The relation between psychological resilience and parental attitudes in adolescents: a systematic review

Abstract

This study aims to review empirical studies that have been conducted to identify parental attitudes or styles that influence the emergence of psychological resilience in adolescents. The researchers scanned English and Turkish articles published between 2008 and 2023 in the specified national and international databases and with the specified keywords. They reviewed 24 articles that met the exclusion and inclusion criteria. These articles are presented in terms of research methods and study results. According to the results, the study determined that supportive, authoritative, democratic, and caring parental attitudes created or increased psychological resilience, whereas neglectful and unfriendly parental attitudes negatively affected adolescents’ psychological resilience. Authoritarian parenting style has controversial effects on psychological resilience since culture’s influences. Additionally, the study found that high family expectations and supportive, caring, and warm parental attitudes have positive effects on psychological resilience. The quality of the studies analyzed was good. Samples are suitable, designs are high-quality and their statistical analyses were sufficient. However, further research may improve research designs and get more quality rating from assessment. Findings of the reviewed articles are discussed in the light of the literature and cultural context. In addition, the limitations are mentioned. Lastly, based on the reviewed articles’ findings, suggestions and implications were made to experts in the psychology and researchers in the field.

Introduction

The concept of psychological resilience is derived from the Latin root “resilire” and refers to the elasticity of a substance and its ability to easily return to its original form. (Greene, 2002; Benard, 2004). In another definition, Fraser (1997, p.136) define psychological resilience as “the ability to achieve positive and unexpected success under difficult circumstances and to adapt to unusual conditions and situations.” In various definitions of the concept of psychological resilience, there are three main points: (a) risk and/or difficulty, (b) positive adaptation, coping, competence, and (c) protective factors. The most important element of the concept of psychological resilience or psychological hardiness that we encounter in the literature is the ability to regain strength in the face of negative events (Olsson et al., 2003), and it presents individuals with the power to endure and fight against difficulties. Those who carry this power are able to recover from negative events and return to their old lives quicker. Psychologically resilient people exhibit the ability to fight against stress and adverse conditions, maintain their existence, and develop and excel in their lives (Eminağaoğlu, 2006). Individuals with high psychological resilience can turn the stress they experience into a situation that will benefit them (Earvolino-Ramirez, 2007). This situation is especially critical in adolescents. One can define psychological resilience as the presence of protective factors that reduce or eliminate the impact of negative life conditions called risk factors (Benard, 2004). The fact that psychologically resilient adolescents do not give up the fight immediately is a factor that will increase their ability to cope with stressful situations and reduce their risky behaviors (Earvolino-Ramirez, 2007).

A person having protective factors while shaping their personality increases psychological resilience. The attention and love one receives from the family, especially in childhood, affects the future life of the individual. Moreover, tensions and traumas experienced in the family at a young age shape the character of the individual over time. The experiences from an individual’s past form their characteristics when they reach adulthood (Sarıkaya, 2015). The significance of family attitudes in the development of adolescents as well as children cannot be overstated. Parental attitudes are one of the most important factors affecting the personality formation of children and adolescents (Savi Çakar & Akboy, 2010; Sarıkaya, 2015). Some familial factors constitute risk factors for adolescents while some constitute protective factors. Familial risk factors include both divorced and sick or deceased parents. Additionally, parental health problems and conflicts, presence of a mother or father with a mental/chronic illness, parents’ low education level, loss of parents due to divorce, separation, or death, socioeconomic status, hereditary diseases, parents’ harsh or inconsistent behaviors, adoption, domestic violence, abuse, and neglect are some of the familial risk factors (Coleman & Hagell, 2007; Gizir, 2007; Ritter, 2005; Ülker Tümlü & Recepoğlu, 2013). At the same time, growing up without the love and affection of the family is also considered a familial risk factor for the individual. In conclusion, considering when family factors, such as the child or adolescent having a positive close relationship with at least one parent or family member in the family, parents having realistic and high expectations for their children, and regular and effective monitoring of children, are important aspects for the academic and social success of children at risk (Buckner et al., 2003). In the related literature, there have been frequent investigations on the relation between the individual characteristics of adolescents and psychological resilience (Neff & McGehee, 2010; Ritter, 2005; Anghel, 2015). However, some of the parental attitudes, which are one of the most important factors in the formation of psychological resilience in adolescents, play a vital role in this process, as protective or as risk factors.

Parenting styles are group of strategies that include directly observable attitudes and behaviors in the child-rearing period. The concept of parenting styles emerged from Baumrind’s (1971) definitions of three groups: authoritative, permissive, and authoritarian parenting. These definitions include communication skills, compassion, warmth, and interventionism in certain proportions. In authoritarian parenting, parents are more strict, and unemotional authorities and parents expect the child/adolescent to comply with their wishes. In the permissive parental attitude, the parents do not put any restrictions or limits on the child/adolescent. The child/adolescent can organize their own activities and make their own decisions as if they were an adult. The democratic parental attitude is similar to the authoritarian parental attitude in terms of setting clear rules and directing the child. However, it differs from authoritarian parenting in a various aspects, parents carry out this discipline in a warm manner, explaining the reasons to the child/adolescent and providing flexibility when necessary (Darling & Steinberg, 1993).

Authoritarian parenting has various negative effects on adolescent’s psychological development, including their psychological resilience. It has been reported in the literature that children raised with an authoritarian parenting style have fewer opportunities to develop skills such as decision-making, problem-solving, and positive coping, resulting in lower chances of developing psychological resilience (Joussemet et al., 2004; Karreman et al., 2006).However, it is also noted that this parenting style is associated with anxiety, low self-esteem, and low self-confidence (Ülker Tümlü & Recepoğlu, 2013). The democratic parenting style and authoritative parenting style share similar characteristics, and in the literature, they are sometimes used interchangeably. Both parenting styles set certain rules and limits for the child while also aiming to support and develop the child. In the democratic parenting style, children are involved in the decision-making process. In the authoritative parenting style, the decision-making power is with the parent, but the child’s opinions are also important (Stafford et al., 2016). Both parenting styles are effective in developing psychological resilience, and more supportive and responsive parenting styles increase psychological resilience. Democratic parents allow their children to make their own decisions while setting reasonable expectations and providing emotional support (Easterbrooks et al., 2019).

The neglectful parenting style was added to these categories in later years. A neglectful parent is not interested in what the child/adolescent does (Aunola et al., 2000). In the following period, Maccoby (1992) developed this theory by stating that parenting styles are formed by the combination of the dimensions of giving, warmth, responsiveness, and control in different proportions. Presently, democratic, overprotective, permissive, and authoritarian parenting styles are frequently mentioned in the literature. Parental attitudes are not limited to the abovementioned parenting styles. There is a wide range of areas in which parents can be involved, such as permissiveness, intervening, compassion, communication, discipline, closeness, boundaries, and parental monitoring. A wide range of parental attitudes emerges as a result (Kosterelioglu, 2018).

In the literature, parents’ expectations and behavior patterns are investigated with many different concepts, including parenting attitude, parenting style, and parenting practices. Parenting attitude is an umbrella term for parenting style and parenting practices. While parenting style is mainly used to describe parent’s general approach and behavior patterns, parenting attitude expresses parents’ expectations and beliefs about their children.

On the other hand, parenting practices refer to the concrete practices that parents employ in their interactions with their children. The fact that parenting style is associated with adolescents’ self-confidence and psychological well-being highlights the importance of this concept (Lesch & Jager, 2013). Positive and productive parenting styles are seen to play an important role in the development of balanced psychological well-being.

Perceived parenting styles corresponds to a picture of their parent’s attitudes from the perspective of the adolescents. Parenting styles are approached through two basic dimensions, demandingness and responsiveness. Authoritative parenting style is characterized by high responsiveness and high demandingness, while authoritarian parenting style is characterized by high demandingness and low responsiveness. Permissive parenting style is characterized by high responsiveness and low demandingness, while uninvolved parenting style is characterized by both low responsiveness and low demandingness. Additionally, authoritative parenting is characterized by parental warmth, with its basic dimensions being autonomy granting, behavioral control and acceptance. Authoritarian parenting is characterized by high control and low warmth. Permissive parenting, on the other hand, is characterized by low control and low warmth. In uninvolved parenting, parents have neither the time nor the energy to devote to their children and to exert control over them (Stafford et al., 2016).

Parenting attitude scales often address different dimensions. Generally, three dimensions are considered: acceptance-rejection, autonomy-control, and excessive-moderate achievement pressure. These dimensions can be used to measure parenting attitudes in different parenting styles, but they are not specific to a particular style alone. The dimensions are useful in understanding how parents can differ from one another and how these different attitudes can affect child development outcomes. The best parenting style depends on the child’s and family’s situation and unique needs. It is noted that although parenting styles have a general pattern, parenting behaviors specific to certain periods and situations can vary, and therefore parenting attitudes are not completely fixed. In real life, parenting styles are not limited to a single form; each parenting style is a combination of behaviors. Additionally, parenting styles can vary within a cultural context, and there are many different scales that measure parenting styles. Therefore, it is crucial for parents to develop the appropriate parenting attitude specific to their situation. (Easterbrooks et al., 2019). In the current sytematic review, although parenting styles and attitudes are primarily considered, parenting practices related to relevant styles and attitudes are occasionally addressed as well due to the lack of clear distinctions between different parenting styles compared to earlier times,. Parenting attitudes encompass a detailed concept that includes both parenting styles and practices.

Although parental attitude is an effective variable in the child/adolescent’s identity, psychological resilience, self-confidence, relationships in adulthood, and many other areas, there are few studies investigating this issue. It is observed that the number of studies in the relevant literature is limited, especially in adolescents. However, adolescence is an important period for ensuring life satisfaction, supporting identity development, discovering talents, and making career choices. In addition, it is stated that adolescents are prone to substance and behavioral addictions, unsafe sexual behavior, internalizing (depression/anxiety) and externalizing problems (aggression), and have a high suicide rate (Scharf et al., 2017). Therefore, research on measures that can be taken in family and school environments is of great importance for raising healthy generations. Therefore, this systematic review of existing studies will be useful in terms of bringing together other studies in the literature on the relation between psychological resilience and parental attitudes. In this way, people can raise more successful, self-confident, and resilient generations. This study aimed to draw attention to the limitations of the studies in the field, summarize the existing research, and emphasize the importance of the role of parental attitudes in increasing psychological resilience in adolescents.

Methods

Aim of the study

In this study, it is aimed to examine the studies conducted between 2008 and 2023 evaluating the relationship between psychological resilience of adolescents and parental attitudes. Within the scope of the study, the purpose of the studies and the findings are included. In line with this purpose, the studies reached were examined separately according to the categories of “study”, “sample (grade level, age, gender, number)”, “method (research designs)”, “country in which the data were collected”, “purpose” and “results”.

Data collection processes

Parallel to the purpose of the research, a literature search was conducted via Google Scholar, ERIC, ProQuest, EBSCOHost, SAGE, PsycInfo, Web of Science, Scopus and Elsevier Science Direct databases through the determined keywords. Key words were determined as “parenting attitudes”, “parenting styles”, “perceived parenting styles”, “psychological resilience”, “resilience”, “adolescents”, “adolescence” and several searches were conducted by writing one by one these words/word groups in the search section of each database. The search equation used in the searches was primarily “perceived parenting attitudes AND psychological resilience OR resilience” and “perceived parenting styles AND psychological resilience AND adolescence”. Then, “perceived parenting attitudes AND resilience AND adolescence” was used as a search equation. As a sufficient number of studies could not be reached, a literature review was conducted by adding each parenting style separately to the search equation, including “authoritative parenting”, “democratic parenting”, “authoritarian parenting”, “permissive parenting”, and “neglectful parenting”. The studies reached as a result of the search made with the help of keywords were downloaded to the computer to be classified according to the determined criteria.

Data extraction and analysis

As a result of the search made in the databases using the relevant keywords determined within the scope of the study, 36 research studies were reached and after these studies were downloaded to the file created in the computer, the summary parts of the researches were examined. At this stage, the number of studies was reduced to 24, considering exclusion criteria such as being a thesis study, the participants in the studies not being in the adolescent group, not being published in full text, not examining parental attitudes, and focusing only on family structure factors. Then, the full texts of these studies were examined in detail according to following criteria: (a) to examine the relationship between psychological resilience and parental attitudes (b) to choose sample from adolescents, (c) to be published between 2008 and 2023, (d) to be published in peer-reviewed journals, and (e) to be published as a full-text article and 2 more studies that did not meet the inclusion criteria were excluded and it was decided to use 24 studies to be analyzed within the scope of this study. The studies obtained as a result of the search were examined by synthesizing in different categories.

The researchers have equally contributed to each stage of the study, but encountered some problems during the selection process. The aim of the study was to investigate the relationship between psychological resilience and parenting attitudes. However, most of the studies in the literature have focused on general family-specific variables such as family functions, empathy, attachment styles, emotional intelligence, and childhood traumas, along with different variables (Paus et al., 2008). In addition, variables such as coping skills with parenting attitudes/parenting styles, mental health, psychological well-being, life satisfaction, school adjustment, social interest, self-esteem, internalizing (anxiety/depression), and externalizing problems (Savi Çakar & Akboy, 2010), and stress have also been studied (Someya et al., 2000). First, studies that did not investigate the relationship between psychological resilience and parenting attitudes were eliminated.

The second problem encountered in the selection of studies is that the majority of studies on psychological resilience are either conducted on university samples or with adults who report their perceptions of parental attitudes in relation to their childhood experiences (Morris et al., 2021), or with parents of younger children. This is thought to be due to the fact that informed consent needs to be obtained from participants, and data collection processes are easier and faster in studies conducted with adult individuals over the age of 18. In this systematic review, researchers selected studies that met these conditions, as they wanted to evaluate adolescents’ psychological resilience and parental attitudes based on their own self-perception, and excluded studies that did not meet these criteria. Despite the broad time range, access to a small number of studies that met the inclusion criteria was possible, considering these reasons.

The third selection criterion is that the study must have been conducted between 2008 and 2023. Detailed information about why these dates were chosen can be found in the study selection section. To include more recent data, the study did not go back to earlier years, which has resulted in a limited number of studies accessed. Finally, there were also some issues with the inclusion criterion that the study must have been published as a full-text article in peer-reviewed journals. Although the other inclusion criteria (variables, year, population) were met, the study did not include other types of work such as these, conference papers, reports, or unpublished articles, in order to increase the quality and effectiveness of the current systematic review.

Studies were collected from all around the world, without any country restrictions. However, the number of studies meeting the inclusion criteria was limited. Few studies meeting the inclusion criteria were found in Europe and America, where different variables were often used. These studies typically involved university samples, evaluating adult perceptions of parental attitudes or involving children’s parents. One of the inclusion criteria for the current systematic review was that the study’s sample consisted of adolescents. Additionally, in the literature, studies from Europe and the USA often focused on concepts such as mental health or coping skills rather than resilience, or they were conducted before 2008. Thus, studies from these countries were not included in the current systematic review as they did not meet the inclusion criteria.

Results

Study selection

In this study, 24 articles were determined about psychological resilience of adolescents and parental attitudes which published between 2008 and 2023. The variables of parental attitudes and practices of families are affected by socio-cultural and technological changes, and given the recent technological advancements and changing living conditions, it was desired that the study be based on current data. Therefore, very old studies were not included in the review article. The reason 2008 was chosen as the starting date is that Brief Resilience Scale (BRS), an important scale measuring psychological resilience, was published in 2008. BRS, developed by Smith et al., 2008 is a short, self-reported scale designed to measure an individual’s ability to “bounce back” and return to a positive outlook after stress and negative life events. BRS is important in psychology and adolescent studies due to many factors. In summary, although there are many different scales that measure psychological resilience (Adolescent Resilience Scale, 2003, Connor-Davidson Scale, 2003; Resilience Scale for Adolescents, 2010), The starting date was chosen as 2008 in order to include current studies due to the importance of BRS in the field, not to make the starting date too old, and to prevent studies that use BRS from being overlooked. They were analyzed under six headings including: (i) study, (ii) sample (class level, age, gender, number, (iii) method (research designs), (iv) country where the study was conducted, (v) purpose of the study and (vi) results of the study and summarized in Table 1:

Fig. 1

Flowchart of the PRISMA review

Table 1 Studies on psychological resilience and parental attitudes in adolescents (N = 24)

Scales used in studies

Although the scales used to measure psychological resilience in studies differ from country to country; the scales are used was given in the followings:, Psychological Resilience and Adolescent Developmental Scale (PSEGS), Ego-Resiliency Scale, Korean Youth Self Report Scale, Resilience Scale, Orientation to Life Questionnaire, The COPE-Scale, The Chinese Adolescent Resilience Scale, Connor Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC10), Strength and Difficulty Questionnaire (SDQ), Adolescent Psychological Resilience Scale, Brief Resilience Scale, The Chinese Resilience Scale, Child and Youth Psychological Resilience Scale, Resilience Scale (RS-14), Self-rating Resilience Scale for Middle School Students (SRSMSS).

Scales used to measure parental attitudes in studies was given in the followings: Family Evaluation Scale (FAS), The Scale of Parenting Style, Parenting Attitudes Scale, Korean Paternal Involvement Scale, The Perceived Parenting Styles Scale, Parental Authority Questionnaire (PAQ), Perceived Parental Rearing Patterns Scale (Egna Minnen av barndoms uppfostran, EMBU) Chinese version, Scale of Parenting Styles (SPS), Parental Attitude Scale, Abbreviated Perceived Parental Attitudes Scale, Parental Authority Questionnaire, Helicopter Parenting Scale, Parenting Style Scale, Perceived Parent Monitoring Scale (a 6-item parent monitoring scale developed by Small & Kerns, 1993) and Transformational Parenting Inventory.

Scales used to measure additional variables in studies was given in the followings: My Memories of Upbringing (EMBU-shmean) Scale, Behavioral Affect Rating Scale, Adolescent Temperament Questionnaire Revised, The Positive and Negative Affect Scale, Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Suppmean (MSPSS), Autonomous-Related Self Scale, Critical Thinking Disposition Scale, The Chinese version of the Essen Trauma Inventory for Kids and Juveniles (ETIKJ), Short Form of Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, Peer Relationship Scale, Warnick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale, The Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D), The Self-rating Anxiety Scale (SAS).

Study characteristics

Information about the general characteristics and methodological features of 24 studies is given in Table 1.

Country in which the data were collected

Regarding the geographic characteristics of the included studies, six were from Turkey (Arıdağ ve Seydoğulları, 2019; Çataloğlu, 2011; Özen, 2019; Özden Yıldırım & Ermiş, 2017; Yılmaz & Yalçın, 2021, Yörük-Topuz, Cihangir-Çankaya, 2022), five were from Korea (Kang & Son, 2016; Kim & Lee, 2016; Kim & Roh, 2016; Noh et al., 2015; Moon et al., 2009), three were from China (Morgan et al., 2020; Qui et al., 2022; Zhai et al., 2015), two were from USA (Nair et al., 2020; Swanson et al., 2010), two were from India (Datta & Thangbiakching, 2020; Prabhu & Shekhar, 2017), one was from Russia (Alikin et al., 2020), one was from Iran (Nikmanesh et al., 2020), one was from Nigeria (Obimakinde et al., 2019), one was from Islamabad (Adnan et al., 2022) and one was from South Africa (Kritzas & Grobler, 2009), one was from Lithuania (Kaniušonytė & Laursen, 2022).

Participants

The 33 reviewed studies comprised 14,120 participants in total. The vast majority of studies recruited more female participants (n = 3692), than male participants (n = 3517). No information was provided about the participants’ gender in seven studies (Datta & Thangbiakching, 2020; Kim & Lee, 2016; Noh et al., 2015; Nair et al., 2020; Nikmanesh et al., 2020; Obimakinde et al., 2019; Zhai et al., 2015). While the number of female participants in twelve studies was higher than male participants (Alikin et al., 2020; Arıdağ & Seydoğulları, 2019; Çataloğlu, 2011; Kang & Son, 2016; Kim & Roh, 2016; Kritzas & Grobler, 2009; Moon et al., 2009; Morgan et al., 2020; Prabhu & Shekhar, 2017; Swanson et al., 2010; Özden Yıldırım & Ermiş, 2017; Yılmaz & Yalçın, 2021), in four studies, the number of male participants was higher than female participants (Adnan et al., 2022; Qui et al., 2022, Özen, 2019, Yörük-Topuz & Cihangir-Çankaya, 2022).

Adolescents who go to school take part as participants in all of the studies. When examined in terms of age groups, some of the studies gave a mean age value, while others gave a certain range. When the studies that indicate the average age group are examined, the highest mean age is 19.62 (Yılmaz & Yalçın, 2021), and the lowest age mean is 11.53 (Nair et al., 2020). In one study, the age group was not specified, and the expression of school-going adolescents was used (Alikin et al., 2020). The mean age of participants varied across the studies: 17.1 in one study (Kaniušonytė & Laursen, 2022) 16 in four studies (Kim & Lee, 2016; Kim & Roh, 2016; Kritzas & Grobler, 2009; Noh et al., 2015); 15.22 in two studies (Çataloğlu, 2011; Özden Yıldırım & Ermiş, 2017); 13–14 in two studies (Yörük-Topuz & Cihangir-Çankaya, 2022; Morgan et al., 2020); 14–15 in two studies (Özen, 2019; Prabhu & Shektar, 2017); and 16–17 in two studies (Arıdağ & Seydoğulları, 2019; Qui et al., 2022).

Considering the studies that expressed the age group as a range, In Adnan et al. (2022), Moon et al. (2009), and Swanson et al. (2010), the age range reported was five years. Datta and Thangbiakching (2020) and Nikmanesh et al. (2020) reported an age range of three years. In one study was six years (Zhai et al., 2015). The narrowest age range reported was 2 years in Kang and Son (2016). The widest age range reported was nine years in Obimakinde et al. (2019).

Operationalization of psychological resilience

Operationalization of a variable comprises describing how a variable is assessed objectively. To objectively assess psychological resilience, various scales were used across the studies. Specifically, the Resilience Scale (RS-14) was used in four studies (Adnan et al., 2022; Datta & Thangbiakching, 2020; Kim & Roh, 2016; Noh et al., 2015), Brief Resilience Scale was used in two studies (Kaniušonytė & Laursen, 2022; Prabhu & Shekhar, 2017). The Adolescent Resilience Scale was used in three studies (Özen, 2019; Özden Yıldırım & Ermiş, 2017, Yörük-Topuz & Cihangir-Çankaya, 2022), while Connor Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC10) was used in two studies (Nair et al., 2020; Nikmanesh et al., 2020), and the Ego Resiliency Scale was used in two studies (Kang & Son, 2016; Kim & Lee, 2016). Additionally, the Hardiness Survey was applied in one study (Alikin et al., 2020), the Child and Youth Pyschological Resilience Scale in one study (Yılmaz &Yalçın, 2021), and the Resilience Scale was used in one study (Arıdağ & Seydoğulları, 2019). The Psychological Resilience and Adolescents Developmental Scale was used in another study (Çataloğlu, 2011), while The COPE- Scale was used in one study (Kritzas & Grobler, 2009). The Chinese Adolescent Resilience Scale was used in one study conducted by Morgan et al. (2020), while another study utilized the Chinese Resilience Scale (Zhai et al., 2015). The Strength and Difficult Questionnaire (SDQ) was used in a study by Obimakinde et al. (2019) and the Self-rating Resilience Scale for Middle School Students (SRSMSS) was applied in a study by Qui et al. (2022). Additionally, the Responses to Stress Questionnaire (RSQ) was used in a study by Swanson et al. (2010), while in another study, the researcher-developed Resilience Scale (Moon et al., 2009) was applied.

Operationalization of parenting attitude

To assess parenting attitude, in three studies, Parenting Attitudes Scale which have acceptance/rejection and autonomy/subdimensions (Kang & Son, 2016; Kim & Roh, 2016, Yörük-Topuz & Cihangir-Çankaya, 2022) was used. In 2 studies Parenting Style Scale (SPS) which have 3 subdimensions: authoritative, authoritarian and permissive (Adnan et al., 2022; Obimakinde et al., 2019) was used. In two studies, EMBU Chinese version which have three subdimensions: rejection/ emotional warmth and overprotection (Morgan et al., 2020; Qui et al., 2022) was used. In two studies, Parental Authority Questionnaire (PAQ) which have 3 subdimensions permissiveness, authoritarianism ve authoritativeness (Kritzas & Grobler, 2009; Zhai et al., 2015) was used. In two studies, BIV Questionnaire (Alikin et al., 2020) was used.

In one study Parenting Scale which has 3 subdimension: laxness, over-reactivity and hostility was used (Çiftçi Arıdağ & Ünal Seydoğulları, 2019) In one study, Perceived Parenting Attitude Scale- Abbreviated Form which have 3 subdimensions: democratic, protective/demanding and authoritarian (Özen, 2019) was used. In two study The Perceived Parenting Styles Scale which have 4 subdimensions authoritative, authoritarian, permissive and uninvolved/negligent styles was used (Nikmanesh et al., 2020; Noh et al., 2015). In one study The Scale of Parenting Style was used (Datta & Thangbiakching, 2020). In one study Family Assessment Scale (Çataloğlu, 2011) was used. In another study, Korean Youth Self-Report Scale (Kim & Lee, 2016). In one study, Child Rearing Practices Report (CRPR) which have 3 subdimensions: protectiveness, discipline and concern/worry (Swanson et al., 2010) was used. In one study, Helicopter Parenting Scale (Yılmaz & Yalçın, 2021) was used. In one of the remaining four studies, the Critical Thinking Disposition Scale and Autonomous-Related Self Scale were administered to adolescents to measure parents’ critical attitudes (Özden Yıldırım & Ermiş, 2017). Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) (Prabhu & Shekhar, 2017) was used in a study to measure family support and parenting attitudes. In one study, the Behavioral Affect Rating Scale was applied to measure parenting control and paternal involvement (Nair et al., 2020). In one study, Perceived Parent Monitoring Scale (PMS) (a 6-item parent monitoring scale developed by Small & Kerns, 1993) and Transformational Parenting Inventory was used to measure parenting monitoring and control (Kaniušonytė & Laursen, 2022). In addition to these, in one study, adolescents’ opinions about parents were taken (Moon et al., 2009).

The concept of parenting attitudes is included as an umbrella term. When considering the sub-dimensions of the scales, parenting attitudes or parenting styles scales often do not categorize parenting attitudes and styles in a rigid manner. As mentioned above, some scales use sub-dimensions such as authoritarianism, permissiveness, and democratic/authoritative style to describe parenting styles, while in other instances, the usage includes parenting attitudes or parenting practices such as warmth/support, behavioral control, psychological control, and protective/demanding. Only the PAQ (Parental Authority Questionnaire) includes all prototypes proposed by Baumrind. In summary, parenting styles are not limited to a single form. Researchers have taken parenting attitudes as an umbrella term, particularly focusing on parenting styles and including parenting practices related to them. Different scales that encompass specific cultural backgrounds and parenting styles have been used (Scharf et al., 2017).

Risk of bias in individual studies

Considering the bias in the studies, sample bias and measurement bias could be mentioned. Considering the sampling bias, an easily accessible sampling method was used in a study (Yörük-Topuz & Cihangir-Çankaya, 2022). This method reduces the generalizability of the study. In addition, since studies were conducted on adolescents, no study could examine the parental perspective. Since all studies used self-report questionnaires, measurement bias can be mentioned.

In addition, to ensure the quality assessment of each eligible study, both researchers independently and blindly assessed the quality of the studies included in the systematic review using an adapted version of The Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies developed by the Effective Public Health Practice Project (Wermelinger Ávila et al., 2017). This tool measures 19 items across eight criteria: (a) study design, (b) blinding, (c) representativeness - selection bias, (d) representativeness - withdrawals and dropouts, (e) confounders, (f) data collection methods, (g) data analysis, and (h) reporting. Each criterion is evaluated on a scale of 1 (low risk of bias; strong) to 3 (high risk of bias; weak). Based on the study conducted by McMullan et al. (2019), studies can have component ratings ranging from 4 to 8 out of the eight criteria. The overall rating is based on the component ratings. For example, if a study has a rating of 6 and does not have any weak ratings but has at least 3 strong ratings, it can be considered strong. If it has one weak rating and less than 3 strong ratings out of 8, it is considered moderate; if it has two or more weak ratings, it is considered weak.

Methodological features of studies

While some of the studies are quantitative studies, it is seen that mixed research design (quantitative and qualitative) was used in one study (Datta & Thangbiakching, 2020). While three studies used cross-sectional research design (Zhai et al., 2015; Prabhu & Shekhar, 2017; Obimakinde et al., 2019), descriptive relational design was used in one study (Nikmanesh et al., 2020). Non-experimental design was used in one study (Kritzas & Grobler, 2009), and Relational Screening Model was used in two studies (Yılmaz & Yalçın, 2021, Yörük-Topuz & Cihangir-Çankaya, 2022). There is one follow-up study (Moon et al., 2009). The design of the remaining 14 studies is unspecified. All studies (n = 24) used self-report scales to collect data. In only one study, the interview method was used in addition to the self-report scale (Datta & Thangbiakching, 2020). There is no data collected online. All of the data in the study were collected by the paper-pencil questionnaire method. Considering the sampling methods, all studies used convenience sampling method. Many limitations were identified in all 24 studies. These limitations can be divided into three groups as sampling problems, measurement problems, and lack of longitudinal studies (all of them are cross-sectional studies, except the follow-up study). Considering the sampling problems, there are differences between the distribution of female and male in studies (Arıdağ & Seydoğulları, 2019; Kim & Roh, 2016; Kritzas & Grobler, 2009; Morgan et al., 2020; Qui et al., 2022; Özen, 2019). It is also seen that the number of samples is limited in some studies (Datta & Thangbiakching, 2020; Nikmanesh et al., 2020). Considering the measurement problems, the Resilience Scale developed by the researcher was used in a study (Moon et al., 2009).

Data on the findings from the studies reviewed

The findings of the studies examined within the scope of this research showed that parental attitudes are among the important factors that constitute the psychological resilience of adolescents. In this context, family support (Prabhu & Shekhar, 2017), friendly behaviour (Kim & Lee, 2016), helpful parenting (Zhai et al., 2015), parental compassion, a family having high educational expectations about the child (Çataloğlu, 2011; Özen, 2019), parental warmth (Kang & Son, 2016), father’s involvement, emotion-focused parental attitude, parental acceptance/affection (Yörük Topuz & Cihangir Çankaya, 2022), and parental control (Nair et al., 2020) were variables that positively affect psychological resilience. These variables can be present in different parenting styles; however, they are primarily associated with the authoritative parenting style. Therefore, as a common research finding of three of the studies examined and measured directly, an authoritative parental style increases the psychological resilience level of adolescents (Adnan et al., 2022; Arıdağ & Seydoğulları, 2019; Datta and Thangbiakching, 2020), while neglectful parenting reduces the psychological resilience of adolescents (Arıdağ & Seydoğulları, 2019). Warmth and support from parents, affection, active listening and participation in teenager’s discussions can be evaluated as a qualification in the authoritative parenting style. These characteristics are not present in neglectful or indulgent parenting style. Parental monitoring and support which is generally describe as belong to authoritative parenting are predicted greater resilience for adolescents (Kaniušonytė & Laursen, 2022). There are different research results about authoritarian parenting. According to Datta and Thangbiakching’s (2020) study authoritarian parental attitude is positively related to psychological resilience just like democratic parental attitude; however, in Arıdag and Seydoğulları’s study (2019), there was a significant negative relation between authoritarian parental attitude and resilience. It was found that as the level of helicopter parenting attitude perceived by adolescents increases, the psychological resilience of adolescents decreases (Yılmaz & Yalçın, 2021).

It has been demonstrated by four studies that high attention and acceptance by parents increase the psychological resilience of adolescents (Alikin et al., 2020; Noh et al., 2015; Obimakinde et al., 2019; Yörük-Topuz & Cihangir-Çankaya, 2022). It has been determined by five studies that parental warmth and parental affection increase the resilience of adolescents (Kang & Son, 2016; Noh et al., 2015; Nikmanesh et al., 2020; Morgan et al., 2020). Five studies have found that familial support increases the resilience of adolescents (Kang & Son, 2016; Prabhu & Shekhar, 2017; Swanson et al., 2010, Yörük-Topuz & Cihangir-Çankaya, 2022; Zhai et al., 2015). The mentioned parenting attitudes are associated with the democratic parenting style. A positive and significant relationship between parents’ high educational expectations and the psychological resilience of adolescents has been demonstrated by two studies (Çataloğlu, 2011; Özen, 2019). It was found that there is a positive and significant relationship between psychological resilience and parental control in one study (Nair et al., 2020), in another study with parents having a constructive critical approach (Özden Yıldırım & Ermiş, 2017), in another study with the variable of parents living together (Yılmaz & Yalçın, 2021), in one study with parents’ emotion-focused behavior (Kritzas & Grobler, 2009), with father’s participation in one study (Nair et al., 2020), with parents’ friendly behavior in one study (Kim & Lee, 2016), with family guidance in another study (Kim & Roh, 2016) and in a study being an example in problem solving (Kim & Lee, 2016). In general, emotion-focused parenting, a friendly approach towards the adolescent, warm, supportive, and responsive parenting can be evaluated under the framework of affectionate parenting attitude. The affectionate parenting attitude is associated with the “Authoritative” parenting style, characterized by clear boundaries and behavioral expectations, along with high levels of warmth, sensitivity, and support.

Reviews determined that positive parental attitude provided by parents’ autonomy support and warmth ,which are characterized by authoritative parenting style, increases the psychological resilience of adolescents and demonstrated that this increase was mediated by positive emotional effects (Nikmanesh et al., 2020). Kang and Son (2016) found that fathers’ parenting involvement mediated the relation between parenting styles and adolescents’ psychological resilience. Findings indicate that parental attitude variables such as the relationship between parents, parenting styles, including affection and hostility, and autonomy and control affect the psychological resilience of adolescents. Hostility can be associated with the authoritarian parenting style, which is low in responsiveness and high in demandingness. Authoritarian parents are often strict and controlling, and may use punishment and criticism to enforce rules and discipline. This can create an environment in which children feel afraid to express themselves or make mistakes, leading to feelings of hostility or resentment. However, it’s important to note that not all children of authoritarian parents will experience hostility, and there may be other factors at play as well.

There was a significant positive relation between affectionate and satisfying parenting styles and the psychological resilience of adolescents, valid for both fathers and mothers. Affection can be present in all parenting styles to varying degrees, but it is most commonly associated with the authoritative parenting style, which is high in responsiveness and demandingness. Authoritative parents are warm, loving, and supportive of their children’s emotional needs, while also setting clear expectations and rules for behavior. However, it’s important to note that affection can also be present in other parenting styles to some degree, such as permissive parenting or even authoritarian parenting in some cases. Ultimately, the level of affection shown by a parent will depend on their individual temperament, values, and beliefs about parenting. Another finding was that parental consistency positively affected the psychological resilience of adolescents (Kang & Son, 2016; Kritzas & Grobler, 2009). Increased psychological resilience was associated with positive parenting; decreased psychological resilience was associated with negative parenting styles. Parenting styles that include positivity, emotional warmth, and understanding have a beneficial effect on psychological resilience of adolescents (Morgan et al., 2020). In addition, it has been found that the psychological resilience of an only child is higher compared to the firstborn child. The father of the firstborn child was found to have a higher tendency towards authoritarian parenting, which includes more severe punishment, while the mother was found to have a higher tendency towards a perceived parenting style. In this study, positive parenting attitude was defined as emotional warmth and understanding, while negative parenting attitude was defined as excessive interference, overprotection, severe punishment, and rejection/denial. Based on these findings, it can be stated that positive parenting attitude corresponds to authoritative parenting, while negative parenting attitude corresponds to authoritarian parenting (Stafford et al., 2016).

According to the study conducted by Arıdağ and Seydoğulları (2019); significant relationships were found between life satisfaction, resilience and parental attitudes. A positive and significant relationship was found between democratic parenting attitude, life satisfaction and resilience. Negatively significant relationships were also found between authoritarian parents, life satisfaction and resilience. It was observed that parenting attitudes and life satisfaction together predicted resilience significantly.

The level of psychological resilience of adolescents was found to be closely related to the nature of their family image (Alikin et al., 2020). Positive family image is associated with authoritative and democratic parenting attitudes, characterized by open communication, mutual respect, and shared values. The more positive the image, the higher the adolescent’s psychological resilience. Parental care and high interest in maintaining the child’s attachment increase adolescents’ psychological resilience (Alikin et al., 2020). According to the study of Yörük-Topuz and Cihangir-Çankaya (2022), acceptance/affection and psychological self-esteem support received from parents significantly predicted the psychological resilience levels of adolescents. In particular, findings indicated that acceptance and care shown by parents was the strongest factor predicting the psychological resilience of adolescents. There was a positive relation between supportive parenting and ego resilience, ego resilience and achievement, and social functioning and health. Supportive parenting is also positively associated with coping, which is positively related to achievement and health. Research indicates that ego resilience mediates associations between supportive or controlling parenting and outcomes. In addition to these controlling parenting which is a qualification of controlling parenting is negatively correlated with psychological resilience of adolescents (Swanson et al., 2010).

According to the findings of the study conducted by Özden Yıldırım and Ermiş (2017): it was found that the supportive attitude of the family which characterized by authoritative parenting was significantly related to autonomy. Secondly, in this study, adolescent’s psychological resilience was found to be positively correlated with parents’ critical thinking disposition. When the relationship between parents’ psychological resilience and critical thinking disposition is examined in depth, there is a significant relationship when both parents’ critical thinking disposition is evaluated together. When the father’s critical thinking disposition was examined alone, it was seen that it is not related to psychological resilience because of there was no relationship with the mother’s critical thinking disposition.

In summary, the variables mentioned above, including parental care, acceptance, high interest (Noh et al., 2015; Obimakinde et al., 2019; Yörük-Topuz & Cihangir Çankaya, 2022), familial support (Prabhu & Shekhar, 2017; Swanson et al., 2010), monitoring (Kaniušonytė & Laursen, 2022; Kim & Roh, 2016; Nair et al., 2020) parental warmth (Kang & Son, 2016; Morgan et al., 2020; Prabhu & Shekhar, 2017; Swanson et al., 2010; Zhai et al., 2015), affection (Kim & Lee, 2016; Moon et al., 2009), emotion-focused parenting (Kritzas & Grobler, 2009) family guidance and counseling (Kim & Roh, 2016), high educational expectations and parental goal setting (Çataloğlu, 2011; Morgan et al., 2020), are among the characteristics of authoritative parenting style. Based on these findings, the current systematic review identified that in 20 studies, there is an association between authoritative parenting/democratic parenting and psychological resilience (Adnan et al., 2022; Çiftçi Arıdağ & Ünal Seydoğulları, 2019; Datta & Thangbiakching, 2020; Kritzas & Grobler, 2009; Nikmanesh et al., 2020; Noh et al., 2015; Obimakinde et al., 2019Yörük Topuz & Cihangir Çankaya, 2022; Zhai et al., 2015).

It can be said that punitive parenting is associated with authoritarian parenting. In 9 studies, a negative and significant relationship between authoritarian parenting and psychological resilience was found (Alikin et al., 2020; Çiftçi Arıdağ & Ünal Seydoğulları, 2019, Kritzas & Grobler, 2009; Kim & Roh, 2016; Morgan et al., 2020; Nair et al., 2020; Özden Yıldırım & Ermiş, 2017; Özen, 2019; Zhai et al., 2015). However, one study found a positive relationship between psychological resilience and authoritarian parenting (Datta & Thangbiakching, 2020).

It is known that parental neglect, low demandingness, and parental rejection are associated with neglectful parenting style. In 5 studies, neglectful parenting style was found to be associated with low psychological resilience (Datta & Thangbiakching, 2020; Nikmanesh et al., 2020; Morgan et al., 2020; Obimakinde et al., 2019; Qui et al., 2022).

It has been demonstrated by 5 studies that an overprotective parenting attitude is associated with the helicopter parenting style, and adolescents with an overprotective parenting attitude have lower levels of psychological resilience (Moon et al., 2009; Özen, 2019; Qui et al., 2022; Swanson et al., 2010; Yılmaz & Yalçın, 2021).

In conclusion, it has been found that adolescents who perceive their parents as authoritative/democratic have higher levels of psychological resilience and experience fewer emotional problems. On the other hand, adolescents who perceive their parents as permissive/neglectful/helicopter parenting style have lower levels of psychological resilience and find it more challenging to regulate their emotions. While authoritarian parenting style has been found to be associated with low psychological resilience in some studies, it has also been found to be associated with high psychological resilience in others. The cultural connection of this phenomenon is discussed in the next section.

Quality assessment

In Table 2, it is demonstrated that the quality assessment of the systematic review. The average quality score is 1.48, with scores ranging from 1 to 3. A score of 1 indicates the highest quality (least likely to be biased and highest overall quality), while a score of 3 indicates the weakest quality (likely to be biased or of the lowest quality). The quality assessment was conducted independently by two researchers, and there was a high level of agreement between the results (κ = 0,95).

Table 2 Quality Assessment of Article

Discussion and recommendations

This systematic review examined 24 studies published in peer-reviewed journals between 2008 and 2023 that examined the relation between the psychological resilience of adolescents and parental attitudes. Additionally, the current review included various data from the reviewed studies, including the following dimensions: (i) country of data collection, (ii) baseline characteristics of participants (age, gender, number, etc.), (iii) measurement of psychological resilience, (iv) measurement of parental attitudes, (v) risk of participant bias in studies, and (vi) methodological characteristics of the study. In addition to these, the study categorized the reviewed articles into (i) study information (author and year), (ii) sample (gender, number, and age), (iii) method (research design and scales used), (iv) country, (v) purpose, and (vi) findings.

In terms of geographical location, the majority of studies (n = 19) collected data from Asian countries; the remaining studies collected data from African countries (n = 2), European (n = 1) or the USA (n = 2). It is a frequent topic of discussion in the literature that trends in parenting attitudes may vary from country to country and may depend on the traditional and cultural norms of the people (Morgan et al., 2020). To increase the cultural and social generalizability of the data obtained from studies conducted in different countries and to scientifically reveal the effects on individuals healthily, it is recommended that future studies use larger samples from various countries on different continents. Additionally, the limited number of studies from Turkey (n = 6) raises questions about the validity of the results in the Turkish sample. Therefore, more studies should be conducted on this issue in Turkey.

Examinations regarding the participants in the reviewed studies indicate that there are many similarities between the studies. More specifically, the studies tend to comprise (i) more female participants than male participants and (ii) students in the high school age group compared to middle school. As the samples in the studies are predominantly composed of women, it is recommended that future studies include more male participants in the studies to reveal the differences between genders. In all of the studies reviewed, the sample group comprised school-going adolescents (n = 24). Therefore, it is not entirely possible to generalize the findings to adolescents who do not attend school. Hence, it is of great importance to conduct studies in which adolescents from families with different socioeconomic statuses are the sample to support the findings for adolescents who do not attend school. Additionally, studies have not addressed the analysis of adolescence in terms of periods. In future studies, it would be more meaningful to divide the participants into the age groups of pre-adolescence, middle adolescence, and late adolescence in terms of the generalizability of the findings to examine parental attitudes and psychological resilience of adolescents for each group and to reveal the differences between the groups. The reasons for the difference in parenting attitudes and styles may include variables such as being an only child or being the first child. In the one-child family type, the child is at the center of the family; he or she does not have to share or compete for the parents’ attention. The results reveal that negative parenting styles, such as excessive interference, overprotection, and the use of severe punishment, are prevalent in the parents of both an only child and the first child. This may be associated with a decrease in psychological resilience. Reports from the literature indicate that firstborn children perceive their parents more negatively (Someya et al., 2000). The reviewed studies do not include any data about birth order of adolescents. In light of these observations, future studies that will examine the relations between adolescents’ psychological resilience and parental attitudes may include different participants (such as women, children from families with different socioeconomic statuses, and adolescents who do not attend school) and obtain different demographic information from the participants (such as the birth order of the adolescents and how old were their parents when they had their children) to increase external validity.

Additionally, upon analyzing the distribution of the studies by year, the number of articles published between 2017 and 2022 (n = 12) was higher. Therefore, although there has been an increase in the number of studies on the subject in recent years, it is still insufficient. The number of studies conducted in this field should increase to obtain more detailed information. In terms of the measurement of parental attitudes, most of the studies reviewed (n = 15) directly considered general parental styles/attitudes as the criterion. Other studies used various measurement tools based on a specific parental attitude (Yılmaz & Yalçın, 2021), such as father involvement (Kang & Son, 2016), familial support (Prabhu & Shekhar, 2017), child-raising practices (Morgan et al., 2020; Swanson et al., 2010), and family assessment (Alikin et al., 2020; Çataloğlu, 2011; Kim & Lee, 2016). Future studies can increase cross-cultural effectiveness by using highly validated instruments that measure only general parental attitudes.

Cultural differences are believed to exist regarding the influence of parental attitudes. Particularly, differences can be found between collectivist societies and individualistic cultures. Additionally, within the same society, there may be various differences based on regional or ethnic minorities. The findings of the study have been evaluated below according to the cultures and traditions of the countries. Firstly, in their study conducted in China, Morgan et al. (2020) found that the psychological well-being of the first-born child was lower compared to only children. It is believed that this finding is due to the first-born child often having a more negatively perceived parenting style. The cultural structure of China is thought to be influential in this regard. Due to the importance given to values such as respect for authority and establishing strong relationships with others in collectivist societies, authoritarian parenting may be more prevalent in rural areas (Peterson et al., 2005). Qui et al. (2022) stated in their study that adolescents in China have higher levels of depression/anxiety symptoms compared to other countries. It is believed that this finding is influenced by factors such as excessive homework load, high academic pressure, and lack of physical activity among adolescents in Chinese society.

Nair et al. (2020) included a sample of Latinx, rural immigrant families in their study conducted in the USA. Positive parenting characterized by affection and warmth was found to be positively associated with psychological well-being. Additionally, considering that many rural Midwestern Latinx families face higher levels of risk factors, it is considered important to develop interventions specifically tailored to such a sample.

In their study conducted in Nigeria, Obimakinde et al. (2019) found that adolescents reported higher levels of emotional problems, while teachers reported more behavioral and peer problems. It was observed that female students exhibited more emotional problems, whereas male students frequently displayed behavioral problems. It is believed that this finding is associated with males externalizing their problems through external symptoms, while females often exhibit internal symptoms. It has been noted that socioeconomic disadvantage and the extended family structure in Nigeria negatively impact psychological well-being. This situation may be related to the lack of support for adolescents’ prosocial behaviors and the difficulty of establishing a warm and nurturing parent-child relationship within extended families (Tsehay et al., 2020).

In the study conducted by Kaniušonytė and Laursen (2022) in Lithuania, a Northern European country, it was found that parental monitoring and support based on authoritative parenting were variables that enhance adolescents’ psychological well-being. Family holds great importance in Lithuania, and parents often have authoritarian, rule-based parenting styles with high expectations for their children. However, in recent years, there has been a transition towards democratic parenting. Religion, historical traditions, and social norms can influence parenting attitudes in Lithuania (Rudy & Grusec, 2001).

Considering the study by Swanson et al. (2010), it can be seen that the majority of the sample consisted of Mexican American youth. Some studies in the literature have shown that in certain minority ethnic groups in Europe or America, or in some collectivist societies, parenting characterized by strict control, which could be associated with authoritarian parenting, does not have as negative an impact on adolescents’ psychological well-being as in individualistic societies (Rudy & Grusec, 2001). On the other hand, some researchers suggest that adolescents under risk conditions, especially minority ethnic groups, experience more risks and have fewer conditions that promote psychological well-being compared to young people in Europe and America (Borman & Overman, 2004). Ethnic groups like Mexican Americans place greater importance on traditional values such as collectivism and interdependence, which serve as protective factors. Some ethnic groups, like Mexican Americans, have both traditional values and exposure to American culture.

The main purpose of this review is to examine the relation between parental attitudes and adolescents’ psychological resilience. In all of the articles reviewed in the current study, there was a significant relation between parental attitudes and the psychological resilience of adolescents. One of the possible explanations for this consistent finding is that adolescence is a critical period in the personality development and that adolescents need parental guidance (Barber et al., 2005; Easterbrooks et al., 2019).

In the current systematic review, another common theme is a consistent relationship between high parental care and acceptance increase adolescents’ psychological resilience of adolescents, supported by multiple studies reviewed (Alikin et al., 2020; Noh et al., 2015; Obimakinde et al., 2019; Yörük-Topuz & Cihangir-Çankaya, 2022). These findings align with the recent focus on tolerant parenting and its positive effect on adolescents’ life satisfaction (Gorostiaga et al., 2019; Zhong et al., 2016). It is known that parents of adolescents with high levels of psychological well-being have qualities that enhance their children’s autonomy and motivate them to establish supportive relationships outside the family. In contrast to positive parenting traits such as high attention and acceptance, one study in the literature states that negative parenting styles may be associated with various mental health problems in adolescents as well as reducing their psychological resilience (Paus et al., 2008).

Five studies (Kang & Son, 2016; Prabhu & Shekhar, 2017; Swanson et al., 2010, Yörük-Topuz & Cihangir-Çankaya, 2022; Zhai et al., 2015) have shown that familial support increases the resilience of adolescents, with emphasis on parental warmth and affection. Positive family education elements were found to be important by the studies. Parental warmth and affection, associated with the authoritative parenting style, were found to increase adolescent resilience and psychosocial adjustment in five reviewed studies (Kang & Son, 2016; Noh et al., 2015; Nikmanesh et al., 2020; Morgan et al., 2020). It has been suggested by the literature that parental warmth increases the psychosocial adjustment of adolescents (Garcia et al., 2020).

In addition, while studies examined the relation between adolescents’ psychological resilience and parental attitudes, they frequently included the depression/anxiety levels of adolescents as the third variable. Studies found that children of parents with higher levels of affection have higher psychological resilience and lower symptoms of depression and anxiety (Moon et al., 2009; Qui et al., 2022). Negative parenting found to be associated with depression and anxiety symptoms. Positive parenting was negatively associated with depression and anxiety. In the study conducted by Moon et al. (2009), affectionate parenting was found to be associated with lower levels of depression and stronger psychological resilience. The significance of parental attitudes in adolescence, the most critical developmental period in terms of personality development, is undeniable. Adolescence is recognized as the peak age for the development of psychological disorders (Paus, 2008). Therefore, increasing the psychological resilience of adolescents is of great importance in terms of increasing the psychological resilience of society in the following years. It is known that parental attitudes affect an individual’s resilience and that individuals with strong resilience are positively affected by mental resources such as life satisfaction, optimism, and a calm mind; therefore, their ability to cope with difficulties, which is characterized as psychological resilience, increases. These findings support a recent systematic review of studies investigating the relation between parental attitudes and adolescents’ internalizing symptoms (Gorostiaga et al., 2019).

Another striking result regarding the effect of parental attitude on adolescents’ psychological resilience is that democratic parenting attitudes increase the level of psychological resilience of adolescents (Adnan et al., 2022). Similarly, Arıdağ and Seydoğulları (2019) and Datta and Thangbiakching’s (2020) findings obtained the same result in their studies. This finding supports the results of a study that examine general resilience of adolescents in the literature (Ritter, 2005).

Further, positive parenting can promote the continuous development of adolescents, support them, increases their ability to cope with stress and thus contribute to their cognitive flexibility and psychological resilience (Nair et al., 2020). Family support positively affects adolescent’s psychological resilience, while growing up in troubled families can lead to emotional and social issues. Competent parenting promotes confidence, independence, adaptability, and better social connections, resulting in higher psychological resilience (Obimakinde et al., 2019). Permissive parenting does not increase adolescents’ psychological resilience; on the contrary, it increases dependent, irresponsible, selfish, and antisocial personality traits (Zhai et al., 2015).

Only one of the reviewed studies investigated the father’s involvement and found that it was a crucial factor in increasing the psychological resilience of adolescents (Kang & Son, 2016). It is known that fatherhood is a vital factor in important transition periods such as early adolescence, and researchers need to shed more light on this issue through further research (Cabrera et al., 2017). This finding in the literature supports the finding of this study. The issue of paternal parenting remains an under-researched topic. Future studies may examine the relation between paternal parenting and adolescents’ psychological resilience by taking into account cultural values related to parenting, such as fathers’ level of involvement at home and their beliefs. In addition, investigating the effect of the “father” on adolescents may reveal important findings about Turkey’s patriarchal family structure and fathers being “strong, protective, and supportive” role models for adolescents. In addition to the father’s involvement, investigating variables such as the mothers’ involvement in parenting and marital quality, which can measure how healthy the relationship between parents is and which is seen as the third parent of the adolescent, can make important contributions to the literature.

High educational expectations from parents which is a qualification of authoritative parenting style can affect adolescents’ psychological resilience (Çataloğlu, 2011; Özen, 2019). High expectations of the families may create a feeling of being trusted in the adolescents. (Ritter, 2005). However, the findings revealed that parental control (Nair et al., 2020) and parents’ friendly behavior (Kim & Lee, 2016) increased the psychological resilience of adolescents, while neglectful parenting attitude had a significant negative impact (Arıdağ & Seydoğulları, 2019; Obimakinde et al., 2019). Permissive parenting style, which restricts love as a threat can lead to relational manipulation and unhealthy behaviors in adolescents, resulting in lower psychological resilience, impulsiveness, and aggressive behaviors (Pearson, 2013).

In addition to these findings, a reviewed study concluded that family guidance, counseling and parents setting an example in problem-solving increase psychological resilience of adolescents (Kim & Lee, 2016; Kim & Roh, 2016). Thus, research supports the finding in the literature that adolescents growing up in families with supportive communication styles are more autonomous and have a higher quality of life (Allen et al., 1994; Aunola et al., 2000). Research suggests that neither the interdependent which does not provide sufficient autonomy, nor independent family models, which does not provide a close enough relationship with adolescents, are not ideal approaches for healthy personal development (Kagitcibasi, 2013).

One of the results of this systematic review study is the finding of Özden Yıldırım and Ermiş (2017) that parents’ critical thinking disposition is related to psychological resilience. When compared with the literature, this study’s finding is consistent with Sagone’s (2013) study indicating that there is a positive relation between psychological resilience and different thinking styles. Additionally, previous studies on families have demonstrated the influential role of quality parenting on adolescent development. It is known that one of the sub-dimensions of quality parenting is critical thinking (Chaffee, 1994). Critical thinking is an intellectual ability that plays a crucial role in the interactions of family members regarding their communication styles. Recent studies have provided evidence that this effect should not be ignored in terms of adolescents’ personality development as well as their psychological resilience (Ritter, 2005).

However, studies investigating authoritarian parenting showed inconsistent findings. One study found that authoritarian parenting decreased the psychological resilience of adolescents (Arıdağ & Seydoğulları, 2019), whereas in another study, it was reported to increase their psychological resilience (Datta & Thangbiakching, 2020). The characteristics of the samples may have led to these inconsistent findings. In addition, the socioeconomic status of families may be effective in this finding. Furthermore, according to the research conducted by Datta and Thangbiakching (2020) in India, family life is important due to the influence of a collectivist culture, especially in rural areas where joint families and authoritarian parenting styles are prevalent. However, in urban households, the accepting parenting style has become more common. In collectivist societies, authoritarian parenting and parental control are not perceived as harmful as in individualistic societies (Nesrin & Mathai, 2018). Therefore, it is believed that the authoritarian parenting style is specific to collectivist cultures like India and may enhance adolescents’ psychological well-being. Another study conducted in rural areas of India highlighted that low socioeconomic status may increase stress levels among adolescents, and in a patriarchal traditional culture, girls experience higher levels of stress and workload compared to boys (Prabhu & Shekhar, 2017). Additionally, in a culture where family unity is still important, young people perceive high levels of social support from their families (Olsson et al., 2003).

Turkey, geographically situated between Eastern and Western societies, carries characteristics of both. Traditional families in Turkey place great importance on the concept of family. In addition, providing support for autonomy by families contributes to adolescents’ psychological well-being by enabling them to act with autonomous will, make choices, and enhance their intrinsic motivation (Salman-Engin et al., 2018). When examining studies in Turkey, various regional differences are predicted. Özen’s (2019) study found that families in Istanbul were more democratic compared to families in Diyarbakır, and there were higher expectations within the household. On the other hand, families in Diyarbakır were found to be more authoritarian and protective compared to families in Istanbul. Furthermore, when it comes to gender, parents were observed to listen more and try to understand the feelings of their daughters, while families of male students were found to be more authoritarian and protective compared to families of female students (Kagitcibasi, 2013).

Arıdağ and Seydoğulları’s study (2020) indicates that the Turkish culture values perseverance and determination. In recent years, along with negative economic developments, messages conveying the idea that many concepts such as success, earning money, and prestige, which are inherently difficult to achieve and sustain, can be easily obtained through technological advancements have been transmitted to young people. This can create stress and tension within families. According to Özden-Yıldırım and Ermiş’s study (2017), a culture that combines both collectivist and individualistic characteristics can reduce the impact of negative life events on adolescents. Additionally, it has been found that the father figure has a significant influence on adolescents due to Turkey being a patriarchal society (Eminağaoğlu, 2006).

When examining studies on helicopter parenting in Turkey, it is known that adolescents who perceive their parents as democratic have higher levels of psychological well-being compared to those whose parents have an excessively protective (helicopter parenting) or oppressive-authoritarian style (Yılmaz & Yalçın, 2021). In collectivist cultures like Turkey, the need for closeness and connectedness in young people precedes the need for autonomy. Moreover, parental control and monitoring behaviors do not negatively impact psychological resilience as much as in Western societies.

Adnan et al.‘s study (2022) in Pakistan reveals that insufficient attention is given to the mental health of adolescents and its relationship with parenting attitudes. Particularly, it is known that parents in Pakistan need information and recommendations through psychosocial education to understand, accept, and love their children. The Pakistani society is characterized by being indulgent and controlling. Due to various social and environmental challenges, parents strive to adapt to changing conditions and become more aware of their children’s needs. However, when they try to do this, they become more overprotective and the stress level of adolescence increase. When the literature examines, it shows that overprotective parental attitudes are associated with low self-efficacy, low problem-solving capacities, and low interpersonal sensitivity (Scharf et al., 2017). These personality traits are thought to tend to constitute risk factors affecting psychological resilience.

As seen in studies conducted in Korean society (Kang & Son, 2016; Kim & Roh, 2016; Kim & Lee, 2016; Noh et al., 2015), the main cultural factors influencing parenting style in Korean society and most East Asian cultures include respect for authority, upbringing with strict boundaries, collectivism, and emphasis on education and achievement. As stated in the study by Moon et al. (2009), it should not be forgotten that challenging circumstances such as chronic illness can create various physical, psychological, and economic difficulties within families, which, in turn, can influence parental attitudes. Particularly, families with an ill child may develop an excessively protective or hostile attitude towards the adolescent.

As supported by the study conducted by Nikmanesh et al. (2020) in Iran, unlike the parenting styles commonly found in Western culture, Iran tends to prefer a more authoritarian parenting style in traditional families, raising their children with strict rules and providing limited opportunities for them to contribute to decisions. However, it should be noted that the study, being a recent one conducted in 2020, indicates that there are families in contemporary times who adopt more flexible and democratic parenting styles, as evident from the study.

Another common finding is having similar parenting styles increases adolescents’ psychological resilience (Kang & Son, 2016; Kritzas & Grobler, 2009). Parental consistency, which has been proven to be important in child-raising (Pérez-Fuentes et al., 2019), should continue in adolescence. In addition, Kritzas and Grobler’s (2009) study investigated the impact of parenting styles on the psychological well-being of adolescents from different races. The study found that authoritative parenting facilitated the development of psychological well-being in both African-American and white adolescents. However, it was observed that only in white adolescents, having a father with an authoritarian style contributed to their psychological well-being.

This review also included an article that specifically included data on parents living together/separately (Yılmaz & Yalçın, 2021). In the same study, it was determined that the parenting style known as helicopter parenting, which involves excessive protectiveness and intervention, is negatively related to the psychological well-being of adolescents. Reviewing the literature, it is evident that this style is associated with low self-efficacy, low problem-solving skills, and low interpersonal sensitivity in adolescents (Scharf et al., 2017), and it can lead to increased risk factors for psychological well-being (Stafford et al., 2016). This finding obtained from the reviewed study is in line with the finding in the literature that divorce negatively affects the psychological resilience of adolescents (Shabrina et al., 2020).

In summary, it has been shown by 20 studies that parents who are affectionate, warm, involved, supportive, and at the same time provide guidance, set goals, show high expectations are often characterized by an authoritative/democratic parenting style. It has also been found that children of such parents tend to have high levels of psychological well-being (Adnan et al., 2022; Arıdağ & Ünal Seydoğulları, 2019; Çataloğlu, 2011; Çiftçi; Datta & Thangbiakching, 2020; Noh et al., 2015; Prabhu & Shekhar, 2017, Swanson et al., 2010; Kaniušonytė & Laursen, 2022; Kim & Roh, 2016; Kang & Son, 2016; Morgan et al., 2020; Prabhu & Shekhar, 2017; Swanson et al., 2010; Kim & Lee, 2016; Kim & Roh, 2016; Kritzas & Grobler, 2009; Moon et al., 2009; Morgan et al., 2020; Kritzas & Grobler, 2009; Nair et al., 2020; Nikmanesh et al., 2020; Noh et al., 2015; Obimakinde et al., 2019 Yörük- Topuz & Cihangir Çankaya, 2022; Zhai et al., 2015). Indeed, these findings are supported by existing studies in the literature (Easterbrooks et al., 2019; Joussemet et al., 2004; Perez et al., 2009; Stafford et al., 2016; Olsson et al., 2003). It is believed that providing both love and affection to adolescents, as well as guiding them with clear boundaries and rules, can enhance their psychological well-being. Adolescents who have such parents are also observed to make more appropriate choices in terms of their friends and social groups they belong to.

In the current systematic review, it has been concluded that adolescents who have punitive parents, based on 8 studies, tend to experience authoritarian parenting styles more frequently and have lower levels of psychological well-being (Alikin et al., 2020; Çiftçi Arıdağ & Ünal Seydoğulları, 2019; Kim & Roh, 2016; Morgan et al., 2020; Nair et al., 2020; Özden Yıldırım & Ermiş, 2017; Özen, 2019; Zhai et al., 2015). In two studies, it was found that adolescents who have authoritarian parenting styles exhibited by their parents had higher levels of psychological well-being (Datta & Thangbiakching, 2020; Kritzas & Grobler, 2009). Indeed, the findings regarding this parenting style are controversial in the literature. While some studies indicate that the authoritarian parenting style reduces adolescents’ self-confidence and negatively affects their psychological well-being (Barber et al., 2005; Coleman & Hagell, 2007; Ritter, 2005), there are also findings suggesting that authoritarian parenting can be protective, particularly in collectivist societies (Kagitcibasi, 2013; Nesrin & Mathai, 2018; Rudy & Grusec, 2001; Someya et al., 2000). The meaning of authoritarian parenting may not be the same for every society or family. What may be perceived as a serious boundary violation in a Western society could be seen as a lack of affection in a collectivist society. Cultural values and norms play a significant role in shaping the interpretation and acceptance of parenting styles. Moreover, even within the same country or city, differences in the manifestation of authoritarian parenting style can be observed among families. Factors such as socio-cultural background, individual beliefs, and personal experiences can contribute to these variations in parenting styles. It is important to consider the contextual factors and cultural nuances when examining the effects of authoritarian parenting.

It has been determined that adolescents who are neglected by their parents, have less demanding parents, or are unwanted by their parents often have a perceived neglectful parenting style. Five studies have found that adolescents with neglectful parents have lower levels of psychological well-being (Datta & Thangbiakching, 2020; Morgan et al., 2020; Obimakinde et al., 2019; Qui et al., 2022). The findings of the current systematic review are in line with the literature (Garcia et al., 2020; Gorostiaga et al., 2019; Pérez-Fuentes et al., 2019). It is believed that adolescents who do not receive warmth and affection from their families may lack unconditional acceptance, which can lead them to seek acceptance among their peers and engage in risky behaviors, ultimately impacting their psychological well-being.

It has been found in 5 studies (Moon et al., 2009; Özen, 2019; Qui et al., 2022; Swanson et al., 2010; Yılmaz & Yalçın, 2021) that an overprotective parenting attitude is associated with the helicopter parenting style, and adolescents with overprotective parents have lower levels of psychological well-being. These findings are consistent with the existing literature (Neff & McGehee, 2010; Paus et al., 2008; Sarıkaya, 2015; Shabrina et al., 2020). It is believed that an overprotective attitude leads to adolescents being less honest with their parents, inhibiting them from expressing their experiences and emotions openly. This can result in increased engagement in risky behaviors by the adolescents.

It is believed that the effects of parenting attitudes on adolescents’ psychological resilience may vary according to culture and context. Based on the findings of the study, it is considered important to take into account specific cultural and contextual factors when evaluating the effects of parenting attitudes/styles. Authoritative parenting is often more prevalent in Western societies, while authoritarian parenting is more commonly observed among ethnic minorities. This difference is suggested to be based on culture and the family’s belief system (Steinberg & Silk, 2002). Ethnic minority families may reside in dangerous neighborhoods where security is frequently a major concern. In this context, authoritarian parenting, emphasizing parental control and obedience, may be advantageous. This parenting attitude may be beneficial in unsafe social environments. Certain cultural groups may place great importance on obedience and respect for authority, which can lead to authoritarian parenting. Additionally, socioeconomic factors and exposure to discrimination can also influence parenting practices. Specifically, in adolescents with chronic illnesses, providing parents with training in communication and problem-solving skills can enhance psychological resilience. Furthermore, in societies like Nigeria, it is believed that reducing socioeconomic inequalities can increase adolescents’ psychological resilience.

Asian societies have different child-rearing practices and understandings compared to the West. In collectivist cultures, cooperation and interdependence are valued, and physical punishment can still be used to control children’s behavior. Parenting attitudes can vary across different regions, cities, and families within a country. For example, while families in Western Turkey tend to have a more authoritative/democratic parenting style, physical punishment may still be considered an acceptable norm in underdeveloped districts and marginalized neighborhoods in the eastern parts of the country. Therefore, parenting scales specific to collectivist societies can be developed, and characteristics believed to enhance resilience in both collectivist and individualistic societies can be blended in parenting practices. For instance, while social support and close, warm relationships with family are seen as positive values in collectivist societies, boundary violations may be viewed as negative values. In individualistic societies, spending less time with family for adolescents can increase depression and anxiety and serve as a risk factor for developing harmful habits such as addiction (Fraser, 1997).

While there are cultural and contextual differences in parenting practices, specific parenting styles can generally be associated with similar outcomes. Neglectful parenting is associated with negative outcomes, authoritarian and intrusive parenting with mixed results, and authoritative parenting is generally linked to positive outcomes (Sahithya et al., 2019). It is recommended for parents to adopt styles that maintain a balance between rules and support, take into account cultural variables and contextual factors, and engage in parenting practices that meet their children’s individual needs. Developing community-based programs in areas with high-risk characteristics, such as marginalized neighborhoods, can enhance adolescents’ psychological resilience. Extra sensitivity should be given to raising parents’ awareness, particularly during risky adolescence periods. Positive parenting attitudes are believed to increase adolescents’ psychological resilience and reduce school dropout rates (Noh et al., 2015).

Considering that adolescents with high psychological resilience possess self-control and can effectively use problem-solving methods, thus exhibiting fewer problematic behaviors, it is anticipated that programs promoting adolescents’ psychological resilience, enhancing their prosocial behaviors, and increasing parents’ levels of compassion can facilitate easier adaptation to high school life and reduce school refusal/dropout. Schools should play a complementary role by increasing interaction between home and school for adolescents. To achieve this, enjoyable activities such as sports competitions and knowledge quizzes can be organized to make parental involvement more enjoyable. Programs can be developed to facilitate parents’ understanding of their adolescent children. It is recommended to provide counseling services specific to different parenting situations, such as multicultural or single-parent families, and to organize counseling and training programs for teachers in the field of family counseling.

There are many limitations to the present review. The first of these is the use of a cross-sectional research design in almost all of the studies. Considering that adolescents’ psychological resilience and parents’ attitudes toward their children are dynamic variables that may vary over time, future longitudinal studies in this field are important to address many other factors of parental attitude in the parent–adolescent relationship (Datta & Thangbiakching, 2020). Except for one study (Datta & Thangbiakching, 2020), all studies used a quantitative research model (n = 22). Only one study used a mixed research model, using both quantitative and qualitative data collection methods with self-report scales and individual interviews. In all studies, data collection occurred face-to-face with adolescents and parents using a paper-and-pencil questionnaire method and a self-report scale.

Considering all these findings, one can say that there are limitations in the generalizability of the results as a causal relation could not be established in almost any of the studies reviewed. Therefore, we can recommend that future studies adopt a longitudinal and experimental research design, use probability sampling methods, and use interview and survey methods simultaneously. Additionally, for future studies, it would be more meaningful in terms of the causality of the results to create and implement parenting programs to increase psychological resilience in adolescents and to conduct experimental studies using pre-test and post-test. Finally, as mentioned earlier, the limitations identified can be broadly categorized into three groups: (i) sampling problems, (ii) measurement problems, and (iii) lack of longitudinal studies (except for one study; Moon et al., 2009; all studies were cross-sectional). Despite the extensive research conducted through databases, some studies on the subject may have been overlooked due to the inclusion of studies published only in English and Turkish languages and database-related limitations. In addition, there may be important research data contained in the work of non-peer-reviewed journals or unpublished theses, dissertations, and scientific reviews. To increase the quality of the studies to be published in the field on adolescents’ mindfulness and parental attitudes, one should consider the above limitations. Overall, the quality of the studies analyzed was moderate and near good. Samples are suitable, designs are high-quality and their statistical analyses were sufficient. However, further research may improve research designs and get more quality rating from assessment.

Although the attitudes of adolescent parents themselves have a huge impact on their children’s lives, family education often happens in younger age groups. Although the family factor is not ignored when working with children, this rate decreases in adolescents. Especially psychological counselors/guidance counselors and psychologists working in schools or the field with adolescents should explain to the parents how positive and negative parental attitudes affect their adolescents. Moreover, clinicians should give importance to attachment styles and its relevance to child upbringing.

Considering the increase in the risky behaviors of adolescents in recent years and their exposure to factors such as addiction, we understand how important their psychological resilience is once again. Studies on psychological resilience are important in minimizing incidents such as violence, aggression, and bullying, which constitute a serious problem for adolescents and society. In addition to crisis intervention or individual psychological counseling, it is thought that preventive studies should be implemented, especially on the adaptation and the academic and social success of adolescents, and group psychological counseling/psychoeducation sessions should be organized. Various institutions can design awareness programs, workshops, and seminars for parental psych-education on topics such as child-rearing practices, risk factors during adolescence, the psychological resilience of adolescents, and the benefits of authoritative parenting style. Through these educational initiatives, parents can learn more appropriate and effective methods to navigate challenging situations with their adolescents. Additionally, measures can be taken regarding school and peer relationships. Alongside raising parental awareness, school management and teachers can participate in group counseling sessions and case studies focusing on perseverance and parental attitudes to increase their awareness.

Considering the significant role of father involvement in the development of adolescents’ psychological resilience, educational programs can promote father engagement. Family therapies are also recommended for managing the underlying issues associated with negative parenting styles. Furthermore, policymakers can implement pre-parenting education programs that emphasize the importance and practices of father involvement before individuals become parents. In school counseling processes, it is important not to overlook adolescents with behavior problems, aggressive attitudes, as well as introverted adolescents. It should be remembered that the psychological resilience of these children can be enhanced, especially through affectionate parenting.

While the current study focuses on adolescents, it is important to note that healthy parenting styles like authoritative parenting should ideally be implemented from the earliest stages of a child’s life to facilitate the development of their psychological resilience. In multicultural societies like South Africa, it is necessary to address racial and gender-specific needs. In today’s society, parents often face difficulties in maintaining sufficient communication with schools due to their professions and work commitments, making it challenging for them to recognize and change incorrect parenting behaviors. Additionally, other social factors such as school and peer relationships play a significant role in mitigating the impact of incorrect parenting styles. In more protective societies like Turkish society, it is important to be aware of the negative consequences of being overly protective, such as behavioral addictions and risk aversion. Parents should also be educated about parenting styles specific to special groups such as gifted children and students with special educational needs.

In summary, to enhance adolescents’ psychological resilience, there are several factors that families and professionals should pay attention to: unconditional love, having a trusted friend, helping others, engaging in regular physical activity, pursuing hobbies, having a reliable adult figure, living in a clean and safe home, attending a school that meets their learning needs, and the fair and consistent implementation of clear rules (Morris et al., 2021). Based on all of these factors, it is important to educate families and teachers and provide adolescents with appropriate opportunities.

In addition to individual studies on adolescents, studies that include the family system are of great importance. In particular, families should be made aware of the negative consequences of overprotective parental attitudes. Based on these findings, the researchers suggest that parent-oriented information studies on parental attitudes that increase the psychological resilience of adolescents should continue and researchers should examine the effectiveness of these strategies by comparing them. Although parents’ parenting styles generally follow a certain pattern, parental attitudes and behaviors can vary depending on specific periods and situations. Therefore, considering that the boundaries of parenting are no longer rigidly fixed in strict categories, particularly in today’s world, it is believed that it might be more beneficial to approach parenting as appropriate attitudes tailored to the family, the child, and the situation at hand. It is thought that positive attitudes gained by parents will increase the psychological resilience of adolescents.

Conclusion

The findings obtained from the current systematic review study prove the importance of investigating the effect of parental attitudes on the psychological resilience of adolescents. According to the findings, researchers should continue to investigate parenting attitudes. The impact of parental attitudes on adolescents’ psychological resilience can be better explained if future studies apply the following factors: (i) considering gender differences; (ii) collecting cross-cultural data on adolescents’ psychological resilience and parental attitudes; (iii) examining specific parental attitudes; and (iv) considering variables such as stress, communication skills, and anxiety as mediating or moderating variables in the relation between parental attitudes and adolescents’ psychological resilience levels. The researchers believe that the findings obtained as a result of the current research and the findings to be obtained in the light of future research can be taken as a basis for the development of school-based psychoeducation programs and family trainings, which can be carried out to increase the psychological resilience of adolescents; this may be useful for the experts who may participate in these trainings. At the same time, the researchers believe that the results of this study can work as a guide for researchers.