Advanced search
1 file | 1.70 MB Add to list

How perfect is (too) perfect? Illuminating why the perfectionism-performance-relationship is (non-)linear

Author
Organization
Abstract
Psychological science remains unclear about how individuals' trait perfectionism impacts their performance-is more perfectionism linearly better or does too perfect backfire? The present study investigates a potentially nonlinear relationship and its underlying mediators. Based on the two-dimensional model of perfectionism that distinguishes perfectionistic concerns (PC) versus strivings (PS), we investigate the (non-)linear relationships of perfectionism and performance in the letter detection task. Additionally, we experimentally examined whether time pressure would moderate these findings. Our study results ( N = 229) establish non-linearity : a quadratic function in the form of an inverted U-shape best explains the relationship between perfectionistic concerns and performance. Contrary to our hypothesis, perfectionistic strivings predicted task performance linearly but negatively . Upon further examination, we also found empirical support for a combinatory effect of both dimensions: Only individuals high in PC showed the negative effect of PS on task performance. Although performance differed in the timed versus untimed task, time pressure did not moderate the (non-)linear relationships of PS or PC on performance. Multiple mediation analyses revealed that perceived distress, rumination, and effort mediated the quadratic relationships of perfectionistic concerns. Overall, our results question the strict disentanglement of perfectionistic dimensions and emphasise the usefulness of a more holistic approach.
Keywords
Trait perfectionism, Performance, Non-linearity, Mediation, Time pressure, Tripartite model, Letter detection task, MODEL, PERSONALITY, OPPORTUNITY, DEPRESSION, RUMINATION, CHALLENGE, STRIVINGS, MEDIATION

Downloads

  • published version.pdf
    • full text (Published version)
    • |
    • open access
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 1.70 MB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

MLA
Nols, Tilman, et al. “How Perfect Is (Too) Perfect? Illuminating Why the Perfectionism-Performance-Relationship Is (Non-)Linear.” PERSONALITY AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES, vol. 228, 2024, doi:10.1016/j.paid.2024.112725.
APA
Nols, T., Kohlenberg, S. A., Klein, S., Boecker, L., Cross, A. E., & Loschelder, D. D. (2024). How perfect is (too) perfect? Illuminating why the perfectionism-performance-relationship is (non-)linear. PERSONALITY AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES, 228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2024.112725
Chicago author-date
Nols, Tilman, Sophia A. Kohlenberg, Sebastian Klein, Lea Boecker, Ashtyn E. Cross, and David D. Loschelder. 2024. “How Perfect Is (Too) Perfect? Illuminating Why the Perfectionism-Performance-Relationship Is (Non-)Linear.” PERSONALITY AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES 228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2024.112725.
Chicago author-date (all authors)
Nols, Tilman, Sophia A. Kohlenberg, Sebastian Klein, Lea Boecker, Ashtyn E. Cross, and David D. Loschelder. 2024. “How Perfect Is (Too) Perfect? Illuminating Why the Perfectionism-Performance-Relationship Is (Non-)Linear.” PERSONALITY AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES 228. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2024.112725.
Vancouver
1.
Nols T, Kohlenberg SA, Klein S, Boecker L, Cross AE, Loschelder DD. How perfect is (too) perfect? Illuminating why the perfectionism-performance-relationship is (non-)linear. PERSONALITY AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES. 2024;228.
IEEE
[1]
T. Nols, S. A. Kohlenberg, S. Klein, L. Boecker, A. E. Cross, and D. D. Loschelder, “How perfect is (too) perfect? Illuminating why the perfectionism-performance-relationship is (non-)linear,” PERSONALITY AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES, vol. 228, 2024.
@article{01JSZ3V32DA5AFRP789EBFAPAD,
  abstract     = {{Psychological science remains unclear about how individuals' trait perfectionism impacts their performance-is more perfectionism linearly better or does too perfect backfire? The present study investigates a potentially nonlinear relationship and its underlying mediators. Based on the two-dimensional model of perfectionism that distinguishes perfectionistic concerns (PC) versus strivings (PS), we investigate the (non-)linear relationships of perfectionism and performance in the letter detection task. Additionally, we experimentally examined whether time pressure would moderate these findings. Our study results ( N = 229) establish non-linearity : a quadratic function in the form of an inverted U-shape best explains the relationship between perfectionistic concerns and performance. Contrary to our hypothesis, perfectionistic strivings predicted task performance linearly but negatively . Upon further examination, we also found empirical support for a combinatory effect of both dimensions: Only individuals high in PC showed the negative effect of PS on task performance. Although performance differed in the timed versus untimed task, time pressure did not moderate the (non-)linear relationships of PS or PC on performance. Multiple mediation analyses revealed that perceived distress, rumination, and effort mediated the quadratic relationships of perfectionistic concerns. Overall, our results question the strict disentanglement of perfectionistic dimensions and emphasise the usefulness of a more holistic approach.}},
  articleno    = {{112725}},
  author       = {{Nols, Tilman and Kohlenberg, Sophia A. and Klein, Sebastian and Boecker, Lea and Cross, Ashtyn E. and Loschelder, David D.}},
  issn         = {{0191-8869}},
  journal      = {{PERSONALITY AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES}},
  keywords     = {{Trait perfectionism,Performance,Non-linearity,Mediation,Time pressure,Tripartite model,Letter detection task,MODEL,PERSONALITY,OPPORTUNITY,DEPRESSION,RUMINATION,CHALLENGE,STRIVINGS,MEDIATION}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  pages        = {{9}},
  title        = {{How perfect is (too) perfect? Illuminating why the perfectionism-performance-relationship is (non-)linear}},
  url          = {{http://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2024.112725}},
  volume       = {{228}},
  year         = {{2024}},
}

Altmetric
View in Altmetric
Web of Science
Times cited: