Skip to main content


Schema therapy posits that psychological difficulties stem from early maladaptive schemas (EMS) and clients’ characteristic responses to them, referred to as ‘coping styles’. This Approval-/Admiration-Seeking information handout forms part of the Psychology Tools Schema series. It is designed to help clients and therapists to work more effectively with common early maladaptive schemas (EMS).

Download or send

Choose your language

Professional version

A PDF of the resource, theoretical background, suggested therapist questions and prompts.

Client version

A PDF of the resource plus client-friendly instructions where appropriate.

Translation Template

Are you a qualified therapist who would like to help with our translation project?


Languages this resource is available in

  • English (GB)
  • English (US)
  • Finnish

Problems this resource might be used to address

Techniques associated with this resource

Mechanisms associated with this resource

Introduction & Theoretical Background

A brief introduction to schema therapy

Schema therapy is an integrative therapy initially developed for treating complex, longstanding, and diffuse psychological difficulties. It combines cognitive behavioral, attachment, gestalt, object relationships, constructivist, psychoanalytic, and neurobiological approaches within a unifying conceptual model (Young, 1990, 1999; Young et al., 2003). Additional interventions have since been outlined, such as EMDR (Young et al., 2002), mindfulness (van Vreeswijk et al., 2014), and body-focused methods (Briedis & Startup, 2020). Schema therapy expands on CBT by emphasizing the developmental origins of psychological problems, incorporating relational and experiential interventions, and targeting the maladaptive coping styles that perpetuate these difficulties (Young et al., 2003).

Early maladaptive schemas

Schemas are enduring and foundational mental structures that play an essential role in cognitive processing, enabling humans to represent the complexities of the world (Rafaeli et al., 2016). By simplifying reality, they make the vast array of information we encounter manageable, so that we can take quick and automatic action. Schemas also act as shortcuts that help us reach conclusions without unnecessary processing. However, while these shortcuts are efficient, they can produce distorted interpretations of reality. Research confirms that schemas can be adaptive or maladaptive, and positive or negative, depending on their output (Young et al., 2003). Adaptive schemas are associated with positive functions and adaptive behavioral dispositions (Louis et al., 2018).

In schema therapy, EMS are defined as negative, pervasive themes or patterns regarding oneself and one’s relationship with others that are dysfunctional and self-defeating. Structurally, EMS are believed to consist of thoughts, memories, emotions, bodily sensations, and the meanings ascribed to them (Van Genderen et al., 2012). Importantly, behavior is not a component of schemas, but a response to their activation. In other words, EMS activation results in schema-driven actions (Young et al., 2003).

Interactions between a child’s temperament, parenting, sociocultural context, and significant life experiences (e.g., traumatic events) can give rise to unmet emotional needs, which form the basis of EMS. EMS are usually accurate representations of these early environments and lead to responses that help the child survive and adapt to these contexts (Farrell et al., 2014; Young et al., 2003). EMS become dysfunctional when they are indiscriminately and repeatedly applied to later life experiences.

EMS are elaborated and strengthened throughout their lifespan, becoming the ‘filters’ through which individuals understand and make predictions about themselves, others, and the world (Young & Klosko, 1994). Accordingly, EMS developed in early life are superimposed on current events (even when not applicable), leading to dysfunctional patterns of thought, feeling, and behavior (Young et al., 2003).

[EMS] become dysfunctional because … they render all new situations, even ones that are profoundly different from the toxic early experiences, similarly toxic (even when in reality they are not), and … lead the person to maintain particular types of [toxic] environments or relationships, even when they can exert influence or choice and create other kinds of experiences.

Rafaeli et al., 2011.

Schema development

Core emotional needs

Satisfying core emotional needs during childhood leads to the development of healthy schemas, while unmet needs give rise to EMS. Young and colleagues (2003) originally outlined 5 core emotional needs based on Bowlby’s (1977) attachment theory and clinical observation (Bach et al., 2018). While they are believed to be universal, the strength of these needs can vary across individuals and potentially across cultures (e.g., Hahn & Oishi, 2006). They are:

  1. Secure attachments (e.g., safety, protection, acceptance, stability, and belonging).
  2. Autonomy, competence, and sense of identity.
  3. Freedom to express needs and emotions.
  4. Spontaneity and play.
  5. Realistic limits and self-control.

Given that core needs initially relate to the child’s primary attachments, difficulties within the nuclear family are often the principal source of EMS (Rafaeli et al., 2011). Young acknowledged that attachment needs were of primary importance for the developing child, laying the foundation for the satisfaction of other needs (Brockman et al., 2023). However, as children mature, needs arising other arenas such as school and the wider community become important (e.g., stable friendships, peer group acceptance, etc.). While unmet needs in these later contexts can lead to EMS, schemas emerging in adolescence are usually less pervasive than those developed during childhood (Young et al., 2003). EMS can also develop in later life (such as in response to deeply disturbing events), although this is much less common (Louis et al., 2018).

Other core needs have also been proposed, such as fairness, self-coherence (Arntz et al., 2021), novelty, self-comprehension (Flanagan, 2010), self-esteem (Loose et al., 2020), meaning (Meier, 2019), and connectedness to nature (O’Sheedy, 2021). However, these core needs have not yet been fully incorporated into the schema therapy model. Core needs are described in more detail in the Psychology Tools Unmet Emotional Needs information handout.

Early experiences

Interactions between a child’s early environment and innate temperament can frustrate their core emotional needs, leading to EMS development. Young and colleagues (2003) identify 4 childhood experiences that contribute to EMS:

  1. Toxic withholding. The child is given too little of what they need (e.g., insufficient attention, affection, protection, etc.).
  2. Toxic excess. The child is given too much of what they need (e.g., they are over-indulged, overprotected, granted excessive freedoms, etc.).
  3. Traumatization. The child is harmed, victimized, or humiliated (e.g., parental abuse, bullying, discrimination, etc.). 
  4. Selective internalization. The child internalizes maladaptive attitudes that are modeled by a caregiver or family member  (e.g., perfectionism, pessimism, etc.).

Emotional temperament

Temperament refers to enduring differences in children’s behavioral style and reactivity (Zentner & Bates, 2008). It can contribute to EMS formation by influencing parenting styles (Eisenberg et al., 1999; Kiff et al., 2011; Pekdoğan & Mehmet, 2022). For example:

  • Irritable children tend to elicit punitive parenting, leading to increased anger.
  • Fearful children tend to elicit protective parenting, leading to increased anxiety.
  • Impulsive children tend to elicit controlling parenting, increasing impulsivity.

Moreover, children have a ‘differential susceptibility’ to their childhood environments and experiences (Belsky, 2013). For example, reactive children are more likely to flounder in response to poor parenting. This partly explains why some individuals develop EMS in the absence of severe trauma (Lockwood & Perris, 2012).

Schema perpetuation

EMS are remarkably obstinate: they “fight for survival”. Young and colleagues (2003) suggest the durability of EMS partly stems the need for ‘cognitive consistency’: people strive to maintain a stable view of themselves and the world, even if it is inaccurate and distressing. Moreover, EMS are often central to an individual’s sense of self, making the idea of a schematic “paradigm shift” extremely threatening (Beck et al., 2004; Young & Klokso, 1994):

Although [the client’s] schematic structure may be unrewarding and lonely, change means that [they] are in new territory... They are being asked not just to change a single chain of behaviors, or reframe a simple perception, but rather to give up who they are and how they have defined themselves for many years, and across many contexts.

Beck et al., 2004.

Several other factors account for why EMS persist and are strengthened over time.

  • Cognitive factors. EMS act as cognitive filters, distorting information and generating unhelpful thinking styles (Young et al., 2003). For example, schema-consistent information is exaggerated, while schema-inconsistent information is filtered out (i.e., magnification and minimization). Other cognitive distortions linked to EMS perpetuation include selective abstraction, overgeneralization, and labeling (Da Luz et al., 2017; Young, 1999). Research indicates schema activation not only generates negative automatic thoughts, but that these appraisals in turn reinforce EMS (Calvete et al., 2013).
  • Affective factors. Individuals often block painful emotions linked to their EMS. Consequently, EMS do not reach conscious awareness which prevents their disconfirmation (Young et al., 2003). Affect can also make schema-congruent perceptions feel true. Finally, schema maintenance processes and their centrality to the individual’s sense of self can engender hopelessness about change (Young, 1999).
  • Behavioral factors. EMS lead to self-defeating behaviors, referred to as ‘coping responses’. For example, individuals might remain in toxic situations, provoke negative responses from others, or select partners that reinforce their EMS (Rafaeli et al., 2011).

Maladaptive coping styles

Coping styles refer to the characteristic ways individuals manage their EMS. Coping styles develop in childhood and operate outside of awareness, helping individuals adapt to their EMS, the intense affect accompanying them, and the environments in which they were formed (Rafaeli et al., 2011; Young et al., 2003). Much like EMS, factors that may influence the emergence of coping styles include temperament, modeling, conditioning, and culture (Loose et al., 2020; Nia & Sovani, 2014). While they are apparent in all individuals, coping styles tend to be more rigid, extreme, and ‘overlearned’ in clinical groups (Beck et al., 2004). Most importantly, coping styles play a central role in EMS perpetuation.

Coping styles, in turn, give rise to idiographic ‘coping responses’ – the situation-specific manifestations of the client’s coping style. While coping styles are repetitious, coping responses are more variable and can take the form of behavioral, cognitive, or emotional reactions to EMS activation (Simeone-DiFrancesco et al., 2015).

Young and colleagues (Young & Klosko, 1994; Young et al., 2003) identify three coping styles, recently reformulated by an international working group (Arntz et al., 2021). 
While most individuals use a mix of coping styles, some disorders are characterized by the predominance of one coping style (e.g., overcompensatory control in narcissistic personality disorder; Rafaeli et al., 2011):

  • ‘Surrender’ (Young et al., 2003) or ‘Resignation’ (Arntz et al., 2021). Corresponding to the evolutionary ‘freeze’ or ‘fawn’ response, the individual responds to their EMS by accepting its core message and behaving as if it were true. Consequently, they experience the pain of the EMS directly.
  • ‘Avoidance’ (Young et al., 2003) or ‘Escape’ (Young & Klosko, 1994). Corresponding to the evolutionary ‘flight’ response, the individual arranges their life such that their EMS is not triggered. The pain of their EMS is avoided or suppressed. Avoidant coping may be overt (e.g., escaping from schema activating situations or individuals) or covert (e.g., using substances or dissociation to dull schema-related distress).
  • ‘Overcompensation’ (Young et al., 2003) or ‘Inversion’ (Arntz et al., 2021). Corresponding to the ‘fight’ response, the individual responds to schema activation by attacking, overcorrecting, or externalizing their EMS (Greenwald & Young, 1998). The pain of the EMS is masked with other thoughts, emotions, and actions (e.g., the individual replaces feelings of inferiority with superiority).

Three additional coping styles (indolence, mockery, and gaucherie) have also been proposed (Askari, 2021).

Young (1990) originally described 15 EMS, which were later increased to 18 schemas (Young et al., 2003). Additional schemas have since been proposed (e.g., Arntz et al., 2021; Brockman et al., 2023; Yalcin et al., 2023). The 18 EMS described by Young and colleagues (2003) were subsequently clustered into ‘schema domains’ which correspond to specific unmet emotional needs. Abandonment is grouped with EMS in the ‘disconnection and rejection’ domain, which are characterized by difficulties forming secure and satisfying relationships with others (Bach et al., 2018; Young et al., 2003).


Social approval and recognition have an impact on everyone’s self-esteem (Leary et al., 2003). Seeking the attention and approval of others is a normal part of development that usually declines as children get older (Rudolph et al., 2005). Striving for approval can also be beneficial, fostering pride, self-worth, motivation, and prosocial behavior. However, when people come to depend on the approval and admiration of others, it can result in significant problems.

The approval-/admiration seeking EMS is characterized by a persistent and exaggerated need for the approval, attention, and recognition, often at the expense of one’s own desires, inclinations, and personal development (Van Genderen et al., 2012). Overly focused on the judgments of others and social status, individuals with this EMS experience corresponding losses in their self-esteem, self-identity, self-directedness, and vitality (Chang, 2020; Ehrlich, 2021).

These patients place excessive importance on gaining approval or recognition from other people at the expense of fulfilling their core emotional needs and expressing their natural inclinations. Because they habitually focus on the reactions of others rather than on their own reactions, they fail to develop a stable, inner-directed sense of self.

Young et al., 2003.

Young and colleagues (2003) note that approval-seeking is not always pathological. Almost all individuals desire and strive for some degree of approval form from an early age (Lind, 2000; Rudolph et al., 2005). Moreover, striving for approval is often socially sanctioned and rewarded. Individuals with this EMS are excessively concerned with acquiring approval, recognition, or status (Simone-DiFrancesco et al., 2015). In addition, their desire to win universal approval or recognition is ultimately impossible, involving the search “for a remote and unrealistic solution… extraordinary accomplishment, radical self-improvement, or celebrity status in order to win the love of everyone” (Lind, 2020). As a result, individuals with this EMS often feel disappointed, empty, and estranged from their ‘true’ selves, thanks in part to the inauthentic and unsatisfying life decisions that stem from their pursuit of validation and admiration (Winnicott, 1965; Young, 2014).

They have spent their lives suppressing their emotions and natural inclinations for the sake of gaining approval or recognition … Compared to genuine self-expression and being true to oneself, other people’s approval provides only a superficial and transient form of gratification. Here, we state a philosophical assumption of our theory: Humans are happiest and most fulfilled when they are expressing authentic emotions and acting on their natural inclinations.

Young et al., 2003

For individuals who strive for admiration and approval, self-worth is largely contingent on the reactions of others (Crocker & Wolfe, 2001). As a result, their self-esteem often feels fragile, inauthentic, or constantly “on the line” (Jordan & Ziegler-Hill, 2013). Because they are so concerned with external validation, individuals with this EMS are preoccupied with other people’s opinions, acutely aware of how they respond, and sensitive to criticism (Young, 2014). In addition, they are often highly adept at changing themselves “in a chameleon-like way… to endear themselves to or impress people” (Young et al., 2003). Most importantly, this prevents individuals from meeting the core emotional needs that they have sacrificed in pursuit of approval (e.g., authentic self-expression).

Young and colleagues (2003) identify two presentations associated with this EMS:

  • Approval-seekers: These individuals base their self-worth on other people’s approval and are primarily concerned with being liked and accepted. This can lead to pressure, anxiety, comparison-making, and reassurance-seeking (e.g., Prieler et al., 2021). To secure other people’s approval, they may act in pleasing, compliant, deferential, or subservient ways. When approval is not forthcoming, they often experience intense shame, self-criticism, low mood, and worthlessness (Jordan & Ziegler-Hill, 2013; Sargent et al., 2006). Approval-seeking is associated with a variety of clinical presentations, including fragile/vulnerable narcissism (e.g., Zeigler-Hill & Vrabel, 2023).
  • Recognition-/ admiration-seekers: These individuals crave admiration and adulation. To secure this, they tend to behave in assertive and self-promoting ways, such as overemphasizing their achievements and personal assets (e.g., wealth, appearance, social status). They are often vigilant to the amount of attention, recognition, and acclaim they receive, as well as their relative influence compared to rivals (Grapsas et al., 2020). Admiration-seeking has been described as the “default mode” in grandiose narcissism (Back et al., 2013). When recognition is not forthcoming, these individuals may resort to rivalrous behaviors to acquire or protect their social status (e.g., aggression, derogation, defensiveness), resulting in conflict and rejection.

As with all EMS, approval-/admiration-seeking has multiple structural components. Individuals with this schema are prone to several cognitive distortions or ‘unhelpful thinking styles’ (Lorzangeneh & Issazadegan, 2022; Young et al., 2003), including:

  • All or nothing thinking (e.g., “Either people approve of me, or I am worthless”).
  • Catastrophizing (e.g., “If I don’t have status, no one will pay attention to me”).
  • Discounting the positives (e.g., “There’s nothing to gain from pursuing my values”).
  • Emotional reasoning (e.g., “When people don’t praise me, I feel like I don’t matter”).
  • Fortune-telling (e.g., “I’ll never be happy until people recognize my success”).
  • Mental filter (e.g., “Being admired is all that matters in life”).
  • Overgeneralization (e.g., “He wasn’t impressed – nothing I’ve done is worthy”).
  • Personalizing (e.g., “She ignored me because I wasn’t impressive enough”).
  • “Should” statements (e.g., “I should impress people to fit in”).

Emotions linked to approval-/admiration seeking include:

  • Anxiety associated with potential disapproval.
  • Envy toward others who receive greater attention or approval.
  • Emptiness and dissatisfaction associated with choices based on other people’s values.
  • Frustration when others fail to acknowledge achievements or successes.
  • Pressure associated with having to constantly impress others.
  • Pride associated with being recognized and admired.
  • Shame and sadness associated with a lack of approval.

As a result, people who are approval-/admiration-seeking may experience difficulties when it comes to:

  • Fluctuating and/or fragile self-worth.
  • Tolerating disapproval, criticism, or a lack of recognition.
  • Authenticity, being ‘true’ to oneself, or recognizing and acting on personal values.
  • Self-confidence and self-assurance.
  • Candid self-expression.
  • Sharing attention with others.
  • Recognizing other people’s achievements.
  • Maintaining long-term relationships (e.g., partners may become frustrated with excessive reassurance-seeking or bragging).
  • Navigating conflicts (without becoming subservient, people-pleasing, or hostile).

Clinical observation suggests that, as with other conditional EMS, approval-/admiration-seeking is often associated unconditional EMS. Young and colleagues (2003) suggest that conditional (or ‘secondary’) EMS emerge in later development and are an attempt to forestall the activation of unconditional (or ‘primary’) schemas. In other words, conditional schemas compensate for unconditional EMS. Unfortunately, conditional EMS tend to chronify and reinforce their unconditional counterparts in the long term: not only are they impossible to consistently fulfil, but the needs underlying unconditional EMS continue to be frustrated (Roediger et al., 2018). EMS that are sometimes associated with approval-/admiration-seeking include:

  • Defectiveness. Admiration and recognition helps the client feel more worthwhile.
  • Emotional deprivation. The client hopes that recognition will secure more care and attention, and help them feel less alone.
  • Entitlement. The client searches for approval, recognition, or attention to gain status or control others.
  • Self-sacrifice. The client self-sacrifices to gain recognition, attention, or approval from others.
  • Social isolation. The client hopes that securing other people’s approval will help them fit in.
  • Subjugation. The client behaves in a compliant, people-pleasing manner to gain their approval and be accepted.
  • Unrelenting standards. The client hopes that striving to be perfect will secure other people’s recognition and approval.

Approval-/admiration-seeking is associated with a range of difficulties, including addictions (Vieira et al., 2023), anger (Askari, 2019), bipolar disorder (Hawke & Provencher, 2012), chronic pain (Saariaho et al., 2010), compulsive behaviors (Pozza et al., 2020), depression (Bishop et al., 2022), OCD (Baz & Karagüzel, 2022), sexual problems (Dikmen & Safak, 2020), and narcissism (Louis et al., 2022).

Development origins

Approval-/admiration-seeking is associated with unmet emotional needs relating to unconditional love and acceptance, self-directedness, self-expression, and validation (Bach et al., 2018; Farrell & Shaw, 2018). Formative experiences that play a role in the development of this EMS may include:

  • Parents who are preoccupied with outward appearances and social approval.
  • Conditional acceptance: the child needed to suppress aspects of themselves to secure love or attention (e.g., genuine self-expression).
  • Pushing the child to succeed and impress rather than nurturing their personal interests or natural inclinations.

Research confirms that specific developmental experiences are associated with approval-/admiration-seeking, including conditional/narcissistic and overprotective parenting (Bach et al., 2018; Bruysters & Pilkington, 2022).

Therapist Guidance

"Many people struggle with seeking approval or admiration from others, and it sounds like this might be relevant to you too. Would you be willing to explore this schema more with me?"

Clinicians might begin by providing psychoeducation about approval-/admiration-seeking and EMS more generally:

  • Schemas are negative themes and patterns that start in your childhood and continue throughout your life. Some are very common.
  • Schemas usually get stronger as time passes, becoming the negative filters people use to understand and predict the world. You could think of them as dark sunglasses – they color and distort our experiences in unhelpful ways.
  • Schemas operate ‘behind the scenes’: we’re not usually aware of them or when they are active. However, with practice, you can become more aware of them. It is a bit like a theatre – you can learn to bring your backstage schemas to the main stage.
  • One common schema is ‘approval-seeking and admiration-seeking’. If you have this schema, you are desperate to gain other people’s attention, approval, or adoration – feeling good about yourself depends on others react to you. However, being so focused on other people can leave you feeling empty, inauthentic, and out-of-touch with what really matters to you.
  • Signs that you have an approval-seeking or admiration-seeking schema include wanting to be liked by everyone, trying to impress others, craving applause, or feeling intensely sad when people don’t approve of you or acknowledge your successes.
  • People develop schemas because some of their emotional needs were not met while they were growing up. As children, schemas help us make sense of our early experiences and to get by. If you have an approval-seeking or admiration-seeking schema, your parents might have been very concerned with outward appearances and how others judged them. Alternatively, you might remember working hard to getting their love, attention, or recognition. Either way, you could not express your ‘true’ self, which has become increasingly distant from you as time has gone on.
  • Schemas are painful, so people learn to cope with them in different ways. You might cope with approval-seeking or admiration-seeking by drawing attention to yourself, trying to please others, avoiding interactions with people who might not approve of you, or deliberately provoking disapproval from the people you admire.

Standard treatment techniques for working with approval-/admiration-seeking are listed below. Some of these are described in more detail in the Psychology Tools Healing Your Schemas information handout. They include:

  • Self-monitoring (e.g., schema diaries).
  • Cognitive interventions (e.g., historical review, decentering, flashcards).
  • Emotion-focused interventions (e.g., imagery rescripting, chairwork, letter-writing).
  • Relational interventions (e.g., limited reparenting, empathic confrontation).
  • Behavioral interventions (e.g., experimentation, behavioral pattern-breaking).

In light of the unmet needs associated with approval-/admiration-seeking, individuals with this EMS also require a specific ‘need-meeting’ style of interaction from the outset of therapy (Cutland Green & Balfour, 2020). This includes acceptance and unconditional positive regard, with an emphasis on encouraging authentic self-expression (e.g., sharing negative reactions) and the pursuit of what is personally meaningful (Lockwood & Samson, 2020). At the same time, attempts to impress, gain attention (e.g., through extravagance), or solicit approval need to be confronted.

References And Further Reading

  • Alba, J., Calvete, E., Wante, L., Van Beveren, M. L., & Braet, C. (2018). Early maladaptive schemas as moderators of the association between bullying victimization and depressive symptoms in adolescents. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 42, 24-35. DOI: 10.1007/s10608-017-9874-5.
  • Arntz, A., & Jacob, G. (2013). Schema therapy in practice: An introductory guide to the schema mode approach. John Wiley and Sons.
  • Arntz, A., Rijkeboer, M., Chan, E., Fassbinder, E., Karaosmanoglu, A., Lee, C. W., & Panzeri, M. (2021). Towards a reformulated theory underlying schema therapy: Position paper of an international workgroup. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 45, 1007-1020. DOI: 10.1007/s10608-021-10209-5.
  • Askari, A. (2021). New concepts of schema therapy: The six coping styles. Amir Askari.
  • Askari, I. (2019). Early maladaptive schemas and cognitive-behavioral aspect of anger: Schema model perspective. Journal of Rational-Emotive and Cognitive-Behavior Therapy, 37, 262-283. DOI: 10.1007/s10942-018-0311-9.
  • Bach, B., Lockwood, G., & Young, J. E. (2018). A new look at the schema therapy model: organization and role of early maladaptive schemas. Cognitive Behaviour Therapy, 47, 328-349. DOI: 10.1080/16506073.2017.1410566.
  • Back, M. D., Küfner, A. C. P., Dufner, M., Gerlach, T. M., Rauthmann, J. F., & Denissen, J. J. A. (2013). Narcissistic admiration and rivalry: Disentangling the bright and dark sides of narcissism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105, 1013–1037. DOI: 10.1037/a0034431.
  • Baz, A., & Karagüzel, E. Ö. (2022). Comparison of early maladaptive schemas in obsessive-compulsive disorder patients, their siblings, and controls. Alpha Psychiatry, 23, 157-163. DOI: 10.5152/alphapsychiatry.2022.21565
  • Beck, A. T., Freeman, A., & Davis, D. D. (2004). Cognitive therapy of personality disorders. Guilford Press.
  • Belsky, J. (2013). Differential susceptibility to environmental influences. International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy, 7, 15-31. DOI: 10.1007/2288-6729-7-2-15.
  • Bishop, A., Younan, R., Low, J., & Pilkington, P. D. (2022). Early maladaptive schemas and depression in adulthood: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 29, 111-130. DOI: 10.1002/cpp.2630.
  • Bowlby, J. (1977). The making and breaking of affectional bonds: I. Aetiology and psychopathology in the light of attachment theory. British Journal of Psychiatry, 130, 201–210. DOI: 10.1192/bjp.130.3.201.
  • Briedis, J., & Startup, H. (2020). Somatic perspective in schema therapy: The role of the body in the awareness and transformation of modes and schemas. In G. Heath and H. Startup (Eds.), Creative methods in schema therapy: Advances and innovations in practice. Routledge, 60-75.
  • Brockman, R. N., Simpson, S., Hayes, C., Wijingaart, R. V. D., & Smout, M. (2023). Cambridge guide to schema therapy. Cambridge University Press.
  • Calvete, E., Orue, I., & Hankin, B. L. (2013). Early maladaptive schemas and social anxiety in adolescents: The mediating role of anxious automatic thoughts. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 27, 278-288. DOI: 10.1016/j.janxdis.2013.02.011.
  • Chang, O. D. (2020). The stakes of self‐worth: Examining contingencies of self‐worth to clarify the association between global self‐esteem and eating disturbances in college women. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 76, 2283-2295. DOI: 10.1002/jclp.23006.
  • Crocker, J., & Wolfe, C. T. (2001). Contingencies of self-worth. Psychological Review, 108, 593-623. DOI: 10.1037/0033-295X.108.3.593
  • Cutland Green, T., & Balfour, A. (2020). Assessment and formulation in schema therapy. In G. Heath & H. Startup (Eds.), Creative methods in schema therapy: Advances and innovation in clinical practice. Routledge, 19-47.
  • Da Luz, F. Q., Sainsbury, A., Hay, P., Roekenes, J. A., Swinbourne, J., Da Silva, D. C., & da S. Oliveira, M. (2017). Early maladaptive schemas and cognitive distortions in adults with morbid obesity: relationships with mental health status. Behavioral Sciences, 7, 1-11. DOI: 10.3390/bs7010010.
  • Dikmen, S. N. T., & Safak, Y. (2020). Effect of early maladaptive schemas and sexual self-schemas in vaginismus. International Journal of Medical Reviews and Case Reports, 4, 15-21. DOI: 10.5455/IJMRCR.Effect-schemas-sexual-self-schemas-vaginismus.
  • Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A., Shepard, S. A., Guthrie, I. K., Murphy, B. C., & Reiser, M. (1999). Parental reactions to children’s negative emotions: Longitudinal relations to quality of children’s social functioning. Child Development, 70, 513-534. DOI: 10.1111/1467-8624.00037.
  • Farrell, J. M., Reiss, N., & Shaw, I. (2014). The schema therapy clinician’s guide: A complete resource for building and developing individual, group and integrated schema mode treatment programs. John Wiley and Sons.
  • Farrell, J. M., & Shaw, I. (2018). Experiencing schema therapy from the inside out: A self-practice/self-reflection workbook for therapists. Guilford Press.
  • Flanagan, C. (2010). The case for needs in psychotherapy. Journal of Psychotherapy Integration, 20, 1–36. DOI: 10.1037/a0018815.
  • Grapsas, S., Brummelman, E., Back, M. D., & Denissen, J. J. (2020). The “why” and “how” of narcissism: A process model of narcissistic status pursuit. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 15, 150-172. DOI: 10.1177/1745691619873350.
  • Greenwald, M., & Young, J. (1998). Schema-focused therapy: An integrative approach to psychotherapy supervision. Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy, 12, 109-126.
  • Hahn, J., & Oishi, S. (2006). Psychological needs and emotional well-being in older and younger Koreans and Americans. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 689-698. DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2005.09.001.
  • Hawke, L. D., & Provencher, M. D. (2012). Early maladaptive schemas among patients diagnosed with bipolar disorder. Journal of Affective Disorders, 136, 803-811. DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2011.09.036.
  • Jordan, C. H., & Zeigler-Hill, V. (2013). Fragile self-esteem: The perils and pitfalls of (some) high self-esteem. In V. Zeigler-Hill (Ed.), Self-esteem. Psychology Press, 80-98.
  • Kiff, C. J., Lengua, L. J., & Zalewski, M. (2011). Nature and nurturing: Parenting in the context of child temperament. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 14, 251-301. DOI: 10.1007/s10567-011-0093-4.
  • Kudryavtsev, V. T. (2011). The phenomenon of child creativity. International Journal of Early Years Education, 19, 45-53. DOI: 10.1080/09669760.2011.570999.
  • Leary, M. R., Gallagher, B., Fors, E., Buttermore, N., Baldwin, E., Kennedy, K., & Mills, A. (2003). The invalidity of disclaimers about the effects of social feedback on self-esteem. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 623-636. DOI: 10.1177/0146167203029005007
  • Lockwood, G., & Perris, P. (2012). A new look at core emotional needs. In M. van Vreeswijk, J. Broersen, & M. Nadort (Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of schema therapy: Theory, research, and practice. John Wiley and Sons, 41–66.
  • Lockwood,G., & Samson, R. (2020). Understanding and meeting core emotional needs. In G. Heath and H. Startup (Eds.), Creative methods in schema therapy: Advances and innovations in practice. Routledge, 76-90.
  • Lind, R. (2000). The seeking self: The quest for self-improvement and the creation of personal suffering. Phanes Press.
  • Loose, C., Graaf, P., Zarbock, G., & Holt, R. A. (2020). Schema therapy for children and adolescents (ST-CA): A practitioner’s guide. Pavilion.
  • Louis, J. P., Louis, K. M., & Young, A. M. (2022). Positive schemas: Replication, associations with negative schemas, and the dark triad. Psychological Reports. 00332941221100445.
  • Louis, J. P., Wood, A. M., Lockwood, G., Ho, M.-H. R., & Ferguson, E. (2018). Positive clinical psychology and Schema Therapy (ST): The development of the Young Positive Schema Questionnaire (YPSQ) to complement the Young Schema Questionnaire 3 Short Form (YSQ-S3). Psychological Assessment, 30, 1199–1213. DOI: 10.1037/pas0000567.
  • Meier, I. (2019). Basic needs and complexes: Similarities between feeling‐toned complexes, emotional schema and affective states. Journal of Analytical Psychology, 64, 761-779. DOI: 10.1111/1468-5922.12545.
  • Nia, M. K., & Sovani, A. (2014). Cross cultural comparison role of early maladaptive schemas and coping styles between women with depressive symptoms in Iran and India. Journal of Applied Environmental and Biological Sciences, 4, 57-65.
  • Noor, R., & Dildar, S. (2021). Childhood traumatic experiences, early maladaptive schemas and personality dysfunctions in shelter home residents. Pakistan Journal of Applied Psychology, 1, 10-23.
  • O’Sheedy, B. (2021). Is connectedness to nature a core human need? Schema Therapy Bulletin, 23, 10-14.
  • Pekdoğan, S., & Kanak, M. (2022). Child temperament as a predictor of parents’ potential for emotional abuse. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 210, 330-334. DOI: 10.1097/NMD.0000000000001449.
  • Pozza, A., Albert, U., & Dèttore, D. (2020). Early maladaptive schemas as common and specific predictors of skin picking subtypes. BMC Psychology, 8, 1-11. DOI: 10.1186/s40359-020-0392-y.
  • Prieler, M., Choi, J., & Lee, H. E. (2021). The relationships among self-worth contingency on others’ approval, appearance comparisons on Facebook, and adolescent girls’ body esteem: A cross-cultural study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18, 901. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18030901.
  • Rafaeli, E., Berstein, D. P., & Young, J. E. (2011). Schema therapy: Distinctive features. Routledge.
  • Rafaeli, E., Maurer, O., Lazarus, G., & Thoma, N. C. (2016). The self in schema therapy. In M. Kyrios, R. Moulding, G. Doron, S. S. Bhar, M. Nedeljkovic, & M. Mikulincer (Eds.), The self in understanding and treating psychological disorders. Cambridge University Press, 59-70.
  • Roediger, E., Stevens, B. A., & Brockman, R. (2018). Contextual schema therapy: An integrative approach to personality disorders, emotional dysregulation, and interpersonal functioning. New Harbinger.
  • Rudolph, K. D., Caldwell, M. S., & Conley, C. S. (2005). Need for approval and children’s well‐being. Child Development, 76, 309-323. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2005.00847_a.x.
  • Saariaho, T. H., Saariaho, A. S., Karila, I. A., & Joukamaa, M. I. (2010). Early maladaptive schemas in Finnish adult chronic male and female pain patients. Scandinavian Journal of Pain, 1, 196-202. DOI: 10.1016/j.sjpain.2010.09.003.
  • Sargent, J. T., Crocker, J., & Luhtanen, R. K. (2006). Contingencies of self-worth and depressive symptoms in college students. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 25, 628-646. DOI: 10.1521/jscp.2006.25.6.628.
  • Vieira, C., Kuss, D. J., & Griffiths, M. D. (2023). Early maladaptive schemas and behavioural addictions: A systematic literature review. Clinical Psychology Review, 102340. DIO: 10.1016/j.cpr.2023.102340
  • Simeone-DiFrancesco, C., Roediger, E., Stevens, B. A. (2015). Schema therapy with couples: A practitioner’s guide to healing. John Wiley and Sons.
  • Sundag, J., Zens, C., Ascone, L., Thome, S., & Lincoln, T. M. (2018). Are schemas passed on? A study on the association between early maladaptive schemas in parents and their offspring and the putative translating mechanisms. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 46, 738-753. DOI: 10.1017/S1352465818000073.
  • Van Genderen, H., Rijkeboer, M., & Arntz, A. (2012). Theoretical model: Schemas, coping styles, and modes. In M. van Vreeswijk, J. Broersen, & M. Nadort (Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of schema therapy: Theory, research, and practice. John Wiley and Sons, 27-40.
  • Van Vreeswijk, M., Broersen, J., & Schurink, G. (2014). Mindfulness and schema therapy: A practical guide. John Wiley and Sons.
  • Wells, A., & Hackmann, A. (1993). Imagery and core beliefs in health anxiety: Content and origins. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 21, 265-273. DOI: 10.1017/S1352465800010511.
  • Winnicott, D. W. (1965). The maturational processes and the facilitating environment. Karnac Books.
  • Yalcin, O., Marais, I., Lee, C. W., & Correia, H. (2023). The YSQ-R: Predictive Validity and Comparison to the Short and Long Form Young Schema Questionnaire. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20, 1-14. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph20031778.
  • Young, J. E. (1990). Cognitive therapy for personality disorders: A schema-focused approach. Practitioner’s Resource Exchange.
  • Young, J. E. (1999). Cognitive therapy for personality disorders: A schema-focused approach (3rd ed.). Professional Resource Press.
  • Young, J. E. (2014). Early maladaptive schemas. Schema Therapy Institute, New York.
  • Young, J. E., & Klosko, J. S. (1994). Reinventing your life: The breakthrough program to end negative behavior and feel great again. Plume.
  • Young, J. E., Klosko, J. S., & Weishaar, M. E. (2003). Schema therapy: A practitioner’s guide. Guilford Press.
  • Young, J. E., Zangwill, W. M., & Behary, W. E. (2002). Combining EMDR and schema-focused therapy: The whole may be greater than the sum of the parts. In F. Shapiro (Ed.), EMDR as an integrative psychotherapy approach: Experts of diverse orientations explore the paradigm prism. American Psychological Association, 181–208.
  • Zeigler-Hill, V., & Vrabel, J. K. (2023). Narcissistic personality features and contingencies of self-worth: What are the foundations of narcissistic self-esteem? Self and Identity, 22, 294-331. DOI: 10.1080/15298868.2022.2091656.
  • Zentner, M., & Bates, J. E. (2008). Child temperament: An integrative review of concepts, research programs, and measures. European Journal of Developmental Science, 2, 7-37.