1. Introduction

The impact of family upbringing styles on individual development is widespread in the development of children and adolescents. Among these, psychological resilience, self-esteem (SE), and academic achievement are important factors that are influenced by family Parenting styles (PSs). Research has shown that PSs not only directly affect children's emotional regulation and ability to cope with frustration, but also have a profound impact on academic performance (AP) and overall development by shaping their SE, attributional style, and achievement motivation [1-3].

First, resilience, as the ability of children to cope when faced with stress or frustration, is one of the domains significantly influenced by PSs. Research has shown that raising children in an atmosphere of warmth and support with moderate control helps them to better develop self-regulation and adaptive skills in the face of adversity [4]. Masten notes that children with emotional support and sound guidance show greater resilience in the face of adversity, whereas authoritarian or permissive PSs tend to limit the formation of children's independence, leading them to be less adaptable in the face of challenges [4].

Secondly, PSs also play an important role in motivation. Motivation involves not only children's positive attitudes and interest in academic activities but also the way they attribute success and failure. Existing research suggests that emotional support and achievement incentives provided by parents are associated with higher achievement motivation in children [5]. Authoritative PSs can encourage children to develop internal motivations, such as curiosity and intrinsic achievement, which can have a positive impact on academics [6].

Finally, academic achievement is also closely related to family PSs. Research has shown that children from supportive families with strong educational climates tend to perform better academically [7]. Particularly in Chinese studies, harmonious family environments (FE) and moderate incentive and punishment mechanisms have been shown to have a significant effect on student achievement [8]; in the absence of these supports, children's AP may be negatively affected [9].

In summary, family PSs have a wide range of effects on children's psychological resilience, motivation, and academic achievement. This study uses a literature review to further explore how different types of PSs play a role in these key areas.

2. Impact of PSs on Resilience

The study explored the mental health issues facing adolescents living in affluent families, and surveyed 262 10th grade students from suburban areas in the northeastern United States. These students were predominantly from high-income families with parents who were highly educated professionals. The differences in PSs between affluent and poor parents may be due to differences in their educational environment and upbringing, and higher levels of academic stress may reflect lower levels of individual resilience. The conventional wisdom is that economically affluent children have fewer mental health problems due to their material well-being. However, a study by Luthar and Latendressez revealed that affluent children instead face unique challenges, such as academic pressures, high parental expectations, and peer competition, which are strongly associated with psychological problems.

The study used questionnaires to assess adolescents' mental health status, academic stress, and family background. The data came from feedback from adolescents, parents, and schools and covered the assessment of psychological problems such as anxiety and depression. The study used correlation analysis and regression modeling to explore the relationship between family affluence and children's mental health. The study found that children from affluent families faced similar mental health risks to children from poorer families, particularly anxiety and depression. This contrasts with previous beliefs that affluent children have fewer mental problems. The study mentions in the results section that stress and academic pressure are important influences on these psychological problems. High parental expectations as well as peer competition were also seen as important factors influencing anxiety and depression. These factors work together to exacerbate the mental health problems that adolescents may face as they grow up.

The shortcomings of this study are that the study population was concentrated in a specific area and the sample was not broad enough. Also, by relying on self-reported data, it may have been influenced by social expectations. In addition, the study only explored the mental health problems of affluent adolescents in the U.S. and lacked a focus on other countries and cultural contexts.

In contrast to the traditional view of resilience as a gift possessed by a small number of individuals, masten proposes that resilience is not a rare trait, but an ability that can be demonstrated by most children with good support. Unlike previous research, this study argues that resilience is not only dependent on an individual's intrinsic personality or traits, but also on the support of the external environment. Although the study shows the universality of resilience, the study was conducted primarily in a Western context and the manifestation of resilience may differ in non-Western cultures.

The study was based on a comprehensive analysis of existing literature and research findings, combined with masten’s own research observations to draw conclusions about the critical role of family support and authoritative PSs in the development of children's resilience. Her study not only emphasized that resilience is a universal competency possessed by most children, but also paid special attention to the critical role of family PSs in promoting the development of children's resilience.Masten found that although toughness relied on an individual's intrinsic traits (e.g., emotional regulation, self-efficacy, etc.), the external support system, especially the family's emotional support and PSs, plays a decisive role. The resilience capacity of children growing up in poverty, single parenting, or traumatic environments is largely dependent on PSs.Masten emphasizes that authoritative PSs, in which warmth and support coexist with a moderate degree of control, can be effective in helping children develop the ability to cope with setbacks. This approach can enhance children's resilience in the face of adversity by providing them with a sense of security, structured guidance, and opportunities for autonomous decision-making.

Other studies comparing differences in child behavior in Western and non-Western contexts have compared the relationship between PSs and child externalizing behavior in two cultures, Japan and the U.S. The total sample of the study was 3,600 children, ranging in age from 1 to 18 years. Using questionnaires about PSs and observations of children's behaviors, the study found that in Japan, parents use a more moderate and indirect form of control, while in the United States, parental control is more direct and emphasizes personal independence. In Japan, moderate control styles were associated with fewer externalizing behaviors in children, whereas in the United States, stricter control styles were also associated with fewer externalizing behaviors in children, provided that they did not suppress children's autonomy. Despite cultural differences in control styles, findings from both countries suggest that parental control styles have a significant impact on children's behavior.

The study assessed PSs through questionnaires and behavioral observations, with particular attention to the degree of parental control over children's behavior. Children's externalizing behaviors were assessed through parent and teacher reports. The study used cross-cultural comparative analysis methods and explored the relationship between PSs and children's behavior through correlation analysis and multiple regression. Although there were significant differences between Japanese and American parents in the way they controlled their children's behavior, there were significant associations between PSs and children's externalizing behaviors in both cultures. Compared with American parents, Japanese parents were more likely to use a moderate control style, which appeared to be more effective in reducing externalizing behaviors. And, differences in externalizing behaviors may reflect differences in resilience.

The study noted that cultural differences may lead to biases in the way questionnaires are answered, especially in cross-cultural comparisons. Parents' understanding of the term “control” may differ due to cultural backgrounds. In addition, the study relied heavily on parental self-reports, which may be subjective. Also, because the context of the study only covered American and Japanese cultures, there was a lack of exploration of PSs in other cultural contexts.

3. Impact of PSs on SE

The authors of this publication conducted a meta-analysis in which 116 studies focused on the relationship between PSs and child and adolescent SE. Such a combination of data sets from a number of experiments not only shows the scope of the issues of contemporary psychology, but also seeks to reveal the changes among those belonging to different age cohorts. The parenting style was mainly assessed using the parental authority questionnaire (56 studies) and the parenting style and dimensions questionnaire (10 s studies) among other tools (50 studies). Rosenberg SE Scale (68 studies), Coopersmith SE Scale (10 studies), Harter Self-Perception Scale (8 studies) and other instruments (30 studies) were used to assess SE [10].

The findings indicated that parents using the authoritative parenting style tended to raise children with high SE, while the opposite was true for parents adhering to an authoritarian style. A permissive parenting style was also shown to be positively related to SE, but the relationship was weaker than that of authoritarian style. Much of the previous literature that has investigated the topic has been confirmed by this meta-analysis which also showed uniformity and strength in the data across the studies.

Nonetheless, the present research also has limitations. First of all, because of the nature of meta-analyses, causation cannot be confirmed. Furthermore, quite a number of studies used the single key informant approach (e.g. self-reporting), which might produce data bias. In order to enhance reliability, future studies should collect data from several sources.

Ajilchi, Kargar, and Ghoreishi investigated the connection between SE of children raised by stressed mothers and their PSs. They focused on high-stressed mothers using the Parenting Stress Index. The maternal parenting style of the participants was measured using the Parenting Style Inventory developed by Baumrind while children’s SE was measured by the Rosenberg SE Scale. Maternal stress is used as a key variable and parenting and children’s SE were treated as outcomes by employing multiple regression analyses [11].

Thus, the data showed that less authoritative parenting characterized with high maternal stress related SE in children, while more authoritarian or permissive PSs related SE in children. The results bring in another important conclusion that stress related disorders in caregivers adversely influence parenting and therefore raise stress as an important variable in the topic. Unlike other models, this research detects occupational stress as an indirect factor in determining children’s SE.

A drawback of this study is that it did not include stress levels and PSs employed by fathers which are likely to be important factors in affecting child SE.

This study explored the connection between PSs and implicit (or unconscious) SE in college students. Using a retrospective approach, researchers evaluated PSs with the Parental Authority Questionnaire and assessed implicit SE with the Implicit Association Test (IAT). Multiple regression analysis was conducted to examine the link between parenting style and implicit SE [12].

The results showed that authoritative parenting correlated with higher implicit SE, authoritarian parenting with lower implicit SE, and permissive parenting had no significant link to implicit SE. This study delved deeper into the concept of SE, investigating the more automatic, unconscious aspects of self-concept and providing a fresh perspective on the research topic.

A limitation of this study is whether the Name-Letter Effect truly measures unconscious beliefs about oneself, as research suggests that mild threats may activate positive implicit associations for those with high explicit SE. Additionally, the reliance on name-letter and birthday preferences as implicit measures could limit the study’s applicability to other implicit SE assessments. Finally, the sample consisted of college students, so the findings may not generalize to younger age groups.

4. The Impact of Family Parenting Style on Academic Achievement

A study in China points out that AP and learning ability is an extremely complex social phenomenon that needs to be analysed from multiple perspectives and dimensions [13]. In this analysis, family factors are one of the key elements that cannot be ignored, especially in the comprehensive assessment of school-age children's AP and ability. Intellectual and non-intellectual factors are ways of categorising the psychological elements inherent in human beings. It is usually believed that intellectual factors include abilities such as observation, memory, thinking, imagination and creativity, while non-intellectual factors are the relevant psychological factors affecting intellectual activities, such as emotions, feelings, will, temperament and personality. Children's living environment and family education, as external factors, have a significant impact on both intrinsic intellectual and non-intellectual factors, which in turn ultimately affect their AP.

In May 2016, a total of 1,000 students in grades 4 to 6 from four primary schools in two poor counties in Guanzhong District, Shaanxi Province, were selected for the survey using random cluster sampling. All respondents filled out the family general information questionnaire and the "family parenting style questionnaire", and finally 841 valid questionnaires were collected, with a validity rate of 84.1 per cent, of which 295 were in grade 4, 270 in grade 5, and 276 in grade 6; and there were 427 male students and 414 female students.

This study analysed the impact of FE on primary school students' AP, and the results showed that, in addition to area of residence and family income, factors such as family type, parental occupation, parental relationship and primary caregiver differed significantly between the high and low subgroups (p<0.05 or <0.001). PSs differed among students with different academic levels, and the differences between the high and low subgroups in the scores of the expectation-demanding, accepting-rejecting, disciplining-controlling, tolerating-indulgent, and caring-siding dimensions were compared, with no differences being statistically significant (p > 0.05). However, the differences were statistically significant (P<0. 05 or <0.01) on the motivation-punishment, democracy-dictatorship, understanding-blame, respect-shame, and warmth-rudeness dimension scores, and the low-grouped Students in the low group scored lower than those in the high group, indicating that the parenting style of students in the low group was negative. Most of the students in the low group came from single-parent families with poor parental relationships, generally with low literacy levels, and most of them were raised by grandparents. In contrast, pupils in the upper subgroup come mainly from nuclear and extended families, where parents have a harmonious relationship, are highly educated, and take an active role in their daily learning and living.

In the comparison of the scores of family PSs of primary school students at different academic levels, although the high and low subgroups on the dimensions of Expecting-Demanding, Accepting-Rejecting, Disciplining-Controlling, Tolerating-Indulging, and Caring-Sorcery differences did not reach statistical significance (p>0.05), but on the dimensions of motivation-punishment, democracy-dictatorship, understanding-blame, respect-shame, and warmth-rudeness, the scores of students in the low group were significantly lower than that of the high subgroup, indicating that the PSs of the students in the low subgroup were biased towards negativity.

Correlation analyses found that the academic achievement of children in the high subgroups was positively correlated with the scores of understanding-blame, respect-shame, motivation-punishment, and warmth-rude PSs (r-values of 0.645, 0.345, and 0.404, respectively, 0.357, p<0.05), while the academic achievement of the lower subgroups of students was negatively correlated with respect-shame, understanding-blame, democratic-authoritarian, and warmth-rude parenting style scores (r-values of -0.112, - 0.184, -0.131, and -0.169, p<0.05). These results indicate that FE and PSs have a significant impact on the AP of primary school students, emphasising the need to improve family education and parental literacy. However, the reasons for the influence of PSs on students' AP still need to be further explored.

The study still has some limitation from the perspective of sampling and data collection. Although random whole cluster sample was used, only four primary schools in two poor counties were selected, which may not be representative of students in the entire Guanzhong region. The researcher may consider increasing the sample size or covering more districts to improve the general is ability of the results.

Balance in age and grade: There is a slight difference in the proportional distribution of year 4, year 5 and year 6 in the sample, with Year 4 being particularly over represented. This may affect comparative analyses of PSs of students in different grades. Consideration should be given to a more balanced sampling between the different grades is needed.

Questionnaire design and validity: although the Family Upbringing Styles Questionnaire (FUSQ) is widely used, consideration should be given to its suitability for the specific population and cultural context of this study. A small pre-test could be considered to verify the applicability and validity of the questionnaire in the local culture.

The questionnaires are all filled out by students, which can lead to reporting bias, especially when it comes to sensitive topics of FE and Personal Secrets PSs. Consideration could be given to including feedback from parents or guardians to increase the objectivity of the data.

Other studies also examine the impact of PSs on academic achievement. Academic achievement is an important predictor of adolescents' future career development, social status, and personal well-being. According to the theory of human ecology, individual development is influenced by human interactions and interdependence [14].

The so-called parenting style refers to the attitude or educational style that parents give or show to their children, including the verbal, non-verbal behaviours or emotional atmosphere created by the parents [15]. There are different types of PSs. For example, the classic classification is the three types proposed by Baumrind-Authoritarian, Authoritative and Permissive.

A meta-analysis of 54 papers, 793 independent samples, and 24,630 subjects revealed that the correlation between the five PSs and academic achievement was significant.

The main instrument used to measure PSs in the Chinese sample was the Evaluation of PSs Scale (EM-BU Chinese version) revised by Yue et al. The scale contains 115 entries and is divided into two subscales for fathers and mothers. The father's subscale includes the dimensions of emotional warmth (EM) and understanding, punishment and severity, excessive interference, favouring the subject, rejection and denial, and overprotection; while the mother's subscale covers the dimensions of EM and understanding, punishment and severity, excessive interference and overprotection, favouring the subject, and rejection and denial. Of these, EM and understanding are classified as positive PSs, while punishment and severity, over-interference, over-protection, favouring subjects, and rejection and denial are classified as negative PSs. Some studies pointed out that the scale had too many entries, and thus it was simplified, resulting in the Short-form PSs Questionnaire [16], which has 46 entries, with both the father's and mother's versions consisting of three dimensions: EM, denial, and overprotection. Given that the Chinese version of the PSs Evaluation Scale is more in line with Chinese cultural habits [17] and has good reliability and validity in local studies [18-20], this study focused on searching for literature on the application of the scale and detect examine the dimensions of EM and Understanding, Punishment and Harshness, Over-Interference, Over-Protection, favouring subjects, and rejection and denial to analyse the relationship between PSs and academic achievement in five areas.

The study used meta-analysis of person product difference correlation coefficient r to calculate effect sizes. The r values were transformed by Fisher Z , and the weights and 95% confidence intervals were calculated based on the sample size . In the study, T2 is an indicator of the heterogeneity of the effect size. In this study, the Q statistic was used to test the significance of T2; secondly, when choosing between the fixed-effects model and the random-effects model, the exact computational model to be used depends on the authors' expectation of whether the studies have the same effect size and the purpose of the study [21]. In the present study, the sample population encompassed toddlers, elementary, middle, and high school students, the place of residence included both urban and rural areas, and there were differences in the instruments used to measure PSs. Therefore, this study used a random effects model in the effect size calculation and a mixed effects model in the moderator variable analysis.

Literature analysis was also used in the study, and the literature search in this study included two paths: the Chinese literature was searched in the CNKI full-text journals, database, China Doctoral Dissertation full-text database, China Outstanding Master's Degree Thesis full-text database, Wipo Journals, and Wanfang Journals; the English literature was searched in the EBsC0, Science Direct, springer LINK database, with the search term "Parenting style" ("Parents , ed- UcAtionAl mode"), " AcAdemic Achievement" or " AcA-demic performAnce".

Research findings:

(1) There is a strong relationship between Chinese parents' PSs and children's academic achievement. Among specific PSs, EM and understanding were most strongly associated with academic achievement.

(2) The continuous implementation of age stage and generation (China's family education work " five-year plan planning "), coupled with the fact that with the development of social and economic development, Chinese families are paying more and more attention to family education, more parents show care, understanding, as well as respect for the child, and more and more understanding of the dangers of spoiling) has a significant effect on the relationship between PSs and AP of Chinese parents. The relationship between PSs and children's AP in China is significantly influenced by the fact that the relationship between the two is stronger at the primary school level than at the middle and high school levels. As the years progressed, the positive associations between positive PSs (e.g., EM and understanding) and academic achievement increased, while the negative associations between negative PSs (e.g.,over-interfering and over-protecting) and academic achievement weakened. In addition, parenting roles (over-interfering and over-protecting) and atmosphere had relatively little effect on the relationship.

Shortcomings and future perspectives of this study:

(1) Much of the research on PSs in this study has relied heavily on children's self-reports of the PSs they receive, with less attention paid to parents' self-reports of the PSs they provide. Future research could explore differences between parental reports of PSs and children's perceived PSs, as well as differences in the performance of these two in relation to academic achievement.

(2) Since most of the children included in the study did not report correlation coefficients between PSs and AP, and the gender and place of residence (urban or rural) of these children were not taken into account. Therefore, the moderating effects of gender and place of residence were not analysed in this study. Future research should explore this in more depth.

(3) The sample size for the partial moderated effects test was small, e.g., there was only one relevant study for the sample of young children. This may lead to errors in the comparison of different subjects' age stages, thus affecting the representativeness of the results. Future studies could categorise subjects at different age stages in more detail (e.g., subdividing the primary stage into lower, middle and upper grades) and consider the interaction of parental roles, students' age, subject and chronological age.

(4) In terms of the choice of instrument to measure PSs, this study only used the EMBU scale, which has the highest frequency of application in the Chinese sample, and did not consider other tools. Future research can explore and expand the tools for measuring PSs in depth based on the Chinese cultural context and the characteristics of family education in the new era.

And family atmosphere and morality will also affect students' grades. Primary school is a fundamental period of education, when students' judgement is not yet mature and they are vulnerable to the negative influence of a poor FE and parental education style. Studying the relationship between primary school students' home environment, PSs and AP will help teachers and parents to have a clearer understanding of the important influence of family factors on primary school students' AP. This study will not only facilitate the establishment of a good co-operative relationship between teachers and parents in creating a positive educational environment for primary school students, but will also ensure that primary school students enjoy good family education while receiving quality school education.

This study uses comprehensive assessment tools such as literature analysis method and questionnaire survey method to explore in depth the intrinsic relationship between primary school students' home environment, PSs and AP. The researcher randomly selected 150 students in grades 4-6 of a primary school, combined all their examination results of the previous school year, based on the average score of each subject for raw data entry, and converted the raw data into standard scores for statistical analysis. A total of 150 questionnaires were distributed, 138 were recovered, and after excluding invalid questionnaires, the final valid questionnaires were 128.

Through the survey and SPSS statistical analysis, the following conclusions were drawn from this study:

There were no significant differences in the home environment and PSs of primary school pupils between grades, but there were gender differences in closeness and ambivalence in the home environment scale. There was also a difference in the factor of father care among primary school children of different genders. Girls scored higher than boys on the father care factor. This is because, in a family, fathers know that boys need to take more responsibility in their future life, and as fathers, they expect more from boys, and higher expectations mean higher demands, so fathers show less caring behaviours to boys in a gentle way, and instead, they often educate him through direct interventions in a harsher way; whereas, for daughters, fathers show more patience and gentleness.

Intimacy in the FE has the greatest impact on primary school students' performance. A harmonious family atmosphere and fewer conflicts among family members are more favourable to the academic progress of primary school students.

PSs have a significant impact on the AP of primary school children. Fathers should understand and support their children in a gentle manner, encourage them and work with mothers to motivate their children, rather than adopting an overly strict approach [22].

Inadequacy of research:

i) Selection of subjects

1. Insufficient sample size: Although 150 students were randomly selected, the final valid sample was only 128, which is a relatively small sample size that may affect the reliability of the results. Insufficient sample may result in the results of the statistical analyses not being robust enough for effective extrapolation to a larger group.

2. Uneven distribution of grades: The participants were distributed in grades 4, 5 and 6, with similar numbers in each grade, but if the educational stages and psychological development characteristics of the different grades are taken into account, this may affect the comparison and analysis of the results of the questionnaire, especially in terms of the impact on AP.

ii) Selection of tools

1. Cultural adaptation of the questionnaires: The Parenting Behaviour Questionnaire (PBI) and the FE Scale (FES-CV), although revised, were originally designed based on a specific cultural context. There may be issues of cultural differences that make their applicability in the Chinese context questionable.

2. Limitations of self-reported measurements: Both the Parenting Style Questionnaire and the FE Scale are self-reported questionnaires, which may be biased by respondents' subjective judgement of their own situation, resulting in the authenticity of the results being compromised.

(iii) Measurement process

1. Influence of the test administration environment: Although the test is administered in a normal teaching situation, the classroom environment may have an impact on subjects' attitudes and results, e.g. students may be affected by the presence of their peers in terms of the truthfulness and accuracy of their responses, and should be given an independent and quiet environment in which to administer the test.

2. Handling of invalid questionnaires: although invalid questionnaires were excluded, the exclusion criteria and process were not clearly stated, which could lead to potential bias and affect the credibility of the final analysis results.

5. Conclusion

Firstly, family PSs can have an impact on children's resilience. Authoritative parenting, with its combination of warmth and support and moderate control, can help children deal effectively with setbacks and thus promote the development of resilience. At the same time, a family's socio-economic status also has an impact on a child's resilience; while higher economic levels may bring more resources, they are also accompanied by challenges such as academic pressures and high parental expectations, and a child may face more external pressures. Furthermore, resilience is not only rooted in an individual's internal traits, but is also closely linked to the support of the external environment.

Second, authoritative parenting is positively associated with higher levels of SE, and this type of parenting provides children with a sense of security and identity, which contributes to their psychological well-being. Authoritarian parenting, on the other hand, is strongly associated with low SE and may inhibit a child's sense of self-worth. In addition, children's SE can be indirectly affected by the stress level of the parent, with high levels of stress in the parent often affecting the quality of parenting and thus the child's level of SE.

Finally, the FE has a significant impact on AP, with EM and understanding often strongly associated with higher AP. Family closeness is also a key factor in AP, with the creation of a harmonious family atmosphere and the reduction of conflict among family members contributing to higher AP. In addition, there may be differences in family closeness and conflict between genders, and gentle parenting by fathers and supportive mothers can be effective in motivating children and helping them to achieve better academic results.

Authors Contribution

All the authors contributed equally and their names were listed in alphabetical order.