Four parenting profiles and disordered eating: A latent profile analysis with cross-validation in Chinese college students

Disordered eating (DE) is increasingly prevalent among Chinese college students, yet its familial correlates remain incompletely understood. Although negative parenting styles have been robustly linked to DE, prior variable-centered approaches obscure how these dimensions configure within specific families. Guided by a Developmental Psychopathology framework, the present study adopted an exploratory person-centered approach to address this gap. Specifically, we sought to identify latent profiles based on paternal and maternal rejection and overprotection, examine their associations with DE, and evaluate sociodemographic predictors of profile membership. A total of 1,198 Chinese college students (45.3% female; Mage = 19.14, SD = 1.20) were recruited from five colleges using stratified cluster sampling and completed the s-EMBU-C to assess paternal and maternal rejection and overprotection, and the EAT-19 to assess DE. Latent profile analysis (LPA) was conducted on the four disaggregated parenting dimensions, utilizing a split-half cross-validation procedure to ensure profile replicability. Profile differences in DE were examined via one-way ANOVA, and multinomial logistic regression evaluated sociodemographic predictors of profile membership. Four replicable parenting profiles emerged: Dual-Risk (5.8%), Moderate (30.5%), Healthy (29.5%), and Helicopter (34.2%; elevated overprotection coupled with low rejection). Profile comparisons revealed significant differences in DE, F (3, 1194) = 14.46, p < .001, with severity ranked as Dual-Risk > Moderate > Helicopter ≈ Healthy. Furthermore, only-child status was the sole significant sociodemographic predictor of profile membership, indicating that only children were significantly more likely to belong to the Helicopter pattern than non-only children (ORs = 0.60–0.61, ps < 0.01). These findings highlight that within the Chinese context, parenting profiles characterized by elevated rejection represent the primary familial correlates of DE vulnerability, whereas those defined by overprotection alone do not. Ultimately, this suggests that culturally sensitive interventions should prioritize addressing rejection-centric family climates over merely curbing intensive involvement. This study explored how negative parenting styles relate to disordered eating (DE) among 1,198 Chinese college students. Unlike many previous studies, which examined parenting behaviors one dimension at a time, we used a person-centered approach that grouped families based on how these behaviors actually co-occur within the same home. The analysis revealed four distinct parenting climates: a Dual-Risk group (extremely high rejection and overprotection), a Moderate group (high rejection, moderate overprotection), a Healthy group (low rejection, low overprotection), and a Helicopter group (low rejection, moderate overprotection)—which emerged as the most common family climate, representing over one-third of our sample. In addition, students from the Dual-Risk and Moderate groups both reported higher DE levels, while those from the Helicopter and Healthy groups showed similarly low levels. Only children were more likely to belong to the Helicopter family climate. These findings suggest that young people from parenting climates marked by elevated rejection are most closely associated with heightened DE vulnerability, whereas those from climates marked predominantly by overprotection show no such elevated risk. This insight may inform more targeted prevention and support strategies for Chinese college students.