T. C.
FEN-
MALTEPE FEF JOURNAL
Fen-
YAYIN KURULU / EDITORIAL BOARD
YAY -IN-CHIEF
/ EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS Prof. Dr. Bahattin
Prof. Dr. Sevil ATAUZ Prof. Dr.
Prof. Dr. Zekiye KUTLUSOY
/SECRETARY
http://fef.maltepe.edu.tr fefdergi@maltepe.edu.tr
Tel. (+90216) 626 1050 / 2240 / 2243 Fax (+90216) 626 1113
/Correspondence Address Fen-
Fen-
-
: 2016
I S S N : 1 30 3 - 3 1 1 5 -
aittir.
Dergimiz TUBITAK-
All the responbilities for the content of their articles belong to the authors.
Bu dergi EBSCOHost Veri T
(Akademik u it
Prof. Dr. Erdal Cengiz
Maltepe
Tuebingen Universitesi, Almanya
Prof. Dr. Felix Koerner
Prof. Dr. Maija Kule University of Latvia, Letonya
Prof. Dr. Zekiye Kutlusoy Prof. Dr. Mircea Dumitru
Prof. Dr. Oktik
Prof. Dr. Ayhan Sol
Zaporozhye National University, Ukrayna
Sa
Sosyoloji
Prof
DTCF
tku Prof
Vural
itesi Felsefe Psikoloji
man
b Y
zer
Yrd.
Maltepe
- r
Advisory Board can change according to the context interms of our blind- review principle.
-
http://fef.maltepe.edu.tr/fakulte/icindekiler- ozetler
EDITORIAL PREFACE
In this issue (2015/1+2) of Maltepe University FEF Journal, six articles and a book review are included concerning topics of our faculty. The common feature of those articles in the fields of social sciences and humanities is the their way of reconsidering facts, concepts and understandings of reviews by taking advantage of current form of comparative interpretations.
Being published si
EbscoHost. Issues from 2009 on can be accessed at http://fef.maltepe.edu.tr/fakulte/icindekiler-ozetler.
Best regards, On behalf of the Editorial Board/Editor-in-Chief
Winter 2015, Maltepe
DETERMINING EFFECTS OF SELF CONCEPT, EARLY MALADAPTIVE SCHEMAS, PERCEIVED PARENTING STYLES ON
INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS , MA eliftugcecolakoglu@hotmail.com.tr
,
ozdenbademci@hotmail.com KARADAYI figenkaradayi@maltepe.edu.tr
Abstract
It has been aimed, to consider joint role factors on interpersonal relationships and to investigate (1) the role of the level of self-concept, early maladaptive schemas and the perceived parenting styles on determining the style of interpersonal relationships, and (2) possible predominance of interpersonal relationship styles in relation to gender.
The subjects of the research consisted of 325 young adults with an age range of 25-40 years. Evaluation of self-concept, early maladaptive schemas, and perceived parenting styles were based on stepwise regression analyses of the data acquired through the Turkish version of Social Comparison Scale Young Schema Questionnaire-Short Form 3, Interpersonal Style Questionnaire and a personal information questionnaire filled in by the participants . The role of the self-concept, early maladaptive schemas and the perceived parenting styles were found to have determining effects on the style of interpersonal relationships, and also interpersonal relationship styles showed significant differences with respect to gender.
Formalistic/moulding and/or exploiting/abusive styles of paternal parenting and conditioned/success focused and extremely allowing/limitless styles of maternal parenting have very significant determining influence on the style of individual interpersonal relationship forming. Especially impaired autonomy and enmeshment dimensions the former two schemas influence most interpersonal relationship styles.
Key words: Self Concept, early maladaptive schemas, perceived parenting styles, interpersonal
Interpersonal relationships consist of mutual approaches through thoughts, emotions and behaviour at different levels of intimacy between two or more individuals (Plutchik
&Conte 1997). The individual differences in interpersonal relationships are shaped by parameters as self-concept, self-respect, self-esteem, locus of control, schemas, personality, coping with stress, aggressiveness, anger, affection, parenting behaviour, depression, anxiety and psychosomatic disorders (Alkan,
Early life experiences influence the formation of interpersonal relationships (Klein, 1959/1985) and self-concept which is mainly formed after interactions with the primary caregiver and relations formed with the social environment (Ainsworth, 1985; Bartholomew and Horowitz, 1991 ; Bowlby, 1968 ; Burger, 2006; Edkins, 1985; Greenberg and Mitchell, 1983; Hazan
1979 ; Sullivan, 1953).
In the theory developed by Safran and Segal (1990) by combining interpersonal relationships and the cognitive approach, a comprehensive cognitive model based on
behaviour are mechanisms that surface and operate within the process of forming interpersonal relationships. Interpersonal schema concept is structured on knowledge based on the
schemas give rise to unfunctional interpersonal relationships (Derry, 1996). Cognitive interpersonal cycle is formed as a result of this interaction, while the appearance of
interpersonal perceptions (Beck et al., 1979; Mason, Platts ve Tyson, 2005; Muris, 2006;
Nordahl, Holthe and Haugum, 2005; Riso et al., 2006; Young, et al., 2009).
Perceived parenting style is a concept developed by Young et al., (2009) which explains parenting styles through the eyes of the children. The parenting behaviour and the parent-child relationship in the early phase of life have effects, to start with, on the -being in the long term (Maynard & Harding, 2010; Shaffer, 2000), and on social adequacy, academic performance, psychosocial development and behaviour (Barnes & Farrel, 1992; Brown et al.,2009 ; Steinberg, Lamborn & Darling, (1994) and predictive significance in the self-perception (Hopkins and Klein, 1993; Singer and Weinstein, 2000).
individual in dialog -
concept, that the individual develops self-perceptions through the perceptions of the individual by others (Smith and Mackie, 2007). Festinger (1954) however, in his Social Comparison Theory has proposed a different approach to self-perception by proposing that individuals develop their behaviour and attitudes by making comparisons of their selves with those of others. Following studies support the importance of self-comparisons in the development of self-concept (Lodi-Smith and Roberts, 2010 ; McCombs and Marzano, 1990 ; Smith, E. R. and Mackie, D. M. 2007; Taylor, Peplau and Sears, 2006).
-
consisting of the individuals past experiences that guides the knowledge related to self throughout the individuals social life, such that, when individuals encounter situations relevant to their past schemas, they are observed to respond, process the situation and predict its future faster (Bargh, 1982; Kuiper and Rogers, 1979; Markus, 1977; Rogers, Kuiper and Kirker,
1977).
-
individual cognitive process (Markus and Zajong 1985). Robak -
-perception is variable, and that individuals can develop different structures of self-perception in time (Baumeister, 1998 ; Fazio, Effrein and Falender, 1981; Schlenker 1994). Self-perception determines psychological well-being in clinical, social, developmental and consultative respects (Leary, Terdal, Ellen and Downs, 1995) and that there are two dominant viewpoints in this respect. One view point asserts that self-
1999; Oyserman, 2001; Tatar, 2006; Watkins et al., 1998). The other view point, however, argues that basically self-perception is distorted, that it is more positive and serves the individual directly (John and Robins, 1994).
Research on early maladaptive schemas considers its relationship with different factors and different groups. A study investigates activation patterns of maladaptive schemas demonstrates that, patients with OCD, most of the early maladaptive schemas including social isolation, vulnerability and pessimism, are prominently activated (Atalay, Atalay, Karahan, 08). Harris and Curtin (2002) inquire cognitive models of depression and propose that negative schemas contribute to depressive symptoms. Another Maladaptive schemas study also offers maladaptive schemas for prediction of depression (Fouladi, 2015).
Research on the styles of interpersonal relationships has demonstrated that many factors are effective in explaining the relationship styles in adulthood and adolescence. Alkan (2008) studied relationship of sexual function disorders, anger and self-perception with
hasized the -perception and psychosomatic disorders; Kaya (2010), studied the relationship of early maladaptive schemas influence of self-perception, anger and
role of self-perception, anger and depression on interpersonal relationships;
aimed to investigate the role of self-perception, interpersonal style, and anger in the context of stress in patients with physical illnesses. Uzun (2008), has worked on the connection between social life and interpersonal relationships. Studies carried out in Turkey have shown that groups diagnosed with psychosomatic disorders, sexual function disorders, depression and anxiety disorders form negative relationships (Alkan, 2008 ;
.
Lombardo and Wood (1979) concluded in a study with psychology students that those who opened themselves warmly to others enjoyed the greatest satisfaction in interpersonal relationships. Sensitivity to interpersonal relationships among university students was found to be associated with self-respect, academic success and depression (McCabe, Blankstein and Mills 1999). Also, Schutte et al., (2001) concluded that individuals formed closer and more affectionate relationships. Similarly, interpersonal relationships were better formed as the emotional intelligence and the desire to succeed increased among university students (Afolabi, Okediji and Ogunmwonyi, 2009; Corsano, Majorano and Champretavy, 2006; Lindberg and Swanberg, 2006).
Research has revealed that the association between gender, attachment and the quality and functioning of intimate relationships is complex. The study examined the relationship between
of past relationship. When men and women with the same attachment styles were compared in this variable, the only significant differences were found between dismissing men and women with the latter reporting fewer partners (Monteoliva, Garcia, Calvo, 2012).
(2011), studied the role of interpersonal relationship styles, gender roles, social support and hopelessness in predicting the tendency to commit suicide in men and women. The analyses revealed that the effect of gender roles on suicide probability was significant along with interpersonal relationship styles and perceived social support. Having low income level, having inhibited relationship style but not using nurturing style, lack of (or insufficient) friend and family support, and hopelessness are found to be significant factors in increasing suicide probability in men. Another study inquired the role of interpersonal relationships on hardiness
Examination of literature has shown that there are plenty of studies which try to discover role of different factors on explaining interpersonal relationships. However consideration of combined influence of self-perception, parental styles and early maladaptive schemas on interpersonal styles the young adults have not been found although they may be studied separately. Also studies were focused more on children (Moore & Aubrey, 2007), clinical conditions (Yoo and Park, 2014) and on normal groups (Lewandowsky, Nardone& Raines, 2010). Therefore, the present study tries to combine the role of the early influences and self- concept on the interpersonal relationships of the young adults.
Interpersonal relationships are formed with greater intensity within the 25-40 year age
steps to establish a life style and assume responsibility for the future (Shaffer, 2000). In general research does not cover the predictive role of, perception of parenting styles or self-concept. Interpersonal styles have been inquired in relation to other factors or it has been taken as independent variable and searched for its impact on other factors. In some studies the role of self-concept, early schemas or parental styles were considered separately. Present study aims to combine the role of the early schemas, parenting styles and self-concept on interpersonal relationship. Those concepts considered to be related to the early phase of life which is thought to have a determining effect on interpersonal relationships of the university students. The study also aims to examine the associations between self-perception and interpersonal relationships of university students. In addition, the role of gender on the interpersonal relationships of the participants has been investigated in the study presented here. According to literature, there are limited studies -perception on interpersonal relationships of normal population. Hence, the hypothesis put to test in this paper are firstly, the nature of the early maladaptive schemas and the perceived parenting styles should predict interpersonal relationships. Secondly, the level of self-perception is associated to interpersonal relationships. Thirdly, the changes in interpersonal relationship according to gender is another inquiry in the study.
Methods Participants
The sampling for this research was purpose-oriented and formed by the snowball sampling technique and on a volunteering basis by the distribution of the experimental conditions by hand or through the internet. A total of 325 young adults of 25-40 years of age
(average age 29.75; standard deviation 3.32), from ten different towns of Turkey. Of the participants 181 (55.7%) were females and 144 (44.3%) were males; 239 (73.54%) were single and 86 (26.46%) were married. Educational demographics of the participants consisted of 2 (0.6%) primary school, 26 (8.0%) senior high school , 243 (73.85%)
Materials
For assessing the self concept, early maladaptive schemas, perceived parenting styles and interpersonal relationship styles of the participants, Turkish Version of Social Comparison Scale (TR-SCS), Young Schema Questionnaire - Short Form 3 (YSQ-SF-3), Perceived Parenting Styles Scale (PPS), Interpersonal Style Questionnaire (ISQ) and personal information questionnaire (PIQ) were used.
In the Personal Information Form filled in by the participants demographic parameters of age, gender, profession, marital status and educational level have been included. However, as the participants were ll in young adulthood period of life and a large majority had university education, the age and education parameters were not included in the classification of the results.
Turkish Version of Social Comparison Scale (TR-SCS): Social Comparison Scale was originally developed by Gilbert, Allan and Trent (1991). The Turkish Version of the rating
Alkan, 2008). The Cronbach Alpha reliability coefficient of the Turkish version of the scale
repeat - 6 likert type points evaluation over 18 two-pole clauses. The scale aims at self-perceptions of the individual when comparing himself/herself in certain areas and dimensions. High score
points indicated positive self-schemas and low points indicated negative self-schemas which have formed the basis of assessing the self-perception level of the participants, the total points scale being 33-
Young Schema Questionnaire - Short Form 3 (YSQ-SF-3): Originally designed to identify early maladaptive schemas, the questionnaire consisted of 205 clauses to cover 16 schemas. As this form is long, the short form consisting of 15 schemas and 75 clauses has been designed, to which subsequently three more schemas, namely: Approval-Seeking/Recognition-Seeking, Negativity/Pessimism, and Punitiveness have been added, whereby the 90-clause short form has bility study of the Turkish version was carried out over 1071 participants by
namely, Disconnection/rejection, Impaired autonomy/performance, Impaired limits, Other- directness, Overvigilence/inhibition , and within these domains 14 schemas as abandonment / instability, emotional deprivation , defectiveness/shame, social isolation/ alienation, enmeshment / undeveloped self, failure to achieve, vulnerability to harm and illness, insufficient self- control/ self-discipline, self-sacrifice, approval seeking / recognition seeking , negativity/
pessimism, emotional inhibition, unrelenting standards/ hypercriticalness, and punitiveness have been identified.
Response scoring is based on 1 (completely wrong) 6 (completely correct) Likert type self- =.63.-80 for the schema domains -.81 for the schema dimensions. The test-repeat test reliability varies in the range r = .66-.83 (p<.01) ,for the schema domains, and r=.66-.82 ( p<.01) for the schema dimensions.
Perceived Parenting Styles Scale (PPSS): Originally developed by Young in 1994, the scale is designed to identify the behaviours of parents that are believed to form the basis of the early maladaptive schemas. It has two parts PPSS-M and PPSS-P for rating, respectively, the maternal and paternal parenting styles. The participant is to select between 1(completely wrong) 6 (completely right) Likert type of self-rating scale according to the description in the clauses of the parenting behaviour of his mother or father. Clauses with high points indicate the negative behaviour of the parent underlying the early maladaptive schemas. The original form of the scale was tested by Sheffield et al., (2005) with university students, and the 37-clause shortened form was demonstrated to be valid and reliable at an applicable and acceptable level. In this short form, parenting behaviours are described as emotionally depriving, extremely protective, belittling, perfectionist, pessimistic/fearful, controlling, emotionally inhibited, punitive and conditioned /narcissistic. The internal consistency -.92 and the test-repeat test reliability -.85. The validity-reliability study of the scale was
and, it was concluded that the 10-factor and 72-clause structure comprising the forms for mothers and fathers was found to be suitable to work with. At the end of the analysis of factors, formalistic/moulding conditional/success focused, belittling/fault finding, extremely allowing/limitless, depriving of emotional satisfaction, pessimistic/anxious, exploiting/abusive, punitive, extremely protective/worrying, and the resistant to change/inhibiting emotions styles were identified. The internal consistency coefficient for
mothering st - -.89.
Interpersonal Style Questionnaire (ISQ) :
.67. The questionnaire consists of 60 clauses and 1-5 Likert type rating scale and is used to assess the interpersonal communication styles. The lowest score and the highest scores are 60 and 300, respectively. The clauses consist of adverse expressions related to interpersonal styles, high scores indicate negative and low scores indicate positive styles. The analyses of factors have identified that there are six subscales standing for dominant style, angry style, insensitive/evading feelings style, manipulative style, evasive style and derisive style.
Data Analysis
Descriptive analyses were used to give the mean values and standart deviations of the data yielded by the materials used in the study. In addition hiearachical maltiple regression analysis was used to predict the impact of the independent variables (self concept, early maladaptive schemas, perceived parenting styles and gender) on the dependent variable (interpersonal relationship of young adults). T-test was used to estimate the variation in the scores for the total and the subscales of interpersonal relationship styles in the groups with low and high self- perception. Tables showing hierarchical multiple regression analysis results contain only those independent variables with significant predictive significance, but not the others.
Scores obtained from the TR-SCS, YSQ-SF-3, total YPPS and the YPPS-M and YPPS-P forms, and ISQ were processed through the completing statistical methods to estimate mean,
standard deviations and frequency. Mann- s T Test were used for
the intergroup comparisons of TR-SCS data with respect to the gender parameter. Multiphase regression analyses were carried out for each total and subscale of PPSS-P, PPSS-M, YSQ-SF-3 in order to identify the ISQ.
Results
Mean values and standart deviations of the the total and subscale scores obtained from the TR-SCS, YSQ-SF-3, total YPPS and the YPPS-M and YPPS-P forms and ISQ were given below in tables 1-3.
Table 1: Mean and Std. Deviation of the Scores of the Participants over the YSQ-SF-3 Schema Domains and Schema Dimensions
N=325 v.
Young Schema Scale Total Score Discontinuity/Rejection Schema Domain
Abandonment dimesion
Emotional Deprivation dimension
Defectiveness dimension Social Isolation dimension Impaired Autonomy Schema Domain
Vulnerability to harm and illness dimension
Enmeshment /undeveloped self dimension
Failure to achieve dimension Impaired limits Schema Domain
Insufficient self-control/self- discipline dimension
Other Directness Schema Domain Self Sacrifice dimension
Approval seeking dimension Overvigilance/inhibition Schema Domain
Negativity/pessimism dimension
Emotional inhibition dimension Unrelenting standards dimension Punitiveness dimension
Table 2: Mean and Std. Dev. of the Scores obtained by the Participants on the PPSS (PPSS-M, PPSS-P) and the Subscales
N=325 v.
Conditioned/success focused Belittling/fault finding
Depriving of emotional satisfaction
Exploiting/abusive
Extremely protective/Worrying Conditioned/success
Extremely allowing/limitless Pessimistic/anxious
Punitive
Resistant to change/inhibiting
emotions 44
Formalistic/Moulding Belittling/fault finding
Depriving of emotional satisfaction
Exploiting/abusive
Extremely protective/Worrying Conditioned/success focused Extreme allowance/limitless Pessimistic/anxious
Punitive
Resistant to change/inhibiting emotions
Table 3: Mean and Std. Dev. Scores of the Participants on the ISQ Scales and Subscales
N=325 M
d.Dev.S Interpersonal Relations Style Total
score 5.93
Dominant style
.41
Evasive style 95
Angry style 30
Insensitive/evading feelings
style 89
Manipulative style 21
Derisive style 28
Differences in total scores and subscales of ISQ according to lower and higher levels of TR-SCS were examined with T- test analysis. Also difference in total scores and subscales of in ISQ according to gender were examined. Differences in the mean values of total and subscales scores of ISQ scores on the basis gender are given in table 4.
Respect to Gender
N=325 Female
(N=181)
Male (N=144)
.Dev. .Dev. z/t P
Score for the Total of
ISQ 04 69
- 3.614
a
0.001*
* + Dominant style
9
- 4.235
a
0.001*
*
+ Evasive style
- 2.012
a 0.044*
++ Angry style
- 0.555
b 0.579
++
Insensitive/evadin g feelings style
- 4.235
b
0.001*
* ++Manipulative
style
- 4.202
b
0.001*
*
+ Derisive style
- 3.526
a
0.001*
* +Mann-Whitney U ++ Student t test, az Value bt Value, *p<0.05
**p<0.01
As it has been shown in Table 4, when the total scores of the female and male participants on the Interpersonal Styles Scale (ISQ) and the scores on the individual subscales Dominant style, Evasive style, Insensitive/evading feelings style, Manipulative style and Derisive style are compared, the scores of the male participants are higher than the respective scores of the females and the observed differences being statistically very significant (p<0.01). However, despite the higher male score on the Angry style subscale, the
Differences in the mean values of total and subscale sores of ISQ according to lower and higher levels of TR-SCS are presented in Tables 5.
the basis of the Self-Perception Scores on TR-SCS
N=325
Low Self Perception (N=158)
High Self Perception (N=167)
ev. .Dev. z/t P
++ Score for the
Total of ISQ 1 31
3.405
b 0.0
01**
+ Dominant style
9
- 2.548
a
0.0 11*
+ Evasive style
- 3.960
a
0.0 01**
++ Angry style 2.887
b 0.0
04**
++
Insensitive/evadi ng feelings style
1.475
b 0.1
41
++Manipulative style
4.473
b 0.0
01**
+Derisive style
- 1.759
a
0.0 79
+Mann-Whitney U ++ Student t test, az Value bt Value, *p<0.05
**p<0.01
s subscales Dominant style, Evasive style, Angry style and Manipulative style on the basis of having low self-perception or high self-perception as assessed on the TR-SCS have revealed statistically significant differences (p<0.01). The scores of the subgroup with low
self-perception were higher than the respective scores of the subgroup with high self- perception.
The results of the multiphase regression analyses on the predictivity of the early maladaptive schemas (YSQ -SF-3) and the Parenting styles (PPSS-M and PPSS-Pand social comparison scale TR-SCS on the interpersonal relationship styles, ISQ are presented in Table 6.
Tablo 6: Multiphase Regression Analyses on the Dependent Variables tested for Predictivity on the Styles of Interpersonal Relationships
Predicted Predictor R R2 Beta t Df F P
YSQ-SF-3
Total 0.603 0.364 0.887 8.701 0.001**
PPSS-P Formalisti c/
Moulding
0.637 0.406 0.165 3.555 0.001**
PPSS-M Condition ed/Success -focused
0.651 0.424 0.132 3.004 0.003**
YSQ-SF-3 Self Sacrifice
0.666 0.443 -
0.227 -4.306 0.001**
YSQ-SF-3 Impaired Autonomy
0.680 0.463 -
0.519 -3.921 0.001**
PPSS-M Extreme allowance
0.688 0.474 0.133 2.821 0.005**
PPSS-P Exploiting / Abusive
0.694 0.481 -
0.088 -2.022 0.044*
YSQ-SF-3 Enmeshm ent
0.698 0.487 0.204 1.968 0.050*
* **
1) Scores on ISQ Dominant style subscale are predicted [(F (6,318)=36.569, p<0.01)] by (a) total scores of YSQ-SF-3, (b)PPSS-P Conditioned/success focused parenting, (c) YSQ-SF-3 Self Sacrifice dimension and Impaired Autonomy dimension, (d) PPSS-M Conditioned/moulding parenting and Extreme allowance/limitless parenting. And, these variables explain 40.8% of the total varience.
2) Scores on ISQ Evasive style subscale are predicted [(F(5,319)=37.054, p<0.01)] by (a) total scores on YSQ-SF-3, (b) YSQ-SF -3 Self Sacrifice dimension and Impaired Autonomy dimension, (c) total scores on TR-SRS. And, these variables explain 36.7% of the total variance.
3) Scores on ISQ Angry style subscale are predicted [(F(5,319)=374.798, p<0.01)]; by scores on (a) PPSS-P Conditioned/moulding parenting , (b) YSQ-SF-3 Insufficient self-control/self- discipline dimension, (c) PPSS-M Conditioned/moulding, (d) YSQ-SF-3 social isolation and Unrelenting standards dimensions. And, these variables explain 35.3% of the total variance.
4) The scores on the ISQ Insensitive/evading feelings style are predicted [(F(6,318)=28.768, p<0.01)] by the scores on (a) YSQ-SF-3 Enmeshment /undeveloped self and emotional inhibition dimensions, (b) PPSS-P Extremely protective/Worrying parenting, (c) YSQ-SF-3 Impaired Autonomy Schema Domain and the Emotional Deprivation dimension,(d) PPSS-M Conditioned/success focused parenting. And, these variables explain 35.2% of the total variance.
5) The scores on ISQ Manipulative style are predicted [(F(8,316)=30.573, p<0.01)] by the scores on (a) YSQ-SF-3 Approval seeking dimension, (b)PPSS-P Conditioned/success focused parenting, (c) PPSS-M Extreme allowance/limitless parenting, (d) PPSS-P Exploiting/abusive parenting, (e) YSQ-SF-3 Social Isolation dimension, (f) PPSS-M Conditioned/success
focused and Depriving of emotional satisfaction parenting, and (g) and the total and subscale scores on TR-SCS. And, these variables explain 43.6% of the total variance.
6) The scores on ISQ Derisive style are predicted [(F(4,320)=22.225, p<0.01)] by (a)the scores on YSQ -SF-3 Impaired limits Schema Domain, (b) the total scores on YSQ-SF-3, scores on (c) YSQ-SF-3 Vulnerability to harm and illness dimension, (d) PPSS-M Conditioned/success focused parenting. And, these variables explain 21.7% of the total varience.
7) On the basis of the the Multiphase Regression analyses, ISQ total scores are predicted [(F(8,316)=37.539, p<0.01)] as can be seen on Table 6, by (a) total scores of YSQ-SF-3, (b) PPSS-P Formalistic/Moulding parenting, (c) PPSS-M Conditioned/Success focused parenting, (d) YSQ-SF-3 Self Sacrifice dimension, (e) YSQ-SF-3Impaired Autonomy domain, (f) YSQ- SF-3 Vulnerability to harm and illness dimension, PPSS-M Extreme allowance /Limitless parenting, (g) PPSS-P Exploiting/Abusive parenting, (h) YSQ-SF-3 Enmeshment/undeveloped self-dimension. Hence these variables explain 48.7% of the variance.
Discussion
This study has aimed to investigate the determining effects of early maladaptive schemas and the perceived parenting styles and the self-concept measured by social comparison styles on their interpersonal relationships styles of young adults. Differences in the styles of interpersonal relationships according to the level of self-concept have also been inquired. Alongside these investigations, differences on the basis of gender in the styles of interpersonal relationships have also been observed, such that male participants have scored higher points than the females on the dominant, evasive, insensitive and manipulative styles of interpersonal relationship formation.
10; Alkan,
higher empathy forming capacity compared to men. Women have found to have higher empathetic tendencies, respectful and open relationship styles compared to men. Self-centred,
interpersonal relationships the female participants also revealed a more positive/nutritional approach than the male participants.
Even although different measures of interpersonal styles do not cover similar subscales they imply similar dominant self-centred styles for men. On the contrary women have more open empathetic styles in relationships. In this study only the Angry interpersonal style did not show
level of education where gender differences may be expected to decrease.
Those participants with low self-perception also scored higher than those with high self- perception in the dominant, evasive, angry, and manipulative styles of relationship formation.
This increase in the manipulative style may be associated with the wish of the individuals with low self-perception to present themselves better to others or may reflect their attempts to compensate their negative self-perceptions by manipulative behaviour with others, because low level of self-perception is associated with low levels of self-confidence and satisfaction with
when the maternal parenting is extremely allowing, conditioned/success focused and emotionally satisfying, with the paternal parenting not being exploiting/abusive, an individual with low self- perception and socially self-rejecting can develop a manipulative style of relationship which is characterised by inconsistency of behaviour and interfering approaches. Individuals brought up
under extremely allowing and indifferent style of parenting with limitless freedom can be treating those in their environment and their relationships according to their own wishes and decisions by adopting the manipulative style. On the other hand, the individual brought up under conditioned/success focused parenting, with the awareness that parental approval depends on personal success, can assume the manipulative style to be accepted in their social environment and their relationships. There are two lines of thought on the determining influence of the exploiting/abusive style of parenting on the use of the manipulative style in relationships. When the parent exploits the child physically or emotionally or deprives the child from emotional satisfaction a negative effect on the use of the manipulative style by the child has been observed
background that has failed to meet their emotional, physical and psychological needs may isolate themselves from their social environment to avoid similarly exploiting approaches because they may evaluate their social environment and people in it threatening and dangerous. But, to the contrary, individuals from similar backgrounds can adopt the manipulative style to compensate for their emotional deprivation or to get satisfaction through abusive approaches in their relationships.
Other research results also support that poisonous reletionhips style were higher among the adolescents who were from the
in the adolescents who were from democratic families. If it is compared, the adolescents whose parents always have adjustable communication use feeding relation style more than the
others.
The perceived parenting styles and the early maladaptive schemas of individuals have been observed to influence every style of personal interrelationship, whether dominant, evasive,
angry, insensitive, manipulative or derisive; and taken together they have nearly 50%
determinative influence on the style of relationship formation. Since studies combining the role of the three factors on interpersonal relationship have not been found comparisons of the joint influence of results were not possible. However 50% determinative role of the independent variables on the interpersonal styles of the young adults in the present study reveals the importance of the combined role of the early schemas, parental styles and self-perception in determining interpersonal styles. It has been demonstrated here that putting autonomy and personal needs in the foreground and experiencing formalistic/moulding and/or extremely allowing/limitless style of maternal parenting and conditioned /success focused style of paternal parenting can give rise to the use of dominant style and the imperative mode in personal relationships, which can be interpreted as attempts to establish superiority.
Individuals with impaired autonomy schema tend to dissociate from the parents and develop self-confidence, while on the other hand those individuals with impaired autonomy schema may have self-sacrifice schema and place the demands of others in the foreground by postponing their own needs (Young et al., 2009; Kaya, 2010). A negative relationship has been observed in this study between the interpersonal relationship and both the dominant style of relationship formation and impaired autonomy and self-sacrifice schemas. Also, extremely allowing/limitless style of parenting as well as the formalistic/moulding type of restrictive parenting have been observed to give rise to adverse type of interpersonal relationships.
Tending to the evasive style of relationships has been found here to be determined by an increase in self-sacrifice schema and increasing impaired autonomy together with a formalistic/moulding type of parenting. Maternal formalistic/moulding style of parenting causes the individual to feel under continuous control and to struggle for perfection (Young et
al., 2009). Such individuals may anticipate control by others as well and, given the feelings of inadequacy in achieving perfection, they may put on an evasive style in their interpersonal relationships. A determining role of the paternal parenting has not been demonstrated on the evasive style of interpersonal relationship which may be attributed to the culturally more distant/withholding stance of a father and the more determining influence of the mother on the children (Cenkseven-onder, 2012).
It has been demonstrated in the results that growing up with overprotective anxious fathers and conditioned/success focused mothers, individuals cannot dissociate from contemporaries to move independently, and with increasing lack of feelings or inhibition of emotions they exhibit the evasive style of personal relationships. Not much activation of the impaired autonomy and inhibited emotions schemas can orient the individual to getting concerned with other aspects of life, such as school, career, etc., and leave emotional satisfaction aside (Young et al., 2009). It is also thought that the passive individuals feeling unprotected, believing that their emotional needs cannot be met and that expressing emotions to others would be harmful may resort to the insensitive/evading feelings style in forming relationships.
Lowered sufficiency in self-control and self-discipline and increased social rejection and unrelenting standards/overcriticalness together with a formalistic/moulding style of parenting resulted in accentuation of the angry style of relationship, which is characterised by weak anger control and the use of offensive and derisory expressions. It becomes evident also in the other studies that such individuals are raised by limitation of freedom and while decisi
feeling of being hindered that gives rise to anger (Budak, 2005) reflected in an angry style of forming relationships. Challenged to achieve perfection and the intolerance for hindrance together with social isolation would also cause feelings of anger to the self as well as the social environment. Inability to control anger would result in the use of the angry style in
In the results the derisive style is prominent in individuals who experience conditioned/success focused maternal parenting and have low autonomy but high physical and psychological durability. Individuals exposed to conditioned/success focused parenting can only be accepted by these parents on proving successful and failure to do so can lead them to adopt a derisory attitude to compensate for their lack of success or having attained success they may be boastful and belittling others in their social environment in the process of getting themselves accepted. The schemas most likely to lead to the derisive style of personal ship formation are impaired limits and insufficient self-control/self-discipline dimension and can be interpreted as selfishness and being spoilt; and also vulnerability to harm and illness which is the fear of facing a calamity at any time (Young et al., 2009). The impaired limits domain of schemas harbours the assuming rights/grandness schema of the individual who always believes to be right and superior to others which may underlie the derisive style of relationships with others (Thimm, 2012).
Conclusion
As it has been assumed by the hypothesis of this research firstly the nature of the early maladaptive schemas and the perceived parenting styles have predicted interpersonal relationships of the young adults. Secondly, the level of self-perception has been also found to create significant differences in the styles of interpersonal relationships. Thirdly, the role of
gender found to bring differences in interpersonal relationships.
Taking together the total of the interpersonal relationship styles discussed above it can be concluded that formalistic/moulding and/or exploiting/abusive styles of paternal parenting and conditioned/success focused and extremely allowing/limitless styles of maternal parenting have very significant determining influence on the style of individual interpersonal relationship forming. Determination by the latter two styles of parenting on the dominant style of relationship formation draws attention for further investigation. Of the early maladaptive schemas, self- sacrifice, impaired autonomy and enmeshment dimensions also play a significant role in this respect. Especially the former two schemas influence most interpersonal relationship styles and merit further research in these dimensions. Finally, the observation that next to being socially rejected, having high standards owing to formalistic/moulding style of parenting, and lacking self-discipline emerges in the angry style of interpersonal relationship also deserves further attention.
References
Afolabi, O. A., Okediji, A., & Ogunmwonyi, E. (2009). Influence of Emotional Intelligence and Need for Achievement on Interpersonal Realtions and Academic Achievement of
Undergraduate. Educational Research Quarterly, 33(2), 15 29.
Ainsworth, M. (1985). Patterns of Mother-Infant Attachments. Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, 61, 792 812.
Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1969). Object Relations, Dependency and Attachment. Child Development. Vol. 40 Issue 4, p969. 57p.
-10.
Atalay H &
Patients with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder: A Cross-sectional Study. International Journal of Psychiatry in Clinical Practice; 12: 268-79
Bargh, J.A. (1982). Attention and automaticity in the processing of self-relevant information.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43,425-436.
Barnes, G.M., & Farrell, M.P. (1992). Parental support and control as predictors of adolescent drinking, delinquency, and related problem behaviors. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54, 763-776
Bartholomew, K., & Horowitz, L. (1991). Attachment Styles Among Young Adults: A Test of a Four - Category Model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 226-244.
Baumeister, R. F. (1982). The Self. In. D. T. Dilbert, S. T. Fisker, & G. Lindzay (Eds.), The Handbook of Social Pychology: Vol 2 (4th ed., pp. 680 740). Boston: McGraw Hill.
-perception and interpersonal style in
Psychiatry), 22(4), 245-254.
Beck, A. T., Rush, A. J., Shaw, B. F., & Emery, G. (1979). Cognitive Therapy of Depression.
New York: The Guilton Press.
Bowlby, J. (1968). Attachment andLoss, Vol. 1: Attachment. New York: Basic Books.
Bowlby (2013).
Brown, G. L.& Mangelsdorf, S. C., Neff, C., Schoppe Sullivan, S., & Frosch, C. A. (2009).
-Conc
Parenting, and Triadic Family Interaction. Merrill Palmer Quarterly, 55(2), 184 216.
Burger, J. M. (2006).
Carizosa, S., & Poertner, J. (1992) Latin American street children: Problems, programmes and critique. International Social Work, 35, 405 413.
Cenkseven-Onder, F. (2012). Parenting Styles and Life Satisfaction of Turkish Adolescents.
Educational Research and Reviews, v7, 8, n26 p.577-584.
Cole & Cole, S. R (1993). The Development of Children. Freeman and Company, U.S.A.
Cooley, C. (1992). H. Human nature and the social order. New York: Scribner's.
Corsano, P., Majorano, M., & Champretavy, L. (2006). Psychological Well Being in Adolescence: The Contribution of Interpersonal Relations and Experience of Being Alone. Adolescence, 41(162), 341 353.
Derry, S. J.(1996). Cognitive Schema Theory in Constructivist Debate. Educational Psychologist, 31 (3/4), 163-174.
n, Z. (2010). Toplumsal Cinsiyet.
Edkins, W. (1985). Object relations theory. In D. Benner (Ed.), Baker encyclopedia of psychology. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House.
21, 543 551.
Fazio, R. H., Effrein, E. A., & Falender, V. J. (1981). Self-perceptions following social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 232 242.
Festinger, L. (1954). A Theory of Social Comparison Processes. Human Relations, 7, 114 140.
Gao, L.,Wheeler, S. C. & Shiv,B.(2009).'The Shaken Self': Choices as a means of Restoring Self- View Confidence.Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.36, 29-38.
Fouladi M. (2015) Prediction of Depression through Early Maladaptive Schemas,Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences. [Online] 6:1 S1
Gilbert, P., Allan, S. & Goss, K. (1996). Parental Representations, Shame, Interpersonal
Problems and Vulnerability to Psychopathology. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 3(1), 23 34.
Greenberg, J. & Mitchell, S. (1983). Object relations in psychoanalytic theory. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
Harris, A.E and Curtin,L. ( 2002). Parental Perceptions, Early Maladaptive Schemas, and Depressive Symptoms in Young Adults, Volume 26, Issue 3, pp 405-416
Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic Love Conceptualized as an Attachment Process.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 511 524.
N. & . (2011). Ki
, Vol. 22 (1), pp. 17-25.
John, O. P. & Robins, R. W. (1994). Accuracy and bias in self-perception: Individual differences in self-enhancement and the role of narcissism. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 66(1), 206-219.
999) .
Klein, M. (1959/1985). Our adult world and its roots in infancy. In A. D. Colman & M. H.Geller (Eds.). Group relations reader 2 (pp.5-19). Washington, D.C.: A. K. Rice Institute.
Kropp, C (1990). Object relations theory. In R. Hunter (Ed.), Dictionary of Pastoral Care and Counseling. Nashville: Abingdon Press.
Kuiper, N.A., & Rogers, T.B. (1979). Encoding of personal information: Selfother differences.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 499 - 514.
Lewandowsky,G.W.; Nardone, N, 6 Raines, A. J. (2010). The Role of Self-concept Clarity in Relationship Quality.Self and Identity, 9: 416 433, 2010
Lindberg, L., & Swanberg, I. (2006). Well Being of 12 Year Old Children Related to Interpersonal Relations, Health Habits and Mental Distress. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Science, 20, 274 281.
Lincourt, J. M. & Olczak, P.V. (1979). H. S. Sullivan and the phenomenology of human cognition. The International Journal Of Social Psychiatry , Spring; Vol. 25 (1), pp. 10-6.
Lombardo, J. P., & Wood, R. D. (1979). Satisfaction with Interpersonal Relations as a Function of Level of Self Disclosure. The Journal of Psychology, 102, 21 26.
Mahler MS, Pine F, Bergman A (1975) The Psychological Birth of the Human Infant: Symbiosis and Separation. New York, Basic Books.
Main, M. (1990). Cross-cultural studies of attachment organization: Recent studies, chancing methodologies and the concept of conditional strategies. Human Development, 33, 48 61.
Markus, H. R. (1977). Self - Schemata and Processing Information About the Self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 63 78.
Markus, Hazel and Robert B. Zajonc. 1985. "The Cognitive Perspective in Social Psychology."
Pp. 137-230 in The Handbook of Social Psychology, Vol. 1. Third Edition, edited by
Gardner Lindzey and Eliot Aronson. Random House.
Mason, O., Platts, H., & Tyson, M. (2005). Early Maladaptive Schemas and Adult Attachment in a UK Clinical Population Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice, 78, 549 564.
Maynard, M. J., & Harding, S. (2010). Perceived parenting and Psychological Well-Being in UK Ethnic Minority Adolescents. Child: Care, Health and Development, 36(5), 630 638.
McCabe, R. E., Blankstein, K. R., & Mills, J. S. (1999). Interpersonal Sensitivity and Social Problem Solving; Relations with Academic and Social Self Esteem, Depresive Symptoms, and Academic Performance. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 23(6), 587 604.
tting the Self in Self-Regulated
Psychologist, 25, 1, 51-69.
Monteoliva, A., Garcia, J., Calvo, A. (2012). Differences between men and women with a dismissing attachment style regarding their attitudes and behaviour in romantic relationships, International Journal of Psychology, 47 (5), 335 345.
Montgomery, C., Fisk, J. E. & Craig, L. (2008). The Effects of Perceived Parenting Style on the Propensity for Illicit Drug Use: The Importance of Parental Warmth and Control. Drug and Alcohol Review, 27, 640 649.
Moore, T. L. M & Aubrey A. (2007). The Impact of Childhood Psychological Abuse on Adult Interpersonal Conflict
The Role of Early Maladaptive Schemas and Patterns of Interpersonal Behavior. Journal of Emotional Abuse, Volume 7, Issue 2,. pages 75-92
Muris, P. (2006). Maladaptive Schemas in Non-Clinical Adolescents: Relations to Perceived Parental Rearing Behaviours, Big Five Personality Factors and Psychopathological Symptoms. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherap, 13, 405 413.
Nordahl, H. M., Holthe, H., & Haugum, J. A. (2005).Early Maladaptive Schemas in Patients with or without Personality Disorders: Does Schema Modification Predict Symptomatic Relief? Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 12, 142 149.
Oyserman, D. (2001). Self - Concept and Identity. A. Tesser & N. Schwarz (Ed.), Blackwell Handbook of Social Psychology: Intraindividual Processes (s. 499 - 517). Oxford, UK:
Blackwell.
lik Analizi.
Plutchik, R., & Conte, H. R. (Eds.). (1997). Circumplex models of personality andemotions.
Washington, DC, American Psychological Association.
Riso, L. P., Froman, S. E., Raouf, M., Gable, P., Maddux, R. E., S, N. T., Pena, S., Blandino, J.
A., Jacobs, C. H., & Cherry, M. (2006). The Long Term Stability of Early Maladaptive Schemas. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 30(4), 515 529.
Robak, R. W. (1986a). Conceiving the self. Reprint Edition. Krieger.
Robak, R. W. (2001). Self-Definition in Psychotherapy: Is it Time to Revisit Self Perception Theory? North American Journal of Psychology, 3(3), 529 534.
Rosenberg, M. (1989). Self Concept Research: A Historical Overview. Social Forces, 68(1), 34 44.
Robinson, L. C. (2000). Interpersonal Relationship Quality In Young Adulthood: A Gender Analysis. Adolesence, 35(140), 775 784.
Rosenberg, M. 1986a. Conceiving the Self. Reprint Edition. Krieger
Safran, J. D. & Segal, Z. V. (1990). Interpersonal Process in Cognitive Therapy. New York:
Basic Books.
- Short Form 3 in a Turkish Adolescent Sample. Journal of Cognitive and Behavioral Psychotherapies, 11(1), 83-96.
Bilissel- s gerlendirme:
Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 6(11), 253 265.
- (1), 75-84.
Schlenker, B.R., Dluogolecki, D. W. & Doherty, K. (1994). The impact of self-presentations on self-appraisals and behaviour: The power of public commitment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 20-33.
Schutte, N. S., Malouff, J. M., Bobik, C., Coston, T. D., Greeson, C., Jedlicka, C., Rhodes, E., &
Wendorf, G. (2001). Emotional Intelligence and Interpersonal Relations. The Journal of Social Psychology, 141(4), 523 536.
Shaffer, D. ( 2000). Social & Personality Development Brooks & Cole NY
Singer, A. T. B. & Weinstein, R. S. (2000). Differential paretal treatment predicts
achievement and self-perceptions in two cultural contexts. Journal ofFamily Psycholog, 14(3), 491-509.
Social Psychology Psychology Press, pp.95- 140.
Sullivan, H. S. (1953). The interpersonal theory of psychiatry. New York: Norton.
Steinberg L, Lamborn SD, Darling N. (1994). Over-time changes in adjustment and competence among adolescents from authoritative, authoritarian, indulgent, and neglectful families.
Child Development, 65, 754 70.
Stein, K. F. (1995). Schema Model of the Self Concept. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 27(3), 187-193.
ve stres.
Thimm, J.C. (2013).Early maladaptive schemas and interpersonal problems: International Journal of Psychology & Psychological Therapy, 13, 1, 113-124
. kileyen Sosyal
Dergisi, 24, 163 178.
Watkins, D., Akande, A., Fleming, J., Ismail, M., Lefner, K., Regmi, M., Watson, S., Yu., J., Adair, J., Cheng, C., Gerong, A., Mclnerney, D., Mpofu, E., Singh Sengupta, S., &
Wondimu, H. (1998). Cultural Dimensions, Gender, and the Nature of Self - Concept: A Fourteen - Country Study. International Journal of Psychology, 33(1), 17 31.
Vlierberghe, L.V. ; Braet, C. ; .Bosmans, G. ; Rosseel, Y.; Boge, S.(2010). Maladaptive Schemas
Youth. Cognitive Therepy Research. 34, 316-332.
Yoo; G. & Park, H.J.(2014). Early Maladaptive Schemas as Predictors of Interpersonal Orientation and Peer Connectedness In University students.Social Behavior and Personality, 2014,42, 8, 1377-1394
Young, J., Klosko, J. S. & Weishaar, M. E. (2009).
