دلبستگی ناایمن، خودارائه گری کمال و قطع ارتباط اجتماعی در نوجوانان
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|38970||2012||6 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||4796 کلمه|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Personality and Individual Differences, Volume 52, Issue 8, June 2012, Pages 936–941
Abstract The purpose of the present study was to investigate several components of the Perfectionism Social Disconnection Model (PSDM) by assessing the relationships among perfectionism, insecure attachment, and social disconnection in adolescents. This study examined perfectionistic self-presentation, attachment style, and experience of disconnection from social environment in a sample of 178 adolescents. Results indicated that perfectionistic self-presentation facets were significantly correlated with social disconnection and fearful attachment was associated with the nondisclosure of imperfection. Moreover, nondisclosure of imperfection partially mediated the relationship between fearful attachment and social disconnection. The current study is the first to examine the link between insecure attachment and perfectionistic self-presentation and provides some evidence supporting the PSDM.
1. Introduction 1.1. Perfectionism and psychopathology Over the past two decades, investigators have shown considerable interest in the relationship between perfectionism and psychopathology. A large body of research has linked perfectionism to numerous adjustment problems in children, adolescents and adults (e.g. see Flett and Hewitt, 2002 and Hewitt et al., in preparation). Perfectionism is often conceptualized as a multidimensional construct (Flett and Hewitt, 2002, Frost et al., 1990 and Hewitt and Flett, 1991) and according to Hewitt and Flett (1991), trait perfectionism entails three dimensions: self-oriented, other-oriented and socially prescribed perfectionism (Hewitt & Flett, 1991). Self-oriented perfectionism is an intrapersonal trait dimension that involves the requirement for one’s own perfection, all-or-nothing thinking, and emphasis of one’s own flaws. In contrast, other-oriented perfectionism involves the extent to which one possesses high expectations and standards for others. Socially prescribed perfectionism is an interpersonal dimension that involves the perception that others have unrealistic expectations for one’s behavior. In addition to these perfectionism traits, Hewitt and colleagues (2003) also described perfectionistic individuals’ need to appear perfect to others by promoting their perfection or by not displaying or disclosing imperfections, termed the perfectionistic self-presentation. Perfectionism traits and perfectionistic self-presentation facets are associated differentially with various types of psychopathology and maladjustment (see Flett and Hewitt, 2002 and Hewitt et al., 2003). Perfectionistic self-presentation facets have been shown to relate to poor relationship functioning and various forms of psychopathology above and beyond trait perfectionism and other personality variables in adults and adolescents (Hewitt et al., 2003 and Roxborough et al., in press). The focus of the current work is on the interpersonal expression of perfectionism among adolescents. 1.2. Perfectionistic self-presentation in adolescents Perfectionistic self-presentation (PSP), the interpersonal expression of perfectionism, involves the need to appear perfect with three dimensions: perfectionistic self-promotion (the need to actively promote one’s supposed “perfection”), nondisplay of imperfection (the need to avoid revealing one’s perceived imperfections), and nondisclosure of imperfection (the need to avoid disclosing one’s imperfections; Hewitt et al., 2003). Recently, Hewitt et al. (2011) have replicated all three facets of the PSP in adolescents. All three PSP facets have been associated with psychological difficulties and distress, including anxiety and relationship difficulties, depression, hopelessness and suicidal risk in clinical and nonclinical samples of adolescents (e.g. Hewitt et al., 2011 and Roxborough et al., in press). Although there is evidence that PSP in adolescents is associated with a variety of deleterious outcomes, there has been little research on mechanisms that explain the association. Recently, Hewitt and colleagues have described a model of perfectionism and maladjustment that focuses specifically on interpersonal components of perfectionism known as the Perfectionism Social Disconnection Model (PSDM; Hewitt, Flett, Sherry, & Caelian, 2006). The current study represents a preliminary exploration of the PSDM in adolescents. 1.3. The Perfectionism Social Disconnection Model The PSDM asserts that interpersonal dimensions of perfectionism (i.e. the PSP facets and socially prescribed perfectionism) develop as a result of inordinate and thwarted needs to feel connected or a sense of belonging. A response to this need for interpersonal acceptance involves the development of perfectionism such that individuals come to learn that if he/she is perfect or appears to others as perfect, others will accept and care for them. However, perfectionistic behaviors actually generate further disconnection from the social environment by fostering problematic or distant interpersonal relationships (Hewitt et al., 2006). According to the PSDM, perfectionism engenders psychological maladjustment through the experience of both subjective (i.e. a felt sense of detachment from others) and objective (i.e. impoverished relationships with others) social disconnection (Hewitt et al., 2006). Therefore, it is proposed that PSP exerts deleterious influences on interpersonal behavior, which, in turn, create a sense of disconnectedness and perceived lack of social support. Few studies have investigated the link between perfectionistic self-presentation style and social disconnection in adolescents. However, in a recent study of 152 psychiatric outpatient adolescents, Roxborough et al. (in press) demonstrated that nondisplay of imperfection was associated with a sense of disconnection, which was correlated with an increase in the overall suicidal risk among adolescents. In addition, Sherry, Law, Hewitt, Flett, and Besser (2008) found that perceived social support mediated the relationship between socially prescribed perfectionism and depression among university students. Taken together, these studies offer initial support for the PSDM. Other recent studies have examined the role of perfectionism on intra- and interpersonal functioning in adolescents. For instance, Gilman, Adams, and Nounopoulos (2011) have found that perfectionistic adolescents had more disruptive and less prosocial relationships than nonperfectionistic adolescents. Furthermore, Ye, Rice, and Storch (2008) found that perfectionistic belief accounted for significance variance in interpersonal difficulties and depressive symptoms for adolescents diagnosed with obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD), even after controlling for OCD symptoms. Together, these studies suggest that perfectionistic adolescents are more vulnerable to interpersonal difficulties that place them at higher risk for maladjustment. 1.4. Attachment style, perfectionistic self-presentation, and social disconnection From a theoretical standpoint, early relationships with parents and family histories may be pivotal in producing perfectionism. Several authors (Blatt, 1995, Burns, 1980, Flett et al., 2002, Hamachek, 1978 and Horney, 1950) have suggested that certain perceived parental practices (e.g. neglect, love withdrawal, intrusive parenting, and shaming) may be important precursors of perfectionism in children. Despite the numerous theoretical accounts of its origin, no studies have investigated the origin and development of PSP. This underscores the need for a conceptual framework linking the various psychological factors and processes associated with PSP. We believe that the adult attachment theory offers such a conceptual framework from which the relationship between perfectionistic self-presentation and social disconnection can be further investigated. Adult attachment theory is concerned primarily with the nature of relationship bonds and their effects on human development across the lifespan (Ainsworth et al., 1978 and Bowlby, 1988). Bowlby (1988) proposed that the quality of caregiver–child relationships results in internal representations or “working models” of the self and others that provide the prototypes for later interpersonal relationships. Subsequently, Bartholomew and Horowitz (1991) created a four-category classification of attachment based on Bowlby’s definition of internal working models: secure, preoccupied, fearful and dismissing. According to their conceptualization, individuals with secure attachment have positive expectations of self and others and report better overall mental and physical well-being. Individuals with preoccupied attachment have a deep-seated sense of unworthiness and are highly dependent on others for validation of self-worth. Fearful individuals are also highly dependent on others for approval. However, they perceive others as untrustworthy and undependable, and they shun intimacy and disclosure to avoid the pain of potential criticism or rejection. Finally, dismissing individuals avoid interpersonal closeness due to their negative views of others. Extensive research has explored the connections between attachment style and affective, cognitive and psychological indicators of adjustment (see Cassidy and Shaver, 1999 and Mikulincer and Shaver, 2007). Flett and colleagues (2002) hypothesized that a poor parent–child relationship produces a chronic sense of disconnection, hopelessness, and self-doubt. To cope with feelings of vulnerability and inferiority, the insecurely attached child may develop an excessive need to appear perfect, to hide imperfections or avoid disclosing flaws and failures. Hence, consistent with the PSDM, children with high attachment insecurity may develop a perfectionistic self-presentation style and, subsequently, experience significant social disconnection. The hypothesis proposed by Flett and colleagues (2002) is also predicated on Mikulincer’s (1995) observation that certain insecurely attached people will become avoidant and isolated from others because “… their self-esteem is so low and fragile that they cannot tolerate discovery of the slightest flaw. This idealization of the self seems to be a defense against the experience of rejection by others on the recognition of one’s imperfections” (p. 1213). Consistent with the hypothesis proposed by Flett et al., 2002 and Hewitt et al., 2011 demonstrated that PSP facets in adolescents are linked with an inordinate need for approval, fear of negative evaluation, and excessive self-consciousness offering further support for our contention that PSP may be motivated by fears of failure and rejection. To our knowledge, no research to date has examined the relationships between attachment style, perfectionistic self-presentation, and the experience of social disconnection among adolescents; however, trait perfectionism has been linked with insecure attachment (Cox et al., 2002, Rice and Mirzadeh, 2000, Wei et al., 2006 and Wei et al., 2004). Furthermore, it has been shown that trait perfectionism mediates the relationship between insecure attachment and depressive symptoms in adults (e.g. Wei et al., 2004 and Wei et al., 2006). 1.5. Hypotheses and goals The current research had several goals. First, previous research has focused exclusively on adult populations, using either perfectionism traits (MPS; Hewitt & Flett, 1991) or perfectionistic attitudes (FMPS; Frost et al., 1990). No study has examined the associations among insecure attachment, PSP, and social disconnection in an adolescent sample. The experience of disconnection may be particularly pertinent among adolescents, because a strong indicator of psychological adjustment in adolescents is a sense of meaningful connection with peers (Rubin & Stewart, 1996). Second, consistent with the PSDM, we hypothesized that PSP would mediate the association between insecure attachment and social disconnection. Specifically, we tested whether any PSP facets serve as mediators of the association between insecure attachment (i.e. fearful, preoccupied, and dismissing) and social disconnection.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
3. Results 3.1. Descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations The means, standard deviations, and internal consistencies for the sample are presented in Table 1. Means for PSPS-Jr (Hewitt et al., 2011), RQ (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991), and SCS-R (Lee et al., 2001) are generally consistent with previous research involving comparable populations.2 Table 1. Descriptive statistics: means, standard deviations, and Cronbach alpha coefficients of PSP, attachment style, and social disconnection for all participants (n = 178). Variables M SD α Total (n = 178) PSP Facet PSP 20.45 6.77 .88 NDSI 19.82 4.16 .70 NDI 11.74 3.08 .62 Attachment style Secure 4.60 1.93 n/a Preoccupied 3.47 1.71 n/a Fearful 4.03 1.85 n/a Dismissing 4.13 1.79 n/a Social disconnection SCS-R 69.01 9.44 .70 Note. PSP = perfectionistic self-promotion; NDSI = nondisplay of imperfection; NDI = nondisclosure of imperfection; SCS-R = social connectedness scale-revised. Table options Correlational analyses were conducted and are shown in Table 2. In terms of the PSP facets and attachment orientations, perfectionistic self-promotion was significantly associated with scores on preoccupied attachment. Nondisplay of imperfection was negatively correlated with ratings on secure attachment. Nondisclosure of imperfection was significantly correlated with lower secure attachment, higher fearful attachment, and dismissing attachment. Furthermore, all three facets of PSP were significantly correlated with social disconnection. Finally, fearful attachment was associated with social disconnection, r = .20, p < .01. Table 2. Correlations between PSPS-Jr subscales, attachment styles and social disconnection for all participants (n = 178). Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Total (n = 178) 1 PSP – 2 NDSI .38⁎⁎ – 3 NDI .26⁎⁎ .41⁎⁎ – 4 Secure −.13 −.22⁎⁎ −.28⁎⁎ – 5 Preoccupied .19⁎ .12 .04 −.03 – 6 Fearful −.01 .12 .23⁎⁎ −.21⁎⁎ .27⁎⁎ – 7 Dismissing −.09 −.03 .16⁎ −.18⁎ −.08 −.05 – 8 SCS-R .15⁎ .29⁎⁎ .22⁎⁎ .01 .13 .20⁎⁎ .05 – Note. PSP = perfectionistic self-promotion; NDSI = nondisplay of imperfection; NDI = nondisclosure of imperfection; SCS-R = social connectedness scale-revised. ⁎ p < .05, two-tailed. ⁎⁎ p < .01, two-tailed. Table options 3.2. Mediator effects for the Social Disconnection Model The principle goal of the current study involved investigating relationships between insecure attachment style and social disconnection and whether these were mediated or had an indirect effect via perfectionistic self-presentation. According to Baron and Kenny (1986), three conditions must be satisfied prior to testing mediation. First, the predictor variable (attachment style) must be significantly associated with the dependent variable (social disconnection), denoted as c-path (see Table 3). Second, the predictor variable (attachment style) must be associated with the mediating variable (PSP), denoted as a-path. Third, the mediating variable (PSP) must be associated with the dependent variable (social disconnection) when controlling for the predictor variable (attachment style), denoted as b-path. Mediation is present when the association between the predictor variable (attachment style) and the dependent variable (social disconnection) when controlling for the mediating variable (PSP), denoted as c′-path, is significantly reduced compared to c-path. Table 3. Path coefficients and confidence intervals of mediational analyses, controlling for gender (n = 178). Mediator variable a-path b-path c-path c′-path 95% CI Dependent variable: social disconnection Predictor variable: fearful attachment PSP facet Perfectionistic self-promotion −.02 .23⁎ 1.03⁎⁎ 1.03⁎⁎ −.19, .13 Nondisplay of imperfection .30 .63⁎⁎⁎ 1.03⁎⁎ .85⁎ .06, .20 Nondisclosure of imperfection .42⁎⁎⁎ .57⁎ 1.03⁎⁎ .79⁎ .03, .82 Note. 95% CI = 95% confidence interval for the indirect effect; all numbers are unstandardized beta coefficients. ⁎ p < .05. ⁎⁎ p < .01. ⁎⁎⁎ p < .001. Table options In these mediational analyses, we used bootstrapping procedures outlined by Shrout and Bolger (2002) and Preacher and Hayes (2004). Bootstrapping is an approach that resamples the original sample size from the data multiple times, and does not rely on the assumption that data are normally distributed. Random sampling with replacement was used to create 5000 bootstrap samples that were used to estimate bias-corrected standard errors and 95% percentile confidence intervals for indirect effects (MacKinnon, Lockwood, Hoffman, West, & Sheets, 2002). The indirect effect is significant at p < .05 if zero is not included in the 95% confidence interval for that indirect effect ( Preacher & Hayes, 2008). We conducted mediational analyses with attachment style as the predictor variable, PSP facet as the mediator and social disconnection as the dependent variable. Gender was entered as a covariate in each analysis. As only fearful attachment was significantly associated with social disconnection; fearful attachment was entered as the predictor variable, each PSP facet (i.e. perfectionistic self-promotion, nondisplay of imperfection, or nondisclosure of imperfection) as the mediator, and social disconnection as the dependent variable. Results of these three analyses indicated that fearful attachment had a significant indirect effect on social disconnection through nondisclosure of imperfection, a 95% confidence interval of .03–.82 (see Table 3). Because zero was not within the confidence interval range, it was concluded that nondisclosure of imperfection significantly mediated the relationship between fearful attachment and social disconnection (Preacher & Hayes, 2008). None of the other PSP facets mediated this relationship