TY - JOUR
T1 - Distress and Restraint as Superordinate Dimensions of Self‐Reported Adjustment
T2 - A Typological Perspective
AU - Weinberger, Daniel A.
AU - Schwartz, Gary E.
PY - 1990/6
Y1 - 1990/6
N2 - ABSTRACT Individual differences in distress and restraint have recently been validated as two superordinate dimensions of social‐emotional adjustment (Weinberger, 1989) In two samples (N1= 139, N2= 136) of university students, scores on these dimensions were jointly used to define six higher order personality styles reactive, sensitized, oversocialized, undersocialized, self‐assured, and repressive To evaluate this typology, group differences were investigated on 28 measures within seven domains related to adjustment self‐expression, emotional control, proneness to personality disorders, physical illness, self‐concept, neurotic symptoms, and impulse gratification One‐way multivariate analyses of variance revealed significant group differences within each domain Univariate analyses revealed significant differences on 26 of the 28 measures and marginally significant differences on the remaining 2 A large number of nonadditive patterns consistent with a priori group descriptions corroborated the utility of a person‐centered, typological approach The data also provided an empirically derived, prototypic description of each adjustment style
AB - ABSTRACT Individual differences in distress and restraint have recently been validated as two superordinate dimensions of social‐emotional adjustment (Weinberger, 1989) In two samples (N1= 139, N2= 136) of university students, scores on these dimensions were jointly used to define six higher order personality styles reactive, sensitized, oversocialized, undersocialized, self‐assured, and repressive To evaluate this typology, group differences were investigated on 28 measures within seven domains related to adjustment self‐expression, emotional control, proneness to personality disorders, physical illness, self‐concept, neurotic symptoms, and impulse gratification One‐way multivariate analyses of variance revealed significant group differences within each domain Univariate analyses revealed significant differences on 26 of the 28 measures and marginally significant differences on the remaining 2 A large number of nonadditive patterns consistent with a priori group descriptions corroborated the utility of a person‐centered, typological approach The data also provided an empirically derived, prototypic description of each adjustment style
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0025442616&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0025442616&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1990.tb00235.x
DO - 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1990.tb00235.x
M3 - Article
C2 - 2213473
AN - SCOPUS:0025442616
SN - 0022-3506
VL - 58
SP - 381
EP - 417
JO - Journal of personality
JF - Journal of personality
IS - 2
ER -