See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/303687938

Introduction to interpersonal acceptance-rejection theory (IPARTheory) and

evidence

Article · January 2016

CITATIONS READS

120 2,879

1 author:

Ronald Preston Rohner

University of Connecticut
185 PUBLICATIONS 7,780 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Fear of Intimacy and Remembered Childhood Experiences of Rejection View project

Loneliness in adulthood predicted by remembrances of childhood acceptance/rejection View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ronald Preston Rohner on 31 May 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Unit 6 Developmental Psychology and Culture
Article 4
Subunit 1 Culture and Human Development: Infancy, Childhood, and Adolescence

4-1-2016

Introduction to Interpersonal Acceptance-

Rejection Theory (IPARTheory) and Evidence
Ronald P. Rohner
University of Connecticut, [email protected]

Recommended Citation
Rohner, R. P. (2016). Introduction to Interpersonal Acceptance-Rejection Theory (IPARTheory)
and Evidence. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 6(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.9707/
2307-0919.1055

This Online Readings in Psychology and Culture Article is brought to you for free and open access (provided uses are educational in nature)by IACCP
and ScholarWorks@GVSU. Copyright © 2016 International Association for Cross-Cultural Psychology. All Rights Reserved. ISBN
978-0-9845627-0-1
Introduction to Interpersonal Acceptance-Rejection Theory
(IPARTheory) and Evidence

Abstract
Interpersonal acceptance-rejection theory (IPARTheory) is an evidence-based theory
of socialization and lifespan development. It is composed of three subtheories,
each of which deals with a separate but interrelated set of issues. IPARTheory’s
personality subtheory – which is the most highly developed component of the theory
– deals primarily with the pancultural nature and effects of interpersonal acceptance
and rejection. Coping subtheory explores the fact that some individuals are better
able to cope with experiences of perceived rejection than are other individuals.
Finally, IPARTheory’s sociocultural systems subtheory attempts to predict and
explain major causes and sociocultural correlates of interpersonal acceptance-
rejection worldwide. Empirical evidence overwhelmingly supports the theory’s major
postulates and predictions, especially postulates and predictions in personality
subtheory. Emerging evidence about the neurobiological and biochemical risks
posed for the development, structure, and function of the human brain are
beginning to help explain why these postulates and predictions are so consistently
confirmed panculturally.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0
License.

This article is available in Online Readings in Psychology and Culture: http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/orpc/vol6/iss1/4

 Rohner: Introduction to Interpersonal Acceptance-Rejection Theory (IPARTheory) and Evidence

Overview of Interpersonal Acceptance-Rejection Theory

(IPARTheory)

Interpersonal acceptance-rejection theory (IPARTheory) is an evidence-based theory of

socialization and lifespan development that aims to predict and explain major consequences
and other correlates of interpersonal acceptance and rejection worldwide (Rohner, 1986,
2004; Rohner & Rohner, 1980). Historically (beginning about 1960), the theory focused
mostly on the effects of perceived parental acceptance-rejection in childhood and extending
into adulthood. At that time, the theory was called “parental acceptance-rejection theory”
(PARTheory). But by 2000, the theory had broadened to include intimate adult relationships
and other significant interpersonal relationships throughout the lifespan. This shift in
emphasis in 2014 led to the transition of the theory and its name from PARTheory to its
current designation: Interpersonal acceptance-rejection theory (IPARTheory). Despite this
change in name and emphasis, significant portions of the theory continue to feature the
effects, causes, and other correlates of children’s perceptions of parental acceptance-
rejection and of adults’ remembrances of parental acceptance-rejection in childhood. This
fact is amplified in this paper. IPARTheory attempts to answer five classes of questions
divided into three subtheories. These are personality subtheory, coping subtheory, and
sociocultural systems model and subtheory.
Personality subtheory asks two general questions: First, is it true, as the subtheory
postulates, that children panculturally – in all sociocultural systems, racial or ethnic groups,
genders, and the like – tend to respond in the same way when they perceive themselves to
be accepted or rejected by their parents and other attachment figures? Second, to what
degree do the effects of childhood acceptance and rejection extend into adulthood and old
age?
Coping subtheory asks one basic question. That is, what gives some children and
adults the resilience to emotionally cope more effectively than most people with the
experience of childhood rejection?
Sociocultural systems model and subtheory asks two very different classes of
questions. First, why are some parents warm and loving and others cold, aggressive,
neglecting/rejecting? Is it true, for example – as IPARTheory predicts – that specific
psychological, familial, community, and societal factors tend to be reliably associated
everywhere in the world with specific variations in parental acceptance-rejection? Second,
in what way is the total fabric of a nation as well as the behavior and beliefs of individuals
within society affected by the fact that most parents in that country tend to either accept or
reject their children? For example, is it true, as IPARTheory predicts, that a people's religious
beliefs, artistic preferences, and other expressive beliefs and behaviors tend to be
universally associated with their childhood experiences of parental love and love
withdrawal?
Several distinctive features guide IPARTheory's attempts to answer questions such
as these. First, by employing a multi-method research strategy, the theory draws extensively
from worldwide, cross-cultural evidence as well as from every major ethnic group in the

Produced by The Berkeley Electronic Press, 2011 3

 Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, Unit 6, Subunit 1, Chapter 4

United States. Additionally, it draws from literary and historical insights as far back as two
thousand years. And more importantly, it draws from and helps provide a conceptual
framework for integrating empirical studies on issues of interpersonal acceptance-rejection
that have been published since the end of the nineteenth century, mostly within the United
States. From these sources the theory attempts to formulate a lifespan developmental
perspective on issues surrounding interpersonal acceptance and rejection. Much of this
lifespan perspective is incorporated into IPARTheory's personality subtheory, described
later. First however, we discuss the concepts of interpersonal acceptance and rejection, or
the warmth dimension of interpersonal relationships. At this point, we should remind readers
that in IPARTheory the term parent refers to whoever the major caregiver(s) is/are of a child
– not necessarily to biological or adoptive parents.

The Warmth Dimension of Interpersonal Relationships

Together, interpersonal acceptance and rejection form the warmth dimension of

interpersonal relationships. This is a dimension or continuum on which all humans can be
placed because everyone experiences more or less love at the hands of the people most
important to them. Thus, the warmth dimension has to do with the quality of the affectional
bond between individuals (e.g., between children and their parents, and between intimate
adults, among others). In particular, the warmth dimension focuses on the physical, verbal,
and symbolic behaviors that individuals use to express their caring or lack of caring about
the other person, as described below. One end of the continuum is marked by interpersonal
acceptance, which refers to the warmth, affection, care, comfort, concern, nurturance,
support, or simply love that one person can express to or experience from another person.
The other end of the continuum is marked by interpersonal rejection, which refers to the
absence or significant withdrawal of these positive feelings and behaviors and by the
presence of a variety of physically and psychologically hurtful behaviors and affects. It is
important to note that individuals are neither accepted nor rejected in any categorical sense.
Rather, everyone falls somewhere along the warmth dimension, experiencing varying
degrees of interpersonal acceptance and rejection in their relationships with significant
others.
Extensive cross-cultural research over the course of six decades in IPARTheory
reveals that interpersonal rejection can be experienced by any combination of four principal
expressions: (1) cold versus warm, and unaffectionate versus affectionate, (2) hostile and
aggressive, (3) indifferent and neglecting, and (4) undifferentiated rejecting (Rohner, 1986,
2004).
Undifferentiated rejection refers to individuals' beliefs that the other person (e.g.,
attachment figure) does not really care about them or love them, even though there might
not be clear behavioral indicators that the other person is neglecting, unaffectionate, or
aggressive toward them. Warmth/coldness, hostility, and indifference refer to internal,
psychological states of individuals. People may perceive significant others to be warm (or
cold and unloving) or to be hostile, angry, bitter, resentful, irritable, impatient, or antagonistic

http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/orpc/vol6/iss1/4 4
 Rohner: Introduction to Interpersonal Acceptance-Rejection Theory (IPARTheory) and Evidence

toward them. Alternatively, individuals may perceive significant others to be unconcerned

and uncaring about them, or to have a restricted interest in their overall well-being. Affection,
aggression, and neglect, on the other hand, refer to observable behaviors that result when
significant others are perceived to act on these emotions. Interpersonal affection can be
shown physically (e.g. hugging, kissing, caressing, and comforting), verbally (e.g. praising,
complimenting, and saying nice things to or about the other), or symbolically in some other
way, as with the use of culturally specific gestures. These and many other caring, nurturing,
supportive, and loving behaviors help define the behavioral expressions of interpersonal
acceptance. When people act on feelings of hostility, anger, resentment, or enmity, the
resulting behavior is generally called aggression. As construed in IPARTheory, aggression
is any behavior where there is the intention of hurting someone, something, or oneself
(physically or emotionally). As shown in Figure 1, people may be physically aggressive (e.g.,
hit, push, throw things, and pinch) and verbally aggressive (e.g. sarcasm, curse, mock,
shout, say thoughtless, humiliating, or disparaging things to or about the other). Additionally,
individuals may use hurtful, nonverbal symbolic gestures toward others.

Figure 1. The warmth dimension of interpersonal relationships. Elements to the left

of the slash marks (i.e., warmth or coldness, hostility, and indifference) refer to
internal, psychological states of individuals. Elements to the right of the slash marks
(affection, aggression, and neglect) refer to observable behaviors that result when
significant others are perceived to act on these emotions.

Produced by The Berkeley Electronic Press, 2011 5

 Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, Unit 6, Subunit 1, Chapter 4

The connection between indifference as an internal motivator and neglect as a behavioral

response is not as direct as the connection between hostility and aggression. This is true
because people may neglect or perceive to be neglected by significant others for many
reasons that have nothing to do with indifference. For example, individuals may neglect
significant others as a way of trying to cope with their anger toward them. Neglect is not
simply a matter of failing to provide for the material and physical needs of significant others,
however. It also pertains to individuals’ failure to attend appropriately to the social and
emotional needs of others. Often, for example, neglecting persons pay little attention to
significant others’ needs for comfort, solace, help, or attention; they may also remain
physically as well as psychologically unresponsive or even unavailable or inaccessible. All
these behaviors, real or perceived—individually and collectively – are likely to induce
individuals to feel unloved or rejected by their significant others. Even in warm and loving
relationships, however, individuals are likely to experience – at least occasionally – a few of
these hurtful emotions and behaviors.
Thus, it is important to be aware that interpersonal acceptance-rejection can be
viewed and studied from either of two perspectives. That is, acceptance-rejection can be
studied as perceived or subjectively experienced by the individual (the phenomenological
perspective), or it can be studied as reported by an outside observer (the behavioral
perspective). Usually, but not always, the two perspectives lead to similar conclusions.
IPARTheory research suggests, however, that if the conclusions are very discrepant, one
should generally trust the information derived from the phenomenological perspective. This
is true because an individual may feel unloved (as in undifferentiated rejection), but outside
observers may fail to detect any explicit indicators of interpersonal rejection. Alternatively,
observers may report a significant amount of interpersonal aggression or neglect, but the
target person may not feel rejected. This occurs with some regularity in reports of child abuse
and neglect. Thus, there is only a problematic relation between so-called "objective" reports
of abuse, rejection, and neglect on the one hand and children's perceptions of parental
acceptance-rejection on the other. As Kagan (1978) put it – in the context of parent-child
relations – “parental rejection is not a specific set of actions by parents but a belief held by
the child" (p. 61).
In effect, much of interpersonal acceptance-rejection is symbolic (Kagan, 1974, 1978).
Therefore, to understand why rejection has consistent effects on children and adults, one
must understand its symbolic nature. Certainly in the context of ethnic and cross-cultural
studies investigators must strive to understand people's symbolic, culturally-based
interpretations of love-related behaviors if they wish to fully comprehend the acceptance-
rejection process in those settings. That is, even though individuals everywhere may
express, to some degree, acceptance (warmth, affection, care, concern) and rejection
(coldness, lack of affection, hostility, aggression, indifference, neglect), the way they do it is
highly variable and saturated with cultural or sometimes idiosyncratic meaning. Parents
anywhere, for example, might praise or compliment their children, but the way they do it in
one sociocultural setting might have no meaning (or might have a totally different meaning)
in a second setting. This is illustrated in the following incident:

http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/orpc/vol6/iss1/4 6
 Rohner: Introduction to Interpersonal Acceptance-Rejection Theory (IPARTheory) and Evidence

A few years ago I [Rohner] interviewed a high caste Hindu woman about family
matters in India. Another woman seated nearby distracted my attention. The
second woman quietly and carefully peeled an orange and then removed the seeds
from each segment. Her 9-year-old daughter became increasingly animated as her
mother progressed. Later, my Bengali interpreter asked me if I had noticed what
the woman was doing. I answered that I had, but that I had not paid much attention
to it. "Should I have?" "Well," she answered, "you want to know about parental love
and affection in West Bengal, so you should know...." She went on to explain that
when a Bengali mother wants to praise her child – to show approval and affection
for her child – she might give the child a peeled and seeded orange. Bengali
children understand completely that their mothers have done something special for
them, even though mothers may not use words of praise for to do so would be
unseemly, much like praising themselves. (Rohner, 1994, p. 113; see also Rohner
& Chaki-Sircar, 1988).

At this point, we should caution that in everyday American English, the word “rejection”
implies bad parenting and sometimes even bad people. In cross-cultural and multiethnic
research, however, one must attempt to view the word as being descriptive of parents' and
others’ behavior, not judgmental or evaluative. This is true because parents in about 25
percent of the world's societies behave normatively in ways that are consistent with
IPARTheory’s definition of rejection (Rohner, 1975; Rohner & Rohner, 1980). But in the
great majority of cases – including historically in the United States – these parents behave
toward their children in the way that they believe good, responsible parents should behave,
as defined by cultural norms. Therefore, in the context of cross-cultural research on parental
acceptance-rejection, a major goal is to determine whether children and adults everywhere
respond the same way when they experience themselves to be accepted or rejected as
children – regardless of differences in culture, language, race, ethnicity, gender, social class,
or other such defining conditions.

IPARTheory's Personality Subtheory

IPARTheory's personality subtheory attempts to predict and explain major personality or

psychological – especially mental health-related – consequences of perceived interpersonal
acceptance and rejection. The subtheory begins with the probably untestable assumption
that over the course of biocultural evolution, humans have developed the enduring,
biologically-based emotional need for positive response from the people most important to
them (Rohner, 1975; see also Baumeister & Leary, 1995; Bjorklund & Pellegrini, 2002;
Leary, 1999). The need for positive response includes an emotional wish, desire, or yearning
(whether consciously recognized or not) for comfort, support, care, concern, nurturance, and
the like. In adulthood, the need becomes more complex and differentiated to include the
wish (consciously recognized or unrecognized) for positive regard from people with whom
one has an affectional bond of attachment. People who can best satisfy this need are

Produced by The Berkeley Electronic Press, 2011 7

 Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, Unit 6, Subunit 1, Chapter 4

typically parents for infants and children, but include significant others and non-parental
attachment figures for adolescents and adults.
As construed in IPARTheory, a significant other is any person who is uniquely
important to the individual, and who is interchangeable with no one else (Rohner, 2005a).
In this sense, parents and intimate partners, for example, are generally significant others.
But these people also tend to have one additional quality not shared by most significant
others. That is, individuals’ sense of emotional security and comfort tends to be dependent
on the quality of their relationship with their significant others. Because of that fact, these
people are usually the kind of significant others called attachment figures in both
IPARTheory (Rohner, 2005a) and attachment theory (Ainsworth, 1989; Bowlby, 1982; Colin,
1996). The essence of the concept attachment as construed in IPARTheory is captured by
a short poem written by Rohner (2009):

Attachment: The Emotional Moon Phenomenon

Sometimes I’m happy
Sometimes I’m blue.
My mood all depends
On my relationship with you.

Parents are thus uniquely important to children because the security and other emotional
and psychological states of offspring are dependent on the quality of relationship with their
parent(s). It is for this reason that parental acceptance and rejection is postulated in
IPARTheory to have unparalleled influence in shaping children's personality development
over time. Moreover, according to IPARTheory's personality subtheory, adults' sense of
emotional security and well-being tends to be dependent on the perceived quality of
relationship with adult attachment figures. Thus, acceptance or rejection by an intimate
partner is also postulated to have a major influence on adults' personality and psychological
adjustment.
The concept personality is defined in personality subtheory (Rohner, 2005a) as an
individual's more or less stable set of predispositions to respond (i.e., affective, cognitive,
perceptual, and motivational dispositions) and actual modes of responding (i.e., observable
behaviors) in various life situations or contexts. This definition recognizes that behavior is
motivated, influenced by external (i.e., environmental) as well as internal (e.g., emotional,
biological, and learning) factors, and usually has regularity or orderliness across time and
space. IPARTheory's personality subtheory postulates that the emotional need for positive
response from significant others and attachment figures is a powerful and culturally invariant
motivator. When children do not get this need satisfied adequately by their major caregivers
– or adults do not get this need met by their attachment figures – they are predisposed to
respond both emotionally and behaviorally in specific ways. In particular – according to the
subtheory – individuals who feel rejected by significant others are likely to be anxious and
insecure. In an attempt to allay these feelings and to satisfy their needs, persons who feel
rejected often increase their bids for positive responses, but only up to a point. That is, they
tend to become more dependent (see Figure 2). The term dependence in the theory refers

http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/orpc/vol6/iss1/4 8
 Rohner: Introduction to Interpersonal Acceptance-Rejection Theory (IPARTheory) and Evidence

to the internal, psychologically felt wish or yearning for emotional (as opposed to
instrumental or task-oriented) support, care, comfort, attention, nurturance, and similar
behaviors from significant others. The term, as used in IPARTheory, also refers to the actual
behavioral bids individuals make for such responsiveness. For young children, these bids
may include clinging to parents, whining, or crying when parents unexpectedly depart, and
seeking physical proximity with them when they return.
In IPARTheory, dependence is construed as a continuum, with independence defining one
end of the continuum and dependence the other. Independent people are those who have
their need for positive response met sufficiently so that they are free from frequent or intense
yearning or behavioral bids for succor from significant others. Very dependent people, on
the other hand, are those who have a frequent and intense desire for positive response, and
are likely to make many bids for responses. As with all the personality dispositions studied
in IPARTheory, humans everywhere can be placed somewhere along the continuum of
being more or less dependent or independent. According to the theory, much of the variation
in dependence among children and adults is contingent on the extent to which they perceive
themselves to be accepted or rejected by significant others. Many rejected children and
adults feel the need for constant reassurance and emotional support.

Figure 2. Dependence/independence in relation to interpersonal

acceptance-rejection.

Produced by The Berkeley Electronic Press, 2011 9

 Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, Unit 6, Subunit 1, Chapter 4

According to personality subtheory, parental rejection as well as rejection by other

attachment figures also leads to other personality outcomes, in addition to dependence.
These include hostility, aggression, passive aggression, or psychological problems with the
management of hostility and aggression; emotional unresponsiveness; immature
dependence or defensive independence depending on the form, frequency, duration, and
intensity of perceived rejection and parental control; impaired self-esteem; impaired self-
adequacy; emotional instability; and negative worldview. Theoretically, these dispositions
are expected to emerge because of the intense psychological pain produced by perceived
rejection. More specifically, beyond a certain point – a point that varies from individual to
individual – children and adults who experience significant rejection are likely to feel ever-
increasing anger, resentment, and other destructive emotions that may become intensely
painful. As a result, many rejected persons close off emotionally in an effort to protect
themselves from the hurt of further rejection. That is, they become less emotionally
responsive. In doing so they often have problems being able or willing to express love and
knowing how to or even be capable of accepting it from others.
Because of all this psychological hurt, some rejected individuals become defensively
independent. Defensive independence is like healthy independence in that individuals make
relatively few behavioral bids for positive responses. It is unlike healthy independence,
however, in that defensively independent people continue to crave warmth and support –
positive responses – though they sometimes do not recognize it. Indeed, because of the
overlay of anger, distrust, and other negative emotions generated by chronic rejection, they
often positively deny this need, saying in effect, "To hell with you! I don't need you. I don't
need anybody!" This attitude is epitomized in the words to Simon and Garfunkel’s classic
folk song, “I Am a Rock.” Defensive independence with its associated emotions and
behaviors sometimes leads to a process of counter rejection, where individuals who feel
rejected reject the person(s) who reject them. Not surprisingly, this process sometimes
escalates into a cycle of violence and other serious relationship problems.
In addition to dependence or defensive independence, individuals who feel rejected
are predicted in IPARTheory's personality subtheory to develop feelings of impaired self-
esteem and impaired self-adequacy. This comes about because – as noted in symbolic
interaction theory (Cooley, 1902; Mead, 1934) – individuals tend to view themselves as they
think significant others view them. Thus, insofar as children and adults feel their attachment
figures do not love them, they are likely to feel they are unlovable, perhaps even unworthy
of being loved. Whereas self-esteem pertains to individuals' feelings of self-worth or value,
self-adequacy pertains to their feelings of competence or mastery to perform daily tasks
adequately and to satisfy their own instrumental (task oriented) needs. To the extent that
individuals feel they are not very good people, they are also apt to feel they are not very
good at satisfying their needs. Or alternatively, insofar as people feel they are not good at
satisfying their personal needs, they often come to think less well of themselves more
globally. Anger, negative self-feelings, and the other consequences of perceived rejection
tend to diminish rejected children's and adults' capacity to deal effectively with stress.
Because of this, people who feel rejected often have problems with emotion regulation. That
is, they tend to be less emotionally stable than people who feel accepted. They often become

http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/orpc/vol6/iss1/4 10
 Rohner: Introduction to Interpersonal Acceptance-Rejection Theory (IPARTheory) and Evidence

emotionally upset – perhaps tearful or angry – when confronted with stressful situations that
accepted (loved) people are able to handle with greater emotional equanimity. All these
acutely painful feelings associated with perceived rejection tend to induce children and
adults to develop a negative worldview. That is, according to IPARTheory, rejected persons
are likely to develop a view of the world – of life, interpersonal relationships, and the very
nature of human existence – as being untrustworthy, hostile, unfriendly, emotionally unsafe,
threatening, or dangerous in other ways. These thoughts and feelings often extend to
people's beliefs about the nature of the supernatural world (i.e., God, the gods, and other
religious beliefs) (Batool & Najam, 2009; Rohner, 1975, 1986) (see IPARTheory's
sociocultural systems subtheory, below).
Negative worldview, negative self-esteem, negative self-adequacy, and some of the
other personality dispositions described above are important elements in the social-
cognition or mental representations of rejected persons. In IPARTheory, the concept of
mental representation (Rohner, 2005a) refers to an individual's more-or-less organized but
usually implicit conception of existence, including conception of things that individuals take
for granted about themselves, others, and the experiential world constructed from
emotionally significant past and current experiences. Along with one's emotional state –
which both influences and is influenced by one's conception of reality – mental
representations tend to shape the way individuals perceive, construe, and react to new
experiences, including interpersonal relationships. Mental representations also influence
what and how individuals store and remember experiences (see also Baldwin, 1992;
Clausen, 1972; Crick & Dodge, 1994; Epstein, 1994).
Once created, individuals' mental representations of self, significant others, and the
world around them tend to induce them to seek or to avoid certain situations and kinds of
people. In effect, the way individuals think about themselves and their world shapes the way
they live their lives. This is notably true of rejected children and adults. For example, many
rejected persons have a tendency to perceive hostility where none is intended, to see
deliberate rejection in unintended acts of significant others, or to devalue their sense of
personal worth in the face of strong counter-information. Moreover, rejected persons are
likely to seek, create, interpret, or perceive experiences, situations, and relationships in ways
that are consistent with their distorted mental representations. And they often tend to avoid
or mentally reinterpret situations that are inconsistent with these representations.
Additionally, rejected children and adults often construct mental images of personal
relationships as being unpredictable, untrustworthy, and perhaps hurtful. These negative
mental representations are often carried forward into new relationships where rejected
individuals develop a fear of intimacy – finding it difficult to trust others emotionally (Phillips
et al., 2013). They are also likely to become hypervigilant and hypersensitive – and to
overreact – to any slights or signs of emotional undependability. This process is often
referred to as rejection sensitivity (Downey & Feldman, 1996; Ibrahim, Rohner, Smith, &
Flannery, 2015). Because of all this selective attention, selective perception, faulty styles of
causal attribution, and distorted cognitive information processing, rejected individuals –
especially children – are generally expected in IPARTheory to self-propel along qualitatively
different developmental pathways from accepted or loved people.

Produced by The Berkeley Electronic Press, 2011 11

 Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, Unit 6, Subunit 1, Chapter 4

Many of these effects of perceived rejection are also found in developmental trauma
disorder (DTD; van der Kolk, 2010) and in complex posttraumatic stress disorder (Complex
PTSD or simply CPTSD; Courtois, 2004). These are conditions where youths experience
repeated trauma – especially interpersonal trauma – over an extended period of time and
developmental periods. Included among the shared effects of perceived rejection, DTD and
CPTSD are issues of hypervigilance, anxiety, often self-hatred, problems with interpersonal
relationships, and suicidality, among several others. Additionally, issues of depression and
substance abuse, discussed later, are also implicated in perceived rejection, DTD, and
CPTSD.
The pain of perceived rejection is very real (MacDonald & Leary, 2005). In fact, brain
imaging (fMRI) studies reveal that specific parts of the brain (i.e., the anterior cingulate
cortex, and the right ventral prefrontal cortex) are activated when people feel rejected, just
as they are when people experience physical pain (Eisenberger, 2012a, 2012b, 2015;
Eisenberger & Lieberman, 2004; Eisenberger, Lieberman, & Williams, 2003; see also Squire
& Stein, 2003). Moreover, Fisher, Aron, and Brown (2005) found that different regions of the
brain are activated among adults who are happily in love versus those who had been
recently rejected by their partners.
In addition to research using fMRIs, results of both animal and human studies suggest
that emotional trauma in childhood may affect brain structure and function in other ways.
For example, evidence shows that emotional neglect in childhood may be a significant risk
factor for cerebral infarction in old age (Wilson et al., 2012). Moreover, perceived rejection
and other forms of long-term emotional trauma are often implicated in the alteration of brain
chemistry (Ford & Russo, 2006). The effect of these and other neurobiological and
neuropsychological changes may ultimately compromise children's central nervous system
and psychosocial development (Ford, 2005). On the positive side, however, Luby et al.
(2012) found that the early experience of maternal nurturance among preschoolers is
strongly predictive of larger hippocampal volume among the same children at school age.
These results are important because the hippocampus is a region of the brain that is central
to memory, emotion regulation, stress modulation, and other functions – all of which are
essential for healthy social and emotional adjustment.
It is perhaps for reasons such as these that over 550 studies involving tens of
thousands of participants cross-culturally and major American ethnic groups consistently
show that about 60 to 80 percent of the children and adults measured so far respond as
personality subtheory predicts (Ki, 2015; Rohner, 2016c). In fact, no adequate study
anywhere in the world – across cultures, genders, ages, geographic boundaries, ethnicities,
and other defining conditions – has failed to show the same basic trend that children’s and
adults’ mental health status tends to be impaired in direct proportion to the form, frequency,
severity, and duration of rejection experienced (see Figure 3). Some adults who came from
loving families, however, also display the constellation of psychological problems typically
shown by rejected children. These people are called "troubled" in IPARTheory; many are
individuals who are in rejecting relationships with attachment figures other than parents. This
fact helps confirm IPARTheory's expectation that, for most people, perceived rejection by
any attachment figure at any point throughout the lifespan effectively compromises the

http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/orpc/vol6/iss1/4 12
 Rohner: Introduction to Interpersonal Acceptance-Rejection Theory (IPARTheory) and Evidence

likelihood of healthy social-emotional functioning. However, it is also expected in

IPARTheory that a minority of individuals will be able to thrive emotionally despite having
experienced significant rejection by an attachment figure. These people are called affective
copers. They are the focus of IPARTheory's coping subtheory discussed next.

Figure 3. Personality subtheory in relation to troubled individuals and affective

copers.

IPARTheory's Coping Subtheory

IPARTheory's coping subtheory deals with the question of how some rejected individuals
are able to withstand the corrosive drizzle of day-to-day rejection without suffering the
negative mental health consequences that most rejected individuals do. Theoretically and
empirically, the coping process is the least well-developed portion of IPARTheory. As is true
for most other bodies of research on the coping process (Ki, 2015; Somerfield & McCrae,
2000; Tamres, Janicki, & Helgeson, 2002), little is yet known with confidence about the
mechanisms and processes that help answer coping subtheory's basic question.
Nonetheless, it seems clear that in order to understand the coping process – indeed the
entire acceptance-rejection process – one must adopt a multivariate, person-in-context
perspective. This perspective has three elements: self, other, and context. Specifically, the
multivariate model of behavior employed in IPARTheory states that the behavior of the
individual (e.g., coping with perceived rejection) is a function of the interaction between self,

Produced by The Berkeley Electronic Press, 2011 13

 Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, Unit 6, Subunit 1, Chapter 4

other, and context. "Self" characteristics include the individual's mental representations
along with the other internal (biological) and external (personality) characteristics discussed
earlier. "Other" characteristics include the personal and interpersonal characteristics of the
rejecting other, along with the form, frequency, duration, and severity of rejection. "Context"
characteristics include other significant people in the individual's life, along with social-
situational characteristics of the person's environment. A specific, but so far not well tested,
hypothesis coming from this perspective states that, all other things being equal, the
likelihood of individuals being able to cope with perceived interpersonal rejection is
enhanced by the presence of at least one warm, supportive attachment figure in their life.
IPARTheory's emphasis on mental activity – including mental representations – leads
us to expect that specific social cognitive capabilities allow some children and adults to cope
with perceived rejection more effectively than others. These capabilities include a clearly
differentiated sense of self, a sense of self-determination, and the capacity to depersonalize
(Rohner, 1986, 2005a). More specifically, coping subtheory expects that the capacity of
individuals to cope with rejection is enhanced to the degree that they have a clearly
differentiated sense of self, one aspect of which is a sense of self-determination or self-
efficacy. Self-determined individuals believe they can exert at least a modicum of control
over what happens to them through their own effort or personal attributes. Other individuals
may feel like pawns: they feel as though things happen to them because of fate, chance,
luck, or powerful others. Individuals with a sense of self-determination are believed in
IPARTheory to have an internal psychological resource for minimizing some of the most
damaging consequences of perceived rejection.
Similarly, individuals who have the capacity to depersonalize are believed in the theory
to be provided with another social-cognitive resource for dealing with perceived rejection.
Personalizing refers to the act of "taking it personally," that is, to reflexively or automatically
relate life events and interpersonal encounters to oneself – interpreting events egocentrically
in terms of oneself, usually in a negative sense. Thus, personalizers are apt to interpret
inadvertent slights and minor acts of insensitivity as being deliberate acts of rejection or
other hurtful intentions. This, too, is related to rejection sensitivity discussed earlier.
Individuals who are able to depersonalize, however, have a psychological resource for
dealing in a more positive way with ambiguities in interpersonal relationships. All three of
these social cognitive capabilities are thought in IPARTheory to provide psychological
shields against the more damaging effects of perceived rejection. However, these attributes
themselves tend to be affected by rejection, especially rejection occurring during the
formative years of childhood. This complicates the task of assessing the independent
contribution that each attribute might make in helping children and adults cope with
perceived interpersonal rejection.
It is important to note here that the concept coper in IPARTheory's coping subtheory
refers to affective copers versus instrumental copers. Affective copers are those persons
whose emotional and overall mental health is reasonably good despite having been raised
in seriously rejecting families or despite being seriously rejected by other attachment figures
throughout the life span. Instrumental copers, on the other hand, are rejected persons who
do well school, in their professions, occupations, and other task-oriented activities, but

http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/orpc/vol6/iss1/4 14
 Rohner: Introduction to Interpersonal Acceptance-Rejection Theory (IPARTheory) and Evidence

whose emotional and mental health is impaired. Instrumental copers maintain a high level
of task competence and occupational performance despite experiencing serious rejection in
childhood. Many prominent personalities in history have been instrumental copers. Included
among them are such personages as Louis "Satchmo" Armstrong, John Stuart Mill, Richard
Nixon, Edgar Allen Poe, Eleanor Roosevelt, Babe Ruth, and Mark Twain, among many,
many others (Goertzel & Goertzel, 1962; Howe, 1982). Biographies and autobiographies of
these individuals reveal that even though they were successful instrumental copers, they
were not affective copers. All appear to have been psychologically distressed in ways
described in IPARTheory's personality subtheory.
Even though the mental health status of affective copers is reasonably good, it is
generally not as good as that of individuals coming from loving (accepting) families or in
other emotionally satisfying relationships – but it does tend to be significantly better than
that of most individuals coming from rejecting families or seriously rejecting adult
relationships (Ki, 2015). Over time, from childhood into adulthood, however, all but the most
severely rejected and psychologically injured individuals are likely to have enough positive
experiences outside their families of origin to help ameliorate the most damaging emotional,
cognitive, and behavioral effects of parental rejection. Thus, given the ordinary resilience
characteristic of most people most of the time (Masten, 2001, 2014) – in combination with
successful psychotherapy, positive work experiences, satisfying intimate relationships, and
other emotionally gratifying experiences – adults who were rejected in childhood are often
better adjusted emotionally and psychologically than they were as children under the direct
influence of rejecting parents – though they tend not to have as positive sense of well-being
as adults who felt loved all along. That is, important sequelae of rejection are apt to linger
into adulthood, placing even affective copers at somewhat greater risk for social, physical,
and emotional problems throughout life than persons who were loved continuously. This is
especially true if the rejection process in childhood seriously compromised the individual's
ability to form secure, trusting relationships with an intimate partner or other adult attachment
figure.
The first empirical study to assess key features of the affective coping process was
conducted by Ki (2015). That study was based on 11,946 adults from 10 nations. Almost
17% of the respondents in the study reported having been seriously rejected in childhood
by one or both parents. Nonetheless, 40% of the respondents fit the conceptual and
operational definition of affective copers. According to Ki, significantly more women than
men tend to be affective copers. At this point, it is unclear why this gender difference exists,
except that women everywhere appear to seek emotional support from others more often
than do men (Tamres et al., 2002). Beyond this, it is worth noting that both male and female
copers tend internationally to report significantly more maternal acceptance than paternal
acceptance (Ki, 2015). However, male copers report experiencing significantly more
maternal acceptance in childhood than do women, and female copers report experiencing
more paternal acceptance in childhood than do men. Nonetheless, remembrances of both
maternal and paternal acceptance in childhood tend to be significant and independent
predictors of male copers’ psychological adjustment in adulthood. For women, on the other
hand, an interaction between remembered maternal and paternal acceptance in childhood

Produced by The Berkeley Electronic Press, 2011 15

 Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, Unit 6, Subunit 1, Chapter 4

are significant predictors of adjustment. That is, female copers’ remembrances of paternal
acceptance in childhood moderate the relation between remembered maternal rejection and
women’s psychological adjustment. Similarly, female copers’ remembrances of maternal
acceptance in childhood moderate the relationship between remembered paternal rejection
and women’s adjustment. Alternatively stated, the psychological adjustment of female
copers who experienced serious maternal rejection in childhood improves to the extent that
they remember their fathers as having been a loving (accepting) parent. But under the
condition of high paternal rejection in childhood, the intensity of the relation between
remembered maternal rejection in childhood and female copers’ psychological
maladjustment intensifies. The same pattern appears when the moderator is maternal
acceptance.

IPARTheory's Sociocultural Systems Model and Subtheory

Interpersonal acceptance-rejection occurs in a complex ecological (familial, community, and

sociocultural) context. IPARTheory's sociocultural systems model provides a way of thinking
about the antecedents, consequence, and other correlates of interpersonal acceptance-
rejection within individuals and total societies (see Figure 4). This model has its historical
roots in the early work of Kardiner (1939, 1945a, 1945b), and later in the work of Whiting
and Child (1953). It also shares notable similarities with Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) ecological
model, and with Berry and Poortinga’s (2006) eco-cultural model. It shows, for example, that
the likelihood of parents displaying any given form of behavior (e.g., acceptance or rejection)
toward their children is shaped in important ways by the maintenance systems of that society
– including such social institutions as family structure, household organization, economic
organization, political organization, system of defense, and other institutions that bear
directly on the survival of a culturally organized population within its natural environment.
The model also shows that parents’ accepting-rejecting and other behaviors directly impact
children's personality development and behavior (as postulated in personality subtheory).
The double-headed arrow in the model shows a bidirectional flow between elements.
This suggests that personal characteristics of children such as their temperament and
behavioral dispositions shape to a significant extent the form and quality of parents' behavior
toward them. Arrows in the model also reveal that – in addition to family experiences –
youths have a wide variety of influential experiences in the context of the natural
environment in which they live, the maintenance systems of their society, peers and adults
in the nation, and the institutionalized expressive systems of their country.
Institutionalized expressive systems and behaviors refer to the religious traditions and
behaviors of a people, to their artistic traditions and preferences, to their musical and folkloric
traditions and preferences, and to other such symbolic, mostly non-utilitarian, and non-
survival related beliefs and behaviors. They are called "expressive" in IPARTheory because
they are believed to express or reflect people's internal, psychological states, at least initially
when the expressive systems were first created. Thus, expressive systems are believed in

http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/orpc/vol6/iss1/4 16
 Rohner: Introduction to Interpersonal Acceptance-Rejection Theory (IPARTheory) and Evidence

Figure 4. IPARTheory’s sociocultural systems model.

IPARTheory to be symbolic creations, formed over time by multiple individuals within a

society. As the people change, the expressive systems and behaviors also tend to change,
though sometimes slowly and grudgingly – especially if the systems have been codified in
writing. It is important to note here – according to sociocultural systems subtheory – that
even though expressive systems are ultimately human creations, once created and
incorporated into the sociocultural system, they tend to act back on individuals, shaping their
future beliefs and behaviors.
Guided by the sociocultural systems model, IPARTheory's sociocultural systems
subtheory attempts to predict and explain worldwide causes of parental acceptance and
rejection. The subtheory also attempts to predict and explain expressive correlates of
parental acceptance and rejection. For example, the subtheory predicts – and substantial
cross-cultural evidence confirms – that in societies where children tend to be rejected,
cultural beliefs about the supernatural world (i.e., about God, gods, and the spirit world)
usually portray supernaturals as being malevolent, that is hostile, treacherous,
unpredictable, capricious, destructive, or negative in other ways (Batool & Najam, 2009;
Bierman, 2005; Dickie et al., 1997; Rohner, 1975, 1986; Thiele, 2007). However, the
supernatural world is usually thought to be benevolent – warm, supportive, generous,
protective, or kindly in other ways – in societies where most children are raised with loving
acceptance. No doubt these cultural differences are the result of aggregated individual
differences in the mental representations of accepted versus rejected persons within these
two kinds of societies. Parental acceptance and rejection are also known to be associated
worldwide with many other expressive sociocultural correlates such as the artistic traditions

Produced by The Berkeley Electronic Press, 2011 17

 Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, Unit 6, Subunit 1, Chapter 4

characteristic of individual societies, as well as the artistic preferences of individuals within

these societies (Brown, Homa, Cook, Nadimi, & Cummings, 2016; Rohner & Frampton,
1982). Additionally, evidence suggests that the recreational and occupational choices adults
make may be associated with childhood experiences of acceptance and rejection (Aronoff,
1967; Mantell, 1974; Rohner, 1986). Hoarding, too, tends to be associated with adults’
remembrances of the experience of childhood rejection (Brown, 2015). All these and other
expressive behaviors and beliefs appear to be byproducts of the social, emotional, and
social-cognitive effects of parental acceptance-rejection discussed earlier.
Why are parents in most societies warm and loving, but parents in about 25 percent
of the world's societies mildly to severely rejecting (Rohner, 1975, 1986; Rohner & Rohner,
1981)? What factors account for these societal differences and for individual variations in
parenting within societies? Questions such as these guide the second portion of
IPARTheory's sociocultural systems subtheory. No single or simple response answers these
questions, but specific factors noted below do appear to be reliably associated with societal
and intrasocietal variations in parental rejection. Principal among these are conditions that
promote the breakdown of primary emotional relationships and social supports. Thus, single
parents (most often mothers) in social isolation without social and emotional supports –
especially if the parents are young and economically deprived – appear universally to be at
greatest risk for withdrawing love and affection from their children (Rohner, 1986). It is useful
to note, however, that from a global perspective, poverty by itself is not necessarily
associated with increased rejection. Rather, it is poverty in association with these other
social and emotional conditions that place children at greatest risk. Indeed, much of
humanity is now and always has been in a state of relative poverty. But despite this, most
parents around the world raise their children with loving care (Rohner, 1975).

Paradigm Shift from Parental Acceptance-Rejection Theory

(PARTheory) to Interpersonal Acceptance and Rejection Theory
(IPARTheory)

IPARTheory initially focused on parental acceptance and rejection. But in 1999, it went
through a paradigm shift from parental to interpersonal acceptance and rejection. More
specifically, the central postulate of what was then called PARTheory stated that perceived
parental rejection is associated with the specific cluster of personality dispositions noted in
personality subtheory. The reformulated postulate now states that perceived rejection by an
attachment figure at any point in life tends to be associated with the same cluster of
personality dispositions found among children and adults rejected by parents in childhood.
Now the theory and associated research is focused on all aspects of interpersonal
acceptance-rejection, including but not limited to parental acceptance-rejection, peer and
sibling acceptance-rejection, teacher acceptance-rejection, grandparent acceptance-
rejection, acceptance-rejection in intimate adult relationships, parent-in-law acceptance-
rejection, and acceptance-rejection in other attachment relationships throughout the

http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/orpc/vol6/iss1/4 18
 Rohner: Introduction to Interpersonal Acceptance-Rejection Theory (IPARTheory) and Evidence

lifespan. Despite this paradigm shift in theory and research-focus, the theory continued to
be known as PARTheory until 2014 because that label had become so widely recognized
internationally.
However, by 2014, overwhelming empirical evidence supported the theory’s basic
postulate that children and adults in many classes of relationships other than parent-child
relationships understand themselves to be cared about (i.e., accepted or rejected) in the
same four ways that children do in parent-child relationships. Additionally, evidence
supported the postulate that individuals in these non-parental relationships tend to respond
to perceptions of acceptance-rejection in the same way that children do when they perceive
themselves to be accepted or rejected by their parents. In view of these facts, the name of
the theory was officially changed to IPARTheory on June 25, 2014 (Rohner, 2014) at the 5th
International Congress on Interpersonal Acceptance and Rejection.
The first empirical study to test IPARTheory's reformulated postulate was conducted
in 2001 (Khaleque, 2001; Rohner & Khaleque, 2008). That study examined the impact of
perceived acceptance-rejection by intimate male partners on the psychological adjustment
of 88 heterosexual adult females in the United States. This path-breaking study sparked
great international interest, so much so that the study was conducted in more than 15
countries worldwide. One of the earliest of these studies (Parmar & Rohner, 2005) dealt with
79 young adults in India. There, the authors found that the less accepting both men and
women perceived their intimate partners to be, the worse was their psychological
adjustment. Simple correlations also showed the expected positive correlation between
adults' psychological adjustment and remembered maternal and paternal acceptance in the
childhood of the adults. However, results of multiple regression analysis showed that partner
acceptance was the strongest single predictor of men's psychological adjustment, though
this relation was partially mediated by remembered paternal (but not maternal) acceptance
in childhood. For women, on the other hand, both partner acceptance and paternal (but not
maternal) acceptance were approximately coequal as predictors of psychological
adjustment.
More recently, similar findings were reported in eight other international studies
including in: Colombia and Puerto Rico (Ripoll-Núñez & Alvarez, 2008); Finland (Khaleque,
Rohner & Laukala, 2008); India (Parmar & Rohner, 2008); Japan (Rohner, Uddin,
Shamsunaher, & Khaleque, 2008); Korea (Chyung & Lee, 2008); Kuwait (Parmar, Ibrahim,
& Rohner, 2008); Turkey (Varan, Rohner, & Eryuksel, 2008), and the United States (Rohner,
Melendez, & Kraimer-Rickaby, 2008). Finally, a 2010 meta-analysis of 17 studies (discussed
later) showed that adults’ perceptions of their intimate partners’ acceptance tended in all
studies to correlate strongly with the psychological adjustment of both men and women
(Rohner & Khaleque, 2010). Collectively, these studies suggest the possibility of a universal
relationship between adults’ mental health status and their perceptions of acceptance-
rejection by adult intimate partners as well as by parents in childhood.
The second major issue to be studied following the reformulation of IPARTheory in
1999 dealt with the relative contribution of perceived teacher versus parental (maternal and
paternal) acceptance and behavioral control to the psychological adjustment, school
conduct, and academic achievement of school-going youths (boys and girls) within six

Produced by The Berkeley Electronic Press, 2011 19

 Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, Unit 6, Subunit 1, Chapter 4

nations cross-culturally (Rohner, 2010). These nations included Bangladesh, Estonia, India,
Kuwait, the Mississippi Delta region of the United States, and Turkey. Results of analyses
exposed enormous gender and sociocultural variability in patterns of predictors assessed
with each of the three outcome variables studied. As expected from IPARTheory, however,
predictors of variations in youth’s psychological adjustment were much more stable. More
specifically, both perceived teacher acceptance and parental (maternal and paternal)
acceptance were significantly correlated with the adjustment of both boys and girls in all
nations where this relationship was studied. Results of multiple regression analyses,
however, showed that perceived teacher acceptance mediated to a large degree the
relationship between perceived parental acceptance and youth’s psychological adjustment
in Bangladesh and India. On the other hand, these analyses showed that only perceived
parental acceptance made independent or unique contributions to student’s psychological
adjustment in Kuwait and Estonia.

Methods in IPARTheory Research

IPARTheory's six-decade program of research is guided methodologically by conceptual

models called anthroponomy and the universalist approach, respectively (Rohner, 1986,
2005a; Rohner & Rohner, 1980). Anthroponomy is an approach to the human sciences
characterized by a search for universals, that is, for worldwide principles of behavior that
can be shown empirically to generalize across our species (Homo-sapiens) under specified
conditions whenever they occur. Although many propositions advanced by Western social
scientists are assumed to apply to all humans, verification of such claims is complex and
involves attention to the role of culture, language, migration, history, and other such factors.
It also requires attention to the strengths and weaknesses of individual measurement
procedures (e.g., self-report questionnaires) and general paradigms of research (e.g., the
holocultural method) (Cournoyer, 2000; Cournoyer & Malcolm, 2004; Rohner, 1986).
In IPARTheory, these issues are addressed in the universalist approach, a multi-
methodology and multi-procedure research strategy that searches for the convergence of
results across an array of discrete measurement modalities and paradigms of research in a
broad range of sociocultural and ethnic settings worldwide. More specifically, five discrete
methods or types of studies have been used to test core aspects of the theory. These
methods can be discussed in two clusters, as follows.

Quantitative Psychological Studies

The first cluster consists of two types of studies. The first involves quantitative
psychological studies using techniques such as interviews, behavior observations, and
self-report questionnaires, most often the Parental Acceptance-Rejection Questionnaire
(PARQ) (Rohner, 2005b), the Parental Acceptance-Rejection/Control Questionnaire
(PARQ/Control) (Rohner, 2005c), and the Personality Assessment Questionnaire (PAQ)
(Rohner & Khaleque, 2005b). Along with many other self-report questionnaires (see Box 1),

http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/orpc/vol6/iss1/4 20
 Rohner: Introduction to Interpersonal Acceptance-Rejection Theory (IPARTheory) and Evidence

these measures were developed to help researchers and practitioners study issues of
interpersonal acceptance-rejection. Extensive information about the reliability and validity of
many of these measures and others for international use and among American ethnic
groups is already available in the Handbook for the Study of Parental Acceptance and
Rejection (Rohner & Khaleque, 2005a) and elsewhere (e.g., Gomez & Rohner, 2011,
Martorell & Carrasco, 2014; Senese, Bacchini, Miranda, Aurino, & Rohner, in press).
References to over 4,400 quantitative psychological studies using these and related
measures may be found in Rohner (2016c). There, interested students and researchers may
do keyword searches to locate articles and books dealing with specific topics of special
interest to them.
Among these many articles are more than 120 studies throughout the Arab world
alone (Ahmed, Rohner, Khaleque, & Gielen, 2016). These and other studies support
IPARTheory’s expectation that perceived parental rejection in childhood and rejection by
attachment figures in adulthood tend to be associated with a host of psychological,
behavioral, physical-health, and other problems, including externalizing and internalizing
behaviors, loneliness, various forms of psychopathology including personality disorders,
risky sexual and other behaviors, suicide and suicidal ideation, among many others.
Perceived parental acceptance in childhood and acceptance by attachment figures in
adulthood, on the other hand, has been found in these studies to be associated with many
psychological, behavioral, emotional, and other benefits, including altruism, positive life
satisfaction, psychological hardiness, positive scholastic achievement, feelings of emotional
security, and social responsibility. Additionally, remembrances of parental acceptance in
childhood have been shown to be an overall buffer in adulthood against the development of
biomarkers indicating a proneness for many negative physical-health outcomes such as
cardiovascular disease (Carroll et al., 2013).
Meta-analyses, the second type of study in the quantitative psychological-studies
category, summarize and synthesize results of a collection of these discrete psychological
studies. In all, 11 such meta-analyses testing central aspects of IPARTheory have been
completed. They are based on 551 quantitative reports representing an aggregated sample
of 125,437 respondents in 31 countries on every continent except the Antarctic.
Collectively, these meta-analyses confirm IPARTheory’s central postulate that both
maternal and paternal acceptance panculturally predict the psychological adjustment of both
boys and girls. Additionally, the meta-analyses show that all seven of the personality
dispositions featured prominently in IPARTheory’s personality subtheory are panculturally
associated with children’s perceptions of parental acceptance. It is worth noting, too, that
children’s perception of parental warmth/affection, hostility/aggression, and
indifference/neglect – along with overall perceived acceptance – each panculturally predicts
significant variations in children’s overall psychological adjustment as well as the seven
personality dispositions measured on the PAQ.
It is not only variations in parents’ love that panculturally predict children’s adjustment
and behavior, but so too do other significant people in children’s lives. For example, as noted
in the 10th meta-analysis (Ali, Khaleque, & Rohner, 2015) children’s perceptions of their
teachers’ acceptance tend to predict panculturally children’s overall psychological

Produced by The Berkeley Electronic Press, 2011 21

 Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, Unit 6, Subunit 1, Chapter 4

adjustment as well as children’s – especially boys’ – conduct in school.

Regarding adults, the meta-analyses show that both men’s and women’s
psychological adjustment are panculturally associated with their remembrances of both
maternal and paternal acceptance in childhood. Additionally, adults’ remembrances of
maternal acceptance in childhood predict all seven of the personality dispositions among

Box 1

http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/orpc/vol6/iss1/4 22
 Rohner: Introduction to Interpersonal Acceptance-Rejection Theory (IPARTheory) and Evidence

both men and women. Adults’ remembrances of paternal acceptance, however, do not
appear to correlate as expected with dependence. Beyond this, it is important to note that
both men’s and women’s psychological adjustment tends to be panculturally associated with
their perceptions of their intimate partners’ acceptance in the same way that adults’
adjustment is associated with remembrances of parental acceptance-rejection in childhood.
Finally, we should observe that men’s remembrances of their mothers’ acceptance
in childhood tend to be associated to a significantly greater extent with the adult sons’
psychological adjustment than do adult daughters’ remembrances of maternal acceptance
in childhood. Adult daughters’ adjustment, however, tends to be influenced by
remembrances of paternal acceptance in childhood to a greater degree than do adult sons’
remembrances of paternal acceptance. Almost all of these conclusions are based on data
using the PARQ and the PAQ. One of the meta-analyses (Khaleque & Rohner, 2002b)
shows that these measures are reliable assessment devices to use in international and
cross-cultural comparative research.

Ethnographic Research

The second cluster of distinctive methods used in IPARTheory consists of three types of
studies based on ethnographic research. The first of these is the ethnographic case study
such as the one done by Rohner and Chaki-Sircar (1988) among women and children in a
Bengali village. Ethnographic case studies employ long-term (e.g., six months to several
years) participant observation procedures within a specific culturally organized community,
along with structured and unstructured observations, interviews, and other such procedures.
Such ethnographic studies produce a context-rich account of the way of life of a people. A
second method within this cluster is the controlled comparison or concomitant variation
study (Naroll, 1968; Pelto & Pelto, 1978; Rohner, 1977). In these studies, investigators
usually locate two or more culture-bearing populations in which one of two conditions is true:
(1) Relevant variables in the sampled populations vary, but other sociocultural factors
remain constant, or (2) relevant variables in the sample population remain constant while
other sociocultural factors are free to vary. Rohner's (1960) comparative study of parental
rejection in three Pacific societies (i.e., a Maori community of New Zealand, a traditional
highland community of Bali, and the Alorese of Indonesia) illustrates the second type of
study in this cluster.
Finally, the holocultural method (traditionally called the cross-cultural survey
method) is the third approach within this cluster (Naroll, Michik, & Naroll, 1976, 1980; Whiting
& Child, 1953). This method is a research design for statistically measuring the relation
between two or more theoretically defined and operationalized variables in a random,
stratified sample of the world's adequately described sociocultural systems. The sources of
data are ethnographic reports rather than direct observations, self-report questionnaires,
interviews, or other such procedures (Rohner et al., 1978). Rohner's (1975) study of parental
acceptance-rejection in 101 well-described non-industrial societies distributed widely
throughout the major geographic regions and culture areas of the world illustrates this type
of study.

Produced by The Berkeley Electronic Press, 2011 23

 Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, Unit 6, Subunit 1, Chapter 4

Strengths and Weaknesses of Each Research Modality

Each of these five types of studies contains unique strengths and weaknesses. There are
several strengths of the psychological-study cluster, for example – including valid, reliable,
and precise descriptions of phenomena. Estimates of both central tendency and variability
in data generated in this cluster of methods allow sensitive and powerful statistical
procedures to be employed to tease out subtle effects. A typical weakness of these studies,
however, is the fact that rich contextual data is usually missing. Special strengths of the
methods in the ethnographic research cluster are validity and groundedness. That is,
ethnographic studies produce accounts that are rich in cultural detail and context. Derived
as they are from ethnography, holocultural studies are also grounded, but they have an
important additional strength in that they allow for truly pancultural sampling that takes into
account the full range of known sociocultural variation throughout the world, especially of
non-industrial societies. A weakness of these methods, however, is the fact that measures
coded from ethnography are sometimes imprecise, and therefore may be low in reliability.

Further Evidence Supporting the Main Features of IPARTheory

Overwhelmingly, the most highly developed portion of IPARTheory is its personality

subtheory. Evidence bearing on that subtheory comes from all five types of studies
described above. Because of their robustness and simplicity, however, hundreds of
researchers internationally have chosen to use the PARQ, PARQ/Control, and the PAQ –
and associated IPARTheory measures – with hundreds of thousands of children and adults
in many ethnic groups and societies on every continent of the world except for Antarctica.
More evidence has been compiled from these studies than from studies using any other set
of measures. Accordingly, results of these studies are given greatest attention here.
Virtually every competent study that has used these measures – regardless of racial,
cultural, linguistic, geographic, economic, and other such variations – has reached the same
conclusion. Specifically, the experience of interpersonal (especially parental) acceptance or
rejection tends to be associated transculturally with the form of psychological adjustment (or
maladjustment) postulated in personality subtheory. The first meta-analysis described
earlier, for example, showed that 3,433 additional studies – all with nonsignificant results –
would be required to disconfirm the conclusion that perceived acceptance-rejection is
panculturally associated with children's psychological adjustment; Nine hundred forty-one
such studies would be required to disconfirm this conclusion among adults (Khaleque &
Rohner, 2002a). All effect sizes reported in the meta-analysis were statistically significant.
Additionally, results showed no significant heterogeneity in effect sizes in different samples
cross-culturally or within American ethnic groups.
That meta-analysis also showed that regardless of culture, ethnicity, or geographic
location, approximately 26% of the variability in children's psychological adjustment and 21%
of the variability in adults' adjustment is accounted for by perceived parental (paternal as
well at maternal) acceptance-rejection. These results support IPARTheory's expectation that

http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/orpc/vol6/iss1/4 24
 Rohner: Introduction to Interpersonal Acceptance-Rejection Theory (IPARTheory) and Evidence

the magnitude of the relation between perceived acceptance-rejection and psychological

adjustment is likely to be stronger in childhood – while children are still under the direct
influences of parents – than in adulthood (Rohner, 1986, 1999). Obviously, a substantial
amount of variance in children's and adults' adjustment remains to be accounted for by other
factors. No doubt a variety of cultural, behavioral, genetic, neurobiological, and other such
factors are implicated in this variance (Reiss, 1997; Saudino, 1997; South & Jarnecke,
2015).
As I said above, three other classes of data also support the major postulates of
IPARTheory's personality subtheory. These are cross-cultural survey (holocultural) studies,
ethnographic case studies, and controlled comparison (concomitant variation) studies.
Regarding the first, results of the major holocultural study (Rohner, 1975) of 101 well-
described non-industrial societies mentioned earlier confirmed the conclusion that parental
acceptance-rejection is associated panculturally with the psychological (mal)adjustment of
children and adults. Additionally, the controlled comparison of three sociocultural groups in
the Pacific mentioned earlier (Rohner, 1960) also supports this conclusion, as did an 18-
month ethnographic and quantitative psychological community study in West Bengal, India
(Rohner & Chaki-Sircar, 1988). Moreover, a six-month ethnographic and quantitative
psychological case study of 349 nine- through 16-year-old youths in St. Kitts, West Indies
(Rohner, 1987) along with a six-month ethnographic and quantitative psychological case
study of 281 nine- through 18-year-old youths and their parents in a poor, biracial (African
American and European American) community in southeast Georgia, USA (Rohner,
Bourque, & Elordi, 1996; Veneziano & Rohner, 1998) also confirm the conclusion that
perceived parental acceptance-rejection is associated with youth’s psychological
adjustment.
All this evidence about the universal expressions of acceptance-rejection along with
evidence about the worldwide psychological effects of perceived acceptance-rejection led
Rohner (2004) to formulate the concept of a relational diagnosis called the acceptance-
rejection syndrome. The acceptance-rejection syndrome consists of two complementary
sets of factors. First, nearly 500 studies in 2004 showed that children and adults everywhere
tend to organize their perceptions of interpersonal acceptance-rejection around the same
four classes of behavior, including warmth/affection – or its opposite, coldness/lack of
affection – hostility/aggression, indifference/ neglect, and undifferentiated rejection. Second,
as noted earlier, cross-cultural and meta-analytic evidence supports the conclusion that
children and adults who experience their relationship with parents and other attachment
figures as being rejecting tend universally to self-report the specific form of psychological
maladjustment specified in personality subtheory. Together these two classes of behavior
comprise a syndrome, that is, a pattern or constellation of co-occurring behaviors, traits, and
dispositions. Any single psychological disposition (e.g., anger, hostility, or aggression) may
be found in other conditions; it is the full configuration of dispositions that compose the
syndrome. Collectively, all this evidence has led IPARTheory to postulate a deep structure
of the human affectional system – i.e., a biocultural coevolutionary foundation of the human
affectional system.

Produced by The Berkeley Electronic Press, 2011 25

 Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, Unit 6, Subunit 1, Chapter 4

In addition to issues of overall psychological adjustment described in personality

subtheory and in the acceptance-rejection syndrome, evidence also strongly implicates at
many other mental health-related issues as likely universal correlates of perceived parental
rejection. These include (1) depression and depressed affect, (2) behavior problems,
including conduct disorders, externalizing behaviors, and delinquency, (3) substance (drug
and alcohol) abuse (Rohner & Britner, 2002), (4) rejection sensitivity (Downey & Feldman,
1996; Ibrahim et al., 2015), (5) fear of intimacy (Rohner, 2016a), and loneliness (Rohner,
2016b), among many others. Some of these issues appear to be direct effects of perceived
interpersonal acceptance-rejection, and some appear to be more indirect effects mediated
by preexisting problems with psychological maladjustment of the type described in
personality subtheory.

The Importance of Father Love

Substantial evidence in many of the foregoing classes of study suggests that father love
(acceptance-rejection) is often as strongly implicated as mother love in the development of
behavioral and psychological problems as well as in the development of offspring's sense
of health and well-being (Rohner, 1998; Rohner & Veneziano, 2001; Veneziano, 2000,
2003). Studies supporting this conclusion tend to deal with the following issues among
children, adolescents, and adults: (1) personality and psychological adjustment problems
(Ahmed, Rohner, & Carrasco, 2012; Amato, 1994; Dominy, Johnson, & Koch, 2000;
Khaleque & Rohner, 2011; Komarovsky, 1976; Stagner, 1938); (2) mental illness (Akun,
2016; Barrera Jr. & Garrison-Jones, 1992; Lefkowitz & Tesiny, 1984); (3) psychological
health and well-being (Amato, 1994); (4) conduct disorder (Eron, Banta, Walder, & Laulicht,
1961; Putnick et al., 2014); (5) substance abuse (Brook & Brook, 1988; Emmelkamp &
Heeres, 1988); (6) delinquency (Andry, 1962); (7) prosocial behavior (Putnick et al., 2014);
(8) children’s social competence (Putnick et al., 2014); and (9) school performance (Putnick
et al., 2014).
Some of these studies, especially those carried out in the 1990s and later, use multiple
regression, structural equation modeling, and other powerful statistical procedures that allow
investigators to estimate the relative contribution of each parent's behavior to youth
outcomes. Many of these studies conclude that father/paternal love explains a unique and
independent portion of the variance in specific child outcomes over and above the portion
explained by maternal love (Ahmed et al., 2012; Carrasco & Rohner, 2013; Rohner &
Carrasco, 2014; Veneziano, 2003). Other studies conclude that paternal love is sometimes
the sole significant predictor of specific child outcomes (Rohner & Veneziano, 2001). Studies
in this latter category tend to address one or more of the following issues: (1) personality
and psychological adjustment problems (Barnett, Marshall, & Pleck, 1992; Bartle, Anderson,
& Sabatelli, 1989; Dickie et al., 1997); (2) conduct and delinquency problems (Kroupa,
1988); and (3) substance abuse (Brook, Whiteman, & Gordon, 1981; Eldred, Brown, &
Mahabir, 1974).

http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/orpc/vol6/iss1/4 26
 Rohner: Introduction to Interpersonal Acceptance-Rejection Theory (IPARTheory) and Evidence

Many newer studies have begun to report differential effects of perceived paternal
versus maternal acceptance on the psychological adjustment of daughters versus sons. For
example, Sultana and Khaleque (2016) found that whereas both maternal and paternal
acceptance made significant and independent contributions to the adjustment of adult sons,
only remembrances of paternal acceptance in childhood made a significant and independent
contribution to adult daughters’ adjustment.
Substantial evidence is also beginning to show that genetic influences on mental
health differ as a function of environmental risk factors such as rejecting parent-child
relationships. For example, South and Jarnecke (2015) reported from a nationwide study of
twins that adults’ remembrances of their fathers’ discipline (punishment and behavioral
control) and affection moderated genetic and environmental influences on internalizing
symptoms of the adults. More specifically, heritability was greatest at the highest levels of
paternal affection and discipline. Adults’ remembrances of their fathers’ affection in
childhood also moderated etiological influences on adults’ alcohol-use problems. In this
context, heritability was greatest at the lowest levels of paternal affection. No moderating
effects were found for mothers.
From all this evidence, it is now clear that paternal acceptance is sometimes a better
predictor of offspring’s psychological and behavioral adjustment than is maternal
acceptance. But until recently, it was not clear why this is true. Conclusions reached in a
recent study of offspring’s (children’s and young adults’) perceptions of each parent’s
(mothers’ versus fathers’) prestige and interpersonal power within the family (Rohner &
Carrasco, 2014) helps to explain why the love-related behavior of one parent (e.g., fathers)
sometimes has a significantly greater impact on offspring’s psychological adjustment than
does the love-related behavior of the other parent (e.g., mothers). Results of research within
the 11 nations in that study revealed that the love-related behaviors of both parents tended
in most countries to make unique (i.e., independent) contributions to the psychological
adjustment of both sons and daughters. This fact notwithstanding, results of analyses also
showed that in many instances, offspring’s perceptions of one parent’s (e.g., fathers’)
interpersonal power and/or prestige within the family tended to moderate the relation
between perceived parental (maternal and/or paternal) acceptance and offspring’s
psychological adjustment. The study of 785 college students in Portugal illustrates this
phenomenon (Machado, Machado, Neves, & Fávero, 2014). There, the authors found that
both men’s and women’s remembrances of maternal and paternal acceptance in childhood
made independent contributions to the psychological adjustment of the young adults. But
the magnitude of the relation between perceived paternal acceptance and daughters’
adjustment intensified significantly the more interpersonal power fathers were perceived to
have relative to mothers. The magnitude of the relation between perceived paternal
acceptance and sons’ adjustment, however, intensified the more prestige fathers were
perceived to have relative to mothers.

Produced by The Berkeley Electronic Press, 2011 27

 Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, Unit 6, Subunit 1, Chapter 4

Implications of IPARTheory Evidence

The search in IPARTheory for panculturally valid principles of behavior is based on the
assumption that with a scientific understanding of the worldwide consequences,
antecedents, and other correlates of interpersonal acceptance-rejection comes the
possibility of formulating culture-fair and practicable programs, policies, and interventions
affecting families and children everywhere. This research contributes to the goal of culture-
fair programs and policies in that it asks researchers and practitioners to look beyond
differences in cultural beliefs, language, and custom when making assessments about the
adequacy of parenting, and to focus instead on whether individuals' fundamental needs
(e.g., the need for emotional support, nurturance, affection, and the like from significant
others, especially attachment figures) are being met. Social policies and programs of
prevention, intervention, and treatment based on idiosyncratic beliefs at a particular point in
history are likely to prove unworkable for some, and probably even prejudicial for many
minority populations. Policies and programs based on demonstrable principles of human
behavior, however, stand a good chance of working as nations and people change. The
values and customs of a particular sociocultural group, therefore, are not – according to
IPARTheory – the most important criteria to be used to evaluate the adequacy of parenting
and other interpersonal relationships in that group. Rather, the most important question
becomes how accepted and cared-about do children and others perceive themselves to be.
Insofar as children and adults perceive their parents and other attachment figures to be
accepting, then – according to both theory and evidence presented here – it probably makes
little difference for children's developmental outcome how external reporters view parents'
behavior.
It is thoughts such as these that have motivated a great part of IPARTheory research.
Now, after almost six decades of research with tens of thousands of children, adolescents,
and adults in over 60 nations worldwide, and with members of every major American ethnic
group, at least two conclusions seem warranted. First, the same classes of behaviors appear
panculturally to convey the symbolic message that "my parent. . ." (or other attachment
figure) "loves me" (or does not love me, care about me, want me – i.e., rejects me). These
classes of behavior include the perception of warmth/affection (or its opposite, coldness and
lack of affection), hostility/aggression, indifference/neglect, and undifferentiated rejection, as
defined at the beginning of this chapter. Additional support for this conclusion is found in the
work of McNeely and Barber (2010) who asked 4,300 adolescents in 12 nations (from Africa,
Asia, Australia, Europe, the Middle East, and North and South America) to respond to the
following question: “Please list the specific things that your parents/caregivers do that make
you feel like they love you?” Responses to this query confirmed that adolescents themselves
in all cultures studied perceived aspects of emotional support (e.g., expressing affection and
encouragement, and the absence of parental hostility or parental aggression) as being
expressions of parental love or acceptance.
The second major conclusion is that differences in culture, ethnicity, social class, race,
gender, and other such factors do not exert enough influence to override the apparently

http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/orpc/vol6/iss1/4 28
 Rohner: Introduction to Interpersonal Acceptance-Rejection Theory (IPARTheory) and Evidence

universal, biologically-based tendency for children and adults everywhere to respond in

essentially the same way when they perceive themselves to be accepted or rejected by
people most important to them, especially attachment figures. Having said this, however,
we must also stress that the association between perceived acceptance-rejection and
psychological and behavioral outcomes for youths and adults is far from perfect. Indeed,
approximately 74% or more of the variance in youths’ and adults’ psychological and
behavioral adjustment is yet to be accounted for, probably by behavior genetic,
neurobiological, sociocultural, and other such factors. Nonetheless, results of research
completed so far are so robust and consistent everywhere in the world that IR believe
professionals should feel confident developing policies and practice-applications based on
the central tenets of IPARTheory – especially IPARTheory's personality subtheory – despite
the fact that much is yet to be learned about the effects, causes, and other correlates of
perceived interpersonal acceptance and rejection.

References

Ahmed, R. A., Rohner, R. P., & Carrasco, M. A. (2012). Relations between psychological
adjustment and perceived parental, sibling, best friend, and teacher acceptance
among Kuwaiti adolescents. In K. Ripoll-Nuñez, A. L. Comunian, & C. M. Brown
(Eds.), Expanding horizons: Current research on interpersonal acceptance (pp. 1-10).
Boca Raton, FL: BrownWalker Press.
Ahmed, R. A., Rohner, R. P., Khaleque, A., & Gielen, U. P. (2016). Parental acceptance and
rejection in the Arab world: How do they influence children’s development? In U. P.
Gielen & J. L. Roopnarine (Eds.) Childhood and Adolescence: Cross-Cultural
Perspectives and Applications (pp. 121-150). Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger/ABC-Clio.
Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1989). Attachment beyond infancy. American Psychologist, 44(4), 709-
716. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.44.4.709
Akun, E. (2016). The relationship between recollections of parental acceptance-rejection in
childhood and adult psychopathology. Manuscript in preparation.
Ali, S., Khaleque, A., & Rohner, R. P. (2015). Influence of perceived teacher acceptance
and parental acceptance on youth’s psychological adjustment and school conduct: A
cross-cultural meta-analysis. Cross-Cultural Research, 49(2), 204-224.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1069397114552769
Amato, P. R. (1994). Father-child relations, mother-child relations, and offspring
psychological well-being in early adulthood. Journal of Marriage and Family, 56(4),
1031-1042. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/353611
Andry, R. G. (1962). Paternal and maternal roles and delinquency. In M. D. Ainsworth (Ed.),
Deprivation of maternal care (Vol. 14) (pp. 31-41). Geneva, Switzerland: World Health
Organization.
Aronoff, J. (1967). Psychological needs and cultural systems: A case study. Princeton, NJ:
D. Van Nostrand.

Produced by The Berkeley Electronic Press, 2011 29

 Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, Unit 6, Subunit 1, Chapter 4

Baldwin, M. W. (1992). Relational schemas and the processing of societal information.

Psychological Bulletin, 112(3), 461-484. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-
2909.112.3.461
Barnett, R. C., Marshall, N. L., & Pleck, J. H. (1992). Adult son-parent relationships and their
associations with sons' psychological distress. Journal of Family Issues, 13(4), 505-
525. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/019251392013004007
Barrera Jr., M., & Garrison-Jones, C. (1992). Family and peer social support as specific
correlates of adolescent depressive symptoms. Journal of Abnormal Child
Psychology, 20(1), 1-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00927113
Bartle, S. E., Anderson, S. A., & Sabatelli, R. M. (1989). A model of parenting style,
adolescent individuation, and adolescent self-esteem: Preliminary findings. Journal of
Adolescent Research, 4(3), 283-298. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/074355488943003
Batool, S., & Najam, H. (2009). Relationship between perceived parenting style, perceived
parental acceptance-rejection and perception of God among young adults
(Unpublished master’s thesis, Quaide-azam University, Islamabad, Pakistan).
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal
attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497-
529. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497
Berry, J. W., & Poortinga, Y. H. (2006). Cross-cultural theory and methodology. In J.
Georgas, J. W. Berry, F. J. R. Van de Vijver, C. Kagitcibasi, & Y. H. Poortinga (Eds.),
Families across cultures: A 30-nation psychological study (pp. 51-71). MA: Cambridge
University Press.
Bierman, A. (2005). The effects of childhood maltreatment on adult religiosity and spirituality:
Rejecting God the father because of abusive fathers? Journal for the Scientific Study
of Religion, 44(3), 349-359. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5906.2005.00290.x
Bjorklund, D. F., & Pellegrini, A. D. (2002). The origins of human nature: Evolutionary
developmental psychology. Washington, D.C.: APA Books.
Bowlby, J. (1982). Attachment and loss: Volume 1, Attachment (2nd ed.). New York, NY:
Basic Books.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and
by design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Brook, J. E., & Brook, J. S. (1988). A developmental approach examining social and
personal correlates in relation to alcohol use over time. The Journal of Genetic
Psychology: Research and Theory on Human Development, 149(1), 93-110.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00221325.1988.10532143
Brook, J. S., Whiteman, M., & Gordon, A. S. (1981). The role of the father in his son's
marijuana use. The Journal of Genetic Psychology: Research and Theory on Human
Development, 138(1), 81-86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00221325.1981.10532844
Brown, C. M. (2015, February). Connecting interpersonal acceptance-rejection theory with
hoarding. Paper presented at annual meeting of the Society for Cross-Cultural
Research, Albuquerque, NM.
Brown, C. M., Homa, N. L., Cook, R. E., Nadimi, F., & Cummings, N. (2016). Perceived
parental acceptance-rejection and artistic preference: Replication thirty years later.

http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/orpc/vol6/iss1/4 30
 Rohner: Introduction to Interpersonal Acceptance-Rejection Theory (IPARTheory) and Evidence

Manuscript submitted for publication.

Carrasco, M. A., & Rohner, R. P. (2013). Parental acceptance and children’s psychological
adjustment in the context of parental power and prestige. Journal of Child and Family
Studies, 22, 1130-1137. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10826-012-9675-0
Carroll, J. E., Gruenewald, T. L., Taylor, S. E., Janicki-Deverts, D., Matthews, K. A., &
Seeman, T. E. (2013). Childhood abuse, parental warmth, and adult multisystem
biological risk in the coronary artery risk development in young adults study.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(42), 17149-17153.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1315458110
Chyung, Y. J., & Lee, J. (2008). Intimate partner acceptance, remembered parental
acceptance in childhood, and psychological adjustment among Korean college
students in ongoing intimate relationships. Cross-Cultural Research, 42(1), 77-86.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1069397107309857
Clausen, J. A. (1972). The life course of individuals. In M. W. Riley, M. Johnson, & A. Foner
(Eds.), Aging in society (Vol. 3, pp. 165-208). New York, NY: Russell Sage
Foundation.
Colin, V. L. (1996). Human attachment. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Cooley, C. H. (1902). Human nature and the social order. New York, NY: Scribner's.
Cournoyer, D. E. (2000). Universalist research: Examples drawing from the methods and
findings of parental acceptance-rejection theory. In A. L. Comunian & U. Gielen (Eds.),
International perspectives on human development (pp. 213-232). Berlin, Germany:
Pabst Science Publishers.
Cournoyer, D. E., & Malcolm, B. P. (2004). Evaluating claims for universals: A method
analysis approach. Cross-Cultural Research, 38(4), 319-342.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1069397104267474
Courtois, C. A. (2004). Complex trauma, complex reactions: Assessment and treatment.
Psychotherapy, 41(4), 412-425. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-3204.41.4.412
Crick, N. R., & Dodge, K. A. (1994). A review and reformulation of social information-
processing mechanisms in children's social adjustment. Psychological Bulletin,
115(1), 74-101. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.115.1.74
Dickie, J. R., Eshleman, A. K., Merasco, D. M., Shepard, A., Venderwilt, M., & Johnson, M.
(1997). Parent-child relationships and children's images of God. Journal for the
Scientific Study of Religion, 36(1), 25-43. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1387880
Dominy, N. L., Johnson, W. B., & Koch, C. (2000). Perception of parental acceptance in
women with binge eating disorder. The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and
Applied, 134(1), 23-36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00223980009600846
Downey, G., & Feldman, S. I. (1996). Implications of rejection sensitivity for intimate
relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(6), 1327-1343.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.70.6.1327
Eisenberger, N. I. (2012a). Broken hearts and broken bones: A neural perspective on the
similarities between social and physical pain. Current Directions in Psychological
Science, 21(1), 42-47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0963721411429455
Eisenberger, N. I. (2012b). The pain of social disconnection: Examining the shared neural

Produced by The Berkeley Electronic Press, 2011 31

 Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, Unit 6, Subunit 1, Chapter 4

underpinnings of physical and social pain. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 13(6), 421-
434. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nrn3231
Eisenberger, N. I. (2015). Social pain and the brain: Controversies, questions, and where to
go from here. Annual Review of Psychology, 66, 601-629.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115146
Eisenberger, N. I., & Lieberman, M. D. (2004). Why rejection hurts: A common neural alarm
system for physical and social pain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(7), 294-300.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2004.05.010
Eisenberger, N. I., Lieberman, M. D., & Williams, K. D. (2003). Does rejection hurt? An fMRI
study of social exclusion. Science, 302(5643), 290-292.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1089134
Eldred, C. A., Brown, B. S., & Mahabir, C. (1974). Heroin addict clients' description of their
families of origin. International Journal of the Addictions, 9(2), 315-320.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/10826087409057350
Emmelkamp, P. M. G., & Heeres, H. (1988). Drug addiction and parental rearing style: A
controlled study. International Journal of the Addictions, 23(2), 207-216.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/10826088809085116
Epstein, S. (1994). Integration of the cognitive and the psychodynamic unconscious.
American Psychologist, 49(8), 709-724. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-
066X.49.8.709
Eron, L. D., Banta, T. J., Walder, L. O., & Laulicht, J. H. (1961). Comparison of data obtained
from mothers and fathers on childrearing practices and their relation to child
aggression. Child Development, 32(3), 457-472. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1126211
Fisher, H., Aron, A., & Brown, L. L. (2005). Romantic love: An fMRI study of a neural
mechanism for mate choice. Journal of Comparative Neurology, 439(1), 58-62.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cne.20772
Ford, J. D. (2005). Treatment implications of altered affect regulation and information
processing following child maltreatment. Psychiatric Annals, 35(5), 410-419.
http://www.healio.com/psychiatry/journals/psycann
Ford, J. D., & Russo, E. (2006). Trauma-focused, present-centered, emotional self-
regulation approach to integrated treatment for posttraumatic stress and addiction:
Trauma adaptive recover group education and therapy (TARGET). American Journal
of Psychotherapy, 60(4), 335-355. Retrieved from http://www.ajp.org
Goertzel, V., & Goertzel, M. G. (1962). Cradles of eminence. Boston, MA: Little, Brown and
Company.
Gomez, R., & Rohner, R. P. (2011). Tests of factor structure and measurement invariance
in the United States and Australia using the adult version of the parental acceptance-
rejection questionnaire. Cross-Cultural Research, 45(3), 267-285.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1069397111403111
Howe, M. J. A. (1982). Biographical evidence and the development of outstanding
individuals. American Psychologist, 37(10), 1071-1081.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.37.10.1071
Ibrahim, D. M., Rohner, R. P., Smith, R. L., & Flannery, K. M. (2015). Adults’ remembrances

http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/orpc/vol6/iss1/4 32
 Rohner: Introduction to Interpersonal Acceptance-Rejection Theory (IPARTheory) and Evidence

of parental acceptance-rejection in childhood predict current rejection sensitivity in

adulthood. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 44(1), 51-62.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/fcsr.12119
Kagan, J. (1974). The psychological requirements for human development. In N. B. Talbot
(Ed.), Raising children in modern America: Problems and prospective solutions (pp.
86-97). Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Company.
Kagan, J. (1978, August 1). The parental love trap. Psychology Today, 12, 54-61.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/magazine/archive
Kardiner, A. (1939). The individual and his society. New York, NY: Columbia University
Press.
Kardiner, A. (1945a). The concept of basic personality structure as an operational tool in the
social sciences. In R. Linton (Ed.), The science of man in the world crisis (pp. 102-
122). New York, NY: Viking Fund.
Kardiner, A. (1945b). The psychological frontiers of society. New York, NY: Columbia
University Press.
Khaleque, A. (2001). Parental acceptance-rejection, psychological adjustment, and intimate
adult relationships (Unpublished master's thesis). University of Connecticut, Storrs.
Khaleque, A., & Rohner, R. P. (2002a). Perceived parental acceptance-rejection and
psychological adjustment: A meta-analysis of cross-cultural and intracultural studies.
Journal of Marriage and Family, 64(1), 54-64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-
3737.2002.00054.x
Khaleque, A., & Rohner, R. P. (2002b). Reliability of measures assessing the pancultural
association between perceived parental acceptance-rejection and psychological
adjustment: A meta-analysis of cross-cultural and intracultural studies. Journal of
Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33(1), 87-99.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022022102033001006
Khaleque, A., & Rohner, R. P. (2011). Transnational relations between perceived parental
acceptance and personality dispositions of children and adults: A meta-analytic
review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16(2), 103-115.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1088868311418986
Khaleque, A., Rohner, R. P., & Laukkala, H. (2008). Intimate partner acceptance, parental
acceptance, behavioral control, and psychological adjustment among Finnish adults
in ongoing attachment relationships. Cross-Cultural Research, 42(1), 35-45.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1069397107309755
Ki, P. (2015). Affective coping among individuals reporting a history of rejection
(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Connecticut, Storrs.
Komarovsky, M. (1976). Dilemma of masculinity: A study of college youth. New York, NY:
Norton.
Kroupa, S. E. (1988). Perceived parental acceptance and female juvenile delinquency.
Adolescence, 23, 171-185.
Leary, M. R. (1999). Making sense of self-esteem. Current Directions in Psychological
Science, 8(1), 32-35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00008
Lefkowitz, M. M., & Tesiny, E. P. (1984). Rejection and depression: Prospective and

Produced by The Berkeley Electronic Press, 2011 33

 Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, Unit 6, Subunit 1, Chapter 4

contemporaneous analyses. Developmental Psychology, 20(5), 776-785.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.20.5.776
Luby, J. L., Barch, D. M., Belden, A., Gaffrey, M. S., Tillman, R., Babb, C., Nishino, T.,
Suzuki, H., & Botteron, K. N. (2021). Maternal support in early childhood predicts
larger hippocampal volumes at school age. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences, 8, 2854-2859.
MacDonald, G., & Leary, M. R. (2005). Why does social exclusion hurt? The relationship
between social and physical pain. Psychological Bulletin, 131(2), 202-223.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.131.2.202
Machado, M., Machado, F., Neves, S., & Fávero, M. (2014). How do parental acceptance-
rejection, power, and prestige affect psychological adjustment? A quantitative study
with a sample of Portuguese college students. Cross-Cultural Research, 48(3), 295-
304. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1069397114528459
Mantell, D. M. (1974). True americanism: Green berets and war resisters: A study of
commitment. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Martorell, J. L., & Carrasco, M. A. (Eds.). (2014). Review of parental acceptance-rejection:
Measures and related constructs [Special issue]. Acción Psicológica, 11(2).
http://dx.doi.org/10.5944/ap.11.2
Masten, A. S. (2001). Ordinary magic: Resilience process in development. American
Psychologist, 56(3), 227-238. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.227
Masten, A. S. (2014). Invited commentary: Resilience and positive youth development
frameworks in developmental science. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43(6),
1018-1024. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10964-014-0118-7
McNeely, C. A., & Barber, B. K. (2010). How do parents make adolescents feel loved?
Perspectives on supportive parenting from adolescents in 12 cultures. Journal of
Adolescent Research, 25(4), 601-631. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0743558409357235
Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self, and society. IL: University of Chicago Press.
Naroll, R. (1968). Some thoughts on comparative method in cultural anthropology. In H. M.
Blalock, Jr. & A. B. Blalock (Eds.), Methodology in social research (pp. 236-277). New
York, NY: McGraw Hill.
Naroll, R., Michik, G. L., & Naroll, F. (1976). Worldwide theory testing. New Haven, CT:
Human Relations Area Files.
Naroll, R., Michik, G. L., & Naroll, F. (1980). Holocultural research methods. In H. C. Triandis
& J. W. Berry (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology (Vol. 2) (pp. 479-521).
Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Parmar, P., Ibrahim, M., & Rohner, R. P. (2008). Relations among perceived spouse
acceptance, remembered parental acceptance in childhood, and psychological
adjustment among married adults in Kuwait. Cross-Cultural Research, 42(1), 67-76.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1069397107309767
Parmar, P., & Rohner, R. P. (2005). Relations among perceived intimate partner
acceptance, remembered parental acceptance, and psychological adjustment among
young adults in India. Ethos, 33, 402-413.
Parmar, P., & Rohner, R. P. (2008). Relations among spouse acceptance, remembered

http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/orpc/vol6/iss1/4 34
 Rohner: Introduction to Interpersonal Acceptance-Rejection Theory (IPARTheory) and Evidence

parental acceptance in childhood, and psychological adjustment among married

adults in India. Cross Cultural Research, 42(1), 57-66.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1069397107309763
Pelto, P. J., & Pelto, G. H. (1978). Anthropological research: The structure of inquiry. New
York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Phillips, T. M., Wilmoth, J. D., Wall, S. K., Peterson, D. J., Buckley, R., & Phillips, L. E.
(2013). Recollected parental care and fear of intimacy in emerging adults. The Family
Journal, 21(3), 335-341. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1066480713476848
Putnick, D. L., Bornstein, M. H., Lansford, J. E., Malone, P. S., Pastorelli, C., Skinner, A. T.,
. . . Oburo, P. (2014). Perceived mother and father acceptance-rejection predict four
unique aspects of child adjustment across nine countries. Journal of Child Psychology
and Psychiatry, 56(8), 923-932. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12366
Reiss, D. (1997). Mechanisms linking genetic and social influences in adolescent
development: Beginning a collaborative search. Current Directions in Psychological
Science, 6(4), 100-105. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.ep11512836
Ripoll-Núñez, K. & Alvarez, C. (2008). Perceived intimate partner acceptance, remembered
parental acceptance, and psychological adjustment among Colombian and Puerto
Rican youths and adults. Cross-Cultural Research, 42(1), 23-34.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1069397107309859
Rohner, R. P. (1960). Child acceptance-rejection and modal personality in three pacific
societies (Unpublished Master’s thesis). Stanford University, CA.
Rohner, R. P. (1975). They love me, they love me not: A worldwide study of the effects of
parental acceptance and rejection. New Haven, CT: HRAF Press (Available as e-book
from Rohner Research Publications, Storrs, CT).
Rohner, R. P. (1977). Advantages of the comparative method of anthropology. Cross-
Cultural Research, 12(2), 117-144. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/106939717701200203
Rohner, R. P. (1986). The warmth dimension: Foundations of parental acceptance-rejection
theory. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. (Available as e-book from Rohner
Research Publications, Storrs, CT).
Rohner, R. P. (1987). [Effects of perceived parental warmth, control, and punishment on the
psychological adjustment, school conduct, and academic achievement of youth in a
biracial southern community.] Unpublished raw data.
Rohner, R. P. (1994). Patterns of parenting: The warmth dimension in cross-cultural
perspective. In W. J. Lonner & R. S. Malpass (Eds.), Readings in psychology and
culture (pp.113-120). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Rohner, R. P. (1998). Father love and child development: History and current evidence.
Current Directions in Psychological Science, 7(5), 157-161.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.ep10836851
Rohner, R. P. (1999). Acceptance and rejection. In D. Levinson, J. Ponzetti, & P. Jorgensen
(Eds.), Encyclopedia of human emotions (Vol. 1, pp. 6-14). New York, NY: Macmillan
Reference.
Rohner, R. P. (2004). The parental "acceptance-rejection syndrome:" Universal correlates
of perceived rejection. American Psychologist, 59(8), 830-840.

Produced by The Berkeley Electronic Press, 2011 35

 Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, Unit 6, Subunit 1, Chapter 4

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.59.8.830
Rohner, R. P. (2005a). Glossary of significant concepts in parental acceptance-rejection
theory. In R. P. Rohner & A. Khaleque (Eds.), Handbook for the study of parental
acceptance and rejection (4th ed, pp. 379-397). Storrs, CT: Rohner Research
Publications.
Rohner, R. P. (2005b). Parental acceptance-rejection questionnaire (PARQ): Test manual.
In R. P. Rohner & A. Khaleque (Eds.), Handbook for the study of parental acceptance
and rejection (4th ed., pp. 43-106). Storrs, CT: Rohner Research Publications.
Rohner, R. P. (2005c). Parental acceptance-rejection/control questionnaire (PARQ/Control):
Test manual. In R. P. Rohner & A. Khaleque (Eds.), Handbook for the study of parental
acceptance and rejection (4th ed.) (pp. 137-186). Storrs, CT: Rohner Research
Publications.
Rohner, R. P. (2009). Attachment: The emotional moon phenomenon. Unpublished
manuscript.
Rohner, R. P. (Ed.) (2010). Teacher acceptance, parental acceptance, and the adjustment,
achievement, and behavior of school-going youth [Special Issue] Cross-Cultural
Research, 44(3).
Rohner, R. P. (2014, June). Parental acceptance-rejection theory gets a new name. Paper
presented at the 6th International Congress on Interpersonal Acceptance and
Rejection, Madrid, Spain.
Rohner, R. P. (2016a, June). International project on the relation between parental rejection
in childhood and adults’ fear of intimacy. Paper presented at the 6th International
Congress on Interpersonal Acceptance and Rejection, Madrid, Spain.
Rohner, R. P. (2016b, June). International project on the relation between remembered
parental rejection in childhood and adults’ loneliness. Paper presented at the 6th
International Congress on Interpersonal Acceptance and Rejection, Madrid, Spain.
Rohner, R. P. (2016c). Interpersonal Acceptance-Rejection Bibliography. Retrieved from
http://csiar.uconn.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/494/2014/01/Merged-Bibliography-
03-04-16.pdf
Rohner, R. P., Bourque, S. L., & Elordi, C. A. (1996). Children's perceptions of corporal
punishment, caretaker acceptance, and psychological adjustment in a poor, biracial
southern community. Journal of Marriage and Family, 58(4), 842-852.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/353974
Rohner, R. P., & Britner, P. A. (2002). Worldwide mental health correlates of parental
acceptance- rejection: Review of cross-cultural and intracultural evidence. Cross-
Cultural Research, 36(1), 16-47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/106939710203600102
Rohner, R. P., & Carrasco, M. A. (Eds.). (2014). Special Issue: Parental power and prestige
moderate the effects of perceived acceptance on offspring’s psychological
adjustment. Cross-Cultural Research, 48(3). http://ccr.sagepub.com
Rohner, R. P., & Chaki-Sircar, M. (1988). Women and children in a Bengali village. Hanover,
NH: University Press of New England (Available as e-book from Rohner Research
Publications).
Rohner, R. P., & Frampton, S. (1982). Perceived parental acceptance-rejection and artistic

http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/orpc/vol6/iss1/4 36
 Rohner: Introduction to Interpersonal Acceptance-Rejection Theory (IPARTheory) and Evidence

preference: An unexplained contradiction. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology,

13(2), 250-259. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022002182013002009
Rohner, R. P., & Khaleque, A. (Eds.). (2005a). Handbook for the study of parental
acceptance and rejection (4th ed.). Storrs, CT: Rohner Research Publications.
Rohner, R. P., & Khaleque, A. (2005b). Personality assessment questionnaire: Test manual.
In R. P. Rohner & A. Khaleque (Eds.), Handbook for the study of parental acceptance
and rejection (4th ed.) (pp. 187-226). Storrs, CT: Rohner Research Publications.
Rohner, R. P., & Khaleque, A. (2008). Relations between partner acceptance and parental
acceptance, behavioral control, and psychological adjustment among heterosexual
adult women in the U.S. In F. Columbus (Ed.), Family relations: Behavioral,
psychological, and sociological aspect (pp. 187-197). New York, NY: Nova Science
Publishers, Inc.
Rohner, R. P., & Khaleque, A. (2010). Testing central postulates of parental acceptance-
rejection theory (PARTheory): A meta-analysis of cross-cultural studies. Journal of
Family Theory & Review, 2(1), 73-87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-
2589.2010.00040.x
Rohner, R. P., Melendez, T., & Kraimer-Rickaby, L. (2008). Intimate partner acceptance,
parental acceptance in childhood, and psychological adjustment among American
adults in ongoing attachment relationships. Cross-Cultural Research, 42(1), 13-22.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1069397107309750
Rohner, R. P., Uddin, M. K., Shamsunaher, M., & Khaleque, A. (2008). Intimate partner
acceptance, parental acceptance in childhood, and psychological adjustment among
Japanese adults. Cross Cultural Research, 42(1), 87-97.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1069397107310594
Rohner, R. P., Naroll, R., Barry III, H., Divale, W. T., Erickson, E. E., Schaefer, J. M., &
Sipes, R. G. (1978). Guidelines for holocultural research. Current Anthropology, 19(1),
128-129. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/202009
Rohner, R. P., & Rohner, E. C. (Eds.). (1980). Worldwide tests of parental acceptance-
rejection theory [Special issue]. Behavior Science Research, 15(1).
http://ccr.sagepub.com
Rohner, R. P., & Rohner, E. C. (1981). Parental acceptance-rejection and parental control:
Cross-cultural codes. Ethnology, 20(3), 245-260. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3773230
Rohner, R. P., & Veneziano, R. A. (2001). The importance of father love: History and
contemporary evidence. Review of General Psychology, 5(4), 382-405.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.5.4.382
Saudino, K. J. (1997). Moving beyond the heritability question: New directions in behavioral
genetic studies of personality. Current Directions in Psychological Sciences, 6(4), 86-
90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.ep11512809
Senese, V. P, Bacchini, D., Miranda, M. C., Aurino, C., & Rohner, R. P. (in press). The adult
parental acceptance-rejection questionnaire: A cross-cultural comparison of Italian
and American short forms. Parenting: Science and Practice.
http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/hpar20/current
Somerfield, M. R., & McCrae, R. R. (2000). Stress and coping research: Methodological

Produced by The Berkeley Electronic Press, 2011 37

 Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, Unit 6, Subunit 1, Chapter 4

challenges, theoretical advances, and clinical applications. American Psychologist,

55(6), 620-625. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.6.620
South, S. A., & Jarnecke, A. A. (2015). Genetic and environmental influences on adult
mental health: Evidence for gene-environment interplay as a function of maternal and
paternal discipline and affection. Behavior Genetics, 45(4), 438-450.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10519-015-9716-8
Squire, S., & Stein, A. (2003). Functional MRI and parental responsiveness: A new avenue
into parental psychopathology and early parent-child interactions? The British Journal
of Psychiatry, 183(6), 481-483. http://bjp.rcpsych.org
Stagner, R. (1938). The rôle of parents in the development of emotional instability. American
Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 8(1), 122-129. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-
0025.1938.tb05309.x
Sultana, S., & Khaleque, A. (2016). Differential effects of perceived maternal and paternal
acceptance on male and female adult offspring’s psychological adjustment. Gender
Issues, 33(1), 42-54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12147-015-9147-0
Tamres, L. K., Janicki, D., & Helgeson, V. S. (2002). Sex differences in coping behavior: A
meta-analytic review and an examination of relative coping. Personality and Social
Psychology Review, 6(1), 2-30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0601_1
Thiele, S. H. (2007). Developing a healing God image: Young adults' reflections on paternal
relational patterns as predictors of God image development during adolescence
(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary,
Louisiana.
van der Kolk, B. A. (2010). Developmental trauma disorder: Towards a relational diagnosis
for children with complex trauma histories. Unpublished manuscript, Department of
Psychiatry, Boston University, Boston, MA.
Varan, A., Rohner, R. P., & Eryuksel, G. (2008). Intimate partner acceptance, parental
acceptance in childhood, and psychological adjustment among Turkish adults in
ongoing attachment relationships. Cross-Cultural Research, 42(1), 46-56.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1069397107309758
Veneziano, R. A. (2000). Perceived paternal and maternal acceptance and rural African
American and European American youths' psychological adjustment. Journal of
Marriage and Family, 62(1), 123-132. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-
3737.2000.00123.x
Veneziano, R. A. (2003). The importance of paternal warmth. Cross-Cultural Research,
37(3), 265-281. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1069397103253710
Veneziano, R. A., & Rohner, R. P. (1998). Perceived paternal acceptance, paternal
involvement, and youths' psychological adjustment in a rural, biracial southern
community. Journal of Marriage and Family, 60(2), 335-343.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/353852
Whiting, J. W. M., & Child, I. L. (1953). Child training and personality. New Haven, CT: Yale
University Press.

http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/orpc/vol6/iss1/4 38
 Rohner: Introduction to Interpersonal Acceptance-Rejection Theory (IPARTheory) and Evidence

Wilson, R. S., Boyle, P. A., Levine, S. R., Yu, L., Anagnos, S. E., Buchman, A. S., . . .
Bennett, D. A. (2012). Emotional neglect in childhood and cerebral infarction in older
age. Neurology, 79(15), 1534-1539.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0b013e31826e25bd

Audio/Visual Resources for IPARTheory

Rohner, R. P. (2013a, November). Video lecture: Benefits of affection given & affection
received. Retrieved from http://csiar.uconn.edu/2014/07/23/video-lecture-benefits-of-
affection-given-affection-recieved/
Rohner, R. P. (2013b, November). Introduction to parental acceptance rejection theory: A
video lecture. Retrieved from http://csiar.uconn.edu/2014/02/04/introduction-to-parental-
acceptance-rejection-theory-a-video-lecture/

Discussion Questions

1. How do expressions of interpersonal acceptance and rejection (including parental

acceptance-rejection) differ cross-culturally and in different ethnic groups? For example,
think about different ways that people express warmth and affection cross-culturally.
2. With reference to this chapter, explain how parents give children a sense of who they
are, and why that is important.
3. How would you summarize information about the importance of interpersonal
acceptance-rejection in an accessible way to an audience of non-psychologists?
4. What kind of relationship (in terms of acceptance-rejection) did you have with your own
parents or primary caregivers when you were young? What bearing do you think that
had on who you are today?
5. What practical (e.g., prevention, intervention, or treatment) implications do you see in
the fact that perceived interpersonal acceptance-rejection has consistent effects on
humans in all societies and ethnic groups of the world?
6. Why is anthroponomy and the universalist approach—or something like it—needed to
confirm the existence of universals in human behavior?
7. Why does perceived rejection by one’s intimate adult partner (or by other attachment
figures) generally have the same psychological effects as perceived parental rejection
in childhood? In other words, what psychological, neurobiological, biochemical, or other
processes seem to be at work here?

Produced by The Berkeley Electronic Press, 2011 39

 Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, Unit 6, Subunit 1, Chapter 4

8. Select any widely known theory of personality (e.g., psychodynamic, social learning,
humanistic, existential), and explain how it would deal with the phenomenon of parental
rejection. How is that like and different from the way in which IPARTheory deals with it?

About the Author

Ronald P. Rohner is Professor Emeritus of Human Development and Family Studies and
Anthropology at the University of Connecticut Storrs, USA. He is also the founding President
and Executive Director of the International Society for Interpersonal Acceptance and
Rejection. Moreover, he is author of interpersonal acceptance-rejection theory, along with
most of the measures used to empirically test the theory. As a result of his lifetime
commitment to cross-cultural research, he received the American Psychological Association
Award for Distinguished Contributions to the International Advancement of Psychology. He
also received the Outstanding International Psychologist Award from the USA for 2008.

http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/orpc/vol6/iss1/4 40

View publication stats