Loyola University Chicago

Loyola eCommons

Dissertations Theses and Dissertations

2014

The Hidden Costs of Success: A Mixed Methods Approach to

Examining Achievement Pressures in Affluent Youth
Lea Ventura Travers
Loyola University Chicago

Follow this and additional works at: https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_diss

Part of the Clinical Psychology Commons

Recommended Citation
Travers, Lea Ventura, "The Hidden Costs of Success: A Mixed Methods Approach to Examining
Achievement Pressures in Affluent Youth" (2014). Dissertations. 1496.
https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_diss/1496

This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses and Dissertations at Loyola eCommons.
It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Loyola eCommons. For more
information, please contact ecommons@luc.edu.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License.
Copyright © 2014 Lea Ventura Travers
 LOYOLA UNIVERSITY CHICAGO

THE HIDDEN COSTS OF SUCCESS: A MIXED METHODS APPROACH TO

EXAMINING ACHIEVEMENT PRESSURES IN AFFLUENT YOUTH

A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO

THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL

IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

PROGRAM IN CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY

BY

LEA V. TRAVERS

CHICAGO, IL

MAY 2015
Copyright by Lea V. Travers, 2015
All rights reserved.
 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to thank Drs. Amy Bohnert, Maryse Richards, Grayson Holmbeck,

and Catherine Haden for contributing to my work as dissertation committee members.

Their comments and suggestions were invaluable and I greatly appreciate the time they

took to guide me through this process. I would also like to thank Dr. Edin Randall for her

mentorship and collaboration throughout the data collection and dissemination of this

work. Finally, words cannot express my gratitude for the endless support and

encouragement of my husband, Dr. Christopher Travers, and my parents, Drs. Ronnie

Ginsberg and Joel Ventura.

iii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................................. iii

LIST OF TABLES ...............................................................................................................v

LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................... vi

ABSTRACT..................................................................................................................... viii

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION AND REVIEW OF LITERATURE ........................1

Overview ........................................................................................................................1
Adjustment in Affluent Adolescents ..............................................................................2
Parental Perfectionism ...................................................................................................3
Parental Life Satisfaction ...............................................................................................6
Perceived Parental Pressure ...........................................................................................8
Parents’ Future Goals for Their Children ....................................................................10
Parental Involvement ...................................................................................................16
Mediation and Moderation Models Examining Adolescent Adjustment ....................19
Summary of the Present Study.....................................................................................23

CHAPTER TWO: METHOD ............................................................................................25

Participants ...................................................................................................................25
Procedure .....................................................................................................................26
Measures ......................................................................................................................27

CHAPTER THREE: RESULTS ........................................................................................32

Data Preparation...........................................................................................................32
Descriptive Statistics ....................................................................................................36
Linear and Curvilinear Analyses .................................................................................43
Mediation Models ........................................................................................................46
Moderation Models ......................................................................................................48

CHAPTER FOUR: DISCUSSION ....................................................................................63

Relations Between Parenting Variables and Adolescent Adjustment .........................63
Relations Among Parenting Variables .........................................................................67
Examining the Fit of Two Models ...............................................................................70
Limitations and Future Directions ...............................................................................76
Implications and Conclusions ......................................................................................79

REFERENCE LIST ...........................................................................................................81

VITA ..................................................................................................................................91

iv
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Correlations between Caregivers 1 and 2 in Adolescent Ratings of Parental

Involvement .................................................................................................................34

Table 2. Correlations among Types of Parental Involvement as Rated by

Adolescents ..................................................................................................................35

Table 3. Rotated Component Matrix for Principal Components Analysis ........................35

Table 4. Descriptive Information and Correlations among Variables ...............................40

Table 5. Curvilinear Relations between Perceived Parental Pressure and Adolescent

Adjustment ...................................................................................................................43

Table 6. Linear Relations between Aspects of Parental Involvement and Adolescent

Adjustment ...................................................................................................................46

Table 7. Significant Moderation Models ...........................................................................50

Table 8. Relation between Parent LS and Depressive Symptoms, Moderated by

Satisfaction with Involvement .....................................................................................50

Table 9. Relation between Self-Oriented Perfectionism and Anxiety, Moderated by

Perceived Parental Pressure .........................................................................................53

Table 10. Relation between Self-Oriented Perfectionism and SWLS, Moderated by

Parents’ Achievement Goals ........................................................................................55

Table 11. Relation between Self-Oriented Perfectionism and SWLS, Moderated by

Parents’ Fulfillment Goals ...........................................................................................57

Table 12. Relation between Other-Oriented Perfectionism and Depressive

Symptoms, Moderated by Parents’ Fulfillment Goals .................................................58

Table 13. Relation between Self-Oriented Perfectionism and SWLS, Moderated by

Parents’ Achievement Goals ........................................................................................60

Table 14. Relation between Other-Oriented Perfectionism and SWLS, Moderated

by Parents’ Fulfillment Goals ......................................................................................61

Table 15. Nonsignificant Findings .....................................................................................62

v
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Proposed Mediation Model ................................................................................20

Figure 2. Proposed Moderation Model ..............................................................................20

Figure 3. Annual Household Income .................................................................................39

Figure 4. Parents’ Highest Level of Education ..................................................................41

Figure 5. Parental Marital Status .......................................................................................41

Figure 6. Mothers’ Employment Status .............................................................................42

Figure 7. Fathers’ Employment Status...............................................................................42

Figure 8. Household Employment Status ..........................................................................42

Figure 9. Perceived Parental Pressure Predicting Adolescent Depressive Symptoms ......44

Figure 10. Perceived Parental Pressure Predicting Adolescent Anxiety ...........................44

Figure 11. Perceived Parental Pressure Predicting Adolescent Life Satisfaction ..............45

Figure 12. Significant Moderation Models ........................................................................51

Figure 13. Interaction Between Parent Life Satisfaction and Adolescent Satisfaction
With Involvement Predicting Depressive Symptoms ..................................................52

Figure 14. Interaction Between Self-Oriented Perfectionism and Perceived Parental

Pressure Predicting Anxiety.........................................................................................53

Figure 15. Interaction Between Self-Oriented Perfectionism and Parents’

Achievement Goals Predicting SWLS .........................................................................55

Figure 16. Interaction Between Self-Oriented Perfectionism and Parents’

Fulfillment Goals Predicting SWLS ............................................................................56

Figure 17. Interaction Between Other-Oriented Perfectionism and Parents’

Fulfillment Goals Predicting Adolescent Depressive Symptoms ................................58

vi
Figure 18. Interaction Between Other-Oriented Perfectionism and Parents’
Fulfillment Goals Predicting Adolescent Anxiety .......................................................59

Figure 19. Interaction Between Other-Oriented Perfectionism and Parents’

Fulfillment Goals Predicting Adolescent Life Satisfaction .........................................61

vii
 ABSTRACT

Within the last ten years, researchers have begun to recognize that youth from

affluent backgrounds report elevated adjustment problems (Csikszentmihalyi &

Schneider 2001; Luthar & Lantendresse 2005a), yet contributing factors have rarely been

investigated. The present study explored various parenting variables and their influence

on adolescents from affluent communities, including two parent-focused parenting

variables (i.e., parental perfectionism and parent life satisfaction) and three adolescent-

focused parenting variables (i.e., perceived parental pressure, parents’ future goals for

their children, and parental involvement in their children’s lives). Using a mixed methods

approach (i.e., quantitative and qualitative data), both linear and curvilinear relations

between parenting variables and adolescent adjustment (i.e., depressive symptoms,

anxiety, and life satisfaction) as well as mediation and moderation models were

examined. Participants included 10th grade students and their parents (n = 88 parent-child

pairs) from four affluent high schools in the Northeast and Midwest. Although it was

proposed that parents’ traits and adjustment could be linked to adolescent adjustment

through various parental behaviors and values (i.e., mediation), we found more support

for the conditions under which parental factors may be related to affluent adolescent

adjustment (i.e., moderation). Lower levels of parental pressure, less emphasis on

achievement-oriented values, and greater emphasis on fulfillment-oriented values

provided circumstances in which parental traits and adjustment could be linked to

viii
healthier adolescent adjustment. Findings also highlighted that the synchronicity or

match between what the child needs/desires and the parent’s emotional and behavioral

involvement may be of particular importance. Additionally, socially prescribed

perfectionism was a consistently unfavorable aspect of parenting, linked to other

undesirable parenting variables, and negatively associated with positive aspects of

parenting. In contrast, parent life satisfaction was associated with greater emphasis on

adolescent growth and fulfillment.

ix
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION AND REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Overview

Despite the vast literature on both risk and protective factors contributing to

adjustment among middle class and economically disadvantaged youth, few researchers

have examined the upper end of the socioeconomic spectrum. Only in the last decade

have researchers begun to acknowledge that the “privileged” status of affluent children

may not be as harmless or advantageous as previously thought, and that adolescents from

affluent families are vulnerable to significant adjustment problems for a unique set of

reasons (Ansary & Luthar, 2009; Luthar, 2003; Luthar & Barkin, 2012; Luthar &

Latendresse, 2005a). Affluence is generally defined as a median annual family income of

roughly $125,000 (Luthar & Latedresse, 2005b). Given recent findings suggesting that

affluent adolescents experience equivalent or higher levels of anxiety and depression as

compared to normative samples and their economically disadvantaged counterparts

(Luthar & Barkin, 2012; Luthar & Lantendresse, 2005a) and that these adjustment

problems lead to worse outcomes later in life (Ansary, Luthar, & McMahon, 2012),

further research is warranted.

It is widely accepted that contextual factors greatly influence children’s attitudes

and beliefs, which subsequently shape how a child interacts with their environment and

ultimately influence patterns of continuity and discontinuity in their behavior

1
 2

(Bronfenbrenner, 1989; Rutter & Sroufe, 2000). Given that context plays a major role in

both healthy adjustment and the development of adjustment problems, it is crucial to

examine the association between risk and resilience factors within influential contexts

(Ansary, Luthar, & McMahon, 2012).

Adjustment in Affluent Adolescents

Adolescence has been identified by numerous researchers as a time period of

significant transition and adjustment. Specifically, symptoms of anxiety and depression

escalate during this time (Graber, 2009). Studies indicate that suburban adolescents in

affluent communities experience adjustment difficulties commensurate with those

struggling with economic deprivation, sparse resources, and exposure to violence (Luthar

& D’Avanzo, 1999). In particular, internalizing problems (i.e., anxiety and depressive

symptoms) have been identified as adjustment difficulties to which wealthy, high

achieving youth are most vulnerable (Luthar, 2003; Luthar, Ansary, & McMahon, 2012;

Luthar & Barkin, 2012; Luthar & Sexton, 2004). In addition to experiencing higher levels

of internalizing symptoms, affluent youth are also less satisfied with their lives in general

(Csikszentmihalyi & Schneider, 2001). Furthermore, research suggests that these

problems worsen over time. Adjustment disturbances in affluent communities begin to

elevate in seventh grade (Luthar & Becker, 2002; Luthar & Latendresse, 2005b) and

continue escalating through the 10th and 12th grades (Luthar & Ansary, 2005; Luthar &

Goldstein, 2008).

Why are affluent adolescents experiencing such significant struggles? Research

indicates that upward mobility, prestige, affluence, and professional success are all highly
 3

valued in affluent communities (Luthar & Sexton, 2004). Though achievement-oriented

values have been cited as a potential antecedent of adjustment problems in affluent

adolescents (Luther & Latendresse, 2005a; Travers, Bohnert, & Randall, 2013), the

source of this pressure has not been fully explained. The present study suggests that these

achievement-oriented values are evident within the parent context. To better understand

the achievement values unique to the culture of affluence, the present study draws on

existing literature describing several parenting factors that may significantly impact

adolescent adjustment.

Parental Perfectionism

One of the parenting variables that is highly understudied in affluent populations

is parental perfectionism. Initially, perfectionism was often portrayed as either

adaptive/normal or maladaptive/neurotic (Hamacheck, 1978; Hollender 1965). Adaptive

perfectionism is described as setting personal goals or standards that lead to feelings of

satisfaction with performance, while maladaptive perfectionism is characterized by

setting inflexible or unattainable standards that often lead to dissatisfaction with

performance (Enns & Cox, 2002). In addition to this dichotomous characterization of

perfectionism, numerous other conceptualizations have been proposed. A strong case can

be made, however, for a multidimensional model of perfectionism (Cox, Enns, & Clara,

2002; Enns & Cox, 2002). This model posits that perfectionism has both intrapersonal

and interpersonal components, and identifies three separate domains: (1) self-oriented

perfectionism, (2) other-oriented perfectionism, and (3) socially prescribed perfectionism.

Self-oriented perfectionism is defined as perfectionistic demands towards oneself, and

 4

often involves exceedingly high, unrealistic, and self-imposed standards accompanied by

an intensive self-scrutiny, criticism, and inability to accept flaws and failure in oneself

(Hewitt & Flett, 1991). Other-oriented perfectionism is self-oriented perfectionism

turned outward and involves demanding that others meet one’s own exaggerated and

unrealistic standards (Blatt, 1995). Socially prescribed perfectionism reflects one’s

perception of perfectionistic demands from others directed towards oneself. This domain

involves a preoccupation with evaluations from others and encompasses the belief that

other people hold unrealistic expectations that one must meet in order to win their

approval (Blatt, 1995; Lundh, 2004).

Few studies to date have explored parental perfectionism in affluent samples, yet

recent research conducted from the same data set utilized in the current study suggests

that parental perfectionism (i.e., self-oriented perfectionism, other-oriented perfectionism,

and socially prescribed perfectionism) is not directly linked to adolescent adjustment (i.e.,

depressive symptoms, anxiety, and life satisfaction) (Randall, Bohnert, & Travers, under

review). Although adolescents’ own perfectionism has been linked with numerous

adjustment disturbances, including depression, anxiety, eating disorders, and achievement

and relationship problems (for reviews, see Flett & Hewitt, 2002), less is known about

the indirect effect of parental perfectionism on adolescent adjustment. Since research

suggests that an individual’s perfectionism can negatively impact their own adjustment,

but parental perfectionism does not seem to be directly linked to adolescent adjustment,

the present study investigated whether the three distinct domains of parental

perfectionism (i.e., self-oriented perfectionism, other-oriented perfectionism, and socially

 5

prescribed perfectionism) are indirectly associated with levels of depressive symptoms,

anxiety, and life satisfaction in their adolescent children.

Prior research suggests that perfectionism is often transmitted across generations

and that children suffer as a result. In other words, children with perfectionistic parents

are likely to also demonstrate perfectionism and experience concurrent psychological

difficulties (Hewitt & Flett, 1991) such as low self-esteem, depression, and suicidality

(e.g., Hamilton & Schweitzer, 2000; Yoon & Lau, 2008). Ample evidence links one’s

own maladaptive perfectionism to their negative adjustment, yet research also connects

positive conceptualizations of perfectionism (Stoeber & Otto, 2006) with several

emotional and academic benefits. For example, one study found associations between

adaptive perfectionism and more secure attachments, better academic

satisfaction/integration, and less depression in a college population (Rice & Mirzadeh,

2000). Another study found that setting high standards may lead to higher motivation and

higher achievement (Bieling, Israeli, Smith, & Antony, 2003). In addition, other research

has shown that adaptive perfectionism, defined as positive striving toward achievement

(Stober & Otto, 2006), correlates positively with self-efficacy (Frost, Marten, Lahart, &

Rosenblate, 1990) and positive affect (Frost et al., 1993).

Although concerns regarding perfectionism are clearly warranted, the potential

benefits of perfectionism have rarely been explored. It may be that curvilinear relations

exist between parental perfectionism and adolescent adjustment. Although no studies to

our knowledge have tested for these relations, others have demonstrated curvilinear

relations between behavioral/psychological control (Kakihara & Tilton-Weaver, 2009),

 6

family acceptance/control (Kurdek & Fine, 1994), and adolescent adjustment.

Furthermore, no research to date has investigated the relations between parental

perfectionism and adolescent adjustment in a sample of affluent parents and adolescents.

The present study aims to close this gap by examining for both linear and curvilinear

relations between parental perfectionism and adolescent adjustment in an affluent sample.

Parental Life Satisfaction

In addition to parental perfectionism, parental adjustment is also believed to relate

to adolescent development and adjustment. Life satisfaction refers to a global assessment

of an individual’s quality of life according to his or her own chosen criteria (Shin &

Johnson, 1978). Life satisfaction is well studied in child, adolescent, and college-age

populations, yet few researchers have examined parental life satisfaction or its association

with adolescent adjustment. Pediatric research suggests that parental distress and

dissatisfaction create stressful environments for their children that can lead to increased

levels of adjustment problems (e.g., Deater-Deckard, 2006), which can potentially have

long-term adverse effects on their children’s lives. In contrast, research suggests that

positive family experiences, effective communication among family members, and a

focus on emotional support all promote psychological well-being among youth (Park,

2004). In general, the literature focuses more on the absence of life satisfaction. Yet

researchers are now recognizing the importance of subjective well-being, which

highlights the presence of positive factors rather than the simple absence of negative

factors. Low levels of pathological symptoms does not necessarily indicate high levels of
 7

positive well-being, thus it is important to examine positive indicators, such as life

satisfaction (Cowen, 1991, 1994).

Parental life satisfaction in affluent populations is especially understudied,

although recent work indicates that more research is warranted. Investigators often

emphasize the importance of the child’s needs, but fail to adequately address the needs of

the parent or the impact an unhappy parent can have on a child. Levine (2006) suggests

that several factors may contribute to life satisfaction, or lack thereof, in affluent parents.

For example, long work hours of one parent can leave the other feeling like a single

parent. Excessively busy schedules and shuttling of children may interfere with parents’

time for friendships, marital activities, and community involvement (Levine, 2006). In

addition, the cultural values that are often emphasized in affluent communities (e.g.,

wealth, status, image, and material consumption) are associated with lower personal well-

being and psychosocial health in general (Kasser, 2002). Furthermore, a desire to avoid

any display of weakness or “tarnishing” of a perfect image may prevent these parents

from seeking help when problems arise, allowing difficulties to persist and escalate

(Levine, 2006). For all of these reasons, affluent parents may be vulnerable and, given

that affluent parents tend to live in communities in which wealth and success are highly

valued and that parents’ happiness is likely to influence child adjustment, it is crucial to

examine parental life satisfaction as well as its potential impact on adolescent adjustment

in this population. Thus the present study examined both the direct and indirect effects of

parental life satisfaction on adolescents’ depressive symptoms, anxiety, and life

satisfaction.
 8

Perceived Parental Pressure

The current study also aims to determine the influence of parenting as viewed

through the eyes of the adolescent, including adolescents’ perception of parental pressure.

Perceived parental pressure is defined in the literature as the degree to which youth

believe their parents (1) set high performance standards for them (i.e., evaluation), and

(2) are overly critical of their performance after failing to achieve those high standards

(i.e., criticism; Luthar & Becker, 2002; Sagar & Stoeber, 2009; Stöber, 1998; Stumpf &

Parker, 2000). The present study posits that perceived parental pressure may be a risk

factor for affluent youth. In other words, parents’ endorsement of achievement-oriented

values may contribute to adolescent adjustment problems, particularly among adolescents

who perceive high parental pressure.

As previously discussed, adolescence is a time period of increased risk for

adjustment disturbances. Not only are youth more susceptible to the development of

internalizing and externalizing problems, but they also exhibit more self-consciousness

and sensitivity to social standards and achievement expectations. As a result, perceived

parental pressure may also affect adolescent adjustment (Flett et al., 2002). The

transactional development of the parent-child relationship is often implicated as an

important source of internalizing difficulties in adolescents (Hudson & Rapee, 2001;

Rapee, 1997; Renshaw, 2008). Several studies suggest that perceived parental criticism

and exceedingly high expectations (i.e., perceived parental pressure) are related to the

development of psychological problems, including low self-efficacy, increased social

 9

anxiety, and more difficulties in the parent-child relationship (Biran & Reese, 2007;

Luthar & Barkin, 2012; Renshaw, 2008).

Empirical research supports the claim that achievement pressure from parents is

significantly associated with distress among affluent youth (Ablard & Parker, 1997;

Ansary, Luthar, & McMahon, 2012; Luthar & Becker, 2002; Randall, Bohnert, &

Travers, in press). For example, Luthar and Becker (2002) found that affluent adolescents

who believe their parents emphasize their achievements over their personal well-being

report higher levels of internalizing symptoms. Furthermore, these adolescents then begin

to set excessively high standards for themselves and subsequently report greater

emotional distress (i.e., depressive and anxiety symptoms) and delinquency (Luthar &

Becker, 2002). Research also suggests that academic underperformance in the context of

intense pressure to achieve is particularly distressing for affluent youth (Ansary, Luthar,

& McMahon, 2012). Consistent with these findings, a recent investigation drawing on the

same sample used in the current study found that adolescents who report higher levels of

perceived parental pressure exhibit higher levels of depressive symptoms and lower

levels of life satisfaction (Randall, Bohnert, & Travers, under review).

Although several studies have demonstrated a significant relation between

perceived parental pressure and symptoms of adolescent depression and anxiety

(Neumeister, 2004; Stoeber & Rambow, 2007; Chambless & Steketee, 1999; Sagar &

Stoeber, 2009; Randall, Bohnert, & Travers, under review), the complete absence of

perceived pressure may not be beneficial either. It is possible that a paucity of parental

pressure to achieve may be interpreted by adolescents as a lack of interest or investment

 10

in their lives, which may exacerbate the low parent-child closeness often found in

affluent populations (Luthar & Latendresse, 2005b). To our knowledge, researchers have

not examined perceived parental pressure as both a risk and protective factor to help

explain the relation between parental perfectionism and adjustment problems. In an effort

to take a more nuanced approach in examining the impact of this pressure, the present

study explored linear and curvilinear associations between perceived parental pressure

and adolescent adjustment. Furthermore, we extended the current body of literature by

investigating whether perceived parental pressure is a mediator or a moderator of parent-

focused parenting variables (i.e., parental perfectionism and parent life satisfaction) and

adolescent adjustment (i.e., depressive symptoms, anxiety, and life satisfaction) (see

Figure 2).

Parents’ Future Goals for Their Children

Parents of academically talented and affluent youth are often accused of

pressuring their children to attain high levels of achievement (Ablard & Parker, 1997;

Levine, 2006). Although research suggests that parental support of high achievement is

beneficial in moderation (Stevenson & Baker, 1987), there is concern that unrealistic

parental expectations create excessive pressure and can lead to childhood adjustment

problems (Sigel, 1987; Levine, 2006). Parents’ beliefs about academic performance are

thought to be influenced by numerous factors, including education level (Steinberg,

Lamborn, Dornbusch, & Darling, 1992), yet these values have rarely been examined in

high socioeconomic status (SES) populations. Affluent communities engender specific

cultural norms about achievement and success that are different from those of the lower
 11

and middle classes. More specifically, it has been suggested that affluent parents value

prestige, affluence, and professional success (Luthar & Sexton, 2004). This type of

pressure is a unique aspect of the culture of affluence, which may have a significant

impact on adolescent adjustment.

The present study posits that certain types of parental goals can lead to

achievement pressures, which may subsequently contribute to adjustment problems in

affluent adolescents. Parents have aspirations for their children that reflect the values and

qualities of life they desire for their children in the future (Dix & Branca, 2003; LeVine,

2003). These long-term goals influence the way in which parents rear and socialize their

children, and vary across cultures (Whiting & Edwards, 1988; LeVine et al., 1994).

Furthermore, childrearing practices differ based on parents’ SES (LeVine et al., 1994).

Given that the culture of affluence emphasizes prestige and upward mobility, and that

excessive achievement pressure can lead to adjustment problems in adolescents, it is

crucial to examine parents’ future academic and career goals for their children.

Although no researchers to our knowledge have directly investigated parents’

academic and career goals for their children, some have examined parents’ general life

goals for their children. For example, Chilman (1980) found that parents report wanting

their children to find personal happiness, become independent and build their feelings of

self-worth, obtain a good education, experience social success, and maintain good health.

Furthermore, mothers and fathers seem to hold similar goals for their children, and these

goals are alike for sons and daughters (Chilman, 1980).

 12

According to the sociocultural perspective, parents transmit their beliefs and

values through everyday interactions (Okagaki, Hammond, & Seamon et al., 1999) by

explicitly sharing their beliefs and/or modeling behavioral ideals (Rogoff, 1990).

Research suggests that parental values play an important role in their children’s education

and career development by shaping children’s perceptions of the appropriateness of

education- and occupation-related decisions (Astin, 1984) and providing encouragement

and/or opportunities to reach educational and vocational goals (Young, 1994).

Furthermore, adolescents are fully aware of the aspirations their parents have for them, as

research demonstrates that children as young as 10 years of age are able to state the

occupational goals their parents have for them (Seligman, Weinstock, & Heflin, 1991).

It is well-established in the literature that parents’ goals for their children

significantly predict child academic achievement (e.g., Zimmerman, Bandura, &

Martinez-Pons, 1992; Bandura, Barbaranelli, Caprara, and Pastorelli, 1996), yet few

studies have examined links to adjustment. Ablard and Parker (1997) touch on this issue

with their investigation of parents’ achievement goals (i.e., performance vs. learning) for

their adolescent children in relation to both parents’ and children’s perfectionism. Data

suggest that parents’ own perfectionism is significantly related to their achievement goals

for their children. Furthermore, children of more performance-oriented parents (i.e.,

emphasize superiority) exhibit a greater propensity for dysfunctional perfectionism than

children of more learning-oriented parents (i.e., emphasize comprehension). Although

psychological problems were not directly assessed in this study, it is important to note

that dysfunctional perfectionism has been linked to several psychological difficulties

 13

(Hewitt & Flett, 1991), including low self-esteem, depression, and suicidality (e.g.,

Hamilton & Schweitzer, 2000; Yoon & Lau, 2008).

In sum, it is clear that parents have goals for their children, and that these

aspirations influence children’s views of their own objectives (Seligman, Weinstock, &

Owings, 1988). Many parents believe it is their responsibility to set high expectations for

their children in order to teach them the benefits of hard work and the pleasures of

surmounting difficult challenges (Levine, 2006). But are certain types of goals more

harmful than helpful? The present study aimed to examine the specific content of parents’

academic and career goals for their adolescents as well as their links to adolescent

adjustment. More specifically, the objective was to determine whether parental goals

functioned as a mediator or moderator when examining the relations between parent-

focused parenting variables (i.e., parental perfectionism and life satisfaction) and

adolescent adjustment (i.e., adolescent depressive symptoms, anxiety, and life

satisfaction).

Although no known studies to date have examined the role of parents’ goals for

their children in adolescent adjustment outcomes, one recent investigation using the same

data set as the current study tested several mediation models to clarify relations among

adolescents’ motivational climate, goal orientation, and adjustment problems (i.e.,

depressive symptoms, anxiety, life satisfaction) (Travers, Bohnert, & Randall, 2013).

Results suggested that affluent adolescents who perceived their school climates to be

more supportive and non-competitive tended to define personal success as learning and

improvement (i.e., rather than beating others) and also experienced fewer depressive
 14

symptoms and greater life satisfaction. Interestingly, however, adolescents who perceived

that their school climates emphasized performance goals (i.e., superiority) were not

themselves more focused on winning/beating others, nor did they report more depressive

symptoms or less life satisfaction. Thus, the associations between motivational climate,

goal orientation, and adjustment emerged only when positive aspects of school

environment and individual achievement values were considered.

In accordance with previous literature, we examined parents’ goals in terms of

how much they reflected performance/achievement values as opposed to

learning/fulfillment values. Analogous to Nicholls’ (1984) two types of goal orientation,

we conceptualized parents’ goals as valuing (1) learning and self-actualization (i.e., task

orientation), or (2) performance and success (i.e., ego orientation). Research suggests

task orientation is linked to positive outcomes such as less performance anxiety, higher

intrinsic motivation, and persistence in the face of setbacks (Ames, 1992; Duda, 1993;

Duda & Ntoumanis, 2005; Kavussanu & Roberts, 1996). Ego orientation, however, is

associated with negative outcomes including more performance anxiety, decreased

intrinsic motivation, and withdrawal in the face of failure (Newton & Duda, 1993;

Roberts, 2001, 2006; Roberts, Treasure, & Conroy, 2007). Thus it is crucial to examine

the potential impact parents’ future academic and career goals have on their adolescents’

adjustment.

It is important to note, however, that high parental expectation in and of itself may

not lead to detrimental adjustment problems in adolescents, and some level of parental

expectation may actually be beneficial. As discussed with other variables of interest in

 15

this study, the examination of links between parent’s goals for their children and

adolescent adjustment requires a more nuanced approach. Therefore, the present study

examined the relations between adolescent adjustment and parental emphasis on

achievement-oriented values (i.e., prestige, performance, upward mobility, professional

or academic success, or affluence), and/or emphasis on fulfillment-oriented values (i.e.,

happiness, fulfillment, person progress or growth, learning, identity development,

enjoyment, satisfaction, work- life balance, passions/interests, choice, exploration). Using

this framework, we were able to examine the impact of different types of goals. No

known studies to date directly assess parents’ academic and career goals for their children

in an affluent sample, nor have they tested for differences in adolescent adjustment based

on goals coded for achievement and fulfillment qualities.

Of note, the parental goals data in the present study was collected in a qualitative

format. There is a longstanding debate among researchers regarding the best

methodology (i.e., quantitative versus qualitative) with which to conduct research.

Proponents of the quantitative tradition have dismissed qualitative research as vague and

even unscientific (see Mays & Pope, 1995), while advocates of qualitative research

suggest that their work provides a richer and more culturally nuanced approach (Wiggins,

2011). Although quantitative research may allow for greater generalizability of findings,

it is rigid and lacks a certain richness. While qualitative data is flexible and allows for the

collection of more nuanced information, it lacks generalizability. Mixed methods

research (MMR) accommodates both sides of the quantitative-qualitative debate by

utilizing the strengths of each methodology to make up for the other’s weaknesses
 16

(Wiggins, 2011). Most researchers acknowledge that all methods have their limitations

(e.g., Shadish, Cook, & Campbell, 2002) and some express concern that constraining

research questions to one methodology leaves the field vulnerable to those limitations

(e.g., Kelle, 2006). Thus, the integration of these methodologies in MMR (i.e.,

methodological eclecticism) provides the ideal solution to the quantitative-qualitative

debate. Furthermore, recent evidence attests to the value of using a mixed methods

approach in the mental health field in particular (Creswell & Zhang, 2010; Palinkas,

Horwitz, Chamberlain, Hurlburt, & Landsverk, 2011). Although the majority of data

collected for the present study was quantitative in nature, this study also utilized

qualitative data to describe parents’ academic and career goals for their children, thereby

employing a mixed method approach.

Parental Involvement

In addition to differing in the type of academic and career goals they have for

their children, parents also vary in level of involvement they have in their children’s

lives. Luthar and Latendresse (2005a) hypothesize that physical and emotional isolation

from adults are two main antecedents of adjustment problems in affluent adolescents.

Research indicates that high school students in upper-middle-class communities are often

left home alone, and that affluent children report low emotional closeness with their

parents at levels equivalent to youth in severe poverty (Luthar & Latendresse, 2005b).

Furthermore, it is hypothesized that the demands of affluent parents’ professional careers

hamper the important communication and family bonding time that typically leads to

parent-child closeness (Luthar & Latendresse, 2005a).

 17

Parents’ physical and emotional absences are associated with increased levels of

distress and adjustment disturbances in affluent youth (Luthar & Latendresse, 2005b).

The data indicate that closeness to parents is a protective factor against both internalizing

(i.e., depression and anxiety) and externalizing (i.e., substance use and delinquency)

symptoms, while parental criticism is a risk factor for increased internalizing symptoms

and lower school competence (Luthar & Barkin, 2012; Luthar & Latendresse, 2005b).

Furthermore, the lack of physical presence of parents (i.e., afterschool supervision)

predicts more internalizing and externalizing problems, fewer meals eaten with parents,

and lower school grades (Luthar & Latendresse, 2005b). Conversely, more family time

(including family meals) predicts better psychosocial adjustment two years later (Crouter,

Head, McHale, & Tucker, 2004). Thus parental presence and involvement are incredibly

important and influential on adjustment for affluent adolescents.

Despite ample evidence suggesting the importance of parental involvement in the

lives of their adolescents, parental intrusiveness, over-involvement, restrictiveness, or

over-protectiveness can actually have highly negative effects. For example, Ginsburg and

Bronstein (1993) examined the impact of parental over-involvement in relation to youths’

motivation and academic performance. They found that higher parental surveillance of

homework, negative and controlling reactions to grades, and over-controlling family

styles in general were associated with more extrinsic motivation and lower academic

performance. Conversely, they found that parental encouragement was associated with

intrinsic motivation and autonomy-supporting family styles were associated with higher

academic performance (Ginsburg & Bronstein, 1993).

 18

Thus it appears that a happy medium between under-involvement (e.g., absentee

parents) and over-involvement (e.g., helicopter parents) is ideal for adolescent

adjustment. Due to the evidence suggesting that some level of parental involvement is

important for positive adolescent adjustment, the present study examined several domains

of parental involvement and adolescents’ satisfaction with parental involvement, as well

as curvilinear relations between this involvement and adolescent adjustment.

Furthermore, we aimed to determine the specific type of role parental involvement plays

by testing it as both a mediator and moderator of the relation between parent-focused

parenting variables (i.e., parental perfectionism and life satisfaction) and adolescent

adjustment (i.e., adolescent depressive symptoms, anxiety, and life satisfaction).

Given that affluent youth are often pressured to achieve, we examined the roles of

parents in (1) choosing classes, (2) completing homework, and (3) deciding to which

colleges to apply. In an effort to capture parental involvement in other extracurricular and

social domains of adolescent life, we also investigated the influence of parental

involvement in (4) choosing organizing activities, (5) deciding which organized activities

in which to remain a participant, (6) deciding which friends with whom to spend time,

and (7) organization of adolescents’ day-to-day schedule. Given that research suggests

mealtime is an important factor in the parent-child relationship (Crouter, Head, McHale,

& Tucker, 2004), we also examined adolescent report of the (8) number of meals they eat

with their parents each week. Finally, (9) adolescents’ overall satisfaction with their

parents’ involvement in their lives was investigated.

 19

Mediation and Moderation Models Examining Adolescent Adjustment

As research begins to substantiate the link between parental influence and

adolescent adjustment, exploring meditation and moderation models may be the next step

in gaining a more thorough understanding of these relations. One method for answering

questions related to mechanisms of influence and conditions under which certain

relations exist is to examine the fit of two models in a mediator versus moderator

approach (Rose, Holmbeck, Coackley, & Franks, 2004). In this instance, variables can

serve as both mediators and moderators, as each model addresses different objectives.

The use of this type of analysis allows researchers to conclude which theory best

accounts for a relation among a set of variables of interest.

The majority of research examining the impact of parenting variables on

adolescent adjustment examines direct relations between variables. Yet the integration of

numerous study findings suggests that the effects of parent-focused parenting variables

on adolescent adjustment may differ based on certain adolescent-focused mechanisms or

under certain circumstances. Thus the present study tested two models to examine

whether the relations between (1) parental perfectionism and (2) parent life satisfaction

and adolescent adjustment (i.e., depressive symptoms, anxiety, and life satisfaction) were

mediated or moderated by (1) adolescents’ perceived parental pressure, (2) parents’

future academic/career goals for their children and (3) parental involvement in their

adolescents’ lives (see Figures 1 and 2).

Previous research has already examined the role of perceived parental pressure as

a mediator (e.g., Randall, Bohnert, & Travers, in press), therefore the present study did
 20

Figure 1. Proposed Mediation Model

Figure 2. Proposed Moderation Model

 21

not repeat this analysis. Findings from this research suggest that perceived parental

pressure does mediate the relation between parental perfectionism and affluent adolescent

adjustment. Specifically, adolescents with parents who report high levels of

perfectionistic pressures from their surroundings (i.e., socially prescribed perfectionism)

or who expect perfectionism from others (i.e., other-oriented perfectionism) experience

their parents as more pressuring (i.e., perceived parental pressure) and also report higher

levels of internalizing problems and lower levels of life satisfaction. This finding is

consistent with prior research indicating that parents with “high pressure” personality

dispositions, characterized by high levels of perfectionism, rigidity, critical attitudes, and

anxiety, are “driven by status needs” (Hyson, Hirsh-Pasek, Rescorla, Cone, & Martell-

Boinske, 1991, p. 348). In other words, high-pressure parents support values and beliefs

associated with achievement and success and thus pressure their children to fulfill their

expectations.

No known research, however, has examined perceived parental pressure as a

moderator, nor has it investigated parental involvement in their adolescents’ lives or

parents’ future academic and career goals for their children as both mediators and

moderators. By testing two competing mediation and moderation models, the present

study was able to answer questions about the conditions under which these variables are

associated (i.e., moderation), as well as the mechanisms that clarify the associations (i.e.,

mediation) (Rose et al., 2004).

The first independent variable in the proposed mediation and moderation models

is parental perfectionism. Children with perfectionistic parents are likely to experience

 22

psychological difficulties (Hewitt & Flett, 1991) such as low self-esteem, depression, and

suicidality (e.g., Hamilton & Schweitzer, 2000; Yoon & Lau, 2008). However, whether

or not that perfectionism is expressed/communicated to the child in various ways may

impact adolescent adjustment problems. Perhaps there is a significant difference between

having a perfectionistic parent and having a perfectionistic parent who places a large

amount of pressure on their child, communicates a desire for their child to achieve lofty

future goals, or is over-or under-involved in their child’s life. For example, if a parent has

highly perfectionistic traits, but their child does not perceive high levels of parental

pressure, those perfectionistic traits may not impact adolescent adjustment as much as

they would have if the child did perceive high levels of parental pressure. In moderation

terms, it is possible that the relation between parental perfectionism and adolescent

adjustment depends on the levels of these three adolescent-focused factors (i.e., perceived

parental pressure, parents’ future goals for their children, and parental involvement). It is

also possible that parents’ perfectionistic tendencies play a role in determining their

future goals for their children or how deeply involved they become in their children’s

lives, which subsequently leads to more positive or negative adolescent adjustment. In

mediation terms, it may be that the parental perfectionism is linked to adolescent

adjustment through these adolescent-focused mechanisms (i.e., parents’ future goals for

their children and parental involvement).

The second independent variable in the proposed mediation and moderation

models is parent life satisfaction. Although few investigators have examined this

construct or its association with adolescent adjustment, research suggests that parental
 23

distress can lead to increased levels of adjustment problems in their children (e.g.,

Deater-Deckard, 2006). In contrast, positive family experiences, effective communication

among family members, and a focus on emotional support all promote psychological

well-being among youth (Park, 2004). Thus, it follows that the relation between parent

life satisfaction and adolescent adjustment may depend on (i.e., moderation) the types of

family interactions, communication, and support adolescents receive (i.e., adolescent

perceptions of parental pressure, parents’ future goals for their children, and parental

involvement). For example, if a parent is highly dissatisfied with their own life and

communicates ambitious future goals to their child as a means of living vicariously

through him or her, the impact of parent life satisfaction on adolescent adjustment may be

more negative than if the parent communicates more learning/fulfillment-oriented goals.

It is also possible that higher/lower levels of parent life satisfaction impact how families

interact, communicate, and support their adolescents, which subsequently leads to

variations in adolescent adjustment (i.e., mediation). In sum, the proposed mediation and

moderation models explored indirect and conditional relations between several parenting

variables and adolescent adjustment.

Summary of the Present Study

The current cross-sectional study examined the role of several parenting variables

in adolescent adjustment using a mixed methods research approach (i.e., quantitative and

qualitative data). Findings from this study provide information regarding the relations

between various parent- and adolescent-focused parenting variables that are influential on

adolescent development, as well as how they are linked to adjustment among affluent
 24

adolescents. The following aims were addressed: (1) the linear and curvilinear relations

between several different aspects of parenting and adolescent adjustment were examined

using both quantitative and qualitative data (2) the relations among the five parenting

variables were examined, and (3) both mediation and moderation models were tested to

determine whether relations between parent-focused parenting variables and adolescent

adjustment were mediated or moderated by adolescent-focused parenting variables (see

Figures 1 and 2).

 CHAPTER TWO

METHOD

Participants

Participants included 10th grade students (N = 123) and their parents. The current

study only included complete adolescent-parent dyads, consisting of data from an

adolescent and at least one parent/guardian. The final analytic sample included 88 parent-

child pairs (40% male, 60% female) from four affluent high schools in the Northeast and

Midwest. Participant ages ranged from 14 to 16 years (M = 15.54, SD = 0.38).

Adolescents were 86% Caucasian, 3% African American, 2% Hispanic/Latino, and 9%

Asian American. Eighty mothers and 28 fathers completed the parent survey. Fifteen

percent of parents reported earning under $100,000 per year, 65% between $100,000 and

$500,000, 13% between $500,000 and $900,000, and 7% $1,000,000 or more. The

analytic sample (n = 88) was not significantly different than the original sample (n = 123)

in terms of age, ethnicity, or annual income.

Inclusion criteria used to select affluent communities/schools were based on prior

studies with this population (see Luthar & Goldstein, 2008; Luthar et al., 2006). Using

census data (US Census Bureau, 2008), schools were selected from townships with (1) a

median annual family income at or above $100,000 and (2) 25% or more of adults with a

graduate degree. Once appropriate schools were identified, outreach was made to school

personnel to assess interest in study participation. Eight schools were contacted, with four

25
 26

agreeing to participate (50% participation rate). Within the schools that agreed to

participate in the study, an average of 31% of students/families agreed to complete the

survey. Of note, due to recruitment difficulties, the researchers altered inclusion criteria

slightly to include one urban, private school in a Midwestern city that, due to being in an

urban setting, is not in a township that fits the inclusion criteria. However, the

investigators obtained information about the school population and noted that the median

family income of the school was over $100,000 with 25% or more of parents with a

graduate degree.

Procedure

School personnel granted permission to investigators to conduct in-person visits

to each school to provide a brief description of the research and consent forms for the

adolescents to bring home to their parents. Once the investigator obtained the parental

consent, links to an online survey were emailed to each parent/caregiver(s) and the

adolescents separately. Online materials instructed parents/caregivers and adolescents to

complete their surveys alone in order to ensure confidentiality. Adolescents were

reminded that all responses including the information they provide would be kept

confidential and thus would not be shared with parents, teachers, activity leaders, or any

other adults/children. After data collection, complete parent-child dyads were entered in a

raffle to win one of three iPads.

 27

Measures

Demographics

Parents were asked to indicate their age, ethnicity, marital status, the number of

people living in their home and each person’s relationship to the participating child, their

highest level of education, their current employment status, and their approximate annual

income.

Parent-Focused Factors

Parental perfectionism. Parents/caregivers completed the Multidimensional

Perfectionism Scale (MPS: Hewitt & Flett, 1991), a 45-item measure of perfectionism in

which fifteen items are each devoted to the three perfectionism subscales: 1) self-

oriented, 2) socially prescribed, and 3) other-oriented. Items are rated on a seven-point

scale. Item examples include ‘‘One of my goals is to be perfect in everything I do” (self-

oriented), “My family expects me to be perfect” (socially prescribed), and “I have high

expectations for the people who are important to me” (other-oriented). Items are

answered on a 7-point scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree) with some

reverse scoring. Scores were computed by averaging across items for each domain. The

subscales have respectively demonstrated good internal consistency (.89/.79/.86) and

test–retest reliability (.88/.85/.75). The MPS’s three-factor composition has been

supported in clinical and nonclinical populations, and subscale scores correlate

significantly with other measures of constructs comprising respective perfectionism

dimensions (Hewitt & Flett, 1991). Internal consistency for the subscales (averaging
 28

parents’ scores when two parent reporters for a family) in the current study were good

and in agreement with prior findings (.85/.84/.78).

Parental life satisfaction. The Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS) is a measure

of life satisfaction developed by Diener and colleagues (Diener, Emmons, Larsen &

Griffin, 1985). It does not assess satisfaction with life in any particular domain, rather

satisfaction with life as a whole. The SWLS consists of 5-items (e.g. “In most ways, my

life is close to ideal” and “If I could live my life over, I would change almost nothing”)

that was completed by parents. Using a 1-7 scale, respondents indicated their agreement

with each statement (1= strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree). For the current study, the

LS similarly demonstrated strong internal reliability (α = .92).

Adolescent-Focused Factors

Perceived parental pressure. To measure perceived parental pressure,

adolescents completed the Perceived Parental Pressure subscale from the English version

of the Multidimensional Inventory of Perfectionism in Sport (MIPS; Stoeber, Otto, &

Stoll, 2005) which was translated from the original German version (Stöber, Otto, &

Stoll, 2004) to English using a back-translation procedure involving two bilingual

speakers (one native English, one native German; see Brislin, Lonner, & Thorndike,

1973). The measure is comprised of eight items that make no reference to sport and were

thus left unmodified. Items are answered on a 7-point scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to

7 (strongly agree), and scores were computed by averaging across items. Findings from

Sagar & Stoeber (2009) indicated high reliability across scores with Cronbach’s alphas >

.80. The current study also indicated good internal consistency (α = .94)
 29

Parents’ future goals. Parents were asked to respond to the open-ended question

of, “What are your future academic and career goals for your child?” (Ablard & Parker,

1997). Responses received two codes; one for their emphasis on achievement-oriented

values (i.e., prestige, performance, upward mobility, professional or academic success, or

affluence), and one for their emphasis on fulfillment-oriented values (i.e., happiness,

fulfillment, person progress or growth, learning, identity development, enjoyment,

satisfaction, work- life balance, passions/interests, choice, exploration). Responses were

scored as a 1 if they displayed no or minimal evidence of the value, 2 if they included

some evidence of the value, or 3 if they contained significant evidence of the value.

Achievement and Fulfillment codes were scored as independent of one another. Two

trained graduate-level students double-coded 100% of this qualitative data. Inter-rater

agreement was high for Achievement-Oriented (ϰ = .81) and Fulfillment-Oriented (ϰ =

.86) responses. Of the final sample of 88 parent-child pairs, 70 mothers and 26 fathers

provided codeable responses (i.e., 10 parents left this question blank). For cases in which

both the mother and father provided codeable responses (N = 18), the scores were

averaged to create one parent score. Similar to the rationale for averaging mother and

father scores on other parent-report measures (e.g., parental perfectionism), we suggest

that examining responses from multiple individuals living in the home together provides

a more complete picture of the overall home environment.

Parental involvement. To assess parental involvement in various domains of

adolescent life, youth responded to nine questions about parental involvement. They

reported how involved their parents were in (1) choosing which classes to take, (2)
 30

deciding which organized activities in which to become involved, (3) determining which

organized activities in which to stay involved, (4) the organization of their day-to-day

schedule, (5) decisions about to which colleges/universities to apply, (6) the completion

of homework (i.e., writing essays, studying for tests, working on class projects), and (7)

deciding which friends with which to spend time. Adolescents rated each of these seven

questions on a 1-5 scale (1 = not at all involved, 5 = extremely involved). They

responded to each item twice, once to describe the involvement of their primary caregiver

and once to describe the involvement of their secondary caregiver. Frequency of

mealtime was assessed by asking adolescents to indicate (8) the number of family meals

(i.e., meals at which all or most of the family members living in the home were present)

they ate on average per week. Finally, adolescents also reported their (9) satisfaction with

each caregiver’s overall level of involvement in their life (1 = not at all satisfied to 5 =

extremely satisfied). All items measuring parental involvement (except item #8)

prompted the adolescents for two rating responses (i.e., one for each caregiver). Ratings

for caregiver 1 and 2 were highly correlated, therefore the ratings were averaged.

Adolescent Adjustment

Depression and anxiety. The Achenbach Youth Self Report–Depression scales

(YSR-D; Clarke et al., 1992) and Anxiety scales (YSR-A) was used to assess adolescent

depression and anxiety. The YSR-D and YSR-A are each 16 items from the 118-item

YSR measure (Achenbach, 1991). Participants read each statement and were instructed

to rate whether it is not true (0), somewhat true (1), or very true (2). Both the depression
 31

and anxiety subscales in the present study have good reliability (α = .85 and .91,

respectively).

Life satisfaction. Adolescents also completed the Satisfaction with Life Scale

(SWLS) (Diener, Emmons, Larsen & Griffin, 1985). Using a 1-7 scale, respondents

indicated their agreement with each statement (1= strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree).

This measure has good reliability in the present sample (α = .88).

 CHAPTER THREE

RESULTS

Data Preparation

Missing Data

As the data set was approximately 99.2% complete (0.8% missing), all missing

values were replaced via individual mean substitution. One advantage of this procedure

is that it uses the non-missing information from each particular scale to calculate the

mean for the missing items. Furthermore, as the missing cases represented a very small

percentage of the overall data set (i.e., less than 1-2% of the total data set), the results

obtained after having employed a mean substitution procedure are likely identical to the

results that may have been obtained had the missing items not occurred (Widaman,

2006).

Nested Data

Multilevel data often arise from “nested” data structures (e.g., children are nested

within schools), however nested data sets do not automatically require multilevel

modeling (MLM; Peugh, 2010). In an effort to assess the need for MLM in the present

data set, intra-class correlations (i.e., the proportion of adolescent adjustment score

variation that occurs across schools) and design effects (i.e., a measure of how much the

sampling variability in a sample differs from the sampling variability in a simple random

sample) were calculated to determine how much variation in the outcome variables (i.e.,

32
 33

depressive symptoms, anxiety, and life satisfaction) was present at the school level.

Results indicated the presence of significant within-school variability for depressive

symptoms, anxiety, and life satisfaction, but no significant between-school variability.

Furthermore, all design effects were found to be smaller than 2.0 and all intra-class

correlations were .01 or lower (Peugh, 2010). These results indicate that there was no

significant variability in adolescent adjustment across schools, thus it was determined that

data from all three schools could be combined for the purpose of conducting the primary

analyses.

Creating Composites

Perfectionism. In instances when both mother and father report was obtained on

the MPS (n = 20), perfectionism scores reflect the average of mother and father totals.

However, in most cases, only one parent completed the perfectionism questionnaire, and

this parent’s score was used in analyses (n = 60 for mothers, n = 8 for fathers).

Parental involvement. Adolescents rated how involved each of their caregivers

were in several aspects of their lives. They responded to each item twice, once to describe

the involvement of their primary caregiver and once to describe the involvement of their

secondary caregiver. Correlations between ratings for caregivers 1 and 2 were all highly

significant (see Table 1), thus the ratings were averaged to create composites.

Parental involvement composites. The present study proposed to examine

parental involvement by asking adolescents to rate how involved their parents were in (1)

choosing classes, (2) completing homework, (3) deciding to which colleges to apply, (4)
 34

choosing organizing activities, (5) deciding which organized activities in which to remain

a participant, (6) deciding which friends with whom to spend time, and (7) organization

of adolescents’ day-to-day schedule. In addition, adolescents were also asked (8) number

of meals they eat with their parents each week and (9) their overall satisfaction with their

parents’ involvement in their lives. The majority of parental involvement variables were

highly correlated (see Table 2). The first seven variables appeared to measure a

unidimensional latent construct (Cronbach’s α = .814). Furthermore, a principal

components varimax rotation analysis revealed that all seven items load best onto one

factor (see Table 3). As a result, the first seven variables were combined to create one

parental involvement composite. Thus, three parental involvement variables were

examined in the present study: (1) parental involvement composite (i.e.,

academic/extracurricular/social involvement; items 1-7), (2) family meals, and (3)

adolescent satisfaction with involvement.

Table 1. Correlations between Caregivers 1 and 2 in Adolescent Ratings of Parental

Involvement
Correlation
between
caregivers 1
Parental involvement in and 2
Decisions about which classes to take .68**
Decisions about which organized activities to become involved in .69**
Decisions about which organized activities to stay involved in .68**
Day-to-day schedule .56**
Decisions about which colleges to apply to .71**
Helping with homework (i.e., writing essays, studying for tests, class projects) .47**
Decisions about which friends to hang out with .68**
Overall satisfaction with parental involvement .46**
*p < .05. **p < .01.
 35

Table 2. Correlations among Types of Parental Involvement as Rated by Adolescents

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1. Classes —
2. OA become .54** —
involved
3. OA stay involved .54** .80** —
4. Schedule .46** .41** .39** —
5. Colleges .52** .37** .34** .20 —
6. Homework .45** .22* .24* .31** .12 —
7. Friends .36** .46** .48** .32** .37** .23* —
8. Family meals .03 .09 -.08 .13 -.10 .02 .04 —
9. Satisfaction with .01 -.01 -.15 -.09 -.06 .17 -.05 .18 —
involvement

*p < .05. **p < .01.

Table 3. Rotated Component Matrix for Principal Components Analysis

Component
1 2
Stay involved in OA .83
Become involved in OA .82
Classes .80
Friends .66
Schedule .62
College applications .61
Homework .47
Family meals .64
Satisfaction with .76
involvement

Power Analysis

A post hoc statistical power analysis (Hintze, 2011) was conducted to determine

the likelihood of obtaining significant results in the data analyses at p < .05. The sample

size (N = 88) provided very strong (95-99%) power to detect large or medium effects, but

only weak (26-27%) power to detect small effects. Thus, although the sample size is
 36

small, it is large enough to support the conducted analyses (F. Bryant, personal

communication, December 6, 2013).

Descriptive Statistics

Means and standard deviations for all study variables are presented in Table 4.

Each domain of parental perfectionism (i.e., self-oriented, other-oriented, socially

prescribed) was measured on a scale ranging from 15-105. Overall, the mean levels of

self-oriented (M = 60.61), other-oriented (M = 58.99), and socially prescribed (M =

45.66) perfectionism were moderate. A paired t-test was used to determine if scores on

the three domains significantly differed from one another. Results indicated that self-

oriented and other-oriented perfectionism were significantly higher than socially

prescribed perfectionism, t (87) = 11.12, p < .01 and t (87) = 10.55, p < .01, respectively.

Alternatively, self-oriented perfectionism and other-oriented perfectionism scores were

not significantly different from each other. Parent life satisfaction, which was measured

on a scale with a possible range of 5-35, was relatively high (M = 26.6). Coded responses

of parents’ future academic and career goals for their children (ranging from 1 to 3) were

more likely to reflect achievement-oriented values (M = 2.12) than fulfillment-oriented

values (M = 1.85), F(1, 77) = 3.97, p = .05.

Perceived parental pressure was measured on a scale with a possible range of 8-

48. Overall, the mean level of perceived parental pressure was moderate (M = 22.77). All

domains of parental involvement (with the exception of family meals) were measured on

a scale with a possible range of 1-5. Mean levels of parental involvement ranged from
 37

2.35-3.88. The mean level of adolescent satisfaction with parental involvement was

relatively high (M = 4.31). The mean number of meals adolescents reported eating with

their family each week was 5.26. Both depressive symptoms and anxiety were measured

on a scale with a possible range of 0-32, and mean levels of depressive symptoms (M =

8.33) and anxiety (M = 9.49) were relatively low. Adolescent life satisfaction, which was

measured on a scale with a possible range of 5-35, was relatively high (M = 24.05). These

descriptive statistics indicate that the sample examined in the present study was relatively

well-adjusted.

Correlations

Correlations among all study variables are presented in Table 4. All three

parental perfectionism domains were positively correlated (p < .01). Additionally,

socially prescribed perfectionism was positively correlated with perceived parental

pressure (p < .05), and negatively correlated with parent life satisfaction (p < .01).

Further, perceived parental pressure was positively correlated with depressive symptoms

(p < .01) and negatively correlated with life satisfaction (p < .05), but unrelated to anxiety

symptoms. Of note, no significant correlations were found between the three domains of

parental perfectionism and adolescent adjustment measures (depressive symptoms,

anxiety, life satisfaction) variables.

The parental involvement composite was positively correlated with perceived

parental pressure (p < .05), but no other study variables. Interestingly, frequency of

family meals was unrelated to the parental involvement composite, but was negatively
 38

correlated with socially prescribed perfectionism (p < .05). Family meals were also

negatively correlated with adolescent depressive symptoms (p < .05) and positively

correlated with adolescent life satisfaction (p < .01). Adolescents’ overall satisfaction

with their parents’ involvement was negatively correlated perceived parental pressure (p

< .01), depressive symptoms (p < .01), and anxiety (p < .05), but positively correlated

with adolescent life satisfaction (p < .01). Finally, adolescent depressive symptoms (p <

.01), anxiety, and life satisfaction (p < .01) were all highly correlated.

Parents’ whose goals for their children were coded as highly achievement-

oriented (i.e., prestige, performance, upward mobility, professional or academic success,

or affluence) reported higher levels of self-oriented (p < .01), other-oriented (p < .05),

and socially prescribed (p < .05) perfectionism. Parents whose goals for their children

were coded as highly fulfillment-oriented (i.e., happiness, fulfillment, person progress or

growth, learning, identity development, enjoyment, satisfaction, work- life balance,

passions/interests, choice, exploration) indicated higher levels of life satisfaction (p <

.05). Achievement- and fulfillment-oriented scores were highly negatively correlated (p <

.01).

Gender Differences

In order to examine possible differences in study variables based on adolescent

gender, t-tests were conducted across all included variables. Analyses indicated that the

only significant gender difference was with regard to anxiety, with females reporting
 39

higher levels of anxiety (M = 10.92, SD = 7.93) than males (M = 7.32, SD = 6.78), t (86)

= -2.31, p < .05.

Income and Education Structure

Income structure and its relation to other study variables were also examined. Of

those who reported their household income (n = 67), the majority (49%) were from

families earning $100,000 to $300,000 per year (see Figure 3).

Figure 3. Annual Household Income

Regression analyses were used to examine relations between level of household

income and all other study variables. Income was positively associated with parental self-

oriented perfectionism, b = 1.27, β = .24, t(66) = 2.02, p < .05, but was not related to the

other forms of perfectionism (other-oriented perfectionism or socially prescribed

perfectionism). Income was not found to be associated with any other study variables.

Of parents who reported their highest level of education (n = 84) and using the

status of the more educated parent in families with two participating parents, the majority

of participants (57%) obtained a Master’s or Doctorate/JD degree (see Figure 4).

Table 4. Descriptive Information and Correlations among Variables

Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
1. Self-Oriented —
Perfectionisma
2. Other-Oriented .67** —
Perfectionisma
3. Socially Prescribed .55** .47** —
Perfectionisma
4. Parent Life -.15 -.06 -.34** —
Satisfactiona
5. Achievement-Oriented .30** .27* .31* -.11 —
Goalsa
6. Fulfillment-Oriented -.17 -.16 -.14 .23* -.38** —
Goalsa
7. Perceived Parental .13 .21 .23* -.12 .20 -.20 —
Pressureb
8. Parental Involvement -.04 .10 .10 .07 -.17 .07 .27* —
Compositeb
9. Family Mealsb -.06 .02 -.24* .05 .09 .06 -.18 .02 —
10. Satisfaction with .17 .15 .09 .09 .09 -.12 -.36** -.04 .18 —
Involvementb
11. Adolescent Depressive -.08 -.11 .13 .00 -.10 -.02 .30** .10 -.25* -.34** —
Sxsb
12. Adolescent Anxiety -.07 -.10 .14 .04 -.07 .03 .20 .12 -.14 -.25* .82** —
Sxsb
13. Adolescent Life .17 .17 -.08 -.08 .02 -.03 -.39** -.11 .29** .31** -.57** -.51** —
Satisfactionb
M 57.55 60.51 44.36 26.60 2.12 1.85 22.77 3.10 5.26 4.31 8.33 9.49 24.05
SD 13.06 9.91 11.59 5.80 0.70 0.70 10.20 0.79 2.34 0.81 5.62 7.33 6.79
Range 15-105 15-105 15-105 5-35 1-3 1-3 8-48 1-5 0-21 1-5 0-32 0-32 5-35

a
Parent report
b
Adolescent report
*p < .05. **p < .01.

40
 41

Figure 4. Parents’ Highest Level of Education

Family Structure

The majority of parents (85%) who participated in the study were married to their

child’s biological mother/father (see Figure 5).

Figure 5. Parental Marital Status

Employment information was gathered from 79 mothers and 78 fathers. Data

revealed that the majority of mothers were either employed full-time (38%) or full-time

homemakers (29%) (see Figure 6). The majority of fathers (92%) were employed full

time (see Figure 7). A closer investigation of employment on the household level

revealed that the majority of participants (40%) came from single-earner families (see

Figure 8).
 42

Figure 6. Mothers’ Employment Status

Figure 7. Fathers’ Employment Status

Figure 8. Household Employment Status

 43

Linear and Curvilinear Analyses

Regression equations (i.e., linear and curvilinear) were calculated to examine

associations between parenting variables (i.e., parental perfectionism, parental life

satisfaction, perceived parental pressure, parents’ goals, and parental involvement) and

adolescent adjustment variables (i.e., depressive symptoms, anxiety, and life satisfaction).

For curvilinear regressions the quadratic function was utilized, in which the linear term

was entered into the regression model first, followed by the squared term.

Parenting Variables and Adolescent Adjustment

Analyses indicate that self-oriented perfectionism, socially prescribed

perfectionism, and other-oriented perfectionism were not linearly or curvilinear

associated with adolescent adjustment. Perceived parental pressure was found to be

curvilinearly related to adolescent depressive symptoms, anxiety, and life satisfaction

(see Table 5 and Figures 9-11). That is, adolescents who perceived very low and very

high levels of parental pressure also experienced more depressive symptoms and anxiety,

and less life satisfaction.

Table 5. Curvilinear Relations between Perceived Parental Pressure and Adolescent

Adjustment

Outcome variable Equation B β T p

Depressive Sxs Quadratic .01 1.11 2.34 .02

Anxiety Quadratic .01 .84 1.70 .04

Life satisfaction Quadratic -.01 -.91 -1.98 .04

 44

Figure 9. Perceived Parental Pressure Predicting Adolescent Depressive Symptoms

Figure 10. Perceived Parental Pressure Predicting Adolescent Anxiety

 45

Figure 11. Perceived Parental Pressure Predicting Adolescent Life Satisfaction

Parents’ future academic and career goals were not found to be linearly or

curvilinearly associated with any of the indices of adolescent adjustment. Relations

between parental involvement and adolescent adjustment are displayed in Table 6.

Analyses revealed that the parental involvement composite was neither linearly nor

curvilinearly associated with adolescent adjustment, however, adolescent satisfaction

with parental involvement was linearly related to all three indices of adolescent

adjustment. More specifically, adolescents who reported higher levels of satisfaction with

parental involvement reported fewer depressive symptoms, less anxiety, and higher levels

of life satisfaction. In addition, adolescents who reported higher levels of satisfaction

with parental involvement also reported lower levels of perceived parental pressure.

Furthermore, family meals were linearly related to depressive symptoms and adolescent
 46

life satisfaction, but were unrelated to anxiety symptoms. Specifically, adolescents who

reported eating more meals with their families also reported significantly fewer

depressive symptoms and higher levels of life satisfaction.

Table 6. Linear Relations between Aspects of Parental Involvement and Adolescent

Adjustment

Independent variable Outcome variable B β t p

Parental involvement 1. Depressive symptoms .69 .10 .89 .37
composite 2. Anxiety 1.44 .16 1.45 .15
3. Adolescent life satisfaction -.97 -.11 -1.05 .30

Adolescent satisfaction with 1. Depressive symptoms -2.34 -.34 -3.30 .00

parental involvement 2. Anxiety symptoms -2.23 -.25 -2.35 .02
3. Adolescent life satisfaction 2.57 .31 2.98 .00
4. Perceived parental pressure -4.54 -.36 -3.57 .00

1. Depressive symptoms -.60 -.25 -2.40 .02

2. Anxiety symptoms -.44 -.14 -1.32 .19
Family meals 3. Adolescent life satisfaction .85 .29 2.83 .01

Mediation Models

As previously discussed, the present study aimed to examine both mediation and

moderation models to obtain a more thorough understanding of which theory best

accounts for the relations among the variables of interest. Currently, bootstrapping

(Preacher & Hayes, 2004, 2008; Shrout & Bolger, 2002) is the considered the most valid

and powerful method for examining indirect effects (Hayes, 2009), as it makes the fewest

unrealistic assumptions about the shape of the sampling distribution and the indirect

effect (Briggs, 2006; Fritz & MacKinnon, 2007; MacKinnon, Lockwood, & Williams,

2004; Williams & MacKinnon, 2008).

The bootstrapping approach includes four main steps (Shrout & Bolger, 2002).

First, the original sample n is used as a population reservoir to create a pseudo (bootstrap)
 47

sample of N people by randomly sampling observations with replacement from the

original n. Next, for each bootstrap sample, a and b are estimated and the product of the

path coefficients are recorded. The third step involves repeating Steps 1 and 2 for a total

of k times (where k = 5,000 as recommended by Hayes, 2009). When complete, this

procedure results in k estimates of the indirect effect, and the distribution of this indirect

effect will function as an approximation of the sampling distribution of the indirect effect.

Finally, the k estimates will be used to generate a percentile-based bootstrap confidence

interval, for which the cut points exclude (α/2) x 100% of the values from each tail of the

empirical distribution. If zero is not between the lower and upper bound, then it is

acceptable to claim that the indirect effect is not zero (Hayes, 2009; Shrout & Bolger,

2002). The present study used bootstrapping to generate bias corrected (BC) confidence

intervals (CI’s, 95%), as they have been shown to produce better type I error rates and

power compared to conventional CIs (Preacher, Rucker, & Hayes, 2007; Preacher &

Hayes, 2008). All results are based on a bootstrapped sample of n = 5,000.

Results of the mediation analyses revealed no significant findings. Specifically,

neither parents’ future goals for their children nor parental involvement were found to

mediate the relations between (1) parental perfectionism and (2) parent life satisfaction

and adolescent adjustment (i.e., depressive symptoms, anxiety, and life satisfaction) (see

Figure 1). These results suggest that a mediation framework does not capture the relations

between the variables of interest in this sample of affluent parents and youth.
 48

Moderation Models

Moderation models provide a competing alternative to mediation and explore the

particular circumstances under which a relation exists thereby offering a deeper

understanding of the phenomenon of interest. PROCESS, a computational procedure for

SPSS, is able to estimate the coefficients of a model using ordinary least squares (OLS)

regression and generates conditional effects in moderation models (Hayes, 2012).

PROCESS displays the proportion of the total variance in the outcome uniquely

attributable to the interaction. Furthermore, it offers the option of using 10th, 25th, 50th,

75th, and 90th percentiles of the moderator when estimating the conditional effects of X.

Traditionally, the mean, one standard deviation above the mean, and one standard

deviation below the mean are used as definitions of “moderate,” “relatively high,” and

“relatively low” on the moderator when probing an interaction. However, there is no

guarantee that all three of these values will be within the range of the data. Thus, if the

distribution of the moderator is skewed, one or more of these values may be a poor

representation of moderate, low, or high. The five percentiles computed in PROCESS,

however, will always be within the range of the data and can be interpreted as “very

low,” “low,” “moderate,” “high,” and “very high” (Hayes, 2012). In light of these

advantages, the PROCESS procedure was utilized to test the proposed moderation

models.
 49

Eighteen models examining relations between (1) parental perfectionism and (2)

parent life satisfaction and adolescent adjustment (i.e., depressive symptoms, anxiety, and

life satisfaction) moderated by (1) adolescents’ perceived parental pressure, (2) parents’

future academic/career goals for their children and (3) parental involvement in their

adolescents’ lives, were tested (see Figure 2). Seven of the models yielded significant

effects (Figure 12 and Table 7). The first significant moderation model (Parent LS X

Satisfaction with Involvement  Dep) indicated a meaningful interaction between parent

life satisfaction and adolescent satisfaction with parental involvement predicting

adolescent depressive symptoms (see Figure 13). As can be seen in Table 8, the

coefficient for the product of Parent LS and Satisfaction with Involvement was

statistically different from zero (p < .05). The R-square increase due to the interaction

indicated that approximately 5% of the variance in depressive symptoms was uniquely

attributable to the interaction between Parent LS and Satisfaction with Involvement. The

conditional effects of Parent LS on depressive symptoms at five different levels (10th,

25th50th 75th and 90th percentiles) of Satisfaction with Involvement indicated that lower

levels of parent life satisfaction were associated with more adolescent depressive

symptoms, but only when adolescent satisfaction with parental involvement was very

low. When satisfaction with involvement was low, moderate, high, or very high, parent

life satisfaction was no longer related to adolescent depressive symptoms (see Table 8).

In other words, parents who were less satisfied with their lives tended to have children

who experienced more depressive symptoms, but only when youth were also less

satisfied with parental involvement. Satisfaction with parental involvement did not
 50

moderate the relations between parent life satisfaction and adolescent anxiety or life

satisfaction. No other types of parental involvement (i.e., academic/extracurricular/social

or family meals) moderated the relation between parent life satisfaction and adolescent

adjustment.

Table 7. Significant Moderation Models

Significant Independent Dependent Coefficient for R2-

Moderator p
model variable variable interaction change
1 Parent life Depressive Satisfaction with -.25 .05 .04
satisfaction symptoms involvement

2 Self-oriented Anxiety Perceived -.01 .06 .03

perfectionism parental pressure

3 Self-oriented Life Achievement- .19 .07 .03

perfectionism satisfaction oriented goals

4 Self-oriented Life Fulfillment- -.28 .12 .00

perfectionism satisfaction oriented goals

5 Other-oriented Depressive Fulfillment- .40 .06 .04

perfectionism symptoms oriented goals

6 Other-oriented Anxiety Fulfillment- .33 .08 .03

perfectionism oriented goals

7 Other-oriented Life Fulfillment- -.45 .05 .03

perfectionism satisfaction oriented goals

Table 8. Relation between Parent LS and Depressive Symptoms, Moderated by

Satisfaction with Involvement

Conditional
Level of moderator effect p
Very low (10th percentile) .37 .04*
Low (25th percentile) .12 .27
Moderate (50th percentile) -.01 .96
High (75th percentile) -.13 .30
Very high (90th percentile) -.13 .30
Figure 12. Significant Moderation Models

51
 52

Figure 13. Interaction Between Parent Life Satisfaction and Adolescent Satisfaction With
Involvement Predicting Depressive Symptoms

Results for the second significant model (self-oriented perfectionism X perceived

parental pressure  Anxiety) indicated a significant interaction between parent self-

oriented perfectionism and adolescent perceived parental pressure predicting adolescent

anxiety (see Figure 14). As can be seen in Table 9, the coefficient for the product of self-

oriented perfectionism and perceived parental pressure was statistically different from

zero (p < .05). The R-square increase due to the interaction is indicated that

approximately 6% of the variance in anxiety was uniquely attributable to the interaction

between self-oriented perfectionism and perceived parental pressure. The conditional

effects of self-oriented perfectionism on anxiety at five different levels (10th, 25th 50th 75th

and 90th percentiles) of perceived parental pressure indicated that higher levels of self-

oriented perfectionism were associated with more anxiety, but only when perceived

parental pressure was high or very high. When perceived parental pressure is moderate,

low, or very low, self-oriented perfectionism was no longer related to adolescent anxiety
 53

(see Table 9). In other words, parents who reported having high perfectionistic standards

for themselves tended to have adolescents with higher levels of anxiety, but only when

youth also perceived high levels of parental pressure. perceived parental pressure did not

moderate the relations between self-oriented perfectionism and adolescent depressive

symptoms or life satisfaction.

Figure 14. Interaction Between Self-Oriented Perfectionism and Perceived Parental

Pressure Predicting Anxiety

Table 9. Relation between Self-Oriented Perfectionism and Anxiety, Moderated by

Perceived Parental Pressure

Conditional
Level of moderator effect p
Very low (10th percentile) .15 .16
Low (25th percentile) .08 .33
Moderate (50th percentile) -.02 .81
High (75th percentile) -.15 .04*
Very high (90th percentile) -.24 .02*
 54

The third significant moderation model (self-oriented perfectionism X

Achievement-Oriented Goals  SWLS) indicated a meaningful interaction between

parent self-oriented perfectionism and parents’ future goals for their children predicting

adolescent life satisfaction (see Figure 15). As can be seen in Table 10, the coefficient for

the product of parent self-oriented perfectionism and Achievement-Oriented Goals was

statistically different from zero (p < .05). The R-square increase due to the interaction

indicated that approximately 7% of the variance in adolescent life satisfaction was

uniquely attributable to the interaction between parent self-oriented perfectionism and

Achievement-Oriented Goals. The conditional effects of parent self-oriented

perfectionism on life satisfaction at five different levels (10th, 25th 50th 75th and 90th

percentiles) of Achievement-Oriented Goals indicated that very low, low, and moderate

emphasis on achievement-oriented goals was not associated with adolescent life

satisfaction. When emphasis on achievement-oriented goals was high or very high,

however, parent self-oriented perfectionism became significantly associated with lower

levels of adolescent life satisfaction (see Table 10). In other words, parents who reported

having high perfectionistic standards for themselves tended to have children with lower

levels of life satisfaction, but only when parents strongly emphasized achievement-

related goals. However, when parents did not strongly emphasize achievement, their

adolescents were equally satisfied with their lives regardless of parental self-oriented

perfectionism.

The fourth significant moderation model (self-oriented perfectionism X

Fulfillment-Oriented Goals  SWLS) indicated another meaningful interaction between

 55

Figure 15. Interaction Between Self-Oriented Perfectionism and Parents’ Achievement

Goals Predicting SWLS

Table 10. Relation between Self-Oriented Perfectionism and SWLS, Moderated by

Parents’ Achievement Goals

Conditional
Level of moderator effect p
Very low (10th percentile) -.17 .19
Low (25th percentile) .03 .65
Moderate (50th percentile) .03 .65
High (75th percentile) .22 .01*
Very high (90th percentile) .22 .01*

parent self-oriented perfectionism and parents’ future goals for their children predicting

adolescent life satisfaction (see Figure 16). As can be seen in Table 11, the coefficient for

the product of Parent self-oriented perfectionism and Fulfillment-Oriented Goals was

statistically different from zero (p < .01). The R-square increase due to the interaction

indicated that approximately 12% of the variance in adolescent life satisfaction was

uniquely attributable to the interaction between parent self-oriented perfectionism and

Fulfillment-Oriented Goals. The conditional effects of parent self-oriented perfectionism

 56

on life satisfaction at five different levels (10th, 25th 50th 75th and 90th percentiles) of

Fulfillment-Oriented Goals indicated that higher levels of self-oriented perfectionism was

associated with lower levels of life satisfaction, but only when parents exhibited very low

or low levels of Fulfillment-Oriented Goals. Conversely, higher levels of self-oriented

perfectionism were associated with high adolescent life satisfaction when parents

exhibited very high levels of fulfillment-oriented goals. When parents exhibited moderate

levels of fulfillment-oriented goals, however, the relation between parent self-oriented

perfectionism and adolescent life satisfaction no longer existed. In other words, parents

who reported having high perfectionistic standards for themselves tended to have

children with lower levels of life satisfaction, but only when parents did not emphasize

fulfillment goals. When parents did emphasize fulfillment goals, higher personal

standards were actually associated with higher levels of adolescent life satisfaction.

Parents’ goals for their children did not moderate the relations between self-oriented

perfectionism and depressive symptoms or anxiety.

Figure 16. Interaction Between Self-Oriented Perfectionism and Parents’ Fulfillment

Goals Predicting SWLS
 57

Table 11. Relation between Self-Oriented Perfectionism and SWLS, Moderated by

Parents’ Fulfillment Goals

Conditional
Level of moderator effect p
Very low (10th percentile) .26 .00**
Low (25th percentile) .26 .00**
Moderate (50th percentile) -.02 .81
High (75th percentile) -.02 .81
Very high (90th percentile) -.29 .03*

The fifth significant moderation model (other-oriented perfectionism X

Fulfillment-Oriented Goals  Depressive Symptoms) indicated a meaningful interaction

between parent other-oriented perfectionism and parents’ future goals for their children

predicting adolescent depressive symptoms (see Figure 17). As can be seen in Table 12,

the coefficient for the product of parent other-oriented perfectionism and Fulfillment-

Oriented Goals was statistically different from zero (p < .05). The R-square increase due

to the interaction indicates that approximately 6% of the variance in adolescent

depressive symptoms was uniquely attributable to the interaction between parent other-

oriented perfectionism and Fulfillment-Oriented Goals. The conditional effects of parent

other-oriented perfectionism on depressive symptoms at five different levels (10th, 25th

50th 75th and 90th percentiles) of Fulfillment-Oriented Goals indicated that higher levels

of parental other-oriented perfectionism were associated with more symptoms of

adolescent depression, but only when the level of parental fulfillment-oriented goals was

very low or low. When parents’ level of fulfillment-oriented goals was moderate, high, or

very high, parent other-oriented perfectionism and adolescent depressive symptoms were

no longer related. In other words, parents who reported having high expectations for
 58

others tended to have children with more depressive symptoms, but only when they did

not emphasize fulfillment goals.

Figure 17. Interaction Between Other-Oriented Perfectionism and Parents’ Fulfillment

Goals Predicting Adolescent Depressive Symptoms

Table 12. Relation between Other-Oriented Perfectionism and Depressive Symptoms,

Moderated by Parents’ Fulfillment Goals

Conditional
Level of moderator effect p
Very low (10th percentile) -.22 .03*
Low (25th percentile) -.22 .03*
Moderate (50th percentile) -.03 .69
High (75th percentile) -.03 .69
Very high (90th percentile) .17 .20

The sixth significant moderation model (other-oriented perfectionism X

Fulfillment-Oriented Goals  Anxiety) indicated a meaningful interaction between

parent other-oriented perfectionism and parents’ future goals for their children predicting

adolescent anxiety (see Figure 18). As can be seen in Table 13, the coefficient for the

product of parent other-oriented perfectionism and Fulfillment-Oriented Goals was

 59

statistically different from zero (p < .05). The R-square increase due to the interaction

indicated that approximately 8% of the variance in adolescent anxiety was uniquely

attributable to the interaction between parent other-oriented perfectionism and

Fulfillment-Oriented Goals. The conditional effects of parent other-oriented

perfectionism on anxiety at five different levels (10th, 25th 50th 75th and 90th percentiles)

of Fulfillment-Oriented Goals indicated that higher levels of parent other-oriented

perfectionism were associated with higher levels of adolescent anxiety, but only when

parents’ level of fulfillment-oriented goals was very low or low. While no relation existed

between other-oriented perfectionism and anxiety when parents’ fulfillment-oriented

goals moderate or high, the relation was marginally significant when fulfillment-oriented

goals were very high. In other words, parents who reported having highly perfectionistic

standards for others tended to have children with higher levels of anxiety, but only when

they did not emphasize fulfillment goals. When parents highly emphasized fulfillment

goals, their high standards for others was actually associated with less anxiety in their

children (marginally significant trend).

Figure 18. Interaction Between Other-Oriented Perfectionism and Parents’ Fulfillment

Goals Predicting Adolescent Anxiety
 60

Table 13. Relation between Self-Oriented Perfectionism and SWLS, Moderated by

Parents’ Achievement Goals

Conditional
Level of moderator effect p
Very low (10th percentile) -.32 .04*
Low (25th percentile) -.32 .04*
Moderate (50th percentile) .01 .93
High (75th percentile) .01 .93
Very high (90th percentile) .34 .05

The seventh significant moderation model (other-oriented perfectionism X

Fulfillment-Oriented Goals  SWLS) indicated a meaningful interaction between parent

other-oriented perfectionism and parents’ future goals for their children predicting

adolescent life satisfaction (see Figure 19). As can be seen in Table 14, the coefficient for

the product of Parent other-oriented perfectionism and Fulfillment-Oriented Goals was

statistically different from zero (p < .05). The R-square increase due to the interaction

indicated that approximately 6% of the variance in adolescent life satisfaction was

uniquely attributable to the interaction between parent other-oriented perfectionism and

Fulfillment-Oriented Goals. The conditional effects of Parent other-oriented

perfectionism on life satisfaction at five different levels (10th, 25th 50th 75th and 90th

percentiles) of Fulfillment-Oriented Goals indicated higher levels of other-oriented

perfectionism were associated with lower adolescent life satisfaction when parents’

fulfillment-oriented goals were low or very low. When fulfillment-orientation levels were

moderate, high, or very high, parent other-oriented perfectionism was no longer related to

adolescent life satisfaction. In other words, parents who reported having highly

perfectionistic standards for others tended to have children with lower levels of life
 61

satisfaction, but only when they failed to emphasize fulfillment goals. When parents did

emphasize fulfillment goals, high parental standards for others was unrelated to

adolescent life satisfaction.

Figure 19. Interaction Between Other-Oriented Perfectionism and Parents’ Fulfillment

Goals Predicting Adolescent Life Satisfaction

Table 14. Relation between Other-Oriented Perfectionism and SWLS, Moderated by

Parents’ Fulfillment Goals

Conditional
Level of moderator effect p
th
Very low (10 percentile) .33 .03*
Low (25th percentile) .33 .03*
Moderate (50th percentile) .07 .37
High (75th percentile) .07 .37
Very high (90th percentile) -.18 .26
 62

Table 15. Nonsignificant Findings

Aim Type of analysis Nonsignificant findings

Aim 1: Test for Linear regression Actual parental involvement was not linearly or
linear and curvilinearly associated with adolescent adjustment.
curvilinear Parental perfectionism was not associated with adolescent
relations between adjustment.
parenting Parent life satisfaction was not associated with adolescent
variables and adjustment.
adolescent Family meal frequency was unrelated to adolescent anxiety.
adjustment No linear or curvilinear relations between parents’ future
goals for their children and adolescent adjustment.

Aim 2: Examine Bivariate correlations Fulfillment-oriented goals were unrelated to parental

how the 5 perfectionism.
parenting PPP was unrelated to OOP or SOP.
variables are The parental involvement composite was unrelated to other
interrelated study variables. Neither family meals nor satisfaction
with involvement were related to parents’ goals.
Parent life satisfaction was unrelated to SOP or OOP and
unrelated to achievement-oriented goals.
PPP was unrelated to parents’ goals.

Aim 3: Test the Mediation Neither parents’ future goals nor parental involvement
fit of two models (bootstrapping) mediated the relations between (1) parental perfectionism
in a mediator and (2) parent life satisfaction and adolescent adjustment.
versus moderator
approach Moderation (process) (1) Parent LS X satisfaction with involvementadolescent
anxiety or life satisfaction
(2) Parent LS X actual parent involvementadolescent
adjustment
(3) SOP X PPPdepressive symptoms/life satisfaction
(4) SOP X parents’ goals depressive symptoms/anxiety
(5) SOP X parental involvement adolescent adjustment
(6) OOP X achievement goalsadolescent adjustment
(7) OOP X PPP adolescent adjustment
(8) OOP X parental involvementadolescent adjustment
(9) SPP X parents’ goalsadolescent adjustment
(10) SPP X PPP adolescent adjustment
(11) SPP X parental involvement adolescent adjustment
(12) Parent LS X PPPadolescent adjustment
(13) Parent LS X parents’ goalsadolescent adjustment
 CHAPTER FOUR

DISCUSSION

The present study aimed to examine the role of several different parenting

variables in adolescent adjustment using a mixed methods research approach (i.e.,

quantitative and qualitative data). The main goals were to (1) examine the direct linear

and curvilinear relations between several different aspects of parenting and adolescent

adjustment, (2) investigate how the five parenting variables (i.e., parental perfectionism,

parent life satisfaction, perceived parental pressure, parents’ future goals for their

children, and parental involvement in their children’s lives) were interrelated, and (3) test

two competing models to determine whether relations between parent-focused parenting

variables (i.e., parental perfectionism and parent life satisfaction) and adolescent

adjustment (i.e., depressive symptoms, anxiety, and life satisfaction) were mediated or

moderated by adolescent-focused parenting variables (i.e., perceived parental pressure,

parents’ future goals for their children, and parental involvement in their children’s lives).

Relations Between Parenting Variables and Adolescent Adjustment

Contrary to expectation, findings suggested that the parent-focused parenting

variables (i.e., parental perfectionism and parent life satisfaction) were unrelated to

adolescent adjustment. In contrast, adolescents who reported feeling more satisfied with

their parents’ level of involvement in their lives reported fewer depressive symptoms,

less anxiety, and higher levels of life satisfaction. Thus, the synchronicity between what

63
 64

the parent provides and what the child needs/desires may be of particular importance

when considering adolescent adjustment. If there is a poor match between what is

provided and what is needed/desired, then parental involvement may be perceived by

adolescents as pressure. Of note, actual parental involvement (i.e., adolescents’ ratings of

how involved parents were in various aspects of their lives) was not associated with any

adolescent adjustment outcomes. Given that adolescence is a crucial time for separation-

individuation, a match between parents’ involvement and adolescents’ need/desire for

involvement may be more influential in terms of adolescent adjustment.

We suggest that adolescent report of satisfaction with parental involvement, in

part, represents their emotional experience of parental involvement. Previous literature

indicates that parents’ physical and emotional absences are associated with increased

levels of distress and adjustment disturbances in affluent youth (Luthar & Latendresse,

2005b); yet parental intrusiveness or over-involvement can also have highly negative

effects on adolescent adjustment (Ginsburg & Bronstein, 1993). While previous literature

describes the two extremes of parental involvement and their links to negative adolescent

adjustment, no research to our knowledge has examined the amount or type of parental

involvement that is associated with positive adolescent adjustment. We hypothesized that

parents’ behavior (i.e., involvement), and specifically a “happy medium” between over-

and under-involvement, would be ideal for positive adolescent adjustment. However,

findings from the present study indicated that parents’ behavioral involvement may be

less important than adolescents’ emotional experience of that involvement. Thus perhaps

parents should strive for a level of involvement that is specific to and in sync with each
 65

adolescent’s needs as opposed to subscribing to a “one-size-fits-all” theory that

emphasizes a certain amount or type of involvement.

Although the majority of our findings indicated that parents’ behavioral

involvement was not associated with adolescent adjustment, an examination of family

meals revealed that adolescents who ate more meals with their families each week tended

to experience fewer depressive symptoms and greater life satisfaction. While eating

meals together is a behavior, we posit that there is something about engaging in family

meals that represents a positive psychological engagement on the part of parents. The act

of parents making time for family dinners may be perceived by adolescents as making

time for them and thus caring more about them. The family systems literature notes that

eating meals together provides an opportunity for families to “replenish themselves and

affirm their experience of ‘we-ness’” (Larson & Richards, 1994, p. 217). When parents

are physically absent from the home, fewer family meals are eaten and adolescents

experience more internalizing, externalizing, and academic problems (Luthar &

Latendresse, 2005b). Conversely, the literature suggests numerous advantages of family

meals, including eating healthier foods (Neumark-Sztainer et al., 2000), providing family

identity, order, and consistency (Wolin & Bennett, 1984), and the promotion of family

communication (Lynam & Tenn, 1989; Riesch, 1997). Furthermore, more family time

(including family meals) predicts better psychosocial adjustment in future years (Crouter,

Head, McHale, & Tucker, 2004). The present study extended this literature by examining

associations between frequency of family meals and adolescent adjustment within an

affluent sample. Research on affluent youth has described a lack of a physical presence of
 66

parents in the home and has noted connections between parental absence and fewer meals

eaten with parents (Luthar & Latendresse, 2005b). However researchers have yet to

examine links between the frequency of family meals and adolescent adjustment in this

population. Results from our study suggest that affluent youth may receive benefits from

family meals similar to those enjoyed by non-affluent youth in terms of psychosocial

adjustment.

While results did not suggest that a “happy medium” between parental over- and

under-involvement is associated with adolescent adjustment, moderate levels of

perceived parental pressure were linked to more positive adolescent adjustment.

Specifically, findings indicated that very low and very high levels of perceived parental

pressure were associated with worse adjustment (i.e., more depressive and anxiety

symptoms and lower life satisfaction), while moderate levels of perceived parental

pressure were related to healthier adjustment (i.e., fewer depressive and anxiety

symptoms and higher life satisfaction). The aforementioned argument about the

importance of parental presence in the home versus parental intrusiveness or over-

involvement may also help explain why a curvilinear relation exists between perceived

parental pressure and adolescent adjustment. Several researchers have demonstrated a

significant relation between perceived parental pressure and symptoms of adolescent

depression and anxiety (Neumeister, 2004; Stoeber & Rambow, 2007; Chambless &

Steketee, 1999; Sagar & Stoeber, 2009; Randall, Bohnert, & Travers, under review); the

present study, however, hypothesized that the complete absence of perceived pressure

may not be ideal either. Extremely low levels of parental pressure may be perceived by
 67

adolescents as parental disengagement or a lack of investment (i.e., absentee parents),

whereas extremely high levels of pressure may signify unrealistic expectations or

psychologically-driven over-involvement (i.e., helicopter parents). Our data replicate the

finding that intense parental pressure to achieve is not conducive to healthy adolescent

adjustment, but adds to the current literature by demonstrating that a paucity of parental

pressure is also associated with adjustment problems. Thus it appears that a moderate

level of pressure or expectations is ideal for the adjustment of affluent youth. Of note,

perceived parental pressure may be directly linked to adolescent adjustment due to

common method variance, as both perceived parental pressure and all three types of

adolescent adjustment were provided through adolescent-report.

Another parenting variable examined in the present study was parents’ future

academic/career goals for their children. Interestingly, no direct relations were found

between parents’ goals and adolescent adjustment. One hypothesis for this lack of

findings is that adolescents’ satisfaction with parental goals or the parent-child goal

“match” may be more influential on adolescent adjustment. Unfortunately, this study did

not examine adolescents’ future academic/career goals for themselves; therefore, we are

not able to speak to this point directly. However, we did test the hypothesis that parents’

future goals may be indirectly associated with adolescent adjustment. These findings are

discussed further in the section on moderating relations.

Relations Among Parenting Variables

Findings indicated that more perfectionistic parents, and particularly parents who

endorsed socially imposed perfectionistic pressures, tended to emphasize achievement

 68

and success when describing their goals for their children, have children who experienced

more pressure from them, and eat fewer family meals with their children. In addition,

parents who reported feeling more satisfied in their own lives tended to emphasize

fulfillment and learning goals for their children. Interestingly, parental involvement was

unrelated to all parenting variables.

The perfectionism literature generally supports the finding that socially prescribed

perfectionism is a maladaptive type of perfectionism that is associated with negative

adjustment outcomes (Enns, Cox, & Clara, 2002; Hamachek, 1978; Hollender, 1965). In

the current study, socially prescribed perfectionism was linked to several negative aspects

of parenting, including lower parental life satisfaction, more achievement goals, more

perceived pressure, and fewer family meals. In contrast, other-oriented perfectionism and

self-oriented perfectionism were not directly related to multiple parenting variables (i.e.,

self-oriented perfectionism only linked to achievement goals). These results suggest that

socially prescribed perfectionism may be a more potently negative aspect of parenting.

Specifically, findings indicated that parents who perceived high perfectionistic

pressures/expectations from their environment (i.e., socially prescribed perfectionism)

tended to have children who perceived more pressure from them (i.e., perceived parental

pressure). As research suggests that perfectionism is often “transmitted” across

generations a (Hewitt & Flett, 1991), it is possible that parents displace the intense social

pressure to achieve onto their children. One way in which parents may displace this

pressure is through their future goals for their children. In the present study, more

perfectionistic parents tended to emphasize achievement goals for their children (i.e.,
 69

emphasized prestige, performance, and success). Alternatively, parents who reported

experiencing lower levels of perfectionistic pressure from their environment (i.e., socially

prescribed perfectionism) experienced greater life satisfaction, and tended to report more

fulfillment-oriented goals for their children (i.e., emphasized learning, identity

development, satisfaction, and exploring passions); yet parent life satisfaction was

unrelated to achievement goals. This finding may suggest that it is easier for parents to

see the value in their children striving for fulfillment goals when they themselves feel

fulfilled and are less affected by societal pressures to achieve and succeed. Interestingly,

parent life satisfaction was not associated with any other parenting variables, nor was it

directly linked to adolescent adjustment.

Although parents’ achievement-oriented goals for their children were unrelated to

their life satisfaction, they were linked to higher levels of parental perfectionism (i.e.,

self-oriented perfectionism, socially prescribed perfectionism, and other-oriented

perfectionism). These findings indicate an important link between perfectionistic traits in

parents and the type of academic/career goals they have for their children. More

specifically, parents who expected more from themselves (i.e., self-oriented

perfectionism), had high expectations for others (i.e., other-oriented perfectionism),

and/or perceived their environment as setting high standards (i.e., socially prescribed

perfectionism) also tended to expect more of their children (i.e., emphasized prestige,

performance, upward mobility, professional or academic success, or affluence). Of note,

neither fulfillment nor achievement goals were associated with adolescent adjustment.

These results suggest that neither parental perfectionism nor parents’ future goals alone
 70

can directly account for adolescent adjustment. Rather, there may be other variables that

mediate or moderate these relations. To our knowledge, no researchers have directly

investigated parents’ academic and career goals for their children, nor have they

examined links between these goals and parental perfectionism.

Examining the Fit of Two Models

The integration of numerous findings from previous literature suggests that the

effects of parent-focused parenting variables on adolescent adjustment may differ based

on certain adolescent-focused mechanisms or under certain circumstances. Thus the

present study aimed to answer questions related to mechanisms of influence and

conditions under which certain relations exist by examining the fit of two models in a

mediator versus moderator approach (Rose, Holmbeck, Coackley, & Franks, 2004).

Results indicated that a moderation model more accurately represents the relations among

the set of variables of interest when compared to a mediation model. In other words, we

are not able to provide information about why our variables of interest are related, but we

are able to describe when or the context in which they are related. This finding suggests

that it is important to consider certain adolescent-focused parenting variables when

examining the links between parent-focused parenting variables and adolescent

adjustment. In other words, the interaction between parent traits/adjustment (i.e., parent-

focused parenting variables) and parental communication of values through behaviors

and expectations (i.e., adolescent-focused parenting variables) is linked to adolescent

adjustment (i.e., moderation).

 71

Regarding mediation, neither parents’ future goals for their children nor parental

involvement were found to mediate the relations between (1) parental perfectionism and

(2) parent life satisfaction and adolescent adjustment (i.e., depressive symptoms, anxiety,

and life satisfaction; see Figure 1). Although we have interpreted this lack of findings as

an absence of support for the mediation model, it is also possible that the small sample

size did not produce enough power to detect such results. However, several moderation

analyses did yield significant results providing evidence that the variables of interest in

the present study are linked under certain circumstances (i.e., moderation).

Several interesting findings emerged from the moderation analyses. First,

adolescent satisfaction with parental involvement in their lives moderated the relation

between parent life satisfaction and adolescent adjustment. Specifically, parents who

were less satisfied with their lives tended to have children with more depressive

symptoms, but only if adolescents were less satisfied with their parents’ level of

involvement in their lives. When adolescents were more satisfied with parental

involvement, parent life satisfaction was no longer related to adolescent depressive

symptoms. As previously discussed, research suggests that parents’ physical and

emotional absences are associated with increased levels of distress and adjustment

disturbances in affluent youth (Luthar & Latendresse, 2005b). However, parental

intrusiveness or over-involvement can also have highly negative effects on adolescent

adjustment (Ginsburg & Bronstein, 1993). The finding in the present study may be linked

to both “absentee” and “helicopter” parenting. Perhaps parents who are not satisfied with

their lives are either disengaged from their children’s lives, or are living vicariously
 72

through their children, resulting in over-involvement in their adolescents’ lives that

mismatches what their child needs or desires. Thus, this finding similarly suggests that

parents’ level of involvement should be in sync with each adolescent’s needs during this

time of separation-individuation.

The second moderation finding indicated that, although certain parental

characteristics (i.e., perfectionism) are not directly related to adolescent adjustment, the

way in which these traits are expressed or communicated to adolescents is associated

with adolescent adjustment. More specifically, parents who had high expectations for

others (i.e., other-oriented perfectionism) tended to have children with worse adjustment

(i.e., more depressive symptoms and anxiety, and lower life satisfaction), but only when

they did not emphasize growth and satisfaction in their goals for their children (i.e.,

fulfillment-oriented goals). In the perfectionism literature, other-oriented perfectionism is

typically considered to be a maladaptive type of perfectionism (Enns, Cox, & Clara,

2002; Hamachek, 1978; Hollender, 1965). However, when fulfillment goals are

emphasized, perhaps the expression of other-oriented perfectionism demonstrates that a

parent cares and is invested in their child’s life as opposed to being critical and

demanding success. Of note, parents’ achievement-oriented goals did not moderate any

of these relations. These results can be linked to one of the main findings in Travers,

Bohnert, & Randall’s (2013) study examining the impact of the school environment on

adolescent mental health; findings indicated that the associations between perceived

school climate (i.e., motivational climate), personal definitions of success (i.e., goal

orientation), and adolescent adjustment emerged only when positive aspects of school
 73

environment and individual achievement values were considered. In other words, non-

competitive values and collaborative environments were found to be particularly

important for adolescent adjustment. Findings from the present study further support the

idea that emphasizing nurturing and supportive values (i.e., fulfillment goals) may be

more important than de-emphasizing performance and success (i.e., achievement goals).

In contrast, both achievement and fulfillment goals significantly moderated the

relation between parents’ self-oriented perfectionism and adolescents’ life satisfaction. In

other words, the link between parent self-oriented perfectionism and adolescent life

satisfaction depended on the type of future academic/career goals parents had for their

children. When parents emphasized prestige and success less, their highly perfectionistic

self-imposed standards (i.e., self-oriented perfectionism) were unrelated to their

children’s life satisfaction. However, when parents strongly emphasized achievement

goals, higher levels of parent self-oriented perfectionism were significantly associated

with lower levels of adolescent life satisfaction. Conversely, when parents failed to

emphasize fulfillment goals or emphasized them very little, higher levels of parental self-

oriented perfectionism were significantly associated with lower levels of adolescent life

satisfaction. When there was a strong emphasis on fulfillment goals, however, higher

levels of parent self-oriented perfectionism were linked to higher levels of adolescent life

satisfaction. In the perfectionism literature, self-oriented perfectionism is viewed as

maladaptive when it involves exceedingly high, unrealistic, and self-imposed standards

accompanied by an intensive self-scrutiny, criticism, and inability to accept flaws and

failure in oneself (Hewitt & Flett, 1991). However, when there is less emphasis on self-
 74

doubt and criticism and more emphasis on pursuit of personal standards, self-oriented

perfectionism has been described as an adaptive type of perfectionism (Enns, Cox, &

Clara, 2002; Hamachek, 1978; Hollender, 1965). Thus, findings from the present study

suggest that the way in which parental self-oriented perfectionism is linked to adolescent

adjustment depends on the values/beliefs the parents hold regarding success, and how

they then transmit those values/beliefs to their children through everyday interactions

(e.g., future academic/career goals). Perhaps fulfillment goals are more in line with the

pursuit of personal standards, a positive aspect of self-oriented perfectionism, while

achievement goals are more strongly associated with self-doubt and criticism, the

maladaptive features of self-oriented perfectionism. We hypothesize that different types

of parental goals (i.e., fulfillment versus achievement) highlight the positive or negative

aspects of self-oriented perfectionism, which is then associated with adolescent

adjustment.

One final moderation finding that emerged indicated that perceived parental

pressure moderated the relation between parental perfectionism and adolescent

adjustment. Specifically, parents with highly perfectionistic self-imposed standards (i.e.,

self-oriented perfectionism) tended to have children who experienced more anxiety, but

only when adolescents also perceived a large amount of parental pressure (i.e., perceived

parental pressure). When perceived parental pressure was relatively low, the relation

between self-oriented perfectionism and adolescent anxiety was insignificant. Again it

was found that parents’ perfectionistic traits were linked to adolescent adjustment, but
 75

only when translated into a recognizable, and negative message to adolescents (i.e.,

parental pressure).

Given the aforementioned finding that socially prescribed perfectionism is

strongly linked to several other negative parenting variables, we found it surprising that

the relation between socially prescribed perfectionism and adolescent adjustment was not

moderated by any of the three adolescent-focused parenting variables. The perfectionism

literature suggests that socially prescribed perfectionism is a maladaptive type of

perfectionism that is associated with negative adjustment outcomes (Enns, Cox, & Clara,

2002; Hamachek, 1978; Hollender, 1965). Findings from this study indicate that the link

between socially prescribed perfectionism and adolescent adjustment is not conditional,

nor dependent upon any other parent-focused or adolescent-focused parenting variable.

However, given that socially prescribed perfectionism is related to several parent-focused

parenting variables that were related to adolescent outcomes (i.e., fewer family meals,

higher levels of perceived parental pressure), it is possible that the relation between

socially prescribed perfectionism, parenting variables, and adolescent outcomes is better

described by a mediated or process-oriented model. Thus our lack of findings may be due

to our small sample size, warranting further investigation with a larger sample. It is also

possible that this hypothesized mediated relationship may be more prevalent in a clinical

sample of adolescents from affluent communities.

The majority of previous research examining the impact of parenting variables on

adolescent adjustment examines direct relations between variables. One recent study

drawing on the same sample used in the current study found that perceived parental
 76

pressure mediates the relation between parental perfectionism and adolescent adjustment

in affluent youth (Randall, Bohnert, & Travers, under review). Specifically, adolescents

with parents who report high levels of perfectionistic pressures from their surroundings

(i.e., socially prescribed perfectionism) or who expect perfectionism from others (i.e.,

other-oriented perfectionism) experience their parents as more pressuring and also report

higher levels of internalizing problems and lower levels of life satisfaction. No known

research, however, has examined perceived parental pressure as a moderator, nor has it

investigated parental involvement in their adolescents’ lives or parents’ future academic

and career goals for their children as both mediators and moderators. The results from the

current study suggest that parent-focused parenting variables are related to adolescent

adjustment under specific conditions (i.e., moderation). While we are not able to provide

information about why our variables of interest are related, we are able to describe when

or the context in which they are related.

Limitations and Future Directions

The current study is one of few that examines the impact of the parent context on

affluent adolescent adjustment. However, there were several limitations. First, the current

study only evaluated the direct and indirect pathways with a sample of affluent

adolescents. Although we propose that the factors included in the models were “culturally

salient” based on prior literature, we did not compare the results to low- or middle-class

adolescents, nor examine the model with an ethnically diverse sample. Therefore, future

research is needed to clarify whether the theories proposed in the current study are unique

to an affluent population or whether there is a consistent pattern among youth and

 77

families from a wide range of socioeconomic and ethnic backgrounds. In addition, the

adolescents in the current sample were relatively well-adjusted, which may have

attenuated the strength of the findings; thus, future research should assess the fit of these

models using a clinical sample. Another limitation of the present study involves the

absence of potentially influential parent-child relationship variables. The literature

stresses the importance of emotional closeness between children and parents, and

suggests that emotional isolation is an influential factor in the adjustment disturbance of

affluent youth (Luthar & Latendresse, 2005a). The present study did not directly assess

the construct of emotional closeness; however the measures of parental involvement and

adolescent satisfaction with parental involvement may provide some level of insight into

how close adolescents feel to their parents. Family meals may also serve as a proxy for

family connectedness in that highly connected families may be more likely to eat meals

together (Neumark-Sztainer, Wall, Story, & Fulkerson, 2004).

Additional limitations of the study are methodological in nature. First, the cross-

sectional design limits what can be concluded about the directionality of the findings.

Second, the small sample size increases the risk of sampling error. The current study

required complete child-parent pairs, which decreased the analytic sample. Of note, the

sample size provided very strong (95-99%) power to detect large or medium effects, but

only weak (26-27%) power to detect small effects. Thus, although the sample size is

small, it is large enough to support our analyses. Finally, several of the significant linear

and curvilinear findings included variables that were assessed through adolescent report

only. Thus it is possible that significant relations are due to common method variance.
 78

All moderation findings, however, included a mix of variables assessed through

adolescent and parent report in each model. Future studies should use a larger sample and

a multi-method approach with a longitudinal design to assess the developmental

progression of parental perfectionism, parent life satisfaction, parents’ future goals for

their children, perceived parental pressure, parental involvement, and affluent adolescent

adjustment.

Furthermore, although the current study collected data from four different high

schools across the country, certain school-level differences were not considered. While

this aspect of the study makes the data more generalizable, it also raises questions about

school differences. While conducting individual analyses by school would provide more

clarity on this issue, the sample size was not large enough to do so. A recent study

drawing from the same sample as the current investigation found that more performance-

oriented climates (i.e., emphasize success, achievement) are associated with more

adjustment problems while climates that emphasize learning and growth are associated

with fewer adjustment problems (Travers, Bohnert, & Randall, 2013). Results suggest the

importance of non-competitive achievement-oriented values and collaborative school

contexts in adolescent adjustment. Thus future studies should investigate the role of

school climate on adolescent adjustment and determine if and how the school

environment may support or counter the beliefs and pressuring behaviors of

perfectionistic parents. This information may help inform parent, teacher, and student

intervention and/or prevention programs aimed at reducing adjustment problems in

affluent communities.
 79

Implications and Conclusions

The current study expands prior research by examining various parental factors

thought to relate to affluent adolescent adjustment, studying the relations among these

variables, and considering when and how these parental factors may exert their influence.

Although we proposed that parents’ traits and adjustment could be linked to adolescent

adjustment through various parental behaviors and values (i.e., mediation), we found

more support for the conditions under which parental factors may be related to affluent

adolescent adjustment (i.e., moderation). For example, lower levels of parental pressure,

less emphasis on achievement-oriented values, and greater emphasis on fulfillment-

oriented values provided circumstances in which parental traits and adjustment could be

linked to healthier adolescent adjustment. Findings also highlighted that the

synchronicity or match between what the child needs/desires and the parent’s emotional

and behavioral involvement may be of particular importance. Additionally, socially

prescribed perfectionism was a consistently unfavorable aspect of parenting, linked to

other undesirable parenting variables, and negatively associated with positive aspects of

parenting. In contrast, parent life satisfaction was associated with greater emphasis on

adolescent growth and fulfillment. Results did not, however, provide insight into the

mechanisms by which or conditions under which parental socially prescribed

perfectionism is related to adolescent adjustment; as such, further investigation is needed.

In sum, parents in affluent communities are struggling with perfectionism and

potentially lower levels of life satisfaction. These difficulties are manifested, emotionally

and/or behaviorally, in a way that may be influencing adolescents, which could

 80

subsequently lead to psychosocial adjustment problems. Thus parents are an important

point of entry with regards to intervention. Given our newfound understanding of the

conditions under which certain types of parental perfectionism impact adolescent

adjustment, this study helps to clarify aims for the development of prevention and

intervention programs. For example, findings from the current investigation support the

idea that parents within the culture of affluence report an immense amount of pressure

from their external environment to be perfect (i.e., socially prescribed perfectionism) and

that this struggle may be “passed on” to their children. Therefore developing programs

that focus on supporting parents and helping them manage their stress may help minimize

the extent to which their children report negative developmental outcomes. Furthermore,

given the importance of the parent-child “match,” interventions should focus on parent-

child work at the individual and programming levels. Although it is clear that prevention

and intervention programs which aim to counter the difficulties faced by parents and

children within the culture of affluence must assume a multi-systemic approach, this

study is an important step towards achieving the goal of positive youth development and

promotion of better adjustment among affluent adolescents.

 REFERENCE LIST

Ablard, K. E., & Parker, W. D. (1997). Parents' achievement goals and perfectionism in
their academically talented children. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 26(6),
651–667.

Achenbach, T. M. (1991). The child behavior Checklish/4–18 and 1991 profile.

Burlington: University of Vermont, Department of Psychiatry.

Ames, C. (1992). Achievement goals, motivational climate, and motivational processes.

In G. C. Roberts (Ed.), Motivation in sport and exercise (pp. 161–176).
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Ansary, N. S., & Luthar, S. S. (2009). Distress and academic achievement among
adolescents of affluence: A study of externalizing and internalizing problem
behaviors and school performance. Development and Psychopathology, 21, 319–
341.

Ansary, N. S., Luthar, S. S., & McMahon, T. J. (2012). Socioeconomic context and
emotional-behavioral achievement links: Concurrent and prospective associations
among low-and high-income youth. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 22, 14–
30.

Astin, H. S. (1984). The meaning of work in women’s lives: A sociopsychological model

of career choice and work behavior. The Counseling Psychologist, 12(4), 117–
126.

Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Capara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (1996). Multifaceted impact
of self-efficacy beliefs on academic functioning. Child Development, 67, 1206–
1222.

Bieling, P. J., Israeli, A. L., Smith, J., & Antony, M. M. (2003). Making the grade: The
behavioral consequences of perfectionism in the classroom. Personality and
Individual Differences, 35, 163–178.

Biran, M. W., & Reese, C. (2007). Parental influences on social anxiety: The sources of
perfectionism. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 55, 282–285.

Blatt, S. J. (1995). The destructiveness of perfectionism: Implications for the treatment of

depression. American Psychologist, 50, 1003–1020.

81
 82

Briggs, N. (2006). Estimation of the standard error and confidence interval of the indirect
effect in multiple mediator models. Dissertation Abstracts International, 37,
475B.

Brislin, R. W., Lonner, W. J., & Thorndike, R. M. (1973). Cross-cultural research

methods. New York, NY: Wiley.

Bronfenbrenner, U. 1989. Ecological systems theory. In: Vasta, R. (ed.) 1989 Six
Theories of Child Development: Revised Formulations and Current Issues. Vol.
6. AI Press, Greenwich, Connecticut.

Cashman, O., & Twaite, J. A. (2009). Toxic wealth: How the culture of affluence can
harm us and our children. Santa Barbara, CA, US: Praeger/ABC-CLIO.

Chambless, D. L., & Steketee, G. (1999). Expressed emotion and behavior therapy
outcome: A prospective study with obsessive-compulsive and agoraphobic
outpatients. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67, 658–665.

Chilman, C. (1980). Parent satisfactions, concerns, and goals for their children. Family
Relations, 29, 339–345.

Cowen, E. L. (1991) In pursuit of wellness. American Psychologist. 46, 404–408.

Cowen, E.L. (1994). The enhancement of psychological wellness: Challenges and

opportunities. American Journal of Community Psychology, 22, 149–179.

Creswell, J. W., & Zhang, W. (2009). The application of mixed methods designs to
trauma research. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 22(6), 612–621.

Crouter, A. C., Head, M. R., McHale, S. M., & Tucker, C. J. (2004). Family time and the
psychosocial adjustment of adolescent siblings and their parents. Journal of
Marriage and Family, 66, 147–162.

Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Schneider, B. (2001). Becoming an adult: How teenagers

prepare for the world of work. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Deater-Deckard, K. (2006). Parenting stress and child adjustment: Some old hypotheses
and new questions. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 5, 314–332.

Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life
scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75.

Dix, T., & Branca, S. H. (2003). Parenting as a goal-regulation process. In L. Kuczynski

(Ed.), Handbook of the dynamics in parent-child relations (pp. 167–187).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
 83

Duda, J.L. (1993). Goals: A social-cognitive approach to the study of achievement

motivation in sport. In R. N. Singer, M. Murphey and L. K. Tennant (Eds.),
Handbook of research on sport psychology (pp. 421–436). New York, NY:
Macmillan.

Duda, J. L., & Ntoumanis, N. (2005). After-school sport for children: Implications of a
task-involving motivational climate. In J. L. Mahoney, R. W. Larson, & J. S.
Eccles (Eds.), After school activities: Contexts of development (pp. 311–330).
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Dweck, C. S. (1984). Motivation. In R. G laser &. A. Lesgold (Eds.), The handbook of

psychology and education (Vol. 1). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

England M.J., & Sim L.J. (2009). Depression in Parents, Parenting, and Children:
Opportunities to Improve Identification, Treatment, and Prevention.
Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

Enns, M. W., & Cox, B. J. (2002). The nature and assessment of perfectionism: A critical
analysis. In G. L. Flett & P. L. Hewitt (Eds.), Perfectionism: Theory, research,
and treatment (pp. 33–62). Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.

Enns, M. W., Cox, B. J., & Clara, I. (2002). Adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism:
Developmental origins and association with depression proneness. Personality
and Individual Differences, 33, 921–935.

Frost, R. O., Marten P., Lahart, C., Rosenblate, R. (1990). The dimensions of
perfectionism. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 14, 449–468.

Frost, R. O., Heimberg, R. G., Holt, C. S., Mattia, J. I., & Neubauer, A. L. (1993). A
comparison of two measures of perfectionism. Personality and Individual
Differences, 14, 119–126.

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. 88–132).
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Fritz, M. S., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2007). Required sample size to detect the mediated
effect. Psychological Science, 18, 233–239.

Graber, J. A., & Sontag, L. M. (2009). Internalizing problems during adolescence. In R.

Lerner & L. Steinberg (Eds.) Handbook of adolescent psychology, Vol 1:
Individual bases of adolescent development (3rd ed., pp. 642–682). Hoboken, NJ
US: Wiley and Sons.
 84

Ginsburg GS, Bronstein P. 1993. Family factors related to children’s intrinsic/extrinsic

motivational orientation and academic performance. Child Development, 64,
1461–1474.

Hamachek, D. E. (1978). Psychodynamics of normal and neurotic perfectionism.

Psychology, 15, 27–33.

Hamilton, T. K., & Schweitzer, R. D. (2000). The cost of being perfect: Perfectionism
and suicide ideation in university students. Australian and New Zealand Journal
of Psychiatry, 34, 829–835.

Hayes, A. F., 2009. Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical mediation in the new
millennium. Communication Monographs, 76(4), 408–420.

Hayes, A. F. (2012). “PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable

mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling” [Working paper].
Retrieved April 15, 2012, from www.afhayes.com

Henderson, R.W. (1981). Home environment and intellectual performance. In R.W.

Henderson (Ed.), Parent-child interaction (pp. 3–32). New York, NY: Academic
Press.

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.

Hintze, J. (2011). Power Analysis and Sample Size (PASS 11) [Computer software].
Kaysville, UT: Number Cruncher Statistical Systems.

Hollender, M. H. (1965). Perfectionism. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 6, 94–103.

Hudson, J. L., & Rapee, R. M. (2001). Parent--child interactions and anxiety disorders:
An observational study. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 39, 1411–1427.

Kakihara, F., & Tilton-Weaver, L. (2009). Adolescents’ interpretations of parental

control: Differentiated by domain and types of control. Child Development, 80,
1722–1738.

Kasser T. (2002). The high price of materialism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Kavussanu, M., & Roberts, G. C. (1996). Motivation in physical activity contexts: The
relationship of perceived motivational climate to intrinsic motivation and self-
efficacy. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 18, 264–280.
 85

Kelle, U. (2006). Combining qualitative and quantitative methods in research practice:

Purposes and advantages. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 293–311.

Kingon Y. S., O’Sullivan, A. L. (2001). The family as a protective asset in adolescent

development. Journal of Holistic Nursing, 19, 102–121.

Kurdek, L. A., & Fine, M. A. (1994). Family acceptance and family control as predictors
of adjustment in young adolescents: Linear, curvilinear, or interactive effects?
Child Development, 65, 1137–1146.

Larson, R., Richards, M. H., & Perry-Jenkins, M. (1994). Divergent worlds: The daily
emotional experience of mothers and fathers in the domestic and public spheres.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 1034–1046.

Levine, M. (2006). The price of privilege. New York, NY: HarperCollins.

LeVine, R. A. (2003). Childhood socialization: Comparative studies of parenting,

learning, and educational change (Cerc Studies in Comparative Education 12).
Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Center, University of Hong Kong.

LeVine, R. A., Dixon, S., LeVine, S., Richman, A., Leiderman, P. H., Keefer, C., &
Brazelton, T. B. (1994). Childcare and culture: Lessons from Africa. New York,
NY: Cambridge University Press.

Lopez, A., Mathers, C., Ezzati, M., Jamison, D., & Murray, C. (2006). Global burden of
disease and risk factors. Washington, DC: World Bank.

Lundh, L. G. (2004). Perfectionism and acceptance. Journal of Rational-Emotive and

Cognitive-Behavior Therapy, 22, 255–269.

Luthar, S. S. (2003). The culture of affluence: Psychological costs of material wealth.

Child Development, 74(6), 1581–1593.

Luthar, S. S., & Ansary, N. S. (2005). Dimensions of adolescent rebellion: Risks for
academic failure among high- and low-income youth. Development and
Psychopathology, 17, 231–250.

Luthar, S. S., & Barkin, S. H. (2012). Are affluent youth truly “at risk”? Vulnerability
and resilience across three diverse samples. Development and Psychopathology,
24, 429–449.

Luthar, S. S., & Becker, B. E. (2002). Privileged but pressured? A study of affluent
youth. Child Development, 73(5), 1593–1610.
 86

Luthar, S. S., & D’Avanzo, K. (1999). Contextual factors in substance use: A study of
suburban and inner-city adolescents. Development and Psychopathology, 11(4),
845–867.

Luthar, S. S., & Goldstein, A. S. (2008). Substance use and related behaviors among
suburban late adolescents: The importance of perceived parent containment.
Development and Psychopathology, 20(2), 591–614.

Luthar, S. S., & Latendresse, S. J. (2005). Comparable “risks” at the socioeconomic

status extremes: Preadolescents' perceptions of parenting. Development and
Psychopathology, 17(01), 207–230.

Luthar, S. S., & Latendresse, S. J. (2005). Children of the affluent. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 14(1), 49–53.

Luthar, S. S., & Latendresse, S. J. (2005). Comparable “risks” at the socioeconomic

status extremes: Preadolescents’ perceptions of parenting. Development and
Psychopathology, 17, 207–230.

Luthar, S. S., & Sexton, C. C. (2004). The high price of affluence. Advances in Child
Development and Behavior, 32, 125–162.

Lynam, M. J., & Tenn, L. (1989). Communication. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 14,
653–660.

Maehr, M. L. (1983). On doing well in science: Why Johnny no longer excels, why Sarah
never did. In S. G. Paris, G. M. Olson, & H. W. Stevenson (Eds.), Learning and
motivation in the classroom (pp. 179–210). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Marjoribanks, K. (1978). Ethnic families and children's achievement. Sydney, Australia:

Allen & Unwin.

Mays, N., & Pope, C. (1995). Qualitative research: Rigour and qualitative research.
British Medical Journal, 311(6997), 109–112.

MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., & Williams, J. (2004). Confidence limits for the
indirect effect: Distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivariate
Behavioral Research, 39, 99–128.

Muthén, B. O. (1991). Multilevel factor analysis of class and student achievement

components. Journal of Educational Measurement, 28, 338−354.

Muthén, B. O. (1994). Multilevel covariance structure analysis. Sociological Methods

and Research, 22, 376−398.
 87

Muthén, B. O., & Satorra, A. (1989). Multilevel aspects of varying parameters in

structural models. In R. D. Bock (Ed.), Multilevel analysis of educational data
(pp. 87−99). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Muthén, B. O., & Satorra, A. (1995). Complex sample data in structural equation
modeling. In P. V. Marsden (Ed.), Sociological methodology (pp. 267−316).
Oxford, England: Blackwell.

Neumark-Sztainer, D., Story, M., Ackard, D., Moe, J., Perry, C. (2000). The “family
meal”: Views of adolescents. Journal of Nutrition Education, 32, 329–334.

Neumark-Sztainer, D., Wall, M., Story, M., Fulkerson, J. (2004). Are family meal
patterns associated with disordered eating behaviors among adolescents? Journa
of Adolescent Health, 35(5), 350–359.

Neumeister, K. L. S. (2004). Factors influencing the development of perfectionism in

gifted college students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 48, 259–274.

Newton, M., & Duda, J. L. (1993). The relationship of task and ego orientation to
performance-cognitive content, affect, and attributions in bowling. Journal of
Sport Behavior, 16(4), 209–220.

Nicholls, J. G. (1984). Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective

experience, task choice, and performance. Psychological Review, 91, 328–346.

Okagaki, L., Hammond, K. A., & Seamon, L. (1999). Socialization of religious beliefs.
Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 20, 273–294.

Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Chamberlain, P., Hurlburt, M. S., & Landsverk, J.
(2011). Mixed-methods designs in mental health services research: A review.
Psychiatric Services, 62, 255–263.

Park, N. (2004). The role of subjective well-being in positive youth development, The
Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 591, 25–39.

Peugh J. L. (2010). A practical guide to multilevel modeling. Journal of School

Psychology, 48, 85–112.

Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect
effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, &
Computers, 36(4), 717–731.
 88

Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Contemporary approaches to assessing mediation

in communication research. In A. F. Hayes, M. D. Slater, & L. B. Snyder (Eds.),
The SAGE sourcebook of advanced data analyses methods for communication
research (pp. 13–54). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Preacher, K. J., Rucker, D. D., & Hayes, A. F. (2007). Addressing moderated mediation
hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate behavioral
research, 42, 185–227.

Rapee, R. M. (1997). Potential role of childrearing practices in the development of

anxiety and depression. Clinical Psychology Review, 17, 47–67.

Renshaw, K. D. (2008). The predictive, convergent, and discriminant validity of

perceived criticism: A review. Clinical Psychology Review, 28, 521–534.

Resnick, M. D., Bearman, P. S., Blum, R. W., Bauman, K. E., Harris, K. M., Jones, J.,
. . . Udry, J. R. (1997). Protecting adolescents from harm. JAMA, 278, 823–832.

Rice, K. G., & Mirzadeh, S. A. (2000). Perfectionism, attachment, and adjustment.

Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47, 238–250.

Riesch, S. K. (1997) Parent-adolescent communication in nondistressed families. Annual

Review of Nursing Research, 15, 123–152.

Roberts G. C., Treasure D. C., & Conroy D. E. (2007). Understanding the dynamics of
motivation in sport and physical activity: an achievement goal interpretation. In
G. T. Tenenbaum, & R. C. Eklund (Eds.)., Handbook of sport psychology (3rd
ed., pp. 3–30). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Roberts, G. C. (2001). Understanding the dynamics of motivation in physical activity:

The influence of achievement goals on motivational processes. In G. C. Roberts
(Ed.), Advances in motivation in sport and exercise (pp. 1–50). Champaign, IL:
Human Kinetics.

Roberts, G. C. (2006). Reflections on 25 years of achievement goal theory. In F. Boen, B.

De Cuyper, & J. Opdenacker (Eds.), Current research topics in exercise and sport
psychology in Europe (pp. 91–105). Leuven, Belgium: Lannoo Campus.

Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Rutter, M., & Sroufe, L. A. (2000). Developmental psychopathology: Concepts and

challenges. Development and Psychopathology, 12, 265–296.
 89

Sagar, S. S., & Stoeber, J. (2009). Perfectionism, fear of failure, and affective responses
to success and failure: The central role of fear of experiencing shame and
embarrassment. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 31, 602–627.

Seligman, L., Weinstock, L., & Heflin, E. N. (1991). The career development of 10 year
olds. Elementary School Guidance and Counseling, 25, 172–181.

Seligman, L., Weinstock, L., & Owings, N. (1988). The role of family dynamics in career
development of 5-year olds. Elementary School Guidance and Counseling, 22,
222–230.

Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-
experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston, MA: Houghton
Mifflin.

Shin, D., & Johnson, D. (1978). Avowed happiness as an overall assessment of the
quality of life. Social Indicators Research, 5, 475–492.

Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental

studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7, 422–
445.

Sigel, I. (1987). Does hothousing rob children of their childhood? Early Childhood
Research Quarterly, 2, 211–225.

Stevenson, D. L., & Baker, D. P. (1987). The family-school relation and the child's
school performance. Child Development, 58, 1348–1357.

Steinberg, L., Lamborn, S. D., Dornbusch, S. M., & Darling, N. (1992). Impact of
parenting practices on adolescent achievement: Authoritative parenting, school
involvement, and encouragement to succeed. Child Development, 63, 1266–1281.

Stoeber, J. (1998). The Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism scale: More perfect with
four (instead of six) dimensions. Personality and Individual Differences, 24, 481–
491.

Stoeber, J., & Otto, K. (2006). Positive conceptions of perfectionism: Approaches,

evidence, challenges. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 295–319.

Stoeber, J., & Rambow, A. (2007). Perfectionism in adolescent school students: Relations
with motivation, achievement, and well-being. Personality and Individual
Differences, 42, 1379–1389.
 90

Stoeber, J., Otto, K., & Stoll, O. (2005, July). Perfectionistic aspirations in athletes:
Except for the negative reactions, they’re positive! Paper presented at the meeting
of the Stress and Anxiety Research Society, Halle/Saale, Germany.

Stumpf, H., & Parker, W. D. (2000). A hierarchical structural analysis of perfectionism

and its relation to other personality characteristics. Personality and Individual
Differences, 28, 837–852.

Warner, J. (2006). Perfect madness: Motherhood in the age of anxiety. New York, NY:
Penguin group.

Whiting B. B., & Edwards, C. P. (1988). Children of different worlds: The formation of
social behavior. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Widaman, K. F. (2006). Missing data: What to do with or without them. Monographs of

the Society for Research in Child Development, 71, 42–64.

Wiggins, B. (2011). Confronting the dilemma of mixed methods, Journal of Theoretical

and Philosophical Psychology, 31(1), 44–60.

Williams, J., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2008). Resampling and distribution of the product
methods for testing indirect effects in complex models. Structural Equation
Modeling, 15, 23–51.

Windfuhr, K., While, D., Hunt, I., Turnbull, P., Lowe, R., Burns, J. , . . . National
Confidential Inquiry into Suicide and Homicide by People with Mental Illness.
(2008). Suicide in juveniles and adolescents in the United Kingdom. Journal of
Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 49, 1155–1165.

Wolin, S. J., & Bennett, L. A. (1984). Family rituals. Family Process, 23, 401–420.

Yoon, J., & Lau, A. (2008). Maladaptive perfectionism and depressive symptoms among
Asian American college students: Contributions of interdependence and parental
relations. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 14, 92–101.

Young, R. A. (1994). Helping adolescents with career development: The active role of
parents. The Career Development Quarterly, 42, 195–203.

Young, R. A., & Friesen, J. D. (1992). The intentions of parents in influencing the career
development of their children. The Career Development Quarterly, 40, 198–207.

Zimmerman, B. J., Bandura, A., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1992). Self-motivation for

academic attainment: The role of self-efficacy beliefs and personal goal setting.
American Educational Research Journal, 29, 663–676.
 VITA

Lea V. Travers graduated from Brown University with honors in 2008 where she

completed a dual major in Cognitive Neuroscience and Hispanic Studies. Before

beginning graduate school at Loyola University Chicago, she worked at the Rush

NeuroBehavioral Center in Chicago, IL as a pediatric neuropsychological testing

technician. She also worked as a research assistant at Northwestern University’s Feinberg

School of Medicine on a study examining affective processing in women with postpartum

depression. Lea is currently a Ph.D. student in the Clinical Psychology program at Loyola

University Chicago. Since beginning graduate school, she has completed a psychotherapy

practicum at Loyola’s undergraduate psychological Wellness Center and a school-based

therapy practicum at Wediko Children’s Services in Boston, MA. She has also completed

pediatric neuropsychological assessment practica at the University of Chicago Medical

Center and Tufts Medical Center’s Floating Hospital for Children. Currently, Lea is a

pre-doctoral intern at Rush University Medical Center in Chicago, IL where she is

completing her training as a pediatric psychologist. Lea’s research with Loyola faculty

advisor Amy Bohnert includes the investigation of organized activity involvement,

obesity, and psychosocial adjustment in adolescents. Along with colleague Edin Randall,

Lea has developed a separate program of research examining various cultural factors

impacting the psychosocial adjustment of affluent youth. Lea will graduate from Loyola

University Chicago in May of 2015 with a Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology.

91