Shedding Light on the Relationship Between Personal Standards and Psychopathology: The Case for Contingent Self-Worth

Perfectionism and achievement goals in young Finnish ice-hockey players aspiring to make the Under-16 national team

“…Adopting Lundh's view to the sport context, coaches and athletes should learn to distinguish perfectionistic strivings from perfectionistic demands and validate perfectionistic strivings as something healthy and functional, while at the same time accepting imperfections. The second approach is based on findings that perfectionistic strivings are only maladaptive when self-worth is made contingent on achieving perfection and when non-achievement of perfection is followed by harsh self-criticism (DiBartolo et al, 2004; see also Dunkley et al, 2006). Consequently, coaches and athletes should learn to hold "pure personal standards" (DiBartolo et al, 2004) and strive for perfection without putting down one's effort, performance, and self-worth should results be less than perfect.…”

“…The second approach is based on findings that perfectionistic strivings are only maladaptive when self-worth is made contingent on achieving perfection and when non-achievement of perfection is followed by harsh self-criticism (DiBartolo et al, 2004; see also Dunkley et al, 2006). Consequently, coaches and athletes should learn to hold "pure personal standards" (DiBartolo et al, 2004) and strive for perfection without putting down one's effort, performance, and self-worth should results be less than perfect. Finally, coaches and athletes may consult Antony and Swinson's (1998) self-help book which contains procedures that have been shown to be effective in helping perfectionists to cope with the negative aspects of perfectionism by identifying and challenging maladaptive perfectionistic thoughts and behaviours (see Pleva & Wade, 2007).…”

Perfectionism and Performance

“…However, there are single scales that represent proxy measures of the two dimensions. Regarding the perfectionistic strivings dimension, proxy measures are the FMPS Personal Standards scale, particularly when only the items measuring pure personal standards are regarded (DiBartolo, Frost, Chang, LaSota, & Grills, 2004); the MPS Self-Oriented Perfectionism scale, particularly when only the items measuring perfectionistic striving are regarded (Campbell & Di Paula, 2002;Stoeber & Childs, 2010) (Stöber, 1998;Stumpf & Parker, 2000); the MPS Socially Prescribed Perfectionism scale, particularly when the items measuring conditional acceptance are regarded (Campbell & Di Paula, 2002;Stoeber & Childs, 2010); the APS-R Discrepancy scale; the PI Concern over Mistakes scale; the Sport-MPS Concern over Mistakes scale; the MIPS Negative Reactions to Imperfection scale; and the MPCI Concern over Mistakes scale.…”

Perfectionism, 2×2 achievement goals and motivational regulations in physical education contexts

“…Si se establecen altas metas de aproximación-rendimiento aisladamente, sin el efecto catalizador de las metas de aproximación-maestría, lo más probable es que las personas exhiban una motivación controlada. Otra plausible explicación puede ser la ofrecida por DiBartolo et al (2004), Gaudreau y Antl (2008), McArdle y Duda (2004) y Stoeber (2011. Los altos estándares personales pueden conducir igualmente a motivación tanto autónoma como controlada en función de cómo aquellos son percibidos: bien como un desafío o bien como el nivel de rendimiento que se debe lograr para probar la autoestima.…”

“…Asimismo, en el contexto deportivo McArdle y Duda (2004) y Gaudreau y Antl (2008) encontraron que los estándares personales se relacionaron positivamente tanto con la motivación autónoma (intrínseca y regulación identificada) como con la controlada (regulación introyectada y externa), y que la preocupación por los errores se relacionó positivamente con la motivación controlada. Para Stoeber (2011) este patrón de relaciones no es sorprendente, puesto que los altos estándares personales pueden conducir a motivación tanto autónoma como controlada en función de si se perciben como un desafío o como un nivel de rendimiento que se debe lograr para probar la propia valía (DiBartolo, Frost, Chang, LaSota y Grills, 2004). Si se percibe como un desafío, los estándares personales son más propensos a actuar como motivadores intrínsecos porque la búsqueda de desafío se considera un aspecto de esta regulación motivacional.…”