Psychology
2012. Vol.3, No.11, 935-939
Published Online November 2012 in SciRes (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/psych) http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/psych.2012.311140
Perceived Parental Rejection Has an Indirect Effect on Young
Women’s Drinking to Cope
Laura Rundell1, Carrie M. Brown2, Rachel E. Cook2
1Department of Psychology, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, USA
2Department of Psychology, Agnes Scott College, Decatur, USA
Received September 6th, 2012; revised October 4th, 2012; accepted November 1st, 2012
While it has been documented that perceived parental rejection is associated with the use of alcohol, it has
not been documented if perceived parental rejection is associated with drinking motives, or self-perceived
reasons for drinking alcohol. Therefore, the purpose of the present study was to determine if, among
young women specifically, perceived parental rejection has an indirect effect, via negative self-esteem, on
the drinking motives of coping, enhancement, and sociability. Ninety-five female young adults (M age =
21.15) completed an online questionnaire that included measures of perceived maternal and paternal re-
jection, negative self-esteem, and drinking motives. The results revealed that higher levels of both per-
ceived maternal rejection and paternal rejection had indirect effects, via more negative self-esteem, on the
decision to drink alcohol as a means of coping, but not as a means of enhancement or sociability. These
findings suggest that, among young women, higher levels of perceived parental rejection extend to the
drinking motive of coping, specifically.
Keywords: Parental Rejection; Alcohol; Self-Esteem
Introduction
Parental Acceptance-Rejection Theory (PARTheory) is a
theory that aims to predict and explain the major sources and
effects of parental acceptance and rejection among people
worldwide (Rohner, 1986; Rohner, Khaleque, & Cournoyer,
2011). In PARTheory, parental acceptance-rejection refers to a
bipolar dimension, with parental acceptance on one end and
parental rejection on the other end. Parental acceptance reflects
warmth, care, affection, support, and all other positive things
that parents do for their children, while parental rejection re-
flects the opposite (Rohner & Khaleque, 2005).
According to PARTheory, humans need to feel accepted by
the people most important to them in childhood (Rohner,
1986). When people feel that their need for acceptance has not
been met, they may develop a specific collection of disposi-
tions that together define the acceptance-rejection syndrome
(Rohner, 1999, 2004). The acceptance-rejection syndrome
includes: 1) hostility and aggression; 2) dependence; 3) nega-
tive self-esteem; 4) negative self-adequacy; 5) emotional unre-
sponsiveness; 6) emotional instability; 7) negative worldview; 8)
anxiety; 9) insecurity; and 10) cognitive distortions (Rohner,
2004).
A multitude of cross-cultural studies have documented that
perceived parental rejection is associated with the acceptance-
rejection syndrome among both children and adults, regardless
of variations in race, culture, gender, language, and geographic
region (Khaleque & Rohner, 2002; Rohner & Britner, 2002;
Rohner & Khaleque, 2010). Further, research has documented
that perceived parental rejection and the acceptance-rejection
syndrome are associated with a multitude of behavioral prob-
lems, including substance use (Campo & Rohner, 1992; Rohner
& Britner, 2002).
Motives to Drink Alcohol
While researchers have documented that perceived parental
rejection and the acceptance-rejection syndrome are associated
with substance use (Campo & Rohner, 1992; Rohner & Britner,
2002), researchers have not documented if perceived parental
rejection and the acceptance-rejection syndrome are associated
with drinking motives, or self-perceived reasons for drinking
alcohol. The concept of drinking motives is based on the as-
sumption that people drink in order to attain valued outcomes
(Cooper, 1994; Cox & Klinger, 1988), whether those outcomes
are related to the direct chemical effects of alcohol or to the
indirect effects of alcohol, such as peer acceptance. A person
does not have to be aware of either having made a decision to
drink or the factors affecting this decision. In most cases, deci-
sions about drinking are unconscious (Kuntsche, Knibbe, Gmel,
& Engels, 2005).
The literature on drinking motives suggests that, whether
unconscious or conscious, there are distinct motives for drink-
ing alcohol. According to Cooper, Russell, Skinner, and Windle
(1992), there are three drinking motives. The first motive, cop-
ing, is aimed at reducing and/or avoiding negative emotional
states. The second motive, sociability, is aimed at affiliating
with others. The third motive, enhancement, is aimed at facili-
tating positive emotions.
Drinking among Young Women
Differences in gender account for variations in drinking hab-
its, causes, and effects. For example, a woman is considered to
be “binge drinking” when she consumes four or more alcoholic
beverages on one occasion, while a man must consume at least
five (Paul, Grubaugh, Frueh, Ellis, & Egede, 2011). Women
metabolize alcohol more slowly than men, which disallows

L. RUNDELL ET AL.
them from drinking the same amount as men do without as
many negative side effects (Wechsler, Dowdall, Davenport, &
Rimm, 1995).
We tested six indirect effects models. In Model One, we
tested if higher levels of perceived maternal rejection would
have an indirect effect, via more negative self-esteem, on cop-
ing motive (see Figure 1). In Model Two, we tested if higher
levels of perceived paternal rejection had an indirect, via more
negative self-esteem, on coping motive (see Figure 2). In
Model Three, we tested if higher levels of perceived maternal
rejection had an indirect effect, via more negative self-esteem,
on enhancement motive (see Figure 3). In Model Four, we
tested if higher levels of perceived paternal rejection had an
indirect effect, via more negative self-esteem, on enhancement
motive (see Figure 4). In Model Five, we tested if higher levels
of perceived maternal rejection had an indirect effect, via more
negative self-esteem, on sociability motive (see Figure 5). In
Model Six, we tested if higher levels of perceived paternal re-
jection had an indirect effect, via more negative self-esteem, on
sociability motive (see Figure 6). Due to the exploratory nature
of our study, we did not make any a priori hypotheses.
Among the consequences women may experience due to
drinking alcohol, sexual indiscretions are of particular concern.
In addition to low inhibitions accounting for an increased like-
lihood of “consensual sex,” intoxicated women may be at ele-
vated risk for being victims of sexual assault. Larimer, Lydum,
Anderson, and Turner (1999) found a correlation between
women’s excessive alcohol consumption and their sexual vic-
timization. Even when sexual activity is not coercive per se,
alcohol may play a role in women’s partaking in risky sexual
behavior. For example, in their study of African American
women who drink alcohol, Seth, Wingood, DiClemente, and
Robinson (2011) found that female drinkers were more likely
than nondrinkers to have multiple sexual partners, to not use
condoms with casual partners, and to have a sexually transmit-
ted infection.
Despite seemingly convincing cause to refrain, women con-
tinue to drink alcohol, often heavily. In their study on the
drinking motives of undergraduate women, Smith and Berger
(2010) found a complex impetus for such behavior. First of all,
college-age women drink as part of a “relational ritual” in
which activities that surround drinking like parties and sporting
events—and the subsequent “storytelling” from such activi-
ties—create new bonds with others and strengthen existing ones,
two things women value highly. Second, the resulting cohesion
of the group forms a kind of “protection” for them, securing
them in the idea that they are part of a group. This protection
softens the blow of any negative consequences that may result
from drinking, including, but not limited to, academic limita-
tions, physical danger, or the aforementioned sexual indiscre-
tions, which are either not discussed or laughed off. As a result,
a cycle is created in which high-risk drinking is promoted as a
means of bonding, the bonding protects from negative conse-
quences, and the lack of consequences promotes further drink-
ing.
In addition to drinking alcohol for “relational rituals” and
“protection,” women may also drink to cope with low self-
esteem. Research suggests that women with higher self-esteem
have more proactive approaches to problem solving than those
with lower self-esteem and are, therefore, less likely to drink
alcohol as a way of coping (Boyd, Bland, Herman, Mestler, &
Murr, 2002).
Purpose of the Present Study
Figure 1.
Model one: proposed model for perceived maternal rejection and
coping motive.
Figure 2.
Model two: proposed model for perceived paternal rejection and
coping motive.
Although researchers have documented that perceived pa-
rental rejection and the acceptance-rejection syndrome are as-
sociated with substance use (Campo & Rohner, 1992; Rohner
& Britner, 2002), researchers have not documented if perceived
parental rejection and the acceptance-rejection syndrome are
associated with drinking motives, or self-perceived reasons for
drinking alcohol. Therefore, the purpose of our study was to
determine if, among young women specifically, perceived pa-
rental rejection is associated, via negative self-esteem, with the
drinking motives identified by Cooper and colleagues (1992):
coping, enhancement, and sociability. We chose negative self-
esteem, one of the dispositions of the acceptance-rejection syn-
drome, because of its documented link with young women’s
alcohol use (Boyd et al., 2002).
Figure 3.
Model Three: Proposed model for perceived maternal rejection
and enhancement motive.
Figure 4.
Model four: proposed model for perceived paternal rejection and en-
hancement motive.
936

L. RUNDELL ET AL.
Figure 5.
Model five: proposed model for perceived maternal rejection and
sociability motive.
Figure 6.
Model six: proposed model for perceived paternal rejection and
sociability motive.
Method
Participants
The participants were 95 female young adults (M age = 21.15
years, SD = 1.59). The majority of the participants self-identi-
fied as Caucasian (88%), with the remaining participants self-
identifying as Asian American (7%), bi- or multi-racial (3%),
African American (1%), and American Indian (1%). One per-
son chose not to respond.
Materials
Demographics. The participants completed a series of de-
mographics that included age, ethnicity, and academic status
(i.e., in school or not in school).
Perceived maternal rejection. The participants completed
the Adult Parental Acceptance and Rejection Questionnaire:
Mother (Short Form; Rohner & Khaleque, 2005; α = .95).
This is a 24-item, 4-point, Likert-type self-report questionnaire
designed to measure a person’s perceptions of their mother’s
treatment of them during childhood. Sample items include: My
mother ridiculed and made fun of me; My mother tried to make
me feel better when I was hurt or sick. A higher cumulative
score reflects a stronger perception of maternal rejection.
Perceived paternal rejection. The participants completed
the Adult Parental Acceptance and Rejection Questionnaire:
Father (Short Form; Rohner & Khaleque, 2005; α = .95). This
measure is identical to the Adult Parental Acceptance and Re-
jection Questionnaire: Mother (Short Form; Rohner & Khale-
que, 2005) but it is answered with a person’s father in mind. A
higher cumulative score reflects a stronger perception of pater-
nal rejection.
Negative self-esteem. The participants competed the Nega-
tive Self-Esteem subscale of the Personality Assessment Ques-
tionnaire (Rohner & Khaleque, 2005; α = .88). This subscale
consists of nine items, rated on a 4-point scale, designed to
measure how negatively a person feels about himself or herself.
Sample items include: I certainly feel worthless; When I meet a
stranger I think that s(he) is better than I am. A higher cumula-
tive score reflects more negative self-esteem.
Drinking motives. The participants completed the Drinking
Motives Questionnaire (Cooper et al., 1992). This questionnaire
consists of a total of 15 items rated on a 4-point scale, designed
to measure three dimensions of a person’s motives for alcohol
use: 1) coping motive (α = .84; five items; e.g., How often do
you drink because it helps you when you feel depressed or
nervous?); 2) enhancement motive (α = .82; five items; e.g.,
How often do you drink because it is exciting?); and 3) socia-
bility motive (α = .70; e.g., How often do you drink because it
is customary on special occasions?). A higher mean score on
each dimension reflects a stronger motive to drink.
Procedure
Before data collection began, approval was granted from the
appropriate Institutional Review Board. The participants were
recruited via snowball sampling on Facebook
(www.facebook.com). Potential participants were provided a
link to a Web site that included the informed consent and ques-
tionnaire. If an individual chose to participate, she first read the
informed consent and then completed the questionnaire. Par-
ticipation in the study was anonymous.
Results
In order to test the six models, we analyzed each of them
separately via indirect effects testing with bootstrapped re-
samples of 5000 (Preacher & Hayes, 2008).
Drinking Motive: Coping
The results of Model One were significant (p < .001, R2 = .16),
with Bias Corrected Confidence Intervals of .0036 and .0232.
Therefore, participants’ perception of greater maternal rejec-
tion had an indirect effect (via more negative self-esteem) on
their increased motivation for drinking alcohol as a way of
coping.
The results of Model Two were also significant (p = .001,
R2 = .14), with Bias Corrected Confidence Intervals of .0015
and .0138. Therefore, participants’ perception of greater pater-
nal rejection had an indirect effect (via more negative self-
esteem) on their increased motivation for drinking alcohol as a
way of coping.
Drinking Motive: Enhancement
The results of Model Three were non-significant (p = .41,
R2 = .02, Bias Corrected Confidence Intervals = –.0056, .0134).
The results of Model Four were also non-significant (p = .47,
R2 = .02, Bias Corrected Confidence Intervals = –.0058, .0048).
Therefore, neither perceived maternal rejection nor paternal
rejection had an indirect effect (via more negative self-esteem)
on participants’ motivation for drinking alcohol as a way of
enhancement.
Drinking Mot i v e : S o c ial
The results of Model Five were non-significant (p = .75,
R2 = .01, Bias Corrected Confidence Intervals = –.0065, .0102).
The results of Model Six were also non-significant (p = .47,
R2 = .02, Bias Corrected Confidence Intervals = –.0058, .0048).
Therefore, neither perceived maternal rejection nor paternal
rejection had an indirect effect (via more negative self-esteem)
on participants’ motivation for drinking alcohol as a way of
sociability.

L. RUNDELL ET AL.
Discussion
The purpose of our study was to determine if, among young
women specifically, perceived parental rejection is associated,
via negative self-esteem, with the drinking motives identified
by Cooper and colleagues (1992): coping, enhancement, and
sociability. Our study included negative self-esteem, one of the
dispositions of the acceptance-rejection syndrome, because of
its documented link with young women’s alcohol use (Boyd et
al., 2002).
The results indicate that, among participants who perceived
stronger maternal rejection, a stronger expression of negative
self-esteem existed, which contributed to a stronger motivation
for alcohol use as a coping method. The same held true for
paternal rejection: Among participants who perceived stronger
paternal rejection, a stronger expression of negative self-esteem
existed, which contributed to a stronger motivation for alcohol
use as a coping method. This suggests that young women may
choose to drink alcohol, in part, as a way to cope with their low
self-esteem, which could be an effect, in part, of having ex-
perienced maternal and/or paternal rejection.
Neither perceived maternal nor paternal rejection had an in-
direct effect on enhancement or sociability motives. The find-
ing that perceived maternal and paternal rejection had an indi-
rect effect on only the coping motive makes sense in light of
PARTheory’s coping subtheory. Although the least well-de-
veloped portion of PARTheory, the purpose of coping subthe-
ory is to explore how some children and adults can cope with
perceived rejection better than others (Rohner et al., 2011). The
subtheory explains that there are affective copers, whose mental
health remains relatively good despite their perceived rejection,
and instrumental copers, who maintain success in task-oriented
activities like work or school but have impaired emotional and
mental health. From this, it is apparent that there are degrees of
success in coping and, presumably, many paths by which to
reach a state of coping, with some being healthier than others.
This study provides evidence that one way in which people
might cope with perceived parental rejection is via an unhealthy
path of drinking alcohol.
The limitations to this study include a racially homogenous
sample. Further, alcohol is a commonly used substance among
young adults (Dawson, Grant, Stinson, & Chou, 2004), perhaps
making the results of this study less generalizable to older
women. In addition, the present study is correlational, which
precludes the ability to make any determinations of causality.
In the future, researchers might consider examining the role
of perceived parental rejection in women’s motivations to use
substances other than alcohol. Further, researchers might also
examine if additional dispositions of the parental acceptance-
rejection syndrome (e.g., negative worldview) connect young
women’s perceptions of parental rejection to their motivations
for alcohol and other substance use. It is also important to note
that although the R2 values for Model One (.16) and Model
Two (.14) were significant, there is still unexplained variance in
the coping motive that was not accounted for by perceived ma-
ternal and paternal rejection, which invites an explanation from
future research.
REFERENCES
Boyd, M. R., Bland, A., Herman, J., Mestler, L., Murr, L., & Potts, L.
(2002). Stress and coping in rural women with alcohol and other
drug disorders. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 16, 254-262.
doi:10.1053/apnu.2002.37280
Campo, A., & Rohner, R. P. (1992). Relationships between perceived
parental acceptance-rejection, psychological adjustment, and sub-
stance abuse among young adults. Child Abuse and Neglect, 16, 429-
440. doi:10.1016/0145-2134(92)90052-S
Cooper, M. L., Russell, M., Skinner, J. B., & Windle, M. (1992). De-
velopment and validation of a three-dimensional measure of drinking
motives. Psycho l o g ic a l Assessment, 4, 123-132.
doi:10.1037/1040-3590.4.2.123
Cooper, M. L. (1994). Motivations for alcohol use among adolescents:
Development and validation of a four-factor model. Psychological
Assessment, 6, 117-128. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.6.2.117
Cox, W. M., & Klinger, E. (1988). A motivational model of alcohol use.
Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 97, 168-180.
doi:10.1037/0021-843X.97.2.168
Dawson, D. A., Grant, B. F., Stinson, F. S., & Chou, P. S. (2004). An-
other look at heavy episodic drinking and alcohol use disorders
among college and noncollege youth. Journal of Studies on Alcohol
and Drugs, 65, 477-488.
Khaleque, A., & Rohner, R. P. (2002). Reliability of measures assess-
ing the relation between perceived parental acceptance-rejection and
psychological adjustment: A meta-analysis of cross-cultural and in-
tracultural studies. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psycholo gy, 33, 86-98.
doi:10.1177/0022022102033001006
Kuntsche, E., Knibbe, R., Gmel, G., & Engels, R. (2005). Why do
young people drink? A review of drinking motives. Clinical Psy-
chology Review, 25, 841-861. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2005.06.002
Larimer, M. E., Lydum, A. R., Anderson, B. K., & Turner, A. P. (1999).
Male and female recipients of unwanted sexual contact in a college
student sample: Prevalence rates, alcohol use, and depression symp-
toms. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 30, 3-4.
Paul, L. A., Grubaugh, A. L., Frueh, B. C., Ellis, C., & Egede, L. E.
(2011). Associations between binge and heavy drinking and health
behaviors in a nationally representative sample. Journal of Addictive
Behaviors, 36, 1240-1245. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2011.07.034
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling
strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple
mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879-891.
doi:10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
Rohner, R. P. (1986). The warmth dimension: Foundations of parental
acceptance-rejection theory. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications,
Inc.
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: Macmillan Reference.
Rohner, R. P. (2004). The parental “acceptance-rejection syndrome”:
Universal correlates of perceived rejection. American Psychologist,
59, 830-840. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.59.8.830
Rohner, R. P., & Britner, P. A. (2002). Worldwide mental health corre-
lates of parental acceptance-rejection: Review of cross-cultural and
intracultural evidence. Cross-Cultural Research, 36, 16-47.
doi:10.1177/106939702129146316
Rohner, R. P., & Khaleque, A. (2005). Handbook for the study of pa-
rental acceptance and rejection (4th ed.). Storrs, CT: Rohner Re-
search Publications.
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 and Review, 3,
73-87. doi:10.1111/j.1756-2589.2010.00040.x
Rohner, R. P., Khaleque, A., & Cournoyer, D. E. (2011). Introduction
to parental acceptance-rejection theory, methods, evidence, and im-
plications. URL (last checked 17 November 2011).
www.cspar.uconn.edu
Seth, P., Wingood, G. M., DiClemente, R. J., & Robinson, L. S. (2011).
Alcohol use as a marker for risky sexual behaviors and biologically
confirmed sexually transmitted infections among young adult Afri-
can American women. Women’s Health Issues, 2, 130-135.
doi:10.1016/j.whi.2010.10.005
Smith, M. A., & Berger, J. B. (2010). Women’s ways of drinking:
938

L. RUNDELL ET AL.
College women, high-risk alcohol use, and negative consequences.
Journal of College Student Development, 51, 35-49.
doi:10.1353/csd.0.0107
Wechsler, H., Dowdall, G. W., Davenport, A., & Rimm, E. B. (1995).
A gender-specific measure of binge-drinking among college students.
American Journal of Public He a l th , 85, 982-985.