Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Ethel 1-Thesis PDF
Ethel 1-Thesis PDF
net/publication/333842964
CITATIONS READS
0 53
5 authors, including:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
All content following this page was uploaded by Muhammad Kamal Uddin on 28 February 2020.
ASSESSMENT
Received: 18 June 2018 / Accepted: 11 July 2019 / Published online: 6 August 2019
Ó National Academy of Psychology (NAOP) India 2019
Abstract The present study examined relationships also showed that perceived paternal rejection in childhood
between childhood parental acceptance–rejection and the has significant independent effects on the rejection sensi-
current psychological adjustment and rejection sensitivity tivity of both young adult men and women, but perceived
of young adult men and women. The study also explored maternal rejection in childhood has no significant effects
independent effects of childhood parental acceptance–re- on the rejection sensitivity of young adult men and women.
jection on the current psychological adjustment and
rejection sensitivity of young adult men and women. Data Keywords Maternal and paternal acceptance–rejection
were collected from 514 university students (49% female Rejection sensitivity
and 51% male) in Bangladesh. The mean age of the Psychological adjustment/maladjustment
respondents was 22 years with a range of 18 through
26 years. Measures used were Adult version (short form) of
the Parental Acceptance–Rejection Questionnaire for The feeling of acceptance is a powerful motivator for
Mothers and Fathers, the Rejection Sensitivity Question- positive interpersonal behavior, personality, and psy-
naire, and the Adult version of the Personality Assessment chosocial development (Khaleque, 2013). Contrarily, the
Questionnaire. Results revealed significant correlations feeling of rejection has an array of negative effects on
between remembered maternal and paternal acceptance– individuals’ personality, behavior, and psychological well-
rejection in childhood and current psychological adjust- being (Khaleque, 2017). Childhood rejection has many
ment and rejection sensitivity of young adult men and negative effects on later development including increased
women. Hierarchical regression analysis showed that both internalizing and externalizing difficulties in adolescence
maternal and paternal acceptance in childhood have sig- (Pedersen, Vitaro, Barker, & Borge, 2007) and hostility,
nificant independent effects on the current psychological aggression, psychological maladjustment, and a host of
adjustment of both male and female young adults. Results other psychopathological symptoms in adulthood (Khale-
que & Rohner, 2011). Rejected individuals often tend to
develop and hold distorted mental representations that may
& Abdul Khaleque lead them to perceive hostility and rejection in interper-
abdul.khaleque@uconn.edu sonal relationships, and interpret relationships as untrust-
1
Department of Human Development and Family Studies,
worthy without any objective basis (Lansford, Malone,
University of Connecticut, 348 Mansfield Road, Unit 1058, Dodge, Pettit, & Bates, 2010). Contrarily, experiences of
Storrs, CT 06269, USA acceptance are associated with a host of positive outcomes
2
Department of Psychology, University of Dhaka, Dhaka, including good psychological adjustment, and positive
Bangladesh personality development, such as higher levels of self-es-
3
Department of Psychology, Jagannath University, Dhaka, teem and self-competence in children, adolescence, and
Bangladesh adults (Khaleque & Ali, 2017; Ohannessian, 2012).
4
Department of Psychology, University of Rajshahi, Rajshahi, Rejection sensitivity (RS) is an individual’s tendency or
Bangladesh predisposition to expect, perceive, and interpret
123
448 Psychol Stud (October–December 2019) 64(4):447–454
interpersonal interactions as rejections (Downey & Feld- and lifespan development that attempts to predict and
man, 1996). An individual with rejection sensitivity often explain causes, consequences, and other correlates of
perceives and reacts extremely to rejection (Downey & interpersonal acceptance and rejection across culture
Feldman, 1996). Research findings show that people prone (Rohner, 1986/2000, 2016; Rohner, Khaleque, & Cour-
to rejection sensitivity are likely to interpret ambiguous noyer, 2012). In IPARTheory, parental acceptance refers to
interpersonal situations—imagined or real, as rejections warmth, affection, care, comfort, nurturance, support, or
and tend to overreact to them (Ayduk et al., 2008). One simply love of parents toward their children. Parental
study showed that the level of remembered parental rejection, on the other hand, refers to the withdrawal or
acceptance–rejection in childhood uniquely contributed to lack of parental warmth, affection, care, comfort, nurtu-
the level of rejection sensitivity in adulthood, and accep- rance, support, or love of parents toward their children
tance–rejection from the same-sex parent accounted for (Rohner, 2016). According to IPARTheory, parental
more variance in rejection sensitivity than did acceptance– rejection takes four major forms: (1) emotional coldness
rejection from the other-sex parent for both men and and lack of affection—absence or withdrawal of emotion-
women (Ibrahim, Rohner, Smith, & Flannery, 2015). ally expressed affection; (2) hostility and aggression—
Heightened concern and sensitivity about the possibility feeling and expression of enmity, anger, or resentment,
of rejection have several maladaptive relational, behav- leading to hurtful verbal and physical behavior of parents
ioral, and personality outcomes including social with- toward their children; (3) indifference and neglect—lack of
drawal, disruption of interpersonal functioning, hostility, concern of parents for children’s physical, psychological,
aggression, violence in intimate relationship, loneliness, and social needs; and (4) undifferentiated rejection. The
anxiety, depression, and low self-esteem (Robillard, 2009). theory assumes that humans have the phylogenetically
Rejection sensitivity has also been found related to a acquired need for positive response or acceptance from
number of psychological disorders including social phobia, people most important to them (Rohner, 2016).
avoidant personality disorder, and borderline personality IPARTheory states that in childhood the need for parental
disorder (American Psychiatric Association, 2000). In acceptance is reflected in parental warmth, affection, care,
addition, rejection sensitivity has been found associated comfort, support, and nurturance. The theory assumes that
with higher levels of depression, loneliness, exclusion, and if and when this need for positive response is not fulfilled
victimization from others (Zimmer-Gembeck, Sieben- by parents or significant others, children tend to develop
bruner, & Collins, 2001). Rejection sensitivity has also the following negative personality dispositions, including:
been implicated to increased risk of victimization in mul- (1) hostility/aggression, (2) dependence, (3) negative self-
tiple contexts such as peer relationships, friendships, and esteem, (4) negative self-adequacy, (5) emotional insta-
romantic relationships (Zimmer-Gembeck, Trevaskis, bility, (6) emotional unresponsiveness, and (7) negative
Nesdale, & Downey, 2014). Rejection sensitivity also worldview. The theory postulates that rejected children
affects the quality of various types of relationships. For tend to develop a negative worldview characterized by
example, young adults who were high in rejection sensi- beliefs that this world is a dangerous place, where people in
tivity in adolescence tended to be less interested in general are unfriendly, hostile, and not trustworthy (Batool
romantic relationships during emerging adulthood, and & Najam, 2012).
those who were in romantic relationships tended to be The theory also predicts that the experience of parental
anxious about the quality and stability of their relationships rejection in childhood often leads to the development of
(Hafen, Spilker, Chango, Marston, & Allen, 2014). Fur- rejection sensitivity and psychological maladjustment that
thermore, rejection sensitivity was found to have a positive tend to extend into adulthood worldwide across culture
significant relationship with anxiety and a negative sig- (Rohner & Khaleque, 2010; Ibrahim et al., 2015). How-
nificant relationship with self-esteem (Khoshkam, Bah- ever, as we know, to date, only one study was conducted in
rami, Ahmadi, Fatehizade, & Etemadi, 2012). the USA to test this prediction of the IPARTheory (Ibrahim
Research on rejection sensitivity often draws from the- et al., 2015). Clearly, further research is needed to explore
ories of interpersonal relationships (Ayduk et al., 2008). if this prediction is true globally. To address the above
According to these theories, rejection sensitivity originates prediction, this study was designed to explore if there are
from childhood experience of rejection, and the impacts of relationships between perceived parental acceptance–re-
which extend to adulthood with a wide range of problem- jection in childhood and current psychological adjustment,
atic behaviors and maladaptive developmental outcomes and rejection sensitivity of young adults in Bangladesh.
(Downey & Feldman, 1996). One such theory is interper- The study addressed the following specific questions: (1)
sonal acceptance and rejection theory (IPARTheory) Are there any relationships between remembrance of per-
developed by Ronald P. Rohner in 1975 (Rohner, 1986/ ceived maternal and paternal acceptance–rejection of
2000). This is an evidence-based theory of socialization young adults in childhood and their current psychological
123
Psychol Stud (October–December 2019) 64(4):447–454 449
adjustment and rejection sensitivity? (2) Do young adults’ (perceived warmth or affection); ‘‘My mother/father goes
perceived maternal and paternal acceptance–rejection have out of her/his way to hurt my feelings’’ (perceived hostility
significant independent effects on their psychological or aggression); ‘‘My mother/father ignores me as long as I
adjustment and rejection sensitivity? (3) Do relationships do to bother her/him’’ (perceived indifference or neglect);
between perceived parental acceptance–rejection, psycho- ‘‘My mother/father does not really love me’’ (perceived
logical adjustment, and rejection sensitivity vary by the undifferentiated rejection).
gender compositions of parent–child dyad? The sum of the four PARQ subscales (with the warmth/
affection subscale reverse-scored to create a measure of
coldness/lack of affection) constitutes a measure of overall
Methods perceived maternal and paternal acceptance–rejection. The
possible scale score ranges from a low of 24 to a high of
Sample 96. The midpoint of the PARQ is 60. Score at or above the
scale midpoint indicates more parental rejection than
Sample consisted of 514 young adults (51% male and 49% acceptance and below the midpoint indicates more parental
female) selected from six major universities in Bangladesh. acceptance than rejection. In this study, alpha coefficient
Mean age of the sample was 22 years ranging from 18 for the Adult PARQ Mother was .87 and that of the Adult
through 26 years. Educational levels of the sample varied PARQ Father was .91. The PARQ has been used in over
from undergraduate (88%) through graduate (12%). The 2000 studies worldwide and is known to have robust reli-
majority of the sample was from middle class (i.e., middle ability and validity for use in cross-cultural research
income) families. The respondents were selected on the (Khaleque & Rohner, 2002; Rohner, 2005). The alpha
basis of convenience, willing consent, and availability. coefficients for the mother version have been found to
range from .76 to .97 and for the father version range from
Measures .81 to .97 (Rohner & Khaleque, 2005).
Four self-report questionnaires were used in this study. The Adult Version of Personality Assessment
These are: the Adult Parental Acceptance–Rejection Questionnaire (Adult PAQ)
Questionnaire (short form): Mother version (Adult PARQ:
Mother; Rohner, 2005), the Adult Parental Acceptance– The Adult PAQ consists of seven subscales assessing self-
Rejection Questionnaire (short form): Father version reports about seven personality dispositions as construed in
(Adult PARQ: Father; Rohner, 2005); Personality Assess- IPARTheory’s personality subtheory. The Adult PAQ
ment Questionnaire (PAQ; Rohner & Khaleque, 2005); and consists of 63 items, nine items for each of seven subscales:
Rejection Sensitivity Questionnaire (RSQ; Downey & (1) Hostility/Aggression, (2) Dependence, (3) Negative
Feldman, 1996). Each of these questionnaires is described Self-Esteem, (4) Negative Self-Adequacy, (5) Emotional
below. Unresponsiveness, (6) Emotional Instability, and (7)
Negative Worldview. Individuals respond to PAQ items on
The Adult Parental Acceptance–Rejection Questionnaire: a four-point Likert-style scale ranging from (4) ‘‘almost
Mother and Father Versions (Adult PARQ: Mother always true of me’’ to (1) ‘‘almost never true of me.’’ A
and Father) profile of an individual’s overall self-reported psychologi-
cal adjustment is achieved by summing the seven subscale
The Adult PARQ: Mother and Father versions (short scores after reverse scoring appropriate items. Scores on
forms) were used to assess adult’s remembrance about their the Adult PAQ range from a low of 63, indicating healthy
maternal and paternal acceptance and rejection during psychological adjustment, to a high of 252 indicating
childhood. The mother and father versions of the Adult serious psychological maladjustment. The instrument is
PARQ short form consists of 24 items. The two versions designed in such a way that scores at or above the test’s
are virtually identical except for reference to ‘‘mother’s’’ midpoint of 157 reveal that individuals experience them-
behavior versus ‘‘father’s’’ behavior. Both versions ask selves to be more psychologically maladjusted than
respondents to reflect on their mothers’ or fathers’ behavior adjusted.
toward them during their childhood. Both the question- The Adult PAQ is available in about 30 languages. The
naires measure adults’ perceptions of maternal and paternal instrument is known to have been used in more than 500
warmth/affection, hostility/aggression, indifference/ne- studies on five continents and among most American ethnic
glect, and undifferentiated rejection. Examples of test items groups (Khaleque & Ali, 2017). Meta-analysis of 252 adult
on the both version of the PARQ short form include, ‘‘My respondents who used the Adult PAQ in the Caribbean and
mother/father makes me feel wanted and needed’’ most American ethnic groups revealed that the overall
123
450 Psychol Stud (October–December 2019) 64(4):447–454
123
Psychol Stud (October–December 2019) 64(4):447–454 451
Table 3 Hierarchical multiple regression analyses of paternal acceptance, maternal acceptance, and rejection sensitivity as predictors of
psychological adjustment of male and female respondents
Predictors Model for men Model for women
2 2
b R DR b R2 DR2
123
452 Psychol Stud (October–December 2019) 64(4):447–454
Table 4 Hierarchical multiple regression analyses of paternal acceptance, maternal acceptance, and psychological adjustment as predictors of
rejection sensitivity of male and female respondents
Predictors Model for men Model for women
2 2
b R DR b R2 DR2
acceptance make unique contributions to the psychological has significant correlations with the rejection of both young
adjustment of both men and women, paternal acceptance men and women, and perceived maternal acceptance–re-
has greater effect on men’s and women’s psychological jection has significant correlation with the rejection sensi-
adjustment than that of maternal acceptance. Multiple tivity of men and not of women. However, results of
regression analysis shows that paternal acceptance multiple regression analysis show that paternal rejection
explains 24% of variability men’s and women’s psycho- has significant unique effects on the rejection sensitivity of
logical adjustment, whereas maternal acceptance explains both men and women, but maternal rejection has no sig-
only 2% of variability. These findings are consistent with nificant unique effects on the rejection sensitivity of men
the interpersonal acceptance–rejection theory’s prediction and women. As noted earlier, after literature review on
that perceived paternal acceptance often has as strong or parental acceptance–rejection and rejection sensitivity, we
even stronger implications than perceived maternal found only one study that shows that paternal rejection
acceptance for children’s and adults’ positive develop- explains more variability in rejection sensitivity of men
mental outcomes, including psychological adjustment than that of women, whereas maternal rejection explains
globally (Rohner, 2016). Evidence from several empirical more variability in rejection sensitivity of women than that
studies supports this assumption (Rohner & Veneziano, of men (Ibrahim et al., 2015). However, Rohner and Brit-
2001; Veneziano, 2008). Some other studies have found ner (2002) found a worldwide tendency for perceived pa-
that men perceive to be less accepted/more rejected by ternal rejection to be a better predictor of negative feelings
parents (Shek, 2008). In addition, a meta-analytic review and behavior problems than maternal rejection.
has shown that paternal acceptance tends to have a sig- Although the evidence provided in this study is based on
nificantly stronger relationship than maternal acceptance a relatively large number of sample, the study is not free
with individuals’ psychological adjustment cross-culturally from certain limitations. For example, this study relies on
(Khaleque & Rohner, 2012). adults’ memories of parental acceptance–rejection in
In terms of relations between rejection sensitivity and childhood, which might have been partially forgotten or
gender, the result shows no significant difference between distorted by memories of other events during adolescence
young men and women in rejection sensitivity. Some and adulthood. Another limitation is about the skepticism
authors, however, suggested that in gender role socializa- concerning the reliability of respondents’ self-reports to
tion, parents often encourage their daughters more than subjective questionnaires, although a number of studies
their sons to be responsive and caring to others’ feelings have shown that claims about the unreliability of self-re-
(Rudolp & Conley, 2005). Consistent to this views, find- ports are often exaggerated (e.g., Cournoyer & Rohner,
ings of some studies show that girls tend to be more sen- 1996). Moreover, this is a cross-sectional and not longi-
sitive to the thoughts and feelings of others than boys tudinal study. For this reason, it is not possible to draw any
(Smith & Rose, 2011). However, some other studies have conclusions about the causal nature of relationships
reported that adolescent males had higher levels of rejec- between variables. These limitations should be addressed
tion sensitivity than adolescent females (Hafen et al., in future research.
2014). We also explored the role of gender in terms of the Despite these limitations, the study provides evidence in
relative impact of maternal versus paternal acceptance– support of the relationships between childhood memory of
rejection on rejection sensitivity of young men and women. paternal and maternal acceptance–rejection with adults’
Results show that perceived paternal acceptance–rejection current psychological adjustment and rejection sensitivity.
123
Psychol Stud (October–December 2019) 64(4):447–454 453
The study also provide interesting evidence about how sensitivity on early adult romantic relationships. Journal of
different gender compositions of parent–child dyad can Research on Adolescence, 24(1), 55–64.
Ibrahim, D. M., Rohner, R. P., Smith, R. L., & Flannery, K. L. (2015).
have different effects on the relationships between parental Adults’ remembrances of parental acceptance–rejection in
acceptance–rejection, psychological adjustment, and childhood predict current rejection sensitivity in adulthood.
rejection sensitivity of adult men and women. Overall, Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 44(1), 51–62.
findings of this study provide empirical support to predic- https://doi.org/10.1111/fcsr.12119.
Khaleque, A. (2013). Perceived parental warmth and affection, and
tions of the IPARTheory that the experience of parental children’s psychological adjustment, and personality disposi-
acceptance in childhood is likely to have specific positive tions: A meta-analysis. Journal of Child and Family Studies,
consequences and the experience of parental rejection in 22(2), 297–306.
childhood is likely to have specific negative consequences Khaleque, A. (2017). Perceived parental hostility and aggression, and
children’s psychological maladjustment, and negative personal-
for psychological functioning in adulthood for both men ity dispositions: A meta-analysis. Journal of Child and Family
and women. These findings clearly show the critical Studies, 26(4), 977–988.
importance of paternal acceptance over maternal accep- Khaleque, A., & Ali, S. (2017). A systematic review of meta-analyses
tance in determining the developmental outcomes of chil- of research on interpersonal acceptance–rejection theory: Con-
structs and measures. Journal of Family Theory and Review,
dren and adult offspring. The findings seem to be 9(4), 441–458. https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12228.
meaningful in the context of male dominance in most of Khaleque, A., & Rohner, R. P. (2011). Transnational relations
the world societies, where men enjoy and exercise more between perceived parental acceptance and personality disposi-
power than women in the family (Khaleque & Shirin, tions of children and adults: A meta-analytic review. Personality
and Social Psychology Review, 16(2), 103–115.
2014). Khaleque, A., & Rohner, R. P. (2012). Pancultural associations
These findings may be useful to clinicians in their effort between perceived parental acceptance and psychological
to treat children, who are experiencing parental, especially adjustment of children and adults: A metal analytic review of
paternal, rejection and consequently suffering from psy- worldwide research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology,
43(5), 784–800.
chological maladjustment and behavioral problems. In Khaleque, A., & Shirin, A. (2014). Influence of perceived parental
addition, the findings seem to have strong implications for power and prestige on parental acceptance and psychological
theory, research, policy, and practice about child-parent adjustment of adult offspring. Bangladesh Journal of Psychol-
relationships, and children’s personality development and ogy, 20(1), 1–14.
Khoshkam, S., Bahrami, F., Ahmadi, S. A., Fatehizade, M., &
behavioral functioning as this study and several other Etemadi, O. (2012). Attachment style and rejection sensitivity:
studies show that children’s perception of parental rejec- The mediating effect of self-esteem and worry among Iranian
tion is associated worldwide with psychological malad- college students. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 8(3),
justment, rejection sensitivity, conduct disorders, 363–374. https://doi.org/10.5964/ejop.v8i3.463.
Lansford, J. E., Malone, P. S., Dodge, K. A., Pettit, G. S., & Bates, J.
depression, delinquency, externalizing behaviors, and E. (2010). Developmental cascades of peer rejection, social
substance abuse (e.g., Rohner & Britner, 2002). information processing biases, and aggression during middle
childhood. Development and Psychopathology, 22(3), 593–602.
Ohannessian, C. M. (2012). Parental problem drinking and adolescent
psychosocial adjustment: The mediating role of adolescent–
parent communication. Journal of Research on Adolescence,
References 22(3), 498–511.
Pedersen, S., Vitaro, F., Barker, E. D., & Borge, A. I. (2007). The
American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical timing of middle-childhood peer rejection and friendship:
manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Amer- Linking early behavior to early-adolescent adjustment. Child
ican Psychiatric Association. Development, 78(4), 1037–1051.
Ayduk, O., Zayas, V., Downey, G., Cole, A. B., Shoda, Y., & Robillard, L. (2009). Rejection sensitivity, information processing
Mischel, W. (2008). Rejection sensitivity and executive control: deficits attachment style and empathic accuracy in violent
Joint predictors of borderline personality features. Journal of relationships (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of
Research in Personality, 42(1), 151–168. Queensland, Queensland.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2007.04.002. Rohner, R. P. (1986/2000). The warmth dimension: Foundations of
Batool, S., & Najam, N. (2012). Relationship between perceived parental acceptance–rejection theory. Newbury Park, CA: Sage
parenting style, perceived parental acceptance–rejection and Publications, Inc. [Reprinted by Rohner Research Publishers].
perception of God among young adults. Journal of Behavioral Rohner, R. P. (2005). Intimate partner acceptance–rejection/control
Sciences, 22(1), 1–7. questionnaire (IPAR/CQ): Test manual. In R. P. Rohner & A.
Cournoyer, D. E., & Rohner, R. P. (1996). Reliability of retrospective Khaleque (Eds.), Handbook for the study of parental acceptance
reports of perceived maternal acceptance–rejection in childhood. and rejection (pp. 227–242). Storrs, CT: Rohner Research
Psychological Reports, 78(1), 147–150. Publications.
Downey, G., & Feldman, S. I. (1996). Implication of rejection Rohner, R. P. (2016). Introduction to interpersonal acceptance–
sensitivity for intimate relationships. Journal of Personality and rejection theory, methods, evidence, and implications. University
Social Psychology, 70(6), 1327–1343. of Connecticut, Ronald and Nancy Rohner Center for the Study
Hafen, C. A., Spilker, A., Chango, J., Marston, E. S., & Allen, J. P. of Interpersonal Acceptance Rejection Website:
(2014). To accept or reject? The impact of adolescent rejection http://csiar.uconn.edu/.
123
454 Psychol Stud (October–December 2019) 64(4):447–454
Rohner, R. P., & Britner, P. A. (2002). Worldwide mental health gender, child gender and grade differences. Sex Roles, 58(9–10),
correlates of parental acceptance–rejection: Review of cross- 666–681.
cultural and intracultural evidence. Cross-Cultural Research, Smith, R. L., & Rose, A. J. (2011). The ‘‘cost of caring’’ in youths’
36(1), 16–47. friendships: Considering associations among social perspective
Rohner, R. P., & Chaki-Sircar, M. (1988). Women and children in a taking, co-rumination, and empathetic distress. Developmental
Bengali village. Hanover, NH: University Press of New England. Psychology, 47(6), 1792–1803.
(Reprinted 2011 as e-book; Storrs, CT: Rohner Research Veneziano, R. A. (2008). The relative importance of fathers versus
Publications). mothers for offspring’s behavior: Theory and implications for
Rohner, R. P., & Khaleque, A. (Eds.). (2005). Handbook for the study future research. Paper presented at the Second International
of parental acceptance and rejection (4th ed.). Storrs, CT: Congress on Interpersonal Acceptance and Rejection, University
Rohner Research Publications. of Crete, Rethymno, Greece, July 3–6.
Rohner, R. P., & Khaleque, A. (2010). Testing the central postulates Zimmer-Gembeck, M. J., Siebenbruner, J., & Collins, W. A. (2001).
of parental acceptance–rejection theory (PARTheory): A meta- Diverse aspects of dating: associations with psychosocial
analysis of cross-cultural studies. Journal of Family Theory and functioning from early to middle adolescence. Journal of
Review, 2(1), 73–87. Adolescence, 24(3), 313–336.
Rohner, R. P., Khaleque, A., & Cournoyer, D. E. (2012). Parental Zimmer-Gembeck, M., Trevaskis, S., Nesdale, D., & Downey, G.
acceptance–rejection theory, methods, evidence, and implica- (2014). Relational victimization, loneliness and depressive
tions. http://www.csiar.uconn.edu/intro. symptoms: Indirect associations via self and peer reports of
Rohner, R. P., & Veneziano, R. A. (2001). The importance of father rejection sensitivity. Journal of Youth Adolescence, 43(4),
love: History and contemporary evidence. Review of General 568–582. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-013-9993-6.
Psychology, 5(4), 382–405.
Rudolph, K. D., & Conley, C. S. (2005). The socio-emotional costs Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
and benefits of social-evaluative concerns: Do girls care too jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
much? Journal of Personality, 73(1), 115–138.
Shek, D. T. L. (2008). Perceived parental control and parent–child
relational qualities in early adolescent in Hong Kong: Parent
123