Perfectionistic Concerns, Social Negativity, and Subjective Well‐Being: A Test of the Social Disconnection Model
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Partner-specific perfectionistic concerns (PC) include concern over mistakes, self-criticism, and socially prescribed perfectionism as it pertains to one's partner. The social disconnection model proposes that PC influences well-being indirectly through interpersonal problems. Thus, we hypothesized that social negativity (expressed anger, hostility, and rejection) would mediate the relationship between dyadic PC and subjective well-being. Data from 203 romantic dyads (92.1% heterosexual) were collected using self-report surveys and a four-wave, 4-week longitudinal design. Participants were predominantly female (53.1%), young (M = 22.69 years), and Caucasian (82.3%). Data were analyzed using an actor-partner interdependence model with multilevel structural equation modeling. There were significant actor effects at the between-subjects and within-subjects levels, and significant partner effects for the relationship between PC and social negativity at the within-subject level. Social negativity mediated the relationships between PC and both negative affect and life satisfaction. However, positive affect was more weakly related to PC and social negativity. The social disconnection model was supported. PC was positively associated with one's own social negativity and evoked hostile behaviors from one's partner. Hostile, rejecting behaviors reduced the well-being of the actor, but not the partner. Results suggest perfectionism may be best understood within an interpersonal context.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it