The Multidimensional Perfectionism Cognitions Inventory–English (MPCI-E): Reliability, validity, and relationships with positive and negative affect

The Multidimensional Perfectionism Cognitions Inventory (MPCI; Kobori & Tanno, 2004) is a promising new instrument developed in Japan to assess perfectionism cognitions regarding personal standards, pursuit of perfection, and concern over mistakes. The present study examined reliability and validity of the English version of the MPCI, the MPCI-E (Kobori, 2006), in a sample of 371 native English speakers. A confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the MPCI-E’s three-factorial oblique structure. Moreover, correlations with measures of dispositional perfectionism and past-week positive and negative affect provided first evidence of the MPCI-E’s convergent and differential validity. Finally, hierarchical multiple regressions indicated that the MPCI-E showed incremental validity in explaining variance in positive and negative affect above variance explained by dispositional perfectionism. Overall, the findings provide first evidence for the reliability and validity of the MPCI-E as a multidimensional measure of perfectionism cognitions that has the potential to further our understanding of positive and negative cognitions in perfectionism

Perfectionism cognitions are multidimensional: A reply to Flett and Hewitt (2014)

We reply to Flett and Hewitt’s (2014) commentary on our findings (Stoeber, Kobori, & Brown, 2014) focusing on the multidimensionality of the Perfectionism Cognitions Inventory (PCI) and the question of whether the Multidimensional Perfectionism Cognitions Inventory (MPCI) represents an alternative to the PCI. In addition, we reiterate the importance of considering suppression effects when examining different dimensions of perfectionism and, in concluding, invite researchers to join forces to further advance the assessment of multidimensional perfectionism cognitions

Answer-Type Modification without Tears: Prompt-Passing Style Translation for Typed Delimited-Control Operators

The salient feature of delimited-control operators is their ability to modify answer types during computation. The feature, answer-type modification (ATM for short), allows one to express various interesting programs such as typed printf compactly and nicely, while it makes it difficult to embed these operators in standard functional languages. In this paper, we present a typed translation of delimited-control operators shift and reset with ATM into a familiar language with multi-prompt shift and reset without ATM, which lets us use ATM in standard languages without modifying the type system. Our translation generalizes Kiselyov's direct-style implementation of typed printf, which uses two prompts to emulate the modification of answer types, and passes them during computation. We prove that our translation preserves typing. As the naive prompt-passing style translation generates and passes many prompts even for pure terms, we show an optimized translation that generate prompts only when needed, which is also type-preserving. Finally, we give an implementation in the tagless-final style which respects typing by construction.Comment: In Proceedings WoC 2015, arXiv:1606.0583

Comparing the observed properties of the GRBs detected by the Fermi and Swift satellites

We studied the distribution of the GRBs, observed by the Fermi satellite, in the multidimensional parameter space consisting of the duration, Fluence, Peak flux and Peak energy (if it was available). About 10% of the Fermi bursts was observed also by the Swift satellite. We did not find significant differences between the Peak flux and Peak energy of GRBs observed and not observed also by the Swift satellite. In contrast, those GRBs detected also by the Swift satellite had significantly greater Fluence and duration. We did a similar study for the GRBs detected by the Swift satellite. About 30% percent of these bursts was also measured by the Fermi satellite. We found a significant difference in the Fluence, Peak flux and Photon index but none in duration. These differences may be accounted for the different construction and observing strategy of the Fermi and Swift satellites.Comment: 7th Huntsville Gamma-Ray Burst Symposium, GRB 2013: paper 5 in eConf Proceedings C130414