Next Article in Journal
Mommy, Can I Play Outside? How Urban Design Influences Parental Attitudes on Play
Previous Article in Journal
Importance of Soft Skills in Health Sciences Students and Their Repercussion after the COVID-19 Epidemic: Scoping Review
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJERPH
Volume 20
Issue 6
10.3390/ijerph20064908
ijerph-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Five-Factor Personality Dimensions Mediated the Relationship between Parents’ Parenting Style Differences and Mental Health among Medical University Students

by
Shuxin Yao
1,2,†,
Meixia Xu
2,† and
Long Sun
3,4,*
1
School of Public Policy and Management (School of Emergency Management), China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China
2
Department of Current Situation and Policy, School of Marxism, Shandong Women’s University, Jinan 250300, China
3
Centre for Health Management and Policy Research, School of Public Health, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan 250012, China
4
NHC Key Laboratory of Health Economics and Policy Research (Shandong University), Jinan 250012, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20(6), 4908; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20064908
Submission received: 9 February 2023 / Revised: 7 March 2023 / Accepted: 8 March 2023 / Published: 10 March 2023
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Background: Previous studies have identified the relationships between parental parenting style, personality, and mental health. However, the interactive influences between mother’s and father’s parenting styles on personality have been examined less often. To fill the gaps, the first aim of this study was to build the relationships between parental parenting style differences (PDs) and five-factor personality dimensions. The second aim was to test the mediating effect of five-factor personality dimensions on the relationships between parental parenting style differences and mental health. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study conducted among medical university students, and 2583 valid participants were analyzed. Mental health was measured by the Kessler-10 scale. The Chinese Big Five Personality Inventory brief version (CBF-PI-B) was used to access five-factor personality dimensions. PD was calculated by the short form of Egna Minnen av Barndoms Uppfostran. Linear regressions were conducted to analyze the associations between PD and five-factor personality dimensions. The SPSS macros program (PROCESS v3.3) was performed to test the mediating effect of five-factor personality dimensions on the associations between PD and mental health. Results: Linear regressions found that worse mental health was positively associated with PD (β = 0.15, p < 0.001), higher neuroticism (β = 0.61, p < 0.001), lower conscientiousness (β = −0.11, p < 0.001), lower agreeableness (β = −0.10, p < 0.01), and lower openness (β = −0.05, p < 0.05). The results also supported that PD was positively associated with lower conscientiousness (β = −0.15, p < 0.01), lower agreeableness (β = −0.09, p < 0.001), lower openness (β = −0.15, p < 0.001), and lower extraversion (β = −0.08, p < 0.001), respectively. The mediating effect of agreeableness or openness was supported for the relationships between PD and mental health. Conclusion: These findings remind us of the importance of consistent parenting styles between mother and father, and they also can be translated into practices to improve mental health among medical university students.

1. Introduction

Parents’ parenting style is a critical social and environmental factor for child and adolescent development. In recent years, a series of influences associated with parents’ parenting style had been identified among children and adolescents, such as cognitive and behavioral differences [1,2,3], psychological health [4,5,6], and so on [7,8,9,10]. However, most of these studies explored the respective effect of parenting style between parents; the interactive effect of parents’ parenting style was less reported.
The difference between parents’ parenting styles (PD), which can be one kind of interaction between parents, may also have an impact on children and adolescents. The reasons may be explained by the theory of cognitive dissonance [11]. As we know, parents are one of the important origins for children’s and adolescents’ cognition [12]. It implied that differing parenting styles between mothers and fathers may result in differing cognition for children and adolescents [13], and differing cognition was one of the main reasons for cognitive dissonance. Further considering the influence of cognitive dissonance on mental health [14,15], the relationship between PD and mental health can be assumed, which was also supported in our previous studies [16,17].
The five-factor model of personality was one of the most prominent models in psychometrics [18]. This model organized personality traits into five fundamental dimensions: neuroticism, extraversion, openness, agreeableness and conscientiousness [19,20]. As we know, personality traits are relatively stable across time and situation [21]. Although the building of personality was complex, parenting style was one of the important factors that contributed to the building of personality [22,23]. However, to our knowledge, no study has reported the associations between parents’ parenting style differences and the five fundamental dimensions of personality. Considering the identified impact of parents’ parenting styles on individuals’ personality, the expected relationships between PD and the five fundamental dimensions of personality may be also exist, which should be tested.
Further considering the established relationships between personality and mental health, the mediating effect of personality on the associations between PD and mental health could be built as shown in Figure 1. To fill these gaps, there were three aims for this study. The first one was to verify that mental health was associated with parenting style differences and the five fundamental dimensions of personality. The second one was to examine the associations between parents’ parenting style differences and the five fundamental dimensions of personality. The third one was to test the mediating effect of personality on the associations between parenting style differences and mental health. The findings can not only help us to further understand the associations among parenting styles, personality, and mental health but also supply fundamental information to improve adolescents’ mental health through parenting style.

2. Methods

2.1. Sample and Design

This was a cross-sectional study, which was conducted among medical university students in Shandong province, China. In total, there are 6 medical universities in Shandong province. In this study, 2 medical universities were randomly selected from these 6 medical universities. In the 2 medical universities, all the 12 majors about medicine were selected to conduct the survey. In each major, one class was randomly selected from each grade. Finally, 2723 medical university students were interviewed in this study. Because the aim of this study related to the parental parenting style differences, participants with single parents or without parents were excluded from the data analyses. After deleting the missing data about the five-factor personality and mental health, 2583 medical university students were included in this study.

2.2. Interview Procedure

The interview in this study was conducted in the classroom. The selected subjects were gathered in their classrooms by each class. Firstly, the interviewers introduced the aims and benefits of this study to the subjects. After signing the agreement on the written informed consent, the participants would fill in the questionnaires anonymously by themselves. Two trained interviewers would be in the classroom to answer the questions from the participants. In total, 8 interviewers participated in the interviews. All these interviewers were graduate students who majored in medicine or health administration, and they would be well trained before the interview. The interviewers were also asked to collect the questionnaires and check the questionnaires in the classroom. All the participants would not receive any credits or awards from this study. The Institutional Review Board (IRB) of Shandong University School of Public Health approved the study plan before data collection (ref. No.: 20181220).

2.3. Measures

2.3.1. Mental Health

The Chinese version of Kessler-10 scale (K10) was used to evaluate mental health among medical university students [24,25,26]. In this scale, there were 10 items about depressive and anxiety symptoms. The participants were asked to classify the presence of these symptoms in the past four weeks. The answers for each item were from 1 (none of the time) to 5 (all the time). The sum of the scores of the 10 items represented the mental health status, and the higher scores mean the higher risk of mental health. K10 had been proved with sound validity and reliability to measure mental health in several previous studies [27,28,29], and the Chinese version of K10 was also proved with good validity and reliability [30,31].

2.3.2. Five-Factor Personality

The Chinese Big Five Personality Inventory brief version (CBF-PI-B) was used to measure five-factor personality, and it was tested with nice validity and reliability among college students [32]. This scale was revised from the NEO Personality Inventory-Revised [33], and it was used by several previous studies to measure five-factor personality in China [34,35,36]. The CBF-PI-B contained 40 items to evaluate big five personality: neuroticism, conscientiousness, agreeableness, openness, and extraversion. The detailed information about this scale could be found in a previous study [32].

2.3.3. Parental Parenting Style Differences (PD)

PD was calculated by the Chinese version of the short form of Egna Minnen av Barndoms Uppfostran (EMBU) among medical university students [37]. It was also used in many previous studies in China and other countries in the world [16,17,38,39]. In this scale, 21 items were applied to measure parents’ parenting styles, respectively. Three sub-scales (rejection, emotional warmth, and overprotection) were included in this scale. The total scores of PD were calculated by the following formula.
P D = ∑ n = i α i − β i
where i represents the 1st to 21st item number in the EMBU scale. α i and β i represent the father’s and mother’s score in each item, respectively. The sum of the differences of the 21 items was analyzed in this study, and the higher scale represents the bigger parental parenting style differences.

2.3.4. Social–Demographic Variables

Gender was analyzed as either male (1) or female (0). Age was calculated by medical university students’ date of birth. As there was a small percentage of other ethnicity other than Hans, ethnicity was recoded into Hans (1) and others (0). Economic status was evaluated by a self-reported question about their economic status compared with their classmates, and the answers were very good, good, average, bad, and very bad. It was recoded into good (1), average (2), and bad (3). Only children were evaluated by the question, “Are you the only child in your family?” The answers were yes (1) and no (0).

2.3.5. Physical Disease

Physical disease was evaluated by one question that “Have you ever been diagnosed with any physical disease?” The answer could be chosen from yes (1) or no (0).

2.3.6. Parental Relationship and Education Level

Parental relationship was evaluated by one question: “What do you think of your parents’ relationship?” The answers included very good, good, normal, bad, and very bad. As there was a small percentage for the very good and very bad selections, the parental relationship was analyzed as good (1), normal (2), and bad (3). The formal one included the very good and good selections, and the last one included recoded very bad and bad selections. The father’s and mother’s education level were evaluated by the question about their parental education level, and the answers were illiterate/semiliterate, elementary school, junior high school, junior college, bachelor, master, and doctor. As the lower report for illiterate/semiliterate, elementary school, master, and doctor, father’s and mother’s education level were analyzed as junior high school or below (1), junior college/senior school (2), and bachelor degree or above (3).

2.4. Statistical Analyses

IBM SPSS Statistics 24.0 (Web Edition) was used for the data analyses. Students t- test and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) were conducted to analyze the associated factors of mental health for categorical variables. Correlation analyses were conducted to analyze correlations between continuous variables and K10 scores. Linear regressions were also conducted to analyze the factors associated with mental health. To test the mediating effect of five-factor personality dimensions, the SPSS macros program (PROCESS v3.3) developed by Andrew F. Hayes was used [40]. All the tests were two-tailed, and a p-value of ≤ 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

3. Results

In this study, 2583 medical university students were analyzed. The sample characteristics are described in Table 1. The mean age for these students was 20.22 years, with a standard deviation of 1.27. The other detailed information could be found in the second column in Table 1. Results about the single analyses for the factors related to mental health are also shown in this table. The results supported that worse mental health was positively associated with older age (r = 0.104, p < 0.001), other ethnicity (t = −2.116, p < 0.05), physical disease (t = 6.034, p < 0.001), worse economic status (F = 11.829, p < 0.001), and worse parental relationship (F = 18.167, p < 0.001). The other detailed information can be found in Table 1.
In Table 2, the correlation coefficient matrix for PD, five-factor personality dimensions, and mental health was analyzed. The results supported that worse mental health was positively associated with higher neuroticism (r = 0.498, p < 0.001), lower conscientiousness (r = −0.069, p < 0.001), and lower openness (r = −0.079, p < 0.001). However, mental health was not supported to be associated with agreeableness (r = 0.027, p > 0.05) and extraversion (r = 0.002, p > 0.05). The associations between parental parenting styles differences and mental health were also supported (r = 0.146, p < 0.001) in this study. The detailed information for the bivariate correlations are shown in Table 2.
Linear regressions were also conducted to analyze the factors associated with mental health among medical university students. In model 1, the factors associated with worse mental health were older age (β = 0.48, p < 0.001), not Hans ethnicity (β = −1.49, p < 0.05), physical disease (β = 3.37, p < 0.001), good economic status (β = −0.96, p < 0.01), good parental relationship (β = −1.38, p < 0.001), and PD (β = 0.15, p < 0.001). In Model 2, we further added five-factor personality dimensions into the regression, and the results showed that worse mental health was positively associated with male (β = 0.73, p < 0.01), older age (β = 0.45, p < 0.001), physical disease (β = 2.34, p < 0.001), bad parental relationship (β = −0.37, p < 0.05), larger PD (β = 0.15, p < 0.001), higher neuroticism (β = 0.61, p < 0.001), lower conscientiousness (β = −0.11, p < 0.001), lower agreeableness (β = −0.10, p < 0.01), and lower openness (β = −0.05, p < 0.05). The detailed information is shown in Table 3.
To build the mediating effect of five-factor personality dimensions, linear regressions were also conducted to analyze the association between PD and five-factor personality dimensions. The results showed that larger PD was associated with lower conscientiousness (β = −0.15, p < 0.01), lower agreeableness (β = −0.09, p < 0.001), lower openness (β = −0.15, p < 0.001), and lower extraversion (β = −0.08, p < 0.001), respectively. The detailed results for the linear regression are listed in Table 4.
The mediating effect of five-factor dimensions on the association between PD and mental health is shown in Figure 2. As the results did not support the associations between extraversion and mental health (β = −0.02, p > 0.05 in Table 3), nor the association between PD and neuroticism (β = 0.02, p > 0.05 in Table 4), the mediating effects of conscientiousness, agreeableness, and openness were explored in this study. The results supported that agreeableness and openness could, respectively, mediate the association between PD and mental health. The detailed information can be found in Figure 2.

4. Discussion

There were several critical findings for this study. The first one was that worse mental health was positively associated with larger PD, higher neuroticism, lower conscientiousness, lower agreeableness, and lower openness. The second one was that larger PD was associated with conscientiousness, agreeableness, openness, and extraversion. The final finding was that conscientiousness or agreeableness could mediate the relationships between PD and mental health.
In this study, the first finding was about the association between mental health, PD, and personality. The results supported that mental health was associated with PD, neuroticism, conscientiousness, agreeableness, and openness. These associations were not unexpected. The association between PD and mental health is supported by previous studies [16,17]. The reason can be explained by the theory of cognitive dissonance [11], as we explained in the Introduction section. Indeed, these associations were also supported by previous studies [41,42]. However, extraversion was not associated with mental health. A previous longitudinal study found that extraversion played roles on mental health through neuroticism [43]. After controlling neuroticism, the association between extraversion and mental health may disappear.
One of the main aims for this study was to test the associations between PD and five-factor personality dimensions. The results supported that PD was negatively associated with conscientiousness, agreeableness, openness, and extraversion. Indeed, the associations between personality and PD was not surprising. The associations between parenting style and personality had been identified in many previous studies [5,44,45]. The reasons could be explained by the theory of cognitive dissonance [46], as we introduced in the Introduction section. As we know, the parenting style was associated with their father and mother. Because of this, we can further suppose the different parenting styles between mother and father may be associated with personality. The identified associations between parenting styles and borderline personality disorder also could imply the associations [47].
Our results did not support the association between PD and neuroticism, although previous studies had found that mental health was associated with both PD and neuroticism [16,48,49]. As we know, the building of neuroticism traits was a gradual process. Parenting styles mainly play more roles on neuroticism in the early stage of life [50,51], and the association between parenting style and neuroticism would be weaker in later life. Although neuroticism is characterized by psychological problems [19], the associations between neuroticism and mental health may strengthen in later life. A longitudinal study found that higher neuroticism was associated with more negative daily experiences [52], and another study also supported that negative daily experiences were associated with mental health [53]. As we know, negative daily experiences happen in everyone’s lives. The more one lives, the more negative daily experiences one has. This may further explain why neuroticism was associated with mental health, but PD was not associated with the neuroticism trait.
The other important aim was to explore the mediating effect of five-factor personality dimensions on the association between PD and mental health. Based on the previous findings in this study, the mediating effects of conscientiousness, agreeableness, and openness were tested, and the results supported that agreeableness and openness could mediate the association between PD and mental health. Considering the stability of personality across time and situation to people [21], we can further assume the stable effect of PD on agreeableness, openness, and mental health.
This study also supported that worse mental health was positively related to being male, older age, physical disease, and bad parental relationship. As all these factors had been identified in many previous studies [54,55]; these factors were not discussed here. This study also supported that males scored lower in all the five-factor personality dimensions than females. Previous studies had proved that girls matured more quickly than boys in the various personality dimensions [56]. The age differences in five-factor personality dimensions were also reported in previous studies [57]. The relationships between parental relationship and family environment were also supported in previous study [58].
Some limitations should be considered when these findings are interpreted. Firstly, as a cross-sectional design, the causal relationships among these factors should be cautious. Secondly, all of variables were self-reported, and the recall bias cannot be avoided in this study. Finally, the data were from the medical university students, and the consistency of our findings in other populations should be tested.
Keeping these limitations in mind, there were several critical findings in this study. Firstly, our results further supported that mental health was associated with PD, neuroticism, conscientiousness, agreeableness, and openness. Secondly, PD was associated with conscientiousness, agreeableness, openness, and extraversion. Finally, the mediating effect of agreeableness or openness on the associations between PD and mental health was also supported in this study. These findings remind us of the importance of consistent parenting styles between mother and father, and they also can be translated into practices to improve mental health among medical university students. The further studies could test the mediating effect of personality on the relationships between PD and mental health based on a longitudinal design.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, L.S.; investigation, M.X.; writing—original draft preparation, S.Y.; writing—review and editing, M.X. and L.S.; project administration, L.S.; All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (71974114).

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Institutional Review Board of Shandong University School of Public Health (protocol code 20181210 and 10/10/2018).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Neel, M.L.M.; Stark, A.R.; Maitre, N.L. Parenting style impacts cognitive and behavioural outcomes of former preterm infants: A systematic review. Child Care Health Dev. 2018, 44, 507–515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Liu, C.; Rahman, M.N.A. Relationships between parenting style and sibling conflicts: A meta-analysis. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 936253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Leuba, A.L.; Meyer, A.H.; Kakebeeke, T.H.; Stulb, K.; Arhab, A.; Zysset, A.E.; Leeger-Aschmann, C.S.; Schmutz, E.A.; Kriemler, S.; Jenni, O.G.; et al. The relationship of parenting style and eating behavior in preschool children. BMC Psychol. 2022, 10, 275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Rakhshani, T.; Hamid, S.; Kamyab, A.; Kashfi, S.M.; Khani Jeihooni, A. The effect of parenting style on anxiety and depression in adolescent girls aged 12-16 years. Heliyon 2022, 8, e11478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Ge, M.; Sun, X.; Huang, Z. Correlation between Parenting Style by Personality Traits and Mental Health of College Students. Occup. Ther. Int. 2022, 2022, 6990151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Abidin, F.A.; Yudiana, W.; Fadilah, S.H. Parenting Style and Emotional Well-Being Among Adolescents: The Role of Basic Psychological Needs Satisfaction and Frustration. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 901646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Shaygan, M.; Bostanian, P.; Zarmehr, M.; Hassanipour, H.; Mollaie, M. Understanding the relationship between parenting style and chronic pain in adolescents: A structural equation modelling approach. BMC Psychol. 2021, 9, 201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Yee, A.Z.H. Examining the Moderating Effect of Parenting Style and Parental Guidance on Children’s Beliefs about Food: A Test of the Parenting Style-as-Context Model. J. Health Commun. 2021, 26, 553–565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Hassan, M.; Malik, A.S.; Sang, G.; Rizwan, M.; Mushtaque, I.; Naveed, S. Examine the parenting style effect on the academic achievement orientation of secondary school students: The moderating role of digital literacy. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 1063682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Asanjarani, F.; Aghaei, K.; Fazaeli, T.; Vaezi, A.; Szczygiel, M. A Structural Equation Modeling of the Relationships Between Parenting Styles, Students’ Personality Traits, and Students’ Achievement Goal Orientation. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 805308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Festinger, L. A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance; Stanford University Press: Stanford, CA, USA, 1957. [Google Scholar]
  12. Sadeghi, S.; Ayoubi, S.; Brand, S. Parenting Styles Predict Future-Oriented Cognition in Children: A Cross-Sectional Study. Children 2022, 9, 1589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Yang, Q.; Yang, J.; Zheng, L.; Song, W.; Yi, L. Impact of Home Parenting Environment on Cognitive and Psychomotor Development in Children under 5 Years Old: A Meta-Analysis. Front. Pediatr. 2021, 9, 658094. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Nakao, M.; Shirotsuki, K.; Sugaya, N. Cognitive-behavioral therapy for management of mental health and stress-related disorders: Recent advances in techniques and technologies. Biopsychosoc. Med. 2021, 15, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Lorentzen, V.; Fagermo, K.; Handegard, B.H.; Skre, I.; Neumer, S.P. A randomized controlled trial of a six-session cognitive behavioral treatment of emotional disorders in adolescents 14–17 years old in child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS). BMC Psychol. 2020, 8, 25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Ding, G.; Xu, L.; Sun, L. Association between Parental Parenting Style Disparities and Mental Health: An Evidence from Chinese Medical College Students. Front. Public Health 2022, 10, 841140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Gui, Z.; Ren, X.; Li, X.; Zhou, C.; Sun, L. Parents parenting styles differences were associated with lifetime suicidal ideation: Evidences from the Chinese medical college students. J. Health Psychol. 2022, 27, 2420–2434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Barańczuk, U. The five factor model of personality and emotion regulation: A meta-analysis. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2019, 139, 217–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. McCrae, R.R.; John, O.P. An introduction to the five-factor model and its applications. J. Pers. 1992, 60, 175–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. McCrae, R.R.; Costa, P.T., Jr. Personality Trait Structure as a Human Universal. Am. Psychol. 1997, 52, 509–516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Gregory, R. Psychological Testing: History, Principles, and Applications, 6th ed.; Allyn and Bacon: Boston, MA, USA, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  22. Nelson, D.A.; Coyne, S.M.; Swanson, S.M.; Hart, C.H.; Olsen, J.A. Parenting, relational aggression, and borderline personality features: Associations over time in a Russian longitudinal sample. Dev. Psychopathol. 2014, 26, 773–787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Mabbe, E.; Vansteenkiste, M.; Brenning, K.; De Pauw, S.; Beyers, W.; Soenens, B. The moderating role of adolescent personality in associations between psychologically controlling parenting and problem behaviors: A longitudinal examination at the level of within-person change. Dev. Psychol. 2019, 55, 2665–2677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Berle, D.; Starcevic, V.; Milicevic, D.; Moses, K.; Hannan, A.; Sammut, P.; Brakoulias, V. The factor structure of the Kessler-10 questionnaire in a treatment-seeking sample. J. Nerv. Ment. Dis. 2010, 198, 660–664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Spies, G.; Stein, D.J.; Roos, A.; Faure, S.C.; Mostert, J.; Seedat, S.; Vythilingum, B. Validity of the Kessler 10 (K-10) in detecting DSM-IV defined mood and anxiety disorders among pregnant women. Arch. Womens Ment. Health 2009, 12, 69–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Furukawa, T.A.; Kessler, R.C.; Slade, T.; Andrews, G. The performance of the K6 and K10 screening scales for psychological distress in the Australian National Survey of Mental Health and Well-Being. Psychol. Med. 2003, 33, 357–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Hides, L.; Lubman, D.I.; Devlin, H.; Cotton, S.; Aitken, C.; Gibbie, T.; Hellard, M. Reliability and validity of the Kessler 10 and Patient Health Questionnaire among injecting drug users. Aust. N. Z. J. Psychiatry 2007, 41, 166–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Uddin, M.N.; Islam, F.M.A.; Al Mahmud, A. Psychometric evaluation of an interview-administered version of the Kessler 10-item questionnaire (K10) for measuring psychological distress in rural Bangladesh. BMJ Open 2018, 8, e022967. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Anderson, T.M.; Sunderland, M.; Andrews, G.; Titov, N.; Dear, B.F.; Sachdev, P.S. The 10-item Kessler psychological distress scale (K10) as a screening instrument in older individuals. Am. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry 2013, 21, 596–606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Bu, X.Q.; You, L.M.; Li, Y.; Liu, K.; Zheng, J.; Yan, T.B.; Chen, S.X.; Zhang, L.F. Psychometric Properties of the Kessler 10 Scale in Chinese Parents of Children with Cancer. Cancer Nurs. 2017, 40, 297–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Zhou, C.; Chu, J.; Wang, T.; Peng, Q.; He, J.; Zheng, W.; Liu, D.; Wang, X.; Ma, H.; Xu, L. Reliability and Validity of 10-item Kessler Scale (K10) Chinese Version in Evaluation of Mental Health Status of Chinese Population. Chin. J. Clin. Psychol. 2008, 16, 627–629. [Google Scholar]
  32. Wang, M.; DAI, X.; Yao, S. Development of the Chinese Big Five Personality Inventory(CBF-PI) Ⅲ:Psychometric Properties of CBF-PI Brief Version. Chin. J. Clin. Psychol. 2011, 19, 454–457. [Google Scholar]
  33. McCrae, R.R.; Costa, P. NEO Inventories for the NEO Personality Inventory-3 (NEO-PI-3), NEO Five-Factor Inventory-3 (NEO-FFI-3), NEO Personality Inventory-Revised (NEO-PI-R): Professional Manual; Psychological Assessment Resources: Lutz, FL, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  34. Xu, Y.; Cai, H.M.; Yang, W.T.; Li, W.P.; Song, B.; Jiang, C.; Zhang, Z.Z.; Chen, Z.; Li, Y.H.; Zhang, H.Z. Effect of personality traits on rehabilitation effect after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: An observational study. Ann. Phys. Rehabil. Med. 2022, 65, 101570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Tie, B.; Liu, X.; Yin, M.; Humphris, G.; Zhang, Y.; Liu, H.; Zhao, Y.; Wang, Q. How physicians respond to negative emotions in high-risk preoperative conversations. Patient Educ. Couns. 2022, 105, 606–614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Liao, Z.; Huang, Q.; Huang, S.; Tan, L.; Shao, T.; Fang, T.; Chen, X.; Lin, S.; Qi, J.; Cai, Y.; et al. Prevalence of Internet Gaming Disorder and Its Association With Personality Traits and Gaming Characteristics Among Chinese Adolescent Gamers. Front. Psychiatry 2020, 11, 598585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Arrindell, W.A.; Richter, J.; Eisemann, M.; Garling, T.; Ryden, O.; Hansson, S.B.; Kasielke, E.; Frindte, W.; Gillholm, R.; Gustafsson, M. The short-EMBU in East-Germany and Sweden: A cross-national factorial validity extension. Scand. J. Psychol. 2001, 42, 157–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Mathieu, S.L.; Conlon, E.G.; Waters, A.M.; Farrell, L.J. Perceived Parental Rearing in Paediatric Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: Examining the Factor Structure of the EMBU Child and Parent Versions and Associations with OCD Symptoms. Child Psychiatry Hum. Dev. 2020, 51, 956–968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Segnini, A.; Posadas, A.; da Silva, W.T.L.; Milori, D.; Gavilan, C.; Claessens, L.; Quiroz, R. Quantifying soil carbon stocks and humification through spectroscopic methods: A scoping assessment in EMBU-Kenya. J. Environ. Manag. 2019, 234, 476–483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Hayes, A.F.; Rockwood, N.J. Conditional process analysis: Concepts, computation, and advances in the modeling of the contingencies of mechanisms. Am. Behav. Sci. 2019, 64, 19–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Mann, F.D.; Atherton, O.E.; DeYoung, C.G.; Krueger, R.F.; Robins, R.W. Big five personality traits and common mental disorders within a hierarchical taxonomy of psychopathology: A longitudinal study of Mexican-origin youth. J. Abnorm. Psychol. 2020, 129, 769–787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Atari, M.; Yaghoubirad, M. The Big Five personality dimensions and mental health: The mediating role of alexithymia. Asian J. Psychiatr. 2016, 24, 59–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Klinger-Konig, J.; Hertel, J.; Terock, J.; Volzke, H.; Van der Auwera, S.; Grabe, H.J. Predicting physical and mental health symptoms: Additive and interactive effects of difficulty identifying feelings, neuroticism and extraversion. J. Psychosom. Res. 2018, 115, 14–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Sahithya, B.R.; Raman, V. Parenting Style, Parental Personality, and Child Temperament in Children with Anxiety Disorders-A Clinical Study from India. Indian J. Psychol. Med. 2021, 43, 382–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Otani, K.; Suzuki, A.; Oshino, S.; Ishii, G.; Matsumoto, Y. Effects of the “affectionless control” parenting style on personality traits in healthy subjects. Psychiatry Res. 2009, 165, 181–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Draycott, S.; Dabbs, A. Cognitive dissonance 1: An overview of the literature and its integration into theory and practice in clinical psychology. Br. J. Clin. Psychol. 1998, 37, 341–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Kaur, M.; Sanches, M. Parenting Role in the Development of Borderline Personality Disorder. Psychopathology 2023, 56, 109–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Tao, Y.; Ma, Z.; Hou, W.; Zhu, Y.; Zhang, L.; Li, C.; Shi, C. Neuroticism Trait and Mental Health among Chinese Firefighters: The Moderating Role of Perceived Organizational Support and the Mediating Role of Burnout-A Path Analysis. Front. Public Health 2022, 10, 870772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Zhang, F.; Baranova, A.; Zhou, C.; Cao, H.; Chen, J.; Zhang, X.; Xu, M. Causal influences of neuroticism on mental health and cardiovascular disease. Hum. Genet. 2021, 140, 1267–1281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Parker, G.; Roy, K.; Wilhelm, K.; Mitchell, P.; Austin, M.-P.; Hadzi-Pavlovic, D. An exploration of links between early parenting experiences and personality disorder type and disordered personality functioning. J. Personal. Disord. 2011, 13, 361–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Stravynski, A.; Elie, R.; Franche, R.L. Perception of early parenting by patients diagnosed avoidant personality disorder: A test of the overprotection hypothesis. Acta Psychiatr. Scand. 1989, 80, 415–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Borghuis, J.; Bleidorn, W.; Sijtsma, K.; Branje, S.; Meeus, W.H.J.; Denissen, J.J.A. Longitudinal associations between trait neuroticism and negative daily experiences in adolescence. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 2020, 118, 348–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Morris, A.S.; Hays-Grudo, J. Protective and compensatory childhood experiences and their impact on adult mental health. World Psychiatry 2023, 22, 150–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Gui, Z.; Sun, L.; Zhou, C. Self-reported sleep quality and mental health mediate the relationship between chronic diseases and suicidal ideation among Chinese medical students. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 18835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Li, C.; Wei, Z.; Wang, Y.; Sun, L. Associations between Suicidal Ideation and Relatives’ Physical and Mental Health among Community Residents: Differences between Family Members and Lineal Consanguinity. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 5997. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Limura, S.; Taku, K. Gender Differences in Relationship Between Resilience and Big Five Personality Traits in Japanese Adolescents. Psychol. Rep. 2018, 121, 920–931. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Chan, W.; McCrae, R.R.; De Fruyt, F.; Jussim, L.; Lockenhoff, C.E.; De Bolle, M.; Costa, P.T.; Sutin, A.R.; Realo, A.; Allik, J.; et al. Stereotypes of age differences in personality traits: Universal and accurate? J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2012, 103, 1050–1066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  58. Nakao, K.; Takaishi, J.; Tatsuta, K.; Katayama, H.; Iwase, M.; Yorifuji, K.; Takeda, M. The influences of family environment on personality traits. Psychiatry Clin. Neurosci. 2000, 54, 91–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Ijerph 20 04908 g001 550
Figure 1. Hypothesis model. Note: PD denotes total differences for parental parenting styles.
Figure 1. Hypothesis model. Note: PD denotes total differences for parental parenting styles.
Ijerph 20 04908 g001
Ijerph 20 04908 g002 550
Figure 2. Mediating effect of big five personality dimensions on the associations between PD and mental health. Note: PD denotes total differences for parental parenting styles. * refers to p < 0.05; ** refers to p < 0.01; *** refers to p < 0.001.
Figure 2. Mediating effect of big five personality dimensions on the associations between PD and mental health. Note: PD denotes total differences for parental parenting styles. * refers to p < 0.05; ** refers to p < 0.01; *** refers to p < 0.001.
Ijerph 20 04908 g002
Table
Table 1. Sample description and single analyses for the factors associated with mental health.
Table 1. Sample description and single analyses for the factors associated with mental health.
VariablesMean ± SD/n (%)Mental Health
(Mean ± SD)		t/r/F
Total2583 (100.0)19.14 ± 6.65--
Gender t = 0.961
   Male1151 (44.6)19.28 ± 6.98
   Female1432 (55.4)19.03 ± 6.37
Age20.22 ± 1.2719.14 ± 6.65r = 0.104 ***
Ethnicity t = −2.116 *
   Hans2504 (95.9)19.09 ± 6.61
   Others79 (3.1)20.70 ± 7.69
Physical disease t = 6.034 ***
   Yes113 (4.4)22.81 ± 7.06
   No2470 (95.6)18.97 ± 6.58
Economic status F = 11.829 ***
   Good520 (20.1)18.18 ± 6.81
   Average1786 (69.1)19.20 ± 6.54
   Bad277 (10.7)20.56 ± 6.78
Only child t = −1.270
   Yes1190 (46.1)18.96 ± 6.88
   No1393 (53.9)19.29 ± 6.44
Parental relationship F = 18.167 ***
   Good2170 (84.0)18.80 ± 6.51
   Normal336 (13.0)20.79 ± 6.83
   Bad77 (3.0)21.48 ± 8.10
Father’s education F = 2.238
   Junior high school or below1312 (50.8)19.41 ± 6.32
   Junior college/senior school887 (34.3)18.85 ± 6.86
   Bachelor degree or above384 (14.9)18.88 ± 7.20
Mother’s education F = 2.171
   Junior high school or below1562 (60.5)19.33 ± 6.52
   Junior college/senior school720 (27.9)18.98 ± 6.70
   Bachelor degree or above301 (11.7)18.52 ± 7.14
Note: SD denotes standard deviation. * refers to p < 0.05; *** refers to p < 0.001. The values of t are calculated from Student’s t test. The values of F are calculated from analysis of variance. The values of r are calculated from bivariate correlation.
Table
Table 2. Correlation coefficient matrix for parenting style differences, big five personality dimensions, and mental health (n = 2583).
Table 2. Correlation coefficient matrix for parenting style differences, big five personality dimensions, and mental health (n = 2583).
Mean ± SD1.11.21.31.41.52
1. Big five personality dimensions
1.1 Neuroticism23.65 ± 6.411
1.2 Conscientiousness29.28 ± 6.850.308 ***1
1.3 Agreeableness28.09 ± 5.800.444 ***0.668 ***1
1.4 Openness30.10 ± 7.470.261 ***0.706 ***0.648 ***1
1.5 Extraversion27.63 ± 6.110.368 ***0.679 ***0.627 ***0.763 ***1
2. Mental health19.14 ± 6.650.498 ***−0.069 ***0.027−0.079 ***0.0021
3. PD4.33 ± 5.970.013−0.160 ***−0.116 ***−0.134 ***−0.090 ***0.146 ***
Note: PD denotes total differences for parental parenting styles. SD denotes standard deviation. *** refers to p < 0.001.
Table
Table 3. Linear regression for the factors associated with mental health (β (95% CI)).
Table 3. Linear regression for the factors associated with mental health (β (95% CI)).
Model 1Model 2
n25832583
Male0.31 (−0.22, 0.84)0.73 (0.29, 1.18) **
Age0.48 (0.29, 0.68) ***0.45 (0.28, 0.62) ***
Hans ethnicity−1.49 (−2.94, −0.03) *−1.08 (−2.30, 0.14)
Physical disease3.37 (2.14, 4.60) ***2.34 (1.30, 3.37) ***
Economic status (Ref. = Average)
   Good−0.96 (−1.63, −0.29) **−0.56 (−1.12, 0.01)
   Bad0.42 (−0.43, 1.27)0.10 (−0.62, 0.81)
Only child−0.46 (−1.03, 0.10)−0.42 (−0.89, 0.05)
Parental relationship (Ref. = Normal)
   Good−1.38 (−2.14, −0.61) ***−0.73 (−1.37, −0.08) *
   Bad0.30 (−1.32, 1.91)−0.47 (−1.83, 0.89)
Father’s education (Ref. = Junior high school or below)
   Junior college/senior school−0.23 (−0.86, 0.40)−0.07 (−0.60, 0.46)
   Bachelor degree or above0.32 (−0.72, 1.36)0.51 (−0.36, 1.38)
Mother’s education (Ref. = Junior high school or below)
   Junior college/senior school0.15 (−0.53, 0.82)0.26 (−0.31, 0.83)
   Bachelor degree or above−0.39 (−1.51, 0.73)−0.38 (−1.32, 0.55)
PD0.15 (0.10, 0.19) ***0.10 (0.06, 0.14) ***
Neuroticism--0.61 (0.57, 0.65) ***
Conscientiousness--−0.11 (−0.16, −0.06) ***
Agreeableness--−0.10 (−0.15, −0.04) **
Openness--−0.05 (−0.10, −0.002) *
Extraversion--−0.02 (−0.08, 0.04)
Constant11.41 (7.08, 15.75) ***4.78 (0.90, 8.66) *
R20.0600.343
Note: CI denotes the confidence interval. PD denotes total differences for parental parenting styles. * refers to p < 0.05; ** refers to p < 0.01; *** refers to p < 0.001.
Table
Table 4. Linear regression for the factors associated with big five personality dimensions (β (95% CI)).
Table 4. Linear regression for the factors associated with big five personality dimensions (β (95% CI)).
NeuroticismConscientiousnessAgreeablenessOpennessExtraversion
n25832583258325832583
Male−1.15 (−1.67, −0.63) ***−0.85 (−1.40, −0.30) **−1.34 (−1.80, −0.88) ***−0.80 (−1.40, −0.20) **−0.69 (−1.19, −0.20) **
Age−0.06 (−0.26, 0.13)−0.15 (−0.36, 0.06)−0.28 (−0.45, −0.10) **−0.45 (−0.68, −0.23) ***−0.29 (−0.47, −0.10) **
Hans ethnicity−0.28 (−1.71, 1.16)1.08 (−0.43, 2.60)0.87 (−0.42, 2.15)0.62 (−1.04, 2.28)0.11 (−1.25, 1.48)
Physical disease1.57 (0.37, 2.78) **−0.47 (−1.75, 0.80)−0.62 (−1.70, 0.46)0.68 (−0.71, 2.08)0.11 (−1.04, 1.26)
Economic status (Ref. = Average)
   Good−1.09 (−1.75, −0.43) **−0.92 (−1.61, −0.22) **−1.19 (−1.78, −0.60) ***−0.69 (−1.45, 0.07)−0.38 (−1.01, 0.25)
   Bad0.26 (−0.58, 1.09)−0.78 (−1.67, 0.10)−0.40 (−1.15, 0.35)−0.56 (−1.53, 0.41)−0.48 (−1.28, 0.32)
Only child−0.22 (−0.78, 0.33)−0.62 (−1.21, −0.03) *−0.23 (−0.73, 0.27)−0.03 (−0.67, 0.61)−0.08 (−0.61, 0.45)
Parental relationship (Ref. = Normal)
   Good−0.53 (−1.28, 0.22)1.60 (0.80, 2.39) ***0.80 (0.12, 1.47) *0.99 (0.12, 1.87) *0.98 (0.26, 1.70) **
   Bad1.60 (0.01, 3.19) *1.41 (−0.27, 3.09)0.51 (−0.91, 1.94)−0.09 (−1.92, 1.75)0.44 (−1.08, 1.95)
Father’s education (Ref. = Junior high school or below)
   Junior college/senior school−0.16 (−0.79, 0.46)0.24 (−0.42, 0.89)0.02 (−0.53, 0.58)0.61 (−0.11, 1.33)0.18 (−0.42, 0.77)
   Bachelor degree or above−0.28 (−1.30, 0.75)0.04 (−1.04, 1.12)0.05 (−0.86, 0.97)0.25 (−0.93, 1.43)−0.05 (−1.02, 0.92)
Mother’s education (Ref. = Junior high school or below)
   Junior college/senior school−0.04 (−0.70, 0.63)0.29 (−0.42, 0.99)0.11 (−0.49, 0.71)0.69 (−0.09, 1.46)0.62 (−0.02, 1.25)
   Bachelor degree or above0.20 (−0.90, 1.29)0.56 (−0.60, 1.72)0.06 (−0.93, 1.04)0.96 (−0.31, 2.22)0.54 (−0.51, 1.59)
PD0.02 (−0.02, 0.06)−0.15 (−0.20, −0.11) ***−0.09 (−0.12, −0.05) ***−0.15 (−0.20, −0.10) ***−0.08 (−0.12, −0.04) ***
Constant26.32 (22.06, 30.58) ***31.22 (26.72, 35.73) ***33.51 (29.69, 37.32) ***38.49 (33.57, 43.42) ***32.96 (28.90, 37.02) ***
R20.0250.0440.0410.0370.022
Note: CI denotes to confidence interval. PD denotes total differences for parental parenting styles. * refers to p < 0.05; ** refers to p < 0.01; *** refers to p < 0.001.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Yao, S.; Xu, M.; Sun, L. Five-Factor Personality Dimensions Mediated the Relationship between Parents’ Parenting Style Differences and Mental Health among Medical University Students. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 4908. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20064908

AMA Style

Yao S, Xu M, Sun L. Five-Factor Personality Dimensions Mediated the Relationship between Parents’ Parenting Style Differences and Mental Health among Medical University Students. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2023; 20(6):4908. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20064908

Chicago/Turabian Style

Yao, Shuxin, Meixia Xu, and Long Sun. 2023. "Five-Factor Personality Dimensions Mediated the Relationship between Parents’ Parenting Style Differences and Mental Health among Medical University Students" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 20, no. 6: 4908. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20064908

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop