رابطه بازداری رفتاری و فرزند داری درک شده با کمال گرایی ناسازگار در دانشجویان

Maladaptive perfectionism has the potential to undermine physical and psychological health (Enns, Cox, Sareen, & Freeman, 2001). The current investigation focused on the characteristics that put individuals at-risk of maladaptive perfectionism. We investigated the relation of parenting (autonomy granting, warmth, and supervision) and personality (BIS/BAS) to maladaptive perfectionism among college students. Findings indicate that BIS was positively related to maladaptive perfectionism and parental autonomy granting was negatively related to maladaptive perfectionism. Interestingly, we observed an interaction such that among individuals with high BIS, maladaptive perfectionism was predicted by BIS (β = .26) and autonomy granting (β = −.26). By contrast, for individuals with low BIS, maladaptive perfectionism was predicted only by parental autonomy granting (β = −.42). Findings indicate the importance of investigating broad models that include both personality and family factors as predictors of perfectionism.

1.1. Maladaptive perfectionism Perfectionism is a multi-faceted characteristic with the potential to impact behavior across the lifespan. Individuals who are high in perfectionism tend to set high standards and are concerned with their mistakes and the possibility of failure. Perfectionism is complex and has both positive and negative correlates. For example, correlates of perfectionism include psychological distress (Aldea & Rice, 2006), depression (Kawamura et al., 2001, Powers et al., 2003 and Sherry et al., 2003), health and alcohol use (Pritchard, Wilson, & Yamnitz, 2007), academic persistence (Zhang, Gan, & Cham, 2007), anxiety (Wu & Wei, 2008), worry (Chang et al., 2007), conscientiousness (Enns & Cox, 2002), and grade point average (Kawamura, Frost, & Harmatz, 2002). Because of the multi-faceted nature of perfectionism, researchers have argued that it is important to differentiate between the more adaptive (striving) and more maladaptive (performance fears) forms of perfectionism (Dunkley et al., 2003, Flett and Hewitt, 2002 and Stoeber and Otto, 2006). Stoeber’s (1998) analysis of the Frost, Marten, Lahart, and Rosenblate (1990) Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale suggests that concerns over mistakes and doubts about actions subscales reflect maladaptive perfectionism. Yoon and Lau (2008) found that this measure of maladaptive perfectionism was correlated with depression. In an investigation that combined doubts about actions, concerns over mistakes, and socially prescribed perfectionism as a measure of maladaptive perfectionism, Enns et al. (2001) found correlations with neuroticism, depression, and hopelessness. Because of the potential of maladaptive perfectionism to undermine psychological health, it is important to understand the characteristics that put individuals at-risk of developing maladaptive perfectionism. Researchers have frequently focused either on individual (personality) factors or family factors as predictors of maladaptive perfectionism. Specifically, parenting practices have been identified as risk factors for the development of maladaptive perfectionism (e.g., Clark and Coker, 2009 and Kawamura et al., 2002). 1.1.1. Maladaptive perfectionism and parenting Early work in parenting by Baumrind (1989) conceptualized parenting as varying along the dimensions of warmth and demandingness (the practice of making age-appropriate maturity demands) resulting in authoritative, authoritarian, permissive, and indifferent parenting styles. Based on Baumrind’s work, numerous investigators have found that the combined warmth and demandingness portrayed in authoritative parenting is associated with a number of positive outcomes (Bednar and Fisher, 2003, Hickman and Crossland, 2004, Jackson et al., 2005 and Kim and Chung, 2003). Because of the positive correlates of authoritative parenting, research has attempted to “unpack” authoritative parenting into its component parts (e.g., Gray and Steinberg, 1999 and Steinberg et al., 1992), suggesting that it reflects three dimensions – autonomy granting, warmth/responsiveness, and behavioral supervision. In the Steinberg approach, parental warmth is characterized by responsiveness and involvement. Behavioral supervision is characterized by parental monitoring and limit setting. Autonomy granting is characterized by the extent to which parents employ non-coercive discipline, allow individual expression, and personal decision making. Maladaptive perfectionism is theorized to arise from families that do not grant autonomy and instead engage in controlling behaviors where personal expression and individual decision making are squelched (Enns & Cox, 2002). Parental approval is based on meeting the high expectations of parents. When these expectations are not met, guilt may follow. Children may respond to these pressures by adopting the high, unrealistic standards of their parents and experience great concern over meeting those standards. This hypothesis has been supported by a number of researchers who have found that maladaptive perfectionism tends to be higher among students who perceive that their parents are low in autonomy granting (or high in controlling behavior) (Enns et al., 2002, Keeney-Benson and Pomerantz, 2005 and Randolph and Dykman, 1998). Soenens et al. (2008) reported that parents’ use of psychological control was related to increases in maladaptive perfectionism in their adolescent children, particularly boys. In a study that included the constructs hypothesized to underlie authoritative parenting, Soenens et al. (2005) found that psychological control was positively related to maladaptive perfectionism, warmth/responsiveness was negatively related to maladaptive perfectionism and behavioral supervision was not related to maladaptive perfectionism. 1.1.2. Maladaptive perfectionism and temperament/personality In addition to parenting variables, it is interesting to note that maladaptive perfectionism is related to a number of personality variables, including anxiety-related measures (Juster et al., 1996). Gray and McNaughton’s revised Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (RST) (Gray & McNaughton, 2000; See Corr (2008) for a summary of the original and revised RST) conceptualized personality as linked to the Fight-Flight-Freeze System (FFFS) which reflects fear and avoidance in response to negative stimuli, the Behavioral Activation System (BAS) which reflects approach to positive stimuli, and the Behavioral Inhibition System (BIS) which reflects anxiety and risk assessment in response to goal–conflict (e.g., approach–approach, approach–avoidance). Research using the Carver and White (1994) BIS/BAS scales indicates a positive relation of the BIS scale with maladaptive perfectionism (Chang et al., 2007, O’Connor and Forgan, 2007 and Randles et al., 2010). Although the Carver and White BIS scale reflects punishment sensitivity, including both the FFFS as well as the BIS (e.g., Beck et al., 2009 and Heym et al., 2008), the findings suggest the importance of individual differences in punishment sensitivity as a predictor of maladaptive perfectionism. 1.1.3. Aims and hypotheses To better understand the role of personality and parenting in predicting maladaptive perfectionism, it is important to understand the relative contributions and potential interactions of these variables to the prediction of maladaptive perfectionism. Therefore, in the current study, we examined the relation of punishment and reinforcement sensitivity and parenting (autonomy granting, warmth, supervision) to maladaptive perfectionism. We predicted that punishment sensitivity as measured by BIS would be positively related to maladaptive perfectionism and parental autonomy granting would be negatively related to maladaptive perfectionism. Additionally, we tested the interaction of punishment sensitivity and autonomy granting to determine if the relation of parenting to maladaptive perfectionism differed as a function of punishment sensitivity.