The assessment of self-oriented and socially prescribed perfectionism: Subscales make a difference

Abstract

Campbell and Di Paula (2002) suggested differentiating Perfectionistic Striving and Importance of Being Perfect subscales when measuring self-oriented perfectionism, and Others’ High Standards and Conditional Acceptance subscales when measuring socially prescribed perfectionism. The present study investigates the utility of this differentiation by analyzing data from 1041 students and examining correlations with positive striving and maladaptive evaluation concerns aspects of perfectionism and with positive and negative indicators of well-being and psychological adjustment. As expected, (a) Perfectionistic Striving scores showed higher correlations with positive striving aspects of perfectionism and with positive indicators of well-being and adjustment than Importance of Being Perfect scores, and (b) Conditional Acceptance scores showed higher correlations with maladaptive evaluation concerns aspects of perfectionism and with negative indicators of well-being and adjustment than Others’ High Standards scores. The findings indicate that Campbell and Di Paula’s differentiation provides for a more detailed and informative assessment of multidimensional perfectionism and its different aspects. Moreover, it provides for new insights into self-oriented and socially prescribed perfectionism and their relationships and associations