Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Cross-sectional study examines impulsivity's role in influencing conformity linked to rejection sensitivity in emerging adults, suggesting intervention strategies.
Background Emerging adulthood is a critical developmental period marked by identity formation, heightened social sensitivity and susceptibility to peer influence. Although rejection sensitivity is recognized as a predictor of maladaptive social behaviour, the conditions under which it translates into conforming behaviour remain poorly understood. Objective The current study examined whether impulsivity moderates the relationship between rejection sensitivity and conforming behaviour in emerging adults. Method A cross-sectional design was employed with a convenience sample of 361 emerging adults aged 18–25 years (M = 20.6, SD = 2.04). Rejection sensitivity, conformity and impulsivity were assessed using Adult Rejection Sensitivity Questionnaire, Information and Normative conformity Scale and Barratt Impulsiveness Scale. Moderation analysis was conducted with mean-centred predictors; simple slopes were examined at −1 SD, mean, and + 1 SD of impulsivity. Results Rejection sensitivity was positively correlated with conformity ( r = 0.223, p < .001) and impulsivity ( r = 0.181, p < .001). The Rejection Sensitivity × Impulsivity interaction was significant (B = 0.007, SE = 0.003, p = .029). The effect of rejection sensitivity on conformity was significant at high (B = 0.242, p < .001) and average impulsivity (B = 0.168, p < .001), but non-significant at low impulsivity (B = 0.095, p = .056). Conclusion Findings support a dual-vulnerability account whereby rejection sensitivity and high impulsivity (reflecting poor self-regulatory control) jointly amplify conformity risk. Multi-component interventions for high-impulsivity youth should jointly target rejection sensitivity and impulse control. Future research should employ longitudinal and experimental designs to test directionality with appropriate rigour.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Parvathy et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: