Martin M. Smith, S. Sherry, Sabrina Ge, P. Hewitt, G. Flett, Dayna L. Baggley
{"title":"Multidimensional perfectionism turns 30: A review of known knowns and known unknowns.","authors":"Martin M. Smith, S. Sherry, Sabrina Ge, P. Hewitt, G. Flett, Dayna L. Baggley","doi":"10.1037/CAP0000288","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Theory and evidence converge to suggest perfectionism is a personality construct that matters a great deal and is linked with many consequential outcomes (e.g., depression, eating disorders, suicide, marital problems, and procrastination). With the multidimensional perfectionism construct turning 30 years of age, our review critically examines the past and the future of this construct with a focus on the six landmark dimensions of Hewitt and Flett’s (1991) and Frost et al.’s (1990) seminal models: Self-oriented perfectionism, other-oriented perfectionism, socially prescribed perfectionism, personal standards, concerns over mistakes, and doubts about actions. Our review considers both what we understand about these dimensions given the extant empirical literature (i.e., known knowns) and areas where gaps exist in our understanding of multidimensional perfectionism and its consequences (i.e., known unknowns). Evidence suggests the core dimensions of Hewitt and Flett’s (1991) and Frost et al.’s (1990) trait and attitudinal models of perfectionism, respectively, are neither captured by nor redundant with other well-established predictors. In fact, these perfectionism dimensions appear to represent core vulnerability factors that are tied intimately to the development and maintenance of a wide range of maladaptive outcomes.","PeriodicalId":47883,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Psychology-Psychologie Canadienne","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"31","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Psychology-Psychologie Canadienne","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/CAP0000288","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 31
Abstract
Theory and evidence converge to suggest perfectionism is a personality construct that matters a great deal and is linked with many consequential outcomes (e.g., depression, eating disorders, suicide, marital problems, and procrastination). With the multidimensional perfectionism construct turning 30 years of age, our review critically examines the past and the future of this construct with a focus on the six landmark dimensions of Hewitt and Flett’s (1991) and Frost et al.’s (1990) seminal models: Self-oriented perfectionism, other-oriented perfectionism, socially prescribed perfectionism, personal standards, concerns over mistakes, and doubts about actions. Our review considers both what we understand about these dimensions given the extant empirical literature (i.e., known knowns) and areas where gaps exist in our understanding of multidimensional perfectionism and its consequences (i.e., known unknowns). Evidence suggests the core dimensions of Hewitt and Flett’s (1991) and Frost et al.’s (1990) trait and attitudinal models of perfectionism, respectively, are neither captured by nor redundant with other well-established predictors. In fact, these perfectionism dimensions appear to represent core vulnerability factors that are tied intimately to the development and maintenance of a wide range of maladaptive outcomes.
期刊介绍:
Canadian Psychology has a mandate to present generalist articles in areas of theory, research, and practice that are potentially of interest to a broad cross-section of psychologists. Manuscripts with direct relevance to the context of Canadian psychology are also appropriate for submission. Original, empirical contributions are not within the mandate of the journal, unless the research is of direct relevance to the discipline as a whole (e.g., a survey of psychologists about the future of the discipline).