Examining Mutual Suppression Effects in the Assessment of Perfectionism Cognitions

Abstract

Perfectionism cognitions capture automatic perfectionistic thoughts and have explained variance in psychological adjustment and maladjustment beyond trait perfectionism. The aim of the present research was to investigate whether a multidimensional assessment of perfectionism cognitions has advantages over a unidimensional assessment. To this aim, we examined in a sample of 324 university students how the Perfectionism Cognitions Inventory (PCI) and the Multidimensional Perfectionism Cognitions Inventory (MPCI) explained variance in positive affect, negative affect, and depressive symptoms when factor or subscale scores were used as predictors compared to total scores. Results showed that a multidimensional assessment (PCI factor scores, MPCI subscale scores) explained more variance than a unidimensional assessment (PCI and MPCI total scores) because, when the different dimensions were entered simultaneously as predictors, perfectionistic strivings cognitions and perfectionistic concerns cognitions acted as mutual suppressors thereby increasing each others' predictive validity. With this, the present findings provide evidence that--regardless of whether the PCI or the MPCI is used--a multidimensional assessment of perfectionism cognitions has advantages over a unidimensional assessment in explaining variance in psychological adjustment and maladjustment.

Perfectionism in Academic Settings

“…However, the initial negligible association between striving and depression ( r = .04) was substantially affected when negative reactions to imperfection were controlled in the analyses ( r = −.29). Stoeber and Rennert (2008) observed similar findings in a study of teacher stress and burnout, and in another more recent study of student emotional adjustment (Stoeber, Kobori, & Brown, 2014). In sum, a few studies suggest that partialling one form of perfectionism from another may reveal associations between standards and some constructs associated with academic outcomes, but perhaps not with more direct indicators of performance.…”

Perfectionism, Health, and Well-Being: Epilogue and Future Directions

“…Indeed, the potentially adaptive effects of Perfectionistic Strivings (or its components) often are only uncovered once the joint variance between Perfectionistic Strivings and Perfectionistic Concerns has been statistically accounted for in the analyses (see Hill, Huelsman, & Araujo, 2010;Stoeber, Kobori, & Brown, 2014a). Some researchers suggest that it is important to test multiple dimensions of perfectionism simultaneously so that researchers can statistically control for the joint variance among the dimensions of perfectionism so as to "purify" the dimension of interest (Aldea & Rice, 2006;Stoeber, Schneider, Hussain, & Matthews, 2014b).…”

“…A person-centered approach would also appear to be quite appropriate for gaining a better understanding of these suppression effects. Indeed, when explaining how to interpret suppression effects in the context of perfectionistic cognitions, Stoeber et al (2014a) asserted that "-if we have two individuals who report the same frequency of perfectionistic concerns cognitions, but different frequencies of perfectionistic strivings cognitions-the individual reporting a higher frequency of strivings cognitions should feel better (more positive affect, less negative affect, fewer depressive symptoms) than the individual reporting a lower frequency of strivings cognitions (p.657)." These hypothesized within person configurations of perfectionistic cognitions (and analogously, within person configurations of trait perfectionism) along with the hypothesized differences between these different groups of individuals can be directly and empirically tested with a person-centered approach, such as Latent Profile Analysis.…”

“…Yet, even when employing these sophisticated statistical techniques we are still left with the nagging question as to what Perfectionistic Strivings really represent when its joint variance with Perfectionistic Concerns has been accounted for in the analyses, especially when we consider that the shared variance among the different dimensions of perfectionism is often quite sizeable (i.e., correlations typically ranging from 0.40 to 0.70; Enns et al, 2001;Stoeber & Otto, 2006;Stoeber et al, 2014a). One plausible interpretation put forth by Stoeber et al (2014a) is that "including perfectionistic concerns in the equation therefore clears out the "negativity" in perfectionistic strivings' predictive validity that is due to its covariance with perfectionistic concerns, thereby making room for the positive effects of perfectionistic strivings to show (p.657)."…”

Revisión teórica sobre el perfil cognitivo del perfeccionismo desadaptativo

“…Algunos autores arguyen que las personas que experimentan más pensamientos relacionados las preocupaciones por ser perfecto y por cometer errores, pueden ser más desadaptativas que aquellas cuyos pensamientos automáticos versan sobre metas elevadas y auto-exigencia (Stoeber, Kobori & Brown, 2014). En este sentido habría pensamientos perfeccionistas negativos, positivos y neutrales o ambivalentes; verificar esta hipótesis es aún una cuenta pendiente para la investigación empírica.…”