Figure 1. The Warmth Dimension of Parenting
PARENTAL ACCEPTANCE-REJECTION THEORY,
METHODS,
EVIDENCE, AND IMPLICATIONS
Ronald P. Rohner
Abdul Khaleque
David E. Cournoyer
University of Connecticut
Abstract
Parental Acceptance-Rejection Theory, Methods, Evidence, and Implications
The empirical study of parental acceptance-rejection has a history going back to the 1890s (Stogdill, 1937). It was not until the 1930s, however, that a more-or-less continuous body of empirical research began to appear dealing with the effects of parental acceptance-rejection. Today more than 1,700 studies are available on the topic (Rohner, 2002). A great many individuals have contributed to this body of work, but a handful have made especially significant and sustained contributions. These individuals and groups represent different programs of research, employing distinctive concepts, measures, and research designs. For example, an especially productive early collection of acceptance-rejection research papers came from the Fels Research Institute in the 1930s and 1940s (Baldwin, Kalhorn, & Breese, 1945, 1949). Researchers associated with the Institute used the Fels Parental Behavior Rating Scales (Champney, 1941). During the 1930s and 1940s the Smith College Studies in Social Work also produced a long and useful series of research articles on the effects of parental acceptance-rejection (e.g., Witmer, Leach, & Richman, 1938).
Especially noteworthy in the 1950s and 1960s--and extending into the 1970s and 1980s--was the seminal work of Schaefer and associates using the Children's Report of Parent's Behavior Inventory (CRPBI) (Schaefer, 1959, 1961; Schludermann & Schludermann, 1970, 1971, 1983). Also noteworthy from the 1960s and 1970s was the work of Siegelman and colleagues using the Parent-Child Relations Questionnaire (PCR) (Roe & Siegelman, 1963). Rohner's program of research, which ultimately led to the construction of parental acceptance-rejection theory (PARTheory) and associated measures, grew directly out of these traditions in the United States as well as from a twenty-year program of cross-cultural comparative research beginning in 1960 (Rohner, 1960, 1975; Rohner & Nielsen, 1978; Rohner & Rohner, 1980, 1981).
Since that time, especially in the 1980s and 1990s, other independent programs of research on issues of acceptance-rejection have also evolved. In the U.S. two of these are especially prominent. One is the sociological tradition of research based on the concept of "parental support" and "parental supportive behavior" advocated by Rollins & Thomas (1979)--and utilizing a wide variety of research measures and research designs (Amato, 1989, 1990; Amato & Booth 1997; Amato & Fowler, 2002; Barber & Thomas, 1986; Barnes & Farrell, 1992; Barnes, Farrell & Windle, 1990; Barnes, Reifman, Farrell, & Pintchell, 2000; Peterson & Rollins, 1987; Peterson, Rollins & Thomas, 1985; Thomas, Weigert, & Winston, 1987; Whitbeck, Conger, & Kao, 1993; Whitbeck, Hoyt, & Ackley, 1997; Whitbeck, Hoyt, Miller & Kao, 1992; Young, Miller, Norton, & Hill, 1995).
The other is Baumrind's widely recognized conceptual model dealing with parenting prototypes, including the concepts of authoritative, authoritarian, permissive, and rejecting/neglecting styles of parenting (Baumrind, 1966, 1968, 1989, 1991). Her work has been widely discussed and incorporated into the research of many other investigators. Perhaps most prominent among these investigators is Steinberg and colleagues (Glasgow, Dornbusch, Troyer, Steinberg, & Ritter, 1997; Gray & Steinberg, 1999; Lamborn, Mounts, Steinberg, & Dornbusch, 1991; Steinberg, Elman, & Mounts, 1989; Steinberg, Lamborn, Dornbusch, & Darling, 1992). Baumrind's parenting prototypes have also generated more controversy than any other single parenting model, especially the claim that the authoritative style of parenting produces the most competent children. Increasingly, doubt is growing about whether authoritative parenting necessarily produces optimum developmental outcomes for ethnic minorities such as African Americans (Baumrind, 1972; Smetana, 2000), Chinese Americans (Chao, 1994), Hispanic Americans (Torres-Villa, 1995), Korean Americans (Kim & Rohner, 2002), and others.
With the exception of Rohner's 42-year program of international research, all these bodies of work focus heavily--though not necessarily exclusively--on European Americans. However, at least three programs of international acceptance-rejection research also exist. First, with the construction and validation of a self-report questionnaire called the EMBU (Perris, Jacobsson, Lindstrvm, von Knorring, & Perris, 1980), Perris, Emmelkamp, & others launched a productive European and cross-cultural program of research on the psychological effects of acceptance-rejection (Arrindell, Gerlsma, Vandereycken, Hageman, & Daeseleire, 1998; Emmelkamp & Hecrus, 1988; Perris, Arrindell, & Eisemann, 1994; Perris, Arrindell, Perris, van der Ende, Maj, Benjaminsen, Ross, Eisemann, & del Vecchio, 1985; Perris, Arrindell, Perris, Eisemann, van der Ende, & von Knorring, 1986).
Second, a somewhat less developed body of international research is that of Parker and associates, working primarily in Australia and England, and using the parental bonding instrument (PBI) (Parker, 1983a, 1983b, 1984, 1986; Parker, & Barnett, 1988; Parker, Tupling, & Brown, 1979; Torgersen, & Alnaes, 1992). Finally, beginning in the 1990's Chen and colleagues have been developing a productive series of longitudinal and cross-sectional studies primarily in The People's Republic of China and Canada on issues surrounding both maternal and paternal acceptance and rejection (Chen, Dong, & Zhou, 1997; Chen, Hastings, Rubin, Chen, Cen, & Stewart, 1998; Chen, Liu, & Li, 2000; Chen, Wu, Chen, Wang, & Cen, 2001).
Among these programs of research on acceptance-rejection, Rohner's is distinctive on at least three counts. First, it is unique in being informed by a continually evolving theoretical perspective called parental acceptance-rejection theory (PARTheory). Second, it is unique in its explicit search for universals pertaining to the antecedents, consequences, and other correlates of interpersonal acceptance and rejection. This search for universals emphasizes a global perspective of sampling widely across all known sociocultural groups of the world, including across all languages, ethnicities, socioeconomic levels, genders, ages, and other such defining conditions. Third, it is distinctive, though not unique, in its progressive use over time of the universalist approach (Rohner, 1975, 1986; Rohner & Rohner, 1980), that is a multimethod and multi-procedure approach to the study of acceptance-rejection and to the search for universals. All these topics are amplified below, beginning first with an overview of PARTheory.
Introductory Overview
The research program reported in this chapter was initiated almost four and a
half decades ago in response to claims by Western social scientists that
parental love is essential to the healthy social and emotional development of
children. After about two thousand studies, many inspired directly by parental
acceptance-rejection theory (PARTheory) described in this chapter, at least one
conclusion is clear: Children everywhere need a specific form of positive
response--acceptance--from parents and other primary caregivers. When this need is
not met satisfactorily, children worldwide--regardless of variations in culture,
gender, age, ethnicity, or other such defining conditions--tend to report
themselves to be hostile and aggressive, dependent or defensively independent,
impaired in self-esteem and self-adequacy, emotionally unresponsive, emotionally
unstable, and to have a negative worldview, among other responses. Additionally,
youths and adults who perceive themselves to be rejected appear to be disposed
toward behavior problems and conduct disorders, to be depressed or have
depressed affect, and to become involved in drug and alcohol abuse, among other
problems.
Evidence reported later suggests that as much as 26% of the variability of
children's psychological adjustment can be accounted for by the degree to which
they perceive themselves to be accepted or rejected by their major caregivers.
In addition, as much as 21% of the variability in adults' psychological
adjustment can be explained by childhood experiences of caregiver
acceptance-rejection. Of course, these figures leave a large portion of
children's and adults' adjustment to be explained by a variety of factors such
as other interpersonal relationships, sociocultural factors, and behavioral
genetic factors. Nonetheless, evidence reported here confirms that perceived
parental acceptance-rejection by itself is universally a powerful predictor of
psychological and behavioral adjustment.
These bold claims are not made lightly. Testing the universality of such
principles is fraught with conceptual and methodological difficulties discussed
in this chapter. As a preview, though, we might note that the line of inquiry
reported here employs a wide range of research strategies including ethnographic
studies, holocultural (cross-cultural survey) studies, and intracultural
psychological studies in a broad array of the world's societies and ethnic
groups. These ethnographic and psychological studies utilize participant
observation procedures, interviews, time- and setting-sampled behavior
observations, and self-report questionnaires--especially the Parental
Acceptance-Rejection Questionnaire (PARQ) and the Personality Assessment
Questionnaire (PAQ).
An important conceptual feature of the research reported here is its emphasis on
individuals' subjective perceptions of parenting behaviors. That is, the key
concepts of perceived acceptance and rejection are defined in terms of the
interpretations that children and adults make of major caregivers' behaviors.
This allows individuals to make interpretations of parenting through their own
cultural and personal lenses, and thus avoids the possibility of misinterpreting
the meaning of caregivers' behaviors. However, even though the words and actions
through which children and adults interpret the behavior of significant others
is usually shaped by culture, evidence provided in this chapter highlights the
fact that individuals everywhere appear to use a common meaning structure to
determine if they are loved (accepted). More specifically, children and adults
appear universally to organize their perceptions of acceptance-rejection around
the same four classes of behavior. These include warmth/affection (or its
opposite, coldness/lack of affection), hostility/aggression, indifference
/neglect, and undifferentiated rejection, as defined later. At this point we
should also note that the term parent is defined in PARTheory as any person who
has a more-or-less long term primary caregiving responsibility for a child. Such
persons may be biological or adoptive parents, older siblings, grandparents,
other relatives, or even non-kinspersons.
These and other issues central to PARTheory are discussed in this chapter, along
with evidence supporting the major postulates of the theory. More particularly,
we begin with an overview of the history of research on parental
acceptance-rejection, and we situate PARTheory research within the context of
this history. Next we provide an overview of the main features of the theory,
discuss universal features of the warmth dimension of parenting (i.e., of
parental acceptance-rejection), and then discuss PARTheory's three subtheories:
personality subtheory, coping subtheory, and the sociocultural systems subtheory.
Following this we describe major classes of methods used to develop and test the
theory. With this information in hand we are then able to present evidence
supporting the main features of the theory. Finally, we end with a brief
discussion of the implications of PARTheory and evidence for social policy and
practice.
History of Research on Parental Acceptance-Rejection
The empirical study of parental
acceptance-rejection has a history going back to the 1890s (Stogdill, 1937). It
was not until the 1930s, however, that a more-or-less continuous body of
empirical research began to appear dealing with the effects of parental
acceptance-rejection. Today almost 2,000 studies are available on the topic (Rohner,
2004a). A great many individuals have contributed to this body of work, but a
handful have made especially significant and sustained contributions. These
individuals and groups represent different programs of research, employing
distinctive concepts, measures, and research designs. For example, an especially
productive early collection of acceptance-rejection research papers came from
the Fels Research Institute in the 1930s and 1940s (Baldwin, Kalhorn, & Breese,
1945, 1949). Researchers associated with the Institute used the Fels Parental
Behavior Rating Scales (Champney, 1941). During the 1930s and 1940s the Smith
College Studies in Social Work also produced a long and useful series of
research chapters on the effects of parental acceptance-rejection (e.g., Witmer,
Leach, & Richman, 1938).
Especially noteworthy in the 1950s and 1960s--and extending into the 1970s and
1980s--was the seminal work of Schaefer and associates using the Children's
Report of Parent's Behavior Inventory (CRPBI) (Schaefer, 1959, 1961;
Schludermann & Schludermann, 1970, 1971, 1983). Also noteworthy from the 1960s
and 1970s was the work of Siegelman and colleagues using the Parent-Child
Relations Questionnaire (Roe & Siegelman, 1963). Rohner's program of research,
which ultimately led to the construction of parental acceptance-rejection theory
(PARTheory) and associated measures, grew directly out of these psychological
traditions in the United States as well as from a twenty-year anthropological
and psychological program of cross-cultural comparative research beginning in
1960 (Rohner, 1960, 1975; Rohner & Nielsen, 1978; Rohner & Rohner, 1980, 1981).
Since that time, especially in the 1980s and 1990s, other independent programs
of research on issues of acceptance-rejection have also evolved. In the U.S.
three of these are especially prominent. One is the sociological tradition of
research based on the concept of "parental support" and "parental supportive
behavior" advocated by Rollins & Thomas (1979)--and utilizing a wide variety of
research measures and research designs (Amato & Booth 1997; Amato & Fowler,
2002; Barber & Thomas, 1986; Barnes & Farrell, 1992; Peterson & Rollins, 1987;
Peterson, Rollins & Thomas, 1985; Whitbeck, Conger, & Kao, 1993; Whitbeck, Hoyt,
Miller & Kao, 1992; Young, Miller, Norton, & Hill, 1995).
Another program of research comes from Baumrind's widely recognized conceptual
model dealing with parenting prototypes, including the concepts of
authoritative, authoritarian, permissive, and rejecting/neglecting styles of
parenting (Baumrind, 1966, 1968, 1989, 1991). Her work has been widely discussed
and incorporated into the research of many other investigators. Perhaps most
prominent among these investigators is Steinberg and colleagues (Glasgow,
Dornbusch, Troyer, Steinberg, & Ritter, 1997; Gray & Steinberg, 1999; Lamborn,
Mounts, Steinberg, & Dornbusch, 1991; Steinberg, Elman, & Mounts, 1989;
Steinberg, Lamborn, Dornbusch, & Darling, 1992). Baumrind's parenting prototypes
have also generated more controversy than any other single parenting model,
especially the claim that the authoritative style of parenting produces the most
competent children. Increasingly, doubt is growing about whether authoritative
parenting necessarily produces optimum developmental outcomes for such ethnic
minorities as African Americans (Baumrind, 1972; Smetana, 2000), Chinese
Americans (Chao, 1994), Hispanic Americans (Torres-Villa, 1995), Korean
Americans (Kim & Rohner, 2002), and others.
Finally, the third program of research comes from the work of Downey, Feldman,
and colleagues (Downey & Feldman, 1996; Downey, Khouri, & Feldman, 1997; Feldman
& Downey, 1994). These researchers explore the issue of "rejection sensitivity."
According to them, interpersonal rejection--especially parental rejection in
childhood--leads children to develop a heightened sensitivity to being rejected.
That is, the children become disposed to anxiously and angrily expect, to
readily perceive, and to overreact to rejection in ways that compromise their
intimate relationships as well as their own well-being. Additionally, these
authors and their colleagues have found that rejection sensitive children and
adults often interpret the minor or imagined insensitivity of significant
others--or the ambiguous behavior of others--as being intentional rejection.
All these bodies of work except for Rohner's focus heavily--though not
exclusively --on European Americans. However, at least three programs of
international acceptance-rejection research also exist. First, with the
construction and validation of a self-report questionnaire called the EMBU
(Perris, Jacobsson, Lindstrvm, von Knorring, & Perris, 1980), Perris, Emmelkamp,
& others launched a productive European and cross-cultural program of research
on the psychological effects of acceptance-rejection (Arrindell, Gerlsma,
Vandereycken, Hageman, & Daeseleire, 1998; Emmelkamp & Hecrus, 1988; Perris,
Arrindell, & Eisemann, 1994; Perris, Arrindell, Perris, van der Ende, Maj,
Benjaminsen, Ross, Eisemann, & del Vecchio, 1985; Perris, Arrindell, Perris,
Eisemann, van der Ende, & von Knorring, 1986).
Second, a somewhat less developed body of international research is that of
Parker and associates, working primarily in Australia and England, and using the
parental bonding instrument (PBI) (Parker, 1983a, 1983b, 1984, 1986; Parker, &
Barnett, 1988; Parker, Tupling, & Brown, 1979; Torgersen, & Alnaes, 1992).
Finally, beginning in the 1990's Chen and colleagues have been developing a
productive series of longitudinal and cross-sectional studies primarily in The
People's Republic of China and Canada on issues surrounding both maternal and
paternal acceptance and rejection (Chen, Dong, & Zhou, 1997; Chen, Hastings,
Rubin, Chen, Cen, & Stewart, 1998; Chen, Liu, & Li, 2000; Chen, Wu, Chen, Wang,
& Cen, 2001).
Among these programs of research on acceptance-rejection, the work of Rohner and
colleagues is most highly developed. Almost 400 studies have been completed in
more than 60 nations internationally, as well as in every major ethnic group of
America (Rohner, 2004a). It is this body of work and the theory from which it is
derived that is featured in this chapter.
Overview of Parental
Acceptance-Rejection Theory (PARTheory)
Parental acceptance-rejection theory (PARTheory) is an evidence-based theory of
socialization and lifespan development that attempts to predict and explain
major causes, consequences, and other correlates of parental acceptance and
rejection within the United States and worldwide (Rohner, 1986, 2004a; Rohner
and Rohner, 1980). It attempts to answer five classes of questions divided into
three subtheories. These are personality subtheory, coping subtheory, and
sociocultural systems subtheory. Personality subtheory asks two general
questions. First, is it true, as the subtheory postulates, that children
everywhere--in different sociocultural systems, racial or ethnic groups, genders,
and the like--respond in essentially the same way when they perceive themselves
to be accepted or rejected by their parents? Second, to what degree do the
effects of childhood rejection extend into adulthood and old age?
Coping subtheory asks one basic question. That is, what gives some children and
adults the resilience to emotionally cope more effectively than most with the
experiences of childhood rejection? Finally, sociocultural systems subtheory
asks two very different classes of questions. First, why are some parents warm
and loving and others cold, aggressive, neglecting/rejecting? Is it true, for
example--as PARTheory predicts--that specific psychological, familial, community,
and societal factors tend to be reliably associated the world over with specific
variations in parental acceptance-rejection? Second, in what way is the total
fabric of society as well as the behavior and beliefs of individuals within
society affected by the fact that most parents in that society tend to either
accept or reject their children? For example, is it true, as PARTheory predicts,
that a people's religious beliefs, artistic preferences, and other expressive
beliefs and behaviors tend to be universally associated with their childhood
experiences of parental love and love withdrawal?
Several distinctive features guide PARTheory's attempts to answer questions such
as these. First--employing a multimethod research strategy--the theory draws
extensively from worldwide, cross-cultural evidence as well as from every major
ethnic group in the United States. Additionally, it draws from literary and
historical insights as far back as two thousand years. And more importantly, it
draws from and helps provide a conceptual framework for integrating empirical
studies on issues of parental acceptance-rejection published since the end of
the nineteenth century, mostly within the United States. From these sources the
theory attempts to formulate a lifespan developmental perspective on issues
surrounding parental acceptance and rejection. Much of this lifespan perspective
is incorporated into PARTheory's personality subtheory, described later. First
however, we discuss the concepts of parental acceptance and rejection, or the
warmth dimension of parenting. At this point we should remind readers that in
PARTheory the term parent refers to whoever the major caregiver(s) is/are of a
child--not necessarily biological or adoptive parents.
The Warmth Dimension of Parenting
Together, parental acceptance and rejection form the warmth dimension of
parenting. This is a dimension or continuum on which all humans can be placed
because everyone has experienced in childhood more or less love at the hands of
major caregivers. Thus, the warmth dimension has to do with the quality of the
affectional bond between parents and their children, and with the physical and
verbal behaviors parents use to express these feelings. One end of the continuum
is marked by parental acceptance, which refers to the warmth, affection, care,
comfort, concern, nurturance, support, or simply love that children can
experience from their parents and other caregivers. The other end of the
continuum is marked by parental rejection, which refers to the absence or
significant withdrawal of these feelings and behaviors and by the presence of a
variety of physically and psychologically hurtful behaviors and affects.
Extensive cross-cultural research over the course of 45 years reveals that
parental rejection can be experienced by any combination of four principal
expressions: (1) cold and unaffectionate, the opposite of being warm and
affectionate, (2) hostile and aggressive, (3) indifferent and neglecting, and
(4) undifferentiated rejecting. Undifferentiated rejection refers to
individuals' beliefs that their parents do not really care about them or love
them, even though there might not be clear behavioral indicators that the
parents are neglecting, unaffectionate, or aggressive toward them.
These behaviors are shown graphically in Figure 1. Elements to the left of the
slash marks (warmth, hostility, and indifference) in the Figure refer to
internal, psychological states of parents. That is, parents may feel or be
perceived to feel warm (or cold and unloving) toward their children, or they may
feel or be perceived to feel hostile, angry, bitter, resentful, irritable,
impatient, or antagonistic toward them. Alternatively, parents may feel or be
perceived to feel indifferent toward their children, feel or be perceived to
feel unconcerned and uncaring about them, or have a restricted interest in their
overall well being. Elements to the right of the slash marks in the Figure
(affection, aggression, and neglect) refer to observable behaviors that result
when parents act on these emotions. Thus when parents act on their feelings of
love they are likely to be affectionate. As noted in the Figure, parental
affection can be shown physically (e.g. hugging, kissing, caressing, and
comforting), verbally (e.g. praising, complimenting, and saying nice things to
or about the child), or symbolically in some other way, as with the use of
culturally specific gestures. These and many other caring, nurturing,
supportive, and loving behaviors help define the behavioral expressions of
parental acceptance.
When parents act on feelings of hostility, anger, resentment, or enmity, the
resulting behavior is generally called aggression. As construed in PARTheory,
aggression is any behavior where there is the intention of hurting someone,
something, or oneself (physically or emotionally). Figure 1 shows that parents
may be physically aggressive (e.g., hitting, pushing, throwing things, and
pinching) and verbally aggressive (e.g. sarcastic, cursing, mocking, shouting,
saying thoughtless, humiliating, or disparaging things to or about the child).
Additionally, parents may use hurtful, nonverbal symbolic gestures toward their
children.
The connection between indifference as an internal motivator and neglect as a
behavioral response is not as direct as the connection between hostility and
aggression. This is true because parents may neglect or be perceived to neglect
their children for many reasons that have nothing to do with indifference. For
example, parents may neglect their children as a way of trying to cope with
their anger toward them. Neglect is not simply a matter of failing to provide
for the material and physical needs of children, however; it also pertains to
parents' failure to attend appropriately to children's social and emotional
needs. Often, for example, neglecting parents pay little attention to children's
needs for comfort, solace, help, or attention; they may also remain physically
as well as psychologically unresponsive or even unavailable or inaccessible. All
these behaviors, real or perceived --individually and collectively--are likely to
induce children to feel unloved or rejected. Even in warm and loving families,
however, children are likely to experience--at least occasionally--a few of these
hurtful emotions and behaviors.
Figure 1. The
Warmth Dimension of Parenting
Thus it is important to be aware that parental
acceptance-rejection can be viewed and studied from either of two perspectives.
That is, acceptance-rejection can be studied as perceived or subjectively
experienced by the individual (the phenomenological perspective), or it can be
studied as reported by an outside observer (the behavioral perspective).
Usually, but not always, the two perspectives lead to similar conclusions.
PARTheory research suggests, however, that if the conclusions are very
discrepant one should generally trust the information derived from the
phenomenological perspective. This is true because a child may feel unloved (as
in undifferentiated rejection), but outside observers may fail to detect any
explicit indicators of parental rejection. Alternatively, observers may report a
significant amount of parental aggression or neglect, but the child may not feel
rejected. This occurs with some regularity in reports of child abuse and
neglect. Thus there is only a problematic relation between so-called "objective"
reports of abuse, rejection, and neglect on the one hand and children's
perceptions of parental acceptance-rejection on the other. As Kagan (1978, p.
61) put it, "parental rejection is not a specific set of actions by parents but
a belief held by the child."
In effect, much of parental acceptance-rejection is symbolic (Kagan, 1974,
1978). Therefore, to understand why rejection has consistent effects on children
and adults, one must understand its symbolic nature. Certainly in the context of
ethnic and cross-cultural studies investigators must strive to understand
people's symbolic, culturally-based interpretations of parents' love-related
behaviors if they wish to fully comprehend the acceptance-rejection process in
those settings. That is, even though parents everywhere may express, to some
degree, acceptance (warmth, affection, care, concern) and rejection (coldness,
lack of affection, hostility, aggression, indifference, neglect), the way they
do it is highly variable and saturated with cultural or sometimes idiosyncratic
meaning. For example, parents anywhere might praise or compliment their
children, but the way in which they do it in one sociocultural setting might
have no meaning (or might have a totally different meaning) in a second setting.
This is illustrated in the following incident:
A few years ago I [Rohner] interviewed a high caste Hindu woman about family matters in India. Another woman seated nearby distracted my attention. The second woman quietly and carefully peeled an orange and then removed the seeds from each segment. Her 9-year-old daughter became increasingly animated as her mother progressed. Later, my Bengali interpreter asked me if I had noticed what the woman was doing. I answered that I had, but that I had not paid much attention to it. "Should I have?" "Well," she answered, "you want to know about parental love and affection in West Bengal, so you should know." She went on to explain that when a Bengali mother wants to praise her child--to show approval and affection for her child--she might give the child a peeled and seeded orange. Bengali children understand completely that their mothers have done something special for them, even though mothers may not use words of praisefor to do so would be unseemly, much like praising themselves. (Rohner, 1994, p. 113; see also Rohner and Chaki-Sircar, 1988).
PARTheory's Personality Subtheory
As we said earlier, PARTheory's personality subtheory attempts to predict and
explain major personality or psychological--especially mental
health-related--consequences of perceived parental acceptance and rejection. The subtheory begins with the probably untestable assumption that over the course of
evolution humans have developed the enduring, biologically based emotional need
for positive response from the people most important to them (Baumeister &
Leary, 1995; Bjorklund & Pellegrini, 2002; Leary, 1999). The need for positive
response includes an emotional wish, desire, or yearning (whether consciously
recognized or not) for comfort, support, care, concern, nurturance, and the
like. In adulthood, the need becomes more complex and differentiated to include
the wish (recognized or unrecognized) for positive regard from people with whom
one has an affectional bond of attachment. People who can best satisfy this need
are typically parents for infants and children, but include significant others
and non parental attachment figures for adolescents and adults.
As construed in PARTheory, a significant other is any person with whom a child
or adult has a relatively long-lasting emotional tie, who is uniquely important
to the individual, and who is interchangeable with no one else. In this sense,
parents are generally significant others, but parents also tend to have one
additional quality not shared by most significant others. That is, children's
sense of emotional security and comfort tends to be dependent on the quality of
their relationship with their parents. Because of that, parents are usually the
kind of significant other called attachment figures in both PARTheory and
attachment theory (Ainsworth, 1989; Bowlby, 1982; Colin, 1996). Parents are thus
uniquely important to children because the security and other emotional and
psychological states of offspring are dependent on the quality of relationship
with their parent(s). It is for this reason that parental acceptance and
rejection is postulated in PARTheory to have unparalleled influence in shaping
children's personality development over time. Moreover, according to PARTheory's
personality subtheory, adults' sense of emotional security and well-being tends
to be dependent on the perceived quality of relationship with attachment
figures. Thus acceptance or rejection by an intimate partner is also postulated
to have a major influence on adults' personality and psychological adjustment.
The concept personality is defined in personality subtheory as an individual's
more or less stable set of predispositions to respond (i.e., affective,
cognitive, perceptual, and motivational dispositions) and actual modes of
responding (i.e., observable behaviors) in various life situations or contexts.
This definition recognizes that behavior is motivated, is influenced by external
(i.e., environmental) as well as internal (e.g., emotional, biological, and
learning) factors, and usually has regularity or orderliness about it across
time and space. PARTheory's personality subtheory postulates that the emotional
need for positive response from significant others and attachment figures is a
powerful motivator, and when children do not get this need satisfied adequately
by their parents (or adults do not get this need met by their attachment
figures), they are predisposed to respond emotionally and behaviorally in
specific ways. In particular--according to the subtheory--individuals who feel
rejected are likely to be anxious and insecure. In an attempt to allay these
feelings and to satisfy their needs, persons who feel rejected often increase
their bids for positive response, but only up to a point. That is, they tend to
become more dependent, as shown in Figure 2.
The term dependence in the theory refers to the internal, psychologically felt
wish or yearning for emotional (as opposed to instrumental or task-oriented)
support, care, comfort, attention, nurturance, and similar behaviors from
attachment figures. The term, as used in PARTheory, also refers to the actual
behavioral bids individuals make for such responsiveness. For young children
these bids may include clinging to parents, whining, or crying when parents
unexpectedly depart, and seeking physical proximity with them when they return.
Older children and adults may express their need for positive response more
symbolically--especially in times of distress--by seeking reassurance, approval,
or support, as well as comfort, affection, or solace from people who are most
important to them--particularly from parents for youths, and from non-parental
significant others and attachment figures for adults.
Dependence is construed in PARTheory as a continuum, with independence defining
one end of the continuum and dependence the other. Independent people are those
who have their need for positive response met sufficiently so that they are free
from frequent or intense yearning or behavioral bids for succor from significant
others. Very dependent people on the other hand are those who have a frequent
and intense desire for positive response, and are likely to make many bids for
response. As with all the personality dispositions studied in PARTheory, humans
everywhere can be placed somewhere along the continuum of being more or less
dependent or independent. According to the theory, much of the variation in
dependence among children and adults is contingent on the extent to which they
perceive themselves to be accepted or rejected. Many rejected children and
adults feel the need for constant reassurance and emotional support.
According to personality subtheory, parental rejection as well as rejection by
other attachment figures also leads to other personality outcomes, in addition
to dependence. These include hostility, aggression, passive aggression, or
psychological problems with the management of hostility and aggression;
emotional unresponsiveness; immature dependence or defensive independence
depending on the form, frequency, duration, and intensity of perceived rejection
and parental control; impaired self-esteem; impaired self-adequacy; emotional
instability; and negative worldview. Theoretically these dispositions are
expected to emerge because of the intense psychological pain produced by
perceived rejection. More specifically, beyond a certain point--a point that
varies from individual to individual--children and adults who experience
significant rejection are likely to feel ever-increasing anger, resentment, and
other destructive emotions that may become intensely painful. As a result, many
rejected persons close off emotionally in an effort to protect themselves from
the hurt of further rejection. That is, they become less emotionally responsive.
In so doing they often have problems being able or willing to express love and
in knowing how to or even being capable of accepting it from others.
Because of all this psychological hurt, some rejected individuals become
defensively independent. Defensive independence is like healthy independence in
that individuals make relatively few behavioral bids for positive response. It
is unlike healthy independence, however, in that defensively independent people
continue to crave warmth and support--positive response--though they sometimes do
not recognize it. Indeed, because of the overlay of anger, distrust, and other
negative emotions generated by chronic rejection they often positively deny this
need, saying in effect, "To hell with you! I don't need you. I don't need
anybody!" Defensive independence with its associated emotions and behaviors
sometimes leads to a process of counter rejection, where individuals who feel
rejected reject the person(s) who reject them. Not surprisingly, this process
sometimes escalates into a cycle of violence and other serious relationship
problems.
In addition to dependence or defensive independence, individuals who feel
rejected are predicted in PARTheory's personality subtheory to develop feelings
of impaired self-esteem and impaired self-adequacy. This comes about because--as
noted in symbolic interaction theory (Cooley, 1902; Mead, 1934)--individuals tend
to view themselves as they think their parents or significant others view them.
Thus, insofar as children and adults feel their attachment figures do not love
them, they are likely to feel they are unlovable, perhaps even unworthy of being
loved. Whereas self-esteem pertains to individuals' feelings of self-worth or
value, self-adequacy pertains to their feelings of competence or mastery to
perform daily tasks adequately and to satisfy their own instrumental
(task-oriented) needs. Insofar as individuals feel they are not very good
people, they are also apt to feel they are not very good at satisfying their
needs. Or alternatively, insofar as people feel they are no good at satisfying
their personal needs, they often come to think less well of themselves more
globally. Anger, negative self-feelings, and the other consequences of perceived
rejection tend to diminish rejected children's and adults' capacity to deal
effectively with stress. Because of this, people who feel rejected often tend to
be less emotionally stable than people who feel accepted. They often become
emotionally upset--perhaps tearful or angry--when confronted with stressful
situations that accepted (loved) people are able to handle with greater
emotional equanimity. All these acutely painful feelings associated with
perceived rejection tend to induce children and adults to develop a negative
worldview. That is, according to PARTheory, rejected persons are likely to
develop a view of the world--of life, interpersonal relationships, and the very
nature of human existence--as being untrustworthy, hostile, unfriendly,
emotionally unsafe, threatening, or dangerous. These thoughts and feelings often
extend to people's beliefs about the nature of the supernatural world (i.e.,
God, the gods, and other religious beliefs) (Rohner, 1975, 1986), discussed more
fully below in PARTheory's sociocultural systems subtheory.
Negative worldview, negative self-esteem, negative self-adequacy, and some of
the other personality dispositions described above are important elements in the
social-cognition or mental representations of rejected persons. In PARTheory,
the concept of mental representation refers to an individual's more-or-less
organized but usually implicit conception of existence, including conception of
things that the individual takes for granted about self, others, and the
experiential world constructed from emotionally significant past and current
experiences. Along with one's emotional state--which both influences and is
influenced by one's conception of reality--mental representations tend to shape
the way in which individuals perceive, construe, and react to new experiences,
including interpersonal relationships. Mental representations also influence
what and how individuals store and remember experiences (Baldwin, 1992; Clausen,
1972; Crick & Dodge, 1994; Epstein, 1994).
Once created, individuals' mental representations of self, of significant
others, and of the world around them tend to induce them to seek or to avoid
certain situations and kinds of people. In effect, the way individuals think
about themselves and their world shapes the way they live their lives. This is
notably true of rejected children and adults. For example, many rejected persons
have a tendency to perceive hostility where none is intended, to see deliberate
rejection in unintended acts of significant others, or to devalue their sense of
personal worth in the face of strong counter-information. Moreover, rejected
persons are likely to seek, create, interpret, or perceive experiences,
situations, and relationships in ways that are consistent with their distorted
mental representations. And they often tend to avoid or mentally reinterpret
situations that are inconsistent with these representations. Additionally,
rejected children and adults often construct mental images of personal
relationships as being unpredictable, untrustworthy, and perhaps hurtful. These
negative mental representations are often carried forward into new relationships
where rejected individuals find it difficult to trust others emotionally, or
where they may become hypervigilant and hypersensitive to any slights or signs
of emotional undependability. Because of all this selective attention, selective
perception, faulty styles of causal attribution, and distorted cognitive
information processing, rejected individuals are expected in PARTheory to
self-propel along qualitatively different developmental pathways from accepted
or loved people.
The pain of perceived rejection is very real. In fact, brain imaging (fMRI)
studies reveal that specific parts of the brain (i.e., the anterior cingulate
cortex, and the right ventral prefrontal cortex) are activated when people feel
rejected, just as they are when people experience physical pain (Eisenberg,
Lieberman, & Williams, 2003. See also Squire & Stein, 2003).
It is perhaps for reasons such as these that dozens of studies involving
thousands of participants cross-culturally and among major American ethnic
groups consistently show that about 80% of the children and adults measured so
far respond as personality subtheory predicts. In fact no adequate study
anywhere--across cultures, genders, ages, geographic boundaries, ethnicities, and
other defining conditions of the world--has failed to show the same basic trend
portrayed in Figure 3.
Figure 3. Copers and Troubled Individuals in Relation to PARTheory's Personality Subtheory
That is, Figure 3 graphically displays PARTheory's postulates about expected relations between perceived acceptance-rejection and individuals' mental health status. More specifically, the Figure shows that, within a band of individual variation, children's and adults' mental health status is likely to become impaired in direct proportion to the form, frequency, severity, and duration of rejection experienced. Some individuals who come from loving families, however, also display the constellation of psychological problems typically shown by rejected individuals. These people are called "troubled" in PARTheory; many are individuals (e.g. adults) who are in a less than loving (e.g., rejecting) relationships with attachment figures other than parents. This fact helps confirm PARTheory's expectation that, for most people, perceived rejection by any attachment figure at any point throughout the lifespan effectively compromises the likelihood of healthy social-emotional functioning. However, it is also expected in PARTheory that a small minority of individuals will be able to thrive emotionally despite having experienced significant rejection by an attachment figure. As shown in Fig. 3 these people are called copers. They are the focus of PARTheory's coping subtheory briefly discussed next.
PARTheory's Coping Subtheory
As we said earlier, PARTheory's coping subtheory deals with the question of how
some rejected individuals appear to be able to withstand the corrosive drizzle
of day-to-day rejection without suffering the negative mental health
consequences that most rejected individuals do. Theoretically and empirically
the coping process is the least well-developed portion of PARTheory. As is true
for most other bodies of research on the coping process (Somerfield & McCrae,
2000), little is yet known with confidence about the mechanisms and processes
that help answer coping subtheory's basic question. Nonetheless it seems clear
that in order to understand the coping process--indeed the entire
acceptance-rejection process--one must adopt a multivariate, person-in-context
perspective. This perspective has three elements: self, other, and context.
Specifically, the multivariate model of behavior employed in PARTheory states
that the behavior of the individual (e.g., coping with perceived rejection) is a
function of the interaction between self, other, and context. "Self"
characteristics include the individual's mental activities along with the other
internal and external (personality) characteristics discussed earlier. "Other"
characteristics include the personal and interpersonal characteristics of the
rejecting parent(s) and other attachment figure(s), along with the form,
frequency, duration, and severity of rejection. "Context" characteristics
include other significant people in the individual's life, along with
social-situational characteristics of the person's environment. A specific
research hypothesis coming from this perspective states that, all other things
being equal, the likelihood of children being able to cope with perceived
parental rejection is enhanced by the presence of a warm, supportive, alternate
caregiver or attachment figure.
PARTheory's emphasis on mental activity--including mental representations--leads
us to expect that specific social cognitive capabilities allow some children and
adults to cope with perceived rejection more effectively than others. These
capabilities include a clearly differentiated sense of self, self-determination,
and the capacity to depersonalize (Rohner, 1986). More specifically, coping
subtheory expects that the capacity of individuals to cope with rejection is
enhanced to the degree that they have a clearly differentiated sense of self,
one aspect of which is a sense of self-determination. Self-determined
individuals believe they can exert at least a modicum of control over what
happens to them through their own effort or personal attributes. Other
individuals may feel like pawns: They feel as though things happen to them
because of fate, chance, luck, or powerful others. Individuals with a sense of
self-determination have an internal psychological resource for minimizing some
of the most damaging consequences of perceived rejection.
Similarly, individuals who have the capacity to depersonalize are provided
another social-cognitive resource for dealing with perceived rejection.
Personalizing refers to the act of "taking it personally," that is, to
reflexively or automatically relating life events and interpersonal encounters
to oneself--of interpreting events egocentrically in terms of oneself, usually in
a negative sense. Thus, personalizers are apt to interpret inadvertent slights
and minor acts of insensitivity as being deliberate acts of rejection or other
hurtful intentions. Individuals who are able to depersonalize, however, have a
psychological resource for dealing in a more positive way with interpersonal
ambiguities. All three of these social cognitive factors appear to provide
psychological shields against the most corrosive effects of perceived rejection.
However, these attributes themselves tend to be affected by rejection, thus
complicating the task of assessing the independent contribution that each might
make in helping children and adults cope with perceived rejection.
It is important to note here that the concept "coper" in PARTheory's coping
subtheory refers to affective copers versus instrumental copers. Affective
copers are those people whose emotional and overall mental health is reasonably
good despite having been raised in seriously rejecting families. Instrumental
copers, on the other hand, are rejected persons who do well school, in their
professions, occupations, and other task-oriented activities but whose emotional
and mental health is impaired. Instrumental copers maintain a high level of task
competence and occupational performance despite serious rejection. Many
prominent personalities in history have been instrumental copers. Included among
them are such personages as Louis "Satchmo" Armstrong, John Stuart Mill, Richard
Nixon, Edgar Allen Poe, Eleanor Roosevelt, Babe Ruth, and Mark Twain, among
many, many others (Goertzel & Goertzel, 1962; Howe, 1982). Biographies and
autobiographies of these individuals reveal that even though they were
successful instrumental copers, they were not affective copers. All appear to
have been psychologically distressed in ways described by PARTheory's
personality subtheory.
Even though the mental health status of affective copers is reasonably good, it
is generally not as good as that of individuals coming from loving (accepting)
families--but it does tend to be significantly better than that of most
individuals coming from rejecting families. Over time, from childhood into
adulthood, however, all but the most severely rejected and psychologically
injured individuals are likely to have enough positive experiences outside their
families of origin to help ameliorate the most damaging emotional, cognitive,
and behavioral effects of parental rejection. Thus, given the ordinary
resilience characteristic of most people most of the time (Masten, 2001)--in
combination with successful psychotherapy, positive work experiences, satisfying
intimate relationships, and other such gratifying processes and outcomes--adults
who were rejected as children are often better adjusted emotionally and
psychologically than they were as children under the direct influence of
rejecting parents--though they tend not to have as positive sense of well-being
as adults who felt loved all along. That is, important sequelae of rejection are
apt to linger into adulthood, placing even affective copers at somewhat greater
risk for social, physical, and emotional problems throughout life than persons
who were loved continuously. This is especially true if the rejection process in
childhood seriously compromised the individual's ability to form secure,
trusting relationships with an intimate partner or other adult attachment
figures.
PARTheory's Sociocultural Systems Model and Subtheory
As we intimated above in our discussion of PARTheory's multivariate model,
parental rejection occurs in a complex ecological (familial, community, and
sociocultural) context. PARTheory's sociocultural systems model shown in Fig. 4
provides a way of thinking about the antecedents, consequence, and other
correlates of parental acceptance-rejection within individuals and total
societies. This model has its historical roots in the early work of Kardiner
(1939, 1945a, 1945b), and later in the work of Whiting & Child (1953). It shows,
for example, that the likelihood of parents (element 3 in the model) displaying
any given form of behavior (e.g., acceptance-rejection) is shaped in important
ways by the maintenance systems of that society including such social
institutions as family structure, household organization, economic organization,
political organization, system of defense, and other institutions that bear
directly on the survival of a culturally organized population within its natural
environment (element 1 in the model). The model also shows that parents
accepting-rejecting and other behaviors impact directly on children's
personality development and behavior (as postulated in personality subtheory).
The double-headed arrow in the model (designed to show an interaction between
elements) shows that personal characteristics of children such as their
temperament and behavioral dispositions shape to a significant extent the form
and quality of parents' behavior toward them. Arrows in the model also reveal
that--in addition to family experiences--youths have a wide variety of
often-influential experiences (element 5, intervening developmental experiences)
in the context of the natural environment in which they live, the maintenance
systems of their society, peers, and adults in the society (element 6), and the
institutionalized expressive systems of their society (element 7).
Institutionalized expressive systems and behaviors refer to the religious
traditions and behaviors of a people, to their artistic traditions and
preferences, to their musical and folkloric traditions and preferences, and to
other such symbolic, mostly nonutilitarian, and nonsurvival-related beliefs and
behaviors. They are called "expressive" in PARTheory because they are believed
to express or reflect people's internal, psychological states, at least
initially when the expressive systems were first created. Thus, expressive
systems are believed in PARTheory to be symbolic creations, formed over time by
multiple individuals within a society. As the people change, the expressive
systems and behaviors also tend to change, though sometimes slowly and
grudgingly--especially if the systems have been codified in writing. It is
important to note here--according to sociocultural systems subtheory--that even
though expressive systems are ultimately human creations, once created and
incorporated into the sociocultural system they tend to act back on individuals,
shaping their future beliefs and behaviors.
Guided by the sociocultural systems model, PARTheory's sociocultural systems
subtheory attempts to predict and explain worldwide causes of parental
acceptance and rejection. The subtheory also attempts to predict and explain
expressive correlates of parental acceptance and rejection. For example the
subtheory predicts--and substantial cross-cultural evidence confirms--that in
societies where children tend to be rejected, cultural beliefs about the
supernatural world (i.e., God, gods, and the spirit world) usually portray supernaturals as being malevolent--i.e., hostile, treacherous, unpredictable,
capricious, destructive, or negative in other ways (Rohner, 1975, 1986).
However, the supernatural world is usually thought to be benevolent--warm,
supportive, generous, protective, or kindly in other ways--in societies where
most children are raised with loving acceptance. No doubt these cultural
differences are the result of aggregated individual differences in the mental
representations of accepted versus rejected persons within these two different
kinds of societies. Parental acceptance and rejection
are also known to be associated worldwide with
many other expressive sociocultural correlates such as the artistic traditions
characteristic of individual societies, as well as the artistic preferences of
individuals within these societies (Rohner & Frampton, 1982). Additionally,
evidence suggests that the recreational and occupational choices adults make may
be associated with childhood experiences of acceptance and rejection (Aronoff,
1967; Mantell, 1974; Rohner, 1986). All these and other expressive behaviors and
beliefs appear to be byproducts of the social, emotional, and social-cognitive
effects of parental acceptance-rejection discussed earlier.
Why do parents in most societies tend to be warm and loving, and parents in
about 25% of the world's societies tend to be mildly to severely rejecting (Rohner,
1975, 1986; Rohner & Rohner, 1981). What factors account for these societal
differences and for individual variations in parenting within societies?
Questions such as these, guide the second portion of PARTheory's sociocultural
systems subtheory. There is no single or simple answer to these questions, but
specific factors do appear to be reliably associated with societal and
intrasocietal variations in parental rejection. Principal among these are
conditions that promote the breakdown of primary emotional relationships and
social supports. Thus, single parents (most often mothers) in social isolation
without social and emotional supports, especially if the parents are young and
economically deprived, appear universally to be at greatest risk for withdrawing
love and affection from their children (Rohner, 1986). It is useful to note,
however, that from a global perspective poverty by itself is not necessarily
associated with increased rejection. Rather, it is poverty in association with
these other social and emotional conditions that place children at greatest
risk. Indeed, much of humanity is now and always has been in a state of relative
poverty. But despite this, most parents around the world raise their children
with loving care (Rohner, 1975).
Methods in PARTheory Research
PARTheory's program of cross-cultural research
is guided methodologically by conceptual models called anthroponomy and the
universalist approach, respectively (Rohner, 1986; Rohner & Rohner, 1980).
Anthroponomy is an approach to the human sciences characterized by a search for
universals, that is, for worldwide principles of behavior that can be shown
empirically to generalize across our species under specified conditions whenever
they occur. Although many propositions advanced by Western social scientists are
assumed to apply to all humans, verification of such claims is complex and
involves attention to the role of culture, language, migration, history, and
other such factors. It also requires attention to the strengths and weaknesses
of individual measurement procedures (e.g., self-report questionnaires) and
general paradigms of research (e.g., the holocultural method) (Campbell & Fiske,
1959; Cournoyer, 2000; Cournoyer & Malcolm, in press; Rohner, 1986).
In PARTheory these issues are addressed in the universalist approach, a
multi-methodology and multi-procedure research strategy that searches for the
convergence of results across an array of discrete measurement modalities and
paradigms of research in a broad range of sociocultural and ethnic settings
worldwide. More specifically, five discrete methods or types of studies have
been used to test core aspects of the theory. These methods can be discussed in
two clusters. The first cluster consists of two types of studies. The first
involves quantitative psychological studies using techniques such as interviews,
behavior observations, and self-report questionnaires, most notably the Parental
Acceptance-Rejection Questionnaire (PARQ) (Rohner, 1990), the Parental
Acceptance-Rejection/Control Questionnaire (PARQ/Control) (Rohner, 1990), and
the Personality Assessment Questionnaire (PAQ) (Rohner, 1990). All these and
other self-report questionnaires are contained in this Handbook.
Three versions of the PARQ and PARQ/Control exist. One is used to assess
children's perceptions of the degree of acceptance or rejection (and behavioral
control) they receive at the hands of their mothers, fathers, or other
caregivers. Another assesses adults' recollections of their childhood
experiences of maternal or paternal acceptance-rejection (and control). The
third asks parents to reflect on their own accepting-rejecting and controlling
behaviors. The PAQ, on the other hand, assesses individuals' (adults' or
children's) self-perceptions of overall psychological adjustment as defined by
the seven personality dispositions central to personality subtheory. Details
about the PARQ, PARQ/Control, and PAQ--including about their reliability and
validity for use internationally and among American ethnic groups--is provided
in Rohner and Khaleque, (2004a), Rohner (1986, 1990), Khaleque & Rohner (2002b),
and in this Handbook. References to several hundred quantitative psychological
studies using all these techniques may be found in Rohner (2004a).
Meta-analysis, the second type of study in this cluster, summarizes and
synthesizes results of a collection of these discrete psychological studies that
may have conflicting results and may or may not include multiple cultural
contexts. The work of Khaleque & Rohner (2002a) illustrates this method.
The second cluster consists of three methods or types of studies based on
ethnographic research. The first is the ethnographic case study such as that
done by Rohner & Chaki-Sircar (1988). Ethnographic case studies employ long-term
(e.g., six months to several years) participant observation procedures within a
specific culturally organized community, along with structured and unstructured
observations, interviews, and other such procedures. Such ethnographic studies
produce a context-rich account of the lifeway of a people. A second method
within this cluster is the controlled comparison or concomitant variation study
(Naroll, 1968; Pelto & Pelto, 1978; Rohner, 1977). In these studies
investigators usually locate two or more culture-bearing populations in which
one of two conditions is true: (1) Relevant variables in the sampled populations
vary, but other sociocultural factors remain constant, or (2) relevant variables
in the sample population remain constant while other sociocultural factors are
free to vary. Rohner's (1960) comparative study of parental rejection in three
Pacific societies (i.e., a Maori community of New Zealand, a traditional
highland community of Bali, and the Alorese of Indonesia) illustrates the second
type of study in this cluster. Finally, the holocultural method (often called
the cross-cultural survey method) is the third approach within this cluster (Naroll,
Michik, & Naroll, 1976; 1980; Whiting & Child, 1953). This method is a research
design for statistically measuring the relation between two or more
theoretically defined and operationalized variables in a random, stratified
sample of the world's adequately described sociocultural systems. The sources of
data are ethnographic reports rather than direct observations, self-report
questionnaires, interviews, or other such procedures (Rohner, et al., 1978).
Rohner's 1975 study of 101 well-described non-industrial societies distributed
widely throughout the major geographic regions and culture areas of the world
illustrates this type of study.
Each of these five types of studies contains unique strengths and weaknesses.
The strengths of the psychological-study cluster, for example, are
several--including valid, reliable, and precise descriptions of phenomena.
Estimates of both central tendency and variability in data generated in this
cluster of methods allow sensitive statistical procedures to be employed to
tease out subtle effects. A potential weakness of these studies however, is the
fact that rich contextual data is often missing. Special strengths of the
methods in the ethnographic research cluster are validity and groundedness. That
is, ethnographic studies produce accounts that are rich in cultural detail and
context. Derived as they are from ethnography, holocultural studies are also
grounded, but they have an important additional strength in that they allow for
truly species-wide sampling that takes into account the full range of known
sociocultural variation. A weakness of these methods, however, is the fact that
measures coded from ethnography are sometimes imprecise, and therefore may be
low in reliability.
Evidence Supporting the Main Features of PARTheory
Overwhelmingly, the most highly developed
portion of PARTheory is its personality subtheory. Evidence bearing on that
subtheory comes from all five types of studies described above. Because of their
robustness and simplicity, however, dozens of researchers internationally have
chosen to use the PARQ, PARQ/Control, and the PAQ with thousands of children and
adults in many ethnic groups and societies throughout the world. More evidence
has been compiled from these studies than from studies using any other set of
measures. Accordingly, results of these studies are given greatest attention
here.
Virtually every study that has used these measures--regardless of racial,
cultural, linguistic, geographic, and other such variations--has reached the
same conclusion: The experience of parental acceptance (or rejection) tends to
be associated with the form of psychological adjustment (or maladjustment)
postulated in personality subtheory. A meta-analysis of 43 studies drawing from
7,563 respondents worldwide using the PARQ and PAQ, for example, showed that
3,433 additional studies, all with nonsignificant results, would be required to
disconfirm the conclusion that perceived acceptance-rejection is panculturally
associated with children's psychological adjustment; 941 such studies would be
required to disconfirm the conclusion among adults (Khaleque & Rohner, 2002a).
All effect sizes reported in the meta-analysis were statistically significant.
Additionally, results showed no significant heterogeneity in effect sizes in
different samples cross-culturally or within U.S. ethnic groups.
The meta-analysis also showed that regardless of culture, ethnicity, or
geographic location, approximately 26% of the variability in children's
psychological adjustment and 21% of that in adults' is accounted for by parental
(paternal as well at maternal) acceptance-rejection. These results support
PARTheory's expectation that the magnitude of the relation between perceived
acceptance-rejection and psychological adjustment is likely to be stronger in
childhood--while children are still under the direct influences of parents--than
in adulthood (Rohner, 1986, 1999). Obviously, a substantial amount of variance
in children's and adults' adjustment remains to be accounted for by factors so
far unmeasured in this program of research. No doubt a variety of cultural,
behavioral, genetic, and other learning factors are implicated in this variance
(Reiss, 1997; Saudino, 1997).
One class of factors is already known to be associated with variations in
adults' psychological adjustment. These factors have to do with the quality of
adults' relationships with their intimate partners (attachment figures). In this
regard for example, Rohner and Khaleque (2004b) found that the self-reported
psychological adjustment of 88 American women was impaired to the degree that
they experienced their intimate male partners to be somewhat rejecting. In fact,
perceived partner acceptance by itself accounted for 16% of the variability in
the women's psychological adjustment. However, childhood experiences of
perceived paternal (but not maternal) acceptance moderated the relation between
perceived partner acceptance-rejection and women's adjustment. That is, women
who felt they had had loving fathers in childhood reported greater psychological
maladjustment to the extent they believed they now have less than loving
intimate partners. But this was true only up to a point. Beyond that point
perceived paternal acceptance in childhood acted as a protective buffer against
further increments in women's maladjustment. On the other hand, psychological
maladjustment increased continuously to the extent that the women reported
having had less than loving fathers in childhood and less than loving current
relationships with their intimate partners.
Similar results were found in a study of 79 young adults in India (Parmar &
Rohner, 2004). There, the authors found that the less accepting both men and
women perceived their intimate partners to be, the worse was their psychological
adjustment. Simple correlations also showed the expected positive correlation
between adults' psychological adjustment and remembered maternal and paternal
acceptance in the childhood of the adults. However, results of multiple
regression analysis showed that partner acceptance was the strongest single
predictor of men's psychological adjustment, though this relation was partially
mediated by remembered paternal (but not maternal) acceptance in childhood. For
women, on the other hand, both partner acceptance and paternal (but not
maternal) acceptance were about coequal as predictors of psychological
adjustment.
Finally, a third study--in Turkey--supports conclusions from the preceding two,
and thus suggests the possibility of a universal relation between individuals'
mental health status and their perceptions of acceptance-rejection by intimate
adult partners. In this study Varan, Rohner, and Eryavuz (2004) found that
[Insert results from Varan re regression analysis for males and females in path
analysis.]
As we said above, three other classes of data also support the major postulates
of PARTheory's personality subtheory. These are cross-cultural survey (holocultural)
studies, ethnographic case studies, and controlled comparison (concomitant
variation) studies. Regarding the first, results of the major holocultural study
(Rohner, 1975) of 101 well-described non-industrial societies mentioned earlier
confirmed the conclusion that parental acceptance-rejection is associated
panculturally with the psychological (mal) adjustment of children and adults.
Additionally, the controlled comparison of three sociocultural groups in the
Pacific mentioned earlier (Rohner, 1960) also supports this conclusion, as does
an 18-month ethnographic and psychological community study in West Bengal, India
(Rohner & Chaki-Sircar, 1988). Additionally, a six-month ethnographic and
psychological case study of 349 9- through 16-year-old youths in St. Kitts, West
Indies (Rohner, 1987) along with a six-month ethnographic and psychological case
study of 281 9- through 18-year-old youths and their parents in a poor, biracial
(African American and European American) community in Southeast Georgia, USA (Rohner,
1994b; Veneziano & Rohner, 1998) also confirm the conclusion that perceived
parental acceptance-rejection is associated with youths' psychological
adjustment.
All this evidence about the apparently universal expressions of
acceptance-rejection along with evidence about the worldwide psychological
effects of perceived acceptance-rejection has led Rohner (2004b) to formulate
the concept of a relational diagnosis called the parental acceptance-rejection
syndrome. The acceptance-rejection syndrome consists of two complementary sets
of factors. First, nearly 400 studies show that children and adult everywhere
appear to organize their perceptions of parental acceptance-rejection around the
same four classes of behavior discussed earlier (i.e., warmth/affection--or, its
opposite, coldness/lack of affect--hostility/aggression, indifference/neglect,
and undifferentiated rejection). Second, as just noted, cross-cultural evidence
strongly supports the conclusion that children and adults who experienced their
relationship with parents (and probably their attachment figures) as being
rejecting tend universally to self-report the specific form of psychological
maladjustment specified in personality subtheory. Together these two classes of
behavior comprise a syndrome, that is, a pattern or constellation of
co-occurring behaviors, traits, and dispositions. Any single psychological
disposition (e.g., anger, hostility, or aggression) may be found in other
conditions; it is the full configuration of dispositions that compose the
syndrome.
In addition to issues of psychological adjustment described in personality
subtheory and in the acceptance-rejection syndrome, evidence also strongly
implicates at least three other mental health issues as likely universal
correlates of parental acceptance-rejection. These issues are (1) depression and
depressed affect, (2) behavior problems, including conduct disorders,
externalizing behaviors, and delinquency, and (3) substance (drug and alcohol)
abuse (Rohner & Britner, 2002). Evidence regarding each of these topics is
briefly amplified below.
Depression. Parental rejection has been found to be consistently related
to both clinical and non-clinical depression and depressed affect within major
ethnic groups in the United States, including African Americans (Crook, Raskin,
& Eliot, 1981), Asian Americans (Greenberger & Chen, 1996), European Americans (Belsky
& Pensky, 1988; Jacobson, Fasman, & DiMascio, 1975; Whitbeck, Conger, & Kao,
1993; Whitbeck, Hoyt, Miller, & Kao, 1992), and Hispanic Americans (Dumka, Roosa,
& Jackson, 1997). In addition, parental rejection has been found to be linked
with depression in many countries worldwide, including Australia (Parker, 1983;
Parker, Kiloh, & Hayward, 1987), China (Chen, Rubin, & Li, 1995), Egypt (Fattah,
1996; Hassab-Allah, 1996; Salama, 1990), Germany (Richter, 1994), Hungary
(Richter, 1994), Italy (Richter, 1994), Sweden (Perris et al., 1986; Richter,
1994), and Turkey (Erkman, 1992). Moreover, a number of longitudinal studies
show that perceived parental rejection in childhood tends to precede the
development of depressive symptoms in adolescence and adulthood (Chen, Rubin &
Li, 1995; Ge, Best, Conger, & Simons, 1996; Ge, Lorenz, Conger, Elder, & Simons,
1994; Lefkowitz & Tesiny, 1984; Peterson, Sarigiani, & Kennedy, 1991; Robertson
& Simonsons, 1989).
Behavior problems. Parental rejection also appears to be a major
predictor of almost all forms of behavior problems, including conduct disorders,
externalizing behavior, and delinquency. Cross-cultural findings that support
this conclusion come from Bahrain (Al-Falaij, 1991), China (Chen, Rubin, & Li,
1997), Croatia (Ajdukovic, 1990), Egypt (Salama, 1984), England (Farrington &
Hawkins, 1991; Maughan, Pickles, & Quinton, 1995), India (Saxena, 1992), and
Norway (Pedersen, 1994). Studies also support this conclusion among American
ethnic groups, including African Americans, Asian Americans, European Americans,
and Hispanic Americans (Chen et al., 1998; Marcus & Gray, 1998; Rothbaum & Weis,
1994; Whitbeck, Hoyt, & Ackley, 1997). Finally, a number of longitudinal studies
in the U.S. (Ge, Best, Conger, & Simon, 1996; Loeber & Stouthamer-Loeber, 1986;
Simons, Robertson, & Downs, 1989), and globally (Chen et al., 1997) show that
parental rejection tends to precede the development of behavior problems.
Substance abuse. Support for the worldwide correlation between parental
acceptance-rejection and substance abuse comes from studies conducted in
Australia (Rosenberg, 1971), Canada (Hundleby & Mercer, 1987), England (Merry,
1972), the Netherlands (Emmelkamp & Heeres, 1988), and Sweden (Vrasti et al.,
1990). Some of these studies clearly suggest that parental rejection is causally
connected with both drug abuse and alcohol abuse. Parental rejection has also
been found to be connected with substance abuse in major ethnic groups in the
U.S., including among African Americans (Eldred, Brown, & Mahabir, 1974; Myers,
Newcomb, Richardson, & Alvy, 1997; Prendergast & Schaefer, 1974; Shedler &
Block, 1990), Asian Americans (Shedler & Block, 1990), and Hispanic Americans
(Coombs & Paulson, 1988; Coombs, Paulson, & Richardson, 1991). Moreover, Rohner
and Britner found a number of studies providing evidence about the relation
between parental rejection and substance abuse among middle class and working
class European Americans.
The importance of father love. Substantial evidence in all these classes
of study supports the conclusion that father love (acceptance-rejection) is
often as strongly implicated as mother love in the development of behavioral and
psychological problems as well as in the development of offspring's sense of
health and well-being (Rohner, 1998; Rohner & Veneziano, 2001; Veneziano, 2000,
2003). Studies supporting this conclusion tend to deal with the following six
issues among children, adolescents, and adults: (1) personality and
psychological adjustment problems (Amato, 1994; Dominy, Johnson, & Koch, 2000;
Komarovsky, 1976; Stagner, 1933); (2) mental illness (Barrera & Garrison-Jones,
1992; Lefkowitz & Tesiny, 1984); (3) psychological health and well-being (Amato,
1994); (4) conduct disorder (Eron, Banta, Walder, & Laulicht, 1961); (5)
substance abuse (Brook & Brook, 1988; Emmelkamp & Heeres, 1988); and (6)
delinquency (Andry, 1962).
Some of these studies, especially those carried out in the 1990s and later, used
multiple regression, structural equation modeling, and other powerful
statistical procedures that allow investigators to estimate the relative
contribution of each parent's behavior to youth outcomes. Many of these studies
conclude that father/paternal love explains a unique and independent portion of
the variance in specific child outcomes over and above the portion explained by
maternal love (Veneziano, 2003). Other studies conclude that paternal love is
sometimes the sole significant predictor of specific child outcomes (Rohner &
Veneziano, 2001). Studies in this latter category tend to address one or more of
the following issues: (1) personality and psychological adjustment problems
(Barnett, Marshall, & Pleck, 1992; Bartle, Anderson, & Sabatelli, 1989; Dickie
et al., 1997); (2) conduct and delinquency problems (Kroupa, 1988); and (3)
substance abuse (Brook, Whiteman, & Gordon, 1981; Eldred, Brown, & Mahabir,
1974).
Implications of PARTheory Evidence
The search in PARTheory for cross-culturally
valid principles of behavior is based on the assumption that with a scientific
understanding of the worldwide antecedents, consequences, and other correlates
of acceptance-rejection comes the possibility of formulating culture-fair and
practicable programs, policies, and interventions affecting families and
children everywhere. This research contributes to the goal of culture-fair
programs and policies in that it asks practitioners to look beyond differences
in cultural beliefs, language, and custom when making judgments about the
adequacy of parenting, and to focus instead on whether individuals' basic needs
(e.g., need for positive response from significant others) are being met. Social
policies and programs of prevention, intervention, and treatment based on
idiosyncratic beliefs at a particular point in history are likely to prove
unworkable for some, and probably even prejudicial for many minority
populations. Policies and programs based on demonstrable principles of human
behavior such as those shown in Table 1, however, stand a good chance of working
as nations and people change. The values and customs of a particular
sociocultural group, therefore, are not--according to PARTheory--the most
important criteria to be used to evaluate the adequacy of parenting in that
group. Rather, the most important question becomes how loved (accepted) do
children perceive themselves to be. Insofar as children perceive their parents
to be accepting, then--according to both theory and evidence presented here--it
probably makes little difference for children's developmental outcome how
external reporters view parents' behavior.
It is thoughts such as these that have motivated a great part of PARTheory
research. Now, after four and a half decades of research with thousands of
individuals in many cultures worldwide, and with members of every major American
ethnic group, at least two conclusions seem warranted. First, the same classes
of behaviors appear universally to convey the symbolic message that "my parent.
. ." (or other attachment figure) "loves me" (or does not love me, care about
me, want me--i.e., rejects me). These classes of behavior include the perception
of warmth/affection (or its opposite, coldness and lack of affection),
hostility/aggression, indifference/neglect, and undifferentiated rejection, as
defined at the beginning of this chapter. Second, differences in culture,
ethnicity, social class, race, gender, and other such factors do not exert
enough influence to override the apparently universal tendency for children and
adults everywhere to respond in essentially the same way when they perceive
themselves to be accepted or rejected by the people most important to them.
Having said this, however, we must also stress that the association between
perceived acceptance-rejection and psychological outcomes for youths and adults
is far from perfect. Indeed, even though perceived acceptance-rejection appears
to account universally for an average of about 25% of the variance in the
psychological adjustment of youths and adults, 75% of the variance is yet to be
accounted for by other factors. No doubt behavior genetics, sociocultural, and
other experiential factors are among these influences. Nonetheless, results of
research completed so far are so robust and stable cross-culturally that we
believe professionals should feel confident developing policies and
practice-applications based on the central tenets of PARTheory--especially
PARTheory's personality subtheory--despite the fact that much is yet to be
learned about the causes, effects, and other correlates of perceived parental
acceptance-rejection.
Table 1. Basic Principles of Parenting Derived from PARTheory
| Principles | Explanations | |
| Principle 1: Help parents and other caregivers communicate love (acceptance) to children | Nearly 2,000 studies suggest that children's feelings of being loved, cared about, wanted, and appreciated probably have greater developmental consequences than any other single parental influence. Improved messages of parental love appear to be the most salient rout through which effective parenting techniques contribute to healthy child development. | |
| Principle 2: Help parents find culturally appropriate ways to communicate warmth and affection. Also help parents avoid behaviors that indicate parental coldness and lack of affection, hostility/ aggression, indifference/ neglect, or that induce children to feel rejected in some other way (e.g., undifferentiated rejection). | Extensive study in every major ethnic group within the U.S. and in several hundred societies worldwide reveals a common meaning structure that children use to determine if they are loved (accepted). Culture and ethnicity shape the specific words and behaviors that carry these concepts, but children everywhere seem to organize their perceptions around the five dimensions of parenting cited in Principle 2. Every cultural and ethnic group has ways to communicate love, and children readily recognize these ways. | |
| Principle 3: Suspect the presence of perceived rejection in children who demonstrate a pattern of psychological maladjustment that includes hostility/aggression; dependency or defensive independence; low self-esteem; low self-adequacy; emotional unres-ponsiveness; emotional instability; negative worldview; anxiety; and, insecurity. | Compared to children who feel loved, children who feel rejected are at greater risk for developing these specific forms of psychological maladjustment. In turn, these feelings and behaviors often become associated everywhere with 1) behavior problems, conduct disorders, delinquency, and perhaps adult criminality; 2) depression and depressed affects; and 3) substance (drug and alcohol) abuse--among other problems. | |
| Principle 4: Suspect the presence of psychological maladjustment of the form specified in personality subtheory (and the acceptance-rejection syndrome) among children who report being rejected by parents and other attachment figures. | The vast majority of studies testing the major postulates of PARTheory's personality subtheory show that children who experience themselves to be rejected also display the constellation of personality dispositions specified in personality subtheory and the acceptance-rejection syndrome. | |
| Principle 5: Don't blame it all on mothers. The love of fathers and other important caregivers is, in many contexts, as important developmentally to children as that of mothers--and sometimes more so. | Evidence from PARTheory research documents the fact that fathers' love-related behaviors often have as strong or even stronger implications for children's social-emotional development than do mothers' love-related behaviors. For example, fathers' love-related behavior (or the love-related behavior of other significant male caregivers) is often as strongly--or more so--associated with offspring's sense of health and well-being in childhood and later adulthood. Paternal (fathers') rejection, however, is sometimes more strongly associated than mothers' rejection with such negative developmental outcomes as depression and depressed affect, conduct problems and behavior disorders, and substance abuse, to mention but three outcomes. |
References
Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1989). Attachment beyond infancy. American Psychologist, 44, 709-716.
Ajdukovic, M. (1990). Differences in parent's rearing style between female and male predelinquent and delinquent youth (abstract). Psychologische Beitrage, 32, 7-15.
Al-Falaij, A. (1991). Family conditions, ego development and sociomoral development in juvenile delinquency: A study of Bahraini adolescents. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, PA.
Amato, P. R. (1989). Family processes and the competence of adolescents and primary school children. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 18, 39-53.
Amato, P. R. (1990). Dimensions of the family environment as perceived by children: A multidimensional scaling analysis. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 52, 613-620.
Amato, P. R. (1994). Father-child relations, mother-child relations, and offspring psychological well-being in early adulthood. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 56, 1031-1042.
Amato, P. R., & Booth, A. (1997). A Generation at Risk. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Amato, P. R., & Fowler, F. (2002). Parenting practices, child adjustment, and family diversity. Journal of Marriage and the family, 64, 703-716.
Andry, R. G. (1962). Paternal and maternal roles and delinquency. In M. D. Ainsworth (Ed.), Deprivation of maternal care (Vol. 14) (pp. 31-41). Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization
Aronoff, J. (1967). Psychological Needs And Cultural Systems: A Case Study. Princeton, NJ: D. Van Nostrand.
Arrindell, W. A., Gerlsma, C., Vandereycken, W., Hageman, W. J. J. M., & Daeseleire, T. (1998). Convergent validity of the dimensions underlying the parental bonding instrument (PBI) and the EMBU. Personality and Individual Differences, 24, 341-350.
Baldwin, A. L., Kalhourn, J., & Breese, F. H. (1945). Patterns of parent behavior. Psychological Monographs, 58, 3.
Baldwin, A. L., Kalhourn, J., & Breese, F. H. (1949). The appraisal of parent behavior. Psychological Monographs, 63, 4.
Baldwin, M. W. (1992). Relational schemas and the processing of societal information. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 461-484.
Barber, B. K. (1996). Parental psychological control: Revisiting a neglected construct. Child Development, 67, 3296-3319.
Barber, B. K., & Thomas, D. L. (1986). Dimensions of fathers' and mothers' supportive behavior: The case for physical affection. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 48, 783-794.
Barnes, G. M., & Farrell, M. P. (1992). Parental support and control as predictors of adolescent drinking, delinquency, and related problem behaviors. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54, 763-776.
Barnett, R. C., Marshall, N. L., & Pleck, J. H. (1992). Adult son-parent relationships and their associations with sons' psychological distress. Journal of Family Issues, 13, 505-525.
Barrera, M., Jr., & Garrison-Jones, C. (1992). Family and peer social support as specific correlates of adolescent depressive symptoms. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 20, 1-16.
Bartle, S. E., Anderson, S. A., & Sabatelli, R. M. (1989). A model of parenting style, adolescent individuation, and adolescent self-esteem: Preliminary findings. Journal of Adolescent Research, 4, 283-298.
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497-529.
Baumrind, D. (1966). Effects of authoritative parental control in child behavior. Child Development, 37, 887-907.
Baumrind, D. (1968). Authoritarian vs. authoritative parental control. Adolescence, 31, 255-271.
Baumrind, D. (1972). An exploratory study of socialization effects on Black children: Some Black-White comparisons. Child Development, 43, 261-267.
Baumrind, D. (1989). Rearing competent children. In W. Damon (Ed.), Child development today and tomorrow (pp. 349-378). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Baumrind, D. (1991). Parenting styles and adolescent development. In J Brock-Gunn, R.M. Lerner, & A.C. Peterson (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Adolescence (Vol. 2, pp. 746-758). New York: Garland.
Belsky, J., & Pensky, E. (1988). Developmental history, personality, and family relationships: Toward an emergent family system. In R. A. Hinde, & J. Stevenson-Hinde (Eds.), Relationships within families (pp. 193-217). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Bjorklund, D. F., & Pellegrini, A. D. (2002). The Origins Of Human Nature: Evolutionary Developmental Psychology. Washington, D.C.: APA Books.
Bowlby, J. (1982). Attachment and Loss, Vol. 1: Attachment, 2nd edition. New York: Basic Books.
Brook, J. E., & Brook, J. S. (1988). A developmental approach examining social and personal correlates in relation to alcohol use over time. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 149, 93-110.
Brook, J. S., Whiteman, M., & Gordon, A. S. (1981). The role of the father in his son's marijuana use. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 138, 81-86.
Champney, H. (1941). The measurement of parent behavior. Child Development, 12, 131-166.
Chao, R. (1994). Beyond parental control and authoritarian parenting style: Understanding Chinese parenting through the cultural notion of training. Child Development, 65, 1111-1120.
Chen, C., Greenberger, E., Lester, J., Dong, Q., & Guo, M. S. (1998). A cross-cultural study of family and peer correlates of adolescent misconduct. Developmental Psychology, 34, 770-781.
Chen, X., Dong, Q., & Zhou, H. (1997). Authoritative and authoritarian parenting practices and social and school adjustment. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 20, 855-873.
Chen, X., Hastings, P. D., Rubin, K. H., Chen, H., Cen, G., & Stewart, S. L. (1998). Child-rearing attitudes and behavioral inhibition in Chinese and Canadian toddlers: A cross-cultural study. Developmental Psychology, 34, 677-686.
Chen, X., Liu, M., & Li, D. (2000). Parental warmth, control, and indulgence and their relations to adjustment in Chinese children: A longitudinal study. Journal of Family Psychology, 14, 401-420.
Chen, X., Rubin, K. H., & Li, B. (1995). Depressed mood in Chinese children: Relations with school performance and family environment. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63, 938-947.
Chen, X., Rubin, K. H., & Li, B. (1997). Maternal acceptance and social and school adjustment in Chinese children: A four-year longitudinal study. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 43, 663-681.
Chen, X., Wu, H., Chen, H., Wang, L., & Cen, G. (2001). Parenting practices and aggressive behavior in Chinese children. Parenting: Science and practice, 1, 159-184.
Clausen, J.A. (1972). The life course of individuals. In M. W. Riley, M. Johnson, & A. Foner (Eds.), Aging in Society, 3. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Colin, V.L. (1996). Human Attachment. New York: McGraw- Hill.
Coombs, R. H., & Paulson, M. J. (1988). Contrasting family patterns of adolescent drug users and nonusers. In R. H. Coombs (Ed.), The Family Context of Adolescent Drug Use (pp. 59-72). New York: Haworth Press.
Coombs, R. H., Paulson, M. J., & Richardson, M. A. (1991). Peer vs. parental influence in substance use among Hispanic and Anglo children and adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 20, 73-88.
Cooley, C. H. (1902). Human nature and the social order. New York: Scribner's.
Cournoyer, D. E. (2000). Universalist research: Examples drawing from the methods and findings of parental acceptance-rejection theory. In A. L. Comunian & U. Gielen (Eds.), International Perspectives on Human Development (pp.213-232). Berlin, Germany: Pabst Science Publishers.
Cournoyer, D. E., & Malcolm, B. P. (In press). Evaluation claims for universals: A method analysis approach. Cross-Cultural Research.
Crick, N. R., and Dodge, K. A. (1994). A review and reformulation of social information-processing mechanisms in children's social adjustment. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 74-101.
Crook, T., Raskin, A., & Eliot, J. (1981). Parent-child relationships and adult depression. Child Development, 52, 950-957.
Dickie, J. R., Eshleman, A. K., Merasco, D. M., Shepard, A., Venderwilt, M., & Johnson, M. (1997). Parent-child relationships and children's images of God. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 36, 25-43.
Dominy, N. L., Johnson, W. B., & Koch, C. (2000). Perception of parental acceptance in women with binge eating disorder. The Journal of Psychology, 134, 23-36.
Dumka, L. E., Roosa, M. W., & Jackson, K. M. (1997). Risk, conflict, mothers' parenting, and children's adjustment in low-income, Mexican immigrant, and Mexican American families. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 59, 309-323.
Downey, G., & Feldman, S. I. (1996). Implications of rejection sensitivity for intimate relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 1327-1343.
Downey, G., Khouri, H., & Feldman, S. I. (1996). Early interpersonal trauma and later adjustment: The mediational role of rejection sensitivity. In D. Ciechetti and S. Toth (Eds.), Models and Integrations, Rochester Symposium on Developmental Psychopathology (Series), Vol. 3.
Eldred, C. A., Brown, B. S., & Mahabir, C. (1974). Heroin addict clients' description of their families of origin. The International Journal of the Addictions, 9, 315-320.
Emmelkamp, P. M. G., & Heeres, H. (1988). Drug addiction and parental rearing style: A controlled study. The International Journal of the Addictions, 23, 207-216.
Epstein, S. (1994). Integration of the cognitive and the psychodynamic unconscious. American Psychologist, 49, 709-724.
Erkman, F. (1992). Support for Rohner's Parental Acceptance-Rejection Theory as a psychological abuse theory in Turkey. In S. Iwawaki, Y. Kashima, & K. Leung (Eds.), Innovations in Cross-Cultural Psychology (pp. 384-395). Liets, Amsterdam: Swets & Zeitlinger.
Eron, L. D., Banta, T. J., Walder, L. O., & Laulicht, J. H. (1961). Comparison of data obtained from mothers and fathers on childrearing practices and their relation to child aggression. Child Development, 32, 457-472.
Farrington, D. P., & Hawkins, J. D. (1991). Predicting participation, early onset and later persistence in officially recorded offending. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 1, 1-33.
Fattah, F.A. El. (1996). Symptoms of Depression and Perception of Parental Acceptance and Control. Paper presented on symposium on PARTheory, Zagazig University, Egypt.
Feldman, S. I., & Downey, G. (1994). Rejection sensitivity as a mediator of the impact of childhood exposure to family violence on adult attachment behavior. Development and Psychopathology, 6, 231-247.
Gavilano, G. (1988). Maternal Acceptance-Rejection and Personality Characteristics Among Adolescents in Different Socio-Economic Sectors. Thesis for completion of Bachelor's Degree, Catholic University of Peru, Lima, Peru.
Ge, X., Best, K.M., Conger, R.D., & Simon, R.L. (1996). Parenting behaviors and the occurrence and co-occurrence of adolescent depressive symptoms and conduct problems. Developmental Psychology, 32, 717-731.
Ge, X., Lorenz, F. O., Conger, R. D., Elder, G. H. Jr., & Simons, R. L. (1994). Trajectories of stressful life events and depressive symptoms during adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 30, 467-483.
Glasgow, K., Dornbusch, S., Troyer, L., Steinberg, L., & Ritter, P. (1997). Parenting styles, adolescents' attributions, and educational outcomes in nine heterogeneous high schools. Child Development, 68, 507-529.
Goertzel, V., & Goertzel, M. G. (1962). Cradles of Eminence. Boston: Little, Brown.
Gray, M. R., & Steinberg, L. (1999). Unpacking authoritative parenting: Reassessing a multidimensional construct. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61, 571-587.
Greenberger, E., & Chen, C. (1996). Perceived family relationship and depressed mood in early and late adolescence: A comparison of European and Asian Americans. Developmental Psychology, 32, 707-716.
Hassab-Allah, A. M. (1996). Perception of Control and Social Support in Relation to Children's Symptoms of Depression. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Department of Psychology, University of Zagazig, Egypt.
Howe, M. J. A. (1982). Biographical evidence and the development of outstanding individuals. American Psychologist, 37, 1071-1081.
Hundleby, J. D., & Mercer, G. W. (1987). Family and friends as social environments and their relationship to adolescents' use of alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 49, 151-164.
Jacobson, S., Fasman, J., & DiMascio, A. (1975). Deprivation in the childhood of depressed women. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 160, 5-14.
Kagan, J. (1974). The psychological requirements for human development. In N. B. Talbot (Ed.), Raising Children in Modern America: Problems and Prospective Solutions. (pp. 86-97). Boston, MA: Little, Brown, & Co.
Kagan, J. (1978). The parental love trap. Psychology Today, 12, 54-61.
Kardiner, A. (1939). The Individual And His Society. New York: Columbia University Press.
Kardiner, A. (1945a). The concept of basic personality structure as an operational tool in the social sciences. In R. Linton (Ed.) The Science of Man in the World Crisis (pp. 102-122). N.Y.: Viking Fund.
Kardiner, A. (1945b). The Psychological Frontiers of Society. New York: Columbia University Press.
Khaleque, A., & Rohner, R. P. (2002a). Perceived parental acceptance-rejection and psychological adjustment: A meta-analysis of cross cultural and intracultural studies. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 64, 54-64.
Khaleque, A., & Rohner, R. P. (2002b). Reliability of measures assessing the pancultural association between perceived parental acceptance-rejection and psychological adjustment: A meta-analysis of cross-cultural and intracultural studies. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33, 87-99.
Kim, K., & Rohner, R. P. (2002). Parental warmth, control, and involvement in schooling: Predicting academic achievement among Korean American adolescents. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33, 127-140.
Komarovsky, M. (1976). Dilemma of Masculinity: A Study of College Youth. New York: Norton.
Kroupa, S. E. (1988). Perceived parental acceptance and female juvenile delinquency. Adolescence, 23, 171-185.
Lamborn, S. D., Mounts, N. S., Steinberg, L., & Dornbusch, S. M. (1991). Patterns of competence and adjustment among adolescents from authoritative, authoritarian, indulgent, and neglectful families. Child Development, 62, 1049-1065.
Leary, M. R. (1999). Making sense of self-esteem. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 8, 32-35.
Lefkowitz, M. M., & Tesiny, E. P. (1984). Rejection and depression: Prospective and contemporaneous analyses. Developmental Psychology, 20, 776-785.
Loeber, R., & Stouthamer-Loeber, M. (1986). Family factors as correlates and predictors of juvenile conduct problems and delinquency. In M. Tonry & N. Morris (Eds.), Crime & Justice (Vol.7, pp. 29-149). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Mantell, D. M. (1974). True Americanism: Green berets and war resisters: A study of commitment. New York: Teachers College Press.
Marcus, R. F., & Gray, L., Jr. (1998). Close relationships of violent and non-violent African American delinquents. Violence and Victims, 13, 31-46.
Masten, A. S. (2001). Ordinary magic: Resilience process in development. American Psychologist, 56, 227-238.
Maughan, B., Pickles, A., & Quinton, D. (1995). Parental hostility, childhood behavior, and adult social functioning. In J. McCord (Ed.), Coercion and Punishment in Long-Term Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self, and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Merry, J. (1972). Social characteristics of addiction to heroin. British Journal of Addiction, 67, 322-325.
Myers, H. F., Newcomb, M.D., Richardson, M. A., & Alvy, K. T. (1997). Parental and family risk factors for substance use among inner-city African American children and adolescents. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 19, 109-131.
Naroll, R. (1968). Some thoughts on comparative method in cultural anthropology. In H. M. Blalock, Jr. & A. B. Blalock (Eds.), Methodology in Social Research (pp. 236-277). New York: McGraw Hill.
Naroll, R., Michik, G. L., & Naroll, F. (1976). Worldwide Theory Testing. New Haven, CT: Human Relations Area Files.
Naroll, R., Michik, G. L., & Naroll, F. (1980). Holocultural research methods. In H. C. Triandis & J. W. Berry (Eds.), Handbook of Cross-Cultural Psychology (vol. 2), (pp. 479-521). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Parker, G. (1983). Parental affection control' as an antecedent to adult depression. Archives of General Psychiatry, 40, 956-960.
Parker, G. (1983b). Parental overprotection: A risk factor in psychosocial development. Philadelphia, PA: Grune & Stratton.
Parker, G. (1984). The measurement of pathogenic parental style and its relevance to psychiatric disorder. Social Psychiatry, 19, 75-81.
Parker, G. (1986). Validating an experiential measure of parental style: The use of a twin sample. Acta Psychiatria Scandia, 73, 22-27.
Parker, G., Barnett, B. (1988). Perceptions of parenting in childhood and social support in adulthood. American Journal of Psychiatry, 145, 479-482.
Parker, G., Kiloh, L., & Hayward, L. (1987). Parental representations of neurotic and endogenous depressives. Journal of Affective Disorders, 13, 75-82.
Parker, G., Tupling, H., & Brown, B. (1979). A parental bonding instrument. British Journal of Medical Psychology, 52, 1-10.
Parmar, P., & Rohner, R. P. (In press). Relations among perceived intimate partner acceptance, perceived parental acceptance, and psychological adjustment among young adults in India. Ethos.
Pedersen, W. (1994). Parental relations, mental health, and delinquency in adolescents. Adolescence, 29, 975-990.
Pelto, P. J., & Pelto, G. H. (1978). Anthropological Research: The Structure of Inquiry. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Perris, C., Arrindell, W. A., & Eisemann, M. (Eds.). (1994). Parenting and Psychopathology. New York: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Perris, C., Arrindell, W. A., Perris, H., Eisemann, M., van der Ende, J., & von Knorring, L. (1986). Perceived depriving parental rearing and depression. British Journal of Psychiatry, 148, 170-175.
Perris, C., Arrindell, W. A., Perris, H., van der Ende, J., Maj, M., Benjaminsen, S., Ross, M., Eisemann, M., & del Vecchio, M. (1985). Cross-national study of perceived parental rearing behaviour in healthy subjects from Australia, Denmark, Italy, The Netherlands and Sweden: Pattern and level comparisons. Acta Psychiatria Scandia, 72, 278-282.
Perris, C., Jacobsson, L., Lindstrvm, H., von Knorring, L., & Perris, H. (1980). Development of a new inventory for assessing memories of parental rearing behaviour. Acta Psychiatria Scandia, 61, 265-274.
Peterson, A. C., Sarigiani, P. A., & Kennedy, R. E. (1991). Adolescent depression: Why more girls? Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 20, 247-271.
Peterson, G. W., & Rollins, B. C. (1987). Parent-child socialization as symbolic interaction. In M. Sussmen & S.K. Steinmetz (Eds). Handbook of Marriage and Family, (pp. 471-508). N.Y. Plenum Press.
Peterson, G. W., Rollins, B. C., & Thomas, D. L. (1985). Parental influence and adolescent conformity: Compliance and internalization. Youth and Society, 16, 397-420.
Prendergast, T. J. Jr., & Schaefer, E. S. (1974). Correlates of drinking and drunkenness among high-school students. Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 35, 232-242.
Reiss, D. (1997). Mechanisms linking genetic and social influences in adolescent development: Beginning a collaborative search. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 6, 100-105.
Richter, J. (1994). Parental rearing and aspects of psychopathology with special reference to depression. In C. Perris, W.A. Arrindell, & M. Eisemann (Eds.), Parenting and Psychopathology (pp. 235-251). Chicester, England: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Robertson, J. F., & Simons, R. L. (1989). Family factors, self-esteem, and adolescent depression. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 51, 125-138.
Roe, A., & Siegelman, M. (1963). A parent-child relations questionnaire. Child Development, 20, 355-369.
Rohner, R. P. (1960). Child Acceptance-Rejection and Modal Personality in Three Pacific Societies. M.A. Thesis, Stanford University.
Rohner, R. P. (1975). They love me, they love me not: A worldwide study of the effects of parental acceptance and rejection. New Haven, CT: HRAF Press (Available from Rohner Research Publications).
Rohner, R. P. (1977). Advantages of the comparative method of anthropology. Behavior Science Research (now Cross-Cultural Research), 12, 117-144.
Rohner, R. P. (1986). The warmth dimension: Foundations of parental acceptance-rejection theory. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. (Available from Rohner Research Publications).
Rohner, R. P. (1987). [Effects of perceived parental warmth, control, and punishment on the psychological adjustment, school conduct, and academic achievement of youth in a biracial southern community.] Unpublished data.
Rohner, R. P. (1990). Handbook for the Study of Parental Acceptance and Rejection. Ronald and Nancy Rohner Center for the Study of Parental Acceptance and Rejection, University of Connecticut at Storrs. (Available from Rohner Research Publications).
Rohner, R. P. (1994). Patterns of parenting: The warmth dimension in cross-cultural perspective. In W. J. Lonner & R. S. Malpass (Eds.) Readings in Psychology and Culture. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Rohner, R. P. (1998). Father love and child development: History and current evidence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 7, 157-161.
Rohner, R. P. (1999). Acceptance and rejection. In D. Levinson, J. Ponzetti, & P. Jorgensen (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Human Emotions, Vol. 1, pp. 6-14. New York: Macmillan Reference.
Rohner, R. P. (2004a). Parental acceptance and rejection extended bibliography. Retrieved July 9, 2004 from http://vm.uconn.edu/~rohner.
Rohner, R. P. (2004b). The parental "acceptance-rejection syndrome:" Universal correlates of perceived rejection. American Psychologist, 59, [pages to be determined].
Rohner, R. P., & Britner, P. A. (2002). Worldwide mental health correlates of parental acceptance-rejection: Review of cross-cultural and intracultural evidence. Cross-Cultural Research, 36, 16-47..
Rohner, R. P., & Chaki-Sircar, M. (1988). Women and Children in a Bengali Village. Hanover, NH: University Press of New England.
Rohner, R. P. & Frampton, S. (1982). Perceived parental acceptance-rejection and artistic preference: An unexplained contradiction. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 13, 250-259.
Rohner, R. P., & Khaleque, A. (2004). Handbook for the Study of Parental Acceptance and Rejection (4th Edition). Storrs, CT: Rohner Research Publications.
Rohner, R. P., & Khaleque, A. (In press). Relations between partner acceptance and parental acceptance, behavioral control, and psychosocial adjustment among heterosexual adult women. Ethos.
Rohner, R. P., Naroll, R., Barry, III, H., Divale, W. T., Erickson, E. E., Schaefer, J. M., & Sipes, R. G. (1978). Guidelines for holocultural research. Current Anthropology, 19, 128-129.
Rohner, R. P., & Neilsen, C. C. (1978). Parental Acceptance and Rejection: A Review and Annotated Bibliography of Research and Theory (2 Volumes). New Haven, CT: HRAF Press.
Rohner, R. P., & Rohner, E. C. (1980). Worldwide tests of parental acceptance-rejection theory [Special Issue]. Behavior Science Research, 15.
Rohner, R. P., & Rohner, E. C. (1981). Parental acceptance-rejection and parental control: Cross - cultural codes (abstract). Ethnology, 20, 245-260.
Rohner, R. P., & Veneziano, R. A. (2001). The importance of father love: History and contemporary evidence. Review of General Psychology, 5, 382-405.
Rollins, B.C., & Thomas, D.L. (1979). Parental support, power, and control techniques in the socialization of children. In Burr, W.R., Hill, R., Nye, F.I., and Reis, I.L. (Eds.). Contemporary Theories about the Family, 1, 317-364.
Rosenberg, C. M. (1971). The young addict and his family. British Journal of Psychiatry, 118, 469-470.
Rothbaum, F., & Weisz, J. R. (1994). Parental caregiving and child externalizing behavior in non-clinical samples: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 55-74.
Salama, M. (1984). Child Rearing Methods in Relation to the Psychological Problems in Middle Childhood. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt. (In Arabic).
Salama, M. (1990). Perceived parental rejection and cognitive distortions: Risk factors for depression. Egyptian Journal of Mental Health, 30, 1-17.
Saudino, K. J. (1997). Moving beyond the heritability question: New direction in behavioral genetic studies of personality. Current Directions in Psychological Sciences, 6, 86-90.
Saxena, V. (1992). Perceived maternal rejection as related to negative attention-seeking classroom behavior among primary school children. Journal of Personality and Clinical Studies, 8, 129-135.
Schaefer, E. S. (1959). A circumplex model for maternal behavior. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 59, 226-335.
Schaefer, E. S. (1961). Converging conceptual models for maternal behavior and for child behavior. In J. C. Glidewell (Ed.) Parental Attitudes and Child Behavior. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
Schludermann, E., & Schludermann, S. (1970). Replicability of factors in children's report of parental behavior. Journal of Psychology, 76, 239-249.
Schludermann, E., & Schludermann, S. (1971). Adolescent perception of parental behavior in Hutterite communal Society. Journal of Psychology, 79, 29-39.
Schludermann, E., & Schludermann, S. (1983). Sociocultural change and adolescents' perception of parent behavior. Developmental Psychology, 19, 674-685.
Shedler, J., & Block, J. (1990). Adolescent drug use and psychological health: A longitudinal inquiry. American Psychologist, 45, 612-630.
Simons, R. L., Robertson, J. F., & Downs, W. R. (1989). The nature of the association between parental rejection and delinquent behavior. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 18, 297-310.
Smetana, J. G. (2000). Middle-class African American adolescents' and parents' conceptions of parental authority and parenting practices: A longitudinal investigation. Child Development, 71, 1672-1686.
Somerfield, M. R., & McCrae, R. R. (2000). Stress and coping research: Methodological challenges, theoretical advances, and clinical applications. American Psychologist, 55, 620-625.
Squire, S., & Stein, A. (2003). Functional MRI and parental responsiveness: A new avenue into parental psychopathology and early parent-child interactions? British Journal of Psychiatry, 183, 481-483.
Stagner, R. (1933). The role of parents in the development of emotional instability. Psychological Bulletin, 30, 696-697.
Steinberg, L., Elman, J. D., & Mounts, N. S. (1989). Authoritative parenting, psychosocial maturity, and academic success among adolescents. Child Development, 60, 1424-1436.
Steinberg, L., Lamborn, S., Dornbusch, S., & Darling, N. (1992). Impact of parenting practices on adolescent achievement: Authoritative parenting, school involvement, and encouragement to succeed. Child Development, 63, 1266-1281.
Stogdill, R. M. (1937). Survey of experiments on children's attitudes toward parents: 1894-1936. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 51, 293-303.
Torgersen, S., & Alnaes, R. (1992). Differential perception of parental bonding in schizotypal and borderline personality disorder patients. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 33, 34-38.
Torres-Villa, M. S. (1995). Parenting styles, language, and parents' education as predictors of school achievement for Hispanic students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Georgia State University, Atlanta.
Veneziano, R. A. (2000). Perceived paternal and maternal acceptance and rural African American and European American youths' psychological adjustment. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 123-132.
Veneziano, R. A. (2003). The importance of paternal warmth. Cross-Cultural Research, 37, 265-281.
Veneziano, R. A., Rohner, R. P. (1998). Perceived paternal acceptance, paternal involvement, and youths' psychological adjustment in a rural, biracial southern community. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 60, 335-343.
Vrasti, R., Eisemann, M., Podea, D., Olteanu, I., Scherppler, D., & Peleneagra, R. (1990). Parental rearing practices and personality in alcoholics classified according to family history. In C. N. Stefanis, C. R. Soldatos, & A. D. Rabavilas (Eds.), Psychiatry: A world perspective (Vol. 4, pp. 359-364). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers.
Whitbeck, L.B., Conger, R.D., & Kao, M. (1993). The influence of parental support, depressed affect, and peers on the sexual behaviors of adolescent girls. Journal of Family Issues, 14, 261-278.
Whitbeck, L. B., Hoyt, D. R., & Ackley, K. A. (1997). Families of homeless and runaway adolescents: A comparison of parent/caretakers and adolescent perspectives on parenting, family violence, and adolescent conduct. Child Abuse and Neglect, 21, 517-528.
Whitbeck, L. B., Hoyt, D. R., Miller, M., & Kao, M. (1992). Parental Support, depressed affect, and sexual experience among adolescents. Youth and Society, 24, 166-177.
Whiting, J. W. M., & Child, I. L. (1953). Child Training and Personality. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Witmer, H. L., Leach, J., & Richman, E. (1938). The outcome of treatments of children rejected by their mothers. Smith College Studies in Social Work, 8, 187-234.
Young, M. H., Miller, B. C., Norton, M. C., & Hill, E. J. (1995). The effect of parental supportive behaviors on life satisfaction of adolescent offspring. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57, 813-822.