Developmental Antecedents of Proactive and Reactive Rebelliousness: The Role of Parenting Style, Childhood Adversity, and Attachment

Adolescence is a time of developmental transition that for one in five young people is characterised by feelings of oppositionality, rebellion, and negativism. Despite the prevalent experience of teen turbulence and despite its significance within the phenomenological framework provided by reversal theory (RT), the childhood antecedents of rebelliousness in adolescence and adulthood have not been given extensive empirical attention within RT, although such work has been carried out using other constructs and theories. We examined recalled parenting style, childhood adversity, and attachment style in adulthood as correlates of proactive and reactive rebelliousness in a sample of 80 participants, aged 18 to 50 years. Each participant responded to a questionnaire package containing the revised Adult Attachment Scale, the Parental Bonding Instrument, the Childhood Experience of Care and Abuse Questionnaire, and the Negativism Dominance Scale. We found that paternal abusive parenting, followed by paternal parenting style, paternal neglect, and paternal antipathy were independently predictive of scores on proactive rebelliousness, the sensation-seeking form. Maternal and paternal indifferent parenting styles each were found to equivalently and independently predict scores on reactive rebelliousness, the interpersonal disaffection form. The results of this study suggest these two forms of rebelliousness may have distinctly different antecedents. A longitudinal study is needed to examine the potentially causal pathways that are suggested by the results of this cross-sectional research. We consider reversal theory explanations of these results and contrast them with complementary theoretical frameworks.

Face matching impairment in developmental prosopagnosia

Developmental prosopagnosia (DP) is commonly referred to as ‘face blindness’, a term that implies a perceptual basis to the condition. However, DP presents as a deficit in face recognition and is diagnosed using memory-based tasks. Here, we test face identification ability in six people with DP, who are severely impaired on face memory tasks, using tasks that do not rely on memory. First, we compared DP to control participants on a standardised test of unfamiliar face matching using facial images taken on the same day and under standardised studio conditions (Glasgow Face Matching Test; GFMT). DP participants did not differ from normative accuracy scores on the GFMT. Second, we tested face matching performance on a test created using images that were sourced from the Internet and so vary substantially due to changes in viewing conditions and in a person’s appearance (Local Heroes Test; LHT). DP participants show significantly poorer matching accuracy on the LHT relative to control participants, for both unfamiliar and familiar face matching. Interestingly, this deficit is specific to ‘match’ trials, suggesting that people with DP may have particular difficulty in matching images of the same person that contain natural day-to-day variations in appearance. We discuss these results in the broader context of individual differences in face matching ability.