Family and cultural factors in the development of autonomy

Introduction

The development of autonomy during adolescence represents one of the central issues in developmental psychology. This stage is associated with changes in the system of parent–child relationships, involving a redefinition of role positions, the establishment of new boundaries, and the search for a balance between dependence and independence. Within the context of contemporary sociocultural dynamics, autonomy is increasingly conceptualized as an indicator of personal maturity and a key condition for successful social adaptation (Kaliteevskaya, Leontiev, 2006; Dergacheva, 2005).

Empirical evidence supports the association between separation from parents and adolescents’ subjective well-being (Korotkevich, Stepanenko, 2024). Family characteristics—such as support, emotional climate, and the consistency of parenting strategies—contribute to the formation of stable personal boundaries and facilitate the development of autonomy (Poskrebysheva, Babkina, 2020; Zhikhareva, Kolchik, 2024).

The study of adolescent autonomy within the context of family and cultural differences is essential for understanding the psychological mechanisms of maturation and the influence of sociocultural factors on processes of separation and self-determination, as well as for identifying both universal and culture-specific aspects of personal autonomy development.

Characteristics of family interaction

The family is a small social unit based on marital and kinship relationships, characterized by a stable structure and the performance of specific functions (Karabanova, 2005). Its development unfolds sequentially within the framework of the family life cycle. According to Evelyn Duvall’s model (Duvall, 1957), the stage of raising an adolescent requires a reconfiguration of parental roles and the establishment of a balance between control and the granting of autonomy.

This stage may be accompanied by intrafamilial and personal difficulties, including a midlife crisis in parents. Such changes intensify emotional tension and may provoke adolescent withdrawal, oppositional behavior, and a decline in trust. The adolescent crisis often acts as a trigger for transformations within the parent–child system, and its successful resolution is associated with an atmosphere of respect, trust, and open dialogue (Lutsenko, 2024).

The parent–child subsystem exerts the most significant influence on the development of autonomy. Emotional involvement, the nature of control, and patterns of interaction play a key role (Poskrebysheva, 2018). Excessive control may hinder autonomy, while its absence may lead to maladjustment. Support, trust, and a positive emotional climate represent essential conditions for the development of personal autonomy (Larina, 2025). International research also demonstrates that the combination of parental warmth and autonomy support is positively associated with adolescents’ subjective well-being (Bülow et al., 2022).

In addition, it has been shown that the perception of autonomy may be mediated by the level of parental control aligned with social norms, highlighting the importance of culturally shaped monitoring strategies (Wehner, Strecker, Graf, 2021).

Emotional separation may lag behind behavioral separation (Dzukaeva, 2016), while the need for support remains. Harmonious separation occurs within a stable family environment, where relationships are transformed into a partnership model characterized as “adult–adult”.

Cross-cultural aspect

Adolescent personality development takes place both within the family and under the influence of the broader cultural context. From an early age, children internalize norms, values, and social roles, thereby forming their social identity.

Two major types of cultural orientations are commonly distinguished: individualistic and collectivistic. The former emphasizes independence and personal autonomy, allowing for the open expression of emotions (Yakimova, 2012). The latter prioritizes respect for elders, obedience, and emotional restraint, which is often reflected in more authoritarian parenting styles.

The cultural context of Russia reflects a synthesis of collectivistic and individualistic tendencies. Parents tend to prioritize educational achievement, while personal development is often considered secondary (Polyvyannaya, Smirnova, 2018). According to Kirienko (2015), a high level of parental ethnic identity contributes to more favorable parent–child relationships. At the same time, a focus on personal development may reduce parental involvement, leading to earlier adolescent independence (Polivanova, 2018). Despite a general orientation toward Western models, traditional attitudes remain influential (Burina, Kudinova, 2020).

In Azerbaijan, where collectivistic orientations predominate, globalization has led to noticeable transformations, particularly in urban environments. Processes of democratization and the nuclearization of the family are becoming more pronounced in cities, while traditional norms remain prevalent in rural areas (Pankratova, Osin, Gasanova, 2017). The Azerbaijani family is grounded in respect, mutual support, and the preservation of social reputation. At the same time, a decline in paternal authority has led to a redistribution of family roles, increasing the burden on women.

Russian families demonstrate a tendency toward individualism, whereas Azerbaijani families retain stronger collectivistic features. Emotional experiences are expressed more openly in Russia, while in Azerbaijan they are more often restrained. In individualistic cultures, adolescents are more likely to make independent decisions, whereas in collectivistic cultures they are more oriented toward family opinion. At the same time, parental control in collectivistic contexts is more often perceived as care (Soenens, Beyers, 2024).

In Russia, the father is more often associated with demandingness, while the mother is associated with support. In Azerbaijan, both parents tend to maintain authority, and role differentiation is less pronounced (Savastenok, 2010). A study by Poskrebysheva and Yusifova (2018) showed that adolescents in Moscow tend to be more independent but also more critical of their parents, whereas adolescents in Baku display higher levels of conflict yet report overall satisfaction with family relationships. Thus, the present study addresses the existing gap in research on the relationship between adolescent personality development and the family system within a cross-cultural context.

Characteristics of adolescent personal autonomy

There are several theoretical approaches to the concept of autonomy. Some consider it as a process of separation from parents (A. Freud, J. Bowlby, M. Mahler), while others view it as a key element of personality development (E. Erikson, L. Steinberg). E. Deci and R. Ryan emphasize self-determination, whereas R. Harré focuses on independence from external influence. In the Russian psychological tradition, autonomy is associated with adulthood, conscious choice, and initiative (L.S. Vygotsky, S.L. Rubinstein, D.B. Elkonin).

Contemporary research continues to develop these ideas. Kaliteevskaya (Kaliteevskaya, Leontiev, 2006) emphasizes the importance of freedom and responsibility as the basis of self-determined behavior. Dergacheva (2005) considers autonomy as a manifestation of intrinsic motivation that is independent of social expectations, linking it to the concept of free will, existential search, and self-realization. In her view, self-regulation is the result of conscious choice determined by personal attitudes and external context, while autonomy is closely related to life meaningfulness and goal setting.

In the study by Zhikhareva and Kolchik (2024), autonomy is associated with stable personal boundaries and the integrity of the self-concept. Dityuk (2015) interprets autonomy as a complex personality characteristic that includes cognitive-behavioral, emotional, and communicative components. In adolescence, the striving for independence is accompanied by a persistent need for parental support, which often becomes a source of internal contradictions.

According to A.S. Gilyano and V.A. Shuvalova, the stable development of autonomy requires a combination of emotional support and consistent demands. Excessive overprotection or inconsistency disrupts this balance (Gilyano, Shuvalova, 2024). This is especially critical in the context of separation, which requires not only distancing but also flexible parental support. Longitudinal analysis has shown that a combination of high parental autonomy support with low levels of control forms the most favorable profile, contributing to both academic achievement and psychological well-being of adolescents (Teuber et al., 2022). K.A. Korzun emphasizes the importance of parents’ ability to “let go” of the child while maintaining emotional contact (Korzun, 2024). International studies also show that a high level of parental control is associated with lower adolescent confidence (Hare et al., 2014).

The development of autonomy in adolescence involves its manifestation through several key aspects:

• Cognitive autonomy — the ability to independently solve cognitive tasks, justify one’s opinion, be aware of external influences, and form a personal position (Backert, 2007).
• Behavioral autonomy — the striving for independence in actions, which increases with parental support and authoritative, but not authoritarian, relationships (Peterson, Bush, 2007).
• Value autonomy — manifested in a conscious choice of beliefs; rejection of parental attitudes based on negativism may indicate dependence.
• Emotional autonomy — associated with overcoming emotional dependence on parents and the free expression of feelings; its high level contributes to social adaptation and reduces the tendency toward risky behavior (Tsaniah, Nurhudaya, Budiman, 2020; Ahmad, Rafeh, Rafique, 2018).

Thus, the conducted theoretical analysis confirms that the development of autonomy in adolescence is based both on personal striving for independence and on the characteristics of family relationships. The influence of sociocultural differences on the content and structure of autonomy remains insufficiently studied. The scientific novelty of the study lies in obtaining empirical data that allow identifying the relationship between the development of adolescent autonomy and the characteristics of the family system in different sociocultural contexts. Particular attention is paid to family factors influencing the formation of emotional and behavioral independence, which expands the understanding of the mechanisms of maturation in conditions of cultural diversity.

The conducted theoretical analysis made it possible to clarify the research problem and determine the direction of empirical testing of the proposed assumptions.

Materials and methods

To empirically test the propositions formulated in the theoretical part, a comparative study was conducted aimed at analyzing the development of adolescent personal autonomy within the context of the family system under different cultural conditions.

The aim of the study was to identify the characteristics of adolescent autonomy development in the context of the family system and to compare family factors influencing autonomy development among adolescents from Moscow and Baku.

The research hypothesis was that differences exist in the development of adolescent personal autonomy depending on cultural context (Moscow and Baku). Adolescents from Baku were expected to demonstrate higher levels of emotional autonomy, whereas adolescents from Moscow were expected to show higher levels of behavioral and overall autonomy.

In accordance with the stated aim and hypothesis, the study was based on a combination of quantitative and qualitative approaches. Quantitative methods provided the opportunity to analyze the structure of autonomy and parameters of family functioning, allowing for the identification of relationships between personal and family characteristics. Qualitative analysis was used to explore adolescents’ representations of independence and family support, enabling interpretation of the results within a cultural context.

The following instruments were used in the study:

1. “Autonomy Questionnaire” (Karabanova, Poskrebysheva, 2011) — aimed at assessing the overall level of autonomy as well as emotional, behavioral, value, and cognitive autonomy in older adolescents.
2. Family Environment Scale (FES) developed by Rudolf H. Moos, adapted by S.Yu. Kupriyanov (Kupriyanov, 1985) — used to assess the family microsocial climate and evaluate key components of family system functioning. The scale includes 10 subscales reflecting three domains: family relationships (cohesion, expressiveness, conflict), personal growth (independence, achievement orientation, intellectual-cultural orientation, active-recreational orientation, moral-religious emphasis), and system maintenance (organization, control).
3. A modified authorial version of the “Incomplete Sentences” technique — developed to examine adolescents’ representations of their family and autonomy. Participants were asked to complete four sentence stems: “My family...”; “I feel independent when...”; “In my family, my achievements...”; “When I need help...”. The resulting categories derived from the responses were evaluated by two experts; their comments and recommendations were taken into account during analysis. The experts agreed with the identified categories and the classification of adolescents’ statements.

Statistical data analysis was conducted using SPSS Statistics. Descriptive statistics were calculated (means and standard deviations), the Mann–Whitney U test was applied to assess significant differences between samples, and Cohen’s d coefficient was calculated to interpret the effect size. In addition, content analysis was used to process responses to the incomplete sentences and to identify semantic categories.

The sample consisted of 201 adolescents (102 from Baku and 99 from Moscow) aged 13 to 18 years. Among them, 82 were boys (40,8% of the sample; 42 from Moscow and 40 from Baku) and 119 were girls (59,2%; 57 from Moscow and 62 from Baku). The mean age of adolescents from Moscow was 14,6 years (SD = 1,36), and from Baku — 14,3 years (SD = 0,76). Adolescents in the Baku sample were aged 13 to 15 years, while those in the Moscow sample ranged from 13 to 18 years.

Participation in the study was voluntary. Adolescents from various general education schools in Moscow and Baku were invited to participate following preliminary oral briefing and consent. The sample was randomly formed among students of general education schools in both cities. All participants completed identical questionnaires and underwent the full set of assessment instruments.

Results

First, let us consider the results of the comparative analysis of different components of autonomy: emotional, behavioral, cognitive, and value autonomy, as well as overall autonomy.

Table 1

Descriptive statistics and cultural differences in levels of personal autonomy components (N = 201)

The results of the study of personal autonomy in the Moscow sample are generally consistent with findings from previous research, although certain cultural specificity is observed.

The level of behavioral autonomy is higher among adolescents from Moscow: they demonstrate greater independence in their actions, whereas adolescents from Baku regulate their behavior to a lesser extent. This may be related to the characteristics of a collectivist culture, in which restraint in the expression of autonomy is supported by both parents and society.

Cognitive autonomy is also lower among adolescents from Baku, which may be associated with the need to take family opinions into account when making decisions. In contrast, adolescents from Moscow more actively express their own ideas and opinions.

With regard to overall autonomy, adolescents from Baku demonstrate lower average levels compared to their peers from Moscow. In collectivist cultures, control and consideration of family opinion play an important role, which may reduce the overall level of autonomy.

Next, we consider the characteristics of family relationships among adolescents from Moscow and Baku (see Table 2).

Table 2

Descriptive statistics and cultural differences in characteristics of family relationships (N = 201)

The analysis showed that across four scales (“Independence,” “Achievement Orientation,” “Organization,” “Control”), there are significant differences between the families of adolescents from Moscow and Baku (p ≤ 0,01). In all cases, the scores are higher among adolescents from Baku.

In Moscow families, control and organization are less pronounced, and achievement motivation plays a less prominent role. In Baku families, a clear hierarchy, strict rules, and a high level of control are present. At the same time, the level of independence among adolescents from Baku is also higher, which may be associated with a transformation of traditional values in Azerbaijani culture, particularly in urban contexts.

To analyze adolescents’ representations of their own independence and family relationships, four incomplete sentences were used (“My family...”; “In my family, my achievements...”; “I feel independent when...”; “When I need help...”). Responses were categorized and evaluated by two experts holding PhD degrees in psychology and having practical experience working with adolescents.

The analysis of responses to the sentence “My family...” made it possible to identify six categories: positive statements, negative statements, neutral statements, references to support and reliance, references to feelings of love, and ambivalent statements (see Table 3).

Table 3

Percentage distribution of categories for the sentence stem “My family…”

The largest number of responses in both groups fell into the category “positive statements about the family” (60 responses; 55%). In the category of “negative statements,” adolescents from Moscow were more frequently represented (11,3% compared to 6,4% in Baku). Ambivalent statements were observed only among adolescents from Moscow (3 responses; 4,8%).

The second sentence, “In my family, my achievements…,” included two categories: “value, respect, positive attitude” (64 responses, with 32 in each group) and “negative attitude” (18 responses, 12 in Moscow and 6 in Baku) (see Table 4).

Table 4

Percentage distribution of categories for the sentence stem “In my family my achievements…”

The majority of adolescents (73,6%) indicate that their achievements in the family are perceived as significant and are accompanied by a respectful attitude from close others, whereas a negative attitude is reported in 20,7% of responses. In Moscow, the level of positive attitude is lower (47,8%) compared to Baku (58,2%), while the level of negative attitude in Moscow is higher.

The third sentence, “I feel independent when…”, included five categories: independent problem solving, physical solitude, independence from others, independence from parents, and the presence of others nearby (see Table 5).

Table 5

Percentage distribution of categories for the sentence stem “I feel autonomous when…”

The majority of adolescents (39,8%) associate independence with solving specific tasks, with adolescents from Moscow reporting this more frequently (50%) compared to those from Baku (28,9%). In Baku, a higher percentage of adolescents associate independence with physical solitude (31,1% compared to 18,8% in Moscow) and with the presence of others nearby (11,1% compared to 0%).

The analysis of the fourth sentence, “When I need help…”, identified five categories: reliance on oneself, help from family, help from friends, absence of a specified source of help, and absence of help (see Table 6).

Table 6

Percentage distribution of categories for the sentence stem “When I need help…”

Adolescents overall most frequently rely on help from the family (31,3%) or do not specify a particular source (33,3%), whereas independent problem solving is reported less often (12,3%). In Moscow, adolescents rely more on themselves (15,1%) and on friends (18,9%) compared to their peers from Baku, while in Baku reliance on the family is more strongly expressed.

Discussion

The results confirm the presence of differences in the components of adolescent autonomy associated with the sociocultural characteristics of their living conditions in Moscow and Baku. Adolescents from Moscow demonstrate higher levels of cognitive, behavioral, and overall autonomy compared to their peers from Baku.

Differences in cognitive autonomy may be related to cultural attitudes: in collectivist cultures, adolescents are more strongly oriented toward family opinion, whereas in individualistic cultures independence is encouraged. These findings are consistent with the results of Pankratova et al. (Pankratova, Osin, Gasanova, 2017), which emphasize the influence of cultural context on personal autonomy.

Family relationships also differ: in Baku families, levels of control, organization, and achievement orientation are higher, which is characteristic of collectivist cultures. At the same time, the relatively high independence of adolescents from Baku may reflect a transitional period in which traditional and modern norms coexist.

Among adolescents from Moscow, traits associated with an individualistic orientation are more frequently observed, which may be reflected in less rigid family rules and a more flexible development of autonomy. At the same time, adolescents from Baku demonstrate a combination of striving for independence with a pronounced orientation toward the family and the preservation of traditional forms of support, which may be related to the characteristics of a collectivist social structure.

The largest number of statements about the family in both groups were positive. Adolescents from Moscow more often referred to acceptance, care, and emotional support from the family (a total of 21% of responses in the categories “support” and “love”, see Table 3), which reflects a higher degree of emotional closeness. This is consistent with findings on the greater expressiveness of Russian culture (Pankratova, Osin, Gasanova, 2017).

Negative statements were more frequent among adolescents from Moscow (11,3% compared to 6,4% in Baku), which may be related to the greater acceptability of criticism in individualistic cultures. The presence of ambivalent evaluations only among adolescents from Moscow may reflect a more differentiated perception of family relationships.

Differences in the perception of family attitudes toward achievements were less pronounced than expected. Despite the hypothesis that achievements would be more significant in Baku, differences between the groups were small. This may be related to the urbanized nature of the sample and the influence of globalization. Negative attitudes toward achievements were expressed by 20.7% of respondents, with a higher proportion in Moscow, which may be associated with a greater tendency to discuss family-related difficulties.

In responses regarding independence, adolescents most often associated it with the completion of specific tasks. Some respondents, particularly from Baku, mentioned physical isolation as an indicator of independence, which may reflect a striving for autonomy. At the same time, the category “independence from parents” was mentioned less frequently, indicating the continued importance of the family in adolescents’ perception of their own independence. These findings are consistent with the conclusions of Poskrebysheva and Babkina (2020), who showed that adolescents perceive independence as a balance between autonomy and interaction.

The analysis of responses concerning help showed that most adolescents tend to turn to parents or friends; however, some, particularly in Moscow, avoid seeking help, possibly due to a desire for independence or fear of dependence. Adolescents from Baku more often emphasize the importance of family support.

The obtained results can be interpreted within the theoretical frameworks outlined in the introduction. In particular, they are consistent with the principles of self-determination theory by Deci and Ryan, according to which autonomy is considered a key component of psychological development and a condition for personal well-being. The findings also support the cultural-historical approach of Vygotsky, which emphasizes that personality development is determined by the specifics of the sociocultural environment. The importance of family factors identified in the study corresponds to the systemic approach to the family (Karabanova, 2005) and is supported by contemporary research on the role of parent–child relationships in the development of adolescent autonomy (Poskrebysheva, Babkina, 2020; Zhikhareva, Kolchik, 2024). Thus, the study extends existing understanding of autonomy development by linking individual and cultural characteristics with patterns of family interaction.

Thus, adolescents from both cultural contexts perceive the family as an important source of support. Adolescents from Moscow demonstrate a more differentiated perception of family relationships, more often emphasizing their emotional aspects (such as support, care, and acceptance), whereas such references are less frequent in the responses of adolescents from Baku. This may indicate greater emotional restraint reflected in their representations of the family. The identified differences reflect cultural characteristics of autonomy development while also indicating shared representations of family and independence.

Conclusions

The study analyzed the role of the family in the development of adolescent autonomy across different cultures. The results showed that the family system and culture exert an interconnected influence on the formation of autonomy.

The hypotheses were partially confirmed: adolescents from Moscow demonstrated higher levels of behavioral, cognitive, and overall autonomy. At the same time, adolescents from Baku more often reported higher levels of organization and control in family life.

It was found that representations of independence are formed differently in the two cultural contexts. For adolescents from Moscow, independence is more often associated with making one’s own decisions and acting without external assistance, while emotional support from the family remains significant. Adolescents from Baku more often associate independence with physical isolation and, in situations requiring support, rely more on help from close others, primarily the family.

Differences in family relationships were also confirmed: in Baku, there is a stronger orientation toward achievement, stricter rules, and greater organization; in Moscow, lower levels of control and greater adolescent independence are observed.

Adolescents from both cultural contexts perceive the family as an important source of support. At the same time, the nature of describing family relationships differs: adolescents from Moscow more often emphasize emotional aspects, including support, care, and acceptance, whereas such references are less frequent in the responses of adolescents from Baku. These differences reflect the characteristics of the cultural context and make it possible to уточнить the role of the family system in the development of adolescent autonomy.

Limitations. This study has limitations related to the sample size and the focus on only two major cities — Moscow and Baku — which limits the generalizability of the findings. Additionally, the Azerbaijani sample included Russian-speaking adolescents, which may have influenced the formation of their social context.

1. Бебчук, М.А. (2023). Психология и психотерапия семьи. М.: «Городец».
   Bebchuk, M.A. (2023). Psychology and Family Psychotherapy. Moscow: «Gorodets». (In Russ.).
2. Бурина, Е.А., Кудинова, А.Е. (2020). Особенности современной российской семьи в условиях социально-исторических изменений института родительства. Вестник Мининского университета, 8(1), Статья 6. https://doi.org/10.26795/2307-1281-2020-8-1-6
   Burina, E.A., Kudinova, A.E. (2020). Modern Russian family in the context of socio-historical changes of parenthood. Bulletin of Minin University, 8(1), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.26795/2307-1281-2020-8-1-6 (In Russ.).
3. Волкова, Т.Г., Милина, А.С. (2025). Самостоятельность подростков с разным уровнем психологической автономии. Вестник психологии и педагогики Алтайского государственного университета, 7(1), 16–
   Volkova, T.G., Milina, A.S. (2025). The autonomy of adolescents: a comparative analysis of psychological independence across varying levels. Bulletin of Psychology and Pedagogy of Altai State University, 7(1), 16–31. (In Russ.).
4. Гильяно, А.С., Шувалова, В.А. (2024). Взаимосвязь психологического благополучия подростков с особенностями их взаимоотношений с родителями. Научно-педагогическое образование, 6, 144–153. DOI:10.23951/2307-6127-2024-6-144-153
   Gilyano, A.S., Shuvalova, V.A. (2024). The relationship of a teenager's psychological well-being with the peculiarities of his relationship with his parents. Pedagogical Review, 6, 144–153. https://doi.org/10.23951/2307-6127-2024-6-144-153 (In Russ.).
5. Дергачева, О.Е. (2005). Личностная автономия как предмет психологического исследования: Дис. … канд. психол. наук. М.: МГУ.
   Dergacheva, O.E. (2005). Personal autonomy as a subject of psychological research:D. Moscow State University. (In Russ.).
6. Дзукаева, В.П. (2016). Культурно-специфические и семейные факторы сепарации от родительской семьи в юношеском возрасте: Дис. ... канд. психол. наук. МГУ. Москва.
   Dzukaeva, V.P. (2016). Culture-specific and family factors of separation from the parental family in adolescence: Dis. … kand. psikhol. nauk. Moscow State University. (In Russ.).
7. Дитюк, А.А. (2015). Психологическая сепарация как феномен межличностных отношений: к проблеме определения понятия. Вестник ЮУрГУ. Серия: Психология, 8(3), 98–102.
   Dityuk, A.A. (2015). Psychological separation as a phenomenon of interpersonal relations: the problem of definition. Bulletin of the South Ural State University. Ser. Psychology, 8(3), 98–102. (In Russ.).
8. Жихарева, Л.В., Кольчик, Е.Ю. (2024). Психологическая суверенность подростков в контексте детско-родительских отношений. Ученые записки Крымского федерального университета имени В.И. Вернадского. Социология. Педагогика. Психология, 10(3(76)), 124–131.
   Zhikhareva, L.V., Kol'chik, E.Yu. (2024). Psychological sovereignty of adolescents in the context of child-parent relations. Scientific Notes of V.I. Vernadsky Crimean Federal University. Sociology. Pedagogy. Psychology, 10(3(76)), 124–131. (In Russ.).
9. Калитеевская, Е.Р., Леонтьев, Д.А. (2006). Пути становления самодетерминации личности в подростковом возрасте. Вопросы психологии, 3, 49–55.
   Kaliteevskaya, E.R., Leont'ev, D.A. (2006). Ways of development of personal self-determination in adolescence. Issues in Psychology, 3, 49–55. (In Russ.).
10. Карабанова, О.А. (2005). Психология семейных отношений и основы семейного консультирования. М.: Гардарики.
    Karabanova, O. (2005). Psychology of Family Relations and Fundamentals of Family Counseling. Moscow: Gardariki. (In Russ.).
11. Карабанова, О.А., Поскребышева, Н.Н. (2011). Автономия как психологический феномен: структура и содержание. Вестник Московского университета. Серия 14. Психология, 2, 36–47.
    Karabanova, O.A., Poskrebysheva, N.N. (2011). Autonomy as a psychological phenomenon: structure and content. Moscow University Psychology Bulletin, 2, 36–47. (In Russ.).
12. Кириленко, И.Н. (2015). Детско-родительские отношения: гендерный и этнический модусы. Монография. М.: КРЕДО.
    Kirilenko, I.N. (2015). Parent-child relations: Gender and ethnic modes. Monograph. Moscow: KREDO. (In Russ.).
13. Корзун, К.А. (2024). Сепарация от родителей как необходимое условие профессионального развития. Международный журнал гуманитарных и естественных наук, (12-2(99)), 284–286. https://doi.org/10.24412/2500-1000-2024-12-2-284-286
    Korzun, K.A. (2024). Separation from parents as a necessary condition for professional Development. International Journal of Humanities and Natural Sciences, (12-2(99)), 284–286. https://doi.org/10.24412/2500-1000-2024-12-2-284-286
14. Короткевич, О.А., Степаненко, Д.С. (2024). Корреляция сепарации от родителей и психологического благополучия в подростковом возрасте. В: Часть 2. Международная научно-практическая конференция «Педагогика и психология в образовательной парадигме» (с. 126–131). Гжель: ГГУ.
    Korotkevich, O.A., Stepanenko, D.S. (2024). Correlation between separation from parents and psychological well-being in adolescence. In: Part 2. International Scientific and Practical Conference "Pedagogy and Psychology in the Educational Paradigm" (pp. 126–131). Gzhel’: GGU.
15. Куприянов, С.Ю. (1985). Роль семейных факторов в формировании вариантов нервно-психического механизма патогенеза бронхиальной астмы и их коррекция методом семейной психотерапии. Дисс. … канд. мед. наук.
    Kupriyanov, S.Yu. (1985). Role of family factors in the formation of variants of the neuro-psychological mechanism of the pathogenesis of bronchial asthma and their correction by the method of family psychotherapy. PhD thesis in Medical Sciences. (In Russ.).
16. Ларина, Г.Н. (2025). Роль семьи в формировании свободы личности подростков. Ученые записки. Электронный научный журнал Курского государственного университета, 1(73), 339–345.
    Larina, G.N. (2025). The role of the family in the formation of personal freedom in adolescents. Scientific Notes. Electronic Scientific Journal of Kursk State University, 1(73), 339–345.
17. Луценко, Е.А. (2024). Кризис подросткового возраста в современной семье: фактор смены детско-родительских отношений. Социально-психологические проблемы современной семьи: ценности и образ мысли: материалы XII Всероссийской научно-практической конференции студентов, аспирантов и молодых ученых с международным участием (с. 21–23). Чебоксары: ИД «Среда».
    Lutsenko, E.A. (2024). Adolescence crisis in the modern family: the factor of changing parent-child relationships. Socio-psychological problems of the modern family: values and mindset: materials of the XII All-Russian scientific and practical conference (pp. 21–23). Cheboksary: ID “Sreda”.
18. Панкратова, А.А., Осин, Е.Н., Гасанова, У.У. (2017). Уровень горизонтального и вертикального индивидуализма и коллективизма в России и Азербайджане. Психологические исследования, 10(55), Статья 3. URL: http://psystudy.ru (дата обращения: 25.05.2025). https://doi.org/10.54359/ps.v10i352
    Pankratova, A.A., Osin, E.N., Gasanova, U.U. (2017). Levels of horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism in Russia and Azerbaijan. Psychological studies, 10(55), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.54359/ps.v10i55.352 (In Russ.).
19. Полывянная, М.Т., Смирнова, И.Н. (2018). Особенности детско-родительских отношений в семье (на материалах Ивановской области). Вестник Нижегородского университета им. Н.И. Лобачевского. Серия: Социальные науки, 51(3), 99–106.
    Polyvyannaya, M.T., Smirnova, I.N. (2018). Some peculiarities of parent-child relationship in a family (based on the materials of the ivanovo region). Bulletin of Lobachevsky State University of Nizhni Novgorod. Series: Social Sciences, 51(3), 99–106. (In Russ.).
20. Поскребышева, Н.Н. (2018). Исследования сепарационных процессов в детско-родительских отношениях подростков. Психологические проблемы современной семьи: сборник материалов VIII Международной научно-практической конференции (с. 307–310).
    Poskryobyshcheva, N.N. (2018). Research on separation processes in adolescent parent-child relationships. Psychological problems of the modern family: Proceedings of the VIII International Scientific and Practical Conference, 307–310. (In Russ.).
21. Поскребышева, Н.Н., Бабкина, А.Ю. (2020). Семейные факторы развития автономии и сепарационных процессов у подростков. Вестник Московского университета. Серия 14. Психология, 3, 120–146. https://doi.org/10.11621/vsp.2020.03.06
    Poskrebysheva, N.N., Babkina, A.Yu. (2020). Family factors of autonomy development and separation processes in adolescence. Moscow University Psychology Bulletin, 3, 120–146. https://doi.org/10.11621/vsp.2020.03.06 (In Russ.).
22. Поскребышева, Н.Н., Юсифова, Н.Д. (2018). Образ детско-родительских отношений у подростков: кросс-культурный аспект. Мир психологии, 1, 126–134.
    Poskrebysheva, N.N., Yusifova, N.D. (2018). The Image of Parent-Adolescent Relations in Adolescents: A Cross-Cultural Aspect. World of Psychology, 1, 126–134. (In Russ.).
23. Рославцева, М.В., Новикова, В.С. (2023). Факторы сепарации московской молодежи от родительской семьи. ДЕМИС. Демографические исследования, 3(3), 43–56. https://doi.org/10.19181/demis.2023.3.3.3
    Roslavtseva, M.V., Novikova, V.S. (2023). Factors of Moscow Youth’s Separation from Their Parental Families. Demographic research, 3(3), 43–56. https://doi.org/10.19181/demis.2023.3.3.3 (In Russ.).
24. Савастенок, С.И. (2010). Особенности восприятия родителей старшеклассниками разных этнических групп. Этнопсихология: вопросы теории и практики, 3, 20–26.
    Savastenok, S.I. (2010). Features of parental perception by high school students of different ethnic groups. Ethnopsychology: Issues of Theory and Practice, 3, 20–26. (In Russ.).
25. Якимова, О.С. (2012). О проблеме определения социокультурного типа современного российского общества. Вестник Красноярского государственного аграрного университета, 12, 219–222.
    Yakimova, O.S. (2012). About the problem of modern russian society sociocultural type definition. The Bulletin of Krasnoyarsk State Agricultural University, 12, 219–222. (In Russ.).
26. Ahmad, S., Rafeh, A., Rafique, M. (2018). Relationship between Emotional Autonomy and Behaviour Problems Among Adolescents: Moderating Impact of Gender. Pakistan Journal of Psychological Research, 33(2), 473–492.
27. Beckert, T.E. (2007). Cognitive autonomy and self-evaluation in adolescents: A conceptual investigation and instrument development. North American Journal of Psychology, 9(3), 579–594. DOI:10.1037/t54411-000
28. Bülow, A., Neubauer, A.B., Soenens, B., Boele, S., Denissen, J.J.A., Keijsers, L. (2022). Universal ingredients to parenting teens: parental warmth and autonomy support promote adolescent well-being in most families. Scientific Reports, 12(1), Article 16836. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-21071-0
29. Duval, E.M. (1957). Family development. Philadelphia: Lippincott.
30. Hare, A.L., Szwedo, D.E., Schad, M.M., Allen, J.P. (2014). Undermining Adolescent Autonomy with Parents and Peers: The Enduring Implications of Psychologically Controlling Parenting. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 25(4), 739–752. doi:10.1111/jora.12167
31. Peterson, G.W., Bush, K.R. (2007). Predicting Adolescent Autonomy from Parents: Relationship Connectedness and Restrictiveness. Sociological Inquiry, 69(3), 431–457. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-682X.1999.tb00880.x
32. Polivanova, K.N. (2018). Modern Parenthood as a Subject of Research. Russian Education & Society, 60(4), 334–347. DOI:10.1080/10609393.2018.1473695
33. Beyers, W., Soenens, B., Vansteenkiste, M. (2024). Autonomy in adolescence: a conceptual, developmental and cross-cultural perspective. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 22(2), 121–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2024.2330734
34. Supple, A.J., Ghazarian, S.G., Peterson, G.W., Bush, K.R. (2009). Assessing the cross-cultural validity of a parental autonomy granting measure: Comparing adolescents in the U.S., China, Mexico and India. Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 40(5), 816–833. DOI:10.1177/0022022109339390
35. Teuber, Z., Tang, X., Sielemann, L., Otterpohl, N., Wild, E. (2022). Autonomy-related parenting profiles and their effects on adolescents' academic and psychological development: A longitudinal person-oriented analysis. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 51(7), 1333–1353. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-021-01538-5
36. Tsaniah, S.M., Nurhudaya, N., Budiman, N. (2020). Sociodrama to Develop Emotional Autonomy of the Adolescents. International Conference on Educational Psychology and Pedagogy (ICEPP 2019), 399, 42–45. URL: https://www.atlantis-press.com/proceedings/icepp-19/125933660 (дата обращения: 25.05.2025). DOI:10.2991/assehr.k.200130.123
37. Wehner, A., Strecker, P., Graf, G. (2021). Social norms and adolescent autonomy: The mediating role of parental monitoring in Germany. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 50, 1223–1239. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-021-01538-5