This study began with the hypothesis that dyadic adjustment might hinge on the balance between dependency and autonomy experienced during adolescence and young adulthood (Belsky et al., 2003; Carli et al., 2010).

The study investigated how individuals' memories of parenting styles during the first 16 years of their lives, along with their processes of differentiation of self, influenced their own adaptation within relationships. Additionally, it explored their subjective perceptions of relationship quality, including consensus, satisfaction, cohesion, and affective expression.

It was expected that the influence of memories of parental styles in terms of levels of overprotection and care on the couple's dyadic adaptation could be mediated by levels of self-differentiation.

Our findings confirm that differentiation of self significantly influences dyadic adjustment. Specifically, lower levels of emotional cutoff and higher levels of I-position are associated with improved dyadic adaptation. These results align with previous studies, which highlight that adequate I-position fosters healthy emotional connections and mutual respect for boundaries, both essential for positive relational adjustment (Lampis, 2016; Lampis et al., 2019; Peleg, 2008). Conversely, low emotional cutoff likely reduces the risk of avoiding conflict or suppressing emotions, which could otherwise hinder intimacy and cooperation, thus complicating adaptation to a partner’s needs and changes (Rodríguez-González et al., 2016; Skowron, 2000).

The results also emphasize that high levels of maternal care, characterized by warmth and emotional availability, are linked to better dyadic adjustment, while maternal control predicts poorer adjustment. High maternal care may teach children empathy, communication, and constructive conflict resolution, facilitating healthier interpersonal dynamics, including romantic relationships. In contrast, maternal control may hinder emotional self-sufficiency and autonomy, leading to difficulties in emotional expression and relationship management (Candel, 2022; Curcio et al., 2019; Davies & Cummings, 1994).

Maternal care and control directly influence levels of self-differentiation. High maternal care appears to foster the development of a strong I-position, suggesting that maternal emotional support helps children develop a more autonomous sense of self, which persists into adulthood. In line with this, high maternal care is associated with lower levels of emotional reactivity, emotional cutoff, and fusion with others—traits that often challenge the maintenance of emotional autonomy within relationships. A secure and nurturing maternal environment promotes emotional balance, reducing tendencies toward excessive emotional reactivity, over-involvement (fusion), or emotional detachment (cutoff), thus enhancing self-differentiation.

Conversely, high levels of maternal control seem to impede the development of a strong I-position. Excessive maternal control may foster emotional dependency or inhibit autonomy in children, limiting their ability to establish clear boundaries. This can result in difficulties asserting individuality or making independent decisions, adversely affecting emotional independence (Choe et al., 2013; Pérez et al., 2021).

The mediation model highlights that maternal care promotes a robust I-position, which, in turn, supports better dyadic adjustment. Individuals with a well-developed I-position are more likely to build and maintain balanced relationships, as they can respect both their own and others' boundaries without sacrificing their identity. This dynamic contributes to improved adaptation within relational contexts, where each partner retains healthy autonomy while remaining emotionally invested in the other.

Maternal control, on the other hand, negatively impacts I-position, and a weak I-position subsequently harms dyadic adjustment. High maternal control restricts emotional autonomy, impeding the growth of an independent identity. When I-position is weak, individuals struggle to maintain healthy relational boundaries, often becoming overly dependent on others for emotional well-being. This dynamic can lead to dysfunctional dyadic adjustment, characterized by difficulties in managing conflict and relational dynamics, fostering emotional dependency, and compromising personal identity.

Furthermore, mothers who provide emotional support and closeness can reduce their child's tendency to adopt defensive strategies such as emotional cutoff, positively impacting future relational adjustment, including in romantic relationships.

Overall, our findings confirm that maternal caregiving styles, characterized by optimal parenting (high care, low control), positively influence dyadic adjustment both directly and indirectly, by fostering better self-differentiation (Tani et al., 2018). This aligns with prior research (e.g., Aryamanesh et al., 2012; Lampis et al., 2019; Rodríguez-González et al., 2019), which underscores the role of self-differentiation in promoting higher levels of dyadic adjustment.

Regarding paternal bonding, our results are less consistent and do not fully confirm our hypotheses. As predicted, paternal care negatively correlates with emotional cutoff, suggesting that attentive and supportive paternal caregiving can reduce emotional withdrawal tendencies. A father who provides emotional support and active involvement may strengthen the emotional connection with their child. This finding is further supported by the mediation model's indirect effects, which reveal that higher levels of paternal care are associated with lower emotional cutoff and, in turn, better dyadic adjustment.

However, contrary to our hypotheses, higher paternal control also correlates with lower emotional cutoff. The mediation model suggests that lower emotional cutoff, resulting from higher paternal control, is linked to better dyadic adjustment. Several factors may explain this result. First, the model may have captured a simultaneous pattern among fathers of our participants, who may exhibit controlling yet emotionally present behaviors. This style aligns with the "affectionate constraint" quadrant in the PBI framework, which is characterized by high care and high protection. It is possible that the caregiving dimension partially mitigates the negative effects of overcontrol. Studies involving clinical samples have shown that psychological distress is associated with "affective control devoid of affection" (low care, high protection) (Kidd et al., 2022; Raffagnato et al., 2021).

It is also important to consider that parenting operates within a family context as a "system" (Cox & Paley, 1997). Maternal and paternal caregiving styles interact and collectively influence family functioning. Coparental relationships, including both supportive and disruptive behaviors, agreement on parenting practices, division of parenting responsibilities, and family dynamics (Feinberg, 2003; Olsavsky et al., 2020), all contribute to differentiation processes. Similarly, the couple's relationship can affect the parental partnership, which in turn impacts children's differentiation processes.

Another plausible explanation relates to cultural stereotypes surrounding paternal caregiving. While less prevalent in our country, these may still exert an influence. Given that the PBI is a retrospective measure assessing parenting at age 16, and the average age of our sample is approximately 35 years, the cultural context must be considered. In our cultural setting, where fathers are traditionally viewed as primarily normative and controlling figures (Di Maggio & Zappulla, 2014; Yaffe, 2020), such parenting styles may have been normalized and not necessarily associated with promoting emotional cutoff.

Finally, one unexpected finding concerns the positive relationship between higher levels of paternal care and an increased tendency toward fusion with others. Fusion refers to a state in which emotional boundaries between an individual and others become blurred, leading to excessive involvement or emotional dependence. The prediction of higher fusion by paternal care could be interpreted in several ways.

First, affectionate fathering might complicate the establishment of healthy relational boundaries. An overly involved caregiving style by the father could foster emotional dependence or excessive fusion between the father and child, hindering the child’s ability to develop emotional autonomy (Baumrind, 1991). Additionally, the effects of paternal care may depend on the emotional climate established within the family (Herzog et al., 2015).

A second interpretation could consider specific cultural factors highlighted in previous research. Studies conducted in Mediterranean and collectivist countries have revealed that the "Fusion with Others" scale of the DSI-R (Differentiation of Self Inventory-Revised) functions less effectively than other scales (Lampis et al., 2017). It does not consistently correlate with relational or psychological well-being (Busonera et al., 2023) and, in some cases, has even been associated with better couple adjustment (Lampis, 2016; Rodríguez-González et al., 2020). Moreover, Italian adolescents reporting greater family enmeshment did not experience higher levels of depressive symptoms or anxiety (Manzi et al., 2006).

A plausible interpretation of our findings, therefore, is that items reflecting fusion with others likely capture normal processes of emotional self-regulation and interpersonal regulation, rather than pathological hyper involvement, which is typically associated with lower differentiation. In these cultures, a strong paternal bond may not necessarily hinder the development of emotional autonomy. On the contrary, it may be interpreted as a supportive mechanism during the early stages of development. This dynamic suggests that emotional closeness, particularly from the father, could play a key role in fostering emotional regulation and providing a foundation for autonomy in collectivist settings. In such cultural contexts, emotional interdependence may not always reflect unhealthy fusion, but rather an adaptive way to support individual growth within the family unit.

Generally, the findings reveal that parental bonding and differentiation of self dimensions play an important role in explaining couple adjustment, and that self-differentiation regulates the balance of attachment and autonomy learned in the relational matrix created by parental caregiving styles (Hardy & Fisher, 2018). However, some caution is necessary regarding the generalizability of the findings.

First, the research used a cross-sectional, correlational design. We assessed self-differentiation, parental bonding, and dyadic adjustment simultaneously, so we cannot draw any causal inferences.

Addressing these limitations could be achieved through longitudinal or multi-method designs. These approaches would allow for a more comprehensive exploration of variables such as relationship duration, relational status, and the presence of children, which could potentially mediate the relationships under study.

Furthermore, investigating the moderating role of romantic attachment styles between self-differentiation and various couple processes, such as adjustment and conflict management, could provide deeper insights into relationship dynamics (Lampis et al., 2017).

It's important to interpret the presented results cautiously due to the reliance on self-report measures alone. This methodological choice limits the ability to control for single-method biases and cognitive biases. To enhance understanding, future research could integrate qualitative assessments of parental styles using methodologies such as the Adult Attachment Interview (Main & Goldwyn, 1998) and assessment of couple functioning throughout the life cycle using the Genogram interview (Bowen, 1978) or Clinical Intergenerational Interview (Cigoli & Tamanza, 2009) could be used to overcome these limitations.

Future research would benefit from including both partners in studies, employing diverse quantitative methods to measure individual differentiation and couple satisfaction, and collecting dyadic data. Incorporating non-self-report assessments of couple relationships, such as in-depth interviews or direct observations, could provide a more comprehensive understanding of relationship dynamics.

Additionally, since the current study utilized data from an opportunistic sample in a non-clinical setting, caution is necessary when generalizing findings to clinical populations.

Moreover, the generalizability of our results is limited by the fact that the people involved in the study belong to a homogeneous sample in terms of nationality and culture.

Research indicates that the interpretation and experience of autonomy and intimacy can be culturally mediated. For example, cultural norms can influence preferences regarding interpersonal distance, highlighting significant variability across cultures. Moreover, concepts such as autonomy, care, and overprotection may have distinct cultural definitions and interpretations. Therefore, it's essential to consider cultural influences when studying these constructs and their implications in different populations (Bekker et al., 2011; Moleiro et al., 2017; Rodríguez-González et al., 2020). Further research on these topics should involve samples from different geographic areas (representative, for example, of individualistic and collectivistic cultures). This approach would enable a deeper exploration of how culture influences interpersonal and intrapsychic processes, as well as the implications of cultural diversity for couple functioning across the lifespan.

However, due to these limitations, definitive conclusions cannot be made about the connections between parental bonding, self-differentiation, and dyadic adjustment. Nonetheless, the researchers argue that the findings hold practical significance as they endorse a potential fusion of attachment theory and family systems theory in counseling and clinical contexts. This suggests that counselors could integrate these theoretical frameworks when evaluating and treating individuals, couples, and families.

Assessing self-differentiation, parental bonding, and dyadic adjustment could serve as an initial phase in individual or couples' interventions to gauge levels of relationship satisfaction and identify specific problematic patterns of self-differentiation such as emotional reactivity and emotional cutoff (Kerr & Bowen, 1988; Skowron, 2000). This information could inform the creation of a clinical environment aimed at helping individuals or couples manage anxiety stemming from processes of personal and familial differentiation.

Therapeutic efforts could focus on several objectives. For instance, exploring experiences within the birth family could aid clients in understanding how relationships with parents might influence current marital challenges (Bowen, 1978; Framo, 1992; Kerr & Bowen, 1988). Therapy might aim to elevate one partner's "I-position" within the relationship or reduce emotional reactivity and cutoff behaviors. A tailored therapeutic approach could assist the couple in tolerating and managing anxiety linked to childhood differentiation processes and current emotional struggles. This approach could enhance self-regulation and interpersonal dynamics within the relationship, fostering a new emotional dynamic for the couple (Fishbane, 2007; Johnson, 2013; Schore, 2008).

Several therapeutic approaches (Atkinson, 2005; Gottman, 2011; Johnson, 2013; Tatkin & Solomon, 2011) have embraced these principles, utilizing a complex and integrated perspective in recent years. Their aim is to assist individuals and couples in imbuing new emotional significance into their past and current relationships, establishing a secure dyadic base, and fostering novel strategies for relational regulation.