PRZEGLĄD PSYCHOLOGICZNY – THE REVIEW OF PSYCHOLOGY

2022, TOM 65, NR 3, 97–112

DOI: 10.31648/przegldpsychologiczny.8803

Perfectionism in theory and research

Karolina Kwarcińska
Center for Research on Personality Development
SWPS University of Social Sciences and Humanities
0000–0002–3507–7142
Katarzyna Sanna
Center for Research on Personality Development
SWPS University of Social Sciences and Humanities
0000–0002–1903–1830
Anna Kamza
Center for Research on Personality Development
SWPS University of Social Sciences and Humanities
0000–0002–0403–8079
Konrad Piotrowski*1
Center for Research on Personality Development
SWPS University of Social Sciences and Humanities
0000–0001–9752–510X

ABSTRACT
Purpose
The purpose of the present article is to systematize knowledge about perfectionism – the
relatively stable tendency to set unrealistic expectations for oneself or others. The article
reviews studies conducted in recent years and presents the evolution of views on the de-
velopment and importance of perfectionism for individual adjustment.
Theses
Knowledge about perfectionism is constantly expanding, which makes it necessary to de-
scribe the history of the study of this phenomenon, the evolution of ways of thinking, and
the theoretical models that have emerged over the past decades. There are relatively few
publications on this subject in the Polish literature, and the presented article aims to at

* Correspondence address: Konrad Piotrowski, Center for Research on Personality

Development, Faculty of Psychology and Law in Poznan, SWPS University of Social Sci-
ences and Humanities, gen. Tadeusza Kutrzeby Street 10, 61–719 Poznań. E-mail: kon-
[email protected].
98 KAROLINA KWARCIŃSKA ET AL.

least partially fill this gap. We present the results of a study on the relationship between
perfectionism and important areas of human functioning, such as health, work and inter-
personal relations, and point out factors associated with the development of this charac-
teristic. We also present the most popular measures of perfectionism.
Conclusion
Perfectionism, initially viewed as an unambiguously negative disposition and treated as
a predictor of psychopathology, in light of studies conducted in recent years should be
treated as a complex personality characteristic that manifests itself manifests itself in
different manner, including positive and adaptive ones.
Keywords: perfectionism models, perfectionism study, perfectionistic strivings, perfection-
istic concerns, adaptive perfectionism, maladaptive perfectionism, perfectionism measure-
ment.

Introduction

Perfectionism is a multidimensional personality trait associated with having

very high, often unrealistic standards and expectations and striving to achieve
them flawlessly (Flett & Hewitt, 2002; Frost et al., 1993; Stoeber, 2018). This
disposition is often accompanied by a tendency to be overly critical of oneself,
depending on one’s assessment of the achievement of standards (Flett & Hewitt
2002; Hewitt & Flett 2007; Stoeber & Otto, 2006). Manifestations of perfection-
ism are evident as early as childhood and adolescence (Flett et al., 2002a; Stoe-
ber et al., 2009), and affect many areas of functioning, such as academics, sports,
hobbies, and in adulthood, intimate relationships, professional activity and par-
enthood (Flett et al., 2003; Piotrowski, 2020a; Stoeber, 2018). However, although
perfectionism can affect all areas of life, in most cases it manifests itself in areas
specific to each individual (Stoeber, 2018).

Development of Studies on Perfectionism

Over the past few decades, there have been significant changes in the percep-
tion of perfectionism. Their essence is the shift from one-dimensional to multidi-
mensional models, and from clearly negative to capturing its positive aspects as
well. The beginning of systematic studies of perfectionism dates to the mid-20th
century. At that time, a one-dimensional approach was dominant, in line with
psychodynamic concepts of the time. Perfectionism was treated as a correlate of
personality disorders, defined as a neurotic and dysfunctional pattern that was
an indicator of psychopathology (Horney, 1950; Pacht, 1984; Weisinger & Lob-
senz, 1981).
In opposition to the above one-dimensional conceptions of perfectionism was
the model proposed by Hamachek (1978). This author pointed out that there
is also a healthy and adaptive dimension to perfectionism, and introduced into
 PERFECTIONISM IN THEORY AND RESEARCH 99

the scientific literature a division of perfectionists into two groups – unhealthy/

neurotic and healthy perfectionists. Perfectionists in the first group view most of
their actions as not good enough. They almost always feel that they could and/
or should have done something better, and as a result, they almost never feel
satisfaction with their tasks. The second group of perfectionists, despite equally
high personal standards, are able to be less demanding of themselves – they al-
low themselves to make mistakes, are characterized by commitment, the ability
to correct goals and accept differences between expected and achieved results
(Hamachek, 1978).
The finding that perfectionism contains both positive and negative compo-
nents has strongly influenced scientific studies of the trait, leading to the devel-
opment of new theoretical models and new measurement methods. In the 1990s,
two multidimensional models of perfectionism were developed, which are still the
cornerstone of studies on the issue today. The first was proposed by Frost and col-
leagues (1990), who distinguished such manifestations of perfectionism as: per-
sonal standards (i.e. setting very high expectations for oneself, expecting quality
and efficiency of performance); concern about mistakes (overreacting to mistakes
made or imagined, linking them to failure and failure); doubting the quality of
one’s actions (tendency to question the quality and results of one’s tasks); orga-
nizing (placing a high value on order, planning and good organization); parental
expectations (experiencing excessive demands from parents); and parental criti-
cism (being judged harshly by parents for mistakes made). A study by Frost and
colleagues (1993) found that personal standards and organization formed a par-
tially positive aspect of perfectionism, which was called perfectionistic strivings,
while the other dimensions, especially fear of mistakes and doubting the qual-
ity of one’s actions, were found to be strongly maladaptive, collectively forming
a construct called perfectionistic concerns.
Shortly after Frost’s model was published (1990), a second model of perfec-
tionism appeared in the scientific literature by Hewitt and Flett (1991). These
researchers described three different manifestations (or types) of perfectionism:
self-oriented perfectionism, other-oriented perfectionism and socially prescribed
perfectionism.
Self-oriented perfectionism is demanding of oneself to meet unrealistical-
ly high standards, critically evaluating oneself and striving for perfection. Oth-
er-oriented perfectionism is demanding high, often unrealistic standards from
other people, often from relatives and significant others (partner, children,
co-workers). Socially-prescribed perfectionism is characterized, in turn, by the
subjective belief that it is others who have high demands and expectations of the
individual, and that these demands must be met.
The study showed that the dimensions described in Frost’s and Hewitt and
Flett’s models are interrelated. Factor analyses revealed that self-oriented per-
fectionism, like the personal standards and organization from Frost’s model, can
be identified with the positively-oriented dimension of perfectionistic striving,
while socially-prescribed perfectionism was found to be a manifestation of dys-
functional perfectionistic concern (Domocus & Damian, 2018; Piotrowski, 2019;
Stoeber & Otto, 2006). Individual differences in the intensity of perfectionistic
100 KAROLINA KWARCIŃSKA ET AL.

strivings and concerns became, in turn, the basis for empirically distinguishing
the two types of perfectionists described earlier by Hamachek (1978): adaptive
perfectionists (characterized by high perfectionistic strivings and low perfection-
istic concerns at the same time1) and maladaptive perfectionists (high perfection-
istic strivings and high perfectionistic concerns at the same time; Piotrowski,
2019; Stoeber & Otto, 2006). A model based on these two factors – perfectionis-
tic strivings and concerns – fulfills a contemporary role as a conceptual frame-
work, organizing the different dimensions of perfectionism and guiding research
(Stoeber, 2018).

Correlates of Perfectionism

Perfectionism and Mental and Somatic Health

Researchers conducting studies in clinical trials, pay particular attention to the

links between mental and physical health and perfectionistic concerns, with
somewhat less attention paid to perfectionistic strivings (Stoeber, 2018). Par-
ticular attention has been paid to the role of perfectionism in eating disorders
(Bulik et al., 2003; Lilenfeld, 2011; Tozzi et al., 2004) and obsessive-compulsive
disorder (Broday, 1988). The association of perfectionism with sexual dysfunc-
tion, including erectile dysfunction (Lilenfeld, 2011; Quadland, 1980), anxiety
and affective disorders (Klibert et al., 2015), alcohol abuse (Flett et al., 1989),
and suicidal tendencies, both in adolescents (Atala & Baxter, 1989) and adults
(Hewitt & Flett, 1991), has also been studied. In addition, the association of
perfectionism with depressive mood, feelings of hopelessness and helplessness
has been verified (Hewitt & Flett, 1991, 1993; Smith et al., 2016), with clinical
depression with episodes of hypomania and dysthymia (Ashby et al., 2006; Blatt,
1995; Hewitt & Flett, 1990). Perfectionism has also been linked to personality
disorders, particularly histrionic and borderline personalities (Hewitt & Flett,
1991; Hewitt et al., 2008). The characteristic has also been linked to sleep prob-
lems (Akram et al., 2015) and stomach problems (Flett et al., 2016). It is also as-
sociated with greater physiological reactivity, including elevated blood pressure,
poor mood, e.g., strong and prolonged negative affect in response to stress and
failure (Curran & Hill, 2019).

1
In the literature on perfectionism, it is not uncommon to see authors misusing these
terms and equating perfectionistic strivings with adaptive perfectionism, and perfection-
istic concerns with maladaptive perfectionism. This is an overly reductionist approach.
Perfectionistic strivings can be adaptive or maladaptive depending on how strong perfec-
tionistic concerns accompany them. A study of adaptive and non-adaptive perfectionism
therefore requires a shift away from a variable-centered perspective toward a person-cen-
tered perspective. In the latter case, it is advisable to rely on procedures such as, for exam-
ple, cluster or latent class analysis in analyzing the results, in order to isolate subgroups
with different configurations of perfectionistic strivings and concerns.
 PERFECTIONISM IN THEORY AND RESEARCH 101

Correlational studies of the relationship between perfectionism and men-

tal health in children and adolescents (Morris & Lomax, 2014) point to similar
disorders as in adults, such as depression, anxiety, eating disorders, and obses-
sive-compulsive disorder. However, as the authors of the review point out, stud-
ies to date lack a multidimensional approach to perfectionism and research on
psychological interventions that take into account the family factor in the emer-
gence and maintenance of perfectionism.
Studies adopting a multidimensional approach (Stoeber & Otto, 2006) have
shown that the dimension of perfectionistic strivings is negatively related to lev-
els of suicidal thoughts, depressive symptoms and lower tendency to feel guilt.
What’s more, people with high levels of perfectionistic strivings and simultane-
ously low levels of perfectionistic concerns achieve higher levels of self-esteem,
lower levels of anxiety, procrastination, dysfunctional stress coping styles and
interpersonal problems. They also report lower levels of somatic symptoms and
symptoms of psychological discomfort compared to those with high levels of per-
fectionistic strivings and high levels of perfectionistic concerns (maladaptive per-
fectionists) and compared to non-perfectionists, characterized by no or low levels
of perfectionistic strivings and concerns (Stoeber & Otto, 2006; Stoeber, 2018).

Perfectionism and Work Activity

In a study verifying the relationship between perfectionism and work and the
phenomenon of workaholism, the so-called perfectionistic work style was identi-
fied (Hornowska & Paluchowski, 2007). This style is characterized by striving for
perfect, flawless and qualitative performance of assigned tasks, a strong focus on
order, competition and achieving only professional success and not tolerating fail-
ures. The result of a perfectionistic work style is often job burnout. Maslach and
Leiter (2017) describe burnout as a process of depletion of emotional resources
and gradual depersonalization, evident in progressive indifference to others and
low evaluation of personal achievement and professional effectiveness. Burnout
is accompanied by a sense of constant fatigue and a negative attitude toward the
workplace, co-workers, customers, or superiors (Stoeber & Damian, 2016). Hill and
Curran (2016), in a meta-analysis of the associations between perfectionistic striv-
ings and concerns and occupational burnout, showed that perfectionistic strivings
had weak negative or nonsignificant associations with job burnout, in contrast to
perfectionistic concerns. Their results also suggest that perfectionistic strivings
may, at least to a small extent, provide protection against the onset of job burnout,
while perfectionistic concerns expose the individual to severe and increasing stress.

Interpersonal Relations

Perfectionism also affects areas of life such as relationship formation, including

romantic relationships. In a study conducted by Habke and colleagues (1999),
the relationship between perfectionism and sexual satisfaction was examined.
102 KAROLINA KWARCIŃSKA ET AL.

The sample included 74 married or cohabiting couples. They found that the inter-
personal dimensions of perfectionism, i.e. socially-prescribed perfectionism and
other-oriented perfectionism, were negatively related to overall sexual satisfac-
tion and relationship satisfaction in both men and women. In addition, the re-
gression analysis conducted showed that other-oriented perfectionism in women
was a unique predictor of lower overall sexual satisfaction, and in men it was
associated with lower satisfaction with their partner’s contribution to the sexual
relationship.
In another study, Haring and colleagues (2003) examined the relationship
between perfectionism, marital relationship quality (defined as feelings of happi-
ness in the relationship) and overall satisfaction with the romantic relationship.
The study involved 76 couples between the ages of 18 and 54. As predicted, one
of the interpersonal dimensions of perfectionism, socially-prescribed perfection-
ism, was associated with poorer marital adjustment. Other-oriented (in this case,
partner-oriented) perfectionism was also associated with low overall satisfaction
with the romantic relationship. Similar results were obtained by Stoeber (2012).
His study included 58 couples. Both measured dimensions of perfectionism –
other-oriented and socially-prescribed perfectionism – were found to correlate
negatively with romantic relationship satisfaction. Partner-oriented perfection-
ism was also negatively related to long-term commitment to the relationship. In
addition, participants who believed that their partner expected perfection from
them were less satisfied with their relationship than those participants who did
not view their partner in this manner.
Perfectionism has also been linked to social isolation. Maladaptive perfec-
tionists, characterized by strong concerns, are sometimes overly preoccupied
with how they are judged by others, focus on expectations and criticism, and feel
that everyone expects more from them than they can give. They associate the
better performance of others with personal failure, which makes it difficult for
them to build satisfying relationships. They also place more importance on task
completion than on interpersonal relationships (Hewitt & Flett, 1991; Stoeber,
2012; Piotrowski, 2020; Piotrowski, 2020a), which leads to a reduction in the so-
cial network, including the social support network.

Roots of Perfectionism

The Role of Genetic Factor

To date, few studies have been conducted on the genetic determinants of perfec-
tionism. Among the few exceptions is a study conducted in Japan (Kamakura
et al., 2003) on the genetic and environmental causes of eating disorders among
female twins. It involved 162 pairs of twins, including 116 pairs of monozygotic
twins and 46 pairs of dizygotic twins in adolescence. The results of the study
revealed an additive genetic contribution of 37%. In contrast, a study by Wade
and Bulik (2007), using a sample of monozygotic and dizygotic female twins aged
 PERFECTIONISM IN THEORY AND RESEARCH 103

28 to 39 with eating disorders, assessed the sources of individual differences in

three dimensions of perfectionism: concern about mistakes, personal standards
and doubting the quality of one’s actions. The results showed the contribution
of an additive genetic factor to all dimensions of perfectionism, with the genetic
factor explaining between 25% and 39% of the variance in perfectionism. Exces-
sive effects of weight or body shape on self-esteem shared only 10% of the sourc-
es of genetic and environmental variance with perfectionism, suggesting that
the common cause model of perfectionism and eating disorders is not the best
explanation for the relationship between the variables. Iranzo-Tatay and col-
leagues (2015), on the other hand, showed that while perfectionism is at least in
part based on genetics, its expression requires specific experiences that directly
condition which type of perfectionism, self-oriented or socially-prescribed perfec-
tionism, will be formed. The heritability coefficient for self-oriented perfectionism
was 23% in boys and 30% in girls, and socially-prescribed perfectionism was 39%
in boys, 42% in girls (see also the study by Tozziet al., 2004).

The Role of Personality Factors

Conscientiousness and neuroticism are considered important personality pre-

dictors of perfectionism (McCrae & Costa, 2005). Studies show that high scores
obtained on the conscientiousness scale correlate with perfectionistic strivings,
which is associated with the ability to plan, good organization, methodical action
and intrinsic motivation (Stoeber et al., 2009). A longitudinal study conducted
by Stoeberand colleagues (2009) in a group of adolescents aged 14–19 found that
high conscientiousness predicts an increase in self-oriented perfectionism over
time. In another study by Stoeber (2016), self-oriented perfectionism, in addition
to a significant positive correlation with conscientiousness, negatively correlated
with agreeableness, which is in line with the results presented earlier linking
perfectionism and interpersonal difficulties. In contrast, in a study by Dunkley
and colleagues (2012), perfectionistic concerns were associated not only with high
levels of neuroticism, but also with low levels of agreeableness, resulting in neg-
ative, antagonistic attitudes toward other people, distrust, little or no altruism,
or unwillingness to give way to others and compromise. Similar results were
obtained by Stoeber (2016) for socially-prescribed perfectionism, observing a sig-
nificant positive correlation with neuroticism, and negative correlations with
agreeableness and extraversion. For other-oriented perfectionism, meanwhile,
a negative correlation with agreeableness was observed (Stoeber, 2012).

The Role of Family Factors

As early as the late 1970s and early 1980s, a hypothesis was put forward about
the relationship between perfectionism and attachment style (Hamachek, 1978;
Pacht, 1984), and in subsequent years Hewitt (1991) described the development
of perfectionism in the context of relationships with parents, siblings, peers and
104 KAROLINA KWARCIŃSKA ET AL.

romantic partners. In his view, it is the perception of significant others as judg-

mental and critical that shapes a fragile and fragmented sense of self, dominated
by low self-esteem and shame. For the perfectionist, the need to be perfect and
gain approval from others is a strategy to compensate, repair and protect dam-
aged self-esteem.
Also Frost (1990) in his model drew attention to the aspect of family deter-
minants of perfectionism. According to this researcher, the root of having un-
realistically high standards of one’s own functioning lies primarily in parental
demands and authoritarian parenting style (Baumrind, 1967). Internalization
of high expectations results in pressure to achieve and be perfect, which leads
to the formation and perpetuation of perfectionism (Domocus & Damian, 2018;
Stoeber & Otto, 2006; Stoeber & Childs, 2011). Thus, for Frost and colleagues
(1990), a central component of perfectionism is the sense that parents have set
or are setting standards that are hard to live up to, and at the same time that
failure to live up to them leads to a loss of their acceptance, love and closeness.
The same happens when parenting is accompanied by strong anxiety, especial-
ly about mistakes or their consequences (Domocus & Damian, 2018). The child
then develops rigorous expectations of himself, and a strong connection is made
between self-esteem and performance, as well as fear of disappointing others
(Hamachek, 1978; Neumeister, 2004). This is, according to Morris and Lomax
(2014), the main source of the child’s formation of a maladaptive form of perfec-
tionism, low self-esteem, a sense of ineffectiveness, irrational beliefs and, conse-
quently, the emergence of psychological problems.

The Role of Educational Factors

In addition to the closest caregivers, people such as teachers and coaches can also
contribute to the development of perfectionism (Stoeber & Childs, 2011). Stoeber
and Eismann (2007), studying young musicians (13–20 years old), verified to
what extent perceived pressure from parents and teachers is related to their mo-
tivation, effort, achievement and perceived distress. The study assumed that, like
parents, teachers also shape development, and like them, they can show support
but also create pressure, causing severe stress. The results revealed that teacher
pressure correlated positively with perfectionistic strivings, concerns about being
imperfect, and parental pressure. Dunn and colleagues (2006), studying athletes,
showed that the strongest predictors of socially-prescribed perfectionism were
attention to mistakes and parental and coach pressure. Coaches, like parents,
thus proved to be central figures associated with increased fear of evaluation and
disapproval – the central manifestations of perfectionism.
Damian and colleagues (2017) conducted a 9-month longitudinal study on the
relationship between perfectionism and school achievement. This was the first
longitudinal study to verify the relationship between perfectionistic strivings, con-
cerns and academic achievement. In addition, unlike usual, the researchers ex-
amined whether school success and higher academic achievement could stimulate
the development of perfectionism. The study included 487 adolescents aged 12–19.
 PERFECTIONISM IN THEORY AND RESEARCH 105

The results revealed that high academic achievement was a common factor in the
development of both perfectionistic strivings and perfectionistic concerns. A year
later, Domocus and Damian (2018) in a short-term longitudinal study (two mea-
surements three months apart) with adolescents (ages 14–19) found that parental
and teacher influences may increase the risk of developing perfectionism in young
people, but also that they may be a protective factor. Teachers’ pressure was not
found to be significant for the increase in perfectionism, while their support was
the main protective factor, leading to a decrease in perfectionistic concerns.

The Influence of Socio-Cultural Factors

One more factor can be added to the above conclusions: socio-cultural influences.
Curran and Hill’s (2019) meta-analysis, compiled from studies conducted be-
tween 1989 and 2016, revealed that cultural changes may have influenced the
growth of perfectionism in recent decades. The results of the study confirmed
a linear increase in perfectionism over the period analyzed, and in each of the
dimensions: self-oriented, other-oriented and socially-prescribed perfectionism.
Based on Markus and Kitayama’s (2010) model, the researchers assumed that
the dominant cultural values of a society at any given time reflect the norms of
social, family, academic, religious, economic and political institutions. This, in
turn, shapes individual attitudes, values, beliefs, but also personality. Just as
culture leads to the formation of individual differences between citizens of differ-
ent countries, the culture of different periods can produce generational personal-
ity differences (Curran & Hill 2019). Researchers have identified neoliberalism
and competitive individualism, meritocracy, and a controlling and anxiety-ridden
parenting style as key cultural changes that can influence the development of
perfectionism (Curran & Hill 2019).

Measuring Perfectionism

Unidimensional Measures to Study Perfectionism

Similar to models conceptualizing perfectionism, the first questionnaires to mea-

sure this trait focused on its maladaptive dimension. An example is the question-
naire developed by Burns (1980), a modification of Weissman and Beck’s (1978)
Dysfunctional Attitude Scale (DAS). The scale prepared by Burns (1980) – the Per-
fectionism Scale – consisted of 10 statements measuring compulsivity and striv-
ing to achieve unrealistic goals. It also included a self-evaluation scale, the score
of which depended on an assessment of one’s own performance and perceptions of
one’s effectiveness. Three years later, Garnerand colleagues (1983) added to the
EDI (Eating Disorder Inventory), which measures eating disorders, a subscale
to measure perfectionism. The measure, still in use today, consists of 64 items,
forming eight subscales. Perfectionism is one of them, and the items forming the
106 KAROLINA KWARCIŃSKA ET AL.

perfectionism subscale relate to the expectation of exceptional achievement in

life and the feeling of pressure to succeed. The Polish version of the Eating Disor-
ders Questionnaire was prepared by Namysłowska and Żechowski (2008). Polish
studies also use the Perfectionistic Work Style subscale, derived from the Work-
aholism Questionnaire by Hornowska and Paluchowski (2007). This style refers
exclusively to the negative aspects of perfectionism, understood as the exagger-
ated striving for perfection in the performance of assigned tasks, hindering or
preventing efficient functioning as a result (Hornowska & Paluchowski, 2007).
It is important to remember, however, that the use of unidimensional mea-
sures, such as those indicated above, carries several limitations. First, studies
using them focus exclusively on maladaptive aspects of perfectionism, reinforcing
the notion that perfectionism is “a kind of psychopathology” (Stoeber, 2018). This
framing does not provide an accurate description of perfectionistic strivings and
concerns, nor does it allow for a comparison of their impact on an individual’s
functioning.

Multidimensional Measures to Study Perfectionism

Among the most widely used contemporary measures of perfectionism are Frost
and colleagues’ Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (FMPS; Frost et al., 1990)
and Hewitt and Flett’s Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (HMPS; Hewitt
& Flett, 1991). The FMPS questionnaire is used to measure perfectionists’ task
functioning and to assess the family environment. The 6-dimensional scale in-
cluded such factors as personal standards (PS; Personal Standards), concern
over mistakes (CM; Concern over Mistakes), doubting the quality of one’s ac-
tions (DAA; Doubts About Actions), being organized (O; Organization), parental
expectations (PE; Parental Expectations) and parenthood criticism (PC; Parental
Criticism). The questionnaire consists of 35 items. It considers the subscales CM
and DAA (indicators of perfectionistic concerns) and PS (indicator of perfection-
istic strivings) to be the most relevant, i.e. the key dimensions of perfectionism.
However, the PE, PC and O dimensions are questionable, with a growing consen-
sus that parental behavior should be viewed as conditions for the development of
perfectionism, rather than perfectionism per se (Stoeber, 1998; Stoeber & Otto,
2006). In contrast, the O scale, because it correlates positively only or mainly
with the PS scale, is not considered a key indicator of perfectionism (Stoeber,
1998; Stoeber & Otto 2006). A Polish adaptation of the FMPS questionnaire was
prepared by Piotrowski and Bojanowska (2019).
Hewitt and Flett’s (1991) HMPS questionnaire, to a greater extent than
FMPS, focuses on the social functioning of perfectionists. The questionnaire as-
sesses three manifestations of perfectionism: self-oriented perfectionism (SOP),
other-oriented perfectionism (OOP) and socially-prescribed perfectionism (SPP).
The questionnaire comes in two versions, a full 45-item version (Hewitt & Flett,
1991) and an abbreviated 15-item version (Cox et al., 2002; Hewitt et al., 2008;
Stoeber, 2016). The shortened version was used in a study by Piotrowski (2020),
who also demonstrated its factor validity in the Polish version.
 PERFECTIONISM IN THEORY AND RESEARCH 107

Another popular questionnaire for assessing perfectionism is the Almost

Perfect Scale-Revised (APS-R; Slaney et al., 2001), which measures three di-
mensions of perfectionism: high standards, organization/order and discrepancy.
A particularly important dimension that distinguishes Slaney and colleagues’
(2001) approach is discrepancy, indicating the subjective belief of meeting or not
meeting excessive expectations. It is the high discrepancy that is treated here
as an indicator of perfectionistic concerns and a component of maladaptive per-
fectionism. The APS-R measure also has several modifications that pay more
attention to the relational aspects of perfectionism. These are: FAPS – The Fam-
ily Almost Perfect Scale (Wang, 2010), used to measure the extent to which an
individual perceives his or her family members as imposing perfectionistic stan-
dards on him or her (studies on adaptations of this scale are currently being con-
ducted in our team), and DAPS – Dyadic Almost Perfect Scale (Shea & Slaney,
1999) used to assess perfectionistic expectations toward a partner in a romantic
relationship. Piotrowski (2020a) is the author of a Polish adaptation of the DAPS
scale and its modification, called C-DAPS – The Children Dyadic Almost Perfect
Scale, which measures perfectionistic expectations for one’s children2.

Summary

The main purpose of the article was to briefly review and systematize the existing
knowledge on perfectionism. Studies conducted in recent decades have contrib-
uted to a better understanding of its specifics and correlates, and have led to the
development of valid and reliable measures. However, many questions about per-
fectionism still remain unanswered. These include questions about the definition,
prevalence and stability of perfectionism, as well as its impact on other domains
of human functioning. More longitudinal studies verifying temporal and causal
relationships are needed to find answers. Cross-sectional studies, while import-
ant and valuable, do not allow us to conclude whether perfectionism is a cause or
a consequence of the variable of interest to the researcher. Cross-sectional studies
also do not show differences over the lifespan, although we know that perfection-
ism can change even over fairly short periods of time (Damian et al., 2013).

References

Akram, U., Ellis, J. G., & Barclay, N. L. (2015). Anxiety mediates the relationship between
perfectionism and insomnia symptoms: A longitudinal study. PLOS ONE, 10(10).
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0138865.

2
Polish- and English-language versions of DAPS and C-DAPS are available at http://
kennethwang.com/apsr/measures.html and from the author.
108 KAROLINA KWARCIŃSKA ET AL.

Ashby, J. S., Rice, K. G., & Martin, J. L. (2006). Perfectionism, shame, and depressive
symptoms. Journal of Counseling & Development, 84, 148–156. DOI: 10.1002/j.1556-
6678.2006.tb00390.x.
Atala, K., & Baxter, R. (1989). Suicidal adolescents. Postgraduate Medicine, 86, 223–230.
DOI: 10.1080/00325481.1989.11704447.
Baumrind, D. (1967). Child care practices anteceding three patterns of preschool behavior.
Genetic Psychology Monographs, 75(1), 43–88.
Blatt, S. J. (1995). The destructiveness of perfectionism: Implications for the treatment of de-
pression. American Psychologist, 12, 1003–1020. DOI: 10.1037/0003-066X.50.12.1003.
Broday, S. F. (1988). Perfectionism and the millon basic personality patterns. Psycholog-
ical Reports, 63, 791–794. DOI: 10.2466/pr0.1988.63.3.791.
Bulik, C. M., Tozzi, F., Anderson, C., Mazzeo, S. E., Aggen, S., & Sullivan, P. F. (2003).
The relation between eating disorders and components of perfectionism. The Ameri-
can Journal of Psychiatry, 160, 366–368. DOI: 10.1176/appi.ajp.160.2.366.
Burns, D. (1980). The perfectionist’s script for self-defeat. Psychology Today, 11, 34–52.
Cox, B. J., Enns, M. W., & Clara, I. P. (2002). The multidimensional structure of perfec-
tionism in clinically distressed and college student samples. Psychological Assess-
ment, 14(3), 365–373. DOI: 10.1037/1040-3590.14.3.365.
Curran, T., & Hill, A. P. (2019). Perfectionism is increasing over time: A meta-analysis of
birth cohort differences from 1989 to 2016. Psychological Bulletin, 14, 410–429. DOI:
10.1037/bul0000138.
Damian, L. E., Stoeber, J., Negru, O., & Băban, A. (2013). On the development of perfec-
tionism in adolescence: perceived parental expectations predict longitudinal increas-
es in socially prescribed perfectionism. Personality and Individual Differences, 55(6),
688–693. DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2013.05.021.
Domocus, J., & Damian, L. (2018). The role of parents and teachers in changing adoles-
cents’ perfectionism: A short-term longitudinal study. Personality and Individual
Differences, 131, 244–248. DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2018.05.012.
Dunkley, D. M., Blankstein, K. R., & Berg, J. L. (2012). Perfectionism dimensions and the
five-factor model of personality. European Journal of Personality, 26, 233–244. DOI:
10.1002/per.829.
Dunn, J. G. H., Dunn, J.C., Gotwals, J. K., Vallance, J. K. H., Craft, J.M., & Syrotu-
ik, D.G. (2006).Establishing construct validity evidence for the Sport Multidimen-
sional Perfectionism Scale. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 7, 57–79. DOI: 10.1016/­
j.psychsport.2005.04.003.
Enns, M. W., Cox, B. J., Sareen, J., & Freeman, P. (2001). Adaptive and maladaptive
perfectionism in medical students: A longitudinal investigation. Medical Education,
35(11), 1034–1042. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2923.2001.01044.x.
Flett, G. L., Besser, A., Davis, R. A., & Hewitt, P. L. (2003). Dimensions of perfectionism,
unconditional self-acceptance, and depression. Journal of Rational-Emotive and Cog-
nitive-Behavior Therapy, 21(2), 119–138. DOI: 10.1023/A:1025051431957.
Flett, G. L., & Hewitt, P. L. (2002). Perfectionism and maladjustment: An overview of
theoretical, definitional, and treatment issues. In G. L. Flett & P. L. Hewitt (Eds.),
 PERFECTIONISM IN THEORY AND RESEARCH 109

Perfectionism: Theory, Research and Assessment (pp. 5–31). Washington DC: Ameri-
can Psychological Association. DOI: 10.1037/10458-001.
Flett, G. L., Hewitt, P. L., & Dyck, D. G. (1989). Self-oriented perfectionism, neuroticism
and anxiety. Personality and Individual Differences, 10, 731–735. DOI: 10.1016/0191-
8869(89)90119-0.
Flett, G. L., Hewitt, P. L., Oliver, J. M., & Macdonald, S. (2002a). Perfectionism in children
andtheir parents: A developmental analysis. In G. L. Flett & P. L. Hewitt (Eds.), Per-
fectionism: Theory, Research and Assessment (pp. 89–132). Washington DC: Ameri-
can Psychological Association. DOI: 10.1037/10458-001.
Flett, G. L., Nepon, T., & Hewitt, P. L. (2016). Perfectionism, worry and rumination in
health and mental health: a review and a conceptual framework for a cognitive theo-
ry of perfectionism. In F. M. Sirois & D. S. Molnar (Eds.), Perfectionism, Health and
Well-Being (pp. 121–155). New York: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-18582-8_6.
Frost, R. O., Marten, P., Lahart, C., & Rosenblate, R. (1990). The Dimensions of Perfec-
tionism. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 14(5), 449–468. DOI: 10.1007/BF01172967.
Frost, R. O., Heimberg, R. G., Holt, C. S., Mattia, J. I., & Neubauer, A. L. (1993). A com-
parison of two measures of perfectionism. Personality and Individual Differences, 14,
119–126. DOI: 10.1016/0191-8869(93)90181-2.
Habke, A. M., Hewitt, P. L., & Flett, G. L. (1999). Perfectionism and sexual satisfaction
in intimate relationships. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment,
21(4), 307–322. DOI: 10.1023/A:1022168715349.
Haring, M., Hewitt, P. L., & Flett, G. L. (2003). Perfectionism, coping, and quality of inti-
mate relationships. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 65, 143–158. DOI: 10.1111/­
j.1741-3737.2003.00143.x.
Hamachek, D. E. (1978). Encounters with the self. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Hewitt, P. L., & Flett, G. L. (1990). Perfectionism and depression: a multidimensional anal-
ysis. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 100, 98–101. DOI: 10.1037/0021-843X.100.1.98.
Hewitt, P. L., & Flett, G. L. (1991). Perfectionism in the self and social contexts: Con-
ceptualization, assessment, and association with psychopathology. Journal of Social
Behavior and Personality, 5(5), 423–438. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.60.3.456.
Hewitt, P. L., & Flett, G. L. (2007). When does conscientiousness become perfectionism?
Current Psychiatry, 6(7), 49–60.
Hewitt, P. L., Habke, A. M., Lee-Baggley, D. L., Sherry, S. B., & Flett, G. L. (2008). The
impact of perfectionistic self-presentation on the cognitive, affective, and physiolog-
ical experience of a clinical interview. Psychiatry: Interpersonal and Biological Pro-
cesses, 71, 93–122. DOI: 10.1521/psyc.2008.71.2.93.
Hill, A. P., & Curran, T. (2016). Multidimensional perfectionism and burnout: a me-
ta-analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 20, 269–288. DOI: 10.1177/­
1088868315596286.
Horney, K. (1950). Neurosis and human growth: the struggle toward self-realization. New
York: W. W. Norton. DOI: 10.4324/9781315010526.
Hornowska, E., & Paluchowski, W. J. (2007). Praca – skrywana obsesja [Work – a hidden
obsession]. Poznań: Bogucki Wydawnictwo Naukowe.
110 KAROLINA KWARCIŃSKA ET AL.

Iranzo-Tatay, C., Gimeno-Clemente, N., Barberá-Fons, M., Rodriguez-Campayo, M. Á.,

Rojo-Bofill, L., Livianos-Aldana, L., Beato-Fernandez, L., Vaz-Leal, F., & Rojo-More-
no, L. (2015). Genetic and environmental contributions to perfectionism and its com-
mon factors. Psychiatry Research, 230, 932–939. DOI: 10.1016/j.psychres.2015.11.020.
Kamakura, T., Ando, J., Ono, Y., & Maekawa, H., (2003). A twin study of genetic and
environmental influences on psychological traits of eating disorders in a Japanese
female sample. Twin Research, 6(4), 292–296. DOI: 10.1375/136905203322296647.
Klibert, J., Lamis, D. A., Naufel, K., Yancey, C. T., & Lohr, S. (2015). Associations between
perfectionism and generalized anxiety: Examining cognitive schemas and gender.
Journal of Rational-Emotive and Cognitive-Behavior Therapy, 33, 160–178. DOI:
10.1007/s10942-015-0208-9.
Lilenfeld, L. R. R. (2011). Personality and Temperament. Current Topics in Behavioral
Neurosciences, 6, 3–16. DOI: 10.1007/7854_2010_86.
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (2010). Cultures and selves: A cycle of mutual constitution.
Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5, 420–430. DOI: 10.1177/1745691610375557.
Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. P. (2017). Understanding burnout: New models. In C. L. Coo-
per & J. C. Quick (Eds.), The handbook of stress and health: A guide to research and
practice (pp. 36–56). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Blackwell.
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (2005). Osobowość dorosłego człowieka. Perspektywa teorii
pięcioczynnikowej [Adult personality. A perspective of the five-factor theory]. Kraków:
Wydawnictwo WAM.
Morris, L., & Lomax, C. (2014). Review: Assessment, development, and treatment of child-
hood perfectionism: A systematic review. Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 19,
225–234. DOI: 10.1111/camh.12067.
Neumeister, K. L. S. (2004). Factors influencing the development of perfectionism in
gifted college students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 48(4), 259–274. DOI: 10.1177/­0016­
98620404800402.
Pacht, A. R. (1984). Reflections on perfection. American Psychologist, 39(4), 386–390. DOI:
10.1037/0003-066X.39.4.386.
Piotrowski, K. (2019). Perfectionism and Identity Process in Two Domains: Mediational
Roles of Worry, Rumination, Indecisiveness, Shame, and Guilt. Frontiers in Psychol-
ogy, 10, 1–11. DOI: 10.31234/osf.io/hnvmw.
Piotrowski, K. (2020). How good it would be to turn back time: adult attachment and per-
fectionism in mothers and their relationships with the processes of parental identity
formation. Psychologica Belgica, 60(1), 55–72. DOI: 10.5334/pb.492.
Piotrowski, K. (2020a). Child-oriented and partner-oriented perfectionism explain different as-
pects of family difficulties. PLOS ONE, 15(8), 1–19. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0236870.
Piotrowski, K., & Bojanowska, A. (2019). Factor structure and psychometric properties
of a Polish adaptation of the Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale. Current
Psychology, 40(6), 2754–2763. DOI: 10.1007/s12144-019-00198-w.
Quadland, M. C. (1980). Private self-consciousness, attribution of responsibility, and per-
fectionistic thinking in secondary erectile dysfunction. Journal of Sexual and Marital
Therapy, 6, 47–55. DOI: 10.1080/00926238008404245.
 PERFECTIONISM IN THEORY AND RESEARCH 111

Shea, A. J., & Slaney, R. B. (1999). The Dyadic Almost Perfect Scale. Unpublished manu-
script. The Pennsylvania State University, University Park.
Smith, M., Sherry, S. B., Rnic, K., Saklofske, D. H., Enns, M., & Gralnick, T. (2016). Are
perfectionism dimensions vulnerability factors for depressive symptoms after con-
trolling for neuroticism? A meta-analysis of 10 longitudinal studies. European Jour-
nal of Personality, 30(2), 201–212. DOI: 10.1002/per.2053.
Stoeber, J. (1998). The Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale: More perfect with
four (instead of six) dimensions. Personality and Individual Differences, 24(4), 481–
491. DOI: 10.1016/S0191-8869(97)00207-9.
Stoeber, J. (2012). Dyadic perfectionism in romantic relationships: predicting relationship
satisfaction and longterm commitment. Personality and Individual Differences, 53,
300–305. DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2012.04.002.
Stoeber, J. (2016). Comparing Two Short Forms of the Hewitt–Flett Multidimensional Per-
fectionism Scale, Sage Journals, 25(5), 578–588. DOI: 10.1177/1073191116659740.
Stoeber, J. (2018). The psychology of perfectionism: critical issues, open questions, and fu-
ture directions. In J. Stoeber (Ed.), The psychology of perfectionism: theory, research,
applications (pp. 333–352). London: Routledge.
Stoeber, J., & Childs, J. H. (2011). Perfectionism. In R. J. Levesque (Ed.), Encyclopedia of
adolescence (pp. 2053–2059). New York: Springer.
Stoeber, J., & Damian, L. E. (2016). Perfectionism in employees: work engagement, worka-
holism, and burnout. In F. M. Sirois & D. S. Molnar (Eds.), Perfectionism, health, and
well-being (pp. 265–283). New York: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-18582-8_12.
Stoeber, J., & Eismann, U. (2007). Perfectionism in young musicians: Relations with moti-
vation, effort, achievement, and distress. Personality and Individual Differences, 43,
2182–2192. DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2007.06.036.
Stoeber, J., & Otto, K., (2006). Positive conceptions of perfectionism: Approaches, evi-
dence, challenges. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10(4), 295–319. DOI:
10.1207/s15327957pspr1004_2.
Stoeber, J., Otto, K., & Dalbert, C. (2009). Perfectionism and the Big Five: conscientious-
ness predicts longitudinal increases in self-oriented perfectionism. Personality and
Individual Differences, 47(4), 363–368. DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2009.04.004.
Tozzi, F., Aggen, S. H., Neale, B. M., Anderson, Ch. B., Mazzeo, S. E., Neale, M. C., & Bu-
lik, C. M. (2004). The Structure of Perfectionism: A Twin Study. Behavior Genetics,
34(5), 483–494. DOI: 10.1023/B:BEGE.0000038486.47219.76.
Wade, T. D., & Bulik, C. M. (2007). Shared genetic and environmental risk factors be-
tween undue influence of body shape and weight on self-evaluation and dimensions
of perfectionism. Psychological Medicine, 37(5), 635–644. DOI: 10.1017/S0033­29­
170­6009603.
Wang, K. T. (2010). The Family Almost Perfect Scale: Development, Psychometric Prop-
erties, and Comparing Asian and European Americans. Asian American Journal of
Psychology, 1, 186–199. DOI: 10.1037/a0020732.
Weisinger, H., & Lobsenz, N. M. (1981). Nobody’s perfect: How to give criticism and get
results. New York: Warne.
112 KAROLINA KWARCIŃSKA ET AL.

Weissman, A., & Beck, A. (1978). Dysfunctional Attitude Scale DAS. Development and
validation of the dysfunctional attitude scale: a preliminary investigation. Paper pre-
sented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, 62,
Toronto, Canada, 1–33.
Żechowski, C. (2008). Polska wersja Kwestionariusza Zaburzeń Odżywiania (EDI) – Ada-
ptacja i normalizacja [Polish version of Eating Disorder Inventory – Adaptation and
normalization]. Psychiatria Polska [Polish Psychiatry], 42(2), 179–193.