Approaching the evaluation of parental involvement through the lens of engagement or interest in their children’s education, we observe that three studies have utilized the Parents’ Involvement in Children’s Learning Scale developed by Cheung and Pomerantz (2011; see also Chen & Mok, 2023; Li et al., 2020; Xu et al., 2020). This scale measures various facets of parental involvement, including a personal dimension that encompasses emotional support and a display of interest in the child’s educational pursuits, the cognitive dimension, which gauges direct assistance with homework, and the behavioral dimension, which assesses aspects linked to overseeing academic progress. Song et al. (2015) also gauge perceived parental support, albeit employing the metrics gathered in the statewide KELS Study 2005 (Kim et al., 2007).

Similarly, Lerner and Grolnick (2020) used Grolnick and Slowiaczek’s (1994) Maternal Involvement Scale to assess three types of maternal involvement: school, personal, and intellectual/cognitive involvement. Also with a triadic division, Rodríguez et al. (2017) assessed perceived parental involvement using the Family Involvement Questionnaire (González-Pienda & Núñez, 1994). This scale also proposes the evaluation of involvement starting from three dimensions: one related to the interest in children’s progress, another that measures parental help in academic tasks, and the last one related to parental expectations.

We also found studies that developed new scales to measure parental school involvement and academic socialization, building on the research of Cheung and Pomerantz (2011) and Wu and Yao (2013). On the one hand, Wei et al. (2022) measured academic socialization as the frequency with which parents discuss the importance of education, learning strategies, and other school-related topics with their children. On the other hand, Zong et al. (2018) assessed it as children’s perception of whether their parents discuss their educational future, provide valuable advice, or explicitly express academic expectations for them.

Other instruments to measure academic socialization are those used by Cimon-Paquet et al. (2023), who used a scale that specifically measures the frequency with which parents spend time with their children discussing and inquiring about their unsupervised time (Stattin & Kerr, 2000); Suizzo et al. (2023), who employed the Parental Academic Socialization Questionnaire-Child scale (PASQ-C; Suizzo et al., 2012); or that utilized by Wehrspann et al. (2016), which in addition to assessing homework help, also employed several items adapted from Murdock’s (1999) Economic Value of Education scale. This scale served as a measure of academic socialization by assessing the degree to which parents communicate the value or utility of education to their children.

When studying parental involvement through parenting practices, various studies (Diaconu-Gherasim et al., 2022; Diaconu-Gherasim & Mirean, 2016; Martins et al., 2020) have assessed parenting dimensions using different translated and adapted versions of the Children’s Report of Parental Inventory (CRPBI). This inventory was originally developed by Schaefer (1965) and later refined and validated by Schludermann and Schludermann (1970). The original 52-item instrument is based on a three-dimensional model with three pairs of orthogonal factors: Acceptance vs. Rejection, Psychological Autonomy vs. Psychological Control, and Firm Control vs. Lax Control.

In this review, we also found studies where only the Autonomy vs. Control dimension was assessed through individual instruments to measure parental autonomy and control. Autonomy, for example, was assessed in several studies (Li et al., 2020; Xu et al., 2018; Zhou et al., 2023; Zong et al., 2018) through a selection of items used in previous research, such as that of Wang et al. (2007), which in turn is based on other previous studies (McPartland & Epstein 1977; Steinberg et al., 1992). The items selected in turn conformed to two dimensions: decision making and opinion exchange.

Other measures of parental autonomy support present in this review were Cheung and Pomerantz’s (2011) 12-item measure employed by Xiang et al. (2017), in which participants indicated the extent to which their parents use autonomy-supportive practices, and the 8-item dimension of autonomy support from the Parenting Context Questionnaire (Wellborn & Grolnick, 1988) employed by Lerner and Grolnick (2020) to assess children’s perceptions of their mothers’ autonomy support.

Meanwhile, Lerner et al. (2022) utilized a combined assessment of autonomy-supportive and controlling parenting dimensions. In particular, they developed a questionnaire to assess the degree to which involvement supported or controlled autonomy. In line with this study, Shi et al. (2024) adapted measures established by several previous studies (Dumont et al., 2014; Moroni et al., 2015; Silinskas & Kikas, 2019). These authors assessed mothers’ autonomy support in terms of allowing or encouraging children to take the initiative to learn and solve task problems independently, as well as assessing mothers’ control in terms of exerting pressure and intrusiveness to achieve certain outcomes. Tunkkari et al. (2024) used a short version of the Learning Climate Questionnaire (Black & Deci, 2000) to measure both aspects.

Regarding the assessment of parental control, several studies have used different scales to measure this construct. Zong et al. (2018), Xiang et al. (2017), and Xu et al. (2018) used the Parental Psychological Control scale developed by Wang et al. (2007), based on previous measures (Barber, 1996; Silk et al., 2003). This scale consists of 18 items distributed in three subscales: Guilt Induction, Deprivation of Love, and Affirmation of Authority. On the other hand, Shih (2021) used Shek’s (2006) Parental Psychological Control Scale, which includes 10 items to assess children’s perception of parental control. In addition, Cimon-Paquet et al. (2023) used a French version of the Parental Control Subscale by Stattin and Kerr (2000) in their research. These different measures provide a varied view of perceived parental control in the family context.

We found a limited number of studies that explore the role of parenting styles. Two of these studies utilized Baumrind’s (1971) conceptual typology. On the one hand, Suarez-Valenzuela and Suarez (2022) identified three parenting styles: democratic, authoritarian, and permissive, using the revised version of Buri’s (1991) Parental Authority Questionnaire (PAQ). Meanwhile, Kosterelioglu (2018) used the Parents Attitude Scale (PAS) (Demir & endil, 2008), incorporating four parenting styles: democratic, authoritarian, overprotective, and permissive. Finally, León-del-Barco et al. (2019) utilized the Norms and Demands Scale child version (ENE-H) (Fuentes et al., 1999) to assess parenting styles from a more behavioral and home rules organization perspective. This scale assesses how parents establish and demand compliance with their rules, and consists of three factors: inductive, rigid, and lenient forms.

From this global perspective, León-del-Barco et al. (2019) measured goal orientation with the Academic Goals Questionnaire (AGC). This 5-point Likert scale comprises 20 items designed to examine the reasons for students’ commitment to their studies. It is based on previous work by Hayamizu et al. (1989) and Hayamizu and Weiner (1991) and adapted to Spanish by González Gómez et al. (2002). It assesses four key motivational factors: external, introjected, identified, and intrinsic regulation. Cimon-Paquet et al. (2023) similarly explored autonomous and controlled motivation through the French version of the Academic Motivation Scale (AMS) (Vallerand et al., 1989).

Shi and Wang (2024) assessed autonomous versus controlled motivation using scales established by Katz et al. (2011), validated for Chinese elementary school students. On the other hand, Wehrspann et al. (2016) used separate scales to measure intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. However, Wei et al. (2022) explored beliefs about educational value using a questionnaire composed of 9 items from Mickelson’s (1990) Abstract Attitudes toward Education Scale.

From a self-regulatory perspective, Lerner and Grolnick (2020), Lerner et al. (2022), and Tunkkari et al. (2024) employed Ryan and Connell’s (1989) Self-Regulation Questionnaire. This scale consists of 23 items designed to measure the degree of autonomy in children’s school motivation, addressing four types of motivation: external, introjected, identified, and intrinsic regulation. These factors are similar to those identified by the Academic Goals Questionnaire (AGC).

We also noted a group of studies that approached the assessment of goal orientation from the 2 x 2 theoretical framework. This theory classifies achievement orientations into four categories: mastery-approach goals, performance-approach goals, mastery-avoidance goals, and performance-avoidance goals. These studies either addressed all four categories of the model, or focused on only three, two, or one of them.

Regardless of the number of goal orientation types assessed in each study, they used a large number of questionnaires to measure this construct. For example, six studies relied on Elliot and McGregor’s (2001) Achievement Goal Questionnaire (AGQ), which measures the four types of goal orientation (Diaconu-Gherasim & Mirean, 2016; Li et al., 2020; Shih, 2021; Song et al., 2015; Xiang et al., 2017; Zong et al., 2018).

Other authors employed Skaalvik’s (1997) Academic Goals Questionnaire (Martins et al., 2020; Suarez-Valenzuela & Suarez, 2022), while Kosterelioglu (2018) employed Akın’s (2006) 2 x 2 Achievement Goal Orientation Scale, also obtaining the four factors solution.

Studies such as Chen and Mok’s (2023), Suizzo et al.’s (2023), Xu et al.’s (2018), and Xu et al.’s (2020) measured goal orientation from a three-category structure using the Patterns of Adaptive Learning Scales (PALS) (Midgley et al., 2000). Diaconu-Gherasim et al. (2022) also employed this scale as well as a more general measure of intrinsic motivation using a brief version of the Intrinsic versus Extrinsic Orientation Scale (12 items; Harter, 1981).

As for Rodríguez et al. (2017), these authors used two subscales of the Inventory of Attitudes toward Mathematics (IAM) (Tapia & Marsh, 2004) to measure performance and mastery goal orientation in mathematics. Finally, Zhou et al. (2023) addressed the unit measure of mastery goal using two items from previous studies (Pomerantz et al., 2005).

One of the most common forms of parental involvement is participating in academic tasks at home. This type of parental involvement involves parents monitoring and helping their children with tasks at home (Rodríguez et al., 2017). These behaviors include checking homework (Wehrspann et al., 2016) and personally teaching children (Song et al., 2015).

The influence of parental involvement at home on students’ goal orientation has been extensively researched, yielding diverse findings. For instance, Rodríguez et al. (2017) identified a positive link between parental assistance with academic tasks and elementary school students’ orientation toward mathematics performance goals, but not toward mastery goals. On the other hand, Zong et al. (2018) reported positive associations between parental supervision of homework and the adoption of mastery, performance, and performance-avoidance goals in elementary school students. However, regression analysis results indicate that this form of parental involvement at home predicts the adoption of performance-approach goals when children perceive low psychological control from their parents. Conversely, homework support did not account for the adoption of mastery goals or performance-avoidance goals. In the case of secondary school students, perceived parental academic support was positively linked to mastery and performance-approach goal orientation, as observed by Song et al. (2015). Ultimately, academic support at home was found to be a significant predictor of higher mastery orientation, as well as higher performance-approach and performance-avoidance orientation in the long term.

Among the articles measuring parental homework support, several authors have taken as a dependent variable motivational orientation toward other types of goals that we find interesting to analyze in this review. Wehrspann et al. (2016), for example, observed that parental-reported homework support did not correlate with children’s intrinsic and extrinsic motives toward school. However, this type of parental involvement perceived by students did correlate positively with students’ intrinsic motivation. For their part, Wei et al. (2022) in a longitudinal study with students from elementary to high school and both their parents observed that the greater the family’s help with homework, the greater the autonomous motivation – intrinsic and identified motivations – of the children. In the case of controlled motivation – extrinsic and introjected motives –, the effect of parental supervision of homework did not reach significance. Finally, Lerner et al. (2022) took a relative autonomy index (RAI) – measured from scores of intrinsic, extrinsic, identified, and introjected motivational orientation – from a group of elementary school students. They found that higher levels of autonomy-supportive home involvement by parents reported by the children were related to higher autonomous motivation. However, there would be no significant correlations between mothers’ time spent supervising homework completion and children’s long-term controlled and autonomous motivation (Shi et al., 2024).

Other parental involvement actions in children’s education are showing interest in children’s progress and communicating with the school and/or teachers. Rodríguez et al. (2017)analyzed the relationship between interest in children’s progress and goal orientation, confirming that when children perceive their parent’s interest in their progress they would adopt mastery-approach goals. On the other hand, results from study showed that parental involvement in school – e.g., attending parent-teacher conferences – was positively associated with the adoption of mastery goals by a group of elementary school students.

Finally, Lerner and Grolnick (2020) measured both mothers’ involvement in school and interest in academic progress reported by mothers and children at the elementary education stage. Higher levels of mothers’ school exchange had a positive effect on children’s autonomous motivation (RAI). On the other hand, for mothers who also showed support for children’s autonomy, showing interest in their progress also had an impact on children’s autonomous motivation. Similarly, Lerner et al. (2022) found that parents showed higher levels of interest and involvement in school than in homework, finding a positive correlation between parental interest and children’s autonomous motivation.

Although we found only two studies using this measure of parental involvement, promoting learning at home is critical to developing children’s interest in learning. In this regard, Lerner and Grolnick (2020) explored the effect of parental cognitive/intellectual involvement – e.g., taking the child to the museum or buying books – on autonomous motivation in elementary school children. In this study, a main effect of mothers’ cognitive/intellectual involvement on children’s levels of autonomous motivation was found. In subsequent research, Lerner et al. (2022) found that parents showed higher levels of cognitive/intellectual autonomy-supportive involvement than in homework performance. Furthermore, they observed a positive correlation between this type of involvement and children’s autonomous motivation.

Parents have a set of qualities, skills, or behaviors, known as socialization goals, that they want their children to acquire to be competent (Darling & Steinberg, 1993). Zhou et al.’s study (2023) differentiated between parents’ self-development socialization goals – parents who want their adolescent children to be unique, autonomous, and assertive – and academic achievement socialization goals – parents who want adolescents to achieve academic success. The study found positive associations between parents’ self-development socialization goals and the adoption of mastery-oriented goals over time and identified the mediating role of parental autonomy support in this link. Parents with more socialization and self-development goals for their adolescent children were more likely to be autonomy-supportive, which predicted greater academic motivation one year later. In contrast, academic achievement socialization goals did not show this association.

In the study by Rodríguez et al. (2017), parental expectations are described as parents’ beliefs about their children’s abilities to cope with academic and non-academic situations. Specifically, parental expectations about children – perceived by elementary school students – positively and indirectly explained mastery and performance goal orientation through motivational variables. Thus, parental expectations were related to the utility value of mathematics. In turn, the utility value was correlated with achievement goals and with mastery goals in mathematics.

One measure of parental involvement that has not been explored in depth in relation to goal orientation, but is of particular interest, is academic socialization. This is understood as the frequency with which parents discuss the importance of education with their children (Wei et al., 2022).

In the study by Zong et al. (2018), parental academic socialization as perceived by elementary school children was found to be positively correlated with mastery, performance-approach, and performance-avoidance goals.

In contrast, the research by Wei et al. (2022) yielded similar results for high school students, but the effect of academic socialization on the autonomous motivation of elementary school students was not appreciated. Along the same lines, Cimon-Paquet et al. (2023) observed moderate positive correlations over time between children’s self-reported academic socialization and their autonomous and controlled motivation. In addition, bidirectional associations were found between autonomous motivation and adolescents’ perceived parental socialization.

The study by Wherspann et al. (2016) found a significant nonlinear association between adolescents’ perceived academic socialization and the adoption of intrinsic and extrinsic motives to learn. Specifically, the positive association between academic socialization and intrinsic motivation weakened at moderate levels of academic socialization and became negative at high levels of academic socialization. Conversely, there was no association between academic socialization and extrinsic motivation at low and moderate levels of academic socialization, but a strong positive association at high levels of academic socialization. These findings suggest that higher levels of communication about the value or usefulness of education do not always benefit children’s academic motivation.

Finally, Suizzo et al. (2023), with a sample of low-income adolescents, observed that their intrinsic future goals and current mastery goals mediated the relationships between parental messages about the importance of working hard to succeed in school and their academic achievement. Adolescents who reported hearing more messages from their parents about the importance of hard work, learning, and education reported higher future intrinsic goals.

There is growing evidence that perceived social support plays an influential role in various aspects of students’ adjustment in school (Izar-de-la-Fuente et al., 2023). This takes the form of perceived social support from parents, peers, and teachers. Studies have usually evaluated the support perceived by these three social agents as a unitary construct without distinguishing between the support provided by each of them in a differentiated manner. However, as Song et al. (2015) argue, support from a particular social agent may have more consequences than support from others in shaping motivation and performance during adolescence. Specifically, the reviewed articles focus on one particular component of social support: emotional support, understood as the belief that significant others respect us as individuals and attend to our feelings and needs, expressing empathy and concern for our well-being (see, e.g., Ahmed et al., 2010).

In in the study by Song et al. (2015), the emotional support offered by parents perceived by adolescents predicted the widest range of motivation and academic achievement indices. Specifically, parental emotional support was positively correlated with mastery and performance-approach goals. In the long run, it predicted stronger mastery and performance-approach goals than any other type of support. Also using a longitudinal perspective, but with elementary school students, Shi et al. (2024) found that mothers with constructive homework involvement – e.g., showing positive emotions – influenced children’s autonomous motivation with homework later on. In contrast, showing negative emotions would favor the adoption of a more controlled motivation.

Although most of the studies reviewed explore specific parental volitional and motivational actions, three articles took a unitary measure composed of different parental involvement behaviors that cannot be disaggregated, so we have chosen to describe these articles as a whole. Chen and Mok (2023) found that high school students’ perceptions of parental involvement at home and at school positively impact their adoption of mastery and performance-oriented goals. Xu et al. (2020) found that over time high school students’ perceived parental involvement and mastery goal orientation would decrease, while their orientation toward performance-approach goals would increase and their orientation toward performance-avoidance goals would remain stable. All in all, the level and changes in parental involvement would have significant effects on changes in mastery goal orientation, and not on performance goal orientations. Finally, Li et al. (2020) identified that high school students who report moderate parental involvement have higher levels of mastery and performance-approach goal orientation and lower levels of performance-avoidance goal orientation.

The results of different research studies coincide in pointing out the relationship between parental psychological control and children’s goal orientation. Thus, several studies indicated that parental psychological control was significantly positively related to children and adolescents’ performance-approach and avoidance goals (e.g., Martins et al., 2020; Xiang et al., 2017; Xu et al., 2018; Zong et al., 2018). In contrast, no relationship was appreciated between parental control and mastery-oriented goals. However, studies such as the one developed by Diaconu-Gherasim and Mirean (2016) found that the relationships between parental control and mastery and performance goal orientation were not significant in a sample of adolescents.

Along the same lines, the work of Shih (2021) and Xiang et al. (2017) found a positive relationship between parental control and performance-approach and performance-avoidance goal orientation, although, in both studies, this relationship was found, equally, with mastery-avoidance goal orientation. Furthermore, in the study by Xiang et al. (2017), parental psychological control was associated with adolescent school adjustment in a maladaptive manner through its positive relationship with mastery-avoidance and performance-avoidance goals.

Cimon-Paquet et al. (2023), in a longitudinal study with adolescents, found that perceived parental control through rules did not predict changes in controlled motivation over time, and controlled motivation also did not predict changes in parental control. The same was true for students’ autonomous motivation.

Regarding parental autonomy support, results from several of the studies reviewed point to it being significantly positively related to children and adolescents mastery goal orientation (Martins et al., 2020; Xiang et al., 2017; Xu et al., 2018; Zong et al., 2018). Regarding performance-approach and performance-avoidance goal orientation, some authors have found significant positive relationships with the former (Martins et al., 2020; Xiang et al., 2017; Zong et al., 2018) and negative relationships with the latter (Diaconu-Gherasim et al., 2022; Martins et al., 2020), while in other research these relationships did not reach statistical significance (Xu et al., 2018; Zong et al., 2018). Regarding mastery-avoidance goals, studies by Diaconu-Gherasim and Mirean (2016) and Xiang et al. (2017) observed that they were positively related to the autonomy support offered by parents.

On the other hand, Zhou et al. (2023) found positive associations between parents’ self-development socialization goals and mastery orientation over time and identified the mediating role of autonomy support in that relationship for elementary school students.

Lerner and Grolnick (2020) also found that mothers’ autonomy support was positively related to autonomous motivation in a group of elementary school students. Specifically, it was appreciated that mothers’ personal involvement was associated with higher autonomous motivation when they were autonomy-supportive. In a later study by Lerner et al. (2022) with both parents, it was found that fathers and mothers who were involved for controlling reasons showed lower autonomy support. This affected children’s autonomous motivation.

For their part, Li et al. (2020) measured psychological control and parental autonomy support together with the level of parental involvement. The results revealed four profiles: high control-low parental involvement (Profile 1), moderate control-moderate parental involvement (Profile 2), high control-high parental involvement (Profile 3), and high autonomy support-moderate parental involvement (Profile 4). Students in Profiles 3 and 4 exhibited similar levels of mastery and performance-approach goal orientation. However, adolescents in Profile 3 showed higher performance-avoidance goals when compared to those in Profile 4. Students in Profile 1 scored lower on both mastery-approach and performance-avoidance goals.

Lastly, two studies examined parental psychological control and autonomy support during homework performance. Tunkkari et al. (2024) examined the bidirectional longitudinal relationships between psychological control and autonomy support during homework completion reported by mothers and academic motivation in a sample of adolescents. Maternal autonomy support in the performance of these tasks did not promote adolescents’ school satisfaction directly or indirectly through increased intrinsic motivation over time. As for maternal psychological control, it was positively related to adolescent demotivation and negatively related to intrinsic motivation. Specifically, higher levels of maternal psychological control predicted higher levels of subsequent adolescent demotivation. On the other hand, a decrease in maternal psychological control predicted higher levels of adolescent intrinsic motivation. In the case of elementary school students, Shi et al. (2024) found that a constructive involvement of mothers in homework, based on autonomy support, favored children’s autonomous motivation to do homework, whereas exerting control over the process would lead to the adoption of a more controlled motivation.

A limited number of articles have analyzed the acceptance-rejection dimension of parenting. Moreover, all of these studies have used measures reported by middle and high school students. In a study by Diaconu-Gherasim and Mirean (2016), statistically significant negative correlations were found between parental rejection and the adoption of mastery-avoidance and performance-approach goals, with these relationships being stronger for girls. In this research, a mediating effect of the orientation to performance-approach and performance-avoidance goals between parental rejection and academic achievement was proven.

In a subsequent longitudinal study, Diaconu-Gherasim et al. (2022) observed that adolescents who indicated lower parental rejection held lower levels of mastery-oriented academic goals in the following school year. Specifically, mastery-approach goals mediated the relationship between adolescents’ perception of parental rejection and their intrinsic motivation in terms of curiosity and preference for challenge.

Regarding mothers’ involvement, Martins et al. (2020) observed that maternal positive evaluation behaviors correlated positively with their children’s mastery and performance-approach goal orientation. The positive evaluation and support dimension would also contribute to the explanation of performance-approach goals, whereas the use of punishment would contribute to the adoption of performance-avoidance goals, and negatively with task-avoidance goals. The results of the regression analysis showed that the positive evaluation and support that adolescents perceived from their mothers explained the adoption of mastery and performance-approach goals and protected them from adopting performance-avoidance and mastery-avoidance goals.