Familial Affective Responsiveness Mediates the Relations Between Parental Perfectionistic Self-Presentation and Adolescent Psychological Maladjustment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Parental perfectionism (e.g., perfectionistic concerns) has been strongly implicated in adolescent psychological maladjustment such as depression and anxiety. However, little is known about the links between parental perfectionistic self-presentation (i.e., the interpersonal expressions of perfectionism) and adolescent psychological outcomes. According to the Perfectionism Social Disconnection Model (Hewitt et al., 2017), people with elevated perfectionistic self-presentation engage in social behaviors characterized by a lack of emotional sensitivity or responsiveness, which then increases one’s risk of social disconnection and psychological maladjustment. This theory has seldom been tested in the context of parent-adolescent and family relationships. Therefore, this cross-sectional study aimed to explore the mediational role of familial affective responsiveness in the associations between parental perfectionistic self-presentation and adolescent psychological outcomes. Participants were 58 dyads of clinically depressed adolescents (Mage = 15.52; 74.5% female) and their primary caregivers (Mage = 46.08; 51 mothers). Path analysis indicated that the overall model fit the data well. Congruent with the Perfectionism Social Disconnection Model, analyses showed that adolescent but not parent-reported family dysfunction in affective responsiveness mediated the relations between parental perfectionistic self-presentation and adolescent depressive symptoms, suicidal ideation, and alcohol-related problems, even after controlling for parental depression. Taken together, our findings provide new information for the role of parental perfectionistic self-presentation in adolescent psychological maladjustment and highlight parental perfectionistic self-presentation as a potential target for therapeutic intervention in adolescent depression.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".