This not only makes Whitney anomalous, it also results in its own perversities, mostly in the form
of hypercompetitiveness and sometimes overwhelming stress on the part of students, who resort to strategies for survival that undermine faculty efforts to make their learning meaningful.
ABSTRACT: Romantic relationships of hypercompetitive individuals are much more problematic with greater conflict compared to those not so hypercompetitive; however, relationship satisfaction and commitment do not covary
with hypercompetitiveness (Ryckman et al., 2002).
We have done this for a variety of reasons, including ignorance, indifference,
hypercompetitiveness at the local level, and a persistent romanticizing of the American version of the laissez - faire dream applied to religious organizations.
Romantic relationships of hypercompetitive individuals are much more problematic with greater conflict compared to those not so hypercompetitive; however, relationship satisfaction and commitment do not covary
with hypercompetitiveness (Ryckman et al., 2002).
This not only makes Whitney anomalous, it also results in its own perversities, mostly in the form of
hypercompetitiveness and sometimes overwhelming stress on the part of students, who resort to strategies for survival that undermine faculty efforts to make their
Indeed,
hypercompetitiveness was associated positively with constraint commitment (i.e.,
Indeed,
hypercompetitiveness was associated positively with constraint commitment (i.e., maintaining a relationship out of concern for one's investment and other social - psychological costs associated with leaving), and was associated negatively with personal dedication commitment (i.e., interest in the relationship based on concerns for mutual benefit).
Study 2 noted that
hypercompetitiveness was associated positively with relationship problems involving both family members and peers; however, relationship closeness with family and friends did not vary with hypercompetitiveness.