Dyadic perfectionism as a predictor of relationship continuity and distress among college students.

Abstract

This study examined the nature and impact of dyadic perfectionism over a 3-month interval within a sample of 116 college students who were currently involved in an intimate heterosexual relationship. Dyadic perfectionism scores were stable and correlated as expected with scores on concurrent measures of adult attachment orientations and relationship satisfaction. Logistic regression analyses revealed that, controlling for initial commitment status and adult attachment orientations, Time 1 dyadic perfectionism scores significantly and uniquely predicted relationship continuity 3 months later. Lastly, controlling for social desirability, relationship commitment status, and Time 1 adult attachment orientation scores, Time 1 dyadic perfectionism scores also uniquely predicted Time 2 relationship distress. Findings provide additional evidence that dyadic perfectionism is a risk factor for relationship dysfunction.

Dyadic perfectionism in romantic relationships: Predicting relationship satisfaction and longterm commitment

“…Taken together, the findings from the four studies (Habke et al, 1999;Haring et al, 2003;Lopez et al, 2006;Shea et al, 2006) provide evidence that both partner-oriented perfectionism and partner-prescribed perfectionism have negative effects on relationship quality. Still, there remain questions.…”

“…First, the evidence that dyadic perfectionism has negative effects is limited to married couples (Habke et al, 1999;Haring et al, 2003). In university students, negative effects have been found only for the discrepancy aspect of partner-oriented perfectionism (Lopez et al, 2006;Shea et al, 2006). Consequently, it is unclear what effects partner-prescribed perfectionism has in students' romantic relationships, particularly as romantic relationships in students have shown a number of significant differences (e.g., more commitment problems) compared to those in married couples (Hsueh, Morrison, & Doss, 2009;Punyanunt-Carter, 2004).…”

“…Two further studies examined dyadic perfectionism and relationship quality in university students (Lopez, Fons-Scheyd, Morúa, & Chaliman, 2006;Shea, Slaney, & Rice, 2006).…”

“…Unexpectedly, high standards showed a significant positive correlation with relationship satisfaction in male students. The second study (Lopez et al, 2006) employed a longitudinal design with two measurement points examining (a) relationship satisfaction using the RAS and (b) relationship continuation as indicated by the percentage of relationships terminated after three months. Unlike Shea and colleagues, Lopez and colleagues did not find any gender differences, but the other findings were in line with Shea and colleagues': Discrepancy showed a significant negative correlation with relationship satisfaction, and high standards showed a significant positive correlation with relationship satisfaction (albeit only at the second measurement).…”

Multidimensional Sexual Perfectionism

“…In married couples, partner-oriented perfectionism did not show any significant relationships with relationship satisfaction, marital happiness, dyadic adjustment, or sexual satisfaction (Habke et al, 1999;Haring et al, 2003). In university students, however, partner-oriented perfectionism showed both positive and negative relationships: Two studies found partner-oriented perfectionism to show positive correlations with relationship satisfaction (Lopez, Fons-Scheyd, Morúa, & Chaliman, 2006;Shea, Slaney & Rice, 2006) whereas one study found negative correlations with relationship satisfaction and longterm commitment (Stoeber, 2012). Hence, like other-oriented perfectionism, partner-oriented perfectionism seems to be an ambivalent form of perfectionism associated with both adjustment and maladjustment.…”