Stöber, J. (2000). Frost Multidimensional
Perfectionism Scale. In J. Maltby, C. A.
Lewis, & A. Hill (Eds.), Commissioned
reviews of 250 psychological tests (Vol. 1, pp.
310-314). Lampeter, UK: Edwin Mellen Press.
".
-
.
ｾ＠
310
Personality and Inidvidual Differences
Personality and Indivdual Differences
311
3.16: FROST MULTIDIMENSIONAL PERFECTIONISM SCALE (FMPS).
AUTHORS: Frost, Marten, Lahart, and Rosenblate.
RELIABILITY: Internal consistency: The FMPS total score has shown high levels
of internal consistency with Cronbach's alphas ranging from .87 (Parker &
VARIABLE: Perfectionism.
Stumpf, 1995) to .91 (Frost, Lahart, & Rosenblate, 1991). Also, the subscales
have shown satisfactory internal consistencies. In a large student sample, Stober
DESCRIPTION: The study of perfectionism has a long history in both clinical
(1998) found Cronbach's alphas of .87 (CM), .78 (PS), .88 (PE), .81 (PC), .73
research and personality psychology (Hewitt & Flett, 1991). Whereas early
(D), and .86 (O).
conceptualizations suggested that perfectionism was a unidimensional concept
(Bums, 1980), recent views have stressed that perfectionism is multidimensional
VALIDITY: Convergent: The PSWQ has demonstrated high convergent
in nature (Frost, Marten, Lahart, & Rosenblate, 1990; Hewitt & Flett, 1991). The
correlations with Bums' (1980) Perfectionism Scale (Frost et 01., 1990), with
Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (FMPS) is a multidimensional self-
Hewitt and Flett's (l991) Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (Flett et 01.,
report scale of perfectionism. It contains a total of 35 items. These are subsumed
1995; Frost, Heimberg, Holt, Mattia, & Neubauer, 1993) and with the
to the following six subscales: Concern over Mistakes (CM; 9 items), Personal
Perfectionism Cognitions Inventory (Flett, Hewitt, Blankstein, & Gray, 1998).
Standards (PS; 7 items), Parental Expectations (PE; 5 items), Parental Criticism
Moreover, it has been able to predict negative reactions during athletic
(PC; 4 items), Doubts about actions (0; 4 items), and Organization (0; 6 items).
competition (Frost & Henderson, 1991) and poor writing perfonnance in students
The first five subscales represent the core dimensions of the FMPS whereas the
(Frost & Marten, 1990). Further, it has shown substantial correlations with various
subscale Organization was found to be only loosely related to the other subscales.
measures related to poor mental health such as obsessive compulsive symptoms
Consequently, Frost el 01. (1990) recommended to exclude 0 when calculating
(Rheaume, Freeston, Dugas, Letarte, & Ladouceur, 1995), depression (Lynd-
total scores (see Frost, Marten, Lahart, & Rosenblate, 1990, pp. 454-456). With
Stevenson & Hearne, 1999), suicidal preoccupations (Adkins & Parker, 1996),
this, the FMPS total score is based on 29 items. All items are scored in the
insomnia (Lundh, Broman, Hetta, & Saboonchi, 1994), eating problems (Bastiani,
direction of perfectionism with a 5-point answer scale from Strongly disagree (I)
Rao, Weltzin, & Kaye, 1995), trait anxiety (Juster, Heimberg, Frost. Holt, Mattia,
to Strongly agree (5), the potential range of FMPS total scores is 29-145.
& Faccenda, 1996), preoccupation (Stober, 1998), and worry (Stober &
Unfortunately, the scale by Frost et 01., (1990) and the one by Hewitt & Flett,
Joormann, in press).
(1991) were both named the Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (MPS). To
avoid possible confusion between these scales, I will follow the suggestion by
LOCATION: Frost, R.O., Marten, P., Lahart, C., & Rosenblate, R. (1990). The
Flett, Sawatzky, & Hewitt (1995) and refer to the scale by Frost et 01. (1990) as
dimensions of perfectionism. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 14,449-468.
the Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (FMPS).
COMMENT: The FMPS is a reliable and valid multidimensional measure of
SAMPLE: The FMPS is intended to be used in nonclinical and clinical samples.
perfectionism. Critical comments concern mainly its factorial validity (Rheaume
Personality and Inidvidual Differences
312
et al., 1995). A recent analysis (Stober, 1998) found that previous factor analyses
of the FMPS suffered from overextraction of factors. However, when the 35
FMPS items were subsumed to four (instead of six) factorslsubscales - namely
Concern over Mistakes and Doubts (CMD; 13 items), Parental Expectations and
Criticism (PEC; 9 items), Personal Standards (PS; 7 items), and Organization (0;
6 items) - factorial validity improved considerably.
313
Personality and Indivdual Differences
and Research, 15, 469-489.
Frost, R.O., & Marten, P.A. (1990). Perfectionism and evaluative threat.
Cognitive Therapy and Research, 14,559-572.
Frost, R.O., Marten, P., Lahart, C., & Rosenblate, R. (1990). The dimensions of
perfectionism. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 14,449-468.
Hewitt, P.L., & Flett, G.L. (1991). Perfectionism in the self and social contexts:
Conceptualization, assessment, and association with psychopathology.
REFERENCES:
Adkins, K.K., & Parker, W.O. (1996). Perfectionism and suicidal preoccupation.
Journal of Personality, 64, 529-543.
Bastiani, A.M., Rao, R., Weltzin,T., & Kaye, W.H. (1995). Perfectionism in
anorexia nervosa. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 17, 147152.
Bums, D.O. (1980, November). The perfectionist's script for self-defeat.
Psychology Today, pp. 34-52.
Flett, G.L., Hewitt, P.L., Blankstein, K.R., & Gray, L. (1998). Psychological
distress and the frequency of perfectionistic thinking. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 1363-1381.
Flett, G.L., Sawatzky, D.L., & Hewitt, P.L. (1995). Dimensions of perfectionism
and goal commitment: A further comparison of two perfectionism
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 456-470.
Juster, H.R., Heimberg, R.G., Frost, R.O., Holt, C.S., Mattia, J.I., & Faccenda, K.
(1996). Social phobia and perfectionism. Personality and Individual
Differences, 21, 403-410.
Lundh, L-G., Broman, J-E., Hetta, J., & Saboonchi, F. (1994). Perfectionism and
insomnia. Scandinavian Journal ｾｲ＠
Behaviour Therapy, 23, 3-18.
Lynd-Stevenson, R.M., & Hearne, C.M. (1999). Perfectionism and depressive
affect: The pros and cons of being a perfectionist. Personality and
Individual Differences, 26, 549-562.
Parker, W.O., & Stumpf, H. (1995). An examination of the Multidimensional
Perfectionism Scale with a sample of academically talented children.
Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 13,372-383.
Rheaume, J., Freeston, M.H., Dugas. MJ .• Letarte, H., & Ladouceur, R. (1995).
measures. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 17,
Perfectionism, responsibility, and obsessive-compulsive symptoms.
111-124.
Behaviour Research and Therapy, 33, 785-794.
Frost, R.O., Heimberg, R.G., Holt, C.S., Mattia, J.I., & Neubauer, A.L. (1993). A
Stober, J. (1998). The Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale: More perfect
comparison of two measures of perfectionism. Personality and Individual
with four (instead of six) dimensions. Personality and Individual
Differences, 14, 119-126.
Differences. 24, 481-491.
Frost, R.O., & Henderson, KJ. (1991). Perfectionism and reactions to athletic
competition. Journal ofSport and Exercise Psychology, 13, 323-335.
Frost, R.O., Lahart, C.M., & Rosenblate, R. (1991). The development of
perfectionism: A study of daughters and their parents. Cognitive Therapy
Personality and Inidvidual Differences
314
Stober, J., & Joonnann, J. (in press). Worry, procrastination, and perfectionism:
Differentiating amount of worry, pathological worry, anxiety, and
depression. Cognitive Therapy and Research.
REVIEWER: Joachim Stober, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg,
Department of Educational Psychology, Franckesche Stiftungen, Haus S, D-06099
Halle, Saale, Gennany. E-mail: stoeber@paedagogik.uni-halle.de
3.17: FUNDAMENTAL INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS ORIENTATION-BEHAVIOUR
(FIRO-B).
AUTHOR: Schutz.
VARIABLES: Three categories of interaction relating to inclusion, control and
affection. Each category combines 'expressed' and 'wanted' measures.
DESCRIPTION: The European English Edition of the FIRO-B consists of S4 items
that load onto the three areas of inclusion, control and affection. Inclusion refers
to being involved with others, Control describes an individual's behaviour in
relation to responsibility, power, influence and decision-making, and Affection
describes an individual's behaviour in fonning close, personal or more intimate
relationships with others.
In each of these three areas, the FIRO-B gives an
'expressed' measure (the extent to which the individual will initiate the
behaviour) and a 'wanted' measure (the extent to which the individual wants to
receive the behaviour from others). This provides the researcher with six scales of
nine items. All items score on a six-point scale: 24 of the items are phrased so that
responses range from (I) Nobody to (6) Most people, the remaining 30 items
range from (I) Never to (6) Usually.
In this way, FIRO-B measures both the
intensity and frequency of interactive needs and wants.