Emerging adults’ received and desired support from parents: Evidence for optimal received–desired support matching and optimal support surpluses

Abstract

This study examined parental support to emerging adults from a support gap perspective, which focuses on discrepancies between the amount of support received and the amount of support desired. Analyzing survey data collected from a sample of emerging adults in college (N = 341) with polynomial regressions and response surface modeling, the current study revealed that implications of support gaps differed by the support type, directionality of the discrepancy (i.e., support deficits or surpluses), and outcome of interest. For all types of support, emerging adults’ perceived stress was lowest when received and desired parental support were congruent. However, received–desired support congruence corresponded with the highest levels of relationship satisfaction only for informational support. For nurturant support (i.e., emotional, esteem, network support), a certain degree of support surplus corresponded with the highest level of relationship satisfaction, demonstrating an “optimal surpluses” phenomenon. Additionally, relationship satisfaction was higher when received and desired support from parents matched at a higher than at a lower level.

Keywords

Emerging adulthood parent–child relationship polynomial regression response surface modeling social support support gaps

Referring to the developmental period between adolescence and adulthood, emerging adulthood is a life phase full of challenges as well as opportunities (Arnett, 2015). The parent–child relationship is important for emerging adults’ psychological adjustment and general well-being (Holt, Mattanah, & Long, 2018). In particular, parents continue to be a primary source of social support for many emerging adults (Fingerman, Cheng, Tighe, Birditt, & Zarit, 2012). Parental support may protect emerging adults from the negative impacts of stressors, facilitate adjustment (Miczo, Miczo, & Johnson, 2006), and maintain satisfying parent–child relationships during this stressful transition (Levitt, Silver, & Santos, 2007). However, research also suggests that parental support is not always beneficial (Padilla-Walker, Nelson, & Carroll, 2012). Whereas insufficient parental support may curtail parent–child closeness and hinder emerging adults’ adjustment, excessive parental support may be overwhelming and potentially damaging to emerging adults’ sense of autonomy (Johnson & Benson, 2012). Therefore, to gain a fuller understanding of its effectiveness, researchers must consider the relational contexts and developmental needs that shape children’s responses to parental support.

A useful approach for enhancing the understanding of parental support to emerging adults involves the concept of “support gap,” which gauges the effectiveness of social support by recognizing the recipient’s desire for support as a vital factor (e.g., Brock & Lawrence, 2009; High & Crowley, 2018; Matsunaga, 2011). A “support gap” indicates a discrepancy between the amount of support received and the amount of support desired (Xu & Burleson, 2001). This perspective has generated a received–desired support matching hypothesis, which posits that social support engenders the optimal personal and relational outcomes when the amount of received support matches the amount of support desired, meaning when there is no gap between received and desired support (Joseph, Afifi, & Denes, 2016; Xu & Burleson, 2001). Moreover, research has distinguished between support surpluses (i.e., receiving more support than desired) and support deficits (i.e., receiving less support than desired). There is some evidence that the outcomes of these two forms of support gaps may differ (Davis & High, 2019; High & Crowley, 2018; McLaren & High, 2015). Yet the complexity of these differences warrants further investigation (Brock & Lawrence, 2009; High & Crowley, 2018).

The purpose of the current study is twofold. First, it aims to obtain a better understanding of parental support to emerging adults using a support gap perspective that focuses on received–desired support congruence. Second, building upon research demonstrating that the implications of support gaps differ by various factors (e.g., Davis & High, 2019; McLaren & High, 2015), this study intends to (a) further unpack the nuanced implications of support gaps depending on the support type, directionality of the discrepancy (i.e., support deficits or surpluses), and the outcome of interest and (b) investigate whether social support outcomes differ at varying levels of received–desired support congruence. To achieve these goals, the current investigation analyzed survey data from a sample of college emerging adults (N = 341) to assess the associations between received–desired parental support gaps and two outcomes: perceived stress in the past month and parent–child relationship satisfaction. Coping and relationship quality have been examined as key indicators of social support effectiveness in the literature (MacGeorge, Feng, & Burleson, 2011); moreover, these outcomes are highly relevant to emerging adults, given the stressful nature of this developmental phase and the importance of parent–child relationship for emerging adults’ well-being (Holt et al., 2018; Miczo et al., 2006). Finally, aiming to reveal more nuanced effects of received–desired congruence and to overcome limitations of using difference scores or moderated regressions to examine support gaps (Edwards, 1994, 2001), this study adopted an analytic technique called polynomial regressions and response surface modeling (Edwards & Parry, 1993).

Received–desired support gaps

It is well established in the literature that receiving support is not necessarily beneficial (e.g., Bolger, Zuckerman, & Kessler, 2000; Floyd & Ray, 2017). Scholars have attempted to explain the potential ineffectiveness of social support (e.g., Floyd & Ray, 2017; Priem & Solomon, 2015). Research on invisible support, for example, suggests that because individuals’ sense of independence and competence may be undermined by receiving support, social support may be most effective if the recipient does not realize it is being provided (Bolger et al., 2000). Maisel and Gable (2009), however, found that invisible support corresponded with negative outcomes when it was perceived to have low partner responsiveness (i.e., the perception that a partner understands and validates one’s needs), whereas visible support was associated with positive outcomes when partner responsiveness was high. Hence, one determining factor of support effectiveness involves the extent to which support meets the needs of the recipient.

Foregrounding support recipients’ needs for support, the support gap perspective gauges the effectiveness of social support by the degree of received–desired support congruence (e.g., Brock & Lawrence, 2009; Xu & Burleson, 2001). From an appraisal-based coping perspective, social support may lower perceived stress by facilitating positive reappraisal (i.e., viewing the stressors as manageable and less threatening; Burleson & Goldsmith, 1998). People may experience support gaps specific to particular stressors (High & Crowley, 2018; Matsunaga, 2011) or have a global perception of support gaps within a particular relationship (Cutrona, 1996; Xu & Burleson, 2001). In either case, support gaps may hinder appraisal by causing negative feelings like anger, disappointment (Cutrona, 1996), and/or hurt (McLaren & High, 2015) as well as by lowering positive self-regard and self-worth (Feeney & Collins, 2015). Additionally, support gaps may negatively impact the quality of support provider–recipient relationships (e.g., Joseph et al., 2016; McLaren & High, 2015). Failing to meet someone’s desire for support may signal a lack of understanding and partner responsiveness. For example, support gaps were associated with reduced marital satisfaction (Brock & Lawrence, 2009). Emotional support gaps during supportive interactions predicted lower relationship satisfaction between dating couples (Joseph et al., 2016). In sum, the support gap approach holds great promise for understanding why social support does not necessarily translate into improved personal and relational well-being.

The directionality of received–desired support gaps: Support deficits and surpluses

Following the above logic, research has developed a received-desired support matching hypothesis, stating that the best outcomes will be obtained when the amounts of received and desired support match. A corollary of this proposition is that any form of support gap will degrade the effectiveness of social support. Indeed, some studies have suggested that receiving either more or less support than desired was tied to negative outcomes (e.g., High & Steuber, 2014; Joseph et al., 2016; Matsunaga, 2011). However, scholars have called attention to differences between the two forms of support gaps—support deficits and surpluses (Brock & Lawrence, 2009). More complex implications of support gaps have been revealed when considering support deficits and surpluses in different types of support (e.g., High & Crowley, 2018; McLaren & High, 2015).

A taxonomy of social support has been developed based on the support’s function (Cutrona & Russell, 1990). Emotional support expresses love and empathy to improve the emotional state of stressed individuals. Esteem support reaffirms self-worth and self-efficacy by assuring individuals that they are likable, valuable, and competent. Network support enhances individuals’ sense of belonging through expressing inclusion or connecting them to a supportive network. Informational support provides useful advice, facts, or opinions. Lastly, tangible support refers to material aids, such as practical services and financial support. These five types of social support are grouped into two broad categories: action-facilitating support and nurturant support. Action-facilitating support, which encompasses informational and tangible support, provides individuals with resources to directly tackle stressors. Nurturant support, which includes emotional, esteem, and network support, helps to relieve distress without directly solving a particular problem (Cutrona & Suhr, 1992; Rains, Peterson, & Wright, 2015).

Prior research consistently showed that deficits in various types of support were problematic (e.g., Davis & High, 2019; High & Crowley, 2018). Also, surpluses in informational support, a form of action-facilitating support, tended to elicit negative outcomes (e.g., McLaren & High, 2015). Surpluses in nurturant support, however, are not necessarily problematic and can even be beneficial. For instance, participants in Davis and High (2019) reported highest perceived supportiveness and cognitive reappraisal in the event of esteem support surpluses. High and Crowley (2018) found positive associations between cognitive reappraisal and surpluses in emotional support provided by close friends and esteem support provided by acquaintances. Additionally, surpluses in emotional support were associated with less hurt (McLaren & High, 2015) and more reappraisal of taboo stressors (High & Crowley, 2018). In short, the implications of action-facilitating support surpluses and nurturant support surpluses are likely different.

Deficits and surpluses of parental support to emerging adults

During emerging adulthood, a major dialectical tension lies between children’s need for autonomy and their continued dependence on parents for support (Fingerman, Cheng, Tighe, et al., 2012; Inguglia, Ingoglia, Liga, Coco, & Cricchio, 2015). Thus, effective parental support should meet children’s need for support without undermining their growing desire for autonomy (Inguglia et al., 2015). Given that social support facilitates reappraisal and coping (Burleson & Goldsmith, 1998; Lazarus & Folkman, 1984), deficits in both action-facilitating support and nurturant support from parents may make emerging adults feel less effective at coping and, in turn, perceive more stress. Further, support deficits, regardless of the type of support, may suggest that parents are not responsive to their children’s need for support or that parents fail to show sufficient care or concern for their children, thereby lowering parent–child relationship satisfaction.

Surpluses in parents’ action-facilitating support are likely unhelpful and may even be experienced as condescending, overwhelming, or controlling. By definition, action-facilitating support directly assists a support recipient in solving a stressful problem (Cutrona & Suhr, 1992). Receiving a surplus of action-facilitating support from a parent may be an indicator of controlling parental behavior. When parents provide an excessive amount of support to help emerging adults tackle specific problems, children may feel that parents are attempting to steer their decision-making (Segrin, Wosidlo, Givertz, Bauer, & Murphy, 2012) and that they are retaining parental authority in domains that emerging adults no longer deem legitimate (Padilla-Walker, Nelson, & Knapp, 2014). In short, surpluses in parents’ action-facilitating support may indicate excessive parental control or overparenting (Segrin et al., 2012), thereby limiting children’s ability to positively assess stressors and causing them to feel less satisfied with the relationship. Based on the above reasoning, it was hypothesized that:

H1: For action-facilitating support, support deficits and surpluses will be (a) positively associated with perceived stress and (b) negatively associated with relationship satisfaction.

H2: For nurturant support, support deficits will be (a) positively associated with perceived stress and (b) negatively associated with relationship satisfaction.

The implications of surpluses in parents’ nurturant support remain unclear. Although the support gap perspective would predict negative outcomes for support surpluses, there is empirical evidence showing that surpluses in nurturant support may not necessarily be problematic and can even be beneficial (e.g., Davis & High, 2019; McLaren & High, 2015). Distinct from action-facilitating support, nurturant support conveys comfort and consolation without directly helping the recipient solve problems (Cutrona & Suhr, 1992). Thus, receiving a surplus in nurturant support may not undermine emerging adults’ sense of autonomy. Given that past research has demonstrated nonnegative—even positive—outcomes associated with surpluses in nurturant support, a research question was proposed:

RQ1: For nurturant support, what will be the patterns of association between support surpluses and (a) perceived stress and (b) relationship satisfaction?

Received–desired support congruence at different levels

Research on support gaps has primarily revolved around the proposition that social support yields better outcomes when the amounts of received and desired support match than when a gap exists between them (e.g., Joseph et al., 2016; Xu & Burleson, 2001). What remains ambiguous, however, is whether outcomes vary when the received–desired support congruence occurs at a high or at a low level. Until it answers this question, research must assume that received–desired support congruence yields optimal outcomes regardless of the amount of support received and desired. This assumption has been largely untested in past studies, primarily due to methodological choices.

Past research has often used difference scores to operationalize received–desired support gaps by subtracting desired support from received support (e.g., Matsunaga, 2011) and then obtaining scores for support surpluses and deficits by retaining the positive or negative values of the difference scores (High & Crowley, 2018; McLaren & High, 2015). However, difference scores eliminate information pertaining to the values of variables; for example, on a 5-point scale, the support gap is zero when received and desired support are both five and when they are both one. In place of difference scores, some research has assessed support gaps using multiple regressions with interaction terms between received and desired support (Davis & High, 2019). Regressions control for the main effects of received and desired support and avoid issues with difference scores, such as low reliability and overly liberal statistical tests (Edwards, 2001). However, like difference scores, moderated regressions cannot test if an outcome varies at different levels of received–desired support congruence because data are fitted on different regression lines (Barranti, Carlson, & Côté, 2017). To remedy these shortcomings, this study employed polynomial regressions and response surface modeling (detailed in the Method section). This technique generates a three-dimensional surface that illustrates how received and desired support jointly affects an outcome variable (Edwards, 1994). Employing this technique, this study aims to obtain a more comprehensive understanding of the support gaps framework by empirically testing whether received–desired support congruence is desirable regardless of the level of support.

A received–desired support congruence exists for emerging adults who desire and receive high levels of parental support as well as for those who desire and receive low levels of parental support. From the stress and coping perspective (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984), individuals experience stress when a situation is appraised as threatening and there are not enough coping resources. The received–desired support matching hypothesis contends that receiving the “right” amount of support should facilitate positive appraisal of stressors (Joseph et al., 2016; Xu & Burleson, 2001). Essentially, the reappraisal process is key to keeping individuals from perceiving situations as stressful. Put differently, receiving the “right” amount of support from parents—that which matches emerging adults’ desired amount, whether high or low—should promote coping, thereby keeping perceived stress constant at a low level. Based on this reasoning, the following hypothesis was proposed:

H3: For all types of support, emerging adults’ perceived stress will remain relatively constant when received and desired support from parents match at different levels.

Receiving high levels of parental support that match emerging adults’ high desire for support may signify parents’ care and concern, thereby amplifying emerging adults’ satisfaction with the parent–child relationship. In other words, frequent supportive interactions featuring received–desired support congruence may make the relationship rewarding and fulfilling. Yet emerging adults may feel equally satisfied with the parent–child relationship when they desire and receive little parental support because congruence at a low level may indicate that they have their parents’ permission for self-direction and that parents respect their need to gain autonomy at this developmental phase. Since there is reason to argue that relationship satisfaction would and would not vary by the levels of congruence, a research question was proposed:

RQ2: For all types of support, will emerging adults’ relationship satisfaction differ when received and desired support from parents match at different levels?

Method

Participants and procedures

Participants (N = 341) were predominantly female (81.2%, n = 277) with a mean age of 20.17 years (SD = 1.31, range = 18–27). Most participants self-identified as White/Caucasian (61.3%, n = 209), followed by Asian or Pacific Islander (16.7%, n = 57), African American/Black (11.7%, n = 40), Hispanic/Latino (7.0%, n = 24), Multiracial (2.3%, n = 8), and Native American or Alaskan Native (0.3%, n = 1). Two participants did not report their race/ethnicity (0.6%). Most participants reported on their mother (80.9%, n = 276) and 17% reported on their father (n = 58). One participant reported on a stepmother and two on stepfather.

Participants were recruited from undergraduate courses at a Midwestern public university in the US to complete a 40-min online survey. They chose one parent (i.e., mother, father, or stepparent) to report on and were instructed to consider only their communication and relationship with the chosen parent when answering the questions.

Measures

The unidimensionality of the multi-item measures was assessed with confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using maximum likelihood estimators with robust standard errors. All measures obtained acceptable fit (Hu & Bentler, 1999). Details of CFAs are available from the author. Table 1 summarizes the descriptive statistics, Cronbach’s αs, and bivariate correlations of the study variables.

Table 1.

Descriptive statistics, reliability, and correlations.

	M	SD	α	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11
Received support
1. Emotional	4.14	.80	.83
2. Esteem	4.08	.84	.87	.77**
3. Network	3.69	.95	.85	.62**	.59**
4. Informational	4.05	.78	.84	.62**	.59**	.62**
5. Tangible	3.85	.79	.78	.59**	.58**	.61**	.51**
Desired support
6. Emotional	4.16	.74	.84	.57**	.46**	.36**	.41**	.37**
7. Esteem	4.05	.87	.93	.44**	.53**	.37**	.37**	.37**	.72**
8. Network	3.70	.86	.86	.34**	.34**	.59**	.34**	.36**	.59**	.65**
9. Informational	3.86	.79	.87	.42**	.41**	.43**	.58**	.42**	.61**	.60**	.62**
10. Tangible	3.96	.83	.84	.35**	.33**	.37**	.35**	.54**	.57**	.59**	.58**	.57**
Dependent variables
11. Relationship satisfaction	6.14	.91	.90	.59**	.54**	.50**	.50**	.49**	.36**	.33**	.25**	.38**	.25**
12. Perceived stress	3.17	.73	.83	−.10	−.05	−.02	−.03	−.05	.02	.07	.11*	.05	0.00	−.14**

*p < .05; **p < .01.

Received and desired support

A shortened version of Xu and Burleson’s (2001) measure was used to assess participants’ general perceptions of the amount of support that they desired as well as received from their chosen parent during stressful times in the past.¹ The measure was comprised of five 4-item subscales (i.e., emotional, esteem, network, informational, and tangible support). Participants responded to each item twice using the same 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = not at all, 5 = a great deal); first, they indicated how much support they desired from the parent and then indicated how much support they received from the parent.

Relationship satisfaction

Eight items adapted from the Marital Opinion Questionnaire (Huston, McHale, & Crouter, 1986) were used to assess parent–child relationship satisfaction. Participants indicated on a 7-point semantic differential scale (e.g., 1 = miserable, 7 = enjoyable) how they felt about their relationship with the parent.

Perceived stress

Participants responded to 10 items that tapped into perceived stress (Cohen, Kamarck, & Mermelstein, 1983). On a 5-point scale (1 = never, 5 = very often), participants indicated how often they felt or thought a certain way during the past month. CFA results showed that the 4 reverse coded items performed poorly; therefore, only the 6 regularly worded items were retained and used to calculate a composite score of perceived stress.

Analytic plan: Polynomial regression and response surface modeling

Polynomial regression and response surface modeling were used for analyses (Edwards, 1994; Edwards & Parry, 1993). These techniques examine the relationships between the congruence of two commensurate variables and an outcome variable (Shanock, Baran, Gentry, Pattison, & Heggestad, 2010). Polynomial regression has considerable advantages over difference scores because it examines how the combination of two variables explains variation of a dependent variable without eliminating information regarding the level of each variable (Edwards, 1994). This technique also avoids combining arbitrarily high and low levels of received and desired support (usually mean ± SD) as with moderated regressions (Barranti et al., 2017).

Following the procedure of polynomial regression (Edwards & Parry, 1993), the two dependent variables were separately regressed on desired and received parental support and three quadratic terms constructed from the two measures. For each regression, five polynomial terms were entered: received support (R), desired support (D), the product of received and desired support (RD), received support squared (R²), and desired support squared (D²). For ease of interpretation, the received and desired support measures were centered along the midpoint of the 5-point scale. The general equation for the regression is

Z = b_{0} + b_{1} R + b_{2} D + b_{3} R^{2} + b_{4} R D + b_{5} D^{2} + e,

where Z is the dependent variable. Because a separate regression was performed for each type of support, 10 polynomial regressions were conducted.

After conducting the polynomial regressions, response surface modeling (Edwards & Parry, 1993) was utilized to generate graphs to illustrate the surfaces implied by the results.² Figure 1 provides a hypothetical example of a surface depicting the associations between received support (R), desired support (D), and a dependent variable (Z). The dashed line on the horizontal plane depicts the line of incongruence (R = −D) between the two commensurate variables and the solid line depicts the line of congruence (R = D). Moving from the left to right, received support increases toward desired support as it approaches the center of the graph; received support exceeds desired support after it crosses the center of the graph. Hence, the shapes of surfaces along the R = −D line correspond to H1, H2, and RQ1, which are concerned with associations between support deficits, surpluses, and the outcome variables. The shapes of surfaces along the R = −D line could be examined by constraining D to be equal to −R in Equation 1 and obtaining the coefficients for R and R²:

Figure 1.

Hypothetical example of a three-dimensional response surface representing results of polynomial regression. R = received support; D = desired support; Z = outcome variable. The solid line on the horizontal plane indicates the R = D line (i.e., received–desired support congruence) and the dotted line indicates the R = −D line (i.e., received–desired support discrepancy).

Z = b_{0} + b_{1} R - b_{2} R + b_{3} R^{2} - b_{4} R^{2} + b_{5} R^{2} + e = b_{0} + (b_{1} - b_{2}) R + (b_{3} - b_{4} + b_{5}) R^{2} + e .

Equation 2 shows that along the R = −D line, b₁ − b₂ represents the slope of the surface at the center of the graph (R = D = 0), and b₃ − b₄ + b₅ represents the curvature of the surface (Edwards & Parry, 1993).

Along the line of congruence (R = D) from the front to the back of the graph, the levels of received and desired support concurrently increase. The shapes of surfaces along the R = D line correspond to H3 and RQ2, which pertain to different levels of received–desired support congruence. Substituting D with R in Equation 1 yields Equation 3:

Z = b_{0} + b_{1} R + b_{2} R + b_{3} R^{2} + b_{4} R^{2} + b_{5} R^{2} + e = b_{0} + (b_{1} + b_{2}) R + (b_{3} + b_{4} + b_{5}) R^{2} + e,

in which b₁ + b₂ represents the slope at the center of the graph (R = D = 0) and b₃ + b₄ + b₅ represents the curvature of the surface along the R = D line (Edwards & Parry, 1993). In summary, the analyses involve testing statistical significance of four coefficients: the slope a₁ = b₁ + b₂ and curvature a₂ = b₃ + b₄ + b₅ of the surface along the R = D line and the slope a₃ = b₁ − b₂ and curvature a₄ = b₃ − b₄ + b₅ of the surface along the R = −D line.

Results

This section describes the results with reference to each hypothesis and research question. It should be noted that the terms “increase,” “decrease,” and “exceed” indicate changes of values from one point to another in the response surface graphs rather than indicating variables’ changes over time or causal associations.

Received–desired support gaps (H1, H2, and RQ1)

H1a predicted that for action-facilitating support, deficits and surpluses would be positively associated with perceived stress. H2a stated that nurturant support deficits would be positively associated with perceived stress, and RQ1a inquired about the patterns of association between nurturant support surpluses and perceived stress. As shown in Table 2, for all five types of support and perceived stress, the slopes at the point R = 0, D = 0 along the R = −D line (a₃) were not significant, but the surfaces had positive curvatures (a₄). A combination of nonsignificant slope and significant positive curvature indicates a U-shaped surface minimized at the point of congruence (R = D = 0). As shown in Figure 2(a) to (e), moving along the R = −D line from the left corner to the center of the graph, perceived stress decreased. Immediately crossing the center point of the graph, the surface began to curve upward, showing that perceived stress increased when moving away from the center of the graph to the right corner. Put differently, the U-shaped surfaces demonstrated that emerging adults’ perceived stress increased as support gaps increased in either direction and that support deficits and surpluses were positively associated with perceived stress for both categories of support. H1a and H2a were supported.

Figure 2.

(a–e) Estimated surfaces demonstrating associations between received–desired support (in)congruence and perceived stress: (a) emotional, (b) esteem, (c) network, (d) informational, and (e) tangible support. In all graphs, the axis on the left side of the horizontal plane represents desired support and the axis on the right represents received support. The vertical axis represents perceived stress.

Table 2.

Results of polynomial regressions.

Support type	Unstandardized coefficient (standard error) of polynomial regression						R = D		R = −D
Support type	b ₁	b ₂	b ₃	b ₄	b ₅	R ²	a ₁	a ₂	a ₃	a ₄
Dependent variable = Perceived stress
Emotional	.10 (.11)	.12 (.13)	.06 (.06)	−.18* (.08)	.10 (.07)	.04*	.03 (.12)	−.02 (.06)	−.22 (.20)	.34** (.13)
Esteem	−.07 (.10)	.15 (.00)	.14** (.06)	−.26*** (.07)	.11* (.06)	.06***	.09 (.11)	−.01 (.07)	−.22 (.14)	.52*** (.09)
Network	−.02 (.07)	.10 (.08)	.03 (.05)	−.18** (.06)	.14* (.06)	.05**	.08 (.06)	−.01 (.02)	−.12 (.13)	.36*** (.09)
Informational	−.09 (.11)	.16 (.11)	.12 (.07)	−.26** (.09)	.13 (.07)	.03*	.07 (.11)	−.01 (.06)	−.25 (.18)	.51*** (.12)
Tangible	−.01 (.10)	.07 (.09)	.03 (.06)	−.16* (.07)	.10 (.06)	.02	.06 (.12)	−.03 (.06)	−.07 (.15)	.28** (.11)
Dependent variable = Relationship satisfaction
Emotional	.65*** (.11)	−.01 (.13)	−.13 (.07)	.23** (.08)	.04 (.08)	.37***	.64*** (.12)	.05 (.05)	.66** (.20)	−.04** (.14)
Esteem	.51*** (.10)	.08 (.09)	−.04 (.06)	.12 (.07)	−.07 (.06)	.30***	.59*** (.12)	.00 (.07)	.43** (.13)	−.23* (.11)
Network	.47*** (.07)	−.04 (.09)	−.10* (.05)	.21** (.07)	−.12 (.07)	.28***	.43*** (.07)	−.01 (.04)	.52*** (.14)	−.43*** (.10)
Informational	.48*** (.12)	.28* (.12)	−.08 (.07)	.22* (.09)	−.23** (.08)	.28***	.76*** (.12)	−.10 (.07)	.20 (.20)	−.53*** (.13)
Tangible	.62*** (.11)	−.13 (.10)	−.09 (.07)	.13 (.08)	−.00 (.06)	.25***	.49*** (.13)	.03 (.06)	.75*** (.16)	−.22 (.12)

Note. b₁–b₅ are unstandardized regression coefficients in: Z = b₀ + b₁R + b₂D + b₃R² + b₄RD + b₅D² + e, where Z = dependent variable, R = received support, D = desired support, R² = received support squared, RD = product of received and desired support, and D² = desired support squared. a₁ and a₂ represent the slope and curvature along the R = D line. a₃ and a₄ represent the slope and curvature along the R = −D line.

*p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001.

H1b proposed that, for action-facilitating support, deficits and surpluses would be negatively associated with relationship satisfaction. Of the two types of action-facilitating support, only the surface along the R = −D line for informational support was consistent with prediction of H1b. As shown in Table 2, for informational support and relationship satisfaction, there was a combination of a nonsignificant slope (a₃) and a significant negative curvature (a₄), which indicated an inverted U-shaped surface maximized at the point of congruence (R = D = 0). Figure 3(d) illustrates this surface. Moving from the left to the right corner, relationship satisfaction increased as received informational support approached desired informational support (i.e., deficits decreased), but after crossing the point of congruence (R = D = 0), the surface curved downward, demonstrating that relationship satisfaction decreased as surpluses in informational support increased. For tangible support and relationship satisfaction, the slope of the R = −D line was positive and significant (a₃), but the curvature was nonsignificant (a₄; see Table 2), suggesting that relationship satisfaction increased linearly along the R = −D line. Relationship satisfaction continued to increase even as tangible support surpluses increased (see Figure 3(d)). Thus, H1b was supported for informational support, but not for tangible support.

Figure 3.

(a–e) Estimated surfaces demonstrating associations between received–desired support (in)congruence and relationship satisfaction: (a) emotional, (b) esteem, (c) network, (d) informational, and (e) tangible support. In all graphs, the axis on the left side of the horizontal plane represents desired support and the axis on the right represents received support. The vertical axis represents relationship satisfaction.

H2b predicted that nurturant support deficits would be negatively associated with relationship satisfaction and RQ1b asked about the patterns of association between nurturant support surpluses and relationship satisfaction. For emotional, esteem, and network support, the slopes (a₃) along the R = −D line were positive and significant, and the curvatures (a₄) were negative and significant (see Table 2). This combination suggests an inverted U-shaped surface with the maximum point shifted toward the region where received support was greater than desired support rather than at the point of congruence. Figure 3(a) to (c) illustrates the surfaces implied by this combination. Moving from the left to right corner of the graph along the R = −D line, parent–child relationship satisfaction increased as support deficits decreased. H2b was thus supported. Relationship satisfaction continued to increase when received support exceeded desired support to some extent, but gradually leveled off and eventually began to decrease, indicating a curvilinear association between support surpluses and relationship satisfaction (RQ1b). The amount that the maximum point shifted was calculated using formulas presented by Edwards (2002) and Edwards and Parry (1993).³ Results showed that for emotional, esteem, and network support, relationship satisfaction leveled off when received support exceeded desired support by 2.32, 1.53, and 1.14 units, respectively.

Received–desired support congruence at different levels (H3 and RQ2)

H3 and RQ2 pertained to the shapes of surfaces along the R = D line. For perceived stress, none of the coefficients along the R = D line were significant (a₁ and a₂; see Table 2). A combination of nonsignificant slope and nonsignificant curvature implies a flat surface along the R = D line (Figure 2(a) to (e)). Thus, supporting H3, perceived stress did not significantly vary when received and desired support were congruent at different levels.

For relationship satisfaction, the surfaces along the R = D line at point R = D = 0 were positively sloped for all five types of support (a₁), whereas the curvatures were not significantly different from zero (a₂; see Table 2). A significant positive slope combined with a nonsignificant curvature indicates a surface that increases linearly. Moving from the front of the graphs to the back along the R = D line, as received and desired support increased concurrently, relationship satisfaction increased (RQ2; see Figure 3(a) to (e)).

Supplementary analyses

To assess whether children’s and parents’ gender and parent–child gender match (i.e., daughter–mother, son–father vs. daughter–father, son–mother) affected the results, these variables were individually entered to each regression as covariates, and then response surface coefficients (a₁–a₄) were recalculated. After accounting for these covariates, the shapes of the surfaces remained identical to those described previously. Hence, the patterns of association did not differ by gender or parent–child gender match. Details of these analyses are available from the author.

Discussion

Adopting a support gap perspective, this study shed new light on circumstances in which parental support to emerging adults was more or less beneficial. Findings revealed that implications of support deficits and surpluses varied by the support type and social support outcome. Specifically, the received–desired support matching hypothesis held true for perceived stress. However, received–desired support congruence corresponded with the highest levels of relationship satisfaction only for informational support. The associations between relationship satisfaction and nurturant support demonstrated a pattern that slightly deviated from the matching hypothesis, such that a degree of support surpluses, rather than a received–desired support congruence, corresponded with the highest relationship satisfaction. These findings suggest that, under certain circumstances, a “match” between received and desired support engenders optimal outcomes; yet, at times, a level of support surpluses can be beneficial (i.e., an optimal surpluses phenomenon). Overall, whereas deficits in various types of parental support were generally problematic, support surpluses had more complicated implications. Lastly, expanding on the basic logic of support gaps, this study found that relationship satisfaction was higher when received and desired support matched at a higher level, underscoring that a “low match” and a “high match” may have different implications for the relationship.

Support gaps: Differences by support types and the directionality of gaps

A primary proposition of the support gap perspective is that discrepancies between the amount of support received and desired will be associated with negative reactions to stressors (Joseph et al., 2016; Matsunaga, 2011). This study offered some support for this proposition. For all five types of parental support, emerging adults’ perceived stress in the past month was lowest at the point of received–desired support congruence. Notably, for perceived stressed, there is no evidence that support surpluses were more or less problematic than deficits (the surfaces approximated symmetrical along the R = D line; see Figure 2(a) to (e)). Although past studies have found benefits with surpluses in nurturant support (Davis & High, 2019; High & Crowley, 2018; McLaren & High, 2015), in this study, surpluses in all five types of parental support did not facilitate coping. Receiving more support from parents than desired may reinforce the “helpless” or “incompetent” role of emerging adults as support recipients who must rely on parents’ support, while their central task is to become self-sufficient individuals (Arnett, 2015). Therefore, the relational context and developmental needs of support recipients should be considered when assessing the implications of support surpluses on coping.

The findings about parent–child relationship satisfaction were inconsistent across different types of support. The support matching hypothesis only held for informational support (see Figure 3(d)). Moreover, Figure 3(d) revealed that patterns of association for support deficits and surpluses approximated symmetry, such that the right corner (received > desired) was nearly as low as the left corner (received < desired). In contrast, the surfaces of emotional, esteem, and network support were apparently asymmetrical (Figure 3(a) to (c)); relationship satisfaction was much lower at the left corner (received < desired) than at the right corner (received > desired). Therefore, for nurturant support, support deficits were more problematic for relationship satisfaction than support surpluses, whereas surpluses in informational support were no less problematic than deficits. These findings suggest that surpluses in parental informational support may be particularly problematic for the parent-emerging adult relationships. Within close knit networks like the family, informational support is perceived as unhelpful or countereffective more often than nurturing or emotion-focused support (Trees, 2014). Surpluses in parents’ informational support may stem from unwanted advice from parents, which tends to be overwhelming and face threatening (Floyd & Ray, 2017). Because advice often provides directions to solve specific problems, undesired advice may indicate parents’ attempt to influence how their children manage problems (Carlson, 2016). Past research has documented the undesirable outcomes of surpluses in informational support; for instance, informational support surpluses were associated with more hurt feelings and negative relational outcomes (McLaren & High, 2015). Adding to extant research, this study demonstrated that surpluses in informational support could be more problematic than surpluses in other support types, particularly for support recipients who seek a sense of self-direction and autonomy.

Inconsistent with the received–desired support matching hypothesis, results for nurturant support revealed a pattern of association between support gaps and relationship satisfaction that has not been documented in prior research. Findings indicated an optimal surpluses phenomenon, in which relationship satisfaction increased as received support approached desired support and continued to increase as received support exceeded desired support, only leveling off when support surpluses became extreme (see Figure 3(a) to (c)). Thus, parents may have some leeway to provide emerging adults with nurturant support in amounts that exceed emerging adults’ desires. The key question, then, is why, for nurturant support, an amount of support surpluses was associated with higher relationship satisfaction than an occurrence of received–desired support congruence. One explanation is that a small amount of surpluses in nurturant support may result in a positive violation of expectancy, making the recipient feel positive about the support provider and the relationship. Violations of expectancies can be interpreted positively, especially when the violations are perceived as rewarding (Afifi & Metts, 1998). Because nurturant support helps relieve distress and enhances perceptions of warmth and care from the support provider (Rains et al., 2015), a level of nurturant support surpluses may convey unexpected parental care and warmth, increasing the rewards of the relationships. Although both expected and desired support are likely shaped by rules, norms, and situational factors, desired support is conceptually distinct from expected support (Davis & High, 2019). Research has incorporated the concept of expectancy to investigate the discrepancy between received and expected support (Davis & High, 2019); thus, it remains to be empirically examined the extent to which support surpluses represent exceeded expectations for support.

It should be noted that benefits of nurturant support surpluses diminished as received support exceeded desired support substantively. Thus, even for the nurturing types of support that are particularly critical in close relationships (Burleson, 2003), extreme surpluses may still curtail parent–child relationship satisfaction during emerging adulthood. Segrin, Wosidlo, Givertz, Bauer, and Murphy (2012) suggested that one aspect of overparenting was parents’ “affect management” of their children, indicating that too much emotion-focused support could be manipulative. Also, the optimal surpluses phenomenon was found only for associations between nurturant support and relationship satisfaction, not perceived stress. In fact, surpluses in nurturant support were associated with increased perceived stress. Therefore, the implications of support surpluses can be simultaneously positive and negative, depending on the outcome of interest and the type of support.

Although informational and tangible support are both types of action-facilitating support (Rains et al., 2015), their results were not identical. Deviating from the pattern implied by the received–desired matching hypothesis, emerging adults’ relationship satisfaction increased linearly as received tangible support exceeded desired support (see Figure 3(e)), suggesting that the more tangible support that emerging adults received, the more satisfied they were with the relationship, regardless of their desires. This finding was unexpected but may be understood by considering emerging adults’ expectation of intense tangible support from parents. Fingerman, Cheng, Wesselmann, et al. (2012) showed that adult children benefited from intense parental support, suggesting that it may have become the “new normal” for young adults to expect frequent and intense tangible support from parents. Receiving an excessive amount of tangible support may not violate autonomy. Yet this finding may be unique to the sample. In fact, past research has reported mixed findings; McLaren and High (2015) found that tangible support surpluses were negatively associated with hurt feelings and negative relational consequences, and Brock and Lawrence (2009) reported associations between tangible support surpluses and declines in marital satisfaction. Thus, implications of tangible support surpluses may depend on contextual factors and warrant further investigation.

Received–desired congruence at different levels

This study showed that when the amounts of received and desired parental support matched, receiving more support was not more beneficial in reducing perceived stress. However, emerging adults’ relationship satisfaction with parents varied as received–desired support congruence occurred at different levels, such that emerging adults reported higher parent–child relationship satisfaction when received–desired support congruence occurred at a higher than at a lower level. There are two possible explanations. First, individuals who desire and receive high levels of parental support may experience a heightened sense of parent–child relational closeness. Indeed, families can strengthen a sense of unity and solidarity by making collaborative efforts to cope with individual family members’ stressful situations (Lyons, Mickelson, Sullivan, & Coyne, 1998). A high match between received and desired support may signify parents’ communal orientation and strengthen the parent–child bond.

Second, desiring and receiving an equally high level of parental support may have a positive “spill over” effect. Engaging in frequent supportive communication may positively impact other aspects of the parent–child interaction, such as signaling warmth and care (Collins & Feeney, 2010) and cultivating trust (Cutrona, Russell, & Gardner, 2005), all of which may enhance relationship satisfaction. In sum, these findings suggest that it is an oversimplified assumption that a received–desired support congruence corresponds with the optimal outcomes regardless of how much support is desired and received. A more comprehensive understanding of support gaps requires researchers to account for the levels of support. There are different conditions for a “zero support gap,” as a “high match” may benefit the relationship more than a “low match.”

Limitations and future research

Several limitations of this study should be acknowledged. First, because participants were recruited from undergraduate courses, findings may not be generalized to noncollege emerging adults (Arnett, 2015). The current sample was primarily comprised of females who reported on their mother. Since relatively few participants reported on their father or a stepparent, this study could not test whether the findings differed by the type of support provider. Although supplemental analyses showed results were not altered by gender or the parent–child gender match, future research should replicate these findings using more diverse samples. Second, the cross-sectional data could not affirm causal associations; for instance, relational quality may bias individuals’ evaluation of supportiveness—a phenomenon termed “sentiment override” (Priem, Solomon, & Steuber, 2009). Emerging adults who are more satisfied with the parent–child relationships may perceive higher received–desired support congruence. Likewise, although the coping perspective conceptualizes social support as the antecedent to stress, it is possible that perceptions of stress in the past month have affected perceptions of received–desired support congruence. Therefore, it is crucial that future research uses longitudinal designs to attain more tenable causal inferences.

Additionally, a perennial problem with surveys is the bias of retrospective self-reports. Participants’ reports of parental support may not accurately reflect their actual experiences. Also, because this study examined perceptions of support gaps within parent–child relationships based on past stressful experiences in general, participants were not asked to reflect on parental support during a specific timeframe. Some participants may have based their reports on memorable supportive interactions with parents that happened a long time ago, which may misalign with their coping with stressors during the past month. Further, although the shortened version of Xu and Burleson’s (2001) social support scale demonstrated reliability and validity in the current sample, it remains unknown whether findings are comparable to those reported in prior studies that used the full scale (e.g., High & Crowley, 2018; McLaren & High, 2015). Future research should compare support gaps across contexts and ensure measurement invariance across samples.

Lastly, this study only analyzed reports from emerging adults. Although research has typically operationalized support gaps from support recipients’ perspectives, it can be extended by incorporating support providers’ perspectives. For example, a gap may exist between parent-reported provided support and child-reported received support. This type of gap may be understood from an invisible support perspective, as parental support is “invisible” when the child does not receive parent-provided support, but “illusory” when the child thinks she or he has received support that the parent did not provide (Bolger et al., 2000). The implications of various types of support gaps is a fruitful avenue for this line of research.

To conclude, the current study contributes to the literature by unpacking nuances in the implications of support gaps and demonstrating the utility of polynomial regressions with response surface modeling for support gap research. Although there was some evidence for the received–desired support matching hypothesis, the optimal surpluses phenomenon suggests it is an oversimplified proposition for certain types of support in relation to certain outcomes. By illuminating the complexity of support gaps, this study pointed out fruitful directions for enhancing understandings of supportive interaction in close relationships.

Footnotes

Author’s note

A previous version of the manuscript was presented at the annual meeting of National Communication Association (November 2017) in Dallas, TX, USA.

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank John Caughlin for his guidance on designing this study and the editor and anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Open research statement

As part of IARR’s encouragement of open research practices, the author has provided the following information: This research was not preregistered. The data used in the research are not available. The materials used in the research are available. The materials can be obtained by e-mailing: wnxcrystal@gmail.com

Notes

References

Afifi

W. A.

Metts

(1998). Characteristics and consequences of expectation violations in close relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 15, 365–392. doi:10.1177/0265407598153004

Arnett

J. J.

(2015). Emerging adulthood: The winding road from the late teens through the twenties (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University.

Barranti

Carlson

E. N.

Côté

(2017). How to test questions about similarity in personality and social psychology research: Description and empirical demonstration of response surface analysis. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8, 465–475. doi:10.1177/1948550617698204

Bolger

Zuckerman

Kessler

R. C.

(2000). Invisible support and adjustment to stress. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 953–961. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79.6.953

Brock

R. L.

Lawrence

(2009). Too much of a good thing: Underprovision versus overprovision of partner support. Journal of Family Psychology, 23, 181–192. doi:10.1037/a0015402

Burleson

B. R.

(2003). The experience and effects of emotional support: What the study of cultural and gender differences can tell us about close relationships, emotion, and interpersonal communication. Personal Relationships, 10, 1–23. doi:10.1111/1475-6811.00033

Burleson

B. R.

Goldsmith

D. J.

(1998). How the comforting process works: Alleviating emotional distress through conversationally induced reappraisals. In Andersen

P. A.

Guerrero

L. K.

(Eds.), The handbook of emotion and communication (pp. 245–280). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Carlson

C. L.

(2016). Predicting emerging adults’ implementation of parental advice: Source, situation, relationship, and message characteristics. Western Journal of Communication, 80, 304–326. doi:10.1080/10570314.2016.1142112

Cohen

Kamarck

Mermelstein

(1983). A global measure of perceived stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24, 385–396. Retrieved from https://www-jstor-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/stable/2136404

10.

Collins

N. L.

Feeney

B. C.

(2010). An attachment theoretical perspective on social support dynamics in couples: Normative processes and individual differences. In Sullivan

K. T.

Davila

(Eds.), Support processes in intimate relationships (pp. 89–120). New York, NY: Oxford University.

11.

Cutrona

C. E.

(1996). Social support as a determinant of marital quality: The interplay of negative and supportive behaviors. In Pierce

G. R.

Sarason

B. R.

Sarason

I. G.

(Eds.), Handbook of social support and the family (pp. 173–194). New York, NY: Plenum.

12.

Cutrona

C. E.

Russell

D. W.

(1990). Types of social support and specific stress: Toward a theory of optimal matching. In Burleson

B. R.

Sarason

I. G.

Pierce

G. R.

(Eds.), Social support: An interactional view (pp. 319–366). New York, NY: Wiley.

13.

Cutrona

C. E.

Russell

D. W.

Gardner

K. A.

(2005). The relationship enhancement model of social support. In Revenson

T. A.

Kayser

Bodenmann

(Eds.), Couples coping with stress (pp. 3–23). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

14.

Cutrona

C. E.

Suhr

J. A.

(1992). Controllability of stressful events and satisfaction with spouse support behaviors. Communication Research, 19, 154–174.

15.

Davis

S. M.

High

A. C.

(2019). Widening the gap: Support gaps in same race versus different race female friendship dyads. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 36, 187–213. doi:10.1177/0265407517722245

16.

Edwards

J. R.

(1994). The study of congruence in organizational behavior research: Critique and a proposed alternative. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 58, 51–100. doi:10.1006/obhd.1994.1029

17.

Edwards

J. R.

(2001). Ten difference score myths. Organizational Research Methods, 4, 265–287. doi:10.1177/109442810143005

18.

Edwards

J. R.

(2002). Alternatives to difference scores: Polynomial regression analysis and response surface methodology. In Drasgow

Schmitt

N. W.

(Eds.), Measuring and analyzing behavior in organizations: Advances in measurement and data analysis (pp. 350–400). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

19.

Edwards

J. R.

Parry

M. E.

(1993). On the use of polynomial regression equations as an alternative to difference scores in organizational research. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 1577–1613. doi:10.2307/256822

20.

Feeney

B. C.

Collins

N. L.

(2015). A new look at social support: A theoretical perspective on thriving through relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 19, 113–147. doi:10.1177/1088868314544222

21.

Floyd

Ray

C. D.

(2017). Thanks, but no thanks: Negotiating face threats when rejecting offers of unwanted social support. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 34, 1260–1276. doi:10.1177/0265407516673161

22.

Fingerman

K. L.

Cheng

Y. P.

Tighe

Birditt

K. S.

Zarit

(2012). Relationships between young adults and their parents. In Booth

Brown

S. L.

Landale

N. S.

Manning

W. D.

McHale

S. M.

(Eds.), Early adulthood in a family context (pp. 59–85). New York, NY: Springer.

23.

Fingerman

K. L.

Cheng

Y.-P.

Wesselmann

R. D.

Zarit

Furstenberg

Birditt

K. S.

(2012). Helicopter parents and landing pad kids: Intense parental support of grown children. Journal of Marriage and Family, 74, 880–896. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2012.00987.x

24.

High

A. C.

Crowley

J. L.

(2018). Gaps among desired, sought, and received support deficits and surpluses in support when coping with taboo marital stressors. Communication Research, 45, 319–338. doi:10.1177/0093650215626975

25.

High

A. C.

Steuber

K. R.

(2014). An examination of support (in)adequacy: Types, sources, and consequences of social support among infertile women. Communication Monographs, 81, 157–178. doi:10.1080/03637751.2013.878868

26.

Holt

L. J.

Mattanah

J. F.

Long

M. W.

(2018). Change in parental and peer relationship quality during emerging adulthood: Implications for academic, social, and emotional functioning. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 35, 743–769. doi:10.1177/0265407517697856

27.

L. T.

Bentler

P. M.

(1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118.

28.

Huston

T. L.

McHale

S. M.

Crouter

A. C.

(1986). When the honeymoon’s over: Changes in the marriage relationship over the first year. In Gilmour

Duck

(Eds.), The emerging field of personal relationships (pp. 109–132). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

29.

Inguglia

Ingoglia

Liga

Coco

A. L.

Cricchio

M. G. L.

(2015). Autonomy and relatedness in adolescence and emerging adulthood: Relationships with parental support and psychological distress. Journal of Adult Development, 22, 1–13. doi:10.1007/s10804-014-9196-8

30.

Johnson

M. K.

Benson

(2012). The implications of family context for the transition to adulthood. In Booth

Brown

S. L.

Landale

N. S.

Manning

W. D.

McHale

S. M.

(Eds.), Early adulthood in a family context (pp. 59–85). New York, NY: Springer.

31.

Joseph

Afifi

T. D.

Denes

(2016). (Unmet) Standards for emotional support and their short-and medium-term consequences. Communication Monographs, 83, 163–193. doi:10.1080/03637751.2015.1068432

32.

Lazarus

R. S.

Folkman

(1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York, NY: Springer.

33.

Levitt

M. J.

Silver

M. E.

Santos

J. D.

(2007). Adolescents in transition to adulthood: Parental support, relationship satisfaction, and post-transition adjustment. Journal of Adult Development, 14, 53–63. doi:10.1007/s10804-007-9032-5

34.

Lyons

R. F.

Mickelson

Sullivan

J. L.

Coyne

J. C.

(1998). Coping as a communal process. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 15, 579–607. doi:10.1177/0265407598155001

35.

MacGeorge

E. L.

Feng

Burleson

B. R.

(2011). Supportive communication. In Knapp

M. L.

Daly

J. A.

(Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication (4th ed., pp. 317–354). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

36.

Maisel

N. C.

Gable

S. L.

(2009). The paradox of received social support: The importance of responsiveness. Psychological Science, 20, 928–932. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02388.x

37.

Matsunaga

(2011). Underlying circuits of social support for bullied victims: An appraisal-based perspective on supportive communication and post-bullying adjustment. Human Communication Research, 37, 174–206. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2010.01398.x

38.

McLaren

R. M.

High

A. C.

(2015). The effect of under-and over-benefited support gaps on hurt feelings, esteem, and relationships. Communication Research. Advanced online publication. doi:10.1177/0093650215605155

39.

Miczo

L. A.

Johnson

(2006). Parental support, perceived stress, and illness-related variables among first-year college students. Journal of Family Communication, 6, 97–117. doi:10.1207/s15327698jfc0602_1

40.

Padilla-Walker

L. M.

Nelson

L. J.

Carroll

J. S.

(2012). Affording emerging adulthood: Parental financial assistance of their college-aged children. Journal of Adult Development, 19, 50–58. doi:10.1007/s10804-011-9134-y

41.

Padilla-Walker

L. M.

Nelson

L. J.

Knapp

D. J.

(2014). “Because I’m still the parent, that’s why!” Parental legitimate authority during emerging adulthood. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 31, 293–313. doi:10.1177/0265407513494949

42.

Priem

J. S.

Solomon

D. H.

(2015). Emotional support and physiological stress recovery: The role of support matching, adequacy, and invisibility. Communication Monographs, 82, 88–112. doi:10.1080/03637751.2014.971416

43.

Priem

J. S.

Solomon

D. H.

Steuber

K. R.

(2009). Accuracy and bias in perceptions of emotionally supportive communication in marriage. Personal Relationships, 16, 531–552. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.2009.01238.x

44.

Rains

S. A.

Peterson

E. B.

Wright

K. B.

(2015). Communicating social support in computer-mediated contexts: A meta-analytic review of content analyses examining support messages shared online among individuals coping with illness. Communication Monographs, 82, 403–430. doi:10.1080/03637751.2015.1019530

45.

Segrin

Woszidlo

Givertz

Bauer

Murphy

T. M.

(2012). The association between overparenting, parent-child communication, and entitlement and adaptive traits in adult children. Family Relations, 61, 237–252. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3729.2011.00689.x

46.

Shanock

L. R.

Baran

B. E.

Gentry

W. A.

Pattison

S. C.

Heggestad

E. D.

(2010). Polynomial regression with response surface analysis: A powerful approach for examining moderation and overcoming limitations of difference scores. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25, 543–554. doi:10.1007/s10869-010-9183-4

47.

Trees

A. R.

(2014). Social support processes in the family. In Turner

L. H.

West

(Eds.), The SAGE handbook of family communication (pp. 138–153). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

48.

Burleson

B. R.

(2001). Effects of sex, culture, and support type on perceptions of spousal social support: An assessment of the “support gap” hypothesis in early marriage. Human Communication Research, 27, 535–566. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2001.tb00792.