Rianne Kok

Most parents lie to their children. Parental lying has been linked to parent–child relationship quality and children's social and moral development, underscoring the importance of accurately measuring this behavior. Existing instruments primarily assess prevalence, focus on a particular subtype of parental lying only (i.e., parenting by lying), and their psychometric properties remain understudied. This study therefore introduces the Parental Lying Scenarios Scale (PLSS), a 40‐item self‐report instrument of parental lying prevalence and frequency across a broad range of parental lies. We assess its test–retest reliability, convergent and predictive validity, and factor structure. Data were collected from Dutch parents of children aged 5–12 years ( n = 247 for test–retest reliability and factor analysis; n = 316 for validity analyses). The PLSS demonstrated strong test–retest reliability and evidence for convergent and predictive validity. Exploratory Factor Analyses at two timepoints consistently identified two distinct factors: lying to influence children's behavior and lying to shape children's knowledge or emotions. This study provides initial support for the PLSS as a reliable and conceptually meaningful instrument for capturing a broader range of parental lying. The PLSS thereby offers a promising methodological foundation for future research on the antecedents and socio‐moral implications of parental lying for both parents and children.

Early regulatory problems (RPs), including excessive crying, sleeping difficulties, and feeding issues in infancy, are associated with later mental health difficulties. However, existing studies used broad mental health outcomes and inconsistent outcome measures. They have also overlooked adolescence, which is a crucial and sensitive developmental period. Using harmonized RP classifications, measured from 6 to 36 months of age, and item-level harmonized mental health dimensions, we examined emotional, social, hyperactivity / inattention, and conduct problems at ages 10, 14, and 18 years in two population-based cohorts (ALSPAC, N = 3870; Generation R, N = 1798). Longitudinal mixed models showed RP-related differences across all mental health dimensions. Specifically, children with multiple (two or more at one timepoint) or multiple-persistent (two or more RPs present at three or more timepoints in the first 36 months) RPs had consistently higher emotional, social, attention, and conduct problems, compared with participants without RPs. These differences remained stable across adolescence, with no evidence of RP-by-assessment wave interactions and were comparable for both sexes. Our cross-cohort findings support early RPs as early indicators of later mental health vulnerability. They additionally show that these associations can be identified reliably using harmonized exposure and outcome constructs across cohorts. Screening for these behaviors in routine pediatric care offers a practical method to identify at-risk children and guide early preventive interventions.

Researchers typically rely on self‐report when investigating individuals' behavior. However, when assessing socially undesirable behaviors such as dishonesty, self‐report is vulnerable to underreporting and positive response bias (“faking good”). The present study examined whether supernormality, an extreme form of positive response bias, influences self‐reported lying behavior. A total of 777 participants completed an online survey assessing supernormality and different dimensions of lying behavior. Based on their scores on the Supernormality Scale‐Revised ( SS ‐R), participants were categorized into a “supernormal group” ( n = 223, 28.7%) or a “credible group” ( n = 554, 71.3%). Group differences across several lying‐related outcomes were examined. Compared to the credible group, the supernormal group reported lower lying frequency, greater unwillingness to lie due to negative internal factors (i.e., higher negativity), lower contextuality, and lower relational and antisocial lying. These differences emerged consistently across multiple dimensions of lying, suggesting a systematic shift in responding rather than isolated effects. The findings suggest that extreme positive response bias may extend beyond the underreporting of psychological distress to socially undesirable behaviors such as lying, potentially leading to systematic underestimation in self‐report research. Overall, the results highlight the vulnerability of self‐report when assessing sensitive behaviors and the importance of accounting for response bias.

Children’s lying behaviour is thought to develop through both domain-specific socialization, such as parental modelling of lying and parental moral messages about lying or honesty, and broader domain-general socialization such as parenting styles. To date, no studies have simultaneously investigated these socialization domains in child lying. The present study used cross-sectional parent-report data from 217 parents of 4- to 8-year-olds to examine associations between parental messages about lying, parenting-by-lying (modelling of lying), parenting styles, and child lying. All three aspects of socialization were independently associated with child lying. First, more parenting-by-lying was associated with more child lying. Second, stronger parental emphasis on honesty was linked to less child lying. Third, higher levels of authoritarian parenting were associated with more child lying. Overall, this study illustrates how different aspects of socialization contribute independently to children’s moral development.

Objective. This study examines trends in (intensive) parenting norms and ideals by analyzing question and answer columns (Q/A columns) in popular periodicals in the Netherlands between 1946 and 2024. Historical reflection offers a means to interpret current parenting pressures by tracing their development over time.Design. We first explored general trends in Q/A columns in Dutch periodicals from 1946 to 2024 and constructed a corpus of 7131 digitized texts from selected columns. Structural topic modeling was used to identify themes and assess their prevalence over time. In addition, we close read texts on “toilet training”, “speech and language”, and the “terrible twos” to analyze changes in the content and type of questions.Results. Classic child rearing themes, such as nutrition and toilet training, were persistently discussed in Q/A columns. Over time, interest in specific themes fluctuated, and parents’ self-presentations changed. Attention to young children increased in the 1970s alongside growing interest in child development stages. From the 1980s onward, parents increasingly foregrounded their insecurities and emotional responses in the questions. In the past two decades, attention for older children and family structures partly supplanted questions on babies and toddlers. Conclusions. Scientific theories and societal developments inform not only the parenting advice offered but also which questions are asked and how, making parenting questions both intuitive and socially constructed. Researchers should, therefore, reflect on how they translate their findings to the wider public, especially in a context where child-rearing has been increasingly envisioned as an individualized, risky, and intensive endeavor.

Many parents lie to their children even though they disapprove of lying and teach their children that lying is wrong. However, discrepancies between parents’ attitudes toward lying, their lying behavior, and their teaching about lying have received little empirical attention, and their extent and nature remain largely unknown. In this preregistered study, we examined the prevalence and frequency of parental lying discrepancies, how these discrepancies cluster, and how parents feel about them. Parents (N = 348) of children aged 5–12 years completed 12 scenario-based items assessing discrepancies in other-oriented (i.e., to benefit or protect someone) and instrumental (i.e., to influence someone’s behavior) lying, as well as their feelings about these discrepancies. Descriptive analyses assessed prevalence, frequency, and parents’ feelings, whereas confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses examined clustering.Results indicated that discrepancies between parents’ attitudes, behaviors, and teaching about lying were highly prevalent, with 96.6% of parents showing at least one discrepancy. A substantial proportion of parents (22.4%) reported showing at least one discrepancy often or very often. Depending on the item, 25%–50% reported negative feelings about their discrepancies. Both confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses showed that discrepancies clustered by lie type (other-oriented vs. instrumental lies), suggesting distinct, context-specific patterns rather than a single form of discrepancy. Overall, these findings indicate that discrepancies between what parents believe, do, and teach about lying are widespread, structured, and can evoke negative feelings, highlighting the need for further research on their antecedents and implications for parents and children’s social and moral development.

Parents worldwide lie to their children to elicit behavioral compliance (instrumental lying). Little is known about how instrumental lying relates to other parenting behaviors and whether it is associated with child compliance. This large preregistered cross-sectional population-based study (N = 734) examined associations between different types of parental instrumental lies and positive and negative control, and children’s behavioral compliance at age 3, using systematic observations in a standardized behavioral control setting. Results showed that instrumental lies involving false promises or exaggerated positive consequences were associated with less positive control and more negative control. Instrumental lies involving false threats or exaggerated negative consequences were associated with more negative control. Regarding child behavior, instrumental lies involving false threats or exaggerated negative consequences, as well as those involving playfulness or imagination were associated with lower compliance. Other instrumental lies were not associated with parental control or child compliance. These findings suggest that some, but not all, aspects of instrumental lying are indicative of negative control. Moreover, although parents tell instrumental lies to promote children’s compliance, some types of instrumental lying were associated with lower compliance. This underscores the need to raise parental awareness of the common practice of instrumental lying and offer practical alternatives. Future longitudinal research could examine causal relationships between different types of instrumental lying, parental control, other parenting behaviors, and child compliance, as well as underlying mechanisms, such as children’s perceptions of parental lies and trust, and parental stress.

Many parents lie to their children. Paradoxically, many also disapprove of lying to children and teach children that lying is unacceptable, suggesting discrepancies between parental lying attitudes, lying behaviors, and teaching about lying. This study explored the alignment and discrepancies between parental attitudes, behaviors, and teaching across three lie types: other-oriented, self-oriented, and instrumental. Cross-sectional data were collected from parents in the Netherlands (N = 312, 79.8% mothers) and analyzed using correlational and Latent Profile Analyses. Between-parent associations suggested a general alignment between parental attitudes, behaviors, and teaching, with variations in strength depending on the type of lie. However, within-parent analyses showed that many parents exhibited discrepancies between their lying attitudes, behaviors, and teaching. The prevalence and patterns of alignment and discrepancies also differed by lie type. These findings suggest that most parents do not fully practice what they believe or preach, nor do they consistently preach what they believe, reflecting internal conflicts within parents and inconsistencies in moral socialization within families. This study not only expands on the limited understanding of parental alignment and discrepancies between lying attitudes, behaviors, and teaching but also proposes novel hypotheses of potential mechanisms underlying parental discrepancies, including parental stress, hierarchical family dynamics, and societal norms.

Parental lying to children, for example, to influence children’s behavior and emotions, is common and linked to more child lying and maladjustment. Existing research mainly relies on retrospective parent- or child-reports of parental lying, does not differentiate between types of lies, and uses cross-sectional designs. This longitudinal population-based cohort study (N = 801) tested a novel systematic coding scheme to observe parental lying to children at age 3 during three structured behavioral control tasks in the laboratory. This study then examined prospective associations with observed child lying at age 4 (n = 537), and parent-reported internalizing and externalizing symptoms at age 5 (n = 729), and callous-unemotional traits at age 9 (n = 563). We reliably observed four types of parental lies to influence children’s behavior (i.e., instrumental lies) and parental lies to foster imagination or fun. Most parents (94%) told at least one of these lies, whereas only few lied often. Prospective associations were examined for the four types of instrumental lies. None of the parental instrumental lies were associated with child lying or internalizing and externalizing symptoms. Parental instrumental lies involving false promises or exaggerated positive consequences were related to fewer callous-unemotional traits. This study shows the feasibility of using structured observations to measure different types of parental lying to children and demonstrates that the casual parental lies we observed were not associated with harmful child development and, in some cases, may even be associated with positive developmental outcomes.