رابطه خلق و خو برای صفت کمال گرایی چند بعدی
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|32600||2005||9 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||محاسبه نشده|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Personality and Individual Differences, Volume 38, Issue 1, January 2005, Pages 203–211
Individual temperamental factors that contribute to the development of two perfectionism traits were studied in 428 Japanese undergraduate students using the Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (MPS) and Temperament and Character Inventory (TCI). The results showed that self-oriented perfectionism is associated with the temperamental characteristics of low novelty seeking, high reward dependence, and high persistence. In contrast, socially prescribed perfectionism is associated with low novelty seeking and high harm avoidance. Hierarchical regression analysis revealed that these temperaments primarily predicted self-oriented perfectionism, controlling for socially prescribed perfectionism. These temperamental characteristics did not predict socially prescribed perfectionism when self-oriented perfectionism was controlled.
1.1. Integrated model of development of perfectionism Flett, Hewitt, Oliver, and Macdonald (2002) proposed a transactional model of the development of perfectionism that includes factors both within and outside the self. Perfectionism develops from transactions between the individual and environment. The individual factors involve temperament (Richter, Eisemann, & Perris, 2000), attachment style (Anderson & Perris, 2000; Brennan & Shaver, 1995), and genetic influences in a twin study (Kamakura, Ando, Ono, & Maekawa, 2003). The environmental factors involve the perfectionism of parents (Frost, Lahhart, & Rosenblate, 1991), family environment (Richter & Tan, 1994), history of being abused (Kaner, Bulik, & Sullivan, 1993; Schaaf & McCanne, 1994), and parenting style (Enns, Cox, & Clara, 2002; Enns, Cox, & Larsen, 2000; Flett, Hewitt, & Singer, 1995; Kawamura, Frost, & Harmatz, 2002; Rice, Ashby, & Preusser, 1996; Stöber, 1998). Flett et al. (2002) noted that it is important to take into account the role of people outside the home (i.e., peers and teachers) and societal and cultural factors (i.e., a culture that emphasizes a perfect body or thinness). Although there is much theoretical speculation and empirical research about environmental factors, there is little information available regarding individual factors that influence the development of perfectionism. The present study investigates the relationship between the characteristics of temperament as described by Cloninger (Cloninger, 1987; Cloninger, Svrakic, & Przybeck, 1993) and two perfectionism traits. 1.2. Multidimensional perfectionism trait Hewitt and Flett’s Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale uses the concepts of self-oriented perfectionism and socially prescribed perfectionism (MPS; Hewitt & Flett, 1991). Self-oriented perfectionism (SOP) reflects a strong motivation for the self to be perfect, setting exacting standards for oneself, and evaluating one’s own behavior stringently. This subscale includes the motivational components of striving to attain perfection in one’s own endeavors as well as striving to avoid failure. The SOP has adaptive as well as maladaptive aspects. For example, SOP was associated with depression (Hewitt & Flett, 1991; Hewitt, Flett, & Ediger, 1996), suicidal ideation (Hewitt, Flett, & Weber, 1994; Hewitt, Newton, Flett, & Callander, 1997; Hamilton & Schweitzer, 2000), and anorexic symptoms (Cockell et al., 2002; Hewitt, Flett, & Ediger, 1995). SOP was also associated with positive affect (Frost, Heimberg, Holt, Mattia, & Neubauer, 1993), self-control (Flett, Hewitt, Blankstein, & O’Brien, 1991), adaptive social skills (Flett, Hewitt, & DeRosa, 1996), and academic achievement (Cox, Enns, & Clara, 2002). Socially prescribed perfectionism (SPP) reflects the perception that others impose on the individual unrealistically high standards and pressures to be perfect, and the belief that the individual is unable to meet the standards of others and that others will evaluate the individual negatively. SPP is associated with a variety of clinical disorders. For example, SPP was associated with depression (e.g., Cox et al., 2002; Hewitt & Flett, 1991; Hewitt et al., 1996). A study of psychiatric patients found that SPP was predictive of the potential to commit suicide even controlling for hopelessness and depression (Hewitt, Flett, & Turnbull-Donovan, 1992). SPP was associated with social anxiety (Blankstein, Flett, Hewitt, & Eng, 1993; Saboonchi & Lundh, 1997), and shyness and fear of negative evaluation (Flett, Hewitt, Blankstein, & Van Brunschot, 1996). SPP was also related to concerns with being thinner, body image disorder, and disordered eating patterns (Hewitt et al., 1995). 1.3. Temperament Cloninger’s psychobiological model of personality consists of both temperament and character (Cloninger et al., 1993). Temperament refers to the biases in automatic responses to emotional stimuli, and is moderately heritable and stable throughout life regardless of culture or social learning (Cloninger, 1986). Cloninger’s four dimensions of temperament involve novelty seeking (NS), harm avoidance (HA), reward dependence (RD), and persistence (PS). NS is viewed as a tendency toward exhilaration in response to novel stimuli, with an associated decrease in influence by cues for reward or relief from punishment. High NS people show an increased frequency of exploratory behavior, impulsive decision-making, a quick temper, and an active avoidance of frustration. The temperament dimension HA reflects a heritable bias in the inhibition or cessation of behaviors. High HA people are pessimistic, worrying, fatigable, shy with strangers, and become tense in unfamiliar situations. The third dimension, RD, reflects sensitivity to social and verbal stimuli that signal personal succor or the preference of other individuals. High RD people are described as sentimental, socially attached, and dependent on the approval of others. PS, originally thought of as a component of RD, is the fourth temperament dimension and reflects the perseverance of behavior despite frustration and fatigue. 1.4. Temperament as a developmental factor for perfectionism The purpose of the present study is to elucidate the relationship between self-oriented perfectionism (SOP), socially prescribed perfectionism (SPP), and Cloninger’s dimensions of temperament. NS is hypothesized to be inversely associated with both SOP and SPP. NS reflects the learning characteristics where individuals seek out novelty, and show active avoidance of the signals of punishment or non-reward. But perfectionists in general would aim at perfection and stick to the same goal or standard rather than seek novelty. PS is hypothesized to be positively associated with both SOP and SPP. PS reflects the learning characteristics where the individual maintains previously rewarded behavior. Also, perfectionists in general would continue their effort and behavior until their goals or standards are met. Lastly, HA is hypothesized to be associated only with SPP. HA reflects learning characteristics where individuals adopt more passive avoidance of the signals of punishment or non-reward, and individual high in HA would develop characteristics such as shy, pessimistic and fearful. These characteristics are specific to SPP because socially prescribed perfectionists hold the pessimistic belief that they are unable to meet the standards of others and that others will evaluate the individual negatively (Hewitt & Flett, 1991), and showed strong fear of failure (Hewitt, Flett, Besser, Sherry, & McGee, 2003).