Helicopter Parents in the Lives of College Students: a Grounded

Florida State University Libraries

Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School

2019

Helicopter Parents in the Lives of College SJeftfeuryd Weillinamt Asll:e nA Grounded Theory Approach

Follow this and additional works at the DigiNole: FSU's Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected] FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF HUMAN SCIENCES

HELICOPTER PARENTS IN THE LIVES OF COLLEGE STUDENTS: A GROUNDED

THEORY APPROACH

JEFFERY WILLIAM ALLEN

A Dissertation submitted to the Department of Family and Child Sciences in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

2019

Jeffery William Allen defended this dissertation on November 12, 2019. The members of the supervisory committee were:

Ming Cui Professor Co-Directing Dissertation

Marsha Rehm Professor Co-Directing Dissertation

Karen Randolph University Representative

Joseph Grzywacz Committee Member

The Graduate School has verified and approved the above-named committee members and certifies that the prospectus has been approved in accordance with university requirements.

TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract ...... iv

1. INTRODUCTION ...... 1

What is Helicopter Parenting? ...... 1

2. LITERATURE REVIEW ...... 11

Brief History of Helicopter Parenting Literature ...... 11 The Current Study ...... 28 3. METHODS ...... 29

Sample ...... 29

4. RESULTS ...... 38

Hovering: A Constant Presence and Influence ...... 38 Not All Parents Hover Equally ...... 42 Factors Impacting Hovering ...... 55 Common Responses to Hovering Parents...... 62 The Germination of a Theory ...... 77

5. DISCUSSION ...... 79

What is Helicopter Parenting ...... 79 Strengths and Limitations ...... 86 Contribution to Knowledge ...... 87

APPENDICES ...... 89 A. QUESTIONNAIRE ...... 89 B. IRB APPROVAL...... 91 References ...... 94 Biographical Sketch ...... 98

iii

ABSTRACT

Helicopter parenting continues to be an important issue for social science researchers.

Researchers continually seek to understand this phenomenon within the context of the college student population. One of the core issues challenging this body of research is the continued tendency and focus towards understanding helicopter parenting through a quantitative lens while overlooking the theoretical foundation upon which this research is built. Through a grounded theory approach, this qualitative study seeks to begin to build a theoretical foundation through interviews of a sample of 20 college students who have experienced helicopter parenting in their own life. Four distinct types of helicopter parenting were discovered and used to begin to create a substantive theory for this field. The empirical implications of how this theoretical discovery could bolster and unify the field, how these findings could fit within the current research literature, and the practical implications for parents and professionals were also discussed.

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION What is Helicopter Parenting?

Helicopter parenting is currently defined as any parenting practice meant to control, micromanage, or being overly involved in children’s lives inappropriate to the child’s developmental stages (Burke, Segrin, & Farris, 2018; LeMoyne & Buchanan, 2011; Padilla-

Walker & Nelsen, 2012; Schiffrin et al., 2014). The one and only qualitative study done on helicopter parenting with college students identified three main themes in the definition: benevolent intention, over involvement, and strict control (diminished autonomy) (Kwon, Yoo,

& De Gagne, 2017). The participants in this study expressed frustration with parents who desired and attempted to be part of all aspects of their life from work, school, and relationships.

Attempting to control all aspects from choosing classes to limiting nightly activities, pushed these students to avoid communication with their parents when possible and to hide certain decisions from their parents (Kwon, Yoo, & De Gagne, 2017).

The focus of the concept, practice, and implication of helicopter parenting is on emerging adults (18 years of age or older). The interest in helicopter parenting has grown from observations in the media to college administrators’ complaints and worries to social scientists’ curiosity of the phenomenon (Somers and Settle, 2010). Over the last decade, the diversity of methods and outcomes continue to grow in length and scope with the consensus being helicopter parenting approach produces mostly negative outcomes. These outcomes include lower levels of psychological satisfaction and well-being, increased criticism in families, an increase of drug/alcohol use, and an increase in anxiety/depression (e.g. Cui, Allen, Fincham, May, & Love,

2019; Indiana University, 2007; LeMoyne & Buchanan, 2011; Segrin et al., 2015).

The research on the topic continues to call for the attention of university administrators and educators, family researchers and practitioners, and parents. These current findings call for changes, at some level, to help those impacted. Support and knowledge can be offered at the professional and university levels. Parents can begin to adapt their approach to one that will build confidence and autonomy in young adults. Changes of this nature are not insignificant and require a solid foundation. That points to the importance of this study; to build substantive theory based on real life experiences for helicopter parenting. The original purpose of substantive theory is to inform specific, narrow areas of inquiry (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). These smaller theories may go on to inform broad formal theories. The hope herein is to create a solid foundation for the field of helicopter parenting and its imperative findings.

One important piece missing to the research puzzle of helicopter parenting is succinct, clear, sound substantive theory to begin the march to a broad, formal theory specific to helicopter parenting. Developing theory from the ground up, grown from and along with those who experience helicopter parenting directly and explicitly, will bring clarity and substance to the definition of helicopter parenting as well as identify specific variables that can be tested and examined by future research. Furthermore, this type of theory would create a theoretical lens built specifically for the topic of helicopter parenting that can strengthen the understanding of possible outcomes on emerging adult children. Clarity of definition and substantive theory will give cohesion and consistency to the field currently built upon a mosaic like theoretical foundation.

Need for A Specific Theory on Helicopter Parenting of Emerging Adult Children

Most of social science is driven by an ontological view of society as a “concrete structure” that can be captured and measured borrowing from quantitative methods used

primarily in the natural sciences (Morgan & Smircich, 1980). Given some flexibility and acceptance of the subjective nature of peoples’ experience, however, an expansion beyond quantitative method is vital in order to gather clearer understanding.

Let me offer a hiking analogy for clarification purposes. Humans hiking into nature bring into nature human smells and sounds in which animals often try to avoid. Therefore, altering animals’ everyday behaviors in those moments’, hikers tromp through the wild. There are moments when animals will sit quietly and view the hikers a moment before moving to safety. A hiker may be able to film or snap pictures of animals in these brief moments and then generalize what they capture as reality because that is what is observed.

The other possibility for the outdoor enthusiast who wants to truly experience nature is to find a secluded spot in the outdoors, sit quietly (for minutes, hours, or even days), and observe nature without rushing through. An astute observer will begin to see movements and activities, hear noises, view unseen animals, and discover intricacies that are nearly never viewed by any other means. One must sit quietly and observe. It is in these different approaches to experiencing nature that one can begin to understand the need for ‘sitting quietly and observing’ approach to understanding people.

The social sciences, by their very nature, deal with humans and their interaction with one another. Inevitably, there is subjectivity and some amount of self-creation of the social world.

Methodologies primarily meant for objective ontologies are not always the best fit. They, however, continue to be the primary tools employed by social scientists. This is also true for the field of helicopter parenting.

. To illustrate this point, we must step into a different realm of research. Wisdom,

Cavaleri, Onwuegbuzie, and Green (2012) examined the methods employed by 1,651 health- service research studies. Of those studies examined over 90% selected a quantitative approach, over 6% selected a qualitative approach, and over 2.5% selected a mixed methods approach.

Understandably, these studies were not selected from a social science field so definitive trends cannot be spoken about within a field like helicopter parenting beyond my own observations.

This trend is very similar within the social sciences and particularly true in the small field of helicopter parenting. In fact, out of the 25 articles cited for this dissertation on the topic of helicopter parenting, 23 are explicitly quantitative. Out of the two that are qualitative, only one is explicitly about helicopter parenting and emerging adult children. If the current trend held, in eight years there would be roughly 50 published articles on the subject with only 2, or 4%, being qualitative.

These trends point to the monopoly of deductive reasoning happening within the field of helicopter parenting. Deductive reasoning is a theory driven approach. Researchers, in an ideal world, choose a theory to study. It is through the lens of their chosen theory that they arrive at questions they would like to explore. After all the work and time and effort that goes into a research study the information gathered goes back into reinforcing, evolving, or disproving their chosen theory (Schutt, 2019). This approach is desired and appropriate when analyzing theory is the goal. This is rarely the case for the social scientists because the theories used are rarely built specifically for the phenomenon under scrutiny.

Theories are created to explain a specific area of focus. For example, a popular theory employed by researches in the field of helicopter parenting is self-determination theory (SDT).

Ryan and Deci (2000) developed SDT as a general theory for human motivation. Agreeably,

there are many ways of testing a theory like SDT and examining the effects of helicopter parenting on emerging adult children may be one of them. SDT was created, not as a theory to explain helicopter parenting, but as a theory to explain the depths and paths of human motivation. SDT may help explain some of the motivation processes found within a helicopter parenting system. SDT is designed to explain motivation not core processes happening within helicopter parenting. Helicopter parenting does not have a theory of its own. Researchers have not taken the time nor put in the effort to create theory inductively (from the data theory is discovered) and specifically for the field of helicopter parenting. Researchers have not addressed core issues of helicopter parenting to help with understanding or resolution. Can genuine advancements happen in a field that is continually testing theories meant to explain other phenomena?

Some may say that specific theory is not needed; that there are sufficient, broad theories in the social sciences to help explain helicopter parenting. Even a general parenting framework

(Baumrind, 1967; Maccoby & Martin, 1983) runs into issues with the current conceptualization and findings of helicopter parenting. For example, researchers may utilize established parent frameworks like Baumrind’s 3 parental types to frame and explain their study. A framework as established as this is not sufficient to explain the unique processes of a phenomenon like helicopter parenting (although, it may help shine some light in its own unique way). This too points to the need of inductively discovered theory long overdue for the field of helicopter parenting.

Researchers are continuously borrowing theories created for other topic areas, like SDT, to study and help explain helicopter parenting. As Glaser and Strauss (1967) explain in their seminal work on grounded theory, each individual field would benefit greatly by developing first

substantive (specific) and eventually formal (broad and encompassing) theory from the ground up. In other words, theory created through the rigorous collection, observation, analyses of peoples’ experience of the phenomenon in question, would help focus and strengthen the research done on helicopter parenting.

Defining Helicopter Parenting in Current Society Context

A natural question flowing from the desire to discover theory in the field of helicopter parenting is: What is helicopter parenting? Naturally, researchers approaching this phenomenon with a deductive, quantitative approach have already sought to answer this question. Those who have deduced a definition have done it through logic reasoning and their own observations, previous literature, and statistical means such as factor analyses. Let’s examine LeMoyne &

Buchanan (2011) work on creating and testing a measure for helicopter parenting assessment.

Deducing a definition that both includes micromanaging and over-involvement, they created a 10 item scale with questions capturing how emerging adult children may feel if they had helicopter parents through their own observations, previous literature (both academic and non-academic), and reasoning on the subject. After surveying 371 college students, factor analyses provided the researchers with the items that they should include in their final helicopter parenting scale. This approach only captured the common themes form this particular sample while overlooking variations and nuances which is equally critical for defining helicopter parenting.

Padilla-Walker and Nelson (2012) published a similar study one year later with the added goal of establishing helicopter parenting as a distinct concept from other parenting concepts like behavioral and psychological control. They define helicopter parenting as over-involvement in an emerging adult’s life, but then move quickly to discuss aspects of control within parenting.

Surveying 438 college students the researchers showed their helicopter parenting items were

statistically different from items measuring psychological control. This helicopter parenting scale left researchers with the same question: is their depiction of helicopter parenting an accurate and sufficient account for the various experiences of the phenomenon by college students?

Do these definitions deduced, and the measures created capture a realistic and accurate picture of the helicopter parenting phenomenon being studied? Participants in the above studies only had the questions and responses offered to them by the researchers. Participants in these two studies were never asked about their personal experiences nor how they would define helicopter parenting. Furthermore, future research has and will build upon the above research discussed carrying their portrayal of helicopter parenting assuming it being accurate and correct. It may very well be accurate, but how does one know for certain without asking those who actually experience the phenomenon?

If the only definitions of a phenomenon is created deductively and through the researcher’s eyes (opposed from the person experiencing the phenomenon under question), how do researchers know they are capturing participants’ actual experiences? How do researchers know their definition of the phenomenon is as close to reality as possible? I propose the way to get closest to an accurate definition that honors those people research purports to benefit is to ask the people living these experiences. A clearer picture awaits discovery by approaching, asking, understanding, and analyzing the experiences of those in the thick of being helicopter parented.

Where Does Helicopter Parenting Fit in Parenting?

Helicopter parenting is relatively new to the scene of both parenting and emerging adult research. Freud was one of the first to illustrate a developmental theory implementing possible parental impacts on child development (Baltes, 1987). Several other theorists, such as Piaget,

worked on developmental theories but rarely did they go beyond the adolescent years. Erik

Erikson was the first prominent developmental theorist to extend his theory throughout the lifespan (Erikson, 1959). His theory sets the stage for researchers to begin thinking about early adulthood and eventually for the development of a specific stage of development identified as emerging adulthood (Arnett, 2000).

Couple this work with that of Bowen and his differentiation theory highlights the importance of separating from one’s parents and gaining an individualized identity (Bowen,

1966). The stage is set for helicopter parenting to develop as a field. It is this theoretical foundation that allowed helicopter parenting to settle on the target population of emerging adults.

For an extensive period of time, research has delved into investigating the three parenting styles articulated by Diana Baumrind (1967). These three styles are authoritative, authoritarian, and permissive. Almost 20 years later Maccoby and Martin (1983) published a two-dimensional approach (responsiveness and demandingness) of the above parenting styles and added a fourth parenting style of neglect. An authoritative parent is high in demandingness and high in responsiveness to the child’s emotional needs. This parenting approach continues to be the best approach for children (Baumrind, 1991; Turner, Chandler, & Heffer, 2009). Parents who are high in demandingness and low in responsiveness to the child’s needs are authoritarian. Those parents low in demandingness but high in responsiveness are permissive. These two parenting styles being generally found to produce negative outcomes for children although culture and ethnicity need to be accounted for especially in the case of authoritarian parenting (Steinberg & Darling,

2017).

Helicopter parenting seems to have a place within the context of authoritative or authoritarian parenting. Some of the research paints parents as high demandingness but does not

address the responsiveness of parenting (authoritarian). Those few studies that have addressed responsiveness considered parental warmth (authoritative). There are parenting behaviors from a helicopter parenting as articulated in the current research, such as meeting with professors and/or getting involved with their adult child’s peer relationships, that don’t fit within this current popular framework.

Indulgent parenting is another wing of the parenting research that may capture some of the current dynamics of helicopter parenting. Indulgent parents rarely have consistent rules, tend to give their children whatever they want immediately, and consequences for children’s behavior are not applied or avoided (Clarke, Dawson, & Bredehoft, 2004; Coccia, Darling, Rehm, Cui, &

Sathe, 2012). Though indulgence is warmth and responsiveness, its low behavioral control may or may not fit helicopter parenting because of the low behavioral expectations and avoidance of behavioral consequences with parental tight control.

Unfortunately, the current field of helicopter parenting has not been able to clearly show where helicopter parenting fits within the plethora of parenting research hitherto conducted.

Perhaps, by applying a grounded theory approach with well thought-out questions will help clarify where helicopter parenting fits or if it is a completely separate branch of parenting altogether.

Using A Grounded Theory to Discover what?

The purpose of this study is to inform by using a grounded theory with a qualitative approach. Substantive theory awaits discovery specific to the field of helicopter parenting and a clear, solid definition (built on actual experience) can be constructed with the support and backing of those living this phenomenon. As this theory develops from peoples’ firsthand

experiences, social scientists interested in the topic of helicopter parenting can then test this theory guided by a solid and clear understanding of helicopter parenting.

As I gather the insights and experiences of those being helicopter parented first hand to gain a clearer understanding of this phenomenon, a secondary aim will be to gather their thoughts on how this parenting approach has either created or hindered their abilities in different aspects of their life. Particularly important for college students is their academic endeavors, healthy peer/romantic relationships (Dennis, Phinney, & Chuateco, 2005; Swenson, Nordstrom,

& Hiester, 2008), and, sometimes, work outside of school. Findings in the current field of helicopter parenting point to this parental approach to a college age child as hampering appropriate development and skill use in each of these areas. Information will be sought on each of these topics. Furthermore, inquiry will be made into the participants’ internal world with questions about their internal thoughts about themselves and their abilities, their awareness and interactions with their emotions, and their ability to develop and follow their personal values.

The information elicited from the participants will allow a deeper understanding of this parenting approach. Achieving greater depth to the theory discovered as well as polishing its defining characteristics. Bringing clarity of these two points will inform a field devoid of precise theory as well as give solid understanding to what helicopter parenting is directly from those who experience it in their own lives.

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW Brief History of the Helicopter Parenting Literature

The empirical movement towards better explaining the relationship between helicopter parenting and emerging adults began a decade ago with a published study focused on asking college students about the frequency parents intervened with college issues. This was the first academic publication with the term “helicopter parenting” used in reporting the results (Indiana

University, 2007). Somers and Settle (2010) delved into the historical background of the term and identified its first use in popular media during the early 90’s with its usage becoming more common throughout that decade and into the next. The frequency of published news stories on the topic and the published report in 2007 seemed to be the catalyst for the academic world to take note and attempt to explain this phenomenon empirically.

Theories Used in the Helicopter Parenting Literature

Theories created to explain other phenomena is used for the foundations of the several studies published on the subject. Researchers utilized related theories like attachment theory, social learning theory, and family systems theory. Also, in the theoretical tool belt of the helicopter parent researcher is SDT as discussed in the introduction. The remaining researchers deductively build a theoretical framework out of the existing literature specific to their study.

For this section of the literature review, I grouped the articles based on the theory used.

For each of the theoretical categories I went in-depth about the articles’ conceptualization of helicopter parenting (and other terms when appropriate), study design, measurement issues, analytical approaches, limitations, and outcomes.

Self-determination theory. SDT is a theory created to help explain human motivation

(Ryan & Deci 2000). In order for a person to become intrinsically motivated a person must fulfill three basic needs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Holding the belief that one makes his or her own choices and those choices are congruent with their personal values is autonomy.

Competence is the belief that one has the necessary skills to achieve the task and, if skill is lacking, the ability to learn and develop mastery over the task. Relatedness is the assumed human need for human connection. When all three characteristics are present and flowing in an individual’s life, intrinsic motivation is easily utilized; in other words, making choices for the joy and passion the individual holds inside themselves. When one or more of these characteristics are missing or underdeveloped, people are theorized to move towards needing external motivation (Deci & Ryan, 2000).

One of the most used theories in helicopter parenting is SDT. The basic assumptions of how intrinsic motivation is cultivated fits well into the current paradigm of helicopter parenting.

A recent study focuses on helicopter parenting and its possible effects on college females’ drinking habits through such mechanisms of basic psychological needs (autonomy, competence, relatedness) and self-control (Cui et al., 2019). Surveying 473 college females to assess drinking, psychological needs, self-control, the authors used structural equation modeling (SEM) to test the fit of their model. Their results suggested that helicopter parenting was associated with basic psychological needs satisfaction which was associated with self-control and subsequently alcohol use. Bootstrapping method was used to test the mediating effects of psychological needs satisfaction and self-control between helicopter parenting and drinking which was found to be significant. Although this study uses SDT as a theoretical framework to argue for and explain the research hypothesis, there is no mentioning of motivation or how this study may inform SDT as

a theory. Furthermore, the lack of diversity, the self-report data, and one time point all limit the power, certainty in the paths identified, and generalizability of this study

In another study, Kouros, Pruitt, Ekas, Kiriaki, and Sunderland (2017) examined the associations among helicopter parenting, autonomy support, and college students’ mental health and well-being. SDT is used to establish theoretical foundation. 118 students were surveyed via online and in a lab. Researchers found higher levels of helicopter parenting was associated with lower well-being for female college students. There are several limitations that stood out with this study: The authors did not separate mothers’ and fathers’ parenting behaviors (one dimensional in considering impact of parents) and the cross-sectional design did not establish the temporal order of the associations. More relevant, they did not revisit the use of SDT, how it may help explain their results, and (more appropriately) how the findings inform the theoretical lens utilized.

Several other studies published in the field also selected SDT as their theoretical bedrock to build their research upon (Reed, Duncan, Lucier-Greer, Fixelle, & Ferraro, 2016; Rousseau &

Scharf, 2015; Schiffrin, Liss, Miles-McLean, Geary, Erchull, & Tashner, 2014; Segrin, Givertz,

Swaitkowski, & Montgomery, 2015). All utilized SEM to analyze their data, except for

Rousseau and Scharf’s study (which used paired t-tests). In Rousseau and Scharf’s study, they found fathers reported higher levels of overparenting than mothers did. Attachment anxiety and perceived psychological control by young adults mediated the relationship of fathers’ overparenting and young adults’ distress and interpersonal sensitivity. Univariate hierarchical multiple regression analysis (UHMRA) was used to test moderation and the results suggested that the connection between maternal overparenting and young adults’ interpersonal sensitivity was moderated by perceived psychological control, attachment avoidance, and gender. The

significance of the moderation dropped to marginal significance after using bootstrapping method. Although this study comes with similar limitations as the first two studies, this study did have a line in their discussion using SDT to interpret their results, but there was no explanation of how their findings may inform SDT or the field of motivation. These authors did survey multiple members of each family (i.e., mothers, fathers, college student) allowing questions to be answered that are impossible to answer when only surveying a single member of a family (e.g., college students’ self-report).

The other three articles all shared similarities in their analytic approach, each using SEM to evaluate a path model. Reed and colleagues (2016) surveyed 461 (80.2% female) college students on their perception of their parenting practices around autonomy support and helicopter parenting. Participants also filled out questionnaires on self-efficacy, anxiety, life satisfaction, physical health, and depression. From their sample, self-efficacy was positively correlated to life satisfaction and physical health was negatively correlated to depression and anxiety. Helicopter parenting was negatively correlated to self-efficacy while autonomy support was positively correlated to self-efficacy. In terms of theory, the authors did note that their study supported a systems approach in developing basic psychological needs, which is an important insight for

SDT but didn’t use it after all. There is a gap in bringing their findings full circle for, as with the previous articles, there is no mentioning of motivation; the primary focus of SDT.

Schiffrin and colleagues (2014) published another study with the same measure and similar results. In this study, 297 (88% female) college students were surveyed. The difference in this study is helicopter parenting being proposed as directly relating to psychological basic needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness. These basic needs were theorized to impact depression, anxiety, and life satisfaction. No significant predictors of anxiety were found.

Neither was there significant predictive power from the parents’ autonomy. This finding stood in contrast to the findings of Reed and colleagues, perhaps due to a smaller sample size. Both autonomy and competence were found to be negatively correlated to depression. Only competence was positively correlated with life satisfaction. In their final model, helicopter parenting was negatively correlated to all of the basic psychological needs. Unlike most of the previous articles discussed, this study used SDT to help support and explain these findings, but motivation was not mentioned directly, which is the primary purpose of SDT. Furthermore, the authors failed to extrapolate how their research finding may inform or challenge SDT.

The last article of this section differed in their use of dyadic data as the focus of the study. Segrin and colleagues (2015) surveyed 477 parent-child dyads. Seventy-eight percent of the parents were female and 72.5% of the emerging adult child were female. Parent’s information was given by the student after they completed the survey on their perceptions of helicopter parenting, parents’ conditional regard, problem with the parent and self, critical family environment, and anxious parenting. Eighty-six percent of the legitimate emails given received finished surveys back from the parent. Parents also filled out survey questions about critical family environment and attitude towards the emerging adult child as well as a measure of overparenting. All the variables were at the latent level. Results suggested that parent reporting on overparenting was not correlated with their emerging adult child’s problems (i.e. coping with parent or self; all child reported). It was, however, positively correlated with critical family environment (dyadic data). Emerging adult child reports on their parents’ overparenting was positively correlated with both child problems and critical family environment. Another important take away from this study is the parent and emerging adult child reports of helicopter parenting could not load on the same latent trait because 95% of the variance for these to

measure were unique. In other words, the perception parents and emerging adult children had on this topic varied considerably. It must be remembered that the measures used to measure helicopter parenting was completely different for parents and their emerging adult children, not just worded differently, which limited the importance of the above take-away message. SDT is the only theory used in this study. They used the theory to look at the phenomenon as if through a pair of binoculars a mile away. It was used to offer some explanations to the results found, but as with all of the studies using SDT, there was no comment on motivation or how the results may inform SDT.

Many of the above studies do not rely solely on SDT to justify and explain their work.

They bring in other literature and theory to patch up their theoretical foundation. This creates a collage like foundation to build on rather than a specific, succinct, solid theoretical foundation specific to the topic at hand.

Although many of these studies were statistically powerful, meaning they had a sufficient sample for the statistical methods employed, and provided insight into important outcomes (i.e. higher level of critical family environment and lower level in basic psychological needs, self- efficacy, well-being) of a specific type parent and adult-child interactions it is clear these authors see the main purpose of their finding is to sound the warning cry against smothering adult children. With a field based on the scientific method and where it is unethical to force people into lab settings to completely control the environment, theory is paramount for the strength and progress of the social research.

The SDT foundation built upon causes one to wonder if it is more appropriate to interpret these important findings through the lens of internal motivation and how this particular parenting approach may cripple an adult child’s ability to tap into and utilize this motivation in their own

life. Rather, these studies are used to inform the science of helicopter parenting and its primarily negative outcomes for the emerging adult.

Social and systems theories. Not all the researchers use theories meant to explain individualized, internal processes, like motivation, to explain the ins and outs of helicopter parenting. Several researchers delve into the social and system theories to examine helicopter parenting. Some have relied on family systems theory to build a framework to explain the importance of emerging adult children movement towards individuation as they emerge into adulthood (Kwon, Yoo, & Bingham, 2016) or as justification for viewing the entire family rather than just focusing on an individual (Segrin, Woszidlo, Givertz, Bauer, & Murphy, 2012). Family differentiation theory is employed to explain the natural and normal course families take as children age into adulthood (Bradley-Geist & Olson-Buchanan, 2014). Lastly, some researchers used a conglomerate of social learning and symbolic interaction theory to help explain why some college students may develop certain meanings around marriage (Willoughby, Hersh, Padilla-

Walker, & Nelson, 2015). Furthermore, Willoughby and colleagues also used marital horizon theory for justification for including three items in their measures: two to measure attitudes towards marriage and one to measure marriage timing.

Assessing the cultural difference in people’s perception of helicopter parenting Kwon and colleagues (2016) surveyed 492 college students across 13 university campuses located in South

Korea. Building on a portion of family systems theory (i.e. individuation and adaptation to change over time), the authors measured helicopter parenting retrospectively to assess the parent- child relationship in their past. The students also filled out measures assessing their locus of control and emotional well-being. Using SEM to discover a model of best fit, the authors found that only a one factor model fit their helicopter parenting data. From the data collected the

authors were confident that the perceptions of helicopter parenting from Korean students didn’t differ from other groups who had been given the same measure (i.e. US college students).

Furthermore, the latent helicopter parent variable was negatively correlated with internal locus of control but was not with emotional well-being. Internal locus of control was positively correlated with emotional well-being. In terms of how the authors utilize systems theory, the authors mentioned it one time to underscore how family systems theory may shed light on some of their findings, but did not discuss how their findings may inform the theory. The impression is given that theory was merely secondary to their findings and how those findings fit into the helicopter parenting landscape.

With a sample from the U.S., Willoughby and colleagues (2015) assessed the possible effects helicopter parenting might have on marital attitudes and timing for emerging adults.

Using data from project R.E.A.D.Y. (Researching Emerging Adults’ Developmental Year), which consists of data collected from 779 college students from around the US, they analyzed measure on marital attitudes, timing, and importance along with measures on helicopter parenting and parental warmth. A three-step hierarchical multiple regression was used to test the models. Higher levels of helicopter parenting were found to be positively correlated with a belief that being single held more advantages than being married, but this connection disappeared when high levels of maternal warmth was present. Perceived helicopter parenting was also positively correlated to marital timing, meaning higher helicopter parenting came with a desire to wait longer than the national average to marry. This study mentioned one of the three theories used to help explain their findings, but only briefly. These authors explained how helicopter parenting may help explain the marital horizon theory used throughout their study. The other two theories

used to create the theoretical foundation, social learning theory and symbolic interaction theory, were never mentioned again after the introduction.

Assessing how helicopter parenting may affect a college student’s experience and workplace expectations, Bradley-Geist and Olson-Buchanan (2014) surveyed almost 500 U.S. college students on that topic. They created a theoretical foundation from family differentiation theory. They also created a scale to measure over-parenting and discovered they had a two factor measure: one for parental involvement and other for over-parenting. The likelihood of being over-parented increased if the college student lived at home. The likelihood of being over- parented decreased if the college student had one or more siblings. Within the student, overparenting was negatively correlated with college students’ self-efficacy. Incorporating the workplace, students who reported over-parenting were also more likely to choose maladaptive responses for the workplace. The authors of this study were thorough in describing their statistical approach. Unfortunately, after all the complicated statistical work there was no discussion of family differentiation theory after using it to build their reasoning. Family differentiation theory was not used to help explain their findings nor were the findings used to support or challenge the theory.

Wanting to hold strictly to the family systems theory chosen for their theoretical foundation, Segrin and colleagues (2012) chose to interview parent-child dyads to understand the possible effects of helicopter parenting on family satisfaction and communication, child entitlement, and adaptive developmental social traits. The 538 parent-child dyads filled out separated measure with the exception of the parent-child communication measure. After creating a latent variable for the over-parenting measure, the variable was used to test several SEM models. They found over-parenting to be negatively correlated with both the parent and the

emerging adult child reports of communication. Communication was positively related to family satisfaction. Overparenting was positively correlated to emerging adult children’s entitlement and negatively correlated to socially adaptive traits. The authors of this study did underscore how the complex theory deduced from parenting styles, family systems theory, and dynamic parenting practices could not be explained by this one study. They acknowledged the need for many more studies to begin to capture the whole picture created by their theoretical foundation.

This is the extent of mentioning theory in their discussion of their findings.

None of the above reviewed articles use theory to guide their entire study nor do they interpret their results for the purpose of informing theory directly. All of these studies begin to shine light on the possible outcomes from what researchers define as helicopter parenting; from marriage perception and timing, to family communication, to self-efficacy and entitlement; they do not shine light (with the exception of one) on the theory used or at least use the theory to shine some light on their findings. Each theory was utilized clearly and succinctly to justify their thinking and hypotheses but that was the end of theory use within each study. Use of these findings was left to other researchers, to choose from studies like these to decide how these findings could be used to inform current theory or deduce future theory.

Deducing theory. The following studies build their cases with no established theory, rather, their hypotheses and study aims are guided by previous research alone. Each study made a clear argument for the separate pieces of their study, however, it is important to note that the research they each base their study on are those that have been founded on other literature (all based on deduction) or theory created to explain other phenomenon other than helicopter parenting.

For example, Schiffrin and Liss (2017) did a spectacular job at illuminating research in the field thus far. They used the previous research, and the justification that the hypotheses they desired to test haven’t been tested yet, to show why their research is important and needed.

Surveying 121 mother-college student dyads, they tested their hypotheses using correlation and t-test. Desiring to know how similar parent-child reports of helicopter parenting are, they tested and found a significant correlation between mother and daughter helicopter parenting measures.

When they examined the measure item-by-item only half of the items correlated significantly.

According to their data, students reporting helicopter parenting also carried perfectionist ideas about themselves, were hyper competitive with their peers, and avoided activities in which low confidence prevailed. Mothers who reported higher helicopter parenting tended to have emerging adult children who scored higher in entitlement measure.

In another study built on previous literature rather than a direct theory, Nelson, Padilla-

Walker, and Nielson (2015) justified the need to better understand helicopter parenting and risk behaviors like stealing and drug use. Complicating their research, they also justified the need to test whether or not maternal warmth worked as a moderator on helicopter parenting and risk behaviors. Using hierarchal regression analysis, they found those students reporting higher rates of helicopter parenting also reported lower levels of self-worth when maternal warmth was also low. Furthermore, when helicopter parenting was high and maternal warmth was low college students reported higher rates of risk behaviors. The reverse was true if maternal warmth was high. This is an important study in the helicopter literature because it points to the nuances of individual experiences with the same phenomenon; as defined by researchers up to this point.

Speaking of nuances; Fingerman, Cheng, Wesselmann, Zarit, Furstenberg, and Birditt,

(2012) examined parent and grown children reports on level of support (perhaps a nuanced

aspect of helicopter parenting), the participants evaluation of the type of support given, grown children’s well-being, and parents level of satisfaction with their own life. Describing different types (i.e. emotional, practical, financial, listening, advice, and socializing) of support and levels

(from less than once a year to daily) of support, these researchers utilized multi-level regression models to test their hypotheses. Grown children still living with their parents, younger compared to older grown children, or had children of their own were more likely to report intense support from parents. Both parents who gave and grown children who experienced intense support labeled this type of support non-normative. Intense support was positively correlated with clarity of life goals and higher life satisfaction. Maybe, the researchers’ conceptualization and operationalization of support only captured part of the helicopter parenting phenomenon, but it was a part that seemed to be missing from the majority of helicopter literature outside of the work that has been done on maternal warmth (Nelson et al., 2015).

Some researchers saw the importance in understanding some of what drove parents to employ practices currently seen as helicopter parenting. Building their case with previous research, Segrin, Woszidlo, Givertz, and Montgomery (2013) surveyed parents and their college age child. College students, who were surveyed first, were asked to provide information about their parents’ parenting, personal stress, narcisissm and coping. Parents were surveyed on regret, anxiety and overparenting. The researchers ended up with data from 653 parent-child pairs.

Using SEM, latent factors were created for all seven of the variables tested. This study finds parents carrying higher levels of regret also carry higher levels of anxiety and this anxiety often leads to overparenting (one time point so path directions is unsure). Adult children who reported higher levels of helicopter parenting were less able to cope and have higher traits of narcissism.

This inability to cope also created higher levels of stress and anxiety in adult children.

These studies were all built on shaky ground because they were left without the foundation a theory offers. Secondly, the information deduced from is built upon theory meant to explain other phenomena, not helicopter parenting. Although these researchers offered possible insights into better understanding helicopter parenting and its possible effects on the lives’ of college students, researcher were left in the dark poking holes in the muddy and squishy ground hoping they will hit something solid.

Latest Helicopter Parenting Research

Researching helicopter parenting continue to be a hot topic for the social sciences with many new studies gaining publication over the last year. Consistency continues in terms of method with some creativity through different analytic approaches. SEM continues to be utilized to analyze the data (Hesse, Mikkelson, & Saracco, 2018; Lee & Kang, 2018 [SDT]; Woo, Hur, &

Ahn, 2017), as well as hierarchical multiple regression (McGinley, 2017). Expanding to new analytic techniques such as the use of the actor–partner interdependence modeling (APIM)

(Rousseau & Scharf, 2017) or simple statistical tools like a one tailed t-test to compare different responses (Milita & Bunch, 2017).

All but two of these studies included college age participants from the US; one studied focused on 96 families living in Israel (Rousseau & Scharf, 2017) and the other focused on

Korean college students (Lee & Kang, 2018). Researchers continue to vary in their foci, questions, and outcomes in a hope to bring better understanding to the helicopter parenting phenomenon. Researchers are finding that being helicopter parented produces a positive outlook on more obtrusive government policies and tactics when compared to those who are not helicopter parented (Milita & Bunch, 2017). Wanting to understand the impacts on moral development McGinley (2017) found that those college students reporting helicopter parenting

from their mother or father also reported lower number of prosocial actions as well as a decrease in the ability to empathize for others. For Korean college students, helicopter parenting came with less affection shared with parents while increasing the amount of pressure from the parent to find a suitable career. Helicopter parenting did directly correlate positively with depression.

Helicopter parenting was indirectly correlated negatively with life satisfaction through either the amount of affection shown by the parent or the amount of pressure (applied by the parent) felt by the emerging adult child about choosing a respectable career (Lee & Kang, 2018). On a more positive note, in Japan, helicopter parenting increases the affection felt between parent and emerging adult child which then impacts psychological well-being (it is important to note that the survey was only offered to college students and so parent perspectives are not included)

(Woo, Hur, & Ahn, 2017).

Desiring to understand why parents may move toward helicopter parenting in their parenting approach Rousseau and Scharf (2017) asked families (two married parents with at least one grown child between the age of 20-30) about helicopter parenting and other attitudes. Those parents carrying worry over past mistakes tended to increase in their helicopter parenting practices. When fathers carried regret from relationship choices, they reported lower levels of helicopter parenting. Fathers also were indirectly impacted in their helicopter parenting practices by their current relationship; when the father held higher regret about relationships and the mother carried worry about the impact past choices had made in her life, this combination led to less helicopter parenting from the father.

Although the research on helicopter parenting continues to grow in approach and scope theory continues to be used that is meant for other phenomenon (e.g. self-determination theory) or theory created deductively based on similar research. With no substantive, specific theory to

guide the research it is as if each researcher has a different color of paint. They each take turns throwing their paint color at a wall all hoping that the cacophony of color will create a coherent, clear picture with depth and substance.

A word on measurement. The earliest mention of a measurement being created specifically for helicopter parenting was given as a poster presentation (i.e. Montgomery, 2010,

May). Montgomery’s measure was administered to college students while creating a new measure to administer to the participating parents (i.e. Segrin et al., 2012). A year before

Segrin’s publication LeMoyne and Buchanan (2011) published the first scientific paper validating a measure created for measuring helicopter parenting from the college students’ perspectives. As Segrin continued to validate and implement his measure of 39 items, another helicopter measure was created and statistically validated in a published study (i.e. Schiffrin et al., 2014). As I have reviewed this literature it is clear that almost all published studies use and validate these measures with little or no variance from the originals.

These observations point back to an important question; what is helicopter parenting?

Each of these measures have been created using reason and logic to capture what the researcher conceives helicopter parenting to be, the understanding gathered from books or available literature at the time, or probably a mixture of both. The problems being the measures given to participants are trying to capture a phenomenon that is being described from the researchers’ perspective, knowledge, insights, and assumptions. Without a clear understanding of what helicopter parenting is from those who actually experience it, these measures may be disregarding important aspects of helicopter parenting or missing the mark completely. Because of this possibility researchers may inadvertently be creating a chasm between what research is finding and those actually experiencing helicopter parenting in their daily lives.

Qualitatively Exploring Helicopter Parenting

Research qualitatively understanding and exploring helicopter parenting is limited. The only qualitative studies found, analyzed 15 parent journal entries relating their experience of implementing autonomy building practices learned from a seven-week course with their children.

The seven-week program was specifically geared to combating controlling behaviors of the parent while building a stronger parent-child relationship and building autonomy of the child.

Prolific and rich support was found for the practice learned by the parents (Froiland, 2015). This study is pertinent to the current state of the helicopter parenting literature that points to the autonomy practices from parents as opposite from helicopter parenting practices (i.e. Kouros et al., 2017; Reed et al., 2016).

Another qualitative study focused on a group of highly involved, controlling Korean mothers labeled “helicopter parents” by the researchers. The purpose of the study was not to understand helicopter parenting. The purpose was to understand how the group gathers and shares information (Park, Lim, & Choi, 2015).

The third study interviewed 32 Canadian fathers on how to protect their children, general attitudes around protection of children, and overprotecting children. Using a grounded theory approach to analyze the data, the researchers found common themes: the subjectivity of what overprotection means, when overprotection is present it is driven by excessive fear, overparenting is connected with over-involvement which restricts the child’s activities and learning, and finally, the fathers consistently expressed worry on how this type of approach would hamper self-confidence and learning important life skills (Brussoni & Olsen, 2013).

The above three qualitative studies have children as their focus rather than emerging adults or grown children. This speaks to the dearth of qualitative work done with emerging adults and the phenomenon of helicopter parenting. Kwon, Yoo, and De Gagne (2017) conducted qualitative study with 40 Korean American college students on their thoughts, beliefs, and experiences with helicopter parenting. Using an online, open-ended question format to gather the experience Korean American College students have with helicopter parenting is practical and easier than face to face interviews, but it does not allow for follow up question to gain needed clarity or understanding of the answers given. Many of the participants expressed the power helicopter parents seemed to hold while the emerging adults felt powerless. However, many of the participants also acknowledged that their parents only wanted the best for them. Most reported parents becoming more relaxed since entering college, but a fourth said it hasn’t changed since starting college. Many of the students talked about going along with their parents and making decisions in secret when doing something their parents would not allow. The rest of the study discuss answers to questions about Korean parents and reasons behind helicopter parenting within a Korean American culture.

This last study is important because it begins the arduous task of compiling natural, firsthand accounts of the phenomenon even if it is specific to another culture. The purpose of this study was to inform the current field rather than build theory (Kwon, Yoo, & De Gagne, 2017).

The lens held by the researchers is informed from many deductive studies done thus far within the field of helicopter parenting.

What is needed is a freshly tilled garden with no previous seeds planted so natural and specific substantive theory can be discovered that will then shape and inform the field rather than merely work to conform to it. Locke, Campbell, and Kavanagh (2012) started this work when

they asked school counselors and professionals as well as mental health professional what characteristics they considered to be overparenting, but no one has continued this work until now.

The Current Study

Given the current state of the science particular to helicopter parenting, with the consistent use of theory meant to study other phenomena (e.g. SDT) and building a theoretical framework from the current literature; there needs to be a change in tactics. In the words of the founders of grounded theory “[grounded theory is a] more trustworthy than logical-deductive theory for the simple reason that the latter often requires forcing of data into categories of dubious relevance to the data’s meaning” (Glaser & Strauss, p. 98). Secondly, the current understanding of helicopter parenting as a construct has come solely from researchers and other experts rather than developed from direct observations of and interviews with those who experience helicopter parenting directly and personally, therefore research needs to utilize a new approach to uncovering a clear, solid definition of helicopter parenting. This study seeks to gain clearer understanding and discover new, theory specific to the field of helicopter parenting; particularly focusing on undergraduate college students.

CHAPTER 3 METHODS Sample

The target population was undergraduate college students who were single and identify as being helicopter parented currently. This population was convenient in that they were in the time of life theorized by researchers to be important for differentiating from their parents and beginning to build their own life. Murry Bowen first stressed the process of differentiating from ones’ family in his development family systems theory (Bowen, 1966). Researching Bowen’s propositions on differentiating in relations to social anxiety and psychological symptoms and functioning, researchers found differentiating was connected with less social anxiety and better psychological functioning (Murdock & Gore, 2004; Peleg-Popko, 2002).

Furthermore, Jeff Arnett has built his career around defining, expounding, and explaining the time period now called emerging adult. Arnett argued that 18-25 has become a distinct period of growth and development because of shifting demographics and social values (Arnett, 2000).

Arnett’s illustration of this particular developmental age group gave license to researchers to target this particular developmental group from different perspectives and in different ways

(Schwartz, Zamboanga, Luyckx, Meca & Ritchie, 2013). Due to the work done on differentiation and on emerging adults, college age children make an ideal population to study the possible effects of a parenting approach that seems to diminish differentiation.

Furthermore, because of the differences culture may play on responses to parenting approaches an effort was made to gather participants who came from both western, individualized culture or those who may have originated from an eastern, collective culture.

Participants were legally an adult (18 years of age or older). Students were not screened for their

understanding of helicopter parenting in hopes to keep their responses as unbiased from current popular conceptualizations of helicopter parenting.

Saturation is a term used by grounded theorist to understand when they have interviewed enough participants. Saturation happens when there is no significant new information being found in the data by the researchers that contributes to developing theory (Glaser & Strauss,

1967). Researchers have found saturation happening around the third or fourth interview (i.e.

Martin & Turner, 1986). A thorough study tracking saturation found almost full saturation, almost 100% of the codes identified, were found within 12 interviews (Guest, Bunce, & Johnson,

2006). Over 50 people participated in the interview process, but not all the interviewees identified as being helicopter parented. Thirty-one of the participants expressed that they did feel helicopter parented. I only selected from those 31 participants who had stated explicitly that they felt helicopter parented. Transcribed and analyzed interviews were not selected in any particular order.

Three participants were used to experiment with the questions and help focus the research. These three pilot interviews were used to work out any issues with questions, interview style/approach, and topics that may have needed to be addressed. Each pilot interviewee was asked their opinion of the questions throughout the interview to help polish and streamline the interview process. During these initial interviews, memos were kept of key themes and concepts.

Keeping memos during the interviews offered opportunity check the validity, of the themes I was noting, with the interviewees personally. Noting key themes throughout the interviews was crucial for finding saturation later in the interview process. Saturation was noticed during the fifteenth, sixteenth and seventeenth interviews. Three more interviews were analyzed to assure saturation and to bring the total interviews analyzed to an even 20 consisting of four males and

16 females, including a set of twin females. The age range for the participants was 18-20 years old. All but one participant had married parents and one had only a single parent.

Procedures

Participants came from a public research university in the Southeast region of the United

States. It did not matter if parents of participants were single or married nor did their income matter because the purpose was to have people who identify as being parented in this way and to understand their experience personally. These nuances were not important throughout the interviews and analyses because the majority of analyzed interviewees had parents who were still together at the time of the interviews (18 out of the 20). At the creation of this study there was a thought to gather equal number of male and female participants in this study at the start, however, a majority of females signed up to participate and so there was not an equal number of males to females (16 females and 4 males). There was no race/ethnicity information gathered directly from the participants, however, throughout the interviews participant shared where they were born and if their parents were originally from the US or not. Culturally, there was one participant from a Central American country. Ten other participants reported they had parents who originated from Central or South American countries. One participant reported their parents emigrated from Cambodia and another reported parents who originated from India. The other seven participants and their parents were born in the US. Outside of gender and culture, a heterogeneous sample was sought after in an attempt to gather as many different perspectives and experiences as possible. Participants were recruited by three different means. The first was by the primary investigator (PI) gaining access from professors to attend courses with large groups of undergraduates from different colleges around the university or to different student groups or clubs around within the university. The PI gave a short explanation of how helicopter

parenting is defined currently, explain the purpose of the research, the interview process, and gave the PI’s contact information. Extra credit was given for a short amount of time to those interested. This method was successful in recruiting multiple interviewees. The second approach was to post flyers around the university with a brief description of the research with the PI’s contact information. A 10-dollar gift card was offered for participation and completion of the interview process. This method was very successful in recruiting majority of the true helicopter parented students. The third approach was called snowballing; people known to the PI were told about the research and asked to reach out to any undergraduates who would be interested in participating. A 10-dollar gift card was also offered. This method was limited in the success of recruiting students. As contact was made to participate in the study, arrangements were made to meet in the PI’s office. Privacy and confidentiality were maintained. Each participant was given the informed consent to read and sign.

Questionnaire and interview. The questions are laid out in Appendix A. Questions were created in an attempt to move away from etic explanations, or those explanations developed from professional outsiders, to emic explanation, or those created by local insiders (Headland, Pike, &

Harris, 1990). The current definition of helicopter parenting (Kwon, Yoo, & De Gagne, 2017) and Baumrind’s parenting styles were used to create a framework of questions meant to capture an emic explanation rather than produce response biased by the current etic explanations. In order to accomplish this goal, interview questions were refrained from utilizing etic terms such as ‘helicopter parenting’ and instead more local terms such as ‘involvement’ and ‘demanding,’

The questions ranged from the participant’s view on parental involvement, control, responsiveness to needs, warmth, and demandingness as well as their own experience with being parented in that way, and the different effects they feel this parenting approach has had on their

life. The questions assessing impact were inspired by the current direction and findings of current research on the topic. The questions were organized so that the participants’ personal views on and experiences with helicopter parenting would inform and be forefront in their mind as they discussed and shared possible impacts in different areas of their lives.

The questions were meant to be open-ended format so that the participants’ answers could be explored and clarified with follow-up questions. These questions needed to be broad enough to gather rich, clear data while being specific enough to shine light on the phenomenon under scrutiny (Charmaz & Belgrave, 2012). The questions were open enough to begin the journey to solid understanding and discovery. Grounded theory, being an adaptive research design, allowed for flexibility to adjust and specify the questions as the interviews and analyses progressed.

Interviews were conducted on Florida State Campus and lasted 30 to 60 minutes.

Participants were thanked for their support and willingness to participate. A few minutes were spent in building rapport and creating a safe environment for each participant. Time was given for reading the informed consent and questions were addressed in full by the PI before the interview commenced. Empathic listening was used throughout the interview while politely reinforcing questions that needed clarification if the interviewee wandered off subject.

Throughout the interview, probing questions were asked so the subjective experience of each participant could be assessed and understood as thoroughly as possible. An example of this may be a participant talking about a parent possibly controlling them; instead of assuming that the participant’s and the PI’s understanding of ‘controlling’ is the same, the PI asked them to elaborate on what that looked like in their life. At the end of the interview, thanks were given.

Participants were given pseudonyms that allowed the PI to organize the data but maintain the confidentiality of the participants. All interviews were recorded and transcribed by the PI.

Digital voice recordings were kept in a secure digital folder. All hard copy transcripts were kept in a secure folder and locked cabinet in the PI’s locked office.

Analytic Strategies

Approaching this data set with a grounded theory approach has allowed for the inductive discovery of substantive theory specific to the field of helicopter parenting of college age children. A constructivist grounded theory view consists of a processes and journey shared between the experiences of the researcher and the participants (Charmaz & Belgrave, 2012;

Glaser & Strauss, 1967). It was important that the word ‘discovering’ is emphasized and underscored to underline a conscious effort by the researcher to acknowledge and hold lightly preconceived ideas on the topic to insure the data was not forced and shaped to fit those preconceptions. Glaser and Strauss (1967) put it this way “To preconceive relevance is to force data, not to discover from data what really works as a relevant explanation” (p. 143).

While expounding a clear analytic process to follow for grounded theory research, Corbin and Strauss (1990) illustrate the importance of the analysis process starting immediately after the first interview is collected and transcribed. By conducting interviews and working on the analysis simultaneously, the study is strengthened by creating a feedback loop of information while allowing researchers to test and validate their observations as the work progresses. The analysis process happens in three main steps. During the first step, the transcripts were combed over meticulously, line-by-line, identifying codes that labeled clearly different events or actions or ideas of the participants. These codes were grouped together in categories; this being called open coding. Throughout coding extensive notes (i.e. referred to by Corbin and Strauss (1990) as

theoretical memos) of thoughts, observations, and future assessing were kept to help organize and focus the analysis. These categories started to inform the questions and observations of the research as the work moved forward so systematic comparison of the categories to future data could happen. Axial coding was the next step and consists of continuing to compare categories and subcategories while looking for explanations for the categories observed through further questioning of more participants. For example, from the start of the interviews there were discussions from the participants around how their parents maintained a presence within their life. These tactics consisted of parents demanding phone calls on a daily basis, to demanding to know the college students every move, to mentally staking a claim constantly in the college students’ thoughts and emotions (all of these serving as codes identified and grouped into a category ‘maintaining a presence’). The explanations were held lightly until validation was found in future data. The final step was labeled selective coding in which all categories were placed within on unifying, core category capturing the phenomenon under study (Corbin &

Strauss, 1990; Glaser & Strauss, 1967).

The founders of grounded theory expressed this process as developing first, conceptual categories and their conceptual properties; and second, hypotheses or generalized relations among the categories and their properties” (Glaser & Strauss, p. 35). Explanations of grounded theory go on to expand the scope and purpose of grounded theory by discussing the importance of uncovering the contexts or conditions leading to certain interactions specific to a phenomenon

(Strauss & Corbin, 1990). These outcomes were sought after pertaining to the phenomenon of helicopter parenting using the grounded theory approach.

Analytical example. Taking note of the words and experiences of the participants happened immediately. For instance, several of the participants discussed how their parents were

never satisfied with anything they ever did. As I listened and probed into these experiences, I took notes on what resonated with these participants’ experience. One example that continually rang true with the participants with parents seemingly never satisfied with the college student was from the movie “Despicable Me.” These conversations were transcribed and coded the previous memos were considered. Phrases like “never enough” or “always pointing out what I could do better” or “a ton of pressure” helped to shed light on this type of parenting as they were grouped under this larger umbrella category. This process was repeated through 20 different interviews in the hope of bringing clarity to the definition, categories, and plausible impacts of such a parental report.

Reflections on my Journey

I have been working as a mental health therapist for the last 8 years in some capacity

(since beginning this Ph.D. program my work as a therapist has decreased dramatically). My learning of different therapeutic models and philosophies coupled with my experience in working with my clients continues to color my view of the world.

Four years I worked at a residential treatment program for teenagers. It was there that I began to see the effects of different types of parenting approaches. Two approaches stand out: parents who took a hands-off approach to parenting and parents who never let their children face life without intense support such as accomplishing tasks for their children or helping them avoid consequences.

As a therapist, I continually saw the impact these parenting approaches had on the teenage children. The largest impact that continued to arise in therapy was surrounding people’s ability to be aware of and make room for all of their emotions. When getting to the ‘heart’ of

their internal and relational issues, their approach to their emotions seem to occupy the heart of the matter much of the time.

It is for these reasons I am interested in understanding better the parent-child relationship; for this project specifically the helicopter parenting approach. Also, my experience focuses my eye on the emotional experience of these participants through the type of probing questions asked as well as how they were asked. Furthermore, this experience has rekindled a passion I have for working with people face to face. Not just to gather data but to be a part of their life journey. Conducting over 50 interviews reminded me of the joy and purpose I receive when genuinely taking the time to sit and understand a person on an emotional level.

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS The results begin by establishing a definition of helicopter parenting based on those people believing they have parents who are helicopter parents. Four main categories are presented to distinguish the nuances of approaches within the helicopter parenting approach.

Table 1.1 highlights the core characteristics for each specific category. Findings discussing the different relational and personal consequences presented by the college students are presented.

Hovering: A Constant Presence and Influence

Throughout the interviews conducted with college students on their experiences with and perceptions of being helicopter parented, one thing was blatantly clear; all felt their parents maintained a constant presence and influence in their life; significantly impacting them in one way or another. These college students used phrases like “always calling” or “constant communication” or “always want me home.” Sonia expressed her frustration with the hovering this way:

I talk to my mom more than my dad. My mom messages me every day. It was kind of

annoying when I first started college. I don’t want to sound ungrateful, but it was kind of

annoying to always have my phone go off. (Sonia)

Most of the interviewees talked about their parents hovering as “annoying” or expressed how “frustrating” the hovering is in their life. Almost all shared their “gratitude” for their parents and their rock-solid support; even if that support was solely financial for physical needs. Ally pondered her past and compared her experience now and then in this way:

I always thought that my parents were helicopter parents because they wanted to know

everything. I think, looking back now, it has been really helpful. Now I can talk to them

about anything and if something is wrong, I can be honest, and I don’t have to hide. Back

then I would scream and cry about them looking at my phone, but now I feel comfortable

about talking to them. I talk to them every day. (Ally)

It is important to point out that none of the college students interviewed were surprised at their parents’ approach when entering college. All discussed what it was like when they lived at home before college and how it has morphed stepping out of their parents’ home and into college life. This established pattern of hovering was produced through three main channels:

Communication, expectations and presence.

Communication

Advancements in technology allows for consistency in communication that has been unprecedented in previous generations of college students. Not only do most people have a phone with them unceasingly but the options to stay in contact with family members almost seems innumerable. For that reason, the parenting approach described by these students needed to be viewed within context of that advancing technology.

The demand for constant communication from parents is common for these students.

These parents often wanted to know who they were with, what their student was doing, and if the student was where they need to be. For example, parents checking to make sure their college student was in their apartment when they thought they should be. Oftentimes this communication was seen as an annoyance. Sometimes it was seen as a wall to a metaphoric cage. Sometimes the reaching out for or demand for this persistent communication was seen as hampering growth into greater independence.

My mom is ultra-focused on me and my life. She seriously freaks if she doesn’t know

what is going on in my life and sometimes, she doesn’t need to. I am at the age where I

need more independence. If I don’t share every little detail it is like betrayal to her. If I

am not involving her, she is really offended. If I don’t answer her for a day because I

need some space, she is deeply offended. She doesn’t get how it is not personal it is just

me needing to create my own life. My whole family is just on a different page then I am.

(Delany)

A common response from parents was to get “upset” or “angry” if their child did not answer their calls or texts within a certain time frame. This was commonly followed with stronger attempts to maintain the pattern of communication.

My first semester my parents struggled because my mom always wanted to know where I

was and what I was doing. They have gotten better this semester. They want me to come

home a lot and visit. I appreciate that they want me home, but I am very forgetful, and I

won’t be the first to call or text. We have difficulty with that point because they want

even more communication and I think we just talked. It can cause some strain. We have

had arguments about coming home more and communicating more. (Beth)

Expectations

College students consistently reported “high expectations” coming from their parents. These high expectations were reported as consistent throughout each of the college students' lives. First, these expectations called for high academic success. Often connected to grades, the expectation of a certain career that would bring financial stability and success in the future. Highlighted less often but still an expectation as seemingly affecting the college student are; health, appearance and morality.

As soon as I left the house my dad was like, ‘I expect a 4.0 this semester’, so no pressure

(laughs). ‘First year classes you should knock them out the park.’ I do think it is working,

I am getting a 4.0. I am also fine living on my own, really don’t have any problems. I

would place my parents outside of normal because I think most parents would understand

a couple of B’s or maybe a C but my parents expect straight A’s and that is the only

option. I think their standards are a little outside the norm. (Dan)

As these expectations stay high, constant, and move outside of grades; students report choosing certain actions. Actions not for their future or because they desire, but to gain their parents’ approval.

I think they are very demanding. I understand the grade thing because they are important,

and they keep my scholarship. They are very demanding with what I eat. They say that I

eat ‘trash food.’ I am trying to fix that...I think I’m doing this, not really for me, but so

they can see me eating the things they think I should eat. It really isn’t for me at this

point. I have been going to gym more too but that is more for them then for me too. I

know it is good for me too, but I just want to say, ‘look at what I did.’ (Kate)

Presence

The established history of high expectations and constant communication created a parental presence in the college student’s life that was at least psychological if not physical as well.

When I think of helicopter parenting, it goes back to always there. Even in my head.

Even if they are not physically there they are in the back of my mind. It looks like a

parent who is very on top of their child for whatever it is. They will get involved with

whatever they need to, teacher or a coach, to make sure their child is getting the best that

they can. Also, at times it can seem like a lot [from the child’s perspective]. (Chelsey)

Parents who hovered in this way were extremely responsive to the college student’s needs. This ultra-responsiveness solidified the idea of the parent being psychologically present even if they were not physically present.

Last semester my mother drove all the way up to pick me up when I was sick and drive

me all the way back home (7 hours one way) and she really didn’t have to do that. I don’t

know any other parent that would do that. My dad takes a little longer usually. They are

there for the most part, my mom is a worrier and is always there immediately. (Ally)

Most of the students interviewed, chose their current university to create distance from their parents, however even with the distance, the parents held onto a psychological presence with their college student.

So, for me when I am out with my friends and it is late and I am more worried about

where my dad is and what he is thinking, that is helicopter parenting to me; being a part

of every aspect of life without letting the kid to go forward. Always present mentally and

emotionally if not physically. (James)

The information gathered and analyzed herein point to a definition of helicopter parenting consisting of three key ingredients: constant parental presence (either physical or psychological or both) created by an extensive and persistent pattern of communication coupled with intensely high expectations (usually focused on academic and temporal success).

Not All Parents Hover Equally

As the students' words and experiences were listened to, transcribed and analyzed, it became clear not all parents hover equally. Parents (their unique history, personality and situation) paired with the child (their unique personality and circumstance) creates a pattern unique to that family.

Four main types of hovering emerged from the data: Spotlight Hovering, Despicable Me

Hovering, Venom Hovering and the Safety-Net Hovering. All these hoverers have the three characteristics discussed above in common. Parents tend to utilize more than one category within their unique pattern of hovering. These should not be considered as distinct categories, rather points along a continuum of possible approaches. The exception were those parents who were considered safety-net hoverers, or at least when safety-net hovering was prominent, it outshined any other type of hovering that may have been present.

Spotlight Hovering

If you have ever experienced a helicopter up close you know the intense noise and power their propellers produce. Imagine on that loud and powerful helicopter there is a spotlight so bright that it seems to blot out the world around you. One of the college students explained it this way:

When you think of a Helicopter, there is, you know, when a criminal is trying to out run

the cops there is a helicopter. Even if the criminal can’t see or hear the helicopter it is in

the back of their mind. That helicopter clouds the judgement of the person on the ground.

And if the helicopter is right above us, we couldn’t even hear each other right now.

(James)

Fear was a driving force behind this type of hovering. Many of the students talked about their parents “freaking out” if they could not communicate with them regularly. Parents also held onto “worse case” scenarios that might happen to the college student if they didn’t do exactly what the parents wanted. Parents would track their college student’s phone in an attempt to keep their parental fears at bay.

They also track my phone...She would get really worried if I wasn’t at my dorm when

they went to bed at 7 pm....I did not feel that they trusted me very much that freshman

year. My mom babies me a lot especially when I am home. My parents are always

bringing up the what if’s and try to prevent all bad things from happening. This has

affected me by creating anger when they tell me ‘what ifs.’ I get nervous when trying

new things like things I didn’t have to do at home, like shipping packages. (Sonia)

The point of the spot light was not only meant to keep their child safe from the “what if’s” of the parent’s mind but also used to direct the child in a life direction the parent felt was going to bring the most success to the child and for the family. “Yes, they have told me my options are engineer, lawyer, doctor and that is it. They consider my college as an investment in their future and not just mine” (Dan). Oftentimes, this push comes from the traditional culture of the parent or parents.

I want to say no, but I can’t just say it. My mom really wanted me to be a doctor, so I was

just an exploratory major because she pushed so much so I ended up in business, but my

dad is really happy about it. I stayed away from being a doctor because my mom was so

adamant about me going into the medical field. She really wanted to be a pharmacist but

never did herself, so she wanted me to do it. (Sonia)

Despicable Me Hovering

In the movie “Despicable Me” the main character had a lifelong dream of going to the moon. He drew a picture of a rocket to get the moon as a small boy. As the boy grew and matured so did his attempts in building a rocket to get to the moon. His first attempt was a cardboard rocket. He then built a model rocket that flew. Finally, he created an actual rocket he

could literally fly to the moon. In each of these attempts he showed his hard work to his mother.

Each time his mom’s response was a dismissing “ehh.”

Despicable Me e helicopter parenting was epitomized by this example from the movie.

Not only because the mother was dismissing of any work he did, no matter how good it was, but also because of the name itself. The phrase “Despicable Me” captures the feeling often created by this type of helicopter parenting. Parents would demand and push incessantly, and the college student would be motivated to reach and surpass the bar set by the parents, but it seemed there was nothing the college student could do to feel good enough. “He will say he is proud of me, but he just keeps pushing because he believes I can do even better. I appreciate that but sometime the stress from him pushing is a little too much” (Ashley). Perhaps a better fit for this type of helicopter parenting would be a drone, rather than a helicopter, that is consistently buzzing over the college students' shoulder with a camera; the buzzing never ending and the camera never turning off. No matter how grand the accomplishment by the college student, the drone is never satisfied indicating the need for something more or better. The impression of being “pushed” and “never being enough” was a consistent take away for the college students who were hovered

“despicably”.

She is very demanding. When I go home, every morning she is mad because I didn’t do

something. So, I will ask ‘what do you want me to do’ and she will write me a list for the

day, and I will do everything on the list. I was doing hard labor for her on my winter

break! I tried my best to be helpful, I did a ton of stuff. Even if I did more than she asked

for, my brothers and I talk about it all the time, it is never enough. There is always

something more we could have done. My brothers always say that. (Christy)

One student described the feeling she experienced from this process as “a lot of pressure.” Using a metaphor to elaborate her experience:

You know, like the elephant in the room when you have a constant issue, it is always

there. It is like they always want to talk about something like eating or exercise or

academics and I don’t want to talk about it, so you have this awkward space in between.

Sometimes it feels like the elephant is not just in the room but on my shoulders. A lot of

pressure. (Kate)

A grand motivation towards perfection often grew out of helicopter parenting that was coupled with a consistent “ehh” response. This often developed pushing one's self with perfection in mind and was coupled with anger and consistent disappointment.

This process started very early on. I can remember my 4th grade teacher telling me an

assignment was good enough and I refused to stop because I needed it to be perfect. I

have a really high standard personally so I know if it doesn’t meet mine it won’t meet his

[dad] and sometimes even if I am really proud of something, he will still just point out

what is wrong with it and that makes me very upset. (Ashley)

Venom Helicopter Parenting

When asked directly to give their opinion on what helicopter parenting is and what it may do to the hypothetical child, one of the greatest concerns put forth was hampering a child’s ability to grow and develop their own identity or the necessary skills to succeed an independent person.

I think it has different effects for different personalities and how much the parents watch

out for stuff and how controlling they are. Like if the parents are controlling the kid's

beliefs and how they think, that can cause other problems. I have never felt that my

parents have ever forced me into any kind of belief. My parents keep a really open mind

when it comes to my beliefs. (Beth)

I think about hovering over your child. No room for them to breathe. Making your child

you, like molding your child rather than letting your child mold into something.

Sometimes they don’t let their child develop properly because you can’t always rely on

your parents. (Ally)

Mike described this approach in terms of an RC (remote control) car.

It is like a parent controlling a RC (Remote Control) car. They want to control everything

in you. If you let them, they will be even in charge of the of the clothes you wear. They

will micromanage every detail. They don’t like things not going their way. They want the

child to go a certain way. (Mike)

Out of all the different types of helicopter parenting this type seemed the most toxic to the college student. Not only did venom describe the possible toxicity; it also could conjure up images of the comic book character Venom. An alien entity fuses with a human host. There is no longer just a human and an alien, now there is a combined and intertwined entity, with the alien feeding on the human.

These types of parents were classified with intense care and worry for their child which manifests in an intense emotional reaction of worry or immediate and overzealous reaction in attempting to help.

I am going through a breakup right now and I told my mom that I was sad and felt alone.

In response my mom traveled to where I live that day. My family told me an hour before

she got here, so I had to clean up my apartment quickly. I mean I love my mom, but this

was not helping me at all, it just created more stress. It has been an awful week. It was

literally one phone call of expressing some real emotions and suddenly she took a flight. I

don’t ever doubt their love, but I do often feel that my mom’s love is smothering. It is

exhausting with my mom because she hurts all the time, something is always wrong, and

no matter what I do it is never enough [for her]. (Delany)

Another characteristic emphasized under this parenting, but not solely isolated within a venom approach, was an attempt to control the college student. One way this is done was by making threats as described here:

It affects me socially especially when I am home. My boyfriend is back home so when I

try to spend time with him, I don’t tell them he is on his own now because they didn’t

even like if I stay there when he was living with his parents and they have extra

bedrooms. Because of this situation my mom wrote me a very passive aggressive letter

when I was home. In the letter she praised my college work and then pointed out that they

would take away my car if I continued sleeping over at my boyfriend’s house. She also

pointed out they are helping pay for college. They do threaten me a lot like saying they

can take away “our” car or stop paying for my education. (Karla)

Another favorite weapon of choice was guilt. Guilt was used in hopes the child will stay in line with what the parents desire.

The guilt is a big thing. It really is constant. I think it has had a huge impact. For

example, my mom being here and me being sad over the break-up she has made it about

her. She has pointed out she is here, and I am not happy, and she has taken it personally.

She makes it about her. The guilt is always about them feeling sad or disappointed even

though sometimes it has nothing to do with them. (Delany)

...socially they expect me to conform to their values. It really gotten a little worse since I

started dating. They do now seem to want me home when I am home because I am away

at college so they will guilt trip me with saying they never get to see me and stuff like

that. I think my mom really wants to be a part of every aspect of my life. She really wants

to be involved. My cousins, who are married, have like a best friend relationship with

their mom; I think my mom wants that, but I don’t. I feel very limited at times in terms of

things I do socially because of my parents and how they are in this aspect of my life.

(Karla)

One of the most prominent aspects of this type of helicopter parenting was how the college age child’s emotions were handled by the parent. These students reported not sharing most emotions with their parents because of how their emotions have been dismissed in the past. Carol expressed it this way, “Emotional needs, not very responsive because the message has always been ‘suck it up.’ It is all I knew.” This dismissive approach towards the college student’s emotions are not restricted to this type of helicopter parenting but it is very prominent herein.

This dismissive attitude towards emotions may have added to the feeling of being eaten from the inside out much like the character Venom.

We can never really express ourselves. My mom is always like ‘I am the parent and I am

not your friend’ it is whatever my mom wanted. If I was upset my mom always just said I

was being rude. So, I could never really express myself. I remember one day I was upset

and crying, and she was ‘why are you crying, you don’t' need to be upset’ and I didn’t

have a good answer, but I was just sad. I could never really say ‘I am sad because you

made me upset,’ she never really cared about that. (Christy)

I had some tough experiences my first years here. Really just overwhelmed. The last year

I have really settled in. When I was struggling, they were monitoring me a lot more. They

still ask about how I am doing. Sometimes I just feel like they are not supportive, and

they just want it to end. They try to just tell me what to do or they say that I shouldn’t be

upset. They really don’t understand that I can’t just throw out my emotions...They are

more worried about solving the problem then trying to understand and listen. If I am

feeling anxious or upset, they just freak out in a terrible way so I will hold those

experiences to myself. They think they can guilt me for feeling a certain way. I just need

to vent sometime, and they just tell me what I should have done differently. I just want

them to listen. I feel like this has been consistent throughout college experience. (Sara)

On the parents’ end, this type of venomous helicopter parenting was often seen as an unwillingness to let go of the adult child as a child. The difficulty in transitioning was often a giveaway to this more hazardous helicopter parenting approach.

My mom is very involved with my life. I don’t think they can transition. I think as a child

ages parents are supposed to become less parents and more like a friend, I think. They are

having a lot of trouble with that transition. When I am far away my mom calls me like 5

times a day and if I don’t answer it is a real problem. I am 20 years old you know. I think

that is kind of weird. (Delany)

My dad wanted me to attend a college closer to home. I couldn’t do that because he

would have visited me every single weekend. I had to choose the school that was 8 hours

away. When I did, he was really mad, and he almost moved to where I chose to go to

school. He was really upset and kind of going crazy. Sometimes it is not mental it is just

that they are verbally always there. (Brianna)

Safety-Net Helicopter Parenting

Like all the other forms of helicopter parenting, safety-net helicopter parenting consists of high expectations; imagine a trapeze circus performer being encouraged to swing as high as they can. With this approach there isn’t a constant hovering over with a sense of “pressure” or

“someone always over you;” Instead, the feeling is “support” and “encouragement” from the parents as they stand below holding a giant safety-net. Imagine those trapeze performers swinging as high as they can while a safety-net is constantly moving and shifting underneath them. If they do fall, they know it will be soft and they know they will be able to climb and swing again or choose to walk the tight rope instead. There is a feeling of internal control within the college student to pave their own path even with the high expectations.

Knowing that I can talk to them about anything and that I have support has helped make

it easier to transition into college. At the same time because we are so close it was

difficult leaving them to go to college. It balances out with how much they call. Although

it can be exhausting with how much they call and want me to come home, it is helpful to

know that they are there. If I need to come home they are never going to say ‘no, it is not

a good time.’ It is always a good time to come home or to call. Even though it is hard

having them expect so much in terms of calling and stuff, it is also helpful. Having a

safety net is a good way to put. (Beth)

I wasn’t sure about how things were going to go once I got into college. They were

always on me about what I wanted to do in college. They made sure I shadowed that

profession before college but when I got here, I decided I didn’t want to go down that

career path. I wasn’t sure how that was going to go, me wanting to change majors, but

when it came down to it, they were really supportive in the change. They were also

willing to let me figure it out. (Chelsey)

Furthermore, these parents tended to be great at having order and rules while being emotionally present and open with their children which seemed to help build the feeling of being supported.

Our parents enforced rules, but they were always easy going and open with everything at

an appropriate level. Some of our friends have very little relationship with their

parents. Some of our friends were really surprised that we tell our parents everything.

(Twins)

The relationship between the parent and child was strongest with this approach. With the adult child feeling understood and safe to choose their own path there seemed to be a strengthening of trust between parent and child.

Our parents wanted us to do what we wanted to do, and they would support what we

wanted. With both of them being in the medical field and knowing us so well they are

realistic and honest but in a supportive way. They are very open to what we want to do or

things we say. If money wasn’t a thing, I would not be doing medicine, but I would

become an English teacher. Our dad is like ‘if that is what you really want to do then do

it, but you got to be the best English teacher there is.’ They have been very accepting in

that way. (Twins)

Helicopter parenting from below allowed for falling (failure). There was actual space created for falling to happen. It was expected and, therefore, no panic from the net holders when it did. The expectations didn’t change but the support came with a net rather than pressure and pushing from above. Ally sums up this approach nicely:

Their strictness really made me a better person. Teaching me certain habits by being

consistent in their expectations and discipline when I was younger. Giving me the

freedom to be me and learn for myself in college. It helped me develop certain skills.

Emotionally, I feel very safe with them and talk to them about anything. They let me fail

and made me figure it out. They didn’t rescue me. I think that has been beneficial because

it has let me build confidence. I thinking failing is okay because you learn from it and do

better the next time. I feel like it is a sense of security because no matter what I do my

parents are there for me. (Ally)

Some Observations

These categories were not meant to be viewed as mutually exclusive. Rather, it was best viewed as a continuum with aspects of each category that could be found in most of the accounts shared. In each account one category took center stage with many of the others joining the stage as secondary characters. The exceptions to this were the venom helicopter parenting and the safety net helicopter parenting. Venom seemed to be so intense for the college student that the pressure was overwhelming; all forms of helicopter parenting contributed to the feeling of being overwhelmed. On the other end of the spectrum, safety-net created an atmosphere of understanding and encouragement. Although the college student knew of the high expectations from parents, the health of the relationship buffered the student from other snippets of pressure resulting from other types of helicopter parenting that may have popped up periodically.

With the more negative forms of helicopter parenting there often was created a lack of trust felt from the parents to the child. This may have even affected how the college student trusted themselves.

Table 1 Helicopter Parenting Categories

Helicopter Quotes Common Parenting Types Outcomes Venom “I feel a lot guiltier at home because I feel like an outsider and -Low self-worth constant guilt, so my self-esteem is really low at home. It is -Low self like ‘I need to be home, I need to be home,’ but I don’t want to confidence be home. I am constantly second guessing myself. It is very -Struggles with stressful. They are still very controlling. I have to ask to go out self-identity when I am home. I don’t like going home because I get so -Low motivation frustrated. I hate having to worry about my mom being mad at me because I am out and not home with the family. I have -Low emotional constant guilt if I am not pleasing them. Even here I have that trust with parents guilt if I don’t answer her calls or something.” (Delany) Spotlight “I feel like I have a great self-esteem, but in other ways it can -Feeling limited be very discouraging because they can make me feel more like and restricted in a child than an adult and that is rough sometimes. But they are choices my parents so I can’t go against them in those ways. I don’t -Parental fear feel this way in college, but it is almost an immediate change plays role when I get home. I feel trapped because of my parents.” -High feelings of (Karla) parental pressure -Feeling trapped -Low emotional trust with parents Despicable Me “Basically, a lot of stress and feeling like I am never enough -Low self-worth basically. Like never being able to measure up to certain -Nothing is ever standards. So, I keep myself busy and I am okay with that. I good enough have just learned to handle a lot of stress ‘Thanks Dad’ -Feeling hopeless (Laughs). But whenever I call home it is like I am never doing -High anxiety enough no matter what. So, there is a lot of anxiety with -Low emotional calling home and also just in day to day life. I am always wondering ‘have I done enough’ not just for him but for trust with parents myself.” (Ashley) Safety Net “It can turn negative if the parents Never give a child any -High emotional freedom. So not teaching a child how to do things but just trust with parents doing things for them creates dependency. My parents made -High confidence me feel very capable. If the parent is sending the message that -Belief in failure the child is not capable then the child will go out in the world -High gratitude expecting to fail and they probable will fail.” (Chelsey) for parental involvement

I do see my dad putting fear in the parenting. I remember that my dad told me that I

couldn’t go out not because he didn’t trust me, but because he didn’t trust the world. That

message has stopped me from doing things I want to do because I have been taught other

people will hurt me or I think that I can’t protect myself. You may even stop trusting

yourself living with that kind of message. (Beth)

On the other side of the spectrum, college students have trust cultivated within them when parents hovered from beneath with a safety-net; trusting and encouraging their child. Pam put it succinctly when she said, “My parents have a little bit of control because they pay for classes, but they know I have my path and trust me to follow it.” There were many responses from college students coinciding with each type of helicopter parenting. These responses will be discussed at length later.

Factors Impacting Helicopter Parenting

There are an endless number of factors that could influence an issue like helicopter parenting. Throughout these interviews and analyses there were a few more prominent factors showing up repeatedly. Factors such as individual factors, family factors, culture and distance.

Individual Factors

Personality. Personality consistently stood out as having an important influence on the situations analyzed. Numerous interviewees discussed how their parents approached their siblings different from them because of the difference in personality. Many pointed out how helicopter parenting stayed consistent across siblings but the responses from the children differ because of the difference in personalities. Several expressed their opinion of the importance of their individual personality and how it impacted their response to their situation.

When it comes to grades, I think it is [pushing from parents] more for our future. I put a

ton of pressure on myself so with me my parents are usually telling me to relax a little.

With my sibling, who don’t care about school, my parents are more on top of them with

getting school done and things like that. (Chelsey)

I have a little brother who is 10. I see a difference between my childhood and my

brother's childhood. He has it so easy. I guess I never learned to fake it; I would just get

in trouble and keep getting in trouble. My brother he knows; he kisses their butts. He will

say ‘sorry’, but I just kept going. I didn’t learn my lesson. (Brianna)

Gender. Gender played a role in how the parents approached the rules and boundaries applied to the college student. This was primarily a female issue with the women feeling as though their parents restricted them or held them to “unreasonable” expectations compared to the males in their families.

My brother can drive whenever and wherever he wants. There is a big difference between

how they treat me and my brother. They tell me that it is because I am a girl. Even like

going out he doesn’t ask to go places and I have to all the time. I am very frustrated over

it. (Ally)

I am also a girl. So, a lot of when I would say ‘I want to go out’ my dad would say ‘you

need to be careful, you need to respect yourself and not be out past 10 P.M. because

people will think things about you’. So, I think there are different factors for me trying to

be freer than my brother but also being a girl, they thought I should be more sheltered.

(Ashley)

Family Factors

Older siblings. Older siblings reported being “test subjects” of sorts by which the parents learned many lessons. Others speak of the expectations they had placed on them to set the

example for the younger siblings and therefore parents hovered tighter to make sure that role was fulfilled.

I do think that my parents are harder on me. They are easier on my youngest sibling. I

think they learned a lot with me and now they approach her differently. I am just so

different from them; it was really hard for me. (Delany)

I am the second to youngest. I have 3 older and one younger sister. My older sisters are

all at least 10 years or older. My parents' sort of started over. So, I was like the oldest. My

older siblings where raised in Mexico, but I was raised here. There was more emphasis

on education for me and being that example for my younger sister. (Eric)

Younger siblings. Several reported seeing their younger siblings as having it easier than they had it when it came to their parents' approach. Others noticed their older siblings having difficult times with their parents and knew they had it easier.

I am the youngest. I think it is because they already had the experience with my sister

because she is 10 ½ years older than me, so they learned things with her that they would

apply to me or not apply to me. She tells me that they were way stricter with her. (Pam)

Others reported a consistent helicopter parenting approach regardless of the siblings order or age.

I have a younger brother who is in junior in high school. I am the oldest. They

are definitely pressuring him. I was the first one they could try things on. I guess my

academic success could have signaled to them that they should keep doing it because it

worked for the first. The problem is he learns differently than I do so he is like ‘they are

telling me all this stuff and I don’t work like that.’ My parents really aren’t very flexible.

They are still using the same tools. (Dan)

Generational. Some reported their view that grandparents contributed to their parents’ helicopter parenting style.

Thinking back on it, my grandma was like my mom but 10 times worse. So, my mom

thought that she was lenient compared to my grandma. I think their culture is a big reason

for it. When I tell my mom that she is being unrealistic and she needs to let me grow up

she talks about how it was for her when she was my age and how I should be grateful

because I don’t have it as bad as she had it. (Carol)

I think my mom is this way because of her past. My mom grew up in a 3rd world country

and her mom was extremely hard on her. She grew up in El Salvador, so I know things

are rough there, so I think that is what affected it. I think my mom learned it from her

mom. (Olivia)

Other college students note that their parent’s experience with their parents was the catalyst in creating a better relationship with them.

Our dad has always been surprised about how we come home to visit. We even talked

about the possibility of living at home after college and our dad laughed because he never

would have done that with his parents. He is proud that we would want to come home

and that we have such a good relationship with him. I think his strained relationship with

his parents really made him want to create something very different with us. He never

wanted us to feel like we couldn’t come to them and talk to them. (Twins)

Culture

Culture was a driving force for many of the families of the college students interviewed.

The college students often saw their parents’ culture as a factor contributing to their brand of parental hovering. Those students who had parents who came directly from a different culture

outside of the United States labeled their parents as collectivistic in their attitude about family.

Different cultures influenced helicopter parenting in different ways. For instances some parents had the expectation that all should contribute financially to the family.

My dad is from Cuba, so he grew up in a very collectivistic society, so he wanted to

branch out from that, but it still showed...He came from that society so he would be upset

that my older brother was tithing to the church and not helping the family. So, when I,

being the younger sibling, got a job he said he was taking a 1/3 of my check. I was fine

with it, but that is how I was raised. (James)

Others explained how the different cultural expectations of adulthood influenced why and how their parents hovered.

We come from a Hispanic family, so we are probably more collectivistic. In Hispanic

households or at least in my extended family, you don’t move out of your parents' house.

Like my cousin just moved out at 28 but only because he got married. For my family I

am the first that has moved out on their own. Even my older brother who is going to

college is living at home. For me I knew I needed to be on my own. (Ashley)

My parents moved here from Vietnam. Then they had me, and I think that they had a lot

of struggles because they really didn’t speak the language, so they struggled in teaching

me and stuff. Now, my dad just puts it on me to teach my little brother. When I was

young, they would leave me home with him to feed him, change him, and watch him and

I was only 10 or 11. Even now I take care of him and help him with homework. I voice

my irritation, but my dad is like ‘don’t worry, you got this.’ He just laughs it off. I don’t

really mind, but it was just a lot because I was working part time, in school, and then I

had to help my brother. I was very bitter then but now I am like ‘whatever.’ (Brianna)

Several students explained their belief that their parents’ culture was a direct cause to the flavor and level of helicopter parenting they experienced from their parents.

I also feel like being from the Caribbean and being Indian caused a lot of the strictness of

my parents. Anytime I did get to do things they didn’t do they would point out how lucky

I was because they couldn’t do what they let me do when they were kids. Anytime I

complain they tell me I am lucky that I didn’t have their life, guilt is a common approach

with my parents. (Sonia)

I think some of it is culture based. Especially in the Latin American cultures. The family

center culture can cause, especially moms, to be very strict on their children. I think the

other part is wanting their kids to turn out so badly, to guarantee success in their minds,

what they want the kid’s personality to be and kids to turn out and everything because

they want the kid to turn out a certain way. They just don’t realize that the child just may

have a different idea of success or a desire to choose a different path. (Delany)

Distance

Distance was an important factor of these students who considered their parents to be of the helicopter parenting type. Participants discussed the difference between being home and being away from home. Most students appreciated the distance and even chose their current university strategically, placing them as far away from their parents with the ability to keep in- state tuition. Sonia praised the distance this way, “This is a big change for me. Distance has helped me grow up a little bit. With social life they have less involvement because of the distance.” The distance allowed the college students to do activities they normally would not have been allowed to do (like staying out late) and enjoy more autonomy then they had at home with helicopter parents.

I like the freedom from my parents. So, the distance is helpful. They are really strict. My

dad tries to tell me what to do but he doesn’t really know what I am doing. Like he will

call me and ask what I am doing at 9 P.M. and I will tell him I am at a friend's house. He

will say ‘you need to be home by 10’ and I will just say ‘okay dad.’ You know, what he

doesn’t know (Laughs). (Brianna)

The distance not only opened the door for more freedom, but also gave some of the college students enough space to start to set appropriate boundaries with their helicopter parents.

They used to call me all the time, but I told them it wasn’t going to be that way. They

used to be very strict in high school, like monitor my every movement but now they kind

of give me more freedom. I think they were just used to being that involved when I first

came to college, but I told them things would be different now. I live 8 hours away so

yeah. (Pam)

Since I moved out, I try to create my own barriers and distance. I keep it to one phone

call a week, but it does last 1 to 2 hours. I will call my mom separately sometimes so I

can talk to her without my dad taking over. I will keep them updated with my grades and

stuff. Right now, I talk to my dad much more because he is helping me fund my London

abroad trip. I am still financially dependent on them so that is a struggle. I am expected to

call in and check up with them. I abide by that. (Ashley)

When these students did return home, they reported major frustration because the contrast was so stark. Karla talks about the difference in this way, “Here it is like my parents know they don’t have as much say, but when I go home it is very strict, like bedtime and restrictions on when and where I can go.” Another described going home as feeling as if they were regressing back to their teenage years.

When I am here, they have very little control. When I go back home it is like I am 15

again. I have a curfew when I am with my mom even though I am almost a senior in

college. She is constantly wanting to know who I am with and where I am. My mom

doesn’t like me going out. It is not that she wants me to spend time with her, she just

wants me home. Even if I am with another person, she is asking why I am not at home.

She is very controlling and judgmental over me and my choices. (Olivia)

Others struggled with the distance because of the closeness they felt with their parents as well as how responsive their parents were when living at home. Chelsey shared, “It has actually been really hard to have parents that were so responsive, who would drop everything in that moment, to be living 12 hours away, trying to figure it out on my own a little bit.” A few of the students wished they were closer and did not have to live so far away from their helpful and responsive parents; the transition of living away from parents was difficult for these students.

I would say [our parents are] fairly involved. When we first got to college, we were going

home every other weekend at least. I feel like that is not different from most college kids

if they live close enough to home. The adjustment was tough even though we were only 2

hours away. Our mom calls us every day or every other day. (Twins)

Common Responses to Helicopter Parents

Five main themes emerged from the data when considering the numerous responses these students had in the context of helicopter parents. These themes included deception, motivation, conflict, building fear and “it’s not all bad.” These themes are explained in depth in the following paragraphs.

Deception

One of the most prominent responses consistent with helicopter parenting, coupled with a dismissive attitude towards emotions and intense reactions to stepping out of the spotlight area provided by parents, was deceit from the college student. One of the interviewees explained it nicely while quoting a friend who was in a similar situation:

One of my best friends has parents like mine too. It is kind of what I said before about

always walking on egg shells. She said to me ‘over protective parents really create the

best liars because you don’t think about covering up, but you just learn that you have to

cover up.’ (Ashley)

The students used average techniques to deceive parents such as lying or being deceitful. More technological advanced methods, however, were often employed to combat the more technological advanced methods of helicopter parenting.

They also track my phone. I did this more freshman year, but I would lie about where I

was. Like if I left my dorm past 7 pm. I had a GPS faker on my phone I would turn on so

my parents would not freak out. [Mom] would get really worried if I wasn’t at my dorm

when they went to bed at 7 P.M. I don’t do it as much now. I did not feel that they trusted

me very much that freshman year. Last year I had a boyfriend and I didn’t tell them

because I was worried about their reaction. My mom doesn’t want me dating till I am 21

My mom babies me a lot especially when I am home. (Sonia)

The deceit flowed into all areas of the college student life. One of most common areas hidden from parents was that of romance.

They are always hovering. There is a lot of things that I can’t do without considering

what my parents will say or how they will react. They are always there if they aren’t

physically present. It is more like the pressure of getting in trouble. I hide so much from

my parents. Like I went on a vacation with my boyfriend for a week, but they thought I

was working. It just not worth sharing when there is going to be a lecture or a fight. It is

not worth asking about certain things when he is just going to say no and give me even

more restrictions, so I just don’t tell them. (Brianna)

Another area of deceit centered around social choices such as alcohol use.

My mom is more like ‘go do whatever you are going to do’ but with guys or any type of

influence she thinks is bad she is not okay with that. So, there are things I don’t tell her

like I drink occasionally but I would never tell her that. I don’t even know what would

happen if she found out I drink sometimes. It would throw her world for a loop. They are

very open to my career desire. I feel like I can talk to them about almost anything outside

social or romantic stuff. (Karla)

A second phrase utilized while discussing deceit was “living two separate lives.” Similar to the character Batman, these college students felt a need to hide parts of their lives usually in the service of building some semblance of independence. Dan discussed the origins of this pattern for him in this way:

Socially, I think my parents see me as really sticking to myself, but I have found a core

group of friends that are a good fit for me here at college. I feel like people are more

friendly in college. You can come and sort of have a fresh start, reinvent yourself. My

parents did prevent me from having these types of experiences when I was in high school.

I couldn’t be upfront with my parents in high school about social activities because they

would be on my case about studying. I really sort of had two separate lives because I

couldn’t tell them if it wasn’t school related. (Dan)

Sara discussed this issue from a gender perspective and highlighted the feelings that arose when thinking of what life would be like if she ever moved back home with her parents:

I think they don’t agree with a lot of feminist views I hold. Sometimes, as a female my

dad just doesn't think I should do some of the things I do. Now I just don’t share those

things with him. The thought of moving back home makes me physically sick. They are

so controlling and want me to do what they want me to do. It is not an issue when I am

here. But when I am with them, I can’t stay out with friends, I can’t sleep-in. They also

have moments of being proud when I do something, they are proud of. They have an

opinion about everything. If I moved home, I couldn’t hide certain things from them like

I do now (Laughs). (Sara)

Emotional deceit. The internal emotional world of the college student was kept hidden especially if the option was opening-up to the helicopter parents (the exceptions to this rule were those college students that were hovered from beneath by safety-net parents). The college student learned to keep emotions tucked away because of the reaction parents often had to their child’s emotions. These reactions may have included dismissing emotions or sending the message that certain emotions were not valid.

I don’t talk to my parents about my emotional needs. Like if I am crying openly my dad

will tell me it is weak. My mom will comfort me a bit but will move to a solution as

quickly as she can. I prefer to not talk to my parents about emotional things. (Sonia)

Emotionally it made me feel some feelings aren’t valid because my parents always told

me to change it or get over it, so I questioned in myself ‘is this really real.’ It has been a

struggle at times, very lonely at times. I don’t think we are very close at all. We don’t

really have anything in common. I don’t really talk to them in detail about what is going

on. (Pam)

Some students had parents who try hard to be emotionally supportive, but their hovering and worrying coupled with extreme emotional reactions of their own caused some to keep their emotions to themselves.

Emotionally, my dad is distant. My mom tries but gets too involved and a lot of the times

she makes it worse. I know that if I go to my mom, she will not like something I say and

then the disappointment comes, and it is not good. I think they want to be there for me

emotionally, but they just don’t know how. It makes me not want to tell her anything. My

dad and I are not very close. We are very distant, but he is not an affectionate person in

general. He is distant and shows he cares through actions. My mom and I are very close,

like it or not. I don’t tell my mom a lot of things. Sometimes I really need to talk to

someone, but I won’t tell her because then I have to deal with everything that comes with

her reaction. (Delany)

Oftentimes, emotions are only shared with friends or simply kept inside.

My emotions never seemed like a problem unless I was down for weeks or something

like that. My dad is of the opinion ‘you should always be smiling’ and ‘always look

presentable’ and ‘everything is fine.’ I never really talked to them about my issues. I

always relied on my own strength or my friends and so I don’t have much to say about

them responding to my needs. (Ashley)

There was often a cultural piece behind the helicopter parents’ approach to emotions. The emotional paradigm of parents raised in a different culture seemed to not consider certain negative emotions as valid.

My parents don’t believe stress is anything. I interviewed my dad for a paper in college

about mental issues. He thinks they don’t exist and talked about how in Venezuela ‘if

child is having problems you hit them and then they are better.’ That is his mindset; so,

he thinks depression or anxiety aren’t real. I feel like I can’t feel certain ways, or I tell

myself I shouldn’t. I don’t talk about my feelings because I shouldn’t have them. My dad

has a certain way of laughing that is very hurtful because the underlining message that

comes with that laugh is hurtful. (Kate)

The result of a parent helicoptering without the emotional support available to the college student was reported as creating stress on the parent-child relationship. Many of the students did not feel as close to their parents as they think they could have or should have been.

It made me dislike my parents a lot. I didn’t want to talk to my parents because anytime I

talked to them it was probably going to turn into something about school or SAT prep or

Boy scouts or colleges. So that led to more of a disconnect because I would rather stay in

my room, so I didn’t have to constantly hear that. This caused a lot of pressure in my

life. So, I would choose to relieve that pressure or just not engage with my parents at all.

Now my parents aren’t a big part of my life, so they don’t know how I am doing day to

day. If I fail a test or something, I would tell them, but if I asked out a girl or something, I

would not tell that to my parents. If I have emotional issues I would not go to my parents.

I get kind of sad when I think about it because, for example, my roommate is really

close with his dad and tells him everything, but I am just not close with my parents. The

focus for my parents is academics and that is it. (Dan)

Motivation

Loosing motivation. Having the experience of living away from helicopter parents, students began to have a different experience in how they are interacting with the world.

Visiting home, however, brought up old feelings and old responses to the world around them.

My motivation goes away when I go home. When I was in high school and home, I was

not motivated. I do feel that has changed since being more on my own at college. Even

over this last summer being home everything reverted to what it was in high school. I

became very unmotivated being home. (Sonia)

Others have struggled to gain a foothold on their own motivation anywhere. They continued to feel the impacts of intense helicoptering that seemed to be more venomous for the student.

It really has had a big impact on how I am today. Them controlling me led me to relying

on them for almost everything even if I didn’t want to. I had to filter everything through

them. Like academics, it was never me doing it for me. It was always their way and for

them. I never had as much self-responsibility as I should have coming into college so that

first year was really difficult. I wasn’t used to doing things myself without someone

forcing me to do them. Academically, building self-responsibility and forcing myself to

do things on my own was really hard. I still struggle with it every day. I even lack

motivation much of the time. I think my whole life having someone force me to do things

really has hurt my motivation level currently. Even like career choices, they have been

pushed so hard I don’t think I have ever just sat back and thought about it for myself.

(Delany)

Other students seemed to have their motivation shifted to focus on taking advantage of the newfound freedom they discovered being at college and away from hovering parents for the first time.

At first, I would say it made me go crazy. Going out and all these choices, it was all

overwhelming. I would just follow what other people were doing. I would stay out too

late. Like stay out until 6 in the morning. I didn’t really understand the balance between

work and partying. Within several semesters I was able to create a balance. (Pam)

We still get in big fights and it really gets to me. My dad was super controlling before,

and I have heard that there are two types of people that come from those situations; those

that go crazy and those that stick it out and learn. I did not go too wild. I partied my first

semester, but I got really tired of it and stopped. (Brianna)

Gaining motivation. Other students had an opposite reaction to the intense pressure and pushing that came from certain types of helicopter parenting. These students saw the helicoptering as a means of preparing them with certain skills and discipline needed for academic success. They seemed to gain motivation towards success because they never wanted to live with their parents again, so self-reliance was sure way out.

I guess they have taught me self-motivation. I have some friends who struggled their first

semester, so their parents are now trying to force them into it and being really strict with

them. I guess just having that desire to complete college and go out on my own because I

never want to go home, I feel that helps me prioritize my life. It lights a fire under me to

succeed. (Dan)

I am able to take on a lot. I have big ambitions. I think this comes from my dad always

pushing me so in that sense it is ‘thank you’ to my dad and I tell myself ‘I am able to

handle this.’ My mom seems to trust me. I think because I showed early that I could keep

2 jobs and go to school. My dad was supportive but always sending me the message that I

could do more. It has equipped me with good skills. But I also knew I needed to get out.

(Ashley)

Others found their newfound motivation grow because they felt that their work was now their own, for their own future and not solely because their parents were helicoptering with a ton of pressure.

Academics were difficult when I first came to college. I did worse at first because I didn’t

know the balance. I wanted it to be better. Now I feel like my grades reflect me now

because it is not them constantly pushing me but me doing the work on my own. It is my

hard work for me, not for them. I find myself enjoying it more now than before. (Pam)

I care more about school now than I did then. I am taking two online classes now and I

get to campus at 9 A.M. before my lecture classes to study for those two online classes.

This is a big change for me. Distance has helped me grow up a little bit. Academics has

improved sense moving to college. I get all A’s now. Very different from my time in high

school. Being on my own has helped me build more motivation. (Sonia)

Conflict

The ability to handle, face or cope with conflict was rare for these students. The main area of struggle was conflict with parents. Most students were “scared” to create any kind of conflict with their helicopter parents.

I have a really hard time telling my parents no when I am at home. Like one time I

wanted to take a trip with my friends to Atlanta. My parents would not let me go so we

had a lot of fights over this. I told my friends about it and they said to tell my mom no,

but I just can’t do that. I think I can’t because I don’t like confrontation and didn’t want

to tell them ‘no.’ I did end up going but it was a big deal with a ton of stress on my end.

They still track my phone. My friends tell me to delete it and I want to, but I don’t want

the conflict. (Sonia)

I get really jealous of other people who can stand up to their parents. I just can’t. Every

time I try, I start crying and my dad will say ‘I can’t even talk to you without you crying.’

It is not worth picking a fight with him. It is easier to do what he says. (Brianna)

One student described being in the middle of trying to keep the peace with her parents and with her boyfriend. all with the hope of avoiding conflict all together.

[My Boyfriend] has his medical marijuana card and my family is against any use, so he

feels he often has to put on an act around my family and I really don’t know what to do

being in the middle until I can financially support myself. I have a lot of internal turmoil

trying to keep him and other friends happy while also trying to keep my parents satisfied.

(Karla)

This also bled over into peer and romantic relationships. Karla explains, “With friends I feel like

I have to be really supportive or kind even if they don’t give it back because it is how I was raised.” Even more explicitly, others expressed a feeling of being “taken advantage of” and having no understanding of how to stand up for themselves.

I feel like their approach has made me get an avoidant attachment towards others. Like

with my significant other, if he does something I don’t like, I act like I don’t care, but I

really do care, but I won’t say anything. I just keep everything inside with him because I

feel like that is what I have learned to do that with my parents. I really struggle with

trusting others. I feel like this has come mainly from my mom because I grew up with

her. (Olivia)

Building Fear

With the worry or fear-based helicopter parenting some parents brought, there began to develop within the child a stable “fear” and “worry” and “questioning” that persisted into college life.

It is hard for me to discern whether or not some of my own struggles with catastrophizing

is genetically driven or something I was taught. I do think I am very similar to my dad in

how I see the world and react to things. I will go the extreme and think ‘man, what am I

doing.’ (James)

My parents instilled in me this money aspect so I am always worried about money and

what I should or shouldn’t do. I do think that my dad being so on top of me played into

my anxiety issues because I have really bad anxiety. I feel like I can’t talk to my dad

about it because he will flip out but at the same time it is like his voice in my head

causing me to worry so much. It is like I can’t talk to anyone that understands what it is

like. It can be really lonely. (Brianna)

Several expressed the experience of questioning their own decision-making abilities leading to greater anxiety. There was a need to check in with parents on little things or to imagine what they would advise constantly.

Here I get nervous to make a decision because it is on me when I am here. But when I go

home, I feel enclosed or like I am in a cage. Sometimes I second guess my thoughts. I

hate doing this but sometimes I will call my parents just to check about what they think. I

think it is just a comfort thing, but sometimes I get really worried about what I am

choosing and feel like I have to check with them. (Ally)

My parents' thoughts and feelings really do influence me all of the time. Seeing my

sisters’ mistakes and the contention and arguments they had I really don’t want that in my

life. So, I tend to just do what my parents say. I don’t think I am as independent, like

making my own decisions, as I want to be. Even like deciding what classes to take. I

wanted to take a class on Greece. I had to justify it to them even though I already knew

what I was doing. I will think of questions before they ask and try and answer them

before they ask. I am doing that in my head all of the time. I think it can be positive in

thinking through things but also it can be very stressful to think about all the possibilities

of what they might do or say. (Kate)

Many expressed the struggles they face socially in making the transition into college life with the new distance from helicopter parents. Learning how to create and maintain friendships was daunting and could be anxiety provoking.

At first, I didn’t know how to talk to people, and I would just let them walk all over me

because I didn't have any friends and didn’t know what to do. I am still in the process of

learning how to figure out if someone is good for me or just using me. My parents don’t

have friends. I am trying hard to keep friends and have a lot of friends. I don’t want to cut

people off because they are not exactly perfect. I don’t want to be alone like my parents.

(Pam)

Growing in an environment of venomous helicopter parenting, where the boundaries of identity between parent and child are blurred, could hamper the college student's ability to maintain appropriate boundaries in peer and romantic relationships.

Socially, I think it made everything harder. I was in a relationship for a long time. It was

my way of getting away from my family, but that wasn’t healthy either. Even with

friendships, I was never able to form close relationships because my parents were always

there pulling me away. They always sent the message that they needed to come first and

be above everyone and everything else. Socially, it has made it hard. I can be distant at

times. It has made friendships hard in general. Any friend I had or someone I liked my

parents didn’t like them. Even now it is hard to get close because growing up I felt like I

was forced to push people away so often...It was hard maintaining relationships. When I

did get into a relationship, we would get too close because I didn’t know the balance. The

model my parents have given me is all or nothing. (Delany)

Some expressed an experience of being “completely overwhelmed” with life in general.

Emotionally, it has made things overwhelming. I feel like my self-control really suffers

because I feel so overwhelmed sometimes. Dealing things on my own as I move into

adulthood and really don’t want my family involved dealing with it for me or with me, it

can be really hard because I didn’t do it my entire life. I always had my whole family

involved in everything. (Delany)

It’s Not All Bad

Not all reports from these students were of a negative nature. All were very

“appreciative” and “grateful” of their parent's willingness to support them in their physical and financial needs. Although not the norm. some reported feeling emotionally supported by their parents especially those who had the safety-net hoverers.

I think emotions is one way she is responsive. Like if I am stressed out with school, she

understands stress, so she is responsive that way. If I am ever low on funds or something

like that, she is always willing to help out with that too. (Eric)

They have always been there for us. I feel like our mom is very in-tune with how we are

feeling. Our dad is but to a lesser extent. He has become soft over the years...Now, he is

much more sensitive and emotional then he was before, or he shows it better. (Twins)

Seeing their parents helicoptering in a positive light, some were thankful for the constant

“sacrifice” to get them whatever they need.

I think it drives their whole parenting, trying to do what is best for us. They have

sacrificed a ton to get what we wanted and what we needed. They put us through private

school and always hands on about making sure we were getting the best of whatever we

needed. They are always very engaged and if we slipped, they always right there.

(Chelsey)

Chelsey also saw her parents' approach as “modeling to teach.” She found great solace that her parents' purpose was not just to have it done their way, but to teach her how to succeed.

I think I have done pretty well figuring it out on my own. Like paying taxes for the first

time so I will have to figure it out, but they will help me if I need it. They will teach me

rather than just do it for me. I see it as very helpful that kind of support. My friends often

think my parents are too on top of me, but I think it is helpful.

Ally expressed an important positive outlook in this way, “I feel like my parents allow me to be me even though they still have strong expectations.” Even with the high expectations it was important for the child to feel like they had an unique and respected identity. Parents who knew when to give a “a little freedom” helped their child stay on their side.

I feel like I have a really good life. I feel really blessed. Once my parents saw me rebel

too much, they let me go a little bit and that little freedom helped me blossom. That

really prevented me from rebelling totally. (Ally)

Others discussed how they saw their parent’s helicoptering as imperative to how they gained the

“necessary skills” to succeed in college and life. Others felt it helped them prioritize and focus on academic success.

I feel like it has been positive because now I am really care about school. [Mom] has

always made school the number one priority. School comes first always. That is how I

prioritize things, so everything else is last. She helped me stay focused on school.

(Christy)

Oftentimes I was like ‘Seriously, no one else is watched like I am.’ I now see it was

always for my benefit. It wasn’t about me being perfect even though I made it feel that

way. I think it was to make sure I was doing what I needed to do. I do think that I gained

necessary skills that I use now. I definitely think that I am more independent than most of

my friends. I can do a lot of things that a lot of people struggle with doing in college.

(Chelsey)

Others reported feeling “pretty close” or “super close” with their parents, especially with moms who tended to be more emotionally supportive. Helicopter parenting from beneath with a safety net of understanding and patience created trust and a willingness to turn towards parents rather than trying to create space or hide from them.

We are actually really close. They always know what is going on with me. They have

never reacted terribly to something I have done to the point where I feel like I can’t tell

them. Whenever I have done something, we always talk it out. I feel like we are close

because they have always wanted me to come to them and reacted in a way that has

allowed me to want to come to them. (Beth)

The Germination of a Theory

Based on the seed of data gathered and analyzed herein a theory begins to germinate shifting the view of how helicopter parenting is viewed and studied. This is merely one study that begins to shape substantive theory (a piece of the possible broad theory that is waiting discovery out of many substantive theories) on the topic of helicopter parenting. This is not a grand theory that is absolutely true and clear, rather, it is like a seed that is beginning to germinate with on looking scientists trying to describe the type of tree the seed will grow into just by the one shoot that is pushing out of the seed. Needless to say, this work needs to be held lightly.

This theory cannot speak to the formation and development of this parenting approach.

This seedling theory begins to shine a light on the time period of early adulthood.

Helicopter parenting is currently viewed through a lens of micromanaging and control.

This work points to helicopter parenting, from the view of those on the receiving end of this parenting approach, being about constant presence in a college age child’s life. This solidified presence being cemented by lifelong, high expectations and persistent communication.

Under this new umbrella definition there arises four distinct types of helicopter parenting possible. Three of the categories (spotlight, despicable me, and venom) are defined by the common picture of a helicopter hovering from above pressuring the adult child in specific life directions. The pressure from above shapes, in a negative light, how the adult child sees their relationship with their parent(s) and themselves. It may be imagined parents categorized in one of these three approaches may state they are attempting to ensure their child is close with them

relationally speaking, however, based on this data all three of these approaches create distance

(especially emotionally) between the child and parent. The last category, still fitting under the new definition, is pictured by parents supportively hovering beneath the adult child with a safety net. This approach of helicopter parenting creates a positive outlook held by the adult child about their relationship with their parents and of themselves. Parents prescribing to this approach create emotional closeness and trust with their children through allowance of possible failure from their child and respecting the child’s chosen life direction.

Many factors may contribute to how an adult child views their parents. Individual factors

(like personality and gender), family factors (like number of siblings, sibling order and generational patterns) and external forces (like culture and physical distance) are theorized to play an imperative role in shaping the view of the college age child and their perception of their parents’ helicoptering.

CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION

This was important foundational work in the field of helicopter parenting for two reasons.

First, helicopter parenting definition was grown directly from those who perceived themselves as being helicopter parented. Second, the experiences discussed and analyzed gave rise to specific types of helicopter parenting (the seeds of substantive theory) grown from the unique circumstances and direct experiences of college students who believe they are helicopter parented.

What Is a Helicopter Parent?

Current definitions within the field of helicopter parenting center around control and or micromanaging at a socially inappropriate level for the college student’s age (Burke, Segrin, &

Farris, 2018; LeMoyne & Buchanan, 2011; Padilla-Walker & Nelsen, 2012; Schiffrin et al.,

2014). These definitions have caused the field to focus on these types of parental characteristics while implicitly addressing issues of constant communication, a high level of expectations for successes, and maintaining a presence (either physical or mental) in the college student’s life.

The experiences analyzed here called for a shift in definition cited above. Research needs to focus on the intensity and type of communication between the parent and college student, the high expectations the parents consistently placed on their college student (and how the college student perceives said expectations) and how the parents maintained a mental or phsycial (or both) presence in the college student's life. These three aspects of this new definition mold together to form parental pressure (this pressure was dependent on the type of helicoptering in creating the intensity of the pressure felt) in the college student’s life. One student described this pressure like there is an elephant always in the room “but the elephant is on my shoulders.” For

those interviewed, parental control was very limited when attending college (outside of financial restrictions placed on those still connected to their parents financially). Controlling and micromanaging behaviors from parents were not the focus, concern, or catalyst of their complaints about their parents. In fact, these students were grateful for the support they received financially from their parents even if there was less freedom in their life because if it. Delany expressed her gratitude in this way even though she struggled everyday with her helicopter parents, “My parents are always very responsive to our basic needs. They are always there, food or money, I can always count on them. That is one good thing about them being so family centered.”

There needed to be a new or different type of label given to a more controlling type of parenting that captures the essence of control and micromanaging. In fact, there is a popular label popping up in media describing parents of adult children who specifically micromanage and

“pave the way” for their child’s success in the adult world. With examples rampant in the latest college admissions scandals fresh in society’s mind, the new phrase given to these parents was the ‘snowplow parent’ (Cook, 2019).

Hover in Your Own Way

The definition grown herein, paired with the four types of helicoptering theorized

(spotlight, despicable me, venom, and safety-net helicoptering), lays a theoretical foundation for what the term “helicopter parenting” means to those on the front line of being hovered over. The research soil here is solidly settled on personal experience. With specific types of helicopter parenting put forth, researchers could work to expand, clarify, and solidify (or change as the research directs) each subset of helicoptering. Future research could focus on clarification of the helicoptering subsets or gathering further understanding for which types of helicoptering were

found together and which ones were found to hover in isolation. For example, it was the observed from these interviews that all the subsets could be seen to run together in each case with different levels of intensity depending on the individual situation. The exception being when the primary chosen helicoptering approach by parents was that of the safety-net variety. College students with safety-net hoverers continually shifted their focus on the support they were receiving from parents allowing other types of helicoptering from their parents to melt away to insignificance. All though an observation like this may have been important and useful it is irresponsible to generalize such an observation without further evidence to support or crumble such a claim.

Fear based helicopter parenting. Spot-light helicoptering with its image of a helicopter very near surrounding its subject with a bright spotlight both to protect and push in a certain direction was the closest type of helicopter parenting to the definition currently used in most of the helicopter research. It is important that the focus be on understanding how the child felt

“pushed” or “pressured” both in being too sheltered and too pushed to take a specific path in order to reach their parent’s definition of success. Researchers exploring avenues like ‘pressure’ and ‘protection’ ask different questions, and if not different questions, they at least ask questions differently, compared to questions focused on ‘control’ and ‘micromanage.’

Never enough. The impression within the college student was different when the primary response from the helicopter parent was of the despicable me variety. The take away for college students under this consistent drone was “never being good enough” for their parents because the expectations were seemingly unreachable. If expectations were reached it was not good enough. Each accomplishment was not met with praise but indifference or a question:

“couldn’t you have done more?” There were the beginnings of a pattern that merits deeper

exploration; the college student in this environment brought with them into college life the internal expectation of “perfection.” This unrealistic ideal carries with it the heavy burden of anxiety that was persistent. Schiffrin and Liss (2017) discovered a pattern similar for female college students who reported being helicopter parented. Questions exploring parental expectations and how parents responded to achievement of the college student were not considered.

Parasitic parenting. College students needed and wanted support from their parents; at least the ones interviewed here desired such support. At the same time, these students naturally desired the opportunity to discover and build their own identity. For some there were times when the parental helicoptering was so intense it did not feel like helicoptering but a total lack of separation. As one student described, “I know she loves me, but sometimes that love is smothering.” These were the parents who were having a difficult time separating from their child and allowing the child to build their own identity as an adult. These are the parents that applied pressure so constantly and intensely that it felt as if there was no distance between the college student and the parent, like being “trapped.” Here too, the word “control” seemed inappropriate because even students under these circumstances reported their parents have “little” or “no control” of their lives when they were away at college. While distance and lack of control were present, the distance perceived between the parent and the college student still felt infinitesimal.

In the current literature the concept of psychological control was closest to this type of intensive helicopter parenting. With aspects such as dismissing the student’s feelings and creating guilt within the child, Padilla-Walker and Nelson (2012) found, when comparing items measuring psychological control and their conceptualization of helicopter parenting, these two concepts do not statistically measure similar concepts. The findings herein call for, not a

dismissal of these characteristics when considering parental helicoptering, but a distinction between the different types of helicopter parenting.

Helicopter parenting from beneath. From the genesis of the concept of helicopter parenting the discussion has centered around how harmful helicopter parenting was to the college student. Contradicting this paradigm was the safety-net hoverers several students reported experiencing. These students reported feeling “very close” to their parents despite their high expectations and constant presence in the student’s life. These students constantly talked about their parents’ support, including emotional support, which was often absent from the other types of helicoptering. These students touted a sure knowledge that their parents would support them in their endeavors no matter the path they chose. These students reported deep gratitude for the “safety-net” held by their involved parents. These students felt their relationship with their parents was strong, important in their life, and they felt respected as individuals. Ally summed up her experience with “safety-net” parents in this way, “I feel like my parents allow me to be me even though they still have strong expectations.”

Although the field has been pulled to focus on the more negative aspects of helicopter parenting as it is currently conceptualized there is some research published discussing some moderating factors influencing the negative impacts of helicopter parenting. If the parent-child relationship is perceived as strong and warm, effects like low self-worth or higher rates of risk behaviors disappear (Walker & Nielson, 2015; Willoughby et al., 2015). The questions used by researchers assess certain parenting behaviors but do not assess the college student perception or feelings about those behaviors. This needs to be added to the question repertoire of researchers seeking to better understand helicopter parenting. Otherwise they will miss the opportunity to

understand what type of helicopter parenting is present and how the college student perceives their helicopter parents.

Other Factors Needing Attention

Parental helicoptering does not happen in isolation. Like all complicated human issues, factors, both complex and numerous, inside and outside the individual enact influence on the issue at hand. As the interviews were listened to and analyzed it became evident from the beginning that other factors influence this phenomenon persistently. Individual factors like personality, family factors like amount siblings and social factors like culture all play significant roles in the type of helicopter parenting experienced by these college students as well as their perception of their parent’s flavor of helicoptering.

Personality and siblings. The college students repeatedly discussed the varying reactions their siblings or friends had with similar helicoptering parents. When reflecting on their own situation they often discussed their own personality being the main reasons their parents approached them in a certain way or why they have handled helicopter parents in a certain way.

Our parents always wanted us to be comfortable with coming to them with anything we

needed. I think it is also in part to our personality type. We have friends whose parents

are similar to ours and those friends completely hate it and act out against it. (Twins)

The internal factor of personality traits of the college student or the parents is yet to be explored.

This, however, is one of the largest influencers on helicoptering and on the response chosen to the helicopter parenting. Researchers need to take the time to account for personality as well as explore thoroughly how personality interacts with different types of parental helicoptering.

Along with personality, being the only child or the oldest or the youngest child was a consistent theme discussed by the college students. These students reported the oldest child had

it more difficult from parents and the youngest saw an easing of parental pressure. Also, being the only child was seen as a major factor in perpetuating continued helicoptering into adulthood.

Socially, I am the only child, so I think I have always been to myself largely because I am

an only child. I think being an only child made it harder for me to build those peer

relationships. My mom’s approach also made it difficult because my mom restricted me

from going out with friends until my junior year. I do think being my mom’s only child

did cause some of the problem too. It was like I was my mom’s world. I think if she

would have had more kids it would have been different for me and my mom. (Olivia)

The factor of sibling order or being the only child has yet to be explored and understood in the realm of helicopter parents except for Bradley-Geist and Olson-Buchanan (2014) who found their participants reporting more siblings also report lower levels of over-parenting. Further effort is needed to fully understand how factors such as these may impact helicopter parenting from parents as well as reactions to helicoptering from the college student.

Culture and traditions. A common message given to these college students, by their parents, when complaining about their parent’s approach was “you don’t have it as bad as I had it.” The generational stories, the cultural context and the family traditions need to be addressed by future researchers. This missing piece of the puzzle will continue to skew the entire picture of hovered college students unless they are looked at clearly.

Yes, looking at where my mom grew up and what she grew up with, you can see where

her parenting style comes from. Her and her parents were pretty strict with her too, so I

think that also is part of it. I would say yeah because family is very important in her

culture, so she is always making sure family is close and together all the time because it

is really important to her. Her dad wasn’t that strict, but her mom was one of those moms

who had plastic on her couches, and you couldn’t touch certain foods. It was a lot of

control in the house. (Beth)

Few researchers have discussed helicopter parenting within the context of culture. Researchers focusing on Korean and Japanese college students started this work recently. Findings with

Korean students are consistent with their US counterparts, but those in Japan differ because of the positive impacts seen from helicopter parents on the college student (Lee & Kang,

2018; Woo, Hur, & Ahn, 2017). Doing research specifically in another country with a fundamentally different collective culture then the US needs to continue. To gain the depth of understanding most researchers are searching for (I hope this is true) the interplay between parental culture of those moving into the US and the US born and raised child is critical in reaching the depth of understanding sought after.

Strengths and Limitations

The purpose of this research was to create, from the fertile soil of first-hand experience, clarification and theory that can direct, unify, and be tested by further research. Due to the richness of experiences willingly shared there were diverse and descriptive accounts of people who felt they were helicopter parented. This rich data gave credence to the preliminary, substantive theory discovered. This gave hope in creating sound and unified research moving forward in the field of helicopter parenting.

The description of what helicopter parents were to these college students can be used to strengthen a unifying definition that will allow the research to dig deeper in a specified direction rather than poking in the dark. The different helicopter modalities could be easily understood and utilized in future research. Researchers will be able to create easily understood, straightforward

questions to more fully understand each category; to strengthen their validity or call for their dismantling.

The first limitation to the current study was data was experiential and limited to a select few from a specific part of the United States. For these reasons, to generalize these findings would be scientifically irresponsible. These theoretical findings needed to be viewed through the lens for which they were discovered; to clarify, unify and strength future research on the topic of helicopter parenting.

A second limitation to the current study was the consistent use of purposeful sampling throughout the process. Future theoretical sampling will allow for a strengthening or clarifying of each category of helicopter parenting discovered by increasing the possible number of descriptions given.

Contribution to Knowledge

This study stands as a possible catalyst for future research. Broadening the foundation by gathering others’ experiences who felt they were helicopter parented will strengthen and clarify the definition uncovered here. Conducting further qualitative work with students in other communities and areas of the country should be a starting point for future research. Researchers could also begin to explore other students with specific cultural and ethnic experience to begin to establish the generalizability of this conceptualization. Longitudinal work following families for an extended period would begin to shed light on the processes of parental helicoptering. With a sound framework established, researchers can step into the quantitative world with surer footing of the questions being asked and the results being found.

In terms of practice, researchers and clinicians alike would be wise to hold lightly any assumptions on parental helicoptering they may have. According to the findings within this study

parental helicoptering is a complicated matter within the world of the college student with both positive and negative aspects growing from this parental approach. Furthermore, remembering that helicopter parenting happens on a continuum with many, if not all types of helicoptering.

For future researchers, close and persistent attention should be given to contributing factors discussed herein, like the personality of the student. These factors are going to be the spotlights shinning the light on the paths taken to get to whatever outcome is being researched.

Unlike previous research conducted on the topic of helicopter parents of college students, this research was solely and directly created from the experience of those college students.

Grown from the soil of their words, these findings set the foundation for a theory that can be built to both unify and guide future research on helicopter parents and their impact on the college students.

APPENDIX A QUESTIONNAIRE Interview Questions for Qualitative for Helicopter Parenting Helicopter Parenting:  How would you describe your parents’ parenting approach towards you currently? . Can you give me Examples of what this looks like for you as a college student? o What specific parenting behaviors fall under their parenting?  How involved are your parents in your life currently? o Can you give examples of what this looks like in your own life? o What aspects of your life do your parents get involved in? o How does this amount of involvement make you feel? o What sort of impacts has this level of involvement had on you personally? Academically? Professionally? Socially? Emotionally?  How much control do your parents have over your decisions? o What parts of your life do they control? o What parts do they not control? o What sort of impacts has this level of control had on you personally? Academically? Professionally? Socially? Emotionally?  How demanding are your parents? o Can you give examples of what this looks like in your own life? o How does this amount of demandingness make you feel? o What sort of impacts has this level of demandingness had on you personally? Academically? Professionally? Socially? Emotionally?  How open are your parents to your perspective and personal desires? o Can you give examples of what this looks like in your own life? o How does their open/closed make you feel? o What sort of impacts has this level of openness had on you personally? Academically? Professionally? Socially? Emotionally?  How responsive are your parents to your needs? Emotional Needs? o Can you give examples of what this looks like in your own life? o How does this amount of responsiveness make you feel? o What sort of impacts has this level of responsiveness had on your personally? Academically? Professionally? Socially? Emotionally?  Do your parents ever prevent consequences from happening to you or rescue you in anyway? Or do things for you that you could do for yourself? o Can you give examples of what this looks like in your own life? o How does this amount of involvement make you feel? o What sort of impacts has this level of rescuing had on you personally? Academically? Professionally? Socially? Emotionally?  How would you describe the closeness between you and your parents?  Is it your mom, your dad, or both? . Examples? o Why do you think your parents or parent decided on this parenting approach? . Their personality or yours?

. Fear? . Deep need for your success? o When did this type of parenting start in your life? . Best guess as to why? o Are their times it has become more or less intense? . Best guess as to why? o Since starting college, has it increased or decreased? . Best guess as to why? . What has this increase/decrease done to you?  Thinking of your parents parenting approach as a whole, How has this parenting approach affected you as an emerging adult? . Specific Examples? o How has it affected your academics/schooling? . Specific Examples? o Peer relationships? . Specific Examples? o Romantic relationships? . Specific Examples? o Your view of yourself? . Specific Examples?  If you had to label your parents’ approach what would you call it? o Animal? o My parents parent as if they are………..  What is helicopter parenting to you? (Probing questions for emotional piece)

 How does helicopter parenting effect your ability to be aware of your own emotions? . Specific Examples? o Has your interaction with your emotions affected other areas of your life? . Specific Examples? o Has your emotional world impacted your relationship with your parents? How? . Specific Examples?

APPENDIX B IRB APPROVAL The Florida State University Office of the Vice President For Research Human Subjects Committee Tallahassee, Florida 32306-2742 (850) 644-8673 · FAX (850) 644-4392

APPROVAL MEMORANDUM

Date: 9/17/2018

To: Jeffery Allen

Address: 1950 North point blvd. Dept.: FAMILY & CHILD SCIENCE

From: Thomas L. Jacobson, Chair

Re: Use of Human Subjects in Research What is helicopter parenting?

The application that you submitted to this office in regard to the use of human subjects in the proposal referenced above have been reviewed by the Secretary, the Chair, and one member of the Human Subjects Committee. Your project is determined to be Expedited per per 45 CFR § 46.110(7) and has been approved by an expedited review process.

The Human Subjects Committee has not evaluated your proposal for scientific merit, except to weigh the risk to the human participants and the aspects of the proposal related to potential risk and benefit. This approval does not replace any departmental or other approvals, which may be required.

If you submitted a proposed consent form with your application, the approved stamped consent form is attached to this approval notice. Only the stamped version of the consent form may be used in recruiting research subjects.

If the project has not been completed by 9/16/2019 you must request a renewal of approval for continuation of the project. As a courtesy, a renewal notice will be sent to you prior to your expiration date; however, it is your responsibility as the Principal Investigator to timely request renewal of your approval from the Committee.

You are advised that any change in protocol for this project must be reviewed and approved by the Committee prior to implementation of the proposed change in the protocol. A protocol change/amendment form is required to be submitted for approval by the Committee. In addition, federal regulations require that the Principal Investigator promptly report, in writing any unanticipated problems or adverse events involving risks to research subjects or others.

By copy of this memorandum, the Chair of your department and/or your major professor is reminded that he/she is responsible for being informed concerning research projects involving human subjects in the department, and should review protocols as often as needed to insure that the project is being conducted in compliance with our institution and with DHHS regulations.

This institution has an Assurance on file with the Office for Human Research Protection. The Assurance Number is FWA00000168/IRB number IRB00000446.

Cc: Ming Cui, Advisor HSC No. 2018.23274

Helicopter Parenting Informed Consent Project Title: A Grounded Theory Study of the Helicopter Parented Emerging Adult Investigator: Jeffery Allen, Child and Family Science program, Florida State University I state that I am over 18 years of age and wish to participate in a program of research being conducted by Jeffery Allen in the Child and Family Science Program at Florida State University. I UDERSTAND THAT PARTICIPATION IN THIS STUDY IS VOLUNTARY AND THERE IS NO PENALTY FOR NONPARTICIPATION. The purpose of this research is to explore the experiences of individuals experiencing helicopter parenting while at university. The procedures for the project involve participation in one 30 to 60 minute interview and a brief follow-up interview with the investigator at a location of the participant’s choosing. I understand that interviews will be taped and transcribed and that I will have the opportunity to review and modify interview responses. Some may find it uncomfortable to discuss the topic of helicopter parenting. I understand that the study is not designed to help me personally, but to help the investigator learn more about the phenomenon of helicopter parenting. Participation in this project is voluntary and I am free to discontinue participation at any time without penalty. I am aware of the services offered on campus either through the FSU counseling center or the FSU center for couple and family therapy if I feel like I need extra support or help in processing possible feelings that may arise from answering the questions. All information collected in this study is confidential. I understand that the data I provide will be grouped with data others provide for reporting and presentation. I will be assigned a pseudonym and my real name will not be used in discussing data and results. I understand that I may contact Jeffery Allen to ask questions or express concerns at the contact information listed below:

Jeffery Allen 435-764-3732 [email protected]

Name of Participant ______

Signature of Subject & Date ______

REFERENCES Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. American psychologist, 55, 469-481. Baltes, P. B. (1987). Theoretical propositions of life-span developmental psychology: On the dynamics between growth and decline. Developmental psychology, 23, 611-617. Baumrind, D. (1967). Child care practices anteceding three patterns of preschool behavior. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 75, 43-88. Baumrind, D. (1991). The influence of parenting style on adolescent competence and substance use. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 11, 56-95. Bowen, M. (1966). The use of family theory in clinical practice. Comprehensive psychiatry, 7, 345-374. Bradley-Geist, J., & Olson-Buchanan, J. (2014). Helicopter parents: An examination of the correlates of over-parenting of college students. Education+ Training, 56, 314-328. Brussoni, M., & Olsen, L. L. (2013). The perils of overprotective parenting: fathers' perspectives explored. Child: care, health and development, 39, 237-245. Burke, T. J., Segrin, C., & Farris, K. L. (2018). Young adult and parent perceptions of facilitation: Associations with overparenting, family functioning, and student adjustment. Journal of Family Communication, 18, 233-247. Charmaz, K., & Belgrave, L. (2012). Qualitative interviewing and grounded theory analysis. The SAGE handbook of interview research: The complexity of the craft, 2, 347-365. Coccia, C., Darling, C. A., Rehm, M., Cui, M., & Sathe, S. K. (2012). Adolescent health, stress and life satisfaction: The paradox of indulgent parenting. Stress and Health, 28, 211-221. Cook, B. (2019, March 20). College Admissions, Youth Sports, and Parents' Desire To Drive the Snowplow. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/bobcook/2019/03/19/college- admissions-youth-sports-and-parents-desire-to-drive-the-snowplow/#6beffb23a6fb Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative sociology, 13, 3-21. Cui, M., Allen, J. W., Fincham, F. D., May, R. W., & Love, H. (2019). Helicopter Parenting, Self-regulatory Processes, and Alcohol Use among Female College Students. Journal of Adult Development, 26, 97-104. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne, 49, 182-185. Erikson, E. H. (1959). Identity and the life cycle: Selected papers. Oxford, England: International Universities Press.

Froiland, J. M. (2015). Parents’ weekly descriptions of autonomy supportive communication: Promoting children’s motivation to learn and positive emotions. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 24, 117-126. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative theory. New Brunswick: Aldine Transaction. Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field methods, 18, 59-82. Headland, T. N., Pike, K. L., & Harris, M. E. (1990). Emics and etics: The insider/outsider debate. Sage Publications, Inc. Hesse, C., Mikkelson, A. C., & Saracco, S. (2018). Parent–Child Affection and Helicopter Parenting: Exploring the Concept of Excessive Affection. Western Journal of Communication, 82, 457-474. Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Publications. Kouros, C. D., Pruitt, M. M., Ekas, N. V., Kiriaki, R., & Sunderland, M. (2017). Helicopter parenting, autonomy support, and college students’ mental health and well-being: The moderating role of sex and ethnicity. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 26, 939-949. Kwon, K. A., Yoo, G., & Bingham, G. E. (2016). Helicopter parenting in emerging adulthood: Support or barrier for Korean college students’ psychological adjustment?.Journal of Child and Family Studies, 25, 136-145. Kwon, K. A., Yoo, G., & De Gagne, J. C. (2017). Does culture matter? a qualitative inquiry of helicopter parenting in Korean American college students. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 26, 1979-1990. Lee, J., & Kang, S. (2018). Perceived Helicopter Parenting and Korean Emerging Adults’ Psychological Adjustment: The Mediational Role of Parent–Child Affection and Pressure from Parental Career Expectations. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 27, 1-15. LeMoyne, T., & Buchanan, T. (2011). Does “hovering” matter? Helicopter parenting and its effect on well-being. Sociological Spectrum, 31, 399-418. Locke, J. Y., Campbell, M. A., & Kavanagh, D. (2012). Can a parent do too much for their child? An examination by parenting professionals of the concept of overparenting. Journal of Psychologists and Counsellors in Schools, 22, 249-265. Maccoby, E. E., & Martin, J. A. (1983). Socialization in the context of the family: Parent-child interaction. In P. H. Mussen (Series Ed.) &E. M. Hetherington (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 4. Socialization, personality, and social development (4th ed., pp. 1 -101) New York: Wiley. Martin, P. Y., & Turner, B. A. (1986). Grounded theory and organizational research. The journal of applied behavioral science, 22, 141-157.

McGinley, M. (2018). Can Hovering Hinder Helping? Examining the Joint Effects of Helicopter Parenting and Attachment on Prosocial Behaviors and Empathy in Emerging Adults. The Journal of genetic psychology, 179, 102-115. Milita, K., & Bunch, J. (2017). Helicopter Parenting and the Policy Attitudes of College Students. PS: Political Science & Politics, 50, 359-366. Montgomery, N. (2010, May). The negative impact of helicopter parenting on personality. Poster session presented at the annual meeting of the Association of Psychological Science. Boston, MA. Morgan, G., & Smircich, L. (1980). The case for qualitative research. Academy of management review, 5, 491-500. Murdock, N. L., & Gore, P. A. (2004). Stress, coping, and differentiation of self: A test of Bowen theory. Contemporary Family Therapy, 26, 319-335. Padilla-Walker, L. M., & Nelson, L. J. (2012). Black hawk down?: Establishing helicopter parenting as a distinct construct from other forms of parental control during emerging adulthood. Journal of adolescence, 35, 1177-1190. Park, S., Lim, H., & Choi, H. (2015). " Gangnam Mom": A Qualitative Study on the Information Behaviors of Korean Helicopter Mothers. iConference 2015 Proceedings. Peleg-Popko, O. (2002). Bowen theory: A study of differentiation of self, social anxiety, and physiological symptoms. Contemporary Family Therapy, 24, 355-369. Reed, K., Duncan, J. M., Lucier-Greer, M., Fixelle, C., & Ferraro, A. J. (2016). Helicopter parenting and emerging adult self-efficacy: Implications for mental and physical health. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 25, 3136-3149. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68-78. Rousseau, S., & Scharf, M. (2015). “I will guide you” The indirect link between overparenting .adjustment. Psychiatry research, 228, 826-834 ׳and young adults Rousseau, S., & Scharf, M. (2018). Why people helicopter parent? An actor–partner interdependence study of maternal and paternal prevention/promotion focus and interpersonal/self-regret. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 35, 919-935. Schiffrin, H. H., Liss, M., Miles-McLean, H., Geary, K. A., Erchull, M. J., & Tashner, T. (2014). Helping or hovering? The effects of helicopter parenting on college students’ well- being. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 23, 548-557. Segrin, C., Givertz, M., Swaitkowski, P., & Montgomery, N. (2015). Overparenting is associated with child problems and a critical family environment. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 24, 470-479. Segrin, C., Woszidlo, A., Givertz, M., Bauer, A., & Taylor, M. (2012). The association between overparenting, parent‐child communication, and entitlement and adaptive traits in adult children. Family Relations, 61, 237-252

Steinberg, L., & Darling, N. (2017). Parenting style as context: An integrative model. In Interpersonal Development (pp. 161-170). Routledge. Somers, P., & Settle, J. (2010). The helicopter parent. College and University, 86, 2. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. M. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Sage Publications, Inc. Schwartz, S. J., Zamboanga, B. L., Luyckx, K., Meca, A., & Ritchie, R. A. (2013). Identity in emerging adulthood: Reviewing the field and looking forward. Emerging Adulthood, 1, 96-113. Turner, E. A., Chandler, M., & Heffer, R. W. (2009). The influence of parenting styles, achievement motivation, and self-efficacy on academic performance in college students. Journal of college student development, 50, 337-346. Wisdom, J. P., Cavaleri, M. A., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Green, C. A. (2012). Methodological reporting in qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods health services research articles. Health services research, 47, 721-745. Woo, J. J., Hur, Y. R., & Ahn, H. Y. (2017). The Influence of Mothers' Helicopter Parenting Behaviours on the Psychological Well-Being of College Students. International Information Institute (Tokyo). Information, 20, 8605-8612. Willoughby, B. J., Hersh, J. N., Padilla-Walker, L. M., & Nelson, L. J. (2015). “Back off”! Helicopter parenting and a retreat from marriage among emerging adults. Journal of Family Issues, 36, 669-692.

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH I received a bachelor’s degree in psychology from Utah State University. I also received masters of marriage and family therapy from the same university. After my master’s degree I worked for over four years doing therapy with individuals, couples and families. After becoming a licensed marriage and family therapist, I decide to fulfill a personal dream of mine to earn a

Ph.D. in family and human sciences and teach at the university level. Throughout my doctoral program I focused on researching the parent-child relationship; specifically focusing on the phenomenon known as helicopter parenting.