4 For better, for worse, or both? 141 in parenting processes. Relatedly, the sample-level reliabilities of the family-specific lagged effects were rather low: between .43 and .53 (with one exception of .28) (withinperson coupling reliability (WPCR index; see Neubauer et al., 2020), which might have attenuated the statistical power to detect parenting effects within each individual family. A higher number of assessments per person may lead to more reliable and detectable individual estimates (Voelkle et al., 2012), and therefore, findings need replication with higher-powered intensive longitudinal studies to optimally apply an idionomic approach (i.e., detecting subgroups by using idiographic, N = 1 data; Chaku & Beltz, 2022; Sanford et al., 2022). Nonetheless, prior work has found no substantial differences in the sign (i.e., positive or negative) and strength of individual parenting effect sizes when 25, 50, or 100 data points were analyzed (Bülow, Neubauer, et al., 2022). Second, the sample included a homogenous community adolescent sample, with the majority being female and following higher secondary education tracks. Therefore, there is a possibility that some subgroups might be underrepresented in our sample. For instance, highly sensitive individuals are more prevalent in clinical samples (Greven et al., 2019). Future studies with larger, more heterogeneous (e.g., clinical) samples are required to replicate (the size of) coexisting responsivity patterns. Moreover, the question remains whether the found responsivity patterns are specific to adolescence. The substantial subgroup who did not perceive changes in parental behavior might consist of adolescents who spend little time with their parents, which is an important developmental task in adolescence (R. W. Larson et al., 1996). Future research should investigate to what extent responsivity-to-parenting patterns replicate to other developmental periods such as childhood. Third, shortcomings of the measures need to be mentioned. Concerning parenting, whereas psychological control was measured in reference to both parents (i.e., My parents were …), parental support concerned support of the primary caregiver (for 81% it was their mother and for 19% their father). Although most adolescents in the sample indicated that they spent most time with their mother, it remains uncertain whether changes in psychological control were driven by maternal and/or paternal behavior. Hence, future studies that make a clear distinction between maternal and paternal parenting behavior (Mabbe et al., 2019; Vrolijk et al., 2020) can examine whether adolescents show a similar responsivity pattern to both maternal and paternal parenting. Concerning the adolescent outcomes, the reliability of self-esteem was somewhat low, with the three negatively formulated items explaining most variance of the construct, which limited our ability to
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw