Current Psychology https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-018-9793-y

Parenting, personality, and culture as predictors of perfectionism Gail E. Walton 1 & David R. Hibbard 1 & Chris Coughlin 2 & Diana D. Coyl-Shepherd 1

# Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Abstract This study examined the relationship between parenting styles, personality traits, culture, and perfectionism. Male and female undergraduate university students from the US (n = 168) and the Middle East (n = 74) completed self-report measures regarding their perceptions of how they were parented, the Big Five Personality Inventory, and two multidimensional measures of perfectionism. As predicted, authoritarian and neglectful parenting was positively correlated with maladaptive forms of perfectionism; they were also positively correlated with personal standards, but only authoritarian parenting was significantly correlated with self-oriented perfectionism. In terms of personality and perfectionism, conscientiousness was positively correlated with adaptive dimensions of perfectionism (personal standards, organization, and self-oriented perfectionism), whereas emotional stability was negatively associated with the maladaptive dimensions of perfectionism (parental criticism, doubts about abilities, concerns about mistakes, and socially prescribed perfectionism). Parenting was more predictive than personality regarding parental expectations, parental criticism, and socially prescribed perfectionism, while personality was more predictive of doubts about abilities, concern over mistakes, personal standards, organization, and self-oriented perfectionism. Middle Eastern participants scored significantly higher than US participants on parental expectations and self-oriented perfectionism. Keywords Parenting styles . Personality . Culture . Perfectionism

Perfectionism has generally been defined as Bstriving for flawlessness^ (Flett and Hewitt 2002, p. 5), but the developmental roots of perfectionism are still unclear. On the one hand, it is likely that perfectionism develops over time and is related to experiences within the family, especially with parents. On the other hand, perfectionism is likely closely linked to one’s personality as well (e.g., Dunkley et al. 2012). For example, we would expect a perfectionist to rate high on such personality traits as conscientiousness, and – depending on how the perfectionism affects the individual – perhaps traits such as emotional stability. Little is known about the impact culture may have on the development of perfectionism. Although most people would acknowledge that perfectionism is prevalent in western cultures (Flett and Hewitt 2002), it is not clear whether the prevalence and nature of perfectionism is similar in non-western societies. Considering the potential

* Gail E. Walton [email protected] 1

California State University, 400 West First Street, Chico, CA 95929, USA

2

Qatar University, PO Box 2713, Doha, Qatar

impact of these influences on the development of perfectionism, limited research to date has explored the relative influence of each of these factors on perfectionism. The main purpose of this study was to explore the dynamic interplay between parenting, personality, culture, and perfectionism, and the predictive power of these constructs. In terms of the development of perfectionism, why might it be important to examine the interconnections between parenting, personality, and culture within one study? It is clear that the development of perfectionism does not occur in a vacuum. Ecological models of development (e.g., Bronfenbrenner 1979) contend that various Bsystems^ around an individual exert both direct and indirect influences on what kind of person a child becomes. For example, the individual’s microsystem – where parents play a pivotal role - has the most direct influence on a child’s development. Thus, parenting has a direct influence on the development of one’s personality, and perfectionistic tendencies could be thought of as one element of an individual’s general disposition. Beyond parents and the other elements in the microsystem (e.g., peers, schools, neighborhood, etc.), however, other systems around the child have less direct influence on the child’s development, but nonetheless affect personality and identity formation. The macrosystem (i.e., the greater culture itself) lays down a general blueprint for how

Curr Psychol

children are to be raised, and includes approaches to childrearing (e.g., high or low expectations, the importance of warmth), values and beliefs to be socialized (e.g., individualism/collectivism), and customs and traditions that are passed on. If perfectionism is to be truly understood, it is necessary to take a contextual approach, where parents, personality, and culture all have a part to play in its development.

The Nature of Perfectionism Past research on perfectionism has utilized a multidimensional approach (e.g., Flett and Hewitt 2002; Frost et al. 1990), which has been useful in identifying both adaptive and maladaptive aspects of perfectionism. Early work by Hamachek (1978) identified both Bnormal^ perfectionists, who have high personal standards but are flexible in their self-evaluation, and Bneurotic^ perfectionists, who negatively self-evaluate unless their performance is always perfect. Similarly, other conceptualizations regard perfectionism as consisting of Personal Standards perfectionism (PS) which is considered largely adaptive, and Evaluative Concerns perfectionism (EC), which is considered maladaptive. Individuals high in PS perfectionism set high goals and strive to achieve (Blankstein et al. 2008), while those who are high in EC negatively evaluate and doubt themselves and are overly concerned with how others view their performance (Dunkley et al. 2006a). Two commonly used - but conceptually distinct - approaches have been proposed by Frost et al. (1990) and Hewitt and Flett (1991). Frost et al. (1990) has argued that a perfectionistic orientation is made up of adaptive dimensions (e.g., personal standards, organization), and maladaptive dimensions (e.g., concerns about making mistakes, doubts about one’s actions or abilities). In addition, Frost and colleagues indicated that parental expectations and parental criticism are separate components of perfectionism related to the family. Hewitt and Flett (1991) contended that the dimensions of perfectionism are based on how perfectionism is Bprescribed^ for the individual. That is, perfectionism can be derived from within an individual (self-oriented perfectionism), from perceived expectations from others or society to be perfect (socially prescribed perfectionism), or expectations that others be perfect (other-oriented perfectionism). Self-oriented perfectionism is generally viewed as adaptive, whereas socially prescribed perfectionism is viewed as maladaptive.

Parenting and Perfectionism Past research has suggested a link between specific parenting styles and the development of perfectionistic tendencies. Originally proposed by Baumrind (1966) and later refined

by Maccoby and Martin (1983), parenting styles have been conceptualized as consisting of two independent dimensions: demandingness and responsiveness. Demandingness refers to the standards and demands set by the parents (e.g., control, supervision), whereas responsiveness refers to parents’ responses to, and communication with, their children (e.g., warmth and acceptance). Based on the level of these dimensions, parenting behavior can be categorized into one of four styles. Authoritative parenting is characterized by high levels of both demandingness and responsiveness where parents use warmth and positivity during communication with their children, as well as appropriate autonomy granting and feelingsoriented reasoning (Mize and Pettit 1997). This type of parenting has been empirically linked to positive outcomes for children in terms of self-esteem, task persistence, and favorable school outcomes (e.g., Amato and Fowler 2002; Aunola et al. 2000). Authoritarian parenting is characterized by a high level of demandingness and a low level of responsiveness, where parents attempt to control, shape, and critically evaluate their children’s behaviors and attitudes. Research has shown that children and adolescents with authoritarian parents tend to have low self-esteem, low self-reliance, and tend to get overwhelmed by challenging tasks (e.g., Hart et al. 2003; Thompson et al. 2003). Permissive-Indulgent parenting is characterized by low demandingness and high responsiveness, where parents are highly accepting of their children, make few demands, and allow children to self-regulate. This style has been linked to more dependence, less task-persistence, and lower school achievement among children and adolescents (e.g., Barber and Olsen 1997; Lamborn et al. 1991). Finally, Rejecting-Neglectful parenting is characterized by both low demandingness and low responsiveness, where parents are unlikely to take part in their child’s activities. Unsurprisingly, this style has been associated with poor emotional self-regulation, school achievement difficulties, depression, and even suicidal tendencies in children and adolescents (e.g., Ehnvall et al. 2008; Lamborn et al. 1991). In terms of perfectionism, Flett et al. (2002) have argued that general family environment likely contributes to the development of perfectionistic tendencies. In particular, they argued that the dimensions of parental control (demands) and harshness (lack of warmth) are pivotal in the development of perfectionism. More specifically, anxious-rearing models of parenting are characterized by a high degree of control and have been shown to predict maladaptive forms of perfectionism. In a study of children aged 7 to 13 years and their parents, Affrunti and Woodruff-Borden (2017) showed that anxious parents attempt to minimize their children’s mistakes, which they see as threatening. As a result, children may develop perfectionism to minimize mistakes when the parents are not available to help them. Indeed, other recent research has seemed to confirm this contention that early messages and expectations from parents regarding achievement, success,

Curr Psychol

and failure may influence whether or not a person becomes a perfectionist (Hibbard and Walton 2012). Moreover, specific styles have been associated with specific dimensions of perfectionism. For example, Hibbard and Walton (2014) found that authoritarian parenting was associated with the more maladaptive dimensions of perfectionism (e.g., concerns about making mistakes, doubting one’s abilities), and neglectful parenting was associated with more feelings of being criticized by parents for being less than perfect. Although authoritative parenting was not directly associated with the adaptive dimensions of perfectionism (personal standards, organization) as predicted, the authors suggested that the authoritative style did seem to somewhat buffer individuals from the maladaptive aspects (Hibbard and Walton 2014). In a study of both American and Asian college students, Kawamura et al. (2002) found the harsh and authoritarian styles were related to the maladaptive, but not the adaptive, dimensions of perfectionism for most of the participants. Similarly, an Australian study of first year university students found that dysfunctional perfectionism was linked to mothers who were highly authoritarian and high on psychological control (Craddock et al. 2009). Along the same lines, authoritarian parenting was positively related to socially prescribed perfectionism (maladaptive), and interestingly, negatively related to creativity among high ability college students (Miller et al. 2012). Taken together, studies such as these seem to indicate that a lack of warmth from parents - paired with high control and harsh criticism for not being Bgood enough^ - may contribute to maladaptive perfectionism. A primary purpose of the current study was to further explore the influence these parenting styles have on the development of perfectionism, as well as to examine how these styles may interact with other variables such as personality traits and culture to shape perfectionistic tendencies.

Personality and Perfectionism In addition to experiences with parents, another likely source of an individual’s perfectionism may be one’s specific personality traits. Although perfectionism could be considered just one aspect of an individual’s personality (Zuroff 1994), it may also be the case that certain traits are associated with, or even predict, distinct aspects of perfectionism. For example, conscientiousness would seem to be naturally linked to high personal standards, organization, or an internal drive for high standards (adaptive perfectionism), whereas neuroticism could be linked to doubting one’s own abilities, being overly concerned about making mistakes, or feeling that others or society in general always expect perfection (maladaptive perfectionism). Indeed, the few studies that have explored this idea have found some support. For example, Dunkley et al. (2006b) found that personal standards perfectionism

(adaptive) was associated with conscientiousness, whereas self-critical perfectionism (maladaptive) was positively related to neuroticism and depression and negatively related to extraversion and agreeableness. Along the same lines, socially prescribed perfectionism (maladaptive) has been consistently associated with higher neuroticism (Cruce et al. 2012; Dunkley et al. 1997), and depression (Hill et al. 1997), and self-oriented perfectionism (adaptive) has been found to be related to conscientiousness (Hill et al. 1997). One limitation to many past studies is the focus on primarily clinical samples. One recent study, however, looked at perfectionism in both a clinical and non-clinical sample (athletes) and found similar associations. That is, negative perfectionism (maladaptive) was associated with higher neuroticism and less agreeableness in the clinical sample, and higher neuroticism and less extraversion and conscientiousness in the non-clinical sample (Egan et al. 2015). In a study of non-clinical participants consisting of university students and a community sample, personal standards perfectionism was associated with conscientiousness, while evaluative concerns perfectionism was associated with neuroticism and negatively associated with agreeableness (Dunkley et al. 2012). Another purpose of the current study was to further examine the relationship between several empirically established personality traits and perfectionism in a nonclinical sample. Moreover, we sought to explore the relative contributions of both parenting styles and personality traits in predicting both adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism.

Culture and Perfectionism Parenting practices and personality development do not occur in a vacuum; culture itself provides a blueprint and context for all aspects of human development. Unfortunately, when it comes to the contribution of culture to the development of perfectionism, both modern conceptualizations and empirical cross-cultural research are lacking (Mobley et al. 2005). Although some recent research has been conducted with Canadian and Asian samples (e.g., Smith et al. 2017), research on Middle Eastern cultures is scarce. Findings from one empirical study from Turkey, however, were consistent with the North American studies. This study found that adaptive perfectionism was predicted by conscientiousness, openness, and extraversion among college students (Ulu and Tezer 2010). Although cross-cultural research is limited, anecdotal evidence seems to indicate that perfectionism is pervasive in western cultures. Some theorists may see this as a natural phenomenon in individualistic societies, but unnecessary in collectivist societies. That is, when a culture values individual achievement over group success, members of that culture will likely strive to set themselves apart from others (see Hofstede 2001). A culture characterized by competitiveness may foster not only the drive to outperform others, but also the drive to outperform

Curr Psychol

one’s own achievements (Hibbard and Buhrmester 2010). Perhaps the desire to be Bperfect^ is one manifestation of this cultural value. These contentions are speculative at this point. As a whole, Middle Eastern cultures are described as patriarchal, with deference given to the male role in general, and to fathers, more specifically (Shwalb et al. 2013). Although families appear traditional in terms of authority and providing economic resources in the family, a study of Qatari females found that important expectations of fathers included showing their children love, ensuring children’s safety, and providing moral guidance (Shafaie et al. 2014). These results imply that both men and women are expected to contribute to children’s development; however, men are not expected to participate in the direct caretaking of children, thus reflecting a traditional role. Given the traditional family structure and patriarchal nature of this culture, we could expect that the Middle Eastern sample would show more authoritarian and neglectful parenting than the US sample. Based on the Turkish study mentioned above, we might also expect similarities in the patterns of association between concientiousness, extraversion, and agreeableness and adaptive perfectionism. In terms of personality differences in general, few studies have specifically compared the US and Middle East, but some research suggests that Americans tend to rate themselves higher on conscientiousness than many other cultures (Peabody 1985). Thus, the final purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between parenting, personality, and the development of perfectionism in both a North American and a Middle Eastern sample.

whereas emotional stability is negatively associated with the maladaptive dimensions of perfectionism (parental criticism, concern over mistakes, doubts about actions, and socially prescribed). No specific predictions are made for other traits such as openness, extraversion, or agreeableness. 3. In terms of the contributions of parenting styles and personality traits, authoritative parenting style is expected to predict adaptive dimensions of perfectionism. Authoritative and authoritarian parenting styles are expected to predict the parental expectations dimension of perfectionism. Authoritarian and neglectful parenting styles are generally expected to have higher predictive value than personality traits to predict maladaptive perfectionism. Conscientiousness is expected to predict adaptive forms of perfectionism, while emotional stability is hypothesized to predict maladaptive forms of perfectionism. 4. In terms of comparing the two cultures, the Middle Eastern sample is expected to show higher levels of authoritarian and neglectful parenting than the North American sample. In terms of personality, conscientiousness and emotional stability is expected to be higher in the North American sample. However, we expected similar associations between parenting, personality, and adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism in both samples.

Method The Current Study To summarize, the current study expands on past research by (a) examining the associations between specific parenting styles, personality traits, and perfectionism, (b) exploring the relative contributions of parenting styles and personality in predicting both adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism, and (c) exploring any cultural similarities and differences between a western and a non-western sample regarding these variables and their associations with perfectionism. Based on past theory and research, our specific hypotheses were as follows: 1. In terms of parenting style and perfectionism, authoritative parenting is expected to be positively associated with adaptive dimensions of perfectionism (e.g., personal standards, organization, and self-oriented), whereas authoritarian and neglectful parenting styles are expected to be positively associated with maladaptive dimensions of perfectionism (e.g., parental criticism, concern over mistakes, doubts about actions, and socially prescribed). 2. In terms of personality traits, conscientiousness is positively associated with the adaptive dimensions of perfectionism (personal standards, organization, and self-oriented),

Participants Participants included 242 undergraduate college students enrolled in the US (n = 168; males = 79, females = 89) and in the Middle East (n = 74; males = 5, females = 69). US participants’ ages ranged from 18 to 58 years (M age = 21.68, SD = 5.08) whom identified as 53% Caucasian, 28% Hispanic, 7% Asian, 1% African American, and 11% Other. Middle Eastern participants ages ranged from 17 to 27 years (M age = 19.92, SD = 2.11) whom identified as 40% Arab, 24% North African, 22% Asian, 7% Caucasian, 6% Mixed ethnicity, and 1% Other. Participants reported 14 different countries of origin in the Middle East; the largest proportion (26%) reported Qatar as their country of origin. Participants were recruited through undergraduate psychology courses at both universities. No incentives were offered.

Measures Demographic information was collected regarding participants’ age, sex, ethnicity, major course of study, and country of origin. Participants then completed measures regarding

Curr Psychol

their perfectionism, perception of their parents’ parenting style, and their personality. P e r f e c t i o n i s m P a r t i c i p a n t s c o m p l e t e d t h e F ro s t Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (FMPS; Frost et al. 1990). The FMPS is a self report measure consisting of six dimensions, including personal standards (seven items; BI have extremely high goals^), parental expectations (five items; BMy parents set very high standards for me^), parental criticism (four items; BAs a child, I was punished for doing things less than perfectly), concern over mistakes (nine items; BI should be upset if I make a mistake^), doubts about actions (four items; BI usually have doubts about the simple everyday things I do^), and organization (six items; BOrganization is very important to me^). The measure consists of 35 items that are rated on a Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). No items are reverse scored; items are totaled to obtain subscale total scores, with higher scores indicating higher perfectionism. Frost et al. (1990) reported adequate internal consistency and concurrent validity for the subscales. In the current study, Cronbach’s alphas were sufficient, ranging from .72 to .90 for the combined samples. The second perfectionism measure was Hewitt and Flett’s (1991) Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (HMPS). This measure has 45 items measuring the dimensions: self-oriented (15 items; BWhen I am working on something, I cannot relax until it is perfect^), socially prescribed (15 items; BI find it difficult to meet others’ expectations of me^), and otheroriented (15 items; BEverything that others do must be of top-notch quality^) perfectionism. Items are rated on a Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Eighteen items are reverse scored; items are totaled to obtain subscale item totals. Higher scores indicate a greater degree of perfectionism. Hewitt and Flett (1991) reported Cronbach’s alphas for the subscales ranging from .82–.87; convergent validity was demonstrated with measures related to social behaviors. In the current study, Cronbach’s alphas were adequate for each of the subscales (self-oriented = .85; socially prescribed = .80; other-oriented = .70 for the combined samples). In this study, we chose to use two different measures of perfectionism. As discussed in the Introduction, past research has utilized conceptually different multidimensional approaches to measure perfectionism. Because we wanted to examine both adaptive and maladaptive components of perfectionism, we were interested in measuring both distinct dimensions of perfectionism (i.e., the FMPS) and how perfectionism is prescribed by individuals (i.e., the HMPS). Our aim was to gain a more complete understanding of any similarities or differences in these conceptionalization of perfectionism in relation to the other variables in the study. Moreover, because of the lack of cross cultural research in this area, we wanted to more fully investigate how these decidedly different conceptualizations of perfectionism would be demonstrated in a Middle Eastern sample.

Parenting Participants’ perception of their parents’ parenting style was measured using the Parental Authority Questionnaire (PAQ; Buri 1991). The instructions asked participants to think about the ways their parents responded to them when they were living at home. The measure contains 20 items that participants complete regarding their mother and father according to Baumrind’s (1971) parenting styles, including: authoritative (five items; BOnce family policy had been established, this parent discussed the reasoning behind the policy with me^), authoritarian (seven items;^ Whenever this parent told me to do something, he/she expected me to do it immediately without asking any questions^), permissive (three items; BThis parent felt I should have my way as often as he/she did^), and neglectful (five items; BI was not especially close to this parent. I had to learn things on my own^). Items are rated on a scale of 1 (false) to 5 (very true). No items are reverse scored; items related to each parenting style are totaled to obtain a score for each parenting style. A higher score indicates a higher perception of that parenting style. Buri (1991) found Cronbach’s alphas for mother’s and father’s parenting ranging from .75–.87, and discriminant validity was demonstrated through intercorrelations with other parenting styles. In the current study, internal consistency reliability was adequate for each of the subscales with Cronbach’s alphas ranging from .70 to .85 for the combined samples. Personality Personality was measured using the Big Five Inventory (John et al. 1991). This self report measure has 54 items pertaining to openness (eighteen items; BHas a wide range of interests^), conscientiousness (nine items; BDoes a thorough job^), extraversion, (nine items; BIs talkativeB), agreeableness (nine items; BIs helpful and unselfish with others^), and emotional stability (nine items; BIs relaxed, handles stress well^). Participants rate how well the statement describes them on a Likert scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Nineteen items are reverse scored, and subscale items are totaled. Higher scores indicate participants’ higher self-description of that trait. Soto and John (2009) found Cronbach’s alphas ranging from .53–.83; in a student sample, convergent validity with the longer version of the scale (NEO PI-R; Costa and McCrae 1992) ranged from .87–1.00. In the current study, internal consistency reliability was adequate for each of the subscales with Cronbach’s alphas ranging from .73 to .87 for the combined samples.

Procedure IRB approval was obtained prior to data collection. After participants gave informed consent, they individually completed the measures either in classrooms, or in a private setting. The measures took approximately 20 min to complete. No incentives were offered.

Curr Psychol

Results Descriptive statistics for the parenting, personality, and perfectionism variables are presented in Table 1. Independent samples t-tests were computed with gender as the independent variable and parenting, personality, and perfectionism as the dependent variables. Results indicated statistically significant differences with males scoring higher for other oriented perfectionism, t(237) = 3.69, p < .0005 (eta squared = .054), permissive parenting t(237) = 2.08, p < .04 (eta squared = .02), and emotional stability t(237) = 5.26, p < .0005 (eta squared = .10). Independent samples t-tests were computed with country as the independent variable and parenting, personality, and perfectionism as the dependent variables. Results indicated statistically significant differences with the Middle Eastern sample scoring higher for parental expectations t(236) = 1.98, p < .05 (eta squared = .02), self-oriented perfectionism t(237) = 2.31, p < .02 (eta squared = .02), and neglectful parenting t(237) = 2.20, p < 03 (eta squared = .02). US participants scored statistically significantly higher on conscientiousness t(237) = 3.31, p < .001 (eta squared = .04), agreeableness t(237) = 3.24, p < .001 (eta squared = .04), and emotional stability t(237) = 2.40, p < .02 (eta squared = .02). Table 1 Descriptive statistics for perfectionism variables, parenting styles, and personality traits Perfectionism variables Parental expectations Parental criticism Doubts about actions Concern over mistakes Personal standards Organization Self-oriented Socially prescribed Other oriented Parenting styles Authoritative parenting Authoritarian parenting Permissive parenting Neglectful parenting Personality traits Openness Conscientiousness Extroversion Agreeableness Stability Sample sizes

Bivariate correlations (Pearson r) were computed to determine significant relationships between parenting styles and perfectionism dimensions. Since patterns of association were similar for both samples, correlations presented in Table 2 reflect all participants. Authoritative parenting was significantly positively correlated with parental expectations and significantly negatively correlated with parental criticism. Authoritarian parenting was significantly positively correlated with parental expectations, parental criticism, doubts about actions, concern over mistakes, personal standards, self-oriented perfectionism, and socially prescribed perfectionism. Permissive parenting was significantly negatively correlated with parental expectations and parental criticism. Significant positive correlations occurred between neglectful parenting and parental expectations, parental criticism, concern over mistakes, personal standards, and socially prescribed perfectionism. Bivariate correlations (Pearson r) were also computed to examine significant relationships between personality traits and perfectionism. Again, patterns of association were similar for both samples; thus, correlations presented in Table 2 reflect all participants. Significant positive correlations were found between openness and personal standards, organization, and self-oriented perfectionism, while a significant negative

Males

Females

U.S.

Middle East

M / SD

M / SD

M / SD

M / SD

3.28 / .79

3.26 / .76

3.20 / .76

3.42* / .79

2.34 / .70 2.70 / .77 2.56 / .74 3.54 / .60

2.32 / .90 2.81 / .85 2.56 / .78 3.52 / .65

2.33 / .83 2.70 / .79 2.55 / .77 3.53 / .61

2.34 / .84 2.93 / .90 2.58 / .75 3.52 / .69

3.78 / .68 3.21 / .52 2.76 / .46 3.05* / .44

3.96 / .76 3.31 / .68 2.70 / .52 2.82 / .47

3.91 / .74 3.21 / .58 2.71 / .54 2.93 / .46

3.87 / .74 3.41* / .71 2.77 / .40 2.83 / .48

3.07 / .60 2.84 / .77 3.15* / .77 1.98 / .71

3.07 / .70 2.74 / .77 2.92 / .85 1.94 / .77

3.05 / .68 3.88 / .74 2.95 / .79 1.88 / .68

3.11 / .63 2.78 / .84 3.11 / .91 2.11* / .87

3.49 / .48 3.52 / .48 3.41 / .72 3.81 / .51

3.50 / .49 3.53 / .54 3.24 / .75 3.84 / .59

3.51 / .47 3.60* / .50 3.33 / .75 3.90* / .56

3.47 / .53 3.36 / .52 3.22 / .71 3.65 / .54

3.35* / .60 84

2.88 / .69 154

3.11* / .68 168

2.88 / .71 70

Parenting style variables reflect the average of mothers’ and fathers’ scores *p ≤ .05 indicates significant mean differences

Curr Psychol Table 2

Correlations among parenting styles, personality traits, and perfectionism variables Parenting variables

Personality traits

Perfectionism variables

Auth

Authr

Perm

Negl

Open

Consc

Extrov

Agree

Stable

Parental expectations Parental criticism

.17** −.17**

.35** .53**

−.14* −.28**

.16* .34**

.04 −.09

−.03 −.11

−.01 −.25**

−.06 −.14*

−.12 −.22**

Doubts about actions

.01

.13*

−.11

.08

−.07

−.10

−.23**

−.04

−.44**

Concern over mistakes Personal standards

−.07 .05

.22** .15*

−.11 −.03

.23** .21**

.00 .25**

.02 .40**

−.04 .17**

−.17* .01

−.36** −.03

Organization Self-oriented

.09 .07

.02 .16*

.02 .00

−.08 .06

.19** .19**

.62** .40**

.16* .12

.13* .05

−.04 −.20**

Socially prescribed

−.02

.30**

−.11

.23**

−.15*

−.02

−.10

−.17**

−.18**

Other oriented

.10

.13

.09

.03

.05

.21**

.15*

−.12

.06

Parenting: Auth Authoritative, Authr Authoritarian, Perm Permissive/Indulgent, Negl Neglectful; Personality: Open Openness, Consc Conscientiousness, Extrov Extroversion, Agree Agreeableness, Stable Emotional Stability * p ≤ .05, ** p ≤ .01

correlation was found between openness and socially prescribed perfectionism. Conscientiousness was significantly positively correlated with personal standards, organization, self-oriented, and other-oriented perfectionism. Extraversion was significantly positively correlated with personal standards, organization, and other-oriented, while extraversion was significantly positively correlated with parental criticism and doubts about actions. Agreeableness was significantly positively correlated with organization, and was significantly negatively correlated with parental criticism, concern over mistakes, and socially prescribed perfectionism. Stability was significantly negatively correlated with parental criticism, doubts about actions, concern over mistakes, self-oriented, and socially prescribed perfectionism. The following results represent a series of hierarchical multiple regressions that were computed to examine the extent to which parenting and personality traits predicted perfectionism variables. Independent and dependent variables for each analysis were chosen based on theoretical grounds and the patterns of significant correlations presented in Table 2. No hypotheses were stated regarding the effect of gender or country on perfectionism variables, but some between-group differences were observed in preliminary analyses of the perfectionism variables. Thus, both gender and country were included in the first step of the regression models as control variables. Preliminary analyses were conducted for each multiple regression to ensure no violation of the assumptions of normality, linearity, multicollinearity, and homoscedasticity occurred. The following analyses are summarized in Table 3. Hierarchical regression was performed to assess the ability of authoritative, authoritarian, permissive, and neglectful parenting styles and the personality traits for extroversion, agreeableness, and stability to predict parental criticism. At Step 1, country and gender explained 0% of the variance. After

entering the parenting styles at Step 2, the variance explained by the model was 31%, F (6, 231) = 17.14, p < .0001. Parenting styles explained 31% of the variance, R square change = .31, F change (4, 231) = 25.69, p < .0001. After entering personality scores for extraversion, agreeableness, and stability at Step 3, the total variance explained by the final model was 36% F (9, 228) = 14.26, p < .0001. Personality scores explained an additional 5% of the variance in parental criticism after controlling for country, gender, and parenting styles, R square change = .05, F change (3, 228) = 6.20, p < .0001. In the final model, the standardized coefficients for authoritarian, permissive, and neglectful parenting, extraversion and stability were statistically significant. Hierarchical regression was performed to assess the ability of authoritarian parenting style and the personality scores for extroversion and stability to predict doubts about actions. Country and gender were entered at Step 1, explaining 1% of the variance. After entering authoritarian parenting style at Step 2, the variance explained by the model was 3%, F (3, 234) = 2.71, p < .05. Authoritarian parenting style explained an additional 2% of the variance, after controlling for country and gender, R square change = .02, F change (1, 234) = 4.42, p < .04. After entering personality scores for extraversion and stability at Step 3, the total variance explained by the model was 22% F (5, 232) = 12.97, p < .0001. Personality explained an additional 19% of the variance in doubts about actions after controlling for country, gender, and authoritarian parenting, R square change = .19, F change (2, 232) = 27.43, p < .0001. In the final model, the standardized coefficients for authoritarian parenting style and stability were statistically significant. Hierarchical regression was performed to assess the ability of authoritarian and neglectful parenting styles scores and the personality scores for agreeableness and stability to

Curr Psychol Table 3

Hierarchical regressions predicting maladaptive and adaptive perfectionism variables from parenting styles and personality traits

Maladaptive Predictor Step 1 Country Gender Step 2 (Parenting)

Parental criticism β ΔR2 ΔF .00

.02

.01

−.02 .42**

Permissive Neglectful

−.14* .14*

Step 3 (Personality) Openness

25.69**

Concern over mistakes β ΔR2 ΔF

1.83

.00

4.42*

.14*

8.50**

.15*

6.20**

.19

27.43**

.05

6.77**

.06

7.36**

−.01 −.23** .10

12.20**

.05

4.65**

.24** .11 .13

19.48** −.12

.

Conscientiousness

.21**

Extroversion Agreeableness

−.16** −.02

−.09

Stability

−.13*

−.42**

Adaptive

Parental Expectations

Predictor Step 1 Country

β

Gender Step 2 (Parenting) Authoritative Authoritarian Permissive

Other-oriented β ΔR2 ΔF

1.25

−.09 .07

.16* .36

.01 .09

−.01 .02

Socially prescribed β ΔR2 ΔF

.05

.02

.02 .31

Authoritarian

.02 .11

−.01

Authoritative

Doubts about actions β ΔR2 ΔF

ΔR2 ΔF .02 2.52

.09 −.06

−.06

−.38**

−.16**

Personal Standards

Organization

Self-Oriented

β

β

β

ΔR2 ΔF .00 .05

ΔR2 ΔF .02 2.22

.16

.00

−.08

.14*

−.07

−.02

.15*

.02

.20 .29** .35** −.15*

Neglectful .02 Step 3 (Personality) Openness Conscientiousness Extroversion

14.40**

.05

5.90**

.06

ΔR2 ΔF .02 2.72

.03

6.53**

.26

29.08**

.16**

.19** .22

23.33**

.15** .42** .03

Agreeableness Stability

.39 .02 .64** .07

38.50** .11* .47**

−.07 −.26**

* p ≤ .05, ** p ≤ 01

predict concern over mistakes. Country and gender were entered at Step 1; they explained 0% of the variance. After entering the parenting styles at Step 2, the variance explained by the model was 7%, F (4, 233) = 4.27, p < .002. Parenting styles explained 7% of the variance, R square change = .07, F change (2, 233) = 8.50, p < .0001. After entering personality scores for agreeableness and stability at Step 3, the total variance explained by the model was 20% F (6, 231) = 9.79, p < .0001. Personality explained an additional 13% of the variance in concern over mistakes after controlling for country, gender, and parenting styles, R square change = .13, F change (2, 231) = 19.48, p < .0001. In the final model, the standardized coefficients for authoritarian parenting style, neglectful parenting style, and stability were statistically significant.

Hierarchical regression was performed to assess the ability of authoritarian and neglectful parenting style scores and the personality scores for openness, agreeableness, and stability to predict socially prescribed perfectionism. Country and gender were entered at Step 1; they explained 1% of the variance. After entering the parenting styles at Step 2, the variance explained by the model was 10%, F (4, 234) = 6.78, p < .0001. Authoritarian parenting style explained an additional 9% of the variance, after controlling for country and gender, R square change = .09, F change (2, 234) = 12.20, p < .0005. After entering personality scores for openness, agreeableness and stability at Step 3, the total variance explained by the model was 15% F (7, 231) = 6.05, p < .0001. Personality explained an additional 5% of the variance in socially prescribed perfectionism after controlling for country, gender, and parenting styles,

Curr Psychol

R square change = .05, F change (3, 231) = 4.65, p < .004. In the final model, the standardized coefficients for authoritarian parenting and stability were statistically significant. Hierarchical regression was performed to assess the ability of personality scores for conscientiousness and extraversion to predict other-oriented perfectionism. Country and gender were entered at Step 1, explaining 5% of the variance. After entering conscientiousness and extraversion at Step 2, the total variance explained by the model was 11%, F (4, 234) = 7.25, p < .0001. Personality explained an additional 6% of the variance, after controlling for country and gender, R square change = .06, F change (2, 234) = 7.36, p < .001. In the final model, the standardized coefficients for gender and conscientiousness were statistically significant. Hierarchical regression was performed to assess the ability of authoritative, authoritarian, permissive, and neglectful parenting styles to predict parental expectations. Country and gender were entered at Step 1; together they explained 2% of the variance. After entering the parenting styles at Step 2, the total variance explained by the model was 22%, F (6, 231) = 10.63, p < .0001. Parenting styles explained an additional 20% of the variance, after controlling for country and gender, R square change = .20, F change (4, 231) = 14.40, p < .0001. In the final model, the standardized coefficients for authoritative, authoritarian, and permissive parenting were statistically significant. Hierarchical regression was performed to assess the ability of authoritarian and neglectful parenting styles scores and the personality scores for openness, conscientiousness and extroversion to predict personal standards. Country and gender were entered at Step 1; they explained 0% of the variance. After entering the parenting styles at Step 2, the variance explained by the model was 5%, F (4, 233) = 2.98, p < .02. Parenting styles explained 5% of the variance, after controlling for country and gender, R square change = .05, F change (2, 233) = 5.90, p < .003. After entering personality scores for openness, conscientiousness and extroversion at Step 3, the total variance explained by the model was 27%, F (7, 230) = 12.19, p < .0001. Personality explained an additional 22% of the variance in personal standards after controlling for country, gender, and parenting styles, R square change = .22, F change (3, 230) = 23.33, p < .0001. In the final model, the standardized coefficients for authoritarian parenting style, neglectful parenting, openness, and conscientiousness were statistically significant. Hierarchical regression was performed to assess the ability of personality scores for openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, and agreeableness to predict organization. Country and gender were entered at Step 1; they explained 2% of the variance in organization. After entering personality at Step 2, the total variance explained by the model was 41%, F (6, 231) = 26.88, p < .0001. Personality explained an additional 39% of the variance, after controlling for country and gender, R square change = .39, F change (4, 231) = 38.50, p < .0005.

In the final model, the standardized coefficients for gender and conscientiousness were significant. Hierarchical regression was performed to assess the ability of authoritarian parenting style scores and the personality scores for openness, conscientiousness, and stability to predict self-oriented perfectionism. Country and gender were entered at Step 1; they explained 2% of the variance. After entering authoritarian parenting style at Step 2, the variance explained by the model was 5%, F (3, 235) = 4.03, p < .008. Authoritarian parenting style explained an additional 3% of the variance, after controlling for country and gender, R square change = .03, F change (1, 235) = 6.53, p < .011. After entering personality scores for openness, conscientiousness, and stability at Step 3, the total variance explained by the model was 31% F (6, 232) = 17.28, p < .0001. Personality explained an additional 26% of the variance in self-oriented perfectionism after controlling for country, gender, and parenting styles, R square change = .26, F change (3, 232) = 29.08, p < .0001. In the final model, the standardized coefficients for country, authoritarian parenting, openness, conscientiousness, and stability were statistically significant.

Discussion This study is one of the first to examine the combined influence of parenting, personality, and culture on the development of perfectionism. Our first prediction was that a harsher parenting style characterized by high demands and low warmth (authoritarian) and a style characterized by low demands and low warmth (neglectful) would be associated with maladaptive aspects of perfectionism. Findings revealed support for this prediction. For example, the authoritarian parenting style was associated with more parental criticism, doubts about abilities, concerns about making mistakes, and socially prescribed perfectionism; the neglectful parenting style was associated with parental criticism, concern over mistakes, and socially prescribed perfectionism. Unexpectedly, however, the authoritarian style was also positively associated with several aspects of adaptive perfectionism (parental expectations, personal standards, and self-oriented perfectionism), as was the neglectful style (parental expectations and personal standards). We also expected the authoritative style (high demands, high warmth) to be positively associated with adaptive aspects of perfectionism. The only significant association for this parenting style was with parental expectations. Counter to expectations, however, this style was not related to the other adaptive dimensions of perfectionism (personal standards, organization, and self-oriented). These results are generally consistent with past research, and likely point to the role that parental warmth plays in mitigating the effects of high parental demands and control. In other words, high demands accompanied with parental

Curr Psychol

warmth – although not necessarily fostering adaptive perfectionism – may be fairly benign. In contrast, putting high demands and expectations for perfection on children without showing much affection or warmth seems to be related to feelings of being criticized, doubting oneself, being overly concerned with making mistakes, and feeling that one is expected to always be perfect. These findings are consistent with past developmental research showing that children with authoritarian parents tend to be more anxious and more overwhelmed by challenges than other children (Hart et al. 2003; Thompson et al. 2003). In addition, our finding that permissive parenting (low demands, high warmth) was negatively related to feelings of parental criticism bolsters the idea that parental warmth has an important role to play in healthy adjustment. One interesting finding in this study was that neglectful parenting was associated with high personal standards. There are reasons to believe that in the absence of family guidance or support, having high personal standards may be a way for individuals to gain control or structure over their lives (Flett et al. 2002; Hamachek 1978). In developmental terms, the message to parents from this study may be: It is fine to have high expectations for your children, but make sure to show them warmth and support as well. In terms of personality and perfectionism, we predicted that conscientiousness would be positively related to adaptive perfectionism and emotional stability would be negatively related to maladaptive perfectionism. In general, this prediction was supported. For example, conscientiousness was positively correlated with personal standards, organization, and selforiented perfectionism. This finding is consistent with past research (Dunkley et al. 2006a; Hill et al. 1997). The drive to work hard and maintain high standards is consistent with the desire to be the best one can be and to strive for personal success. Indeed, some researchers and theorists have even argued that adaptive perfectionism is simply a proxy for high levels of conscientiousness (Hewitt and Flett 2007). Also consistent with our predictions, emotional stability was negatively related to dimensions of maladaptive perfectionism (parental criticism, doubts about abilities, concerns about mistakes, and socially prescribed perfectionism). Emotional stability was also negatively correlated with self-oriented perfectionism, an adaptive dimension. Overall, these findings generally mirror past research (Cruce et al. 2012; Dunkley et al. 2012; Egan et al. 2015). That is, if an individual has a history of feeling criticized by parents for not being perfect, doubts oneself, and feels like society constantly expects perfection, he or she probably experiences a good deal of anxiety as well. Although we made no specific predictions about the other personality traits, our findings are revealing. For example, openness to experience was positively correlated with the adaptive dimensions of perfectionism (personal standards, organization, and self-oriented) and negatively correlated with one maladaptive dimension (socially prescribed perfectionism).

The reason for this finding is not clear, but it may be that openness is often considered a positive trait, and research has shown that students who score high on personal standards perfectionism consider themselves goal-oriented, open to their feelings, willing to consider new ideas, and well organized (Dunkley et al. 2012). Interestingly, extraversion was negatively related to two maladaptive dimensions (parental criticism, doubts about actions), but positively related to two positive dimensions (personal standards, organization). This finding is consistent with past work (see Dunkley et al. 2006b) and suggests that being socially outgoing (e.g., a good network of friendships) may elicit positive evaluations from others beyond parents, such as peers. Finally, agreeableness was negatively related to several maladaptive dimensions (parental criticism, concern over mistakes, socially prescribed perfectionism). It is possible that the direction of influence between these variables may help to explain this finding. In other words, if an individual is anxious and constantly worried about measuring up to extremely high standards in the pursuit to be Bflawless,^ he or she may develop a generally less agreeable disposition. Another major goal of this study was to explore the combined contributions of parenting style and personality traits in predicting maladaptive and adaptive perfectionism. First, authoritative parenting style was expected to predict adaptive dimensions of perfectionism. We found limited support for this prediction. Although parenting contributed to a small amount of variance in personal standards, organization, and self-oriented perfectionism, personality traits (e.g., conscientiousness, emotional stability) were better predictors of these adaptive dimensions. Second, we expected authoritative and authoritarian parenting to predict the parental expectations dimension of perfectionism. As predicted, parenting was the only significant predictor for this dimension. Third, authoritarian and neglectful parenting styles were expected to have higher predictive value than personality traits to predict maladaptive perfectionism. Support was mixed for this prediction. Although parenting was more predictive of parental criticism and socially prescribed perfectionism, doubts about abilities and concern over mistakes were better predicted by personality variables (e.g., agreeableness, emotional stability). Finally, conscientiousness was expected to predict adaptive forms of perfectionism, while emotional stability was hypothesized to predict maladaptive forms of perfectionism. Findings generally supported this prediction; conscientiousness was a significant predictor of personal standards, organization, and selforiented perfectionism, whereas emotional stability was a significant predictor of doubts about abilities, concern over mistakes, and socially prescribed perfectionism. What can we conclude about the relative contributions of parenting style and personality to the development of perfectionism? It is not surprising that parenting is a better predictor of parental expectations and parental criticism. Messages from parents about what they expect of their children are often

Curr Psychol

communicated clearly, and being consistently criticized for not being Bgood enough^ would likely be connected to this maladaptive aspect of perfectionism. Moreover, if children feel pressure from parents to meet extremely high standards, it follows that they will likely perceive that other people outside of their family expect them to be perfect as well (i.e., socially prescribed perfectionism). The fact that personality traits were better predictors than parenting for a number of the adaptive and maladaptive dimensions seems to suggest that perfectionism may be closely weaved into a person’s general disposition. In particular, conscientiousness seems to be closely linked to adaptive perfectionism, whereas emotional stability is closely linked to maladaptive dimensions. Of course, parenting can also shape one’s personality. In correlational research, however, it is difficult to tease apart the causal influence that parenting has on an individual’s personality development, and in turn, his or her perfectionistic tendencies. Longitudinal research is clearly needed to further pinpoint the specific familial and dispositional origins and sources of perfectionism. Finally, we were interested in exploring cultural similarities and differences by comparing a North American sample and a Middle Eastern sample. We found many similarities between the two samples, especially in the patterns of associations between parenting, personality, and perfectionism. There were, however, several noteworthy differences. First, the Middle Eastern sample scored significantly higher than the US sample on the parental expectations dimension of perfectionism. Second, the Middle Eastern sample also scored significantly higher on self-oriented perfectionism. Third, the Middle Eastern sample reported significantly more neglectful (but not authoritarian) parenting than the US sample. Finally, the US sample scored significantly higher than the Middle Eastern sample on several personality dimensions: conscientiousness, agreeableness, and emotional stability. What might these similarities and differences mean? In terms of similarities between the two samples, it should be noted that all participants in each culture were Englishspeaking college students. Thus, the participants in this study were likely goal-driven, committed to pursuing higher education, and of similar ages. In that sense, the students in the two cultures share many similar characteristics so we would not expect major differences on most of the measures. However, the few differences may be revealing of the cultures involved. In general, the US is considered an individualistic culture, whereas the Middle East is considered collectivist (Hofstede 2001). It should be noted that the students from the Middle East reported a variety of countries of origin (e.g., Qatar, Sudan, Palestine). The parenting differences we found in the Middle Eastern sample – higher parental expectations and higher neglectful parenting – may reflect a more traditional and patriarchal parenting model focusing on high uncertainty avoidance and high power distance in the family (see Hofstede 2001). Since the US is considered highly individualistic, the

fact that the Middle Eastern sample scored higher than the US sample on self-oriented perfectionism is puzzling and runs counter to cultural expectations. Informal interviews with female university students in the Middle Eastern sample revealed two interesting facets of family life and perfectionism. First, students noted that parents frequently fostered competition between their children by comparing siblings with one another. Second, females commented that because access to university education was recent in history for females in Middle Eastern cultures, academic achievement and success were extremely important to them. Because the Middle Eastern sample was primarily female, these conversations may provide some insight regarding why the Middle Eastern sample scored higher in selforiented perfectionism. We contend that this finding needs replication before attempting further interpretation. Finally, it is not clear why the US sample scored higher on conscientiousness, agreeableness, and emotional stability than the Middle Eastern sample. Although some research suggests that Americans tend to rate themselves higher on conscientiousness than many other cultures (Peabody 1985), researchers (e.g., Schmitt et al. 2007) have often acknowledged that comparing personality traits across cultures can be difficult for a variety of reasons (e.g., translation issues, biases, response styles), and we would advise caution in the interpretation of this finding without replication.

Conclusions, Limitations, and Future Research Strengths of this research include the examination of relationships between parenting, personality, culture, and perfectionism in non-clinical samples, which has not been examined in previous research. Moreover, this study is the first of its kind to examine all of these variables in one study. This research adds to the literature by providing knowledge about the predictors of perfectionism, such as parenting and personality, while simultaneously investigating another culture. What general conclusions can be drawn from this study? If we want to better understand the roles that parenting, personality, and culture play in the development of perfectionism, it is useful to take an ecological approach (Bronfenbrenner 1979). By acknowledging the different levels of influence on an individual’s development, we begin to understand how the cultural blueprint laid down in the macrosystem gets played out in the microsystem. For example, looking through a cultural lens can help us better understand parenting, and the culture itself provides a context regarding parental expectations, roles, and values. Findings from this study suggest that when patterns of parenting are similar across cultures, then similar parenting styles (e.g., authoritarian, neglectful) predict the development of maladaptive perfectionism. Understanding this connection between culture, parenting, and perfectionism could be useful to clinical and counseling psychologists across cultures who want to help individuals struggling with maladaptive perfectionism. Morever, this information has implications for parent

Curr Psychol

education across cultures. Al-Maadadi and Ikhlef (2015) noted the important role of parent education for clinical and family practice in Qatar. Parental education, in turn, also has the potential to transform both the parenting blueprint of the macrosystem as well as family interactions in the microsystem. Consistent with previous research, this study also found that adaptive perfectionism was predicted primarily by personality traits rather than by culture or parenting. This study has several limitations. In terms of the demographic makeup of our samples, although we had approximately equal numbers of males and females in the US sample, females were over-represented in the Middle Eastern sample which made it difficult to examine gender differences by culture. Moreover, all participants were college-age students – a specific population that may not be generalizable to other populations. Future research should attempt to collect data from a range of ages to better see the developmental progression of perfectionism. Finally, all measures were self-report surveys, which may be influenced by both social desirability and response biases. For example, participants had to recall the parenting styles they experienced while living at home. Future research should consider supplementing self-report survey data with multiple-source reporting (e.g., surveying parents themselves) as well as qualitative methods, such as interviews or observational techniques. Several other issues could be addressed in future research. For example, replication of this study with other cultures (both individualistic and collectivist) would provide insight as to whether perfectionism is a universal concept, how it manifests itself in different societies, and if its associations with parenting and personality traits are reliable across cultures. Another consistent conceptual theme in perfectionism research is whether adaptive perfectionism is actually a distinct form of perfectionism or simply an exaggerated level of conscientiousness. Further theoretical conceptualizations and rigorous empirical research are needed to tease these two concepts apart. As this study and others have shown, parenting, personality, and culture do account for some, but not all, of the variation seen in perfectionism. This study has provided extensive descriptive data; however, research that examines specific mediating and moderating variables is clearly needed. Finally, a major task for future research is to discover what other social, personal, and environmental variables help to explain why one becomes a perfectionist.

Compliance with Ethical Standards Conflict of Interest On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest. Ethical Approval All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References Affrunti, N. W., & Woodruff-Borden, J. (2017). The roles of anxious rearing, negative affect, and effortful control in a model of risk for child perfectionism. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 26, 2547– 2555. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-017-0767-8 Al-Maadadi, F., & Ikhlef, A. (2015). What mothers know about child development and parenting in Qatar: Parenting cognitions and practices. The Family Journal: Counseling and Therapy for Couples and Families, 23, 65–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/1066480714555669 Amato, P. R., & Fowler, F. (2002). Parenting practices, child adjustment, and family diversity. Journal of Marriage and Family, 64, 703–716. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2002.00703.x Aunola, K., Stattin, H., & Nurmi, J. E. (2000). Parenting styles and adolescents’ achievement strategies. Journal of Adolescence, 23, 205–222. https://doi.org/10.1006/jado.2000.0308 Barber, B. K., & Olsen, J. A. (1997). Socialization in context: Connection, regulation, and autonomy in the family, school, and neighborhood, and with peers. Journal of Adolescent Research, 12, 287–315. https://doi.org/10.1177/0743554897122008 Baumrind, D. H. (1966). Effects of authoritative parental control on child behavior. Child Development, 37, 887–907. https://doi.org/10.2307/ 1126611 Baumrind, D. H. (1971). Current patterns of parental authority. Developmental Psychology Monographs, 4, 1–103. Blankstein, K. R., Dunkley, D. M., & Wilson, J. (2008). Evaluative concerns and personal standards perfectionism: Self-esteem as a mediator and moderator of relations with personal and academic needs and estimated GPA. Current Psychology, 27, 29–61. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Buri, J. R. (1991). Parental authority questionnaire. Journal of Personality Assessment, 57, 110–119. Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO personality inventory (NEO PI-R) and NEO five-factor inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa: Psychological Assessment Resources. Craddock, A. E., Church, W., & Sands, A. (2009). Family of origin characteristics as predictors of perfectionism. Australian Journal of Psychology, 61(3), 136–144. Cruce, S. E., Pashak, T. J., Handal, P. J., Munz, D. C., & Gfeller, J. D. (2012). Conscientious perfectionism, self-evaluative perfectionism, and the five-factor model of personality traits. Personality and Individual Differences, 53(3), 268–273. Dunkley, D. M., Blankstein, K. R., & Flett, G. L. (1997). Specific cognitive-personality vulnerability styles in depression and the five-factor model of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 23, 1041–1053. Dunkley, D. M., Blankstein, K. R., Masheb, R. M., & Grilo, C. M. (2006a). Personal standards and evaluative concerns dimensions of ‘clinical’ perfectionism: A reply to Shafran et al. (2002, 2003) and Hewitt et al. (2003). Behaviour Research and Therapy, 44, 63–84. Dunkley, D. M., Blankstein, K. R., Zuroff, D. C., Lecce, S., & Hui, D. (2006b). Self-critical and personal standards factors of perfectionism located within the five-factor model of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 409–420. Dunkley, D. M., Blankstein, K. R., & Berg, J. (2012). Perfectionism dimensions and the five-factor model of personality. European Journal of Personality, 26, 233–244.

Curr Psychol Egan, S. J., Piek, J. P., & Dyck, M. J. (2015). Positive and negative perfectionism and the big five personality factors. Behaviour Change, 32(2), 104–113. Ehnvall, A., Parker, G., Hadzi-Pavlovic, D., & Malhi, G. (2008). Perception of rejecting and neglectful parenting in childhood relates to lifetime suicide attempts for females – but not for males. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 117, 50–56. https://doi.org/10.1111/j. 1600-0447.2007.01124.x Flett, G. L., & Hewitt, P. L. (Eds.). (2002). Perfectionism: Theory, research and treatment. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Flett, G. L., Hewitt, P. L., Oliver, J. M., & Macdonald, S. (2002). Perfectionism in children and their parents: A developmental analysis. In G. L. Flett & P. L. Hewitt (Eds.), Perfectionism: Theory, research, and treatment (pp. 89–132). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi.org/c9wc3b Frost, R. O., Marten, P., Lahart, C. M., & Rosenblate, R. (1990). The dimensions of perfectionism. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 4, 449–468. Hamachek, D. E. (1978). Psychodynamics of normal and neurotic perfectionism. Psychology: A Journal of Human Behavior, 15, 27–33. Hart, C. H., Newell, L. D., & Olsen, S. (2003). Parenting skills and socialcommunicative competence in childhood. In J. O. Greene & B. R. Burleson (Eds.), Handbook of communication and social interaction skills (pp. 753–797). Mahwah: Erlbaum. Hewitt, P. L., & Flett, G. L. (1991). Perfectionism in the self and social contexts: Conceptualization, assessment, and association with psychopathology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 456–470. Hewitt, P. L., & Flett, G. L. (2007). When does conscientiousness become perfectionism? Current Psychiatry, 6(7), 49–60. Hibbard, D. R., & Buhrmester, D. (2010). Competitiveness, gender, and adjustment among adolescents. Sex Roles, 63(5–6), 412–424. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9809-z Hibbard, D. R., & Walton, G. E. (2012). Where does perfectionism come from? A qualitative investigation of perfectionists and nonperfectionists. Social Behavior and Personality, 40(7), 1121– 1122. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2012.40.7.1121 Hibbard, D. R., & Walton, G. E. (2014). Exploring the development of perfectionism: The influence of parenting style and gender. Social Behavior and Personality, 42(2), 269–278. https://doi.org/10.2224/ sbp.2014.42.2.269 Hill, R. W., McIntire, K., & Bacharach, V. R. (1997). Perfectionism and the big five factors. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 12(1), 257–270. Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage. John, O. P., Donahue, E. M., & Kentle, R. L. (1991). The big five inventory–versions 4a and 54. Berkeley: University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Personality and Social Research.

Kawamura, K. Y., Frost, R. O., & Harmatz, M. G. (2002). The relationship of perceived parenting styles to perfectionism. Personality and Individual Differences, 32(2), 317–327. 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. doi.org/b97 Maccoby, E. E., & Martin, J. A. (1983). Socialization in the context of the family: Parent-child interaction. In E. M. Hetherington (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Socialization, personality, and social development (Vol. 4, pp. 1–101). New York: Wiley. Miller, A. L., Lambert, A. D., & Speirs Neumeister, K. L. (2012). Parenting style, perfectionism, and creativity in high-ability and high-achieving young adults. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 35, 344–365. doi.org/qr8 Mize, J., & Pettit, G. S. (1997). Mothers’ social coaching, mother-child relationship style, and children’s peer competence: Is the medium the message? Child Development, 68, 312–323. doi.org/czstk2 Mobley, M., Slaney, R. B., & Rice, K. G. (2005). Cultural validity of the almost perfect scale – Revised for African American College students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(4), 629–639. Peabody, D. (1985). National characteristics. New York: Cambridge University Press. Schmitt, D. P., Allik, J., McCrae, R. R., & Benet-Martinez, V. (2007). The geographic distributions of the big five personality traits: Patterns and profiles of human self-description across 56 nations. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 38(2), 173–212. Shafaie, S., Mayers, G., Al-Maadadi, F. Y., Coughlin, C., & Wooldridge, D. G. (2014). Females’ perception of the role of fathers in caring for children. International Journal of Education and Social Science, 1(3), 20–31. Shwalb, D. W., Shwalb, B. J., & Lamb, M. E. (2013). Fathers in cultural context. New York: Routledge. Smith, M. M., Saklofske, D. H., Yan, G., & Sherry, S. B. (2017). Does perfectionism predict depression, anxiety, stress, and life satisfaction after controlling for neuroticism? A study of Canadian and Chinese undergraduates. Journal of Individual Differences, 38(2), 63–70. Soto, C. J., & John, O. P. (2009). Ten facet scales for the Big Five Inventory: Convergence with NEO PI-R facets, self–peer agreement, and discriminant validity. Journal of Research in Personality, 43(1), 84–90. Thompson, A., Hollis, C., & Richards, D. (2003). Authoritarian parenting attitudes as a risk for conduct problems: Results from a British national cohort study. European Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 12, 84–91. doi.org/c66gg3 Ulu, I. P., & Tezer, E. (2010). Adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism, adult attachment, and big five personality traits. Journal of Psychology, 144(4), 327–340. Zuroff, D. C. (1994). Depressive personality styles and the fivefactor model of personality. Journal of Personality Assessment, 63(3), 453–472.