Parent and Romantic Partner Behaviors during Adolescence as Predictors of Young Adult Positive Personality, Relational Competence, and Functional Independence

Abstract

Experiences with parents and romantic partners during adolescence are theorized to have long-term effects on youth development. However, little research has empirically examined the relative contributions of experiences in each type of relationship at different points during adolescence to positive development in young adulthood. The goal of the present study was to predict relative changes in youth positive personality characteristics, relational competence, and functional independence during young adulthood from specific behaviors experienced from parents and romantic partners during early and late adolescence. A diverse community sample of 147 individuals (59 males, 88 females) from the southeastern United States was repeatedly assessed across a 14-year period from age 13 to age 27. As hypothesized, parental acceptance and successful parental positive influence behavior toward adolescents at age 13 predicted relative increases in positive personality traits (e.g., agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional stability) between ages 23 and 27. These same parental behaviors measured at age 18 were less robust predictors of key outcomes relative to similar qualities of romantic relationships. Instead, romantic behaviors of toleration and appreciation at age 18 predicted relative increases in functional independence and relational competence between ages 23 and 27 (e.g., attachment closeness, reliable alliance, nurturance, and functional independence). Results suggest that parents’ successful efforts to positively influence and accept their children during early adolescence may lay a foundation for future positive personality growth, and that similar positive behaviors experienced in late adolescent romantic relationships may help prepare youth to develop broader supportive social relationships and independence skills in young adulthood.

Introduction

Across cultures, parents identify positive personality traits, relational competence, and functional independence as important for their children to develop to become successful adults (Suizzo, 2007). However, little is known about what types of specific adolescent-era relational experiences may propel youth toward positive changes in these domains. Parents are often prime sources of support and influence for youth in early adolescence, suggesting that parenting behavior during the earlier part of this socially-sensitive period may play a foundational role in adolescents’ positive development (Scriber & Guyer, 2017). As adolescence progresses, however, romantic partners tend to equal or surpass parents as critical sources of support for positive development, and evidence suggests that experiences with romantic partners during the later adolescent years may further spur youth social and personality growth beyond parental behavior (Neyer & Asendorpf, 2001; Rosenthal & Kobak, 2010). This study examines how parental acceptance and successful parental positive influence behaviors, as well as analogous experiences in romantic relationships, contribute to positive development in young adulthood. Importantly, this study seeks to understand how the timing of these relationship experiences (early vs. late adolescence) might differentially predict adaptive developmental characteristics including positive personality traits (e.g., conscientiousness, agreeableness, emotional stability), indicators of relational competence (e.g., attachment closeness, reliable alliance, and nurturance), and functional independence.

Indicators of Positive Development in Adulthood

Positive personality traits

Researchers have identified a number of personality, social, and behavioral traits indicative of positive development in adulthood. In the personality domain, the confluence of agreeableness, conscientiousness, and emotional stability have been identified as key traits reflecting adaptive functioning in adulthood (DeYoung et al., 2002; Digman, 1997). Agreeableness is often associated with prosocial behavior and tendencies toward being likeable, cooperative, and helpful (Graziano & Eisenberg, 1997). Conscientiousness is described as the tendency to be organized, responsible, and hardworking (VandenBos, 2007). Emotional stability (the opposite of neuroticism) refers to positive emotional responses to threat, frustration, or loss (Costa & McCrae, 1992). These personality traits have shown positive associations with critical outcomes across the lifespan, including autonomy development, positive relationships with others, environmental mastery, academic performance, emotion regulation, reduced likelihood of internalizing problems, and feelings of purpose in life (Connor-Smith & Flachsbart, 2007; Kotov et al., 2010; Poropat, 2009; Schmutte & Ryff, 1997). Importantly, although personality traits are strongly informed by genetics, research has not only found that personality change occurs most often in young adulthood, but also that both genetics and environmental factors (such as earlier parenting behaviors) may contribute comparably to personality change during this time (Belsky & Barends, 2002; Blonigen et al., 2008). As such, the present study aims to examine parental and romantic behaviors as environmental factors that may contribute to relative changes in positive personality traits in young adulthood.

Relational competence and functional independence

Beyond personality outcomes, researchers have identified qualities related to relational competence and functional independence as critical to adult health, success, and well-being (House et al., 1988). Specifically, relationships with others that are characterized as nurturing, close, and reliable are associated with positive outcomes across the lifespan. Nurturance refers to the impulse to care for others, and has been linked to evolutionary tendencies to care for offspring as well as empathy toward others (Batson et al., 2005; Bell, 2001). Closeness in relationships refers to a high degree of intimacy, which confers need fulfillment and predicts well-being that is not similarly achieved from simply having a large social network (Johnson et al., 2012; Prager & Buhrmester, 1998). Similarly, having relationships that are reliable and can be counted on in times of need are associated with higher levels of romantic relationship satisfaction and adjustment (see Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007). Importantly, this pattern of findings has not been better accounted for by personality characteristics, suggesting unique contributions of such relationship qualities to these outcomes (see Mikulincer & Shaver, 2013).

Finally, functional independence captures one’s real-world functioning (Le Deist & Winterton, 2005). Measures of functional independence have been correlated prospectively with greater career satisfaction in young adulthood, as well as concurrently with increased likelihood of being employed and lower likelihood of living at home with parents in young adulthood (Miles et al., 2018; Szwedo et al., 2017). Given the value that Western societies place on individuation, self-reliance, and the development of one’s own career and family separate from the family-of-origin, the level of functional independence displayed during young adulthood is also an important marker of positive development in such societies. Thus, given the added importance of developing relational and functional competencies beyond core positive personality traits for success in young adulthood, this study also seeks to determine how specific parental and romantic behaviors may contribute to relative changes in these domains.

Relationship Contexts and Timing for Positive Development

Developmental theory and prior research provide guidance for predicting the types and timing of parental and romantic partner behaviors that may be important for facilitating positive changes in young adults’ personality traits, relational competence, and functional independence. With regard to relationship behaviors, attachment theory suggests that experiences in close relationships with individuals who provide care and support shape the development of these characteristics throughout the lifespan (Bowlby, 1969/1982). In particular, experiences of sensitive care such as acceptance and support are thought to shape positive representations of the self and others that guide positive social-emotional development (Ainsworth et al., 1978; Sroufe, 2005). Indeed, extensive research has shown that security in relationships predicts emotional stability (for reviews see Cassidy, 1994; Calkins & Leerkes, 2011), nurturance and care for others (see Shaver et al., 2016), healthy independence (e.g., Szwedo et al., 2017), and relative increases in relational competence over time (Loeb et al., 2021). Related evidence indicates that experiences of supportive behavior during sensitive periods of development, including adolescence, get “under the skin” to shape brain development across adolescence and into adulthood, suggesting increased capacity for cognitive, social, and emotional functioning that may continue to develop years after the positive behavior occurs (Whittle et al., 2014).

Attachment theory also suggests that different types of relationships become more salient at certain points during development. Typically, parents are identified as primary attachment figures in early adolescence and may remain so during late adolescence, though romantic partners also begin to emerge as attachment figures in late adolescence (Rosenthal & Kobak, 2010). Thus, in early adolescence, when there is less likely to be reliance on peer or romantic partners for guidance on core issues of how to carry oneself or interact with others in the world, parents’ behaviors toward adolescents may have a greater likelihood of informing youth behavior (Zeifman & Hazan, 2008). Romantic relationships become increasingly salient as adolescence progresses, becoming both more intimate in nature and important to how teens view themselves (Montgomery, 2005). Indeed, romantic involvement is a key emerging developmental task in late adolescence, and previous research suggests that late adolescence may be a particularly critical window for optimal development (Roisman et al., 2004; Kansky & Allen, 2018a). Indeed, research has suggested that both romantic involvement during early adolescence and dating delayed until emerging adulthood may be related to problematic outcomes, whereas romantic involvement occurring during mid- and late adolescence may be associated with long-term psychological benefits (Collins, 2003; Kansky & Allen, 2018; Lehnart et al., 2010). Thus, theory and research suggest that positive parental behaviors occurring during early adolescence may be stronger predictors of future youth outcomes as compared to parental behaviors during later adolescence, when intimate romantic relationships tend to emerge and perhaps sometimes overshadow parents as more salient contexts for reliance and support.

Parental predictors of positive adult outcomes

Although theory and research discussed above suggest the relevance of adolescent-era relationship experiences as predictors of long-term positive personality development, relational competence, and functional independence, few studies have directly addressed these possibilities. Some research has suggested that parent-adolescent relationship quality in adolescence is only moderately predictive of future outcomes, whereas actual parental behaviors seem more likely to be predictive (Allen et al., 2022). For example, one study found that a closer mother-adolescent relationship, and more positive parenting behaviors from fathers during early adolescence, predicted higher levels of their children’s relational competence (Liu et al., 2018). Similarly, in one of the few studies to examine parents’ role in shaping positive personality development, higher levels of parental warmth and lower parental hostility in early adolescence predicted increases in adolescents’ positive personality traits in mid-adolescence (i.e., conscientiousness, agreeableness, emotional stability; Schofield et al., 2012). In contrast, high levels of perceived psychological control by parents in early adolescence have been shown to predict lower success in mid-adulthood, including lower relational competence and educational attainment (Loeb et al., 2021). Thus, parental behavior in early adolescence characterized by broad acceptance of adolescents and successful efforts to positively influence and support them are likely to promote adaptive development in young adulthood. In the present study parental acceptance is characterized by parents’ efforts to help their adolescent feel better when upset, spend time together, and show care and affection, whereas parents’ successful efforts to positively influence their adolescents is defined by youths’ acknowledgment of how much their parents’ efforts to provide helpful advice, indicate that they think well of them, and act as positive role models actually inform adolescents’ behavior. Importantly, it has been suggested that adolescents’ perceptions of parental behavior likely play a critical role in whether or not youth accept and internalize intended messages of such behavior (Grusec & Goodnow, 1994). As such, the present study considers measures of adolescents’ perceptions of parental acceptance as well as their perceptions of the success of parents’ efforts to be a positive influence as predictors of key outcomes.

Romantic relationship predictors of positive adult outcomes

As previously suggested, there is also emerging evidence that behaviors from romantic partners during late adolescence may facilitate long-term positive development in ways that reach beyond the effects of parents’ behavior. For example, a longitudinal investigation of the development of mastery (the sense that one can affect the environment to achieve desired outcomes) examined the role of parent and romantic partner support during specific developmental periods. The authors found that parental support at age 15 predicted levels of adolescent mastery concurrently, and parental support at age 18 predicted mastery prospectively across the first half of the participants’ 20s. Importantly, however, partner support at age 19, but not parental support (at either ages 15 or 18), was responsible for further increases in levels of youth mastery during the later years of the 20s (Surjadi et al., 2011). These results fit with research suggesting that, toward the latter end of adolescence, youth may be more likely to experience positive growth through experiences with peers or romantic partners rather than with parents (Allen et al., 2022; Furman & Shomaker, 2008).

As within parental relationships, certain types of behavioral support within romantic relationships may be particularly likely to facilitate adolescents’ positive personal growth. For example, Kansky & Allen (2018) found that adolescents who were engaged during a support-seeking task, as evidenced by attempts to draw their partner out and share their own experiences to help relate to their partner, had fewer mental health symptoms over time. In the previously discussed study examining mastery outcomes (Surjadi et al., 2011), support from romantic partners was operationalized in part by behaviors including care and affection, appreciation, and helping the adolescent with something important to them. Using these behaviors as a guide, the present study considers two similar types of adolescent-specific romantic experiences identified by Levesque (1993) as characteristics of satisfying adolescent romantic relationships: toleration and appreciation. In Levesque’s (1993) work, toleration is the expression of being patient and accepting, similar to behaviors captured in this study by parental acceptance. Appreciation is defined by thinking one has good ideas, taking pride in their accomplishments, and showing concern when things may not be going well, akin to what is assessed in the study as parental positive influence. While these qualities have been identified as predictors of adolescent romantic satisfaction, they are also arguably representative of behaviors that might promote positive development more broadly, potentially contributing to adolescents’ subsequent attitudes and behaviors toward others and their confidence pursuing goals as independent adults. Toleration and appreciation occurring within romantic relationships during late adolescence are thus expected to predict relative increases in positive personality traits, relational competence, and functional independence during young adulthood beyond contributions made by parental behavior.

Malleability of outcomes and potential confounds

Although personality traits, relational competence, and functional independence are likely to have a high degree of stability over time (e.g., Jones et al., 2018), the 20s are thought to be a time of exploration and experimentation during which competencies are both actively constructed and revised, suggesting opportunity for change (Arnett, 2000). Indeed, research supports that the ways in which people relate to others and the world may change during young adulthood as a function of their life experiences (Roberts et al., 2008). As such, this study aims to examine relative change in desirable adult outcomes by observing levels of each outcome at age 27 relative to their initially recorded levels at age 23. This strengthens the position that hypothesized parental and romantic predictors would not simply predict higher levels of desirable outcomes that remain static (or are only best predicted by earlier levels of themselves), but actually predict relative changes in the outcomes in question beyond a baseline comparison.

Likewise, the study controls for participants’ reports of cumulative positive life events that youth experience beyond our predictors of interest, given that such cumulative life events have been shown to predict long-term changes in adaptive behavior (Shiner et al., 2017). Controlling for positive life events experienced helps to increase confidence in the value of observed associations between parental and romantic predictors and positive adult outcomes. That is, even if positive parenting and romantic relationship experiences “go together” with other positive life events that could help predict positive outcomes, this study accounts for this possibility in its models and is thus better able to determine the unique effects of parenting and romantic behaviors.

Current Study

Theory and research suggest that behaviors from both parents and romantic partners experienced during adolescence are likely to have positive long-term effects for youth. However, research has yet to identify which specific types of parent and romantic behaviors might predict such effects, and during which stages of adolescence each type of relationship and behavior might be most salient for long-term development. As such, the present study examines how parental acceptance and successful parental positive influence behaviors in early and late adolescence (ages 13 and 18), and similar behaviors of appreciation and toleration within romantic relationships during late adolescence (age 18), predict relative changes in positive personality, relational competence, and functional independence between ages 23 and 27. This study predicts that parental behaviors during early adolescence (age 13) reflecting parental acceptance and successful parental positive influence will predict relative increases in positive personality traits, relational competence, and functional independence during early adulthood (between ages 23 and 27; Hypothesis 1). Because romantic partners take on greater importance as adolescence progresses, it is also hypothesized that romantic behaviors that occur during late adolescence (age 18) will significantly predict relative increases in these markers of positive adult development between ages 23 and 27 beyond predictions by parental behaviors at age 13 or 18 (Hypothesis 2).

Methods

Participants and Procedure

These data are taken from a larger longitudinal study on adolescent and adult development. Initially, participants were recruited from the 7th and 8th grades of a public middle school in the Southeastern United States with both suburban and urban populations. First, students were recruited through an initial mailing to all parents of students in the school. Next, those who were interested in the study were contacted by telephone. Informed consent from the parents and informed assent from all participants were obtained before each interview session when the participant was under 18 years old. Later, informed consent was obtained directly from the participants after age 18. Participants included 184 individuals (86 male, 98 female) followed over a 14-year period from approximately ages 13 (M = 13.32; SD = 0.65) to 27 (M = 26.64; SD = 1.00). The community sample was diverse in terms of race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status: 56% identified as White, 29% as African American, 8% as mixed race/ethnicity, and 5% as other. When adolescents were 13, their parents reported a median family income around $50,000. Parents also reported their education level, with 39% of mothers and 50% of fathers reporting completing college or post-graduate work. At mean age 13 participants completed questionnaires about their parents’ behavior. Follow-up data was obtained for participants across ages 17–19 (M = 18.35; SD = 1.03) on these measures. Additionally, if participants reported being in a romantic relationship lasting 3 months or longer between the ages of 17–19 (n = 97; Ms = 17.26–19.58; SDs = 0.85–1.06), they were asked to complete questionnaires about their current romantic relationship. Participants provided data about their romantic relationships, and the average duration of these romantic relationships was 14 months (M = 14.04; SD = 12.55). Participants also provided follow-up data at mean age 23 (M = 23.73; SD = 0.96), and 27 (M = 26.64; SD = 1.00) regarding their social functioning, personality, and major life events. Participants were given the option to complete questionnaires in-person in a private room in a University building or to complete and return mailed questionnaires; most participants chose to return mailed questionnaires.

Attrition Analyses

Attrition analyses examined potential differences on study variables for participants who did vs. did not complete all assessments across each study time point. Of the 184 participants who provided data at age 13, data were available for 178 participants at age 18, 155 participants at age 23, and 147 participants at age 27. Additionally, 97 participants at ages 17–19 completed questionnaires about their current romantic relationship. There were no observed differences on age 13 study variables for participants who did vs. did not have follow-up data at age 18. Participants who had complete data at age 23 were more likely to report higher levels of appreciation in their romantic relationships at age 18; there were no other differences. Finally, participants with complete data at age 27 reported greater successful efforts by their parents to positively influence them at age 13; there were no other differences.

To best address potential biases due to missing data within waves, Full Information Maximum Likelihood methods were utilized for all analyses, including all variables that were linked to future missing data (i.e., where data were not completely missing at random). These procedures have been found to provide the least biased estimates when all available data are used for longitudinal analyses (Arbuckle, 1996). No data is estimated or imputed in this procedure; rather, it simply accounts and corrects for biases due to missing data. As a result, all analyses reflect the entire sample for which there was data at age 27 (n = 147). Alternative longitudinal analyses using only those without any missing data yielded results that were substantially identical to those reported below.

Measures

Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, and Emotional Stability (age 23, 27)

To assess adult personality characteristics, participants responded to 50 items from the International Personality Item Pool (IPIP; Goldberg, 1999) when they were 23, and again when they were 27. Respondents rated a series of statements on a scale from 1 (very inaccurate) to 5 (very accurate). The present analyses focus on the three 10-item scales of Agreeableness (e.g., “I am concerned about others”), Conscientiousness (e.g., “I pay attention to details”), and Emotional Stability (e.g., “I am relaxed most of the time”). The IPIP has been widely used in studies of adult personality (see Goldberg et al., 2006) and shows good psychometric properties and convergent validity with other validated personality indices (e.g., Lim & Ployhart, 2006). Internal consistencies in the present sample at ages 23 and 27, respectively, were: agreeableness αs = 0.74, 0.80; conscientiousness αs = 0.77, 0.84; emotional stability αs = 0.89, 0.89.

Attachment Closeness, Reliable Alliance, and Nurturance (age 23, 27)

Characteristics of adult relational competence were assessed on the 24-item Social Provisions Scale (SPS; Cutrona and Russell, 1987); the present analyses focus on three key dimensions of Attachment Closeness, Reliable Alliance, and Nurturance. Respondents rated a series of four statements regarding to what extent a statement described their current relationships with other people; responses range from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree). The Attachment Closeness subscale includes the items: “I feel that I do not have close personal relationships with other people” (reversed); “I have close relationships that provide me with a sense of emotional security and well-being”; “I feel a strong emotional bond with at least one other person”; “I lack a feeling of intimacy with another person” (reversed). The Reliable Alliance subscales includes the items: “There are people I can depend on to help me if I really need it”; “If something went wrong, no one would come to my assistance” (reversed); “There is no one I can depend on for aid if I really need it” (reversed); “There are people I can count on in an emergency”. The Nurturance subscale includes the items: “There are people who depend on me for help”; “I feel personally responsible for the well-being of another person”; “There is no one who really relies on me for their well-being” (reversed); “No one needs me to care for them” (reversed). The SPS shows good convergent and predictive validity with established indicators of social support, loneliness, and mental health (Cutrona & Russell, 1987; Russell et al., 1980; Vogel & Wei, 2005). Internal consistencies in the present sample at ages 23 and 27, respectively, were: attachment closeness αs = 0.60, 0.67; reliable alliance αs = 0.67, 0.69; nurturance αs = 0.54, 0.75.

Functional Independence (age 23, 27)

Functional Independence was assessed via a 5-item questionnaire completed by adolescents’ best friend related to their perceptions of the participant’s independence. Participants could select a different best friend at age 27, and 61% of adolescents chose to do so. Items for this scale were taken from the Young Adult Adjustment Scale by Capaldi et al. (1992). Items included “Is a responsible adult,” “Is able to take care of himself/herself,” “Is financially independent,” “Is happy,” and, “Is successful.” Internal consistency for this scale was 0.88 at age 23 and 0.87 at age 27.

Positive Life Events (age 23–27)

The Life Events Survey (LES; Sarason et al., 1978) comprises 57 items reflecting events that occurred in the past year (e.g., “major change in financial status,” “engagement,” “ending formal schooling”). Participants respond on an 8-point scale, with 0 indicating that the event did not occur, and scores of 1–7 indicating the impact of the event (1 = extremely negative, 4 = no impact, 7 = extremely positive). Positively impactful events (i.e., those rated 5–7) are rescaled on 1–3 positive impact scale and then summed to derive a Positive Change score. This study used the mean of Positive Changes across ages 23–27.

Parental Acceptance (age 13, 18)

Target participants completed the 30-item version of the Childhood Report of Parenting Behavior (CRPBI; Schaefer, 1965; Schludermann & Schludermann, 1970, 1988) when they were 13 and 18. The 10-item Acceptance scale includes items such as “My mother/father is a person who enjoys doing things with me”. Respondents indicate the extent to which each item is not like, somewhat like, or a lot like their parent. Ratings for maternal and paternal acceptance were averaged to yield a combined parental acceptance score from the perception of the adolescent. The CRPBI shows good psychometric properties and convergent validity with multiple dimensions of family functioning and adolescent outcomes (e.g., Schaefer, 1965; Schludermann & Schludermann, 1970; Steinberg et al., 1989). At ages 13 and 18, respectively, Cronbach’s αs were 0.89, 0.92 for maternal acceptance and 0.89, 0.93 for paternal acceptance in the present sample.

Parental Positive Influence Behaviors (age 13, 18)

The Ways Peer/Parent Influence Questionnaire (WPIQ) was used to assess multiple sources of social influence on adolescents’ lives, including from their parents. Items were developed for the present study and derived from established measures of social influence, including measures of parental monitoring/control. The present analyses focus on adolescents’ perceptions of their parents’ actual influence (as opposed to attempted influence) in three ways: the degree to which parents give helpful advice, think well of their adolescent, and model positive behavior. These modes of influence were assessed by asking teens to report about the reasons why they do or do not engage in five different types of behaviors. One example behavior assessed asked participants: “Which of the following explain why you act towards and treat other kids a certain way?” Participants then read prompts including (a) “My parents explain to me how I should act towards and treat other kids” (parents give helpful advice), (b) “My parents will say good things about me or be proud of me if I act towards and treat other kids a certain way” (think well of their adolescent), (c) “My parents act toward and treat other people a certain way, so I do those things too” (model positive behavior). Finally, participants responded to each prompt by selecting one of the following options listed in parentheses: “That’s (a big / a medium / a small/ not a) reason why I hang out with certain people and do certain things with my friends”. This format was followed to assess parental influence as reasons why participants: “hang out with certain people and do certain things with your friends”; “obey your parents or follow their rules”, “don’t go very far with your sexual experiences (no modeling question)”; and, “don’t drink alcohol or use drugs”. Higher scores indicate parents’ behavior as a bigger perceived reason for their own behavior. Cronbach’s αs at age 13 were: parents give helpful advice α = 0.74, parents think well of their adolescent α = 0.83, parents model positive behavior α = 0.61. When participants were 18, they completed this measure again. Cronbach’s αs at age 18 were: parents give helpful advice α = 0.82, parents think well of their adolescent α = 0.76, parents model positive behavior α = 0.62.

Romantic Appreciation and Tolerance (age 18)

The Relationship Experiences Questionnaire (REQ; Levesque, 1993) was designed to measure dyadic experiences most relevant to romantic relationship satisfaction. Participants rated 72 statements about how they are treated within their relationship with their respective partner, including two scales used in the present analyses: Appreciation (e.g., “He thinks my ideas are important; He knows when something is bothering me”) and Toleration (e.g., “She is patient with me; She takes me for what I am”). Respondents indicate their agreement with each of six statements on a 6-point scale (1 = strongly disagree, 6 = strongly agree). The measure demonstrated good internal reliability in the present sample, α = 0.85 and 0.77 for Appreciation and Toleration, respectively.

Results

Preliminary Analyses

Univariate and correlational analyses

Means and standard deviations for all primary variables are presented in Table 1. For descriptive purposes, correlations were examined between all key variables of interest and are presented in Tables 2 and 3. These analyses revealed that gender and family income had significant associations with several primary variables. Female participants were more likely to report greater parental acceptance (r = 0.22, p < 0.01) and greater successful positive parental influence at age 18 (r = 0.34, p < 0.001), and scored higher on the measure of agreeableness (r = 0.23, p < 0.01) and lower on the measure of emotional stability (r = −0.31, p < 0.001) at age 27. Higher levels of household income at adolescent age 13 were associated with greater parental acceptance (r = 0.16, p < 0.05) but lower successful positive parental influence (r = −0.34, p < 0.001) at age 13. Both demographic variables were included as covariates in all regression analyses to account for any effects that may not have reached conventional levels of statistical significance in correlational analyses.

Table 1.

Descriptive statistics for study variables

Variable	N	Mean	SD	Min	Max
Gender (59 male, 88 female)	147	–	–	–	–
Income	144	40–60K/year	−	<$5K/year	>$60K/year
Positive Life Events (23–27)	147	9.82	6.73	1	50
Parental Acceptance (13)	146	25.37	3.56	13	30
Parental Influence (13)	145	2.80	0.68	1	4
Parental Acceptance (18)	143	24.24	4.32	11	30
Parental Influence (18)	138	1.93	0.68	0.88	4
Romantic Partner Toleration (18)	82	27.05	3.05	17	30
Romantic Partner Appreciation (18)	83	33.39	3.29	24	36
Agreeableness (23)	135	40.01	5.43	22	50
Conscientiousness (23)	135	37.20	6.16	18	50
Emotional Stability (23)	135	34.04	8.90	11	49
Nurturance (23)	137	12.05	2.17	6	16
Attachment (23)	135	13.37	2.23	7	16
Reliable Alliance (23)	132	14.57	1.83	7	16
Functional Independence (27)	117	20.07	4.57	7	25
Agreeableness (27)	147	40.31	5.80	23	50
Conscientiousness (27)	147	37.78	6.93	12	50
Emotional Stability (27)	147	33.85	8.58	15	50
Nurturance (27)	141	12.53	2.61	5	16
Attachment (27)	140	13.75	2.18	6	16
Reliable Alliance (27)	141	14.56	1.86	7	16
Functional Independence (27)	123	19.78	4.61	6	25

Table 2.

Correlations between study variables

	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15
1. Gender	–
2. Income	−0.11	–
3. Positive Life Events (23–27)	0.02	−0.13	–
4. Parental Acceptance (13)	−0.04	0.16*	−0.02	–
5. Parental Influence (13)	0.12	−0.34***	0.00	0.07	–
6. Parental Acceptance (18)	0.22**	0.13	0.09	0.41***	0.15	–
7. Parental Influence (18)	0.34***	−0.10	0.16*	0.09	0.35***	0.28***	–
8. Romantic Partner Toleration (18)	0.03	0.21	0.11	0.07	0.04	0.16	−0.05	–
9. Romantic Partner	0.09	0.16	0.11	0.06	0.11	0.23*	−0.03	0.66***	–
Appreciation (18)
10. Agreeableness (27)	0.23**	0.16	0.17*	0.30**	−0.01	0.34***	0.28***	0.14	0.17	–
11. Conscientiousness (27)	0.12	0.03	0.24**	0.08	0.17*	0.13	0.19*	0.25*	0.10	0.42***	–
12. Emotional Stability (27)	−0.31***	−0.08	0.06	0.01	0.27***	0.01	0.01	0.22*	0.12	0.19*	0.38***	–
13. Nurturance (27)	0.06	−0.12	0.20*	0.12	0.18*	0.20*	0.11	0.39***	0.18	0.23**	0.36***	0.19*	–
14. Attachment (27)	0.02	0.14	0.14	0.15	0.08	0.37***	0.22**	0.36***	0.29**	0.44***	0.40***	0.30**	0.42***	–
15. Reliable Alliance (27)	0.13	0.01	0.16*	0.11	0.03	0.27***	0.11	0.35***	0.23*	0.39***	0.36***	0.24**	0.31**	0.61***	–
16. Functional Independence (27)	0.10	0.10	0.00	−0.02	−0.06	−0.06	0.06	0.12	0.24*	0.16	0.09	0.26**	−0.06	0.06	0.17

Numbers in parentheses indicate the ages at which adolescents were assessed

^*p < 0.05,

^**p < 0.01,

^***p < 0.001

Table 3.

Correlations between outcome variables and potential confounds

	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15	16
1. Gender	–
2. Income	−0.11	–
3. Positive Life Events (23–27)	0.02	−0.13	–
4. Agreeableness (23)	0.18*	0.23**	0.12	–
5. Conscientiousness (23)	0.10	0.05	0.11	0.54***	–
6. Emotional Stability (23)	−0.28**	0.03	−0.08	0.16	0.31***	–
7. Nurturance (23)	0.04	0.02	0.23**	0.16	0.20**	0.05	–
8. Attachment (23)	0.05	0.15	0.03	0.36***	0.36***	0.34***	0.45***	–
9. Reliable Alliance (23)	0.07	0.09	0.04	0.42***	0.35***	0.26**	0.27**	0.56***	–
10. Functional	−0.07	0.09	−0.04	0.05	0.05	0.10	−0.07	−0.08	−0.07	–
Independence (23)
11. Agreeableness (27)	0.23**	0.16	0.17*	0.53***	0.34***	0.16	0.25**	0.28***	0.38***	−0.09	–
12. Conscientiousness (27)	0.12	0.03	0.24**	0.17*	0.59***	0.27**	0.30***	0.32***	0.26**	−0.01	0.42***	–
13. Emotional Stability (27)	−0.31***	−0.08	0.06	0.10	0.21*	0.68***	0.23**	0.24**	0.14	0.09	0.19*	0.38***	–
14. Nurturance (27)	0.07	−0.12	0.20*	0.03	0.17*	0.12	0.57***	0.23**	0.27**	0.00	0.23**	0.36***	0.19*	–
15. Attachment (27)	0.02	0.14	0.14	0.24**	0.24**	0.21*	0.44***	0.50***	0.51***	0.01	0.44***	0.40***	0.30**	0.42***	–
16. Reliable Alliance (27)	0.13	0.01	0.16*	0.36***	0.29***	0.19*	0.24**	0.29***	0.49***	0.09	0.39***	0.36***	0.24**	0.31**	0.61***	–
17. Functional Independence (27)	0.10	0.10	0.00	0.17	0.02	0.17	−0.06	0.00	0.06	0.41***	0.16	0.09	0.26**	−0.06	0.06	0.17

Numbers in parentheses indicate the ages at which adolescents were assessed

^*p < 0.05,

^**p < 0.01,

^***p < 0.001

Preliminary analyses also investigated possible associations between predictor, control, and outcome variables. Results of these correlational analyses revealed several positive significant associations between parental and romantic partner predictors and outcome variables. Outcome variables were moderately positively correlated with one another, suggesting these variables represented related but not redundant constructs. The outcome variables assessed at age 27 demonstrated significant correlations with their respective assessments at age 23 (rs 0.41–0.67, all ps < 0.001), suggesting moderate stability (see Table 3). Finally, the control variable of cumulative positive life events experienced across ages 23–27 was positively correlated with the outcome variables of agreeableness (r = 0.17, p < 0.05), conscientiousness (r = 0.24, p < 0.01), nurturance (r = 0.20, p < 0.05), and reliable alliance (r = 0.16, p < 0.05) at age 27.

Primary Analyses

Hypotheses were tested using hierarchical regression modeling to assess the unique contributions of primary variables to variance predicted in outcomes indicative of positive adult development. At Step 1, participant gender and household income were entered into the model. At Step 2, the respective age 23 assessment of the outcome variable was entered. At Step 3, the positive life events variable from ages 23–27 was entered. At Step 4, parental acceptance and successful positive influence at age 13 were entered. At Step 5, parental acceptance and successful positive influence at age 18 were entered. At Step 6, romantic partner toleration and appreciation at age 18 were entered. Tables 4 and 5 illustrate the variance explained at each step as well as the unique effects of each variable in the final models with all predictor and control variables included.

Table 4.

Predicting relative changes in positive personality traits from ages 23–27 from parent and romantic partner behaviors in early and late adolescence

	Agreeableness (27)				Conscientiousness (27)				Emotional Stability (27)
	β final	95% Cl	ΔR 2	R 2	β final	95% Cl	ΔR 2	R 2	β final	95% Cl	ΔR 2	R 2
Step I			0.08**	0.08*			0.02	0.02			0.11***	0.11***
Gender	0.06	−0.08, 0.20			0.04	−0.09, 0.19			−0.17	−0.30, 0.04
Income	0.03	−0.12, 0.17			0.08	−0.06, 0.23			−0.06	−0.19, 0.06
Step II			0.21***	0.29***			0.30***	0.34***			0.38***	0.49***
Outcome	0.43***	0.30, 0.57			0.53***	0.40, 0.65			0.61***	0.50, 0.71
Variable (23)
Step III			0.01	0.30***			0.04**	0.38***			0.01	0.50***
Positive Life	0.07	−0.06, 0.21			0.18**	0.04, 0.31			0.10	−0.02, 0.22
Events (23–27)
Step IV			0.05**	0.35***			0.02	0.40***			0.04**	0.54***
Parent	0.15*	0.01, 0.30			−0.03	−0.18, 0.11			−0.02	−0.14, 0.10
Acceptance (13)
Parent	−0.06	−0.21, 0.10			0.15*	0.01, 0.30			0.21*	0.07, 0.34
Influence (13)
Step V			0.05**	0.40***			0.01	0.41***			0.00	0.54***
Parent	0.11	−0.05, 0.27			0.01	−0.14, 0.17			0.01	−0.13, 0.15
Acceptance (18)
Parent	0.23**	0.07, 0.39			0.06	−0.08, 0.21			−0.01	−0.13, 0.13
Influence (18)
Step VI			0.01	0.41***			0.01	0.42***			0.02	0.56***
RP	−0.02	−0.26, 0.22			0.17	−0.05, 0.40			0.19	−0.01, 0.38
Toleration (18)
RP	0.10	−0.14, 0.35			−0.14	−0.37, 0.08			−0.08	−0.28, 0.11
Appreciation (18)

RP romantic partner

^*p < 0.05,

^**p < 0.01,

^***p < 0.001

Table 5.

Predicting relative changes in independence and relational competence from ages 23–27 from parent and romantic partner behaviors in early and late adolescence

	Nurturance (27)				Attachment (27)				Reliable Alliance (27)				Functional Independence (27)
	β final	95% Cl	ΔR 2	R 2	β final	95% Cl	ΔR 2	R 2	β final	95% Cl	ΔR 2	R 2	β final	95% Cl	ΔR 2	R 2
Step I			0.02	0.02			0.02	0.02			0.02	0.02			0.02	0.02
Gender	0.05	−0.10, 0.19			−0.08	−0.23, 0.07			0.08	−0.07, 0.23			0.14	−0.03, 0.31
Income	−0.18*	−0.34, −0.02			−0.02	−0.18, 0.14			−0.08	−0.24, 0.08			0.10	−0.08, 0.27
Step II			0.30***	0.32***			0.25***	0.25***			0.23***	0.25***			0.17***	0.19***
Outcome	0.50***	0.35, 0.64			0.35***	0.17, 0.52			0.48***	0.31, 0.64			0.51***	0.34, 0.68
Variable (23)
Step III			0.00	0.32***			0.01	0.26***			0.01	0.26***			0.00	0.19***
Positive Life	0.04	−0.10, 0.18			0.05	−0.10, 0.18			0.06	−0.09, 0.21			−0.04	−0.21, 0.12
Events (23–27)
Step IV			0.01	0.33***			0.01	0.27***			0.00	0.26***			0.00	0.19***
Parent	0.04	−0.11, 0.20			−0.03	−0.18, 0.11			−0.04	−0.21, 0.12			0.04	−0.12, 0.22
Acceptance (13)
Parent	0.04	−0.13, 0.20			−0.03	−0.20, 0.13			−0.06	−0.23, 0.11			0.01	−0.18, 0.19
Influence (13)
Step V			0.01	0.34***			0.06**	0.33***			0.01	0.27***			0.05*	0.24***
Parent	0.04	−0.11, 0.23			0.25**	0.07, 0.42			0.08	−0.10, 0.26			−0.26**	−0.46, −0.07
Acceptance (18)
Parent	−0.02	−0.19, 0.14			0.16	−0.01, 0.32			−0.01	−0.16, 0.18			0.08	−0.10, 0.26
Influence (18)
Step VI			0.05*	0.39***			0.08***	0.41***			0.09***	0.36***			0.10***	0.34***
RP	0.30**	0.07, 0.52			0.34**	−0.09, 0.58			0.41***	0.18, 0.63			−0.08	−0.37, 0.19
Toleration (18)
RP	−0.18	−0.43, 0.06			0.14	−0.32, 0.21			−0.18	−0.43, 0.07			0.41**	0.14, 0.68
Appreciation (18)

RP romantic partner

^*p < 0.05,

^**p < 0.01,

^***p < 0.001

Hypothesis 1

Parents’ behaviors at adolescent age 13 will predict relative increases in positive personality, relational competence, and functional independence between ages 23 and 27.

In final models, parental acceptance at age 13 predicted a relative increase in young adult agreeableness at age 27 after controlling for agreeableness at age 23 (β = 0.15, p < 0.05). Similarly, successful positive parental influence at age 13 predicted relative increases in conscientiousness (β = 0.15, p < 0.05) and emotional stability (β = 0.21, p < 0.05) at age 27 after controlling for these outcomes in respective models at age 23.

Although parental behaviors at age 18 were not hypothesized to be associated with relative changes in independence or relational competence in final models, parental acceptance at age 18 predicted a relative increase in young adult attachment closeness at age 27 after controlling for attachment closeness at age 23 (β = 0.25, p < 0.01). Parental acceptance at age 18 also predicted a relative decrease in functional independence after controlling for functional independence at age 23 (β = −0.26, p < 0.01). Successful positive parental influence predicted a relative increase in agreeableness at age 27 after controlling for agreeableness at age 23 (β = 0.23, p < 0.01).

Hypothesis 2

Romantic behaviors at adolescent age 18 will predict relative increases in positive personality, relational competence, and functional independence between ages 23 and 27, after accounting for parental behaviors at ages 13 and 18. In final models, romantic toleration behavior at age 18 predicted a relative increase in young adult nurturance (β = 0.30, p < 0.01), attachment (β = 0.34, p < 0.01), and reliable alliance (β = 0.41, p < 0.001) at age 27 after controlling for these outcomes in respective models at age 23. Romantic appreciation at age 18 predicted a relative increase in functional independence (β = 0.41, p < 0.01) at age 27 after controlling for functional independence at age 23.

Post-hoc Analyses

Post-hoc analyses also examined whether or not parents’ early behavior toward adolescents predicted future behaviors with adolescents’ romantic partners, with parents’ behaviors perhaps setting the stage for selecting partners who may help promote additional personal growth. However, there were no correlations between parental variables at age 13 and romantic relationship variables at age 18. There was only one significant positive correlation between parental acceptance at age 18 and romantic partner appreciation at age 18 (r = 0.23, p < 0.05).

Interactions between parent and romantic variables were also tested for exploratory purposes. These variables were standardized and interaction terms were created by multiplying each parent variable by each of the romantic variables to create a total of six interaction terms. These were added a block to the models described above. Significant interactions were graphed, with high and low values representing 1 SD above and below the mean, respectively, with particular interest in identifying the conditions for higher levels of positive personality traits, relational competence, and functional independence. Five significant interactions were significant and graphed and are described below.

Higher levels of emotional stability were predicted when successful positive parental influence at 18 was low and romantic tolerance at 18 was high (β = 0.20, p = 0.03). Higher levels of nurturance were predicted when successful positive parental influence at 18 was low and romantic appreciation at 18 was low (β = 0.30, p = 0.01). Higher levels of attachment were predicted when successful positive parental influence at 18 was high and romantic appreciation at 18 was high (but also when successful positive parental influence at 18 was low and romantic appreciation at 18 was low; β = 0.30, p = 0.02). Higher levels of reliable alliance were predicted when parental acceptance at 13 was high and romantic appreciation at 18 was low (β = −0.31, p = 0.006). Higher levels of functional independence were predicted when successful positive parental influence at 18 was high and romantic tolerance at 18 was high (β = 0.37, p = 0.01).

Sensitivity/Alternate Model Analyses

Alternative models replicating those described above, but with age 23 controls removed, were also examined. Results indicated that all previously reported significant results for personality outcomes at age 27 remained significant with one exception: successful positive parental influence at age 13 was no longer a statistically significant predictor of conscientiousness (β = 0.15, p = 0.08; previous β = 0.15, p < 0.05). Additionally, in these models, romantic toleration became a significant predictor of both conscientiousness (β = 0.33, p = 0.01; previous β = 0.17, ns) and emotional stability (β = 0.26, p = 0.03; previous β = 0.19, ns). All previously reported significant results for relational competence/functional independence measures remained significant. Additionally, successful positive parental influence at age 18 became a statistically significant predictor of attachment (β = 0.18, p < 0.05; previous β = 0.16, ns).

Analyses also examined whether or not having a romantic partner at age 18 predicted any of the age 27 outcome variables. There were no correlations between romantic partner status at age 18 and any outcome variables. Having a romantic partner at age 18 was associated with greater perceived acceptance from parents at age 13 (r = 0.23, p < 0.01) and at age 18 (r = 0.21, p = 0.01). Analyses also examined whether or not there were any significant differences on predictor variables for youth who had a romantic partner at age 18 and lived at home with their parents at age 18 (vs. did not). Out of the 82 youth who had romantic data at age 18, 65 reported living at home with their parents. Comparisons revealed no significant differences.

Finally, although this article focused on the personality characteristics of agreeableness, conscientiousness, and emotional stability due to their particular salience to developmentally relevant outcomes, data were also available for the personality characteristics of openness and extraversion. As such, models were tested with these outcome variables as well. None of the parent or romantic variables predicted openness, with or without age 23 openness as a control. Instead, a relative change in openness was only predicted by more cumulative positive life events across ages 23–27 (β = 0.23, p = 0.001). A relative increase in extraversion was also predicted by cumulative positive life events across ages 23–27 (β = 0.21 p = 0.001), but also by successful parental positive influence behaviors at age 13 (β = 0.16, p = 0.03).

Discussion

Adolescence has been characterized as a sensitive period for the social brain, and research suggests that supportive parental behavior during such sensitive periods of development may effectively get “under the skin” to shape development across adolescence and into adulthood (Blakemore & Mills, 2014; Moutsiana et al., 2015, Whittle et al., 2014). The emergence of romantic relationships during late adolescence, however, often marks the beginning of a developmentally appropriate shift toward increased time and attention to, and possibly influence from, romantic partners (Surjadi et al., 2011). As such, the relative contribution of experiences with parents and romantic partners during adolescence for predicting long-term markers of young adulthood positive development remains unclear. It is important to address this gap to better understand the types of parenting behaviors that might be important to positive development in young adulthood, at what time points during adolescence they might be most critical, and, if and when behaviors from romantic partners may begin to surpass those of parents for predicting positive development. The present study examined how specific behaviors within relationships with parents and romantic partners in early and late adolescence (ages 13 and 18) predict relative changes in personality traits, relational competence, and functional independence during young adulthood (between ages 23 and 27). Results of final models revealed that parents’ acceptance and successful positive influence behaviors at age 13 predicted relative increases in positive personality characteristics between age 23 and 27. A developmental shift was largely observed at age 18, with romantic partner behaviors more robustly predicting relative increases in relational competence and functional independence.

Parental Behaviors as Predictors of Positive Adult Development

With regard to personality traits, the confluence of agreeableness, conscientiousness, and emotional stability has been linked to adaptive functioning in adulthood and a variety of positive life outcomes (DeYoung et al., 2002; Digman, 1997). Previous research has demonstrated that high levels of parental warmth and low hostility may predict increases in these personality traits during adolescence (Schofield et al., 2012), and the current findings extend this work into young adulthood. In the present study, parents’ successful positive influence behaviors and acceptance of adolescents, particularly in early adolescence, predicted relative increases in positive personality traits in young adulthood. It was hypothesized that qualities of relationships with parents occurring earlier versus later in adolescence would be more likely to predict changes in key outcomes, and the present findings support this idea, at least in terms of personality traits examined. Such positive parenting behavior may be particularly meaningful during early adolescence, when parents typically still serve as adolescents’ primary attachment figures (Rosenthal & Kobak, 2010). Teens may have a stronger tendency to look to their parents for how to act and carry themselves at this age, as compared to mid or late adolescence when they begin to look more to peers for such cues. One possible explanation may be that parents’ acceptance and positive influence behavior may effectively guide their adolescents toward more adaptive ways of interacting with others and the world. Perhaps when later faced with greater demands and responsibilities throughout their adolescence and young adulthood, such youth respond by more strongly adopting the tendencies set forth by their earlier experiences with their parents.

Parental behavior that occurs in later adolescence may play a lesser role in predicting positive adult development as adolescents increasingly shift their time and attention toward peers and romantic partners and consider them more influential sources of support (Rosenthal & Kobak, 2010). Thus, successful parental positive influence behaviors and acceptance of adolescents at age 18 were hypothesized to have a lesser effect on adult outcomes. Results provided partial support for this hypothesis, as there were some effects of parental behavior at age 18 that emerged. Parents’ acceptance of adolescents at 18 predicted a relative increase in attachment closeness to others in young adulthood, and successful parental positive influence behaviors at 18 predicted a relative increase in agreeableness. These results are consistent with attachment theory and research demonstrating links between positive experiences with accepting caregivers and the development of secure attachment and the capacity for healthy intimacy (Ainsworth et al., 1978; Bowlby, 1969/1982; Sroufe, 2005). Moreover, the positive influence behaviors assessed in this study are framed as efforts to help youth navigate different aspects of interpersonal situations, and it may be that such socialization during late adolescence helps youth develop adaptive social skills that are particularly relevant during the young adulthood timeframe. Indeed, there were several significant correlations between age 18 parental behaviors and relational competence measures that became diminished in final regression models. The presence of these associations thus offers some support for the continued importance of parents’ behavior toward youth during late adolescence when considered independently of romantic partners.

Contrary to predictions, however, parents’ acceptance of adolescents at age 18 predicted relative decreases in functional independence during young adulthood. One possible explanation for this finding may be that adolescents’ perceptions of high parental acceptance during later adolescence reflects a lack of the normative push for autonomy that adolescents negotiate with parents, and therefore a subsequent decrease in independence during young adulthood. Research suggests that personal growth and autonomy may be facilitated by adolescent relationships that both challenge and support adolescents in appropriate ways (Neyer & Asendorf, 2001; Syed & Seiffge-Krenke, 2013). Higher perceived parental acceptance during this period may be associated with a lack of developmentally appropriate challenge and allow increased dependency on parents in young adulthood.

Romantic Behaviors as Predictors of Positive Adult Development

Romantic partners’ toleration behaviors at age 18 predicted relative increases in attachment closeness, nurturance, and reliable alliance during young adulthood. Toleration was defined by expressions of patience, acceptance, and forgiveness within the romantic relationship. Experiencing these behaviors in late adolescence from a peer who is perhaps less obligated to express them relative to parents may breed a willingness to trust and be open to closeness in future relationships. Indeed, romantic relationships that contribute to a positive sense of self have been shown to be key predictors of later global satisfaction and total life stress as ages 26 and 28, respectively, after controlling for the parent–child relationship at age 13 (Englund et al., 2011). Thus, romantic relationships may provide an increasingly important context in which to practice skills for navigating mutually responsive social interactions. Further, given that the caregiving system continues to develop throughout adolescence (George & Solomon, 2016), romantic relationships may provide greater opportunities for adolescents to provide care in the form of nurturance and reliable alliance that they carry forward into young adulthood.

Notably, the only significant predictor of increasing functional independence during this young adulthood was romantic partner appreciation at age 18. Appreciation was operationalized by perceptions that romantic partners admired adolescents’ persistence in pursuing goals, showed adolescents respect, and expressed concern when something seemed to be troubling them. Such characteristics seem indicative of instrumental and emotional support for adolescents’ goal-driven behavior, and may help foster a sense of confidence and agency that is carried forward in young adulthood. It may be that this type of support in late adolescence may be more meaningful, or more well-received, than parents’ direct attempts to advise their adolescent at that age.

Interactions between Parent and Romantic Behaviors

Although the study did not have hypotheses about interactions between parent and romantic variables, tests of interactions revealed interesting insights into how behaviors from one relationship might compensate for another or how positive behaviors from both might better predict more positive outcomes. For example, higher levels of emotional stability were predicted when successful parental positive influence at 18 was low and romantic tolerance at 18 was high. Because of the heightened importance of peers and romantic partners in late adolescence, this pattern may reflect a normative developmental shift in looking more to a romantic partner for guidance as compared to parents at that age. Higher levels of both successful parental positive influence and romantic toleration at 18 predicted higher levels of functional independence, and high successful parental positive influence and romantic appreciation predicted higher levels of attachment, suggesting the ongoing importance of parental influence for helping youth to establish themselves as independent and form close relationships in young adulthood. Interestingly, higher levels of attachment were also predicted when successful parental positive influence and romantic appreciation at 18 were low. It would be interesting to know which relationships youth might feel most closely attached to under these conditions; perhaps youth may be motivated to look outside of parental and romantic relations for closeness and friendships may fill a gap in these circumstances. Nurturance was also higher when successful parental positive influence and romantic appreciation were low, suggesting that perhaps youth may be more motivated to provide support to others when they perceive themselves as receiving less of it.

Study Limitations and Future Directions

It is particularly notable that the parental and romantic partner behaviors assessed in this study predicted relative changes during young adulthood after controlling for baseline measurements that already accounted for substantial variance in the outcomes of interest. This suggests that these behaviors, captured during early and late adolescence, may be setting a foundation of skills and values that are not be fully needed or appreciated until early adulthood. For example, there may be something uniquely critical about experiencing positive behaviors from parents in early adolescence, and from romantic partners in late adolescence, that perhaps kindles self-confidence which builds over time toward beliefs of efficacy in challenging situations and comfort being oneself in relationships with others. But such behaviors may also be setting in motion developmental processes that are not accounted for in the present study. It is quite possible that behaviors from parents in early adolescence predict how youth will interact first with friends, and that the development of positive friendships further cascades toward the development of relational skills necessary for entering into positive romantic relationships. Moreover, positive romantic relationships at age 18 may predict qualities of romantic relationships in young adulthood that may be even more strongly related to this study’s outcomes. Thus, the effects observed in the present study, though clearly relevant for understanding potential paths toward positive development in young adulthood, may only capture part of a larger developmental progression.

The present study was correlational, which also precludes conclusions about causality or the direction of influence. It is possible that relational competence or positive personality traits like agreeableness emerging earlier in adolescence contributed to adolescents’ ability to forge romantic relationships characterized by toleration and appreciation in late adolescence. Future work should leverage autoregressive models and experimental designs to better understand such possibilities. Although the study aimed to be inclusive by asking participants to consider both their mothers’ and fathers’ behaviors in order to create a broader measure of parental behavior, this approach presumes that parental effects are simply additive, which may well not be true when parents adopt radically different parenting styles. Future studies may benefit from a more nuanced examination of parental behaviors to determine if one parent’s more positive behavior may be able to compensate for less positive behavior from the other. Similarly, studies would benefit from assessing the amount of time spent with parents and romantic partners to better assess their opportunities for potential influence. Although having a friend report of functional independence may offer a more objective assessment as compared to self-report (which was not available for the present study), it is possible that results with this measure might be more in line with other findings when considering the participants’ perspective. The internal consistency for the relational competence measures were also lower than expected. It is possible that participants had difficulty with the reverse coded items, as correlations between items that were reversed and those that were not tended to be lower than between items phrased in the same direction. And as previously suggested, is also not yet clear by what mechanisms experiences with parents and romantic partners contribute to the growth of positive social and functional behavior in adulthood. Research should test alternative theory-grounded mechanisms of change, such as adolescents’ selection of more prosocial partners, neurobiological mechanisms of self-regulation, parent-coparent modeling of nurturing partner behavior, and “broaden-and-build” cycles of positive emotion and security in relationships (e.g., Mikulincer & Shaver, 2020).

Future work would also benefit from considering underlying contextual factors that may shape adolescents’ independence as well as their personality and social development. For example, it is possible that independence is supported by contextual factors not accounted for in the present study, such as financial stability, career opportunities, and environmental supports (e.g., access to affordable housing, or romantic partners providing additional financial support), rather than individual-level parental or romantic influences. Similarly, positive parental or romantic experiences may be more important among adolescents with one or more sources of social risk, or it may be that other contextual supports can buffer or compensate for the lack of positive experiences with parents or romantic partners and promote positive growth. It is also important to note that the observed study outcomes may only help individuals move toward a positive adulthood, and that many other factors are involved in determining and assessing such success (e.g., physical and mental health, job and relationship satisfaction).

Conclusion

Experiences with parents and romantic partners during adolescence have been identified as key contributors to youth positive development. However, there is a lack of evidence regarding the specific adolescent-era behaviors within these relationships that may predict relative increases in positive development during early adulthood. Moreover, questions remain about how the timing of these behaviors may be important to consider for predicting such development. This study thus addressed questions regarding the timing of and behaviors within adolescent-era relationships with parents and romantic partners that may be important for predicting adult positive development in the domains of personality, relational competence, and functional independence. Results supported the idea that behaviors experienced within adolescent relationships may be seeds for success that bear fruit over a decade later, but that relationships with parents and romantic partners may play unique roles during specific periods of development. Specifically, parental behaviors of acceptance and successful positive influence were particularly important during early adolescence for predicting positive changes in personality traits, even when considering potential contributions from later adolescent romantic experiences. This suggests that parents (and perhaps other adult caregivers in the adolescent’s life) should continue to make efforts to let their adolescents know they are appreciated and supported even as they are likely beginning to explore and give greater attention to relationships with peers during this time. Although there were some indications of these parental behaviors having some importance when occurring during later adolescence, these effects were diminished when considered together with behaviors occurring within late adolescent romantic relationships. Toleration and appreciation in romantic relationships predicted relative increases in relational competence and functional independence during young adulthood after considering effects of early and late adolescent parental behavior. Thus, although not all adolescent romantic relationships may bear equal weight for development, feeling particularly supported and respected by a romantic partner may help instill confidence and provide opportunities to practice important relational skills that help foster adult positive relationships and independence. Such findings suggest that adolescent romantic relationships, particularly those in later adolescence, deserve attention and support from parents and friends when they feature positive behaviors predictive of future positive development in young adulthood.

Biographies

David E. Szwedo is an Associate Professor at James Madison University. His major research interests include adolescent and young adult social development and online social networking behavior.

Jessica A. Stern is a Postdoctoral Fellow at the University of Virginia. Her major research interests include the development of attachment, empathy, and prosocial behavior.

Jessica Kansky is a Postdoctoral Fellow at the Medical University of South Carolina. Her major research interests include psychosocial predictors and outcomes of romantic relationships.

Emme Lis (MA) is a Market Researcher at Fors Marsh Group. Her major research interests include attachment and prosocial behaviors in romantic relationships.

Joseph P. Allen is a Professor at the University of Virginia. His major research interests include the development of autonomy and relatedness in adolescence and adolescent attachment organization.

Data Sharing and Declaration

This manuscript’s data will not be deposited.