Topic: Relationship between Parenting styles, and Life Satisfaction amongst Asian and White ethnicity young adults with neuroticism (emotional stability) as a Moderator.

Topic: Relationship between Parenting styles, and Life Satisfaction amongst Asian and White ethnicity young adults with neuroticism (emotional stability) as a Moderator.

Pages: 7, Double spaced
Sources: 11
Order type: Dissertation Chapter – Discussion
Subject: Psychology
Style: APA
Language: English (U.K.)
Order Description
Reffer to the files please
As supervisor requested in discussion

01) Hypothesis and results
Explain what your results say and relate it to past studies (whether it’s in line with past studies or not)

02) New finding of the study (neuroticism has not used as a moderator in any of the studies when evaluating parenting styles and life satisfaction among Asian and White young adults)

03) Original thoughts and discuss it

04) Limitations
When assessing parents together they might have only thought about mother or father not together.
Asian young adults who are filling the questionnaire, their second language is English
Equal number of participants in both groups

05) Future studies
 Combine the perception of parents on their parenting styles
 Parenting styles- Qualitative study
 Replicating with different set of samples of young adults.
Different areas (urban/city/rural)
Divide Asian group as it’s a big population (north, west, south etc)
 Exploring the same study using other personality variables as a moderator
 etc

06) Contribution of the study

07) Conclusion

Title: Relationship between Parenting style, and Life Satisfaction amongst Asian and White ethnicity young adults with neuroticism as a Moderator.
Life satisfaction can be defined as a global cognitive evaluation of an individual with regard to the overall satisfaction with his/her own life (Diener, Oishi, & Lucas, 2003; Lucas, Diener, & Suh, 1996). According to many studies, life satisfaction is a key indicator of one’s quality of life, and it links with a wide range of positive personal, psychological, social, interpersonal and intrapersonal outcomes (Proctor, Linley, & Maltby, 2009). For instance, individuals in levels of higher global life satisfaction achieve better life outcomes, including financial and academic success, self-esteem, self-efficacy, sound mental health, supportive relationships, effective coping and physical health and longevity (Gilman & Huebner, 2006; Proctor et al., 2009; Suldo & Huebner, 2006). In contrast, individuals in lower levels of life satisfaction tend to have increased vulnerability to anxiety and depression, and increased occurrences of emotional and behavioral problems (Suldo & Huebner, 2006). Hence, life satisfaction is a key factor in assessing people’s psychological and social well-being.
Considering the importance of the life satisfaction factor in terms of measuring quality of life, psychologists have made many attempts to find the correlates and predictors of people’s life satisfaction. As per research, personality traits are regarded as one of the main predictors of life satisfaction (Diener et al., 2003; Steel, Schmidt, & Shultz, 2008). For instance, neuroticism – which is a risk factor against quality of life, is considered to have a negative effect on life satisfaction. Parental style is also considered as having much impact on an individual’s life satisfaction (Chan and Koo, 2011; Milevsky et al, 2007).
Arnett (2000) identified a new developmental period, which he termed as “emerging adulthood” or “young adults”. According to his work, there is a clear interim between adolescence and adulthood (roughly ages 18 through 25), which possesses its own distinct characteristics.
There is a significant lack of research focused on the predictors of life satisfaction among young adults. Even though previous studies indicate that neuroticism and parenting styles have a significant impact on life satisfaction (Diener et at, 2003; Leung, McBird-chang, Lai, 2004), it should be noted that these studies are primarily conducted among adults or children, with a very little research on young adults/emerging adults. Given that the life perspectives and development needs of young adults are different to those of adolescents and adults, the findings of these research studies cannot be generalized for young adults. Furthermore, Aquilino (2001) also emphasizes the need of investigating the correlation between parenting styles and life satisfaction of young adults.
As such, it is important to understand how culture impacts on parenting styles and how it influces young adults life satifaction. One’s cultural context plays a significant role in shaping one’s characteristics, parenting and life satisfaction (Chen, 2014, Cheung et al., 2008; Diener et al. 2003). Since most studies on life satisfaction in association with parenting styles or neuroticism were conducted in western cultural context, there is a dearth of research focusing on similar experiences in Asian cultural contexts. Given the differences in culture, results obtained from studies conducted in Western contexts cannot be generalized to other cultural contexts. Moreover, none of the existing research use a pure cultural sample for example young adults born and raised in the same country. Since of individuals who have migrated or experienced a shift in cultural setting different to their actual country of origin within the period of 3 years (Kashima, Kent, Kashima, 2015).
This study also has drawn a sample from young adults who are born and raised in the same country as well as their parents having the same ethnicity as young adults. And this study aimed to address the comparative predictive power of different parenting styles in Asian and white ethnicity cultural context in young adults and how neuroticism moderates this relationship.
Parenting Styles
Parenting styles, presented as a psychological construct, refer to the strategies that parents choose to employ in rearing their children (Chao, 1994). It is important to differentiate between the quantity of time that a parent spends with their child and the quality of parenting that they provide their children. For an example, even though a parent may spend a lot of time with their child, this should automatically be interpreted to mean that they offer their children good parenting. The parent may concentrate on other things besides the child while they are spending time with the child and this is bound to have some impact on the child’s development. Since children undergo various developmental stages, the parenting styles of their parents also go through a certain dynamic as the interaction between the two also develops. For an example, while the parenting style of parents caring for an infant child may be defined by attachment, that between parents and their teenage child may be defined more by the need for freedom of the child and the desire to instill discipline in the child for the parents (Smetana, 2011).
Understanding the dynamic between parenting styles and the developmental stage of the child is crucial, as research suggests that it has a direct impact on how the child turns out later in their adult life and how it impacts their satisfaction of life (Xie, Fan, Wong and Cheung, 2016; Milevsky et al., 2007).
Research by Christopher Spera (2005) makes an important distinction between parenting styles and parenting practices. Parenting practices refer to the specific behaviours employed by parents in socializing their children. On the other hand, parenting styles refer to the emotional climate within which parents rear their children (Spera, 2005). Researchers have investigated the outcomes that result from continuous parental behaviour. Some of the behaviours investigated include harsh punishment, approval, warmth, involvement, monitoring, and support. Parenting practices including approval, warmth, support, and monitoring are associated with better grades in school, fewer and less pronounced problem behaviours and better mental health as compared to children who experience harsh punishment (Spera, 2005). There is no specific age that the parent should initiate these parenting practices so that the child can benefit from them in the adult life but it is preferable that parents do this right from pre-school (Amato & Fowler, 2002).
Influential theorists such as John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau have made important contributions to the study of parenting styles and the outcome of children. Locke highlights the importance of childhood experiences and emphasises the importance of developing the child’s physical habits. Rousseau proposes that early education to children should be less focused on books and more on the child’s experience with the world. In this respect, parents have an important role to play as they have the greatest influence on the child’s development during the early childhood stages (Reynolds & Fletcher-Janzen, 2007).
For a clear understanding of the differences in parenting outcomes, it is important to come up with a classification. In this study, we consider the classification developed by Diana Baumrind. In developing a classification of parenting styles, she considered three basic parenting practices or behaviours which determine the success of parenting. The three elements are demanding versus undemanding, and responsiveness versus unresponsiveness. Baumrind introduced three distinct parenting styles: authoritative, authoritarian, and permissive parenting (Huver et al., 2010). An understanding of these parenting styles is essential to deduce the emotional impact that they have on children and young adults (Suldo and Heubner, 2006).
Life Satisfaction
It is important to have a clear understanding of what life satisfaction means given that it is the dependent variable used in the research. Life satisfaction can be defined as a measure of well-being which can be in terms of the goals that one has achieved, mood, or the self-perceived ability to deal with daily life (Diener et al., 2003). It is different from the emotion of happiness in that it more enduring and unlikely to change abruptly. Life satisfaction differs depending on one’s culture (Park, Park & Peterson, 2010). For example, for people from a “white” community, life satisfaction is achieved if a young adult is allowed independence and the autonomy to make the decision they deem fit (Chan & Koo, 2010). On the other hand, within the Asian culture, life satisfaction is achieved if the young adult gets along with other members of the community and fits well in the society (Park et al., 2010). Therefore, the parenting styles of White and Asian parents will affect young adults differently and their ability to enjoy life satisfaction.
Life Satisfaction and parenting styles
In authoritative parenting, the parent is demanding and responsive. The parents have high expectations for the child, understands how they feel and help them learn how to regulate their feelings (Santrock, 2007). This parenting style helps young adults enjoy life satisfaction fully.
Authoritarian parents are demanding but not responsive. They do not focus on the feelings of the child and administer heavy punishment when children fail to follow what they tell them. Children are likely to develop feelings of resentment as parents fail to explain the reason behind them giving the directions that they do (Thompson, Hollis & Richards, 2003). This parenting style limits the life satisfaction that the young adult enjoys.
Permissive parenting is also called indulgent parenting shows minimal behavioural expectations from children. Although they are responsive to the needs of children, they do not require their children to regulate their behaviour. Children of these parents develop inappropriate behaviours that can be shocking even to their parents (Aunola, Stattin, & Nurmi, 2000). Young adults raised using this parenting style may have difficulties gaining life satisfaction because their behavioural problems may cause them to conflict with the society.
Neglectful parents show no behavioural expectations from their children and neither are they responsive to their emotional needs. They show the least parental involvement and leave their children to determine their future with minimal to no guidance (Aunola, Stattin, & Nurmi, 2000). Hence, this parenting style produces the least life satisfaction for young adults. Studies suggest that authoritative parenting style results in the best outcomes for children and young adults for Western populations, but for Asian populations authoritarian parenting has been seen to produce equally good outcomes (Darling. 1999; Chao, 1994; Juang, Qin and Park, 2013). These parenting styles and their outcome on life satisfaction apply to young adults of both White and Asian Ethnicities.
Life Satisfaction and Neuroticism
The emotional state of a young adult is an important determinant of life satisfaction. Therefore, in this study, will consider the neuroticism (emotional state/stability) as a moderator. Neuroticism is defined as the long-term tendency to be in a negative emotional state (Schimmack et al., 2002) Trait neuroticism refers to a stable inclination to respond to threats, frustration or loss with negative emotions (Goldberg, 1993; Lahey, 2009). Neuroticism is a very important psychological trait when it comes to assessing public health, because it is well connected with a wide range of adverse outcomes, including both mental and physical health issues (Lahey, 2009).
People considered as neurotic are likely to be in a depressed mood most of the time, suffering from feelings of anger, anxiety, envy, and guilt. They experience these feelinsgs with greater severity than an average person, even resulting from things that other people would consider normal daily occurrences. Neuroticism is associated with poor interpersonal skills, impaired psychosocial functioning, and ineffective coping strategies. This means that children or young adults are likely to experience low life satisfaction because they generate negative life events frequently. In many personality-assessing studies, it has been strongly established that neuroticism is most strongly correlated with life satisfaction among adolescents and adults that. (Garcia, 2011; Rigby and Huebner, 2005; Pavot et al., 1997). Recent meta-analysis studies also show that neuroticism was a significant negative predictor of life satisfaction (Steel et al., 2008; Deneve and Cooper, 1998). With a cross-culture perception, it was suggested that neuroticism related to life satisfaction and relationship between neuroticism and life satisfaction are prone to be controlled by cultural context (Schimmach et al., 2002).
Research conducted in both Western and non-Western cultures have strongly supported the association between neuroticism and life satisfaction (Zheng, Wang and Qiu, 2003). Since individuals with high levels of neuroticism experience events in a more negative light, and are more responsive to negative feedback, tend to overrate any challenge they encounter (Diener et al., 2003; Lahey, 2009).
Neuroticism can have a strong negative greater impact on life satisfaction regardless of the parenting styles that parents employ (Schimmack et al., 2002). If the young adults are neurotic, it is bound to have a negative impact on their life satisfaction outcomes (Schimmack et al., 2002).
Parenting Styles in White Ethnicity
For the British and other European populations, the authoritative parenting style results in the best outcomes for children and young adults as parents balance between their demands towards their children and the help that they offer towards helping them regulate their emotions. However, studies on Asian populations suggest that the concepts that describe Asian parenting as authoritarian, restrictive or controlling may be ethnocentric and misleading when considering White populations (Park et al., 2010). Asian parents may score high on “controlling” and “authoritarian” but this may have a completely different implication for White populations because they have a different cultural system from the western culture.
A study by Wing Chan and Anita Koo (2010) suggests that authoritative parenting style is preferable for the white ethnicity as it is results in better outcomes than authoritarian parenting and leads to life satisfaction for young adults. Results from the study suggest that social class does not have a net association with the subjective outcomes of young adults with respect to self-esteem, wellbeing, health and risky behaviour. The element that affects these aspects the most for young adults is the parenting style, which has been used in rearing the young adults. In particular, young adults of parents who used the authoritative parenting style had a high self-esteem, their subjective well-being was good, they had minimal chances of developing undesirable habits such as smoking, they were unlikely to be involved in fights, and they were less likely to keep friends who use drugs or are drug abusers (Chan & Koo, 2010).
Even where parental education and economic status serve as important indicators of education outcomes for young adults, the parenting style still shows significant net association. When compared with other parenting styles including permissive and authoritarian parenting, authoritative parenting is associated with better GCSE results, and the students are more likely to remain in school past the school-leaving age (Chan & Koo, 2010). The study suggests that supervision and discipline are not the only important aspects for young adults to achieve academic success and consequently life satisfaction. The parenting styles that young adults are exposed to play an important role in determining how they turn out in life. Relative to authoritative parenting, authoritarian parenting produces suboptimal outcomes in academic performance, and this might be explained by the emphasis on supervision and monitoring, which is characteristic of the parenting style. The authoritarian parenting style also overlooks the aspects of acceptance and involvement, which might explain the inferior outcomes of the parenting style (Chan & Koo, 2010).
The role of parents in helping children and young adults achieve life satisfaction was theorised by Erik Erikson in his Theory of Development. Erikson argues that individuals undergo eight life stages within their lifetime. For one to move to the next stage of life successfully, they need to resolve the crisis that they face in their current stage. For example the presence of loving and caring parents for children below the age of one year, yields trust, whereas the lack of this results in the child developing mistrust. The stage of life that is of interest to this study is identity versus role confusion. Young adults between the age of 12 and 18 years fall under this stage. They question themselves about their self-identity and where they fit (Kroger & Marcia, 2011). Authoritative parenting, which results in life satisfaction for the White ethnicity, proposes that parents let these young adults explore and come up with their own identity. On the other hand, authoritarian parenting proposes a more restrictive approach where prescriptions are made to the young adults, and they are expected to operate within the confines of these prescriptions. Successfully adhering to these prescriptions results in acceptance and approval by Asian communities and this, in turn, leads to life satisfaction for these young adults. Authoritarian parenting does not lead to life satisfaction for the White ethnicity, but for Asian populations, it does (Kordi & Baharudin, 2010).
Parenting Styles in Asian Ethnicity
While “controlling,” “restrictive” and “authoritarian” parenting styles have been associated with poor school performance for White children, many Asian children whose parents use these parenting styles are seen to perform well in school (Chao & Tseng, 2002). For this study, this is interpreted to mean high life satisfaction. In an attempt to explain the apparent paradox of authoritarian parenting and school achievement, one explanation offered was that parental influences do not have an impact on school performance. However, this offers a less compelling argument as compared to the argument that the concepts of “controlling,” “restrictive” and “authoritarian” may not mean the same for Asians as they do for the Whites. To the White, these concepts are interpreted to mean strictness and they may be viewed as a manifestation of parental hostility, mistrust, aggression, and dominance (Chan & Koo, 2010). For Asians populations, the concept of strictness is viewed differently. It is viewed as a sign of parental concern, involvement and caring. Parental control for Asians may not necessarily involve domination but rather a form of organization or control to maintain family harmony (Chan and Koo, 2010).
In the study of Asian populations, the term “child training” is used interchangeably with “child rearing.” Therefore, the aspect of control involves child rearing or training children to adopt behaviours that are culturally acceptable (Chao & Tseng, 2002). The child training that Asian children undergo facilitates development. The process involves learning that combines the role of the environment and the inherent goodness of the child or young adult. Parents play an important role in exposing children to examples of behaviour that is acceptable and desirable while restricting them to the exposure of behaviour that is considered undesirable. Mothers in the Asian ethnicity play an especially integral role in training children and young adults. It is the role of the mother to offer a nurturing environment and attend to the needs of the child or young adult by being physically available. Mothers inform young adults of school age about the family’s expectations about their success in school (Park et al., 2010). “Controlling,” “restrictive” and “authoritarian” parenting styles lead to life satisfaction for Asian populations because they help the child and young adult integrate with the society. For Asian populations, this is more important autonomy and independence which the White Value.
In summary, research suggests that there is a paradoxical preference of parenting styles between the White and Asian ethnicity. Whereas the White ethnicity prefers the authoritative parenting style, Asian populations prefer the authoritarian parenting style. This difference is accounted for by the difference in the cultures of these two regions. The Whites value autonomy and freedom of choice, so they allow their children to explore their self-identity and form it on their own. On the other hand, Asian populations uphold community values and children are expected to adhere to the behavioural prescriptions that are given to them by their parents. Despite this cultural disparity, research suggests that the parenting styles produce dissimilar results for the White and Asians. However, regardless of the parenting style that young adults experience, they are likely to have low life satisfaction if they suffer from neuroticism. Nonetheless, if the parent uses the appropriate parenting style depend on the cultural context, then the young adult is likely to enjoy life satisfaction. This review of literature suggests that parenting styles are of utmost importance to the child’s development process, which leads a positive satisfaction in life, additionally their emotional stability is also plays a major role when leading to positive life satisfaction.
Current study
The current study aims to establish relationship between parenting style and life satisfaction in among young adults. It also aims to contribute to the parenting styles and life satisfaction relationship literature by proving an understanding in a cross-cultural context in determining how young adults neuroticism (emotional state) moderate this relationship between different parenting styles and life satisfaction. By exploring the life satisfaction of young adults in two different cultures greater insight could be provided to the field of psychology and fill the gap in previous research. Because not many studies yet appear to have investigated the relationship between parenting styles and life satisfaction in a pure cross culture content therefore, this study will contribute a new point of view, and the identified gap will have a positive and socially significant impact on the society.
Finally, the study aim is to investigate whether these components predict life satisfaction because knowledge regarding these predictors could benefit the therapists in therapeutic setting when consulting clients from different cultural backgrounds. The findings of this study can contribute to building a greater insight for psychotherapy field. Thereby helping to understand individual’s perceptions in terms of cultural content.
The research data will be collected from young adults of White and Asian ethnicity. The research is designed to investigate how parenting styles (permissive, authoritarian and authoritative) predict the life satisfaction of young adults of White and Asian ethnicity and to examine extent to which neuroticism, as a situational factor, strengthens or inhibits the relation between parenting styles and life satisfaction. The parenting styles of both the mother and the father of the young adult will be assessed together.
The study hypothesized that there is a difference in life satisfaction among Asian and white ethnicity young adults as predicted by the parenting style (authoritative, authoritarian and permissive). Secondly, there is a difference in life satisfaction among Asian and White ethnicity young adults by the interactive effective of Parenting style and neuroticism.
Participants were recruited by purposive sampling. They were drawn from the United Kingdom general population using an online survey, with the probability that this sample would provide a wider and more ideal to this study rather than only recruiting purely from one University student’s sample. Participants were recruited by advertising a poster around Anglia Rusking University premises, and also the study was advertised in other forums such as Facebook (, social group of Cambridge, and International student group of Cambridge to recruit as much as possible young adults. Beside the advertisement an anonymous re-usable web link was posted, which led participants to the study via Qualtrics (, a website for designing and distributing surveys.

The advertisement (see appendix A), which was approved by the Anglia Rusking ethics panel, explained the inclusion criteria for participants that who are eligible to contribute in this research. All participants must be over 18 years and below 25 years old. For this cross culture study it was important that participants should be either from Asian ethnicity or White ethnicity, and participants parents should be from the same ethnicity. Lastly, participants must also not live in another country for more than three years other than the country they were born and raised. All this information was also clearly stated in the participation information (See appendix B) sheet too. Prior to start on the survey participants read and understood whether they were eligible for this study. Questions on online survey were partially yes/no answers and partially multiple-choice questions, lasting approximately 10 minutes.

The recruited sample (N=126) contained 70 young adults from Asian ethnicity and 56 young adults from White ethnicity. There were 42 males and 28 females in Asian ethnicity group and 20 males and 36 females in White ethnicity group with an age range of 18 to 25 years (M = 23.55). The majority of the sample was currently living in Cambridge, while 12% were from Manchester, 2% from 1%London. Young adults who reported in Asian ethnicity, majority were from Sri Lanka, while 10% from China, 9% Malaysia, 5% Pakistan. While In White ethnicity majority was British young adults.
To measure the variables of interest in this study, the Qualtrics online survey included several self-report questionnaires. First Questionnaire used was The Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS) developed by Diener, Emmoms, Larsen and Griffin in 1985 to measure young adults life satisfaction. This scale is a 5 item self-repot scale, designed to be the most applicable scale, as suggested by these authors, it includes individuals overall judgment and concept of their life. Further, life satisfaction as a cognitive judgment process (Diener et al., 1985). Items include such statements as “in most ways my life is close to my ideal”, utilizing a 7 point Likert response scale ranging 1 being strongly disagree to 7 being strongly agree. The possible ranges of score are 5-35, with a score of 20 representing a neutral point (4- neither agree nor disagree) on the scale. All responds were scored positively. Total scores 5-9 indicate that respondents are extremely dissatisfied with life, while total score 31-35 indicate the respondents are extremely satisfied with life.
Furthermore, this scale was the most fitted to this study as SWLS has been validated for cross culture studies when accessing general overall life satisfaction. The Satisfaction with Life Scale is known for its reliability and brevity of application. It also provides a cross-cultural validity to the data and a broad overview in assessing overall satisfaction with life. Hence, this scale is often used by researches as an ancillary measure (Sachs, 2003)
Second scale was used in this study was The Big Five Inventory (BFI) questionnaire, recreated and developed by John and Srivastava (1999), to measure individuals personality traits. The scale has 44 items containing 5 sub scales (extraversion, agreeableness, openness, conscientiousness and neuroticism). In this study only Neuroticism (emotional Stability) questions were chosen to self-report. Neuroticism is not a factor of inability and meanness, nonetheless one of self-reliance and being comfortable in individual’s own life. It includes individual’s emotional stability and general irritability (John and Srivastava, 1999). In neuroticism, it included 8 items (item numbers as follows; 4, 9, 14, 19, 24, 29, 34 and 39). Items included such as “I see myself as someone wo is depressed, blue”, utilising a 5 point Likert scale ranging from 1 being strongly disagree to 5 being strongly agree. Item 9, 24 and 34 were reversed scored and other items were scored positively. Total high scores for each participant for Neuroticism indicated more negative traits.
The Parental Authority Questionnaire (PAQ) (Buri, 1991) is a 30 item self-report, developed to measure parental authority or disciplinary practices from the view of a child in any age. All items were stated from the child’s point of view. This questionnaire contains 3 subscales, Authoritative, permissive and authoritarian. Each subscale contained 10 items. However, as Buri (1991) suggested this questionnaire was to measure separately mother and father by using the same form but changing the gender. In this study, the parenting styles of both the mother and the father of the young adults were assessed together by altering the father/mother word to parents. Participants were required to assess their parents together with permissive items such as “While I was growing up my parents felt that in a well-run home the children should have their way in the family as often as the parents do”, authoritarian item such as “even if children did not agree with parents, they felt that it was for our own good if we were forced to confirm to do what they thought was right”, and authoritative/flexible item such as “as I was growing up, once family policy has been established, my parents discussed the reasoning behind the policy with the children in the family”. Items were marked on a 5 point Likert scale, ranging from 1= strongly disagree and 5= strongly agree. Summing the individual scores for each subscales range from 10-50 scores the questionnaire. Higher scores for authoritarian subscale indicate that children have very strict parenting styles, authoritative trustworthy and reliable parenting style and permissive having flexible and non-restrictive parenting styles.
Furthermore, this scale was the most suitable for this study, since the Parental Authority Questionnaire has been validated as a tool that can be used extensively across cultures when assessing different parenting styles (Zulfiqar, 2017).
Other additional materials included in the online survey are: participant information sheet (Appendix B); a consent form (Appendix C); and a debrief form (Appendix D). Lastly, a demographic questionnaire (Appendix E) was included, which gathered participants’ background information such as gender, age, culture, ethnicity of their parents, and the country they were born and raised in.
The current study was a non-experimental correlational design, using several self-reported questionnaires to explore how diverse parenting styles in White and Asian cultures predict Life satisfaction in young adults, and how neuroticism moderate life satisfaction in young adults regardless of parenting styles. Predictor variables were the three parenting styles; Authoritative, Authoritarian and Permissive and criterion variable was life satisfaction; and the moderate variable was neuroticism.
All eligible participants followed the web link, posted in different forums and were directed to the survey via Qualtrics. Firstly, participants were instructed to read and understand the information sheet, in order to provide their consent by clicking the agree box to confirm their participation before continuing to the questions. That procedure confirmed that they accepted and were willing to take part in this study. It was made mandatory to answer the question, and the participants were not able to proceed further without ticking the agree box. As participants’ ID, they were asked to provide their date of birth as a 8 digit number (DD/MM/YYYY) code, for future reference in case they want to withdraw from the study. And participants were asked some background information their age, gender, ethnicity, country they were born and raised, current reside place in UK and the ethnicity of their parents. Finally, the questionnaires were completed, Life Satisfaction (Diener et al., 1985), which consisted questions about their life in overall, Neuroticism (John et al., (1999), which consisted questions about their emotional stability and finally, Parenting Authority Questionnaire (Buri, 1991) how, they think their parents practice from the point of view of the child. Once these questions are completed, survey was directed to the debriefing page (Appendix D).
There was no time limit given for the participants. Therefore, the, participants were allowed to complete the survey in their own time on any available device. However, survey took approximately 10 minutes to complete.

This study abides by the established ethical guidelines of the British Psychological Society, and is approved by the Departmental Research Ethics Panel of Anglia Ruskin University. According to these guidelines, all information and data pertaining to the participants have been treated with utmost confidentiality throughout the experiment, and several measures were adopted to protect the anonymity of the participants. The Survey Qualtrics platform, with its enhanced Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) security enabled the transmitting of participants’ information through a secure, encrypted connection, thereby limiting the researcher’s access to the survey data. The current survey was also set up in manner that prevented the IP addresses from being recorded. The only form of identification was a self-allocated participant ID, which was a necessary measure to identify data in case a participant wished to withdraw from the survey. All this information were clearly provided to all participants through the information page so that the consent of the participants was fully informed. The participants were also required to tick a box at the beginning for the survey to indicate their consent. Owing to the online nature of this survey, the participants had the freedom to withdraw from the survey or to take part in it. A captcha was added at the beginning for the survey to prevent harmful spam and automated extraction of data from websites, and the participant’s access to the survey was contingent in satisfying the captcha requirement. While it is conceded that this is not a fool-proof technique, it was deemed sufficient considering the low-risk nature of the survey.

Moreover, the participants were given access to the researcher through email and contact number provided they need any assistance or further information. While the research did not foresee any greater harm to the participants than those experienced in real life, a debriefing was provided to communicate the nature and scope of the study, and to provide supportive contact numbers in case they experience any distress consequent to taking part the survey.
Statistical Analysis
Data were analyzed quantitatively by using the SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences). There were two statistical analyses used in this study. Firstly, using the enter method two multiple regressions were conducted to investigate how parenting styles (Permissive, Authoritative and Authoritarian) predict life satisfaction in two cultures (Asian and White); and secondly, using the process method, six moderators were performed to explore the extent to which neuroticism as a situational factor, strengths or inhibits the relationship between parenting styles and life satisfaction in two cultures.
Research questions
Does life satisfaction change among Asian and white young adults as predicted by the parenting styles.?
Does the relationship between parenting styles and life satisfaction moderated by neuroticism among white ethnicity and Asian young adults?

Amato, P. R., & Fowler, F. (2002). Parenting practices, child adjustment, and family diversity. Journal of marriage and family, 64(3), 703-716.
Aunola, K., Stattin, H., & Nurmi, J. E. (2000). Parenting styles and adolescents’ achievement strategies. Journal of adolescence, 23(2), 205-222.
Chan, T. W., & Koo, A. (2010). Parenting style and youth outcomes in the UK. European Sociological Review, 27(3), 385-399.
Chao, R., & Tseng, V. (2002). Parenting of Asians. Handbook of parenting, 4, 59-93.
Darling, N. (1999). Parenting Style and Its Correlates. ERIC Digest.
Huver, R. M., Otten, R., de Vries, H., & Engels, R. C. (2010). Personality and parenting style in parents of adolescents. Journal of Adolescence, 33(3), 395-402.
Kordi, A., & Baharudin, R. (2010). Parenting attitude and style and its effect on children’s school achievements. International Journal of Psychological Studies, 2(2), 217.
Kroger, J., & Marcia, J. E. (2011). The identity statuses: Origins, meanings, and interpretations. In Handbook of identity theory and research (pp. 31-53). Springer New York.
Park, N., Park, M., & Peterson, C. (2010). When is the search for meaning related to life satisfaction?. Applied Psychology: Health and Well‐Being, 2(1), 1-13.
Park, Y. S., Kim, B. S., Chiang, J., & Ju, C. M. (2010). Acculturation, enculturation, parental adherence to Asian cultural values, parenting styles, and family conflict among Asian American college students. Asian American Journal of Psychology, 1(1), 67.
Reynolds, C. R., & Fletcher-Janzen, E. (Eds.). (2007). Encyclopedia of special education: A reference for the education of children, adolescents, and adults with disabilities and other exceptional individuals (Vol. 3). John Wiley & Sons.
Santrock, J. W. (2007). Biological beginnings. JW Santrock (4Ed.), A topical approach to life-span development, 69-70.
Schimmack, U., Radhakrishnan, P., Oishi, S., Dzokoto, V., & Ahadi, S. (2002). Culture, personality, and subjective well-being: integrating process models of life satisfaction. Journal of personality and social psychology, 82(4), 582.
Smetana, J. G. (2011). Parenting styles and practices. Adolescents, Families, and Social Development: How Teens Construct Their Worlds, 193-215.
Spera, C. (2005). A review of the relationship among parenting practices, parenting styles, and adolescent school achievement. Educational psychology review, 17(2), 125-146.
Thompson, A., Hollis, C., & Richards, D. (2003). Authoritarian parenting attitudes as a risk for conduct problems. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 12(2), 84-91.
Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Lucas, R. E. (2003). Personality, culture, and subjective well- being: Emotional and cognitive evaluations of life. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 403–425.
Lucas, R. E., Diener, E., & Suh, E. (1996). Discriminant validity of well-being measures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 616–628.
Proctor, C. L., Linley, P. A., & Maltby, J. (2009). Youth life satisfaction: A review of the literature. Journal of Happiness Studies, 10, 583–630.
Gilman, R., & Huebner, E. S. (2006). Characteristics of adolescents who report very high life satisfaction. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 35, 311–319.
Steel, P., Schmidt, J., & Shultz, J. (2008). Refining the relationship between personality and subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 138–161.

Suldo, S. M., & Huebner, E. S. (2006). Is extremely high life satisfaction during adolescence advantageous? Social Indicators Research, 78, 179–203.
Aquilino, W. S., & Supple, A. J. (2001). Long-term effects of parenting practices during adolescence on well-being outcomes in young adulthood. Journal of Family Issues, 22(3), 289-308.

Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. American psychologist, 55(5), 469.

Chan, T. W., & Koo, A. (2010). Parenting style and youth outcomes in the UK. European Sociological Review, 27(3), 385-399.

Kashima, E. S., Kent, S., & Kashima, Y. (2014). Life satisfaction in the new country: a multilevel longitudinal analysis of effects of culture and 5-HTT allele frequency distribution in country of origin. Social cognitive and affective neuroscience, 10(1), 50-54.

Chen, W. W. (2014). The relationship between perceived parenting style, filial piety, and life satisfaction in Hong Kong. Journal of Family Psychology, 28(3), 308.

Cheung, F. M., Fan, W., Cheung, S. F., & Leung, K. (2008). Standardization of the Cross-cultural [Chinese] Personality Assessment Inventory for adolescents in Hong Kong: A combined emic-etic approach to personality assessment. Acta Psychologica Sinica.

Leung, C. Y. W., McBride-Chang, C., & Lai, B. P. Y. (2004). Relations among maternal parenting style, academic competence, and life satisfaction in Chinese early adolescents. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 24(2), 113-143.

Milevsky, A., Schlechter, M., Netter, S., & Keehn, D. (2007). Maternal and paternal parenting styles in adolescents: Associations with self-esteem, depression and life-satisfaction. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 16(1), 39-47.

Xie, Q., Fan, W., Wong, P., & Cheung, F. M. (2016). Personality and parenting style as predictors of life satisfaction among Chinese secondary students. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 25(3), 423-432.

Chao, R. K. (1994). Beyond parental control and authoritarian parenting style: Understanding Chinese parenting through the cultural notion of training. Child development, 65(4), 1111-1119.

DeNeve, K. M., & Cooper, H. (1998). The happy personality: a meta-analysis of 137 personality traits and subjective well-being. Psychological bulletin, 124(2), 197.

Steel, P., Schmidt, J., & Shultz, J. (2008). Refining the relationship between personality and subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 138–161.
Goldberg, L. R. (1993). The structure of phenotypic personality traits. American Psychologist, 48, 26–34.
Lahey, B. B. (2009). Public health significance of neuroticism. American Psychologist, 64, 241–256.
Zheng, X., Wang, L., & Qiu, L. (2003). College students’ subjective well- being and its relationship with personality traits. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 11, 105–107.
Juang, L. P., Qin, D. B., & Park, I. J. (2013). Deconstructing the myth of the ‘‘tiger mother’’: An introduction to the special issue on tiger parenting, Asian-heritage families, and child/adolescent well-being. Asian American Journal of Psychology, 4, 1. doi:10. 1037/a0032136.
Garcia, D. (2011). Two models of personality and well-being among adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(8), 1208-1212.

Pavot, W., Fujita, F., & Diener, E. (1997). The relation between self-aspect congruence, personality and subjective well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 22(2), 183-191.

Rigby, B. T., & Huebner, E. S. (2005). Do causal attributions mediate the relationship between personality characteristics and life satisfaction in adolescence?. Psychology in the Schools, 42(1), 91-99.

References in measures
Buri, J. R. (1991). Parental authority questionnaire. Journal of personality assessment, 57(1), 110-119.
Diener, E. D., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of personality assessment, 49(1), 71-75.
John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. Handbook of personality: Theory and research, 2(1999), 102-138.
Sachs, J. (2003). Validation of the satisfaction with life scale in a sample of Hong Kong university students. Psychologia, 46(4), 225-234.
References in Results
Bross IDJ (1971), “Critical Levels, Statistical Language and Scientific Inference,” in Godambe VP and Sprott (eds) Foundations of Statistical Inference. Toronto: Holt, Rinehart & Winston of Canada, Ltd.
Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS. Sage publications.
Tabachnick, B. G., Fidell, L. S., & Osterlind, S. J. (2001). Using multivariate statistics.