241238096. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  33. Kağıtçıbaşı, Ç. 1996. “Autonomous‐Related Self: A New Synthesis.” Turkish Journal of Psychology 11, no. 37: 36–43. [Google Scholar]
  34. Kağıtçıbaşı, Ç. 2017. “Psychology and Culture Construct “Autonomy”.” In Autonomy in Adolescent Development, 193–214. Psychology Press. [Google Scholar]
  35. Kegan, R. 1982. The Evolving Self: Problem and Process in Human Development. Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar]
  36. Kegan, R. 1994. In Over Our Heads: The Mental Demands of Modern Life. Harvard University Press. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26761853. [Google Scholar]
  37. Kohlberg, L. , and Kramer R.. 1969. “Continuities and Discontinuities in Childhood and Adult Moral Development.” Human Development 12, no. 2: 93–120. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Laube, C. , van den Bos W., and Fandakova Y.. 2020. “The Relationship Between Pubertal Hormones and Brain Plasticity: Implications for Cognitive Training in Adolescence.” Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience 42: 100753. 10.1016/j.dcn.2020.100753. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Leung, J. T. Y. , and Shek D. T. L.. 2026. “Theories of Adolescent Development: Overview.” In The Encyclopedia of Child and Adolescent Development, edited by Hupp S. and Jewell J., 1–12. 10.1002/9781119171492.wecad305. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  40. Loevinger, J. 1976. Ego Development. Jossey‐Bass. [Google Scholar]
  41. Manukyan, V. R. , Golovey L. A., and Strizhitskaya O. Y.. 2015. “Formation of Personality Psychological Maturity and Adulthood Crises.” Psychology in Russia: State of the Art 8, no. 2: 99–112. https://psychologyinrussia.com/volumes/?article=3710. [Google Scholar]
  42. Maslow, A. H. 1968. Toward a Psychology of Being, 2nd ed. Van Nostrand Reinhold. [Google Scholar]
  43. Maslow, A. H. 1970. Motivation and Personality, 2nd ed. Harper & Row. [Google Scholar]
  44. McWayne, C. , Downer J. T., Campos R., and Harris R. D.. 2013. “Father Involvement During Early Childhood and Its Association With Children's Early Learning: A Meta‐Analysis.” Early Education & Development 24, no. 6: 898–922. 10.1080/10409289.2013.746932. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  45. Morales‐Vives, F. , Ferrando P. J., Dueñas J. M., Martín‐Arbós S., Varea M. D., and Castarlenas E.. 2024. “Are Older Teens More Frustrated Than Younger Teens by the Covid‐19 Restrictions? The Role of Psychological Maturity, Personality Traits, Depression and Life Satisfaction.” Current Psychology 43, no. 13: 12208–12220. 10.1007/s12144-023-04317-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Moss, B. F. , and Schwebel A. I.. 1993. “Defining Intimacy in Romantic Relationships.” Family Relations 42: 31–37. 10.2307/584918. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  47. Oliphant, A. E. , and Kuczynski L.. 2011. “Mothers' and Fathers' Perceptions of Mutuality in Middle Childhood: The Domain of Intimacy.” Journal of Family Issues 32, no. 8: 1104–1124. 10.1177/0192513X11402946. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  48. Panfile, T. M. , and Laible D. J.. 2012. “Attachment Security and Child's Empathy: The Mediating Role of Emotion Regulation.” Merrill‐Palmer Quarterly: A Peer Relations Journal 58, no. 1. https://digitalcommons.wayne.edu/mpq/vol58/iss1/1. [Google Scholar]
  49. Phillips, K. F. V. , and Power M. J.. 2007. “A New Self‐Report Measure of Emotion Regulation in Adolescents: The Regulation of Emotions Questionnaire.” Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy: An International Journal of Theory & Practice 14, no. 2: 145–156. 10.1002/cpp.523. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  50. Prager, K. J. 1997. The Psychology of Intimacy. Guilford Press. [Google Scholar]
  51. Rogers, C. R. 1961. “The Place of the Person in the New World of the Behavioral Sciences.” Personnel & Guidance Journal 39, no. 6: 442–451. 10.1002/j.2164-4918.1961.tb01913.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  52. Roth, G. 2008. “Perceived Parental Conditional Regard and Autonomy Support as Predictors of Young Adults' Self‐ Versus Other‐Oriented Prosocial Tendencies.” Journal of Personality 76, no. 3: 513–534. 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2008.00494.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Sayil, I. , and Devrimci‐Ozguven H.. 2002. “Suicide and Suicide Attempts in Ankara in 1998: Results of the WHO/EURO Multicentre Study of Suicidal Behaviour.” Crisis 23, no. 1: 11–16. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Semple, R. J. , and Burke C. A.. 2012. “Mindfulness‐Based Treatment for Children and Adolescents.” In Child and Adolescent Therapy: Cognitive‐Behavioral Procedures, edited by Kendall P. C., Vol. 411, e428. Guilford Press. [Google Scholar]
  55. Sen, S. , and Banerjee S.. 2024. “Exploring the Relationship Between Psychological Maturity and Leadership Personality Traits–A Discourse Analysis.” Prabandhan: Indian Journal of Management 17, no. 5: 60–70. [Google Scholar]
  56. Sessa, F. M. , and Steinberg L.. 1991. “Family Structure and the Development of Autonomy During Adolescence.” Journal of Early Adolescence 11, no. 1: 38–55. 10.1177/0272431691111003. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  57. Silk, J. S. , Steinberg L., and Morris A. S.. 2003. “Adolescents' Emotion Regulation in Daily Life: Links to Depressive Symptoms and Problem Behavior.” Child Development 74, no. 6: 1869–1880. 10.1046/j.1467-8624.2003.00643.xD. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. Smetana, J. G. , and Rote W. M.. 2019. “Adolescent–Parent Relationships: Progress, Processes, and Prospects.” Annual Review of Developmental Psychology 1, no. 1: 41–68. 10.1146/annurev-devpsych-121318-084903. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  59. Staudinger, U. M. , and Kunzmann U.. 2005. “Positive Adult Personality Development: Adjustment and/or Growth?.” European Psychologist 10, no. 4: 320–329. 10.1027/1016-9040.10.4.320. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  60. Sunar, D. , and Fisek G.. 2005. “Contemporary Turkish Families.” In Families in Global Perspective, edited by Gielen U. and Roopnarine J., Vol. 169, 183. Allyn& Bacon/Pearson. [Google Scholar]
  61. Tabachnick, B. G. , Fidell L. S., and Ullman J. B.. 2013. Using Multivariate Statistics, Vol. 6, 497–516. Pearson. [Google Scholar]
  62. Uçanok, Z. , and Güre A.. 2014. “Perceived Economic Strain and Psychological Well‐Being: The Mediational Role of Parental Relations in Turkish Early Adolescents.” Journal of Early Adolescence 34, no. 6: 685–711. 10.1177/0272431612450948. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  63. Van Lissa, C. J. , Hawk S. T., Koot H. M., Branje S., and Meeus W. H. J.. 2017. “The Cost of Empathy: Parent–Adolescent Conflict Predicts Emotion Dysregulation for Highly Empathic Youth.” Developmental Psychology 53, no. 9: 1722–1737. 10.1037/dev0000361. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  64. Yıldız, M. A. , and Duy B.. 2014. “The Turkish Adaptation of the Emotion Regulation Scale for Adolescents.” Turkish Psychological Counseling and Guidance Journal 5, no. 41. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/tpdrd/article/230027. [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

The data used to support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.

Articles from Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Nursing are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES