Perfectionism, Health and Preventive Health Behaviours by Charlotte Williams Submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy School of Psychology Faculty of Arts and Human Sciences University of Surrey Supervisor: Professor Mark Cropley ©Charlotte Williams, 2015 Declaration of originality This thesis and the work to which it refers are the results of my own efforts. Any ideas, data, images or text resulting from the work of others (whether published or unpublished) are fully identified as such within the work and attributed to their originator in the text, bibliography or in footnotes. This thesis has not been submitted in whole or in part for any other academic degree or professional qualification. I agree that the University has the right to submit my work to the plagiarism detection service TurnitinUK for originality checks. Whether or not drafts have been so-assessed, the University reserves the right to require an electronic version of the final document (as submitted) for assessment as above. Signature: ___________________________________________ Date: ______________________________________________ Abstract The perfectionism and health literature suggests that maladaptive perfectionism is associated with a plethora of negative health outcomes and adaptive perfectionism with both favourable and unfavourable health outcomes. Additionally, a small amount of research has proposed maladaptive perfectionists may refrain from engaging in preventive health behaviours whilst adaptive perfectionists may engage more readily. This thesis explored the differences between adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism in relation to engagement in preventive health behaviours as well as addressing possible intervening variables in the perfectionism, engagement relationship (e.g. self-presentation, perceived stress, self-efficacy and affect). Four studies were carried out. In study 1, (N=370), using a sample of university students, results identified maladaptive perfectionism to be associated with decreased engagement in preventive health behaviours and adaptive perfectionism with increased engagement. Self-concealment (a self-presentational strategy) was found to partially mediate the perfectionism, engagement relationship for maladaptive perfectionists. In study 2, (N= 875), again with university students, (using a different conceptualisation of perfectionism), results showed that although ‘type’ of perfectionism did not interact with perceived stress to influence engagement, significant differences were identified between type of perfectionism and a number of health related variables. In study 3, results from a qualitative study involving university students showed that factors inherent in the university environment as well as factors characteristic of perfectionism prohibited engagement in preventive health behaviours. In study 4, using a general population sample, adaptive perfectionism was associated with greater engagement but no relationship was found for maladaptive perfectionism. Various factors were found to moderate and mediate the perfectionism, engagement relationship for adaptive perfectionism and adaptive perfectionism was associated with more benefits to engagement and maladaptive perfectionism with more barriers to engagement in preventive health behaviours. In summary, the results from this thesis suggest there are differences between the two perfectionism dimensions in relation to engagement and other health variables, although this may be dependent on the population/context being studied. More research is warranted to explore the perfectionism, engagement relationship specifically looking at different populations to establish whether maladaptive perfectionists in a university environment represent a particularly vulnerable group. i Acknowledgements Anyone who knows me will be aware of what a long journey this has been. There have been many times when the self-doubt has been overpowering and I have wondered how I could ever finish this thesis. Writing a thesis about perfectionism when you are highly perfectionistic yourself has probably added another level of difficulty to the process; something I didn’t really think about when I started. Thank you to my supervisor Professor Mark Cropley for all your help and support and for giving me the space to develop my own ideas and do things in my own time. One thing is certain, I could never have got this far, had it not been for the support of my wonderful family. My husband Paul who has supported me throughout all of my academic pursuits (since A Levels); I just can’t thank you enough for everything you’ve done. My children; Jake, Beth and Sam; thank you for allowing me time away from being a Mum to be able to pursue this. My Mum; thank you for always believing that I had it in me, and Dad, I’m so sorry that you didn’t get to see me finish, but I know you would be so proud of me. ii Table of Contents Page Abstract………………………………………………………………………….. i List of tables……………………………………………………………………... vi List of figures……………………………………………………………………. vii List of charts…………………………………………………………………….. viii List of appendices……………………………………………………………….. ix Chapter 1. Introduction 1 1.1 Background to the current research…………………………………………. 1 1.2 Main aims of the thesis……………………………………………………… 4 1.3 Thesis outline………………………………………………………………... 6 Chapter 2. Review of the literature 10 2.1 Definitions and conceptualisation……………………………........................ 2.1.1 Early conceptualisations……………………………………................ 2.1.2 The multidimensional perspective…………………………................. 2.1.3 Definitional issues and controversies………………………………… 2.1.4 Current conceptualisations…………………………………................ The 2 x 2 Model of Dispositional Perfectionism……………......... Cognitive Behavioural Model of Clinical Perfectionism…………. The Transdiagnostic Model……………………………………….. 2.1.5 Conclusion to part 1…………………………………………............... 2.2 The relationship between perfectionism, health and health behaviours……... 2.2.1 Perfectionism and psychopathology………………………….............. Depressive disorders…………………………………..................... Anxiety disorders………………………………………………….. Eating disorders…………………………………………………… Suicide…………………………………………………………...... 2.2.2 Perfectionism and physical health………………………………......... Chronic Fatigue Syndrome…………………………………........... Perfectionism and the personal experience of illness………........... 2.2.3 Perfectionism and stress………………………………………............. 2.2.4 Perfectionistic self-presentation and health…………………………… 2.2.5 Perfectionism and health behaviours………………………………….. Potential intervening variables……………………………………. 2.2.6 Treating perfectionists……………………………………………........ 2.2.7 Can perfectionism be beneficial to health and wellbeing?..................... 2.2.8 Conclusion to part 2……………………………………………............ 10 10 13 17 22 22 26 28 30 31 31 32 33 35 36 39 41 43 45 48 50 53 59 62 64 Chapter 3 The relationship between perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours: The mediating role of self-concealment (study 1) 66 iii 3.1 Introduction………………………………………………………….............. 3.1.1 Hypotheses……………………………………………………............ 3.2 Methods……………………………………………………………………… 3.2.2 Measures………………………………………………………........... 3.2.3 Data analysis…………………………………………………………. 3.3 Results………………………………………………………………............. 3.4 Discussion………………………………………………………………….... 3.5 Conclusion…………………………………………………………………… 66 70 71 71 74 75 82 85 Chapter 4 The relationship between perfectionism and engagement in Preventive health behaviours: The role of perceived stress (study 2) 87 4.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………….. 4.1.1 Hypotheses…………………………………………………………… 4.2 Methods………………………………………………………………........... 4.2.1 Measures……………………………………………………………... 4.2.2 Data Analysis………………………………………………………… 4.3 Results……………………………………………………………………...... 4.4 Discussion…………………………………………………………………… 4.5 Conclusion………………………………………………………………....... 87 91 92 92 96 97 104 108 Chapter 5 A qualitative study exploring engagement in preventive health behaviours and obstacles to engagement in adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists: An interpretative phenomenological analysis (study 3) 109 5.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………….. 110 5.2 Methods…………………………………………………………………....... 112 5.2.1 Data analysis……………………………………………...………...... 114 5.3 Results……………………………………………………………………….. 115 5.3.1 Taking personal responsibility for health………………………......... 116 5.3.2 Lack of awareness of limitations…………………………………….. 124 5.3.3 Control over health and wellbeing…………………………………... 131 5.4 Discussion…………………………………………………………………... 142 5.4 Conclusion………………………………………………………………….. 151 Chapter 6 Moderators and mediators in the relationship between perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours (study 4) 152 6.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………............. 6.1.1 Hypotheses………………………………………………………....... 6.2 Methods…………………………………………………………………….. 6.2.1 Measures…………………………………………………………….. 6.2.2 Data analysis……………………………………………………….... 6.3 Results…………………………………………………………………......... 6.4 Discussion…………………………………………………………………… 6.5 Conclusion………………………………………………………………....... 152 158 160 161 166 167 175 182 iv Chapter 7 General discussion 184 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 186 189 202 206 208 211 Summary of findings………………………………………………………… Contribution of research……………………………………………………... Limitations of research……………………………………………………..... Future research………………………………………………………………. Implications for Interventions………………………………………………... Overall conclusions………………………………………………………….. References………………………………………………………………………... 212 Appendices………………………………………………………………………... 253 v List of tables Page Chapter 2 2.1 The differences between adaptive (“normal”) and maladaptive………….. 13 (“neurotic”) perfectionism (taken from Hewitt & Flett, 2002) 2.2 The key features of the two multidimensional perfectionism scales……... 14 2.3 The tripartite model of perfectionism (Stoeber & Otto, 2006)……………. 19 2.4 The 2 x 2 model of dispositional perfectionism…………………………… 23 (Gaudreau & Thompson, 2010) Chapter 3 3.1 Sample demographics, means, standard deviations and reliabilities for all….. 76 variables 3.2 Correlation matrix for all major variables…………………………………… 78 3.3 Summary of the regression analysis for the variables: Maladaptive………… 80 Perfectionism, self-concealment and engagement in preventive health behaviours 3.4 Summary of the regression analysis for the variables: Maladaptive………… 81 Perfectionism, self-concealment and psychological distress Chapter 4 4.1 The four perfectionism groups formulated for the study………………......... 94 4.2 Sample demographics, means, standard deviations and reliabilities for…..... 98 all variables 4.3 Participant characteristics by perfectionism group………………………...... 99 4.4 Correlation matrix for all major variables………………………………....... 100 Chapter 5 5.1 Interview participants……………………………………………………….. 113 5.2 The three superordinate themes……………………………………………... 115 5.3 Possible obstacles to engagement…………………………………………… 149 Chapter 6 6.1 The scales and subscales of the Exercise Benefits/Barriers questionnaire….. 163 6.2 Sample demographics, means, standards deviations and reliabilities for........ 167 all variables 6.3 Correlation matrix for all major variables………………………………....... 170 6.4 Table showing predictors of engagement in preventive health behaviours.... 172 vi List of figures Page Chapter 1 1.1 Possible reasons why maladaptive perfectionists may represent a………..... 3 “high risk” group in terms of health and wellbeing Chapter 3 3.1 Testing the indirect effect using the method outlined by Sobel (1982)……... 75 3.2 The mediating role of self-concealment in the relationship between……….. 79 maladaptive perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours 3.3 The mediating role of self-concealment in the relationship between………... 81 maladaptive perfectionism and psychological distress Chapter 6 6.1 Model of adaptive perfectionism as a predictor of engagement in…………… 174 preventive health behaviours mediated by exercise self-efficacy 6.2 Model of adaptive perfectionism as a predictor of engagement in………….. 175 preventive health behaviours, mediated by self-presentational efficacy expectancy Chapter 7 7.1 Possible reasons why maladaptive perfectionists may represent a………….. 198 high risk group in terms of health and wellbeing vii List of charts Page Chapter 2 4.1 Engagement in preventive health behaviours by perfectionism group…….. and stress group 101 4.2 Reporting of physical symptoms by perfectionism group and stress………. 102 group 4.3 State anxiety by perfectionism group and stress group…………………….. 103 4.4 Trait anxiety by perfectionism group and stress group…………………….. 104 viii List of appendices Appendix A Page Unpublished version of article submitted to the Journal……….... 253 of Health Psychology (Williams and Cropley, 2014) B Interview schedule for study 3……………………………………. 277 C The Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale………………… 278 D Self-Concealment Scale…………………………………………… 279 E Preventive Health Behaviours Questionnaire……………………... 280 F The Hopkins Symptom Checklist-21……………………………… 281 G Satisfaction with Life Scale……………………………………….. 282 H Perceived Stress Scale…………………………………………….. 283 I The Pennebaker Inventory of Limbic Languidness……………….. 284 J The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory………………………………… 286 K The Godin Leisure-Time Exercise Questionnaire…………………. 288 L The Exercise Benefits/Barriers Scale……………………………… 289 M The WHO-5 Wellbeing Index……………………………………... 291 N Self-Presentational Efficacy Scale…………………………………. 292 O Physical Activity Motivation Scale………………………………... 293 P Exercise Self-Efficacy Scale………………………………………. 295 Q The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule………………………. 296 ix Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1 Background to the current research For some, the pursuit of excellence may be a positive experience that energizes and challenges them to achieve greatness. For others, the drive to achieve excellence may represent a negative experience; an unremitting struggle to achieve perfection whatever the cost to health and wellbeing. Perfectionism has been described as a fairly stable personality trait characterised by the setting of and striving towards unreasonably high standards of performance. Often it is believed to be accompanied by self-criticism and doubts about the quality of one’s actions (Frost, Marten, Lahart & Rosenblate, 1990). Perfectionism represents for many, a double edged sword. A highly sought after quality in certain circles, for example by employers and academics but not necessarily the case for those whose lives are affected by the darker side of perfectionism. For some individuals the desire to achieve perfection may have severe consequences in terms of their health and wellbeing. Recent research has highlighted how this often praised and valued personality trait can shorten life expectancy (Fry & Debats, 2009), markedly increase the risk of suicide (Flett, Hewitt & Heisel, 2014) and lead to lower levels of life-satisfaction and wellbeing (Park and Jeong, 2015). The problem is exacerbated by the fact that many perfectionists try and conceal the extent of their difficulties and distress from others in an attempt to project a perfect and flawless persona (Hewitt, Flett, Besser, Sherry & McGee, 2003). It is therefore difficult to gauge the extent of the problem and the result of this may be a controlled and measured outward expression to the rest of the world but one which masks the inner turmoil and distress that is experienced by the perfectionist. A further complication of the situation is that many perfectionists seem to be reluctant to ask for help or utilise social support networks (Crăciun & Dudău, 2013; Flett, Baricza, Gupta, Hewitt & Endler, 2011) perhaps this is based on a fear that such actions will expose a flaw or potential weakness and make them vulnerable to criticism. Perfectionists, according to health professions also represent a particularly difficult client group to treat (Blatt & Zuroff, 2002; Scott, 2001). Research has identified that perfectionistic beliefs are fairly resistant to change and that perfectionists may sabotage the therapy process by using 1 it as yet another opportunity to set unrealistically high standards and then push themselves relentlessly to try and achieve them. Unfortunately, it would appear that we live in a perfectionistic society where turbulent economic conditions have put increased pressure on us to achieve and continue pushing ourselves to meet higher and higher standards (Greenspon, 2014). Young people are likely to be aware of these pressures from a young age and as a result are being socialised into a world where they have to set their sights high and compete to be the best. The result of which, aside from the health implications, is that we develop a perception of ourselves, where we can only be accepted and valued for what we can achieve, rather than who we are as people. The present thesis sits within the wider field of perfectionism and health and an abundance of research points to the existence of a maladaptive side to the perfectionism construct that has been linked to a multitude of physical and psychological health problems (e.g. Fry and Debats, 2009; Egan, Wade & Shafran, 2011). Well established links have been made between the maladaptive dimensions of perfectionism and a wide array of health issues such as depression, anxiety, eating disorders, chronic pain, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, Irritable Bowel Disease etc. The situation is further exacerbated by the fact that perfectionists seem to find it harder than non-perfectionists to deal with stress (Flett & Hewitt, 2002). Researchers have also explored and identified what they believe to be an adaptive dimension to the perfectionism construct (Hamachek, 1978; Slade & Owens, 1998). This positive personality dimension is considered to embody the positive qualities associated with perfectionism, (e.g. high levels of organisation, conscientiousness, a desire to approach challenges and experiencing satisfaction when a job has been completed) without all of the negative connotations that appear to accompany the maladaptive dimension (e.g. doubting the qualities of one’s actions, a desire to avoid challenges and lack of satisfaction when a job is completed). Unfortunately, the evidence to support this premise has not been consistent, with some authors wholeheartedly supporting the existence of an adaptive form of perfectionism (Slade & Owens, 1998) and others suggesting that even taking the positive characteristics into account, perfectionism is, and always will be, inherently dysfunctional (Flett & Hewitt, 2006). 2 Although there is a well-established body of literature addressing the psychopathological correlates of perfectionism and, to a lesser extent, a number of studies looking at the relationship between perfectionism and physical health variables, there is limited research that has touched on whether perfectionists actively engage in activities that may safeguard and protect their health and wellbeing (preventive health behaviours) from the potential risks associated with being highly perfectionistic (e.g. Longbottom, Grove & Dimmock, 2010; Williams & Cropley, 2014). It has not been established empirically whether perfectionists regularly engage in preventive health behaviours. The small body of literature that is available points to a reduced level of engagement, particularly for maladaptive perfectionists. If it is found that maladaptive perfectionists refrain from engaging in preventive health behaviours, and also show no let-up in term of pushing themselves to meet their exceptionally high standards, then there may be a very real danger that they will eventually push themselves to the point where they have nothing left to give, and their health and wellbeing may suffer as a result. When you also consider the vast body of research linking the maladaptive dimension of perfectionism with unfavourable health outcomes then it seems logical to assume that maladaptive perfectionists may represent a ‘high risk’ group in terms of their health and wellbeing, (see figure 1.1). Figure 1.1 Possible reasons why maladaptive perfectionists may represent a “high risk” group in terms of health and wellbeing Difficult client group to treat Reluctance to seek help Lower levels of life satisfaction and wellbeing Increased risk of suicide Maladaptive Perfectionists: A “high risk” group? Linked to psychopathology Increased risk of mortality Linked to physical health problems Stress Conceal personal difficulties 3 1.2 Research aims The purpose of the present thesis was to address a gap in the literature within the broad area of perfectionism and health. What is known from previous research is that perfectionism, particularly the maladaptive dimension is associated with both psychological and physical health difficulties. Perfectionism is also known to have a complicated relationship with stress whereby stress has been implicated in the generation and maintenance of various psychopathological states (Flett & Hewitt, 2002). We also know that perfectionists tend to conceal the extent of their difficulties from others, reportedly to preserve a perfect and flawless persona. What is not known, however, in the research literature is whether perfectionists actively engage in behaviours that may safeguard or protect them from the pressures and problems that seem to accompany perfectionism as well as the type of factors that may interfere with their ability to maintain such behaviours. The main aims of the thesis are as follows; 1. To explore engagement in preventive health behaviours (such as exercise, physical activity, diet and looking after their emotional wellbeing) for both adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists and try and establish if there are any differences between the two perfectionism dimensions in terms of engagement. 2. To explore two key areas; self-presentation and perceived stress, that are considered to play an important role in the relationship between perfectionism and health outcomes and on the basis of this are predicted to influence the relationship between perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours 3. To explore the possible benefits and barriers to engagement, i.e. the factors that might intervene in the relationship between perfectionism and engagement that either encourage or discourage engagement. 4. To generate support for the possibility that maladaptive perfectionists may represent a high risk group in terms of health and wellbeing. 5. To support a distinction between the two dimensions of perfectionism: a maladaptive type of perfectionism related to maladjustment and an adaptive type of perfectionism associated with potential benefits to health and wellbeing. 4 By concentrating on these specific areas, the intention is to further research in this field by moving beyond what is currently known about the relationships between perfectionism and health and develop a deeper understanding of the decisions perfectionists (adaptive and maladaptive) make in relation to how well they look after their health and wellbeing and gain a deeper understanding of factors that may interfere with perfectionists’ ability to look after themselves. One of the difficulties associated with conducting perfectionism research, is despite an increase in research interest in this area over the past few decades; there is still no universally accepted definition. A variety of ways of conceptualising the construct have been developed with the majority of these acknowledging that perfectionism consists of both positive/adaptive qualities as well as negative/maladaptive features. The two conceptualisations that have received the most interest as evidenced by their extensive usage within the perfectionism and health literature are those developed by Frost and colleagues (1990) and Hewitt & Flett (1991b). The conceptualisation that has been chosen for the present thesis follows and supports the work of Frost and Colleagues (1990) and utilises their Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale as a means of establishing a measure of both adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism, for the four studies contained within this thesis. The reason for choosing this particular conceptualisation, over other methods was based primarily on the flexibility of the scale in being able to differentiate between the constructs of adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism and it was also considered to be the most appropriate method to explore the main aims of the thesis. The added difficulty with conceptualisations and definitions is the unresolved debate over the potential “adaptiveness” of the perfectionism construct. Most would agree that perfectionism consists of both adaptive and maladaptive qualities; however, what has not been established is whether the potentially adaptive features (such as high personal standards, organisation, and conscientiousness) are able to bring associated benefits to health and wellbeing. From a health perspective, the downside of having multiple definitions and multiple assessment methods means that there may be problems with the diagnosis and treatment of individuals struggling with the consequences of extreme forms of maladaptive perfectionism. If it were possible to categorically identify the existence of a positive and adaptive form of perfectionism (that would bring with it associated health benefits) then this would influence the way in which perfectionism could and should be defined. Additionally from the point of view of health and wellbeing, the existence of an 5 adaptive and potentially healthy form of perfectionism may provide answers about how best to help individuals struggling to deal with the maladaptive and potentially destructive side of perfectionism. 1.3 Thesis outline Chapter 2 (part 1). The issue of multiple conceptualisations/definitions continues to be a fiercely debated subject in the perfectionism field and a problem that has infiltrated the perfectionism and health literature. In addition, there are no reviews to date that have provided an overview of past and present approaches taking into consideration the most recent conceptualisations in the perfectionism literature. On the basis of this, it was felt that before embarking on reviewing the area of perfectionism and health, it would be beneficial to first begin with a detailed and up to date review of the available literature on definitions/conceptualisations. As well as a discussion of the available approaches, the first part of this chapter also discusses some of the specific definitional issues and controversies that have arisen over the past few decades. Chapter 2 (part 2). Provides a detailed review of the literature exploring the subject of perfectionism and health. To begin with, the relationships between perfectionism and psychopathology and perfectionism and physical health are discussed, highlighting some of the specific conditions that have been associated with the maladaptive dimension of perfectionism, such as depression, anxiety, eating disorders, suicide and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. It is important to note that this review was not intended to present an exhaustive list of conditions associated with perfectionism, rather, a selection have been carefully chosen to present an overview. Following on from this, the relationships between perfectionism and two specific areas are discussed; stress and self-presentation. Towards the end of the review the focus shifts to address the relationship between perfectionism and health behaviours. Consideration is then given to factors that may influence engagement in preventive health behaviours such as self-handicapping behaviours, physical activity motivation, perceived stress and self-efficacy. Treatment issues are considered as the penultimate element of the literature review and the final section is devoted to a discussion of the available literature concerning the potentially adaptive dimension of perfectionism. The relevance of chapter 2 is, firstly to explore the concept of perfectionism (part 1) and secondly to discuss the potential health implications of this personality construct (part 2). Establishing the potential health consequences of being a perfectionist seems to be an 6 essential first step in supporting one of the basic premises of the thesis; to generate support for the possibility that maladaptive perfectionists may represent a high risk group in terms of health and wellbeing as well as identifying whether the so called ‘adaptive’ dimension of perfectionism is really worthy of its name; in providing potential benefits to health and wellbeing. The next step was to gather empirical evidence to support the aims of the thesis. It is important to note that the focus of the present thesis was intentionally wide to encompass an expansive area of research. Due to the limited availability of research specifically addressing perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours, it was necessary to draw on a large number of areas within the field of perfectionism and health to try and address the main aims of the thesis. Chapter 3. The area of self-presentation was highlighted in the literature review as permeating various aspects of the perfectionism, health relationship; therefore this chapter presents the results of a cross-sectional study exploring self-concealment (a selfpresentational strategy) as a potential mediator in the relationship between perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours. Self-concealment involves the need to withhold personal and sensitive information from others and it was hypothesised that maladaptive perfectionists would engage less than adaptive perfectionists in preventive health behaviours. Research has suggested that perfectionists, particularly maladaptive perfectionists may have a strong desire to hide their imperfections from others (Hewitt et al, 2003) and therefore engaging in preventive health behaviours, such as exercise classes or going to the gym (where there is an element of public exposure) may be more of a challenge to them because they don’t want to expose a less than perfect image. The associations between adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism and a number of other health related variables were also considered such as psychological distress, wellbeing and lifesatisfaction. As discussed in the chapter, one of the limitations of the study involved the conceptualisation of perfectionism that was employed. To address this, a different conceptualisation was utilised in the next study. Chapter 4. As well as identifying self-presentation as a key area that may influence decisions to engage in preventive health behaviours, the literature review also highlighted perceived stress to be an important area that has been shown to have associations with both perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours. In study 2, the relationship between perfectionism and perceived stress was explored to determine if type of perfectionism interacted with level of perceived stress to predict engagement in preventive 7 health behaviours. Using a slightly different conceptualisation; four groups of perfectionist were considered; non-perfectionists, adaptive perfectionists and two types of maladaptive perfectionist (based on their coexisting levels of adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism traits). The main effects of perfectionism and perceived stress were also considered in relation to a number of other health related variables such as physical symptom reporting, perception of general health and level of anxiety. After addressing these two key areas; self-presentation and perceived stress, the next logical step was to look more closely at factors that may intervene in the relationship between perfectionism and engagement. Chapter 5. In this chapter, the focus of the thesis moves on to address intervening factors that may influence decisions to engage in preventive health behaviours. The chapter presents the results of a qualitative study which explored the area of engagement in preventive health behaviours in a group of university students and attempted to identify potential obstacles to engagement. There are very few studies that have addressed perfectionism from a qualitative perspective and none that have looked specifically at engagement in preventive health behaviours, therefore this study was considered to address a gap in the research literature. Using Interpretative phenomenological analysis, the intention was to discover a number of key themes that may help explain which factors influence engagement and how individuals’ manage to maintain their engagement when there are other pressures and distractions. Furthermore the intention was to build up a more detailed representation of how type of perfectionism (adaptive/maladaptive) may affect the engagement process as well as identify any differences between the two perfectionism dimensions. After providing a qualitative explanation of the potential obstacles to engagement in preventive health behaviours, it was felt necessary to explore this area in more detail from a quantitative perspective; looking at both barriers and benefits to engagement. Chapter 6. To extend the findings of study 3, This chapter presents the results of a crosssectional study exploring a range of potential mediators and moderators in the relationship between adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism and two types of engagement; engagement in general preventive health behaviours (as in studies 1 and 2) as well as the specific area of physical activity/exercise behaviour. Potential intervening variables that were considered included; adaptive/maladaptive cognitions and behaviours towards exercise/physical activity, perceived stress, specific benefits/barriers to exercise, selfpresentational efficacy and exercise self-efficacy. The focus of the study was to try and 8 identify the possible reasons why perfectionists may choose to engage/not engage in preventive health behaviours and attempt to identify any differences between the two perfectionism dimensions. Chapter 7. This final chapter presents a general overview and discussion of the thesis. This includes a summary of the four studies and the main findings, a discussion of the contribution of the research to the wider field of perfectionism and health, with specific attention to whether the main aims of the thesis have been achieved. General limitations are discussed as well as ideas for future research. Finally an overall conclusion is presented. 9 Chapter 2: Review of the literature 2.1 Definitions and Conceptualisations 2.1.1 Early conceptualisations Despite the vast increase in perfectionism research over the past few years, there still remains a lack of consensus about how to conceptualise and define this personality trait. As a result, conducting research in this field can be problematic because there is no single definition to adhere to. For this part of the review, the main conceptualisations will be introduced and the most recent formulations discussed along with a number of definitional issues and controversies that have dominated in the research literature. Early writers viewed perfectionism as a predominantly maladaptive unidimensional personality construct, almost always associated with psychopathology (e.g. Burns, 1980). Definitions of perfectionism encompassed various attributes such as excessively high standards (Horney, 1950; Ellis, 1962), a lack of flexibility in ideas (Ellis, 2002), dichotomous thinking (Ellis, 2002; Burns, 1980), poor self-esteem/self-acceptance (Horney, 1950; Missildine, 1963), hypersensitivity to criticism (Horney, 1950), overgeneralisation (Beck, 1976; Burns, 1980), being ruled by “should” statements (Horney, 1950; Burns, 1980) and an inability to gain satisfaction from one’s own accomplishments (Missildine, 1963; Weisinger & Lobsenz, 1981). Many of these attributes are still considered relevant to the most recent formulations that now dominate in the perfectionism literature. Early definitions often focussed on a dysfunctional cognitive style that was present in the dialogue of many highly perfectionistic individuals. Horney (1950) maintained that perfectionists were driven by an inner narrative that dictated what they ‘should’ and ‘should not’ do in a given situation. This harsh self-talk was purported to lead perfectionists to set themselves unrealistic and impossible standards, without considering the internal or external factors that may influence their achievement of such goals (Horney, 1950). An example of the all-encompassing and biased cognitions present in the inner dialogue of the perfectionist has been described by Ellis (2002); 10 “A person should be thoroughly competent, adequate and intelligent in all possible respects; the main goal and purpose of life is achievement and success; incompetence in anything whatsoever is an indication that a person is inadequate or valueless” (Ellis, 1962). Burns (1980) identified multiple cognitive distortions in perfectionism such as the presence of ‘all or nothing’ thinking, over-generalisations and frequent use of punishing ‘should’ statements. Burns (1980) suggested that individuals who were driven to pursue excellence were locked in an unhealthy and self-defeating cycle whereby they were prone to gauge their own self-worth according to their ability to achieve impossibly high standards of performance. The unhealthy tendencies of perfectionists were also identified by Pacht (1984) who questioned whether the concept of perfection could ever really exist. He suggested that striving for perfection was akin to striving for the impossible and therefore psychological problems were to be an expected consequence. For many years, the unidimensional view dominated and gave the impression that being a perfectionist was fraught with harmful and damaging consequences which would inevitably lead the individual into a downward spiral towards psychopathology. Unfortunately this view was not able to account for any of the positive attributes that had been noted in some perfectionistic individuals, such as being highly organised, conscientious and effective in meeting high standards. Following these observations, it became necessary to consider the possibility that there might also be individuals who were driven by high standards but who did not develop the problems that were experienced by some of the more extreme perfectionists. Although the setting of high standards was considered to be one of the fundamental traits characterising highly perfectionistic individuals (Burns, 1980; Hollender, 1965; Hamachek, 1978; Pacht, 1984), authors gradually realised that it wasn’t the setting of the high standards that was the problem, rather the tendency to make overly critical evaluations of ones’ performance in relation to these high standards (Frost et al, 1990). Frost and colleagues proclaimed that the associations between perfectionism and psychopathology were a product of the harsh evaluative tendencies that coincided with the setting of exceptionally high standards and that not all perfectionists reacted to these in the same manner. 11 A seminal article by Hamachek (1978) represented a significant shift in the way that perfectionism would come to be conceptualised and defined. This article suggested that it was possible to view perfectionism as embodying both maladaptive and adaptive traits. In his article, Hamachek identified two types of perfectionism that he termed; ‘normal’ and ‘neurotic’. He described normal perfectionists as “those who derive a real sense of pleasure from the labours of painstaking effort and who feel free to be less precise as the situation permits” (p.27) and conversely, neurotic perfectionists as “the sort of people whose efforts, even their best ones never seem quite good enough” and who “are unable to feel satisfaction because in their own eyes they never seem to do things good enough to warrant that feeling” (Hamachek, 1978,p.27). One of the key differences between these two conceptualisations and a factor that set adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists apart was identified as; possessing the flexibility to adjust ones’ standards depending on the situation and being able to express a sense of satisfaction form ones’ efforts. This was in stark contrast to neurotic perfectionists who seemed to possess an absence of such flexibility and derived little satisfaction from their endeavours. Adaptive perfectionism, in contrast to maladaptive perfectionism was believed to be driven by a desire for success (Hamachek, 1978) and was believed to be associated with characteristics such as; high personal standards, a high level of organisation, a desire to achieve personal goals (Slade & Owens, 1998), greater life satisfaction, positive affect (Chang, Watkins & Banks, 2004), conscientiousness (Cox, Enns & Clara, 2002; Enns, Cox, Sareen & Freeman, 2001) and higher academic attainment (Bieling, Israeli, Smith & Antony, 2003). When compared to maladaptive perfectionists, adaptive perfectionists were believed to ruminate less, be less susceptible to negative affectivity and engage in fewer self-critical evaluations in appraisal situations (Beiling, Summerfeldt, Israeli & Antony, 2004; Enns et al, 2001; Rhéaume, Freeston, Ladouceur, Bouchard, Gallant, Talbot, et al, 2000), see table 2.1. With the emergence of studies focussing on the adaptive/positive side of perfectionism, the research field grew and findings began to dispel the negative bias that had dominated the perfectionism literature for many years. Research focussing on the possibility of understanding and explaining perfectionism from a more positive perspective began to 12 emerge and the multidimensional perspective became recognised (Frost et al, 1990; Hewitt & Flett, 1991a, 1991b). The Differences between Adaptive (“Normal”) and Maladaptive Table 2.1 (“Neurotic”) Perfectionism taken from Hewitt and Flett (2002). Adaptive Perfectionism Able to experience satisfaction from Maladaptive Perfectionism ones’ endeavours Unable to experience pleasure from ones’ endeavours Flexibility to adjust standards Inflexibly to adjust standards Set achievable standards that are Sets unrealistically high standards that matched to strengths/limitations of the are not matched to strengths/limitation person of the person Focus is on striving for success Focus is on a fear of failure Attitude that is relaxed but careful Attitude that is tense/anxious Sense of self, not tied to the successful Sense of self-worth highly dependent completion of tasks on performance Timely completion of tasks Associated with procrastination Motivation to gain positive Motivation to avoid negative feedback/rewards consequences Failure associated with renewed efforts Balanced thinking Desire to excel A reasonable level of certainty about white thinking: perfectionism versus actions failure Failure associated with harsh selfcriticism Distorted cognitions e.g. black and Belief that one should excel Note. Table derived from Burns (1980), Hamachek (1978) and Pacht (1984) (Hewitt & Flett, 2002) 2.1.2 The multidimensional perspective The move towards a multidimensional perspective was one of the most significant developments in the perfectionism field. This perspective recognised both the personal and interpersonal dimensions of perfectionism as well as acknowledging both the 13 adaptive/positive and maladaptive/negative attributes. The early 1990s marked the arrival of two new methods of assessing perfectionism both named the Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (Frost, et al, 1990; Hewitt & Flett, 1991a). Table 2.2 The key features of the two Multidimensional Perfectionism Scales Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale Hewitt and Flett Multidimensional (MPS-F) Perfectionism Scale (MPS-HF) Authors Authors Frost, Marten, Lahart and Rosenblate (1990) Hewitt and Flett (1991b) Purpose/Focus Purpose/Focus Focusses on self-directed cognitions Focusses on interpersonal aspects associated with perfectionism as well as self-directed cognitions associated with perfectionism Measures six subscales/dimensions Measures three dimensions Personal Standards (PS) Self-Oriented Perfectionism (SOP) Concern over Mistakes (CM) Socially-Prescribed Perfectionism (SPP) Doubts about Actions (DA) Other-Oriented Perfectionism (OOP) Organisation (O) Parental Criticism (PC) Parental Expectations (PE) Number of items Number of items 35 items to measure the six subscales 45 items to measure the three Dimensions Scoring Scoring A total score can be derived from Scores are derived by totalling the Summing five out of the six subscales*. An responses for each of the three Adaptive perfectionism score can be dimensions, producing a score for each of the derived from summing PS and O** and a dimensions of perfectionism Maladaptive perfectionism score obtained from summing CM and DA or CM, DA, PC and PE*** * The Organisation subscale was found to have weak correlations with the other subscales and as such was excluded from the total perfectionism score (Frost et al, 1990)** This method of obtaining a measure of Adaptive Perfectionism has been supported by research (e.g. Harris, Pepper & Mack, 2008)*** This method of obtaining a measure of Maladaptive Perfectionism has been supported by previous research (e.g. Dunn, Gotwals, Dunn & Syrotuick, 2006; Frost et al, 1990; Harris et al, 2008; Wei, Mallinckrodt, Russell & Abraham 2004) 14 In developing their scale, Frost et al (1990) honed in on a number of key features that they felt typified the perfectionism construct. These included; the setting of excessively high standards, having doubts about the quality of one’s actions, an excessive concern over making mistakes, the influence of parents with regards to expectations and evaluations and finally a fixation on organisation and order. Frost and colleagues generated many new items for their scale as well as utilising items from two existing measures; the Burns Perfectionism Scale (BPS; Burns, 1983) and the Eating Disorders Inventory (EDI-P; Garner, Olmsted & Polivy, 1983). Sixty seven items were reduced down to thirty five statements and factor analyses resulted in the identification of six subscales; Personal Standards (PS), Concern over Mistakes (CM), Doubts about Actions (DA), Organisation (O) and finally two subscales relating to parental involvement – Parental Criticism (PC), and Parental Expectations (PE). To provide a separate scale of adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism, studies have typically combined the PS and the O subscales (adaptive perfectionism) and the CM and DA subscales (maladaptive perfectionism), (Dunn et al, 2006; Frost et al, 1990; Harris et al, 2008; Wei et al, 2004). The Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale has been used extensively to study a diverse range of psychopathological indicators, such as Obsessive Compulsive Disorder symptoms, Chronic fatigue syndrome, suicidal ideation, indecisiveness, erectile dysfunction and social phobia (Enns & Cox, 2002). The Hewitt and Flett Multidimensional scale (Hewitt & Flett, 1991a) differed from the Frost scale in that it focussed on the interpersonal aspects of perfectionism as well as selfdirected cognitions. These authors described three distinct dimensions; Self Oriented Perfectionism (SOP) which referred to the setting of exceptionally high standards for oneself, Socially Prescribed Perfectionism (SPP) which related to the perception of others having exceptionally high standards of oneself and the third dimension, Other-Oriented Perfectionism (OOP) which referred to an individual having exceptionally high standards for others and expecting perfection from them. From a total of one hundred and twenty two potential items, forty five items were chosen to assess the three dimensions. Initial testing of the MPS-HF provided good measures of reliability and validity (Hewitt & Flett, 1991b). Since its development the Hewitt & Flett Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale has been extensively used with a variety of clinical groups and a wide range of psychopathological indicators (Hewitt & Flett, 2002) e.g. depression, anxiety, suicidal ideation, self-esteem, obsessional symptoms and social adjustment difficulties (Enns & 15 Cox, 2002). It is now generally accepted that the socially prescribed dimension of perfectionism represents a maladaptive type of perfectionism that has been related to depression, anxiety and suicidal ideation (Enns & Cox, 2002). A lack of consensus surrounds how to categorise the self-oriented dimension proposed by Hewitt and Flett (1991a) with some authors supporting its association with positive personal attributes such as achievement in academic settings and elevated levels of positive affect (e.g. Molnar, Reker, Culp, Sadava & DeCourville, 2006) and other authors advocating an association with maladjustment (Hewitt and Flett, 2004). Although sharing the same name, the two Multidimensional Perfectionism Scales were developed from somewhat different perspectives; the MPS-F (Frost et al, 1990) focussing on self-directed intrapersonal perfectionism and the MPS-HF (Hewitt & Flett, 1991a) placing more emphasis on interpersonal elements of the perfectionism construct (Parker & Adkins, 1995b). Despite their differences, Frost, Heimberg, Holt, Mattia & Neubauer (1993) considered there to be a considerable degree of overlap between the two scales. These authors found that the nine dimensions (six from the MPS-F and three from the MPS-HF) could be reduced to a two factor solution which they labelled; “Maladaptive Evaluative Concerns” which was identified as reflecting the negative/maladaptive traits of perfectionism and “Positive Strivings” which reflected the positive/adaptive traits. Considerable empirical investigations examining the possible correlates of both types of perfectionism have been carried over out over the years in an attempt to validate the perfectionism construct as both adaptive and maladaptive. Although different labels (positive/negative, functional/dysfunctional, active/passive, normal/neurotic and healthy/unhealthy) have been used to refer to the two types of perfectionism, the majority of studies have utilised a combination of the original facets identified by Frost et al (1993), (Bieling, Israeli & Antony, 2004; Beiling et al, 2003; Chang et al, 2004; Cox et al, 2002; Dunkley, Blankstein, Masheb & Grillo, 2006; Dunkley, Zuroff & Blankstein, 2003; Enns et al, 2001; Hill, Huelsman, Furr et al, 2004; Lynd-Stevenson & Hearne, 1999; Parker & Stumpf, 1995; Rice, Ashby & Slaney, 1998; Suddarth & Slaney, 2001). Slade and Owens’ (1998) Dual Process Model has provided a theoretical explanation for the distinction between the dimensions of adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism. The model was based on Skinner’s (1968) theories of positive and negative reinforcement. Slade and Owens focussed on the motivational tendencies driving the perfectionistic 16 behaviours and suggested that there were fundamental differences in the way that perfectionists approached tasks. Positive or adaptive perfectionists possessed a desire to ‘approach’ (pursue) situations or challenges whereas negative perfectionists were motivated to “avoid” (escape) situations. Positive perfectionists were believed to gain satisfaction, gratification and even elation in response to success whereas negative perfectionists were seen to be reluctant to ‘let themselves go’ possibly due to an awareness that “failure could be just around the corner” (Slade & Owens, 1998). Slade and Owens even went as far as to say that positive perfectionism was considered to be healthy and advantageous for the individual and therefore should be encouraged and promoted. Negative perfectionism, on the other hand, was viewed as unhealthy personality trait and something that should definitely be eluded and remedied. Within the model, individuals were considered to be jointly motivated by both the positive and negative aspects of perfectionism. Much of the support for this model was derived from the literature on eating disorders and field of sport psychology (e.g. Frost & Henderson, 1991; Terry-Short, Owens, Slade & Dewey, 1995). The multidimensional approach has not been received without criticism. The factor structure of the Frost et al (1990) MPS has been repeatedly questioned (Parker & Adkins, 1995; Rhéaume, Freeston, Ladouceur et al, 1995; Stober, 1998) and various suggestions have been made to adjust the number of factors (e.g. Stober, 1998; Stumpf & Parker, 2000). In terms of the Hewitt and Flett (1991a) MPS, the main criticism has been that some of the dimensions are not relevant in a clinical setting, specifically when considering the associations between perfectionism and psychopathology (Shafran, Cooper & Fairburn, 2002). Despite the criticisms, these two conceptualisations represent two of the most widely utilised perfectionism scales in both clinical and non-clinical settings. 2.1.3 Definitional Issues and Controversies There is no doubt that the two multidimensional perfectionism scales have been instrumental in generating considerable research in the perfectionism field, however, the absence of a universally accepted conceptualisation/definition has led to some confusion and inconsistency in the research literature and has meant that researchers have needed to be very clear about the specific conceptualisations and methods that they are utilising so that the results of studies can be interpreted correctly. Two particular concerns have arisen in the research field; firstly, what is gained from subdividing perfectionism into its two 17 component parts (adaptive and maladaptive)? And secondly, can perfectionism ever really be described as a positive construct? These two themes have infiltrated the perfectionism literature over the past few decades and despite the emergence of yet more conceptualisations in recent years, still continue to be debated. To subdivide perfectionism the majority of studies have used either a dimensional or group based approach. The dimensional approach has been described as one where the facets of perfectionism have been amalgamated to produce two independent dimensions e.g. labelled ‘perfectionistic strivings’ (positive features of perfectionism such as high personal standards and self-oriented perfectionism) and ‘perfectionistic concerns’ (maladaptive features of perfectionism such as concern over mistakes, doubts about actions, perceived discrepancy between high expectations and actual achievements and socially prescribed perfectionism). The group based approach involves combining the elements of perfectionism to produce two groups of perfectionists e.g. labelled healthy and unhealthy perfectionists (Stoeber & Otto, 2006). Stoeber and Otto (2006) conducted an extensive review of thirty five studies that followed either a dimensional or group based approach and on the basis of their findings developed a further conceptual framework for defining and conceptualising perfectionism. The Tripartite Model was based on an amalgamation of elements from both the dimensional and group based approaches. Three groups were identified; ‘healthy perfectionists’ who were identified as having “high perfectionistic strivings” and “low perfectionistic concerns”; ‘unhealthy perfectionists’ who were identified as possessing “high perfectionistic strivings” and “high perfectionistic concerns” and ‘non-perfectionists’ who were identified as having “low perfectionistic strivings” and “low perfectionistic concerns”. Stoeber and Otto (2006) felt that ‘perfectionistic concerns’ may be the crucial factor differentiating a healthy pursuit of high standards from the clinical forms of perfectionism. 18 Table 2.1.3 The Tripartite Model of Perfectionism (Stoeber & Otto, 2006) Subtype of perfectionism Perfectionistic Perfectionistic concerns** strivings* Non-perfectionism1 Low Low Healthy perfectionism High Low Unhealthy perfectionism High High *Perfectionistic Strivings – positive features of perfectionism **Perfectionistic Concerns – negative features of perfectionism The motivations behind the need to subdivide perfectionism appear to be related to the desire to find out if there is a healthy type of perfectionism that has the potential to bring with it particular benefits to health and wellbeing (this will be discussed in more detail in part 2 of this chapter). Unfortunately it would appear that a lack of consensus in the literature has made it difficult to say with any certainty that there may be a positive and healthy form of perfectionism. In discussing their theoretical framework, Stoeber and Otto (2006) felt that despite incorporating aspects of the adaptive perfectionism traits into their model, that it would be too early (due to the lack of consensus in the research literature) to describe perfectionism as adaptive or functional and felt the terms ‘healthy’ and ‘unhealthy’ were more appropriate. The work of Stoeber and Otto (2006) represented a tangible method of amalgamating some of the existing conceptualisations to produce a new formulation for explaining the dimensions of perfectionism, however, as more methods continue to emerge (e.g. Egan et al, 2011; Gaudreau & Thompson, 2010) it has yet to be established whether have added clarity to the situation or further complicate matters by providing yet more ways of defining and subdividing the perfectionism construct. From a treatment perspective, being able to subdivide perfectionism to be able to identify the relative levels of adaptive and maladaptive dimensions within an individual may have important implications. Flett & Hewitt (2006) suggest that some perfectionists may have specific difficulties that stem from the competing tendencies associated with the desire to both approach and avoid situations, therefore it could be argued that finding out the 1 Although not made explicit in their model, Stoeber and Otto also identified individuals with low levels of perfectionistic strivings (adaptive traits) and high levels of perfectionistic concerns (maladaptive traits) to fall within the category of non-perfectionism 19 relative contribution of each type of perfectionism be particularly important. The need to gauge the relative contribution of both adaptive and maladaptive tendencies has been supported by Sorotzkin (1998) who identified the coexistence of both depressive and narcissistic tendencies in many perfectionists and suggested that individuals may struggle from a treatment point of view because they are likely to have cognitive and behavioural conflicts that result from the two competing tendencies. The second issue of whether perfectionism can justifiably be classified as an adaptive or healthy trait has not been resolved and therefore remains a potential problem from both a theoretical and practical standpoint. From a personality perspective, adaptive perfectionism has been associated with the personality dimensions of conscientiousness (Hill, McIntire & Bacharach, 1997; Stumpf & Parker, 2000), extraversion and openness (Ulu & Tezer, 2010). This has led to the suggestion that what has been described as adaptive or positive perfectionism is simply just a type of conscientiousness of an achievement striving dimension of personality (e.g. Flett & Hewitt, 2006). Flett and Hewitt have questioned whether perfectionism can ever be considered healthy as they have failed to identify any empirical evidence that has convinced them that the adaptive dimension of perfectionism may be related to positive emotions such as fulfilment, elation and contentment. Similar inconsistencies have been noted when looking at research that has explored the relationship between perfectionism and life-satisfaction (Enns et al, 2001; Mitchelson & Burns, 1998). In support of a healthy and adaptive subtype of perfectionism, Slade and Owens (1998) have provided suggestions for the motivations behind the different perfectionism dimensions. Adaptive perfectionists, they argue, are motivated to act and behave in particular ways because they are driven by a desire for success. Flett and Hewitt (2006) have argued against this suggestion, claiming that Slade & Owens’ explanation oversimplifies the underlying thought processes of adaptive perfectionists. Their belief (Flett and Hewitt) is that if an adaptive or positive type of perfectionism exists, then the underlying motivations are fuelled jointly by “a desire for success and a fear of failure”, (p. 481). Slade and Owens (1998) have also maintained that adaptive perfectionists are able to deal with setbacks and achievement failures, however, Flett and Hewitt (2006) have also disputed this suggestion, stating, from their own research that self-oriented perfectionists (often considered to represent a more adaptive form of perfectionism) may be at risk of 20 developing depression when they experience achievement setbacks of failures (Hewitt and Flett, 2002). There is a considerable body of research that has found associations between the adaptive dimension of perfectionism and negative outcomes such as higher levels of perceived hassles (Dunkley, Blankstein, Halsall et al, 2000), decreased levels of wellbeing and perceived social support networks (Hill et al, 2004) as well as negative affect, experienced as depression, neuroticism and anxiety (Bieling et al, 2004; Cox et al, 2002; Enns et al, 2001). After a critical review of the literature looking at whether perfectionism can bring with it benefits to health, Greenspon (2000) concluded there to be “no factual or theoretical basis for such a claim” (p.197). He went on to assert that “the recent broad acceptance of the term healthy perfectionism is based neither on logical argument nor on scientific reasoning, but rather on uncritical acceptance of assertions made in the literature on perfectionism” (p. 202). Stoeber and Otto (2006) suggest that the situation of whether perfectionism can be considered healthy and adaptive cannot be resolved because of a number of ambiguities in the research literature all of which all point to a lack of consistency across studies; firstly, studies have utilised a multitude of different labels, features and combinations of features to define and conceptualise perfectionism. Secondly, studies have used either a group based or dimensional approach to subdividing perfectionism into adaptive/healthy and maladaptive/unhealthy components and finally, not all studies have found an association between the adaptive/healthy dimension of perfectionism and positive characteristics and there are some studies that have achieved mixed results, i.e. an association with both positive and negative characteristics, (e.g. Bieling et al, 2003; Cox et al, 2002; Dunkley et al 2000; Enns et al, 2001). It has been generally accepted that research linking the adaptive/positive forms of perfectionism with potentially positive outcomes has not been as consistent as research that has linked the maladaptive/negative forms of perfectionism with various negative outcomes (see part 2 of the present chapter). Some believe that this may be due to the possible overlap between the dimensions of positive and negative perfectionism¸ for example Stoeber and Otto (2006) have highlighted the fact that research focussing on the adaptive form of perfectionism may be compromised by a coexisting level of maladaptive 21 perfectionism and therefore correlations between adaptive perfectionism and negative outcome may become over inflated. Clearly a resolution of whether a healthy form of perfectionism really exists needs to be reached. The implications of identifying a so called adaptive/positive/healthy/functional form of perfectionism leading to positive outcomes for the individual may have positive implications in the management and treatment of extreme forms of perfectionism and accompanying psychopathology (Flett & Hewitt, 2006). Before we can fully accept that an adaptive form of perfectionism exists it seems that we would need to be able to say unequivocally that what has been described as ‘adaptive perfectionism’ constitutes a distinct subtype of the perfectionism construct and not simply an extreme form of achievement striving or conscientiousness. On the positive side, the lack of consensus in the research literature has led to the development of a number of recent conceptualisations that may have helped to shed some light on these definitional issues and controversies. 2.1.4 Current conceptualisations On the positive side, the lack of consensus in the research literature has led to the development of a number of conceptualisations that have gained popularity in recent years. At present, three of the most utilised conceptualisations in the research literature are the 2 x 2 model (Gaudreau and Thompson, 2010), a Cognitive Behavioural Model of Clinical Perfectionism (Shafran, Cooper & Fairburn, 2002) and the Transdiagnostic Model (Shafran, Egan & Wade, 2010). The 2 x 2 Model of Dispositional Perfectionism In developing their model, Gaudreau and Thompson (2010) felt that previous approaches had focussed solely on the associated outcomes of the core facets of perfectionism rather than how the dimensions were structured and additionally how these two dimensions might be integrated within each individual. To address this shortfall, Gaudreau and Thompson formulated a model that focussed on the potential integration of the core dimensions of perfectionism. Conceptually the model was similar to the Tripartite Model of Perfectionism (Stoeber & Otto, 2006) in that it recognised and supported a need to address the interactive effects of the two dimensions of perfectionism (adaptive and maladaptive) rather than concentrate on the core facets on perfectionism individually. Two general dimensions were identified; Evaluative Concerns Perfectionism (ECP) and 22 Personal Standards Perfectionism (PSP). ECP has been described as “a socially prescribed tendency to perceive that others are exerting pressure to be perfect, combined with a propensity to evaluate oneself harshly and to doubt one’s capacity to progress towards elevated standards” and PSP has been described as “the self-oriented tendency to set highly demanding standards and to consciously strive for their attainment”, (Gaudreau & Thompson p. 532). The focus of the model was on the within-person combinations of these two broad dimensions. Table 2.4 The 2 x 2 Model of Dispositional Perfectionism (Gaudreau & Thompson, 2010) EVALUATIVE CONCERNS PERFECTIONISM ** LOW HIGH HIGH STANDARDS MIXED PERFECTIONISM PERFECTIONISM PURE EVALUATIVE LOW PERSONAL STANDARDS PERFECTIONISM * PURE PERSONAL NON-PERFECTIONISM CONCERNS PERFECTIONISM *Personal Standards Perfectionism – encompasses more of the adaptive traits of perfectionism **Evaluative Concerns Perfectionism – encompasses more of the maladaptive traits of perfectionism The model has proposed four subtypes of dispositional perfectionism; the first, nonperfectionism, refers to individuals who possess low levels of both personal standards perfectionism and evaluative concerns perfectionism. Such individuals have been described as not being directed by perfectionistic strivings and do not feel that significant others and expecting them to meet high standards. The second subtype, pure personal standards perfectionism, refers to an internally regulated subtype of perfectionism which according to Gaudreau and Thompson (2010) is (the category) “at the heart of the debate 23 about the healthy or unhealthy nature of perfectionism” (p. 533), where individuals possess high levels of personal standards perfectionism but low levels of evaluative concerns perfectionism. The third category, pure evaluative concerns perfectionism, describes individuals who have a type of externally driven perfectionism whereby the individual is primarily influenced by pressures inherent in the social environment (low personal standards perfectionism/high evaluative concerns perfectionism). The final category, mixed perfectionism refers to a partially internally regulated category of perfectionism which is characterised by individuals who have high levels of both evaluative concerns perfectionism and personal standards perfectionism. These individuals are influenced jointly by the perceived pressure from others as well as the need to strive and achieve for themselves. Although sharing a number of similarities with the tripartite model of perfectionism (Stoeber & Otto, 2006), the Gaudreau and Thompson (2010) model does have one fundamental difference which concerns the dimension of non-perfectionism; in the tripartite model there are two formulations for non-perfectionism; firstly an amalgamation of low levels of both ECP and PSP (similar to the 2 x 2 model) but also a combination of low PSP and high ECP (which Gaudreau and Thompson have labelled “pure evaluative concerns perfectionism”). Gaudreau and Thompson suggest that it is impossible to label the second category as non-perfectionism because the “two subtypes are etiologically and functionally distinct” (p. 533). Testing of the 2 x 2 model (by Gaudreau & Thompson, 2010) has revealed that the subtype of pure evaluative concerns perfectionism was associated with lower general positive affect, lower academic self-determination, lower academic goal progress, lower academic satisfaction and higher negative affect when compared to the subtype of nonperfectionism. Further to this, the subtype of pure evaluative concerns perfectionism produced the most negative outcomes when compared to all the other subtype of perfectionism. These findings are contrary to the findings of Stoeber and Otto (2006) who identified a subtype possessing high levels of both perfectionistic striving and perfectionistic concerns to (which matches the Gaudreau and Thompson category of mixed perfectionism) to be the most unhealthy and maladaptive type of perfectionism. A potential rational for the category of ‘pure evaluative concerns’ being more maladaptive and unhealthy than the category of ‘mixed perfectionism’ has been proposed by recent 24 research (Altstötter-Gleich, Gerstenberg & Brand, 2012) that has explored the underlying functions of the ‘perfectionistic strivings’ and ‘perfectionistic concerns’ dimensions of perfectionism. Findings indicated that whilst ‘perfectionistic concerns’ represented an inherent vulnerability factor due to an underlying relationship with stress related processes, ‘perfectionistic strivings’ was found to have a potentially protective or buffering effect. If this is true, then it makes sense that possessing high levels of both evaluative concerns perfectionism and personal standards perfectionism (Gaudreau and Thompson, 2010) would be considered more adaptive overall, because the high levels of the adaptive perfectionism traits could potentially or neutralise of cancel out the deleterious effects of the maladaptive dimensions. It then follows, as Gaudreau and Thompson’s model has supported, that the category of pure evaluative concerns perfectionism (low PSP, high ECP) would be more maladaptive as the negative consequences of the high levels of maladaptive perfectionism are not buffered by any of the adaptive traits. Focussing on the potential adaptiveness of perfectionism, Gaudreau and Thompson (2010) found the subtype of pure personal standards perfectionism (high PSP/low ECP) to be associated with the most favourable outcomes (when compared with non-perfectionists) which included higher levels of; self-determination, academic satisfaction, academic goal progress and general positive affect. These results support the association between positive perfectionism and possible benefits to psychological wellbeing. These results also support the dualistic model proposed by Slade and Owens (1998) purporting a positive type of perfectionism being associated with a willingness to approach challenges and responsibilities. A small number of studies, predominantly in the sport domain, have tested and supported the 2 x 2 model of dispositional perfectionism (Cumming & Duda, 2012; Gaudreau & Verner-Filon, 2012; Hill, 2013). The 2 x 2 conceptualisation, focussing on both the adaptive and maladaptive domains of the perfectionism construct appear to have proved beneficial in this context because there seems to have been a maladaptive bias when addressing many of the difficulties concerning perfectionism in sport (Stoeber, 2014). Although some authors have only provided partial support for the model (e.g. Hill & Davis, 2014) most would agree that it represents a useful framework through which to understand and explain the interactive effects of the different components of perfectionism. 25 Cognitive Behavioural Model of Clinical Perfectionism Broadening and supporting the area of clinical perfectionism, Shafran et al, (2002) have developed a conceptualisation of clinical perfectionism encompassing a cognitive behavioural framework. According to these authors, clinical perfectionism within a cognitive behavioural perspective represents a unidimensional construct focussing on; “the overdependence of self-evaluation on the determined pursuit of personally demanding, self-imposed, standards in at least one highly salient domain, despite adverse consequences”, (Shafran et al, 2002). Although it has been suggested that at least one domain may be affected, Shafran et al (2002) state that clinical perfectionism has the potential to affect multiple life domains. With clinical perfectionism the main focus has been concerned with the distorted way that individuals evaluate their personal standards and associated performance. If self-imposed standards are not achieved, this is interpreted as a personal failure with harsh self-criticism likely to ensue. If on the other hand, standards are achieved, the individual is likely to reevaluate them as not being demanding enough in the first instance. Perfectionists are considered to spend a disproportionate amount of time attending to their failures and not really noticing or congratulating themselves when they have done a good job or been successful at their endeavours (Shafran et al, 2002). According to Shafran and colleagues the dysfunctional consequences of clinical perfectionism are endured because “the person’s self-evaluation is contingent on the pursuit of attainment of their goals” (p. 778). This suggests that an individuals’ self-belief and self-worth are inextricably linked to their achievement of their goals. The unpleasant consequences, according to Shafran et al are tolerated because they provide feedback and confirmation to the perfectionist that they are continuing to push themselves (Shafran et al, 2002). Within the clinical conceptualisation, Shafran et al (2002) have focussed on a number of cognitive processes that they consider contribute to the maintenance of perfectionism e.g. a morbid fear of failure, dichotomous thinking, the need for self-control, harsh evaluation of performance (negative self-evaluation), discounting of successes and the reappraisal of standards as being too low if they are reached. Historically, cognitive processes have been implicated in the maintenance of perfectionism. Hollender (1965), for example, observed 26 that perfectionists were prone to selectively attend to certain features of their surroundings. He stated that the individual is “constantly on the alert for what is wrong and seldom focuses on what is right. He looks so intently for defects or flaws that he lives his life as though he were an inspector at the end of a production line” (p. 95). In developing their model, Shafran et al (2002) noted the role of perfectionism in the aetiology, continuation and development of certain psychopathological states such as anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa (Fairburn, Cooper, Doll & Welch, 1999; Lilenfeld, Stein, Bulik, Strober, Plotnicov, Pollice, et al, 2000). The coexistence of perfectionism with various Axis I and Axis II disorders such as eating disorders, depression and obsessive-compulsive personality disorder have also been identified within the cognitive behavioural model of clinical perfectionism (Shafran et al, 2002; Shafran et al, 2003). In terms of treatment outcomes, these authors have noted there to be evidence of perfectionism being counterproductive in relation to the effective management and treatment of depression (Blatt, Zuroff, Bondi, Sanislow & Pilkonis, 1998). Treatment issues will be discussed further in chapter 2, part 2. Shafran et al (2002) have taken issue with the multidimensional approach to measuring and conceptualising perfectionism. These authors feel that perfectionism as defined by the multidimensional methods presents a conceptualisation that measures too broad a range of features than those realistically encountered by clinicians. According to Shafran and colleagues, only some of the dimensions have relevance in a clinical setting such as “selforiented perfectionism” (from the MPS-HF), the “personal standards” subscale and some, though not all items of the “concern over mistakes” subscale (of the MPS-F). The other dimensions are considered by these authors to detract from the clinical picture. Although noting their contribution to the literature on perfectionism, Hewitt et al (2003) have criticised the definition of clinical perfectionism put forth by Shafran et al (2002). These authors (Hewitt et al, 2003) have identified a number of concerns with the clinical approach; Firstly they take issue with Shafran and colleagues’ suggestion that the interpersonal dimensions of perfectionism are not relevant to clinical perfectionism, Hewitt et al (2003) have argued that the multidimensional orientation can help to understand concepts such as “fear of failure”, something that is central to the clinical model of perfectionism proposed by Shafran et al (2002). Secondly, Hewitt et al (2003) argue that 27 the clinical model makes only limited references to cognitive processes despite presenting a cognitive framework for conceptualising perfectionism. They have argued that the model has not taken into consideration other relevant research focussing on cognitive processes such as rumination (Frost & Henderson, 1991; Frost, Trepanier, Brown, Heimberg, Juster, Makris, & Leung, 1997) and the individual differences in automatic thoughts (Flett, Hewitt, Blankstein & Gray, 1998). Finally Hewitt et al (2003) have suggested that the clinical model should not place its focus on only one significant life domain, “although concerns about being imperfect in just one life domain can be quite distressing for individuals, we believe that even greater dysfunction is likely among people who strive for perfection in multiple domains, despite negative consequences” (Hewitt et al, 2003, p. 1228-1229), and “by definition, the study of perfectionism as a personality trait implies generalisation across situations and life domains” (p. 1229). In response to the criticisms, a revised version of the cognitive-behavioural model (Shafran, Egan & Wade, 2010) considered the role of performance related behaviours and their function in the maintenance cycle of clinical perfectionism. Such behaviours have been identified as procrastination, avoidance and excessive checking of performance. The Transdiagnostic Model The cognitive behavioural model of clinical perfectionism (Shafran et al, 2002; Shafran et al, 2010) paved the way for understanding perfectionism from a transdiagnostic perspective. Over the past two decades perfectionism has repeatedly been associated with the cause, maintenance and progression of various adjustment difficulties such as anxiety, depression and eating disorders (e.g. Antony, Purdon, Huta & Swinson, 1998; Flett, Besser, Davis & Hewitt, 2003; Shafran et al, 2002; Sutander-Pinnock, Woodside, Carter et al, 2003). Based on an extensive review of the available literature, Egan, Wade and Shafran (2011) formulated the conceptualisation of perfectionism as a transdiagnostic process. Transdiagnostic literally means “across diagnosis” and translates as an approach that concentrates on several symptoms and trends that seem to occur across several diagnostic classifications. Their formulation has gone beyond the basic definition (of a transdiagnostic process) to also incorporate risk and maintaining factors. Egan and colleagues have identified a number of important factors that provide support for their formulation of perfectionism. Firstly perfectionism has been found to be elevated 28 across a variety of disorders including depression (e.g. Blatt, 1995; Hewitt and Flett, 1991), eating disorders (e.g. Lilenfeld et al, 2000; Sassaroli, Lauro, Ruggiero, Mauri, Vinai, & Frost, 2008), obsessive compulsive disorder (e.g. Frost, Novara & Rhéaume, 2002), panic disorder (e.g. Antony et al, 1998), anxiety disorders (e.g. Frost & Dibartolo, 2002) and personality disorders (e.g. Halmi, Tozzi, Thornton, et al, 2005). Secondly, perfectionism has been identified as being an explanatory and underlying factor for the cooccurrence of various disorders. This has been supported by research looking at perfectionism, anxiety and mood disorders (Bieling et al, 2004). Thirdly, perfectionism has been identified as a maintaining factor in the cognitive conceptualisations of various disorders such as eating disorders (Fairburn, Cooper & Shafran, 2003) and social phobia (Heimberg, Juster, Hope & Mattia, 1995). This is also supported by the model of “Clinical Perfectionism” (Shafran et al, 2002) which identifies perfectionism as a maintaining factor for a wide variety of psychopathologies. Finally, evidence from studies addressing the impact of perfectionism on treatment outcomes has found that perfectionism can have a negative impact on treatment outcomes e.g. in the case of eating disorders, raised perfectionism scores have been related to a worse prognosis after admission (Bizuel, Sadowsky & Rigaud, 2001) and treatment drop-out rate (Sutandar-Pinnock et al, 2003). In relation to treatment for depression, data from the National Institute of Mental Health, Treatment of Depression Collaborative Research Program identified perfectionism to predict a worse response to treatment across all patient groups when tested post treatment and at follow up (NIMH, Elkin, Shea, Watkins, Imber, Sotsky, Collins et al, 1989). According to Macedo, Marques & Pereira (2014), viewing perfectionism as a transdiagnostic process has implications in terms of helping individuals who are suffering from the extreme or maladaptive consequences of being highly perfectionistic. The result of treating one area of dysfunction is likely to have a knock on effect in relieving symptoms in multiple areas of an individuals’ life. A treatment approach that embodies multiple domains rather than focusing on a single disorder has been identified as being a promising avenue for the treatment of perfectionism (Egan, Shafran & Wade, 2010) and has also been highlighted as a more flexible and transferable approach (McHugh, Murray & Barlow, 2009). 29 2.1.5 Conclusion to part 1 The way that perfectionism has been defined and conceptualised has been debated considerably over the past few decades. The major shift in the 1990s was a move from a predominantly negatively oriented unidimensional perspective to a more balanced view; identifying and supporting both the adaptive and maladaptive facets of the perfectionism construct within a multidimensional framework. Other ways of defining and conceptualising perfectionism have emerged in recent years and there are currently a number of dominant conceptualisations that are represented within the research literature, predominantly focussed on viewing perfectionism in a clinical context. On the positive side, the plethora of conceptualisations/definitions has meant a huge increase in this research area and led to multiple studies purporting to add clarity and support for the existing formulations as well as studies that have led to the development of yet more methods of defining perfectionism. The downside of this, however, has been a level of confusion for researchers concerning which definitions and formulations to choose. Perhaps it is the case that the multiplicity of conceptualisations has resulted in further confusion and actually diverted attention away from reaching a universally accepted definition? From a practical point of view, considering health and treatment implications, the particular definition or conceptualisation employed can have profound consequences for treating individuals who are struggling to deal with clinical perfectionism or extreme levels of maladaptive perfectionism. The problem has been compounded by the fact that there is also no recognised and accepted method of subdividing the construct in terms of the trait dimensions of adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism and still no agreement reached over the possible adaptiveness of the perfectionism construct. With the clinical and transdiagnostic approaches gaining prominence, and the suggestion that there may be fundamentally distinct cognitive and behavioural processes that underlie the two dimensions of perfectionism (adaptive and maladaptive), perhaps we are at last getting closer to reaching an agreement about the most comprehensive approach to defining the personality construct of perfectionism. 30 2.2 The Relationship between Perfectionism, Health and Health Behaviours The research area concerning perfectionism and health has been dominated by studies that have supported the association between the maladaptive dimensions of perfectionism and negative health outcomes (both psychological and physical). This review intends to provide a synopsis of these areas as well as bring together a number of other research areas that may have implications for the perfectionism – health relationship, these include; a summary of the relationship between perfectionism and stress, the self-presentational aspect of perfectionism in relation to health, perfectionism and health behaviours, treating perfectionists and finally a return to the debate over whether there is an adaptive type of perfectionism that can be beneficial to health and wellbeing. The intended purpose of this literature review is to bring together a number of carefully selected strands of research that have not been brought together before, to answer two main questions; 1. Do maladaptive perfectionists represent a high risk group in terms of health and wellbeing? 2. Is there an adaptive type of perfectionism that is beneficial to health and wellbeing? By providing answers to these questions, the intention is to identify a potential gap in the research literature and provide justification for exploring whether perfectionists actively take steps to look after their health and wellbeing as well as the types of factors that may interfere with their ability to do so. Additionally by providing support for there being a potentially adaptive or protective aspect to the perfectionism construct, this will provide valuable information concerning how these specific traits can be fostered and nurtured to help maladaptive perfectionists take better care of themselves. 2.2.1 Perfectionism and Psychopathology There is a well-established relationship between the maladaptive elements of the perfectionism construct and negative psychological functioning (see Blatt, 1995; Chang, 2003; Pacht, 1985; Flett & Hewitt, 2002; Shafran & Mansell, 2001). Perfectionism has been identified as playing a pivotal role in the aetiology, continuation and progression of a range of psychopathological disorders such as depression, anxiety and eating disorders (Shafran & Mansell, 2001; Shafran et al, 2002). 31 The transdiagnostic model of perfectionism (Egan et al, 2011) described earlier in this chapter has identified an increase in perfectionism across a range of disorders and has identified that perfectionism increases susceptibility to certain conditions such as eating disorders. Perfectionism has been found to predict treatment outcomes for a range of disorders including depression, social anxiety and Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (for a review see Egan et al, 2011). Perfectionism has also been identified as a potential amplifier of suicide risk (see Flett et al, 2014) and furthermore, it has been identified that in an attempt to self-present a perfect and flawless persona, perfectionists often conceal the extent of their difficulties from others which makes it difficult to gauge the extent of the problem (Flett et al, 2014). Depressive disorders Blatt (1995) was one of the early researchers to acknowledge the potentially harmful role of perfectionism in depression. One of the main problems for perfectionists seems to be that they become embroiled in a self-defeating cycle of pushing themselves continually to achieve impossible standards, whilst never really acknowledging their successes or feeling any sense of satisfaction from their efforts (Blatt, 1995). As a result, perfectionists become burdened with the constant pressure of trying to avoid failure, which according to Blatt, will inevitably lead to increases in negative affect and distress and make them vulnerable to depression. Enns & Cox (2002) have also identified the presence of exceptionally high standards to affect the quantity and intensity of perceived failures with in turn often leads to depression. A more recent examination of the relationship between perfectionism and depression has identified that the two dimensions of perfectionism may be differentially related to depressive symptoms (Flett, Hewitt, Blankstein & Mosher, 1995). The strongest association between perfectionism and depression has been demonstrated for the dimension of socially prescribed perfectionism2. Socially prescribed perfectionists feel that standards and expectations are being imposed upon them by external sources (Hewitt & Flett, 1990, 1991a, 1991b). Such is the need for these perfectionists to gain the esteem and acceptance of others, that they often feel the only course of action is to push themselves harder and harder to meet these high standards. Individuals who experience this type of 2 Socially prescribed perfectionism is one of the perfectionism dimensions formulated by Hewitt and Flett, 1991a. This perfectionism dimension is considered to represent a maladaptive type of perfectionism. 32 perfectionism often have the perception that these external expectations are out of their control and as a consequence seem more likely to experience feelings of helplessness and hopelessness which are often related to depression and suicidal ideation. Research supporting this notion has been demonstrated using both clinical and non-clinical samples (Enns & Cox, 1999; Hewitt & Flett, 1991a; Hewitt, Flett & Ediger, 1996). Self-oriented perfectionism, (involving individuals’ imposing unrealistically high standards and expectations upon themselves) is a type of perfectionism that has been associated with both positive and negative outcomes. Although this dimension of perfectionism has been associated with improved psychological functioning (Frost et al, 1993), there has also been the suggestion that under certain circumstances, (i.e. the presence of negative life events) this type of perfectionism can become maladaptive (Hewitt & Flett, 1991b). The diathesis-stress model of perfectionism and depression has been proposed as a potential explanation for the disparity in findings concerning the dimension of self-oriented perfectionism (Hewitt & Flett, 1993) and depression. According to the model, when perfectionism combines with life stress, it has the potential to become maladaptive, leading to depressive symptomatology (Hewitt & Flett, 1991b). There has been considerable support for the model (e.g. Hewitt & Flett, 1993; Flett et al, 1995) and findings suggest that self-oriented perfectionism may have adaptive health enhancing qualities up to a point (when daily stress levels are at a minimum), however, if stress levels increase for any reason, this may increase the risk of developing depressive symptoms or enhancing existing psychopathology (Hewitt & Flett, 1993; Flett et al, 1995). 2.6.2: Anxiety Disorders There is a considerable amount of research that has explored the relationship between perfectionism and anxiety disorders such as Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD) and social phobia (Antony et al, 1998). Perfectionism has been identified as a risk factor in the development of OCD (The Obsessive Compulsive Cognitions Working Group, 2003) and as levels of OCD increase, researchers have identified an associated rise in levels of perfectionism (Reuther, Davis, Rudy et al, 2013). It would appear that OCD sufferers may find themselves in a vicious cycle where the desire for perfectionism and certainty in their actions leads them to have increased doubts about their actions, which leads to a rise in uncertainty and then more checking behaviours. Frost & Steketee, (1997) have stated that “doubting the quality of one’s actions has been a hallmark of OCD and indeed may reflect 33 symptoms of patients checking rituals”, (p. 294). A similar pattern is evident for social anxiety. The primary insecurity behind social anxiety is that social situations have the potential to be unsafe and therefore individuals rationalise that the only way to stay safe and to avoid social humiliation is to set very high standards of performance to work towards (Heimberg et al, 1995). Unfortunately for these individuals, the standards set are often completely out of reach and this often results in an increase in worry about achieving the expected standard, which in turn reinforces the core beliefs that are driving the disorder (Shafran & Mansell, 2002). In terms of addressing how the adaptive and maladaptive dimensions of perfectionism are related to anxiety disorders, research has supported the presence of high levels of the maladaptive perfectionism traits in both social anxiety (Juster, Heimberg, Frost et al, 1996; Faccenda 1996; Saboonchi & Lundh, 1997) and OCD (Bardone-Cone, Wonderlich, Frost, Bulik, Mitchell, Uppala et al, 2007. One of the most significant findings for anxiety disorders is that they appear to show little elevation in the achievement striving/positive dimension of perfectionism when compared to individuals with depressive disorders (Bardone- Cone et al, 2007). A number of studies have specifically addressed this by comparing groups of individuals with anxiety and depressive disorders. Results have indicated that both groups show similarities on the maladaptive dimensions of perfectionism but when compared on the achievement striving/positive dimension, individuals with depressive disorders had much higher scores than the anxiety disorders group (Hewitt & Flett, 1991b; Norman, Davies, Nicholson, Cortese & Malla, 1998). Referring back to the conceptualisations and definitions of perfectionism discussed earlier and specifically the formulations that have considered the interactive and within-person combinations of both adaptive and maladaptive dimensions (Gaudreau & Thompson, 2010; Stoeber & Otto, 2006), it may be that the psychological burden of anxiety disorders is greater than for depressive disorders because of the interactive combination of high levels of the maladaptive dimension accompanied by low levels of the adaptive dimension. For depressive disorders perhaps there is some compensation to having high levels of both adaptive and maladaptive dimensions of perfectionism. 34 Eating disorders There is a long history of perfectionism being implicated as an important factor in the eating disorders literature from both a theoretical and phenomenological perspective (Shafran & Mansell, 2001). Perfectionism has been related to the onset, continuation and progression of both anorexia nervosa (AN) and bulimia nervosa (BN), (Bardone-Cone et al, 2007; Bieling et al, 2004; Fairburn et al, 2003) and has repeatedly been identified as a key influence for individuals trying to attain the ideal body weight (Goldner, Cockell, & Srikameswaran, 2002). Research involving both clinical and non-clinical samples has identified AN sufferers to have elevated perfectionism scores compared to healthy controls (Bastiani, Rao, Weltzin & Kaye, 1995; Slade & Dewey, 1986) and both the adaptive and maladaptive dimensions of perfectionism have been implicated with respect to eating disorder symptoms (Hewitt et al, 1995; Minarik & Ahrens, 1996). In an extensive review of the literature concerning the relationship between perfectionism, eating disorders and other psychopathology, Bardone-Cone et al (2007) identified a number of important factors concerning both AN and BN sufferers; firstly, Individuals with AN and BN presented with higher mean levels of perfectionism (as measured by the EDI – Eating Disorders Inventory, Olmsted et al, 1983) when compared to healthy controls (e.g. Halmi, Sunday, Thornton, Crow, Fichter, Kaplan et al, 2000; Lilenfeld et al, 2000; Sutander-Pinnock et al, 2003; Tachikawa, Yamaguchi, Hatanaka et al, 2004). Secondly, when compared to other psychiatric groups, AN sufferers (and to a lesser extent BN sufferers) presented with higher mean levels of perfectionism over and above other disorders such as OCD, depressive disorders, social phobia and panic, and, finally, the elevations in mean perfectionism scores for AN sufferers were maintained for both maladaptive and adaptive dimensions of perfectionism. Research addressing the role of perfectionism in eating disorders appears to have progressed further than research focussing on the role of perfectionism in depression and anxiety disorders (Bardone-Cone et al, 2007). This is evidenced by research that addressed both premorbid and hereditary patterns of perfectionism in relation to both AN and BN (e.g. Fairburn et al, 1999; Lilenfeld et al, 2000). For AN sufferers there is evidence that elevated perfectionism levels pre-treatment have been associated with poorer prognosis for anorexia nervosa sufferers at long term follow ups (Bizeul et al, 2001) and greater drop-out 35 rate before the completion of treatment (Sutander-Pinnock et al, 2003). There is also evidence that perfectionism levels remain elevated in eating disorder sufferers even after successful treatment (e.g. Bastiani et al, 1995; Kaye, Strober & Jimerson, 2004; Srinivasagam, Kaye, Plotnikov et al, 1995). Suicide Blatt (1995) in his descriptive accounts of a number of high profile suicides drew attention to the relationship between perfectionism and suicide. Attributes highlighted by Blatt as being consistent across cases included a compulsion towards perfection whilst being tortured by extreme self-doubt and self-criticism. Blatt noted how the self-presentational needs of such perfectionists contributed to their vulnerability and would propel them to extreme lengths to avoid public criticism and maintain a flawless persona. Added to this, a lack of satisfaction when a task was completed, markedly increased feelings of selfscrutiny and susceptibility to depression and suicide. More recent case accounts continue to demonstrate the association between perfectionism and suicide (e.g. Bialosky, 2011; Hyatt, 2010). The strongest evidence for the link between perfectionism and suicide points to the involvement of two of the trait dimensions of perfectionism identified by Hewitt & Flett (1991a). Shafran & Mansell (2001) in a review of the literature concerning perfectionism and psychopathology, identified a significant relationship between both self-oriented and socially prescribed perfectionism in relation to suicidal ideation in both clinical and nonclinical samples. The dimensions of self-oriented and socially prescribed perfectionism have both been identified as being relevant to suicidal behaviour although sociallyprescribed perfectionism appears to show the closest relationship with both suicide ideation and actual suicide attempts (Dean & Range, 1996; Dean, Range & Goggin, 1996; Enns et al, 2001; Hamilton & Schweitzer, 2000; Hewitt, Flett & Turnball-Donovan, 1992; Hewitt, Norton, Flett, Callender & Cowan, 1998). A number of authors have proposed possible mechanisms and models to help explain the perfectionism-suicide link; these include Hewitt and Flett’s (2002) explanation of the role of stress in the relationship between perfectionism and suicide, the Escape Theory of 36 Sucide (Baumeister, 1990) and the Perfectionism Social Disconnection Model (Hewitt, Flett, Sherry & Caelian, 2006). Each of which will be discussed briefly. Hewitt & Flett (1993, 2002) have suggested that specific aspects of the stressperfectionism relationship have the potential to produce suicidal potential in certain individuals. These authors believe that perfectionistic behaviour has the capacity to influence both the frequency and intensity of certain stressors and in doing so, increases vulnerability to suicide ideation and suicide attempts. Additionally, Hewitt & Flett suggest that the aversiveness of the stressor may be elevated when the type of stress interacts with the particular perfectionism dimension involved e.g. self-oriented perfectionists are thought to find failures associated with achievement more difficult to deal with because their primary focus is on achievement and the attainment of high standards. In a similar way, socially prescribed perfectionists are believed to find it more difficult to deal with social stressors because their focus is primarily concerned with the interpersonal aspects of feeling approved of and fitting in with society. Recent research by Hewitt, Caelian, Chen & Flett (2014) examined the diathesis stress model of perfectionism and suicide and found that socially prescribed perfectionism interacted with daily hassles to predict suicide potential in adolescent psychiatric patients diagnosed with depression even after controlling for previous suicide attempt, level of depression and hopelessness. The Escape Theory of Suicide (Baumeister, 1990) proposes that in some cases individuals who attempt suicide have a powerful desire or motivation to escape from their own painful awareness that they have flaws and imperfections. A central component of the theory is how the individual deals with expectations either from the self or from others. It is believed that much distress is generated from a perceived inability to meet unrealistically high standards and in particular, how the individual deals with the discrepancy between the idealised view of how they would like their life to be and the reality of potentially falling short of such stringent standards. Many authors have considered how individuals react to a perceived or actual failure to meet unrealistically high standards. Hamachek (1978) believed this to be one of the central facets differentiating adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists, with adaptive perfectionists being able to rationalise achievement failures as being acceptable, whereas maladaptive perfectionists internalising the failure as unacceptable. Maladaptive perfectionists are believed to rate highly in terms of discrepancy (see Slaney, Rice, Mobley et al, 2001; Almost Perfect Scale-Revised). 37 According to the Escape Theory, suicide is viewed as the final step to flee from the discrepancy within the self and from the world. The Perfectionism Social Disconnection Model (PSDM; Hewitt et al, 2006) proposes that much of the distress associated with perfectionism stems from a thwarted need to feel accepted and connected to others. The model focuses on the role of perfectionistic selfpresentation and its associated influences on interpersonal relationships and behaviour. As a result of the interplay between type of perfectionism (socially prescribed) and the perfectionist’s self-presentational need to feel accepted and connected to the social environment, diminished social relationships and psychological maladjustment can result. Further problems have been identified as being associated with the sustained role of selfpresentation in perfectionism with interpersonal difficulties such as hostility and hypersensitivity (Habke & Flynn, 2002) making social disconnection more likely. According to the model, social disconnection has been related to various adverse consequences that include suicide ideation and attempted suicide (Hewitt et al, 2006). Recent research by Flett et al, (2014) suggests that the role of perfectionism in suicide has been seriously underestimated. These authors call for a re-evaluation of the perfectionism construct on the basis of the potential risk to both the individual and the wider society. Specifically, rather than studying individual variables as potential risk factors, Flett et al (2014) believe there is a need to focus on the whole person and take into consideration accumulative risk factors. One of the fundamental problems and reasons for playing down the perfectionism-suicide link, according to these authors, is the widespread view that perfectionism in society is often considered a positive and adaptive personality attribute that is highly valued and praised in work and educational settings. Another problem appears to concern the self-presentational desires of perfectionists, specifically the tendency of many perfectionists to hide or conceal their flaws and imperfections behind a mask of apparent invulnerability (Blatt, 1995; Flett et al, 2014; Friedlander, Nazem, Fiske, Nadoff & Smith, 2012) which suggests that many individuals do not let on to others about the extent of their difficulties. The role of self-concealment in suicide behaviour has been supported by a number of authors (see Friedlander et al, 2012). Flett & Hewitt (2013) believe that particularly in children and adolescents, there is a high proportion of individuals who are “flying under 38 the radar” whereby their psychological problems are seriously underestimated due to the presence of a personality style that is motivated to keep psychological distress hidden or disguised. Flett et al (2014) propose that self-concealment becomes deeply ingrained into the persona of some perfectionists to the extent that serious psychological problems may be overlooked and underestimated. It has been suggested that self-presentational tendencies, specifically self-concealment may help explain the lack of warning that often accompanies the suicide of seemingly high functioning individuals (Flett et al, 2014). 2.2.2 Perfectionism and Physical Health Compared to the area of perfectionism and psychopathology, the area of perfectionism and physical health has received only a modest amount of research attention (Molnar, Reker, Culp, Sadava & DeCourville, 2006). This is also in direct comparison to the much vaster research field addressing the relationships between personality and physical health. The importance of studying the long-term effects of how perfectionists cope with physical health symptoms has been exemplified by Fry & Debats (2009) who, over the course of six years, and after controlling for the effects of neuroticism and conscientiousness identified perfectionism to be associated with early all-cause mortality. Personality factors have been explored as risk factors for the onset and development of physical illness with well-established links being identified between neuroticism and conditions such as Irritable Bowel Syndrome (Hazlett-Stevens, Craske, Mayer et al, 2003), Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (Buckley, MacHale, Cavanagh et al, 1999; Taillefer, Kirmayer, Robbins & Lasry, 2003) and medically unexplained symptoms (McCrae & Costa, 1987; Kirmayer, Robbins & Paris, 1994). Conversely, conscientiousness has been identified as having a potential protective or buffering effect on health and longevity (Carver & ConnerSmith, 2010) with high levels of this personality trait linked to greater perceived health, life satisfaction (Roesch, Aldridge, Vickers, & Helvig, 2009), and an increased tendency to follow treatment regimens (Christenson & Smith, 1995). Highly conscientious individuals may experience more positive health outcomes due to their engagement in behaviours that have been identified as either promoting or impeding good health. Indeed research by Bogg & Roberts, (2004) identified conscientious individuals to engage more readily in health protective behaviours (such as having a good diet and exercising regularly) and less 39 likely to engage in unsafe health behaviours (such as risky sexual practices and excessive alcohol, tobacco or drug use). Much of the early work addressing the relationship between perfectionism and physical health utilised a unidimensional perspective of the perfectionism construct, focussing solely on the negative/maladaptive perfectionism traits and negative health outcomes. Such research found associations between perfectionism and various physical difficulties/disorders such as chronic pain (Van Houdenhove, 1986), asthma (Morris, 1961), migraine (Burns, 1980), Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS) and Ulcerative Colitis (Pacht, 1984). More recent research, embracing a multidimensional view of perfectionism (e.g. Martin, Flett, Hewitt, Krames & Szanto, 1996) has supported some of these associations and new connections have been identified between perfectionism and various other health conditions such as Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (White & Schweitzer, 2000), fibromyalgia (Sansone, Levengood & Sellbom, 2004), Crohns Disease, Ulcerative Colitis (Flett et al, 2011) and general somatic health problems e.g. daytime sleepiness, tension, insomnia and headaches (Saboonchi & Lundh, 2003). Relationships between perfectionism and health symptoms have been studied in both student samples (Bottos & Dewey, 2004; Martin, Flett, Hewitt, Krames & Szanto, 1996) and general population samples (e.g. Molnar et al, 2006; Saboonchi & Lundh, 2003). Recognising both the adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism dimensions has meant that it has been possible to explore whether the specific dimensions of perfectionism are differentially allied to physical health variables. The result of which has enabled researchers to further explore and understand the possible “adaptiveness” of the perfectionism construct and try and establish whether there are positive qualities that could have a beneficial or protective impact on health and wellbeing. Other authors using a multidimensional perspective have supported the association between the maladaptive dimensions of perfectionism and physical health (e.g. White & Schweitzer, 2000). Additional research has identified that both adaptive and maladaptive dimensions may be associated with poorer health outcomes (Saboonchi & Lundh, 2003), with this result found even after controlling for the personality dimensions of conscientiousness, extraversion and neuroticism (Molnar et al, 2006). 40 The relationship between adaptive perfectionism and physical health outcomes appears to be less clear cut. Exploring the role of affect in the relationship between perfectionism and physical health, a study by Molnar et al (2006) identified perfectionism to represent a “double edged sword” in terms of its association with physical health. Using the multidimensional framework put forth by Hewitt & Flett (1991b), these authors have supported the association between the maladaptive dimension of perfectionism and poorer health outcomes as well as giving credence to the notion that the adaptive dimension of perfectionism may be associated with some benefits to health and wellbeing (Frost et al, 1993; Slade & Owens, 1998). Perhaps it is the case that in certain situations and under certain conditions the adaptive perfectionistic traits may provide some advantages as far as health and wellbeing are concerned, indeed, Molnar and colleagues, identified the relationship between self-oriented perfectionism and physical health to be much more complex than first thought. When looking at the role of perfectionism in fibromyalgia, a moderate or optimal level of self-oriented perfectionism was identified as being potentially adaptive to health, however, too much or too little of this type of perfectionism was found to be associated with considerable reductions in physical health functioning (Molnar, Flett, Sadava, & Collautti, 2012) Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Studying the relationship between perfectionism and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome has become increasingly popular in the last decade. Addressing this research field is proving to be important because there is the possibility that it may hold the key to our understanding of how perfectionism may be related to physical health as well as informing the literature about how the dimensions of perfectionism may be differentially related to health outcomes. There has been a long standing association between perfectionism and fatigue, indeed, Freudenberger (1974) first noted burn out and exhaustion to be more prevalent in perfectionists. Fatigue was seen to be part of a vicious circle where the perfectionist’s need to strive endlessly and relentlessly to meet their own prescribed standards would lead to distress and ultimately fatigue. Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) has been described as consisting of a sustained period of fatigue accompanied by other symptoms such as headaches, muscle pain and tiredness after physical exertion (Fukuda, Strauss, Hickie, Sharp, Dobbins & Komaroff, 1994). Commonly, individuals suffering from CFS also 41 endure chronic pain (Kanaan, Lepine & Wessely, 2007; VanHoudenhove, Kempe & Luyten, 2010) and associations have been found between CFS and fibromyalgia syndrome (Yunus, 2007; Van Houdenhove & Luyten, 2009). CFS has also been associated with depression (Arnold, 2008; Kempke, Goossens, Luyten et al, 2010). Individuals with CFS have been found to demonstrate elevated levels of perfectionism when compared to healthy controls (White and Schweitzer, 2000; Deary & Chalder, 2010) with maladaptive perfectionism (i.e. Concern over Mistakes and Doubts about Actions) being most consistently associated with CFS (Kempke et al, 2011; Luyten, Van Houdenhove, Cosyns & Van den Broeck, 2006; Magnusson, Nias & White, 1996; White & Schweitzer, 2000). Recent research has identified that on a daily basis, the maladaptive dimension of perfectionism is predictive of both fatigue and pain in CFS sufferers (Kempke, Luyten, Claes et al, 2013). In terms of the role of adaptive perfectionism in CFS (although research has been limited in this area) Deary & Chalder (2010) found a positive correlation between the adaptive and maladaptive dimensions of perfectionism (in CFS patients) and as such suggested the CFS profile be typified by high personal standards and organisation as well as doubts about the quality of one’s actions and concern over mistakes. One could therefore argue that if this client group have a similarly high level of both maladaptive and adaptive perfectionism traits then the adaptive traits may provide some sort of protective buffer against the potentially serious consequences of the maladaptive traits. Unfortunately when compared to a control group, the CFS group possessed significantly elevated levels of fatigue, depression and anxiety which has led some authors to question whether a high combination of both adaptive and maladaptive traits is a healthy combination for individuals suffering from CFS (Deary & Chalder, 2010; Kempke, Van Houdenhove, Luytens et al, 2011). Research of this nature is important as it has focussed on the differential contribution of both the maladaptive and adaptive dimensions of perfectionism in relation to health outcomes, as well as contributing to the ongoing debate over whether there really is a subtype of perfectionism that can be regarded as positive or healthy. In the CFS literature, results have demonstrated that by itself, adaptive perfectionism has not been linked directly with negative health outcomes (Deary & Chalder, 2010) and the considerable overlap between the dimensions has made it difficult to pinpoint the unique contribution of adaptive perfectionism. 42 Research that has addressed the relationship between perfectionism and CFS is also important because it has generated interest in the potential mediators in the relationship between perfectionism and health. Research by Kempke et al (2011) using the Frost MPS, investigated the role of depression as a potential mediator. These authors found depression to fully mediate the relationship between the maladaptive dimension of perfectionism and fatigue which exemplifies the importance of looking at both the personal experience of perfectionism and any coexisting conditions which may jointly exacerbate and perpetuate a condition such as CFS. Perfectionism and the personal experience of illness The role that perfectionism may play in the personal experience of illness is a relatively new area of research. There are a number of factors that appear to feature highly when perfectionists are faced with the challenge of having to live with health problems of a predominantly physical nature. These include; dealing with perfectionistic automatic thoughts and cognitive distortions, utilising different coping mechanisms, difficulties when a health problem interferes with achievement goals and problems associated with the selfpresentational nature of perfectionism. Research has identified that perfectionistic automatic thoughts and other cognitive distortions/biases may alter the personal experience of illness for the individual (e.g. Flett et al, 2011). Cognitive distortions accompanied by being highly perfectionistic are likely to exacerbate an already difficult and stressful situation (Hewitt & Flett, 1991) such as having to deal with having health problems, a chronic condition or disease. Blatt (1995) proposed the combination of cognitive distortion and perfectionism to be devastating in terms of decreasing quality of life. Recent research focussing on the relationship between perfectionistic automatic thoughts and psychosomatic symptoms has proposed that the potential cognitive preoccupation in perfectionism may lay the foundations for future health difficulties (Flett et al, 2011). In describing the potentially debilitating role of perfectionistic thoughts in this process, these authors suggest “Chronic awareness of not being perfect while still feeling compelled and needing to achieve this essential personal goal should be a chronic source of stress and distress for certain perfectionists that should be reflected eventually by a heightened experience of psychosomatic symptoms” (page 566). 43 One of the main difficulties appears to be an inability on the part of the perfectionist to disengage cognitively from the need to keep pushing towards the achievement of perfection (Flett et al, 2011). This is likely to use up valuable resources and unsurprisingly may interfere and hinder the successful management of an illness. There may be clear differences in the coping mechanisms utilised by perfectionists, specifically with regard to coping style. Perfectionistic individuals appear to rely more on avoidant or emotion focussed coping in response to stressful situations such as dealing with the burden of a health difficulty (Flett et al, 2011). Such strategies, although providing short-term relief, may not be beneficial in the long-term as they do not address the source of the stress. Research on coping mechanisms by Epping-Jordan, Compas & Howell, (1994) identified a faster rate of physical deterioration in cancer patients who used avoidance strategies. Looking specifically at the research literature concerning perfectionism and chronic conditions such as Cardiovascular disease (CVD) and Irritable Bowel Disease (IBD), perfectionism has been associated with maladaptive coping styles, poor rehabilitation prospects (Shanmugasegaram, Flett, Madan, Oh, Marzolini, Reitav, Hewitt & Sturman, 2014) and a tendency to amplify the impact of a chronic condition (Flett, et al, 2011). What may exacerbate the situation further is the fact that there seems to be reluctance for perfectionists to utilise social support networks (Crăciun & Dudău, 2013; Flett et al, 2011). There is a robust relationship in the research literature linking the availability of social support with improved physical health outcomes (for reviews please refer to Berkman, Glass, Brissette & Seeman, 2000; Uchino, 2004) and individuals with low levels of social support have been found to have higher rates of mortality especially from conditions such as cardiovascular disease (Berkman et al, 2000; Lespérance, FrasureSmith, Juneau et al, 2000). Perfectionists appear to have specific difficulties dealing with health problems when they interfere with the achievement of their goals (Flett et al, 2011). This seems logical when you consider the importance that perfectionists place on the achievement of personal standards and expectations. Highly perfectionistic individuals have been found to experience increased amounts of stress when they experience achievement failures and when they feel they have not achieved the expected standard of performance (Hewitt & Flett, 2002). It may be particularly stressful for perfectionists when health difficulties interfere with their ability to pursue and achieve their goals or perhaps when treatment interferes with the achievement of goals and standards. This was found for cardiac 44 rehabilitation patients where the rehabilitation itself was identified as an additional stressor that further burdened the individual and represented yet another impossible standard to work towards (Medved & Brockmeier, 2011). The self-presentational nature of perfectionism has been described by Hewitt et al, (2003) as a dual drive towards wanting to appear perfect at all times accompanied by attempts to minimize or prohibit the public display/disclosure of imperfections. Research addressing the area of perfectionism and physical health has identified that certain physical conditions may be particularly difficult for perfectionists to cope with because they interfere with the self-presentational drive towards wanting to portray the perfect public image. Flett et al (2011) explored the relationship between perfectionism and living with two chronic bowel conditions; Crohn’s Disease and Ulcerative Colitis. Both conditions consist of a variety of symptoms (e.g. diarrhoea, abdominal pain, rectal bleeding, inflammation, fatigue and nausea) that have been described by sufferers as being embarrassing and misunderstood by others (Hall, Rubin, Dougall et al, 2005). Flett et al (2011) have suggested that it is particularly important to consider perfectionism in relation to understanding the reactions of individuals living with irritable bowel disease (IBD) “given the emphasis that patients have on maintaining the appearance of normality to others”, (p. 562). The resulting research identified perfectionism to be associated with a greater psychosocial awareness of the impact of living with the disease, greater physical impact and an elevated level of preoccupation coping which has been identified as a style of coping thought to have negative consequences in a chronically ill population ( Macrodimitris & Endler, 2001). 2.2.3 Perfectionism and Stress Stress has been implicated as both a moderating and mediating variable in the relationship between perfectionism and psychological health, specifically in the generation or maintenance of psychopathological states. According to Hewitt & Flett (2002), when compared to non-perfectionists, perfectionists are more likely to have an increased exposure to stress from two sources; firstly in the form of daily hassles and secondly from the constant unremitting burden to achieve exceptionally high standards. Such high levels of stress exposure as well as maladaptive ways of coping with stress are likely, according to these authors, to lead to a greater chance of experiencing psychological distress. In addressing the precise way that stress is involved, the relationship between perfectionism, 45 stress and psychopathology appears to be a complex one with perfectionism implicated in the generation, anticipation and perpetuation of stress in relation to psychopathology (Hewitt & Flett, 2002). Certain individuals may be more vulnerable to developing psychological difficulties because they have a personality style that means they are more likely to place themselves in situations, engage in particular behaviours or ways of thinking that increase their exposure to stress. Hewitt & Flett (2002) believe that perfectionists are more likely to fall into this category because “of their unrealistic approach to life” (p. 259). Such an approach according to these authors, involves the setting of unrealistically high standards for performance, a cognitive style that involves focussing predominantly on the negative aspects of performance as well as experiencing only minimal satisfaction from their efforts. The generation of stress is likely to be influenced in part by a lack of flexibility by perfectionists to lower their standards or adjust their goals. Research has identified such attitudinal inflexibility to be a pervasive characteristic present in both the adaptive and maladaptive dimensions of the perfectionism construct (Ferrari & Mautz, 1997). Focussing on only the negative elements of a situation means that perfectionists are likely to interpret even innocuous events as representing serious threats (Dunkley, et al, 2003). Hewitt and Flett (2003) have elaborated on this by suggesting that even minor shortfalls in performance can represent major failings for self-oriented perfectionists. In a test of the diathesis-stress model of perfectionism and depression, where self-oriented perfectionism interacted with achievement hassles of predict depression, Hewitt & Flett (2003) felt that minor achievement hassles were particularly significant for self-oriented perfectionists as they may serve to activate much deeper beliefs concerning personal failings and imperfections of the self. In terms of the anticipation of stress, research has shown that perfectionists tend to become preoccupied with the fact that stressful events may occur in the future, for example worrying that they may fail at a particular task that has yet to occur. Evidence of a failure orientation in perfectionism has been supported by a number of research studies (e.g. Flett, Hewitt, Blankstein & O’Brien, 1991; Frost & Henderson, 1991). Research by Flaxman and colleagues, addressing the psychological benefits of taking time off from work, found that self-critical perfectionists were more inclined than non-perfectionists to worry about ‘what might happen’ whilst away from work which appeared to have a detrimental effect on their 46 health and wellbeing when they returned to work (e.g. higher levels of fatigue, exhaustion and anxiety), (Flaxman, Ménard, Bond & Kinman, 2012). There also seems to be a perception that there is nothing that can be done to avert the stressful events form occurring, (Hewitt & Flett 2002). This has been confirmed by a study by Martin, et al, (1996) who identified self-reported depressive symptoms to be greater for socially prescribed (maladaptive) perfectionists when they held the belief that they do not have control over the major outcomes in their life (low self-efficacy). Hewitt & Flett (2002) suggest that perfectionists’ anticipation of stressful events occurring in the future accompanied by a lack of desire to address this in advance, can be explained as a type of hopelessness response that has been identified in various models of depression (Brown & Harris, 1978; Abraham, Metalsky & Alloy, 1989). Research has confirmed the link between perfectionism and depression in both student samples (e.g. Flett et al, 1991; Hewitt & Flett, 1991) and clinical samples (Hewitt & Flett, 1993). Furthermore, feelings of hopelessness and helplessness seem to be an integral part of the maladaptive perfectionistic profile (e.g. Hewitt & Flett, 1991a, 1991b) e.g. socially prescribed perfectionists have been identified as having an inherent worry about the likelihood of stressful events happening and it has been the certainty of their convictions that appears to exacerbate the stress associated with these events (Hewitt & Flett, 2002). In terms of perpetuating the stress response, it would appear that perfectionists have a tendency to draw on maladaptive tendencies that keep a stressful experience going for longer than is required. Such maladaptive tendencies have been described by Hewitt & Flett (2002) as falling into three categories of interrelated cognitive tendencies; a preoccupation with self-blame coupled with a failure orientation which make the possibility of rationally dealing with a stressful episode highly unlikely, secondly a propensity to experience frequent negative automatic thoughts concerning the negative aspects of perfectionism which have been found to be associated with psychological distress and finally, having a ruminative response orientation whereby perfectionists worry specifically about failing to meet their expected standards. Not being able to achieve the expected standard is likely to create a discrepancy for the perfectionist between their actual and ideal self. Furthermore, once a stressful event has occurred, the perfectionist is likely to ruminate, and it is this rumination that will act as a reminder about the discrepancy between their actual and ideal self, which may lead to further psychological distress (Strauman, 1989). 47 A further area contributing to the perpetuation of stress in perfectionism may be associated with how perfectionists utilise social support networks when they are feeling vulnerable or in need of help. Hewitt & Flett (2002) have identified a significant factor contributing to the perpetuation of the stress response to be reluctance on the part of the perfectionist to admit to other people that they are having personal problems. This seems to be linked to the self-presentational aspect of the perfectionism construct where perfectionists, in their attempts to appear flawless and avoid potential negative evaluation from others, resort to concealing negative information about themselves. It is likely that the desire to keep such personal information concealed from others is a block to such individuals seeking or asking help from other people. Perfectionists, it would seem, often have difficulty asking for help because they seem to perceive this as an admission of failure to cope, which may have the effect of displaying to the outside world that they are not perfect. Hewitt & Flett (2002) have identified that not utilising social support networks seems to be a key factor in prolonging or exacerbating the stressful experience and the accompanying psychological distress. 2.2.4 Perfectionistic Self-Presentation and Health The self-presentational aspect of the perfectionism, according to Hewitt et al (2003) encompasses two specific motivational components; the desire to demonstrate one’s perfection to the world (self-promotion) and the desire to conceal one’s imperfections from others (self-concealment). Hewitt et al (2003) proposed that perfectionists differ not only in their level of trait perfectionism but also in terms of their levels of self-presentation. Self-presentational aspects of perfectionism have already been discussed briefly in the context of a number of health related areas, specifically; in relation to masking the extent of both psychological and physical health difficulties, creating problems when dealing with certain physical health conditions such as irritable bowel disease and affecting the likelihood that perfectionists will seek help or support for health related problems. In terms of its relationship with health and wellbeing, the self-concealment aspect of selfpresentation has received considerable research attention, specifically, its proposed relationship with psychological distress (Cepida Benito & Short, 1998; Kawamura & Frost, 2004). Withholding personally distressing information has been associated with greater depression (Kelly & Achter, 1995) and more interpersonal conflict (Straits-Tröster, 48 Patterson, Semple, et al, 1994). Despite the health implications, for certain individuals, it would appear, the desire to self-conceal outweighs and justifies the potential health difficulties that may accompany such a personality trait (Flett & Hewitt, 2013). The resulting problem, however, is the likelihood that certain individuals are suffering in silence, not willing to accept or reveal either the psychological distress they are experiencing or the flaws and imperfections that are fuelling such distress. Perfectionistic self-presentation is considered to be a problematic and unhealthy strategy for a number of reasons; firstly it is unlikely that the individual will be able to conceal their personal flaws and imperfections indefinitely (Hewitt et al, 2003, Leary, Tchividijian & Kraxberger, 1994), secondly there may be a reluctance on the part of the individual to take risks because at any point the individual may let their guard down and this could invalidate the façade that they are trying so hard to maintain, and thirdly a tendency to self-conceal can cause problems in the development and maintenance of intimate relationships because a desire to self-conceal can be interpreted by others to represent a lack of authenticity. Research has shown that individuals who freely express their flaws are more successful in developing successful close relationships (Derlaga, Metts, Petronio & Margulis, 1993). Self-presentational strategies specifically self-concealment have also associated lower levels of help seeking for psychological or physical health problems, specifically high selfconcealers are less likely to seek help for their difficulties either in the form of personal requests for help or acceptance of help from external sources (Hewitt et al, 2003). Cepida Benito & Short (1998) identified an avoidance on the part of high self-concealers, to seek counselling, despite individuals’ expressing a need for such psychological interventions. Research has attempted to address why self-presentational strategies, specifically selfconcealment may be detrimental for health. Consistent with Bem’s (1972) Self Perception Theory, the active concealment of personal information may signify to the individual that they have been acting in a shameful or inappropriate manner and consequently interfere with their core perception of themselves (Kelly, 2002) thus leading to psychological difficulties. Additionally there is the suggestion that the additional effort and self-control involved in hiding potentially sensitive and personal information from others may itself cause psychological and physiological symptoms (Kelly, 2002). There may also be an indirect pathway whereby self-concealment leads to psychological and physical health difficulties because of a lack of engagement in preventive health behaviours. Recent 49 research has identified an inverse relationship between self-concealment and engagement in such behaviours (Williams & Cropley, 2014). Exploring the subject of self-presentation in perfectionism and how this is related to health seems to be an essential step in furthering our understanding of the perfectionism-health relationship. Perfectionists may be avoiding admitting to health difficulties, seeking help or engaging in preventive health behaviours for fear of being judged negatively and they may engage in further impeding behaviours so as to justify their lack of engagement in their health and wellbeing, such as self-handicapping behaviours. These types of behaviours appear to come about from trying to conceal personal imperfections. 2.2.5 Perfectionism and Health Behaviours Gochman (1982) described health behaviours as “those personal attributes such as beliefs, expectations, motives, values, perceptions and other cognitive elements; personality characteristics, including affective and emotional states and traits; and overt behaviour patterns, actions and habits that relate to health maintenance, to health restoration, and to health improvement”. Such behaviours have frequently been subdivided into health protective (preventive health behaviours) and health risk behaviours. Health protective behaviours have the effect of enhancing health and include such behaviours as eating a healthy balanced diet, exercising regularly and reducing stress. Health risk behaviours have the effect of impairing health such as excessive smoking and alcohol use, risky sexual behaviours and eating a poor diet. Research has identified clear evidence that engaging in preventive behaviours such as exercise/physical activity are beneficial to health, both psychologically and physically. The psychological benefits include reduced levels of depression, improvements to mood, altering an individuals’ appraisal of a stressful situation, improving ability to cope with stress and improving self-esteem and body image e.g. Biddle, Gorely & Stensel, 2004; Bouchard, Blair & Haskell, 2007; Fox, Stathi, McKenna & Davis, 2007; Netz, Wu, Becker & Tennenbaum, 2005. Physical benefits include improving levels of longevity, mortality, preventing many chronic illnesses (particularly in relation to cardiovascular disease) as 50 well as improving treatment outcomes for a number of acute and chronic conditions (e.g. Biddle et al, 2004; Bouchard et al, 2007; Fox et al, 2006; Netz et al, 2005). Conversely, not engaging in such behaviours has been found to increase vulnerability to acute and short term health problems as well as increasing the likelihood of long term health difficulties such as chronic illnesses. McGinnis & Foege (1993) have suggested that health behaviours represent the most significant contribution to unfavourable health outcomes and according to Roberts and colleagues, are important to long term health because of their association with chronic conditions such as cancer, cardiovascular disease and accidental death (Roberts, Currie, Samdal et al, 2007). Despite clear evidence of the benefits of engaging in regular physical activity, it seems that many people do not appear to be engaging in the recommended amount (UK Department of Health, 2004). Research has supported the link between specific personality styles and engagement in preventive health behaviours (e.g. Sirois & Voth, 2007; Caspi, Begg, Dickson et al, 1997) with certain personality types associated with increased amounts of engagement in such behaviours. The Five Factor model of personality has often been used as a framework for researching the interrelations between personality dimensions and health behaviours (e.g. Booth-Kewley & Vickers, 1994) with two of the five factors; conscientiousness and neuroticism emerging as the most significant predictors. High levels of conscientiousness have been associated with increased health promotion activities such as diet, exercise, less risk taking and more accident control (Bogg & Roberts, 2004; Booth-Kewley & Vickers, 1994) and low levels of conscientiousness have been linked to increased health risk behaviours (Bogg & Roberts, 2004) such as sexual risk taking (Hoyle, Fejfar & Miller, 2000) and an inability to restrict alcohol consumption (Loukas, Krull, Chassin & Carle, 2000). Conscientiousness is believed, by a number of authors to have protective qualities in terms of health and wellbeing (e.g. Carver & Conner-Smith, 2010). Specifically it has been associated with a reduced desire to engage in activities or health practices that detract from good health as well as often being accompanied by health promoting activities (Roberts & Bogg, 2004). Neuroticism, on the other hand has been associated with less wellness behaviours, less accident control, more risk taking (Booth-Kewley & Vickers, (1994), greater alcohol consumption and riskier sexual behaviours (Trobst, Herbst, Masters & Costa, (2002). 51 Research has supported the association between the two major perfectionism dimensions and the two personality dimensions of conscientiousness and neuroticism (Hamachek, 1978; Stoeber & Otto, 2006) with the maladaptive, socially prescribed perfectionism dimension being associated with neuroticism and self-oriented (often viewed as the most adaptive dimension) perfectionism associated with conscientiousness. In the light of this evidence one could assume that adaptive perfectionists may engage more readily in preventive health behaviours because of the high levels of conscientiousness and maladaptive perfectionists engage less frequently due to the association between this dimension of perfectionism and neuroticism. Molnar et al (2006) proposed two health behaviour pathways that could potentially help explain the relationship between perfectionism and physical health outcomes, specifically how the behaviours of certain perfectionists may adversely affect their health. The first pathway was identified as a greater propensity to engage in health risk behaviours and the second pathway described as a lack of engagement in behaviours that are likely to have a positive impact on short and long-term health (health protective behaviours or preventive health behaviours). Socially prescribed perfectionism (maladaptive) was predicted to be associated with more health risk behaviours and self-oriented (adaptive) with more health promoting behaviours. Unfortunately equivocal results were obtained from this research with neither perfectionism dimension being related to health promoting behaviours and contrary to the proposed hypotheses, self-oriented perfectionism was associated with less engagement in health risk behaviours, Molnar et al (2012). Unfortunately there is a lack of research specifically addressing the relationship between perfectionism and engagement in health behaviours (health promoting and health risk). A recent study by Williams & Cropley (2014) focussed on the differences between adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism and their association with health behaviours. These authors found maladaptive perfectionism to be associated with decreased levels of engagement and increased levels of psychological distress and adaptive perfectionism related to higher levels of engagement in preventive health behaviours. Recent research by Longbottom et al (2010) has proposed that the cognitive and behavioural motivations underlying the two dimensions of perfectionism (adaptive and maladaptive) are fundamentally distinct and have proposed that adaptive perfectionism may be associated with positive motivational tendencies e.g. higher levels of self-efficacy and perseverance when engaging in physical 52 activity/exercise and maladaptive perfectionism associated with negative motivational tendencies that reflect a fear of failure and a desire to avoid engaging in such activities. Such results provide support for the fact that maladaptive perfectionists may be putting their long-term health and wellbeing at risk by not engaging in such behaviours, particularly considering the well evidenced association between maladaptive perfectionism and psychological distress. Furthermore the fact that adaptive perfectionism has been linked to greater engagement may point to some potential health benefits attached to being an adaptive perfectionist, which adds more weight to the debate over whether there may be a type of perfectionism that is health promoting. Clearly more research investigating the potential factors that may influence perfectionist’s engagement in health behaviours is required. Potential intervening variables There are many factors that may influence the relationship between perfectionism and engagement in health behaviours in that they may consciously or unconsciously present themselves as possible barriers and benefits to engagement. Although the present review cannot do justice to all of these factors, five possible intervening variables are discussed that are considered to fit most appropriately with the specific research questions that are addressed within the present thesis these are; self-presentation, self-handicapping, perceived stress, physical activity motivation and self-efficacy. The self-presentational aspect of perfectionism, encompassing the desire to self-conceal has already been addressed in the preceding section and is considered an integral component of the perfectionism construct, particularly concerning maladaptive perfectionism. Considering self-presentation in direct relation to engagement in preventive health behaviours may provide important information relating to the decisions perfectionists make concerning how they look after their health and wellbeing. Self-presentation has been described as a method employed by individuals to attempt to control other peoples’ impressions of them and therefore it is likely that individuals will do what they can, in a situation, to try and create the best possible impression to others. To be able to do this they may feel that they only want to present the information that will show 53 them in a favourable light, whilst leaving out information that could jeopardise the desired ideal image. Research addressing self-presentational processes in relation to exercise behaviour (see Hausenblas, Brewer & Van Raalte, 2004) has identified self-presentation to be an important factor influencing decision to engage in physical activity and selfpresentational concerns have been found to have the potential to either encourage or deter exercise behaviour. Self-presentation is considered to be related to exercise in a multifaceted way having the power to influence individuals’ thoughts, feelings and behaviours related to exercise (Hausenblas et al, 2004). Motivation to engage may be influenced by a complex process of considering the likelihood of being able to self-present oneself favourably in an exercise context. If an individual feels they have the confidence to self-present as someone who appears to be fit, healthy and toned they may experience greater motivation to engage in exercise behaviour. If, on the other hand there are any doubts about the ability to self-present in this way they may feel discouraged from engaging (Leary, 1992). Empirical research has suggested that individuals displaying more of the maladaptive dimensions of perfectionism are more likely to use self-presentational strategies (Hewitt et al, 2003). In an exercise setting maladaptive perfectionists may find it particularly challenging because of a heightened awareness of the need to self-present a favourable public image. There is no doubt that attending an exercise class or going to the gym involves a certain amount of personal exposure in terms of displaying one’s abilities to the outside world. Maladaptive perfectionists may have a heightened fear of negative evaluation and fear of making a mistake in front of others. There is the possibility that their need for positive approval may lead them to believe that such situations are too difficult for them to endure and therefore avoidance may seem like a logical option. The term self-handicapping was first discussed by Jones & Berglas (1978) to refer to the tendency for individuals to create barriers to their achievement of success with the intention of not having to take responsibility for failure or having a reason to explain away a failure should it occur. “By finding or creating impediments that make good performance less likely, the strategist nicely protects his sense of self-competence. If the person does poorly, the source of failure is externalised in the impediment. If the person does well, then he or she has done well in spite of less than optimal conditions”. (Jones & Berglas, p. 201) 54 In essence, what someone is trying to do when they engage in self-handicapping behaviours is trying to distance themself from the potential failure of a task and in doing so, protect their self-esteem if something doesn’t work out as planned (Prapavessis & Grove, 1998). Examples of self-handicapping behaviours include; procrastination, overcommitting, avoidance, adopting a “sick role”, utilising alcohol, lack of effort, not taking time to practise, not putting effort in and avoiding challenges (Kearns, Forbes, Gardiner & Marshall, 2007). Self-handicapping has been linked to poor adjustment (Zuckerman, Kieffer, & Knee, 1998), higher levels of depression, reduced self-esteem and anxiety in both student and clinical samples (Lay & Silverman, 1996; Saddler & Sacks, 1993). Procrastination has probably received the most interest in the research literature as it is considered one of the most common forms of self-handicapping (Ellis & Knaus (1977). Procrastination has been associated with a reduced intention to engage in health behaviours (Sirois, 2004) and fewer wellness behaviours such as exercise and healthy eating (Sirois, Melia-Gordon & Pychyl, 2003). Procrastination has also been associated to higher stress levels and poor general health (Tice & Baumeister, 1997). According to Sirois (2007); “people who chronically procrastinate tend to not practice health protective behaviours, delay seeking care for their health problems, have higher stress levels, and report a greater number of acute health problems” (p. 2) Higher levels of perfectionism have been associated with a greater propensity to use selfhandicapping behaviours (Frost et al, 1990; Hobden & Pliner, 1995). These behaviours may be particularly attractive to perfectionists because these individuals may feel that they have a lot to lose in evaluative situations. Previous research has supported these findings identifying a propensity towards self-handicapping in people who have a high level of uncertainty about their skills and capabilities (Snyder & Smith, 1982). In recognising the close associations between perfectionism and self-handicapping, Kearns et al, (2007) proposed a model linking the two. They proposed self-handicapping behaviours may occur (although not always) in response to the flawed and biased cognitions that tend to be inherent in perfectionists. Although noting that both perfectionism and self-handicapping often appear to coincide with each other, these authors do suggest that the two do not always coexist, although, the close relationship between perfectionism and selfhandicapping may mean that perfectionists are more likely to utilise such strategies as an 55 excuse for not engaging in preventive health behaviours such as exercise and physical activity. Clear associations have been found between perceived stress and poor health outcomes (see section 3.4). There are many proposed ways that stress may influence health but one route may be through health behaviours. Research has provided evidence for an association between perceived stress and engagement in health risk behaviours such as smoking, alcohol consumption, and eating high fat foods (Abbey, Smith & Scott, 1993; Macht & Simons, 2000) suggesting that engaging in such behaviours can be a pleasurable experience (Zillman & Bryant, 1985) and help manage mood (Ng & Jeffery, 2003). Adler and Matthews (1994) have suggested that engaging in health risk behaviours acts as a means of offsetting the stress that one is dealing with. Although most studies have found a positive association between perceived stress and health behaviours such as following an unhealthy diet (Hellerstedt & Jeffery, 1997; Pak, Olsen & Mahoney, 2000), there have been less consistent results for studies that have addressed the relationship between stress and physical activity. Some studies have identified a relationship between reduced physical activity and stress (Heslop, Smith, Carroll et al, 2001; Stetson, Rahn, Dubbert, Wilner & Mercury, 1997) whilst some research has identified that adults increased physical activity when they experienced high levels of stress (Spillman, 1990). Adler and Matthews (1994) suggest engagement in health promoting behaviours is likely to be compromised in times of high stress. This has been supported by research looking at the effects of academic stress on health behaviours in young adults. Studies have identified that during periods of high stress (i.e. when academic demands were high) engagement in certain health behaviours was reduced. Specifically behaviours that required effort on the part of the individual were found to be diminished such as following a healthy diet or engaging in regular exercise whereas those behaviours requiring little effort (e.g. personal hygiene and keeping oneself safe) tended to be unaffected (Weidner, Kohlmann, Dotzauer & Burns, 1996). Adler and Matthews (1994) have suggested that the act of engaging in health promoting activities, at times of stress, may evoke certain behavioural demands on the individual that are simply too overwhelming for them to deal with. Research has shown that there is a well-established relationship between perfectionism and stress and research by Molnar et al (2012) has identified perceived stress to be one of the 56 key processes connecting perfectionism to indices of health. For maladaptive perfectionists where the pressure to meet high standards is already high, coupled with the presence of higher than normal levels of stress, the likelihood of having the resources to engage in preventive health behaviours may be compromised. Another factor potentially affecting engagement are motivational tendencies. Selfdetermined motivation has been consistently linked with the maintenance and perseverance of exercise and physical activity behaviours (Huberty, Ransdell, Sidman, et al, 2008; Wang & Biddle, 2001). A specific multidimensional framework for exploring motivation in an exercise/physical activity setting has been developed by Martin, Tipler, Marsh, Richards & Williams (2006). The model encompasses adaptive and maladaptive cognitions and behaviours that are considered to influence physical activity levels. Adaptive cognitions and behaviours are proposed to relate to factors that facilitate physical activity such as; the value individuals’ place on physical activity, beliefs that the desired levels of activity can be achieved as well as planning and maintaining regular activities. Maladaptive cognitions and behaviours are believed to encompass factors that may obstruct the engagement process such as; fear of negative evaluation, uncertainty, selfhandicapping behaviours, aversion to physical activity and withdrawal (Martin et al, 2006). The model has received support with the four factors being related to physical activity levels and the maintenance of physical activity and exercise (e.g. Marsh, Richards, Johnson et al (1994). Perfectionism has been considered as one of a number of variables that may underpin the motivational desires of individuals in an exercise and physical activity context (Longbottom et al, 2010). The adaptive and maladaptive aspects of perfectionism have been found to relate to the adaptive and maladaptive facets of physical activity motivation proposed by Martin et al (2006); specifically a positive association has been identified between the adaptive dimension of perfectionism and adaptive motivational cognitions and behaviours (such as confidence, self-efficacy and a proactive attitude) and the maladaptive dimensions of perfectionism related to maladaptive cognitions and behaviours (such as self-handicapping and avoidance), (Longbottom et al, 2010). These findings are supported by Slade & Owens’ dual process model of perfectionism (Slade & Owens, 1998), detailing a fundamental distinction between the two dimensions of perfectionism in relation to their behaviour; with adaptive perfectionists motivated to ‘approach’ situations and maladaptive perfectionists likely to ‘avoid’ situations. As well as identifying a potential barrier or 57 obstacle to engagement in preventive health behaviours, addressing the role of physical activity motivation in relation to the adaptive and maladaptive dimensions of perfectionism may add further support for the potential adaptiveness of the perfectionism construct. Another factor that may influence engagement in preventive health behaviours is selfefficacy. This concept refers to an individuals’ belief that they have the personal resources to carry out a desired behaviour in a particular context and the likelihood that it will be sustained in the event of potential barriers and setbacks. Self-efficacy, according to Bandura is not a global trait, rather, it can be described as “a differentiated set of selfbeliefs linked to distinct realms of functioning” (Bandura, 2006, p. 307). Bandura uses the example of a business executive who may possess a high level of efficacy in a work domain but low self-efficacy in terms of their beliefs about their parenting abilities. There is a considerable amount of research supporting the fact that self-efficacy is an important predictor and correlate of physical activity participation (e.g. Sallis & Hovell, 1990; Sallis, Hovell, Hofstetter et al, 1989). Individuals with high self-efficacy have been found to exert greater effort to conquer health promoting behaviours and persevere longer when there may be obstacles threatening to get in the way of their engagement in such behaviours (Laffrey, 2000). In contrast, low self-efficacy has been associated with a greater tendency to self-handicap, which in turn may affect engagement. In terms of the relationship between perfectionism and self-efficacy, Burns (1980) identified the two to be linked on a theoretical basis, predominantly due to the fact that both perfectionism and self-efficacy appear to be concerned with the setting and achievement of goals and standards. Perfectionists, according to Burns (1980) are likely to have low self-efficacy because of the unrealistically high standards they often set themselves, “Stated simply, the higher the standard of success, the less likely it is that a successful result will be perceived as a probable outcome. Thus, the perfectionist minimizes outcome efficacy by setting over-ambitious and nearly inaccessible goals” (Burns, 1980, p. 38) Research investigating the relationship between perfectionism and self-efficacy has identified the possibility that the two dimensions of perfectionism (adaptive and maladaptive) may be differentially related to self-efficacy, (Dunkley et al, 2003; Hart, Gilner, Handal & Gfeller, 1998; Stoeber & Otto, 2006). As both perfectionism and selfefficacy are concerned with the setting of personal goals and standards, a factor that is 58 considered to distinguish adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists, (and that may help explain the link with self-efficacy) is the way that adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists cope with failing to meet their expected standards of performance. Adaptive perfectionists, in contrast to maladaptive perfectionists, are considered to have more tolerance and be more accepting of themselves when their expected standards are not achieved. Another common theme between perfectionism and self-efficacy appears to relate to the way that an individual may deal with a task or potential challenge. According to Slade & Owens (1998), adaptive perfectionists are more likely to ‘approach’ challenges with a positive focus whereas maladaptive perfectionists will be more likely to ‘avoid’ situations for fear of negative evaluation and fear of failure. Similarly, self-efficacy research has identified that individuals with high self-efficacy tend to adopt a ‘performance-approach orientation’ and individuals with low self-efficacy possess a ’performance-avoidance orientation’ (Wolters, Yu, & Pintrich, 1996). Self-efficacy research has generally identified higher levels of self-efficacy for adaptive perfectionists compared to maladaptive or nonperfectionists (Locicero & Ashby, 2000) which as well as confirming the link between perfectionism and self-efficacy, could suggest a potential health benefit associated with being an adaptive perfectionist. 2.2.6 Treating perfectionists As discussed in the preceding subsections of this chapter, perfectionism has been viewed by many to be a maladaptive personality style that has the potential to bring with it various problems and difficulties for the individual, specifically with respect to their health and wellbeing. Following on from this, it would appear that if perfectionists are to be considered to be an “at risk” group then it is vitally important to consider how perfectionists respond to treatment for both physical and psychological problems. If perfectionists represent a client group that are difficult to treat then the health implications of this personality dimension may be more significant than first anticipated. Evidence suggests that across a multitude of different therapeutic modalities, perfectionists have particular problems that tend to impede the successful course of therapy and treatment. Examples of such problems include difficulties forming a good therapeutic relationship/working alliance with their therapist (Blatt & Zuroff, 2002), difficulties 59 adhering to treatment guidelines (e.g. regarding taking medications, Scott, 2001) and selfreports of disappointing treatment outcomes (Blatt & Zuroff, 2002; Scott, 2001). Some authors have tried to formulate possible explanations for the potential difficulties treating perfectionists. Problems associated with forming a successful therapeutic relationship have been hypothesised as being associated with an unwillingness to reveal intimate details of personal difficulties to another individual for fear that such selfdisclosure may be perceived as a personal weakness or as an admission of failure (Habke, 1997; Nadler, 1983). The self-presentational aspect of the perfectionism construct has been discussed in the preceding sections of this chapter and the desire to self-present a flawless image, whilst trying at all costs to conceal any negative personal information is more likely to lead to a reluctance to ask for/seek help for personal difficulties (Flett & Hewitt, 2002). Such reluctance has been identified as leading to an increase in levels of psychological distress a well as having the potential to undermine the entire treatment process (Habke¸ Hewitt, & Flett, 2001). It may also be the case that perfectionists have unrealistic expectations about wanting to create the perfect environment in therapy i.e. to be the perfect client or by placing excessive and unrealistic demands on the therapist to embody the characteristics of the perfect therapist (Flett & Hewitt, 2002). Sorotzkin (1998) has addressed the desire for perfectionists to try and achieve perfection in the treatment process; “as they become more knowledgeable about psychological issues, they may also become perfectionistic in the process of therapy, by trying to become the perfect emotional specimen (i.e. by not having any anxieties, conflicts or fears)” (p. 92). Research has also examined how well perfectionists adhere to treatment plans and medication regimens. Flett et al, (1995) have highlighted that perfectionists generally have an elevated need for control and such adherence to treatment plans is likely to interfere with their need for personal regulation. Length of treatment has also been considered as an important factor influencing the success of therapy. Some would argue that only long-term therapeutic interventions are likely to be beneficial due to the deep rooted nature of many perfectionistic traits (e.g. Blatt, Quinlan, Pilkoms & Shea, 1995) and that short term therapies may simply not be enough to address the core beliefs associated with the perfectionism construct. 60 Specific cognitive biases that have been associated with perfectionism may also hinder successful treatment. Selectively attending to the possibility of failure as well as a compulsion to monitor performance have been identified as two cognitive biases that may interfere with the treatment process (Shafran & Mansell, 2001). Additionally the dichotomous thinking style that is common to perfectionism may interfere with treatment outcomes. All or nothing thinking can make it difficult for perfectionists to notice and appreciate small improvements in therapy and attribute these to a successful outcome (Sorotzkin, 1998). An additional problem seems to be reluctance on the part of the perfectionist to let go of unrealistically high standards during the treatment process. Despite having information to suggest that pushing oneself towards such unrealistically high standards may be detrimental for health, individuals may still find it hard to let go of them. There may be a number of possible explanations for this; firstly individuals may perceive that their high standards have for the most part served them well e.g. in a work setting this may have contributed to them reaching a high position with high earnings, secondly, perfectionistic beliefs have often had their origins in childhood and therefore such ingrained personality traits are difficult to change and finally, according to Greenspon (2014) we live in a society where perfectionistic traits are necessary to deal with the fierce competition that exists in the workplace. In western society, particularly, there are clear and often tangible rewards attached to pushing oneself to reach high standards and such traits are often praised and rewarded, therefore it may be almost inconceivable for some perfectionists to consider adjusting their standards. Being aware of how perfectionists react to treatment and how perfectionism may interfere with the treatment process may be helpful for health professionals in developing more appropriate treatment programs that can be specifically directed towards helping individuals who suffer from the maladaptive traits of the perfectionism construct. Additionally knowing levels of perfectionism (i.e. adaptive and maladaptive traits) pretreatment via effective assessment and screening methods may help more accurately match individuals to the most effective treatment modalities. 61 2.2.7 Can perfectionism be beneficial to health and wellbeing? As discussed in the previous chapter, there has been considerable debate over the issue of whether or not there is an adaptive side to the perfectionism construct, which may bring potential benefits to health and wellbeing (e.g. Slade & Owens, 1998). This issue has already been discussed from a theoretical and conceptual viewpoint earlier in the present chapter and now consideration is given to the practical implications of there being an adaptive and healthy type of perfectionism. Research addressing the relationship between the maladaptive aspects of perfectionism and dysfunction has been more consistent than research that has addressed the relationship between adaptive perfectionism and healthy functioning. Indeed for the adaptive dimension there has been equivocal findings with some authors supporting healthy and positive associations (e.g. Frost et al, 1993) and others providing evidence to suggest that the so called adaptive dimension may lead to various levels of maladjustment and poor physical health outcomes too (Saboonchi & Lundh, 2003; Molnar et al, 2006). There is also evidence to suggest, according to the perfectionism diathesis stress model proposed by Hewitt & Flett, (1993; 2002) that under certain circumstances the apparently higher functioning perfectionists (those demonstrating higher levels of the more adaptive selforiented perfectionism) may be vulnerable to increased depressive symptomatology and suicide potential when stress interferes or blocks their attempts to meet their high standards. According to Stoeber & Otto (2006) the equivocal findings concerning the existence of a positive and healthy side to perfectionism rest upon several inconsistencies in the research literature, including the use of a variety of different labels, features and combinations of these components that researchers have utilised to formulate their conceptualisations. A further problem may be derived from difficulties associated with trying to accurately identify the influence of one or other of the two perfectionism dimensions. Perfectionism has been found to be characterised by coexisting levels of both the adaptive and maladaptive traits and therefore it may be difficult to accurately extrapolate the unique effect of each of the dimensions and their relative associations with health and wellbeing. Being able to say, unequivocally, that a healthy type of perfectionism exists would have implications for the assessment and treatment of individuals presenting with problems associated with perfectionism. Similar to the views of Slade & Owens (1998) a positive 62 form of perfectionism could be considered advantageous for the individual and could be nurtured and encouraged. Also knowing how the different dimensions of perfectionism are related to different problems could aid our understanding of particular conditions and disorders and knowing levels of perfectionism (i.e. adaptive and maladaptive traits) pretreatment via effective assessment and screening methods may help more accurately match individuals to the most effective treatment modalities. Research exploring the relative contribution of the dimensions of perfectionism, in relation to health outcomes, may be a promising area of research. It has already been recognised that there are differences between various conditions and disorders with respect to their associated levels of the adaptive and maladaptive dimensions. Although demonstrating similar levels of the maladaptive dimensions, individuals with depression and anxiety have been found to differ on the achievement striving or adaptive dimension of perfectionism (Bardone-Cone et al, 2007) with individuals suffering from depression possessing higher levels of the adaptive traits than anxiety sufferers (Hewitt & Flett, 1991b; Norman et al, 1998). Similar results have been found for Anorexia Nervosa (Bardone-Cone et al, 2007) and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (Deary & Chalder, 2010) with both being identified as showing high levels of both the adaptive and maladaptive traits. Perhaps it is the case that the dysfunction associated with high levels of maladaptive perfectionism is somehow offset by the accompanying high levels of the adaptive perfectionism dimension, thus neutralising the level of dysfunction and offering some type of psychological buffer as has been suggested for conscientiousness (Carver & Conner-Smith, 2010). It is difficult, however, to make such inferences (i.e. suggesting there may be some benefits to health and wellbeing) when discussing conditions that are unquestionably inherently dysfunctional. Personality research may have added some clarity to the situation; conscientiousness, a personality trait that has been thought to have considerable overlap with perfectionism has been identified as having an “enabling” function (Weiss & Costa, 2005) with regards to protecting against the effects of stress (McCrae & Costa 1987). The “protective or buffering effect” of conscientiousness with regard to longevity has also received much support in the literature (e.g. Friedman, Tucker, Tomlinson-Keasy et al, 1993; Kern & Friedman, 2008; Roberts et al, 2007) and higher levels of conscientiousness have also been associated with greater engagement in positive health behaviours (Bogg & Roberts, 2004). There appear to be clear associations between conscientious related traits and positive health outcomes. 63 There is clearly a bias in the research literature focussing on studies that have addressed the relationship between the maladaptive dimensions of perfectionism and various health related problems and with the more recent conceptualisations focussing on the clinical manifestations of perfectionistic traits, this disparity is likely to increase. There is no doubt that addressing the needs of individuals struggling to deal with the consequences of the more extreme and dysfunctional forms of perfectionism has to take priority, however, there would also seem to be a need for more research addressing the potentially protective aspects of perfectionism. Such findings may provide insights that could be refined in such a way as to help vulnerable individuals suffering from the negative effects of high levels of maladaptive perfectionism. 2.2.8 Conclusion to part 2 The main objective of the present literature review was to bring together some of the key research areas within the field of perfectionism and health with the intention of answering two key questions; do maladaptive perfectionists represent a high risk group in terms of health and wellbeing? And, is there an adaptive type of perfectionism that is beneficial to health and wellbeing? It would seem that taking into account the different research areas that have been discussed in this literature review and which fall within the field of perfectionism and health; there is a considerable amount of research suggesting that maladaptive perfectionists may represent a high risk group in terms of health and wellbeing. With this in mind, it seems reasonable to suggest that a justifiable avenue of research is to address whether maladaptive perfectionists (and adaptive perfectionists) actively take steps to look after their health and wellbeing by engaging in preventive health behaviours as well as identify any intervening variables in the relationship. When addressing the second question regarding the potential adaptiveness of the perfectionism construct, the answers are not so clear. Equivocal findings within the research domains discussed in the present chapter have not been able to provide a definite answer of whether or not there is an adaptive form of perfectionism that may be beneficial to health and wellbeing. Further research in this field is clearly required. This thesis aims to look at the 64 potential differences between the adaptive and maladaptive dimensions of perfectionism to attempt to add support for their being a potentially adaptive and health enhancing form of perfectionism. 65 Chapter 3 Study 1 The Relationship between Perfectionism and Engagement in Preventive health Behaviours: The Mediating Role of Self-Concealment3 The previous chapter provided a review of the literature concerning two areas of perfectionism; part 1 was a review of the conceptualisations/definitions and formulations of perfectionism and part 2 was a review of the area of perfectionism, health and health behaviours. The available literature points unequivocally to a well-established relationship between perfectionism and unfavourable health outcomes. Having established that maladaptive perfectionists may already be at risk from a health point of view, the next step was to address whether perfectionists look after their health and wellbeing by engaging in preventive health behaviours. The first study addressed the area of perfectionism and a sub-type of self-presentation; self-concealment, in relation to engagement in preventive health behaviours. 3.1 Introduction Both perfectionism and the self-presentational traits allied with perfectionism have been linked to a wide range of unfavourable health outcomes. These include difficulties of both a psychological and physical nature and are discussed in detail in chapter 2 (part 2). The significance of the problem has been exemplified by recent research suggesting that the suicide risk in perfectionists has been gravely underestimated due to the self-presentational need of many perfectionists to keep their difficulties concealed in order to maintain the appearance of a perfect and flawless image (Flett et al, 2014). The maladaptive aspects of the perfectionism construct have been associated with a multitude of different health concerns including; anxiety (Antony et al, 1998; Shafran & Mansell, 2001), substance abuse (Pacht, 1984), chronic pain (Liebman, 1978), coronary heart disease (Pacht, 1984), stress (Hewitt & Flett, 2002), depression (Blatt, 1995; Chang, 2000; Enns & Cox, 1999; Frost et al, 1990; Frost et al, 1993; Hewitt & Flett, 1991; Kawamura, Hunt & Frost, 2001; Pacht, 1984), eating disorders (Bardone-Cone et al, 2007; 3 This chapter represents an earlier version of a published study: Williams, C., & Cropley, M. (2014). The relationship between perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours: The mediating role of self-concealment. Journal of Health Psychology, 19(10) 1211-1221. 66 Bieling et al, 2004; Fairburn, et al, 2003), Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (Bardone-Cone et al, 2007), Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (Deary & Chalder, 2010) and suicide (Flett et al, 2014). Although some authors have suggested that the adaptive dimensions of perfectionism may be associated with noticeable benefits to health and wellbeing (specifically in the form of improvements in psychological functioning, Frost et al, 1993), this has remained a contentious issue in the research literature with some authors arguing (from a health perspective) that perfectionism can only be viewed as negative and maladaptive, (Flett et al, 1991). For a full discussion of this topic please refer chapter 2, part 2. The self-presentational desires of perfectionists have been identified as consisting of a dual need to project and display a flawless image (self-promotion) coupled with a simultaneous desire to conceal and withhold personally sensitive information (self-concealment), (Hewitt et al, 2003). The use of self-presentational strategies by perfectionists seems to be concerned with the need to manage and control the social impressions of others. Sorotzkin (1985) believed that the need for admiration and approval from others leads the perfectionist to attempt to create a socially acceptable persona that will protect them from the potential rejection of others. Research has identified that trying to both present and protect a flawless image may place considerable strain on an individuals’ health and wellbeing and the self-concealment dimension of self-presentation has been identified as having the closest relationship to maladjustment (Kelly, 2002). Elevated levels of self-concealment have been associated with a range of negative health related outcomes including anxiety, depression (Kahn & Hessling, 2001), symptoms of illness (Larson & Chastain, 1990) and self-reported distress (Cepeda-Benito & Short, 1998). Additionally the need to conceal one’s imperfections has been related to; a diminished desire to seek help (Hewitt et al, 2003), less of an inclination to pursue counselling (Cepeda-Benito & Short, 1998), difficulties forming lasting and trusting relationships with other people (Derlaga, et al, 1993), lower levels of seeking out and utilising social support networks (Kawamura and Frost, 2004) and decreased motivation to engage in physical activity and exercise behaviour (Leary, 1992). One possible reason for the negative associations with self-concealment may be due to the additional effort and self-control required on the part of the individual to hide potentially sensitive and personal information from others, which may lead to an increase in 67 psychological and physiological symptoms (Kahn & Hessling, 2001). Unfortunately, it would appear that actively concealing negative information relating to the self (Larson & Chastain, 1990) is not a long-term healthy strategy for living; at some point it is likely that the individual will either be required to demonstrate their perceived inadequacies and flaws to others or may accidentally let their guard down and expose their imperfections. Either way, additional psychological pressure is likely to be involved in the maintenance of such a false persona. Hewitt and Flett (2002) have suggested that high levels of selfconcealment may be detrimental to health because of an association with increased levels of perceived stress. The relationship between perfectionism, stress and health has been discussed in chapter 2 (part 2). Although there is only a small amount of research that has focussed specifically on perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours (Longbottom et al, 2010; 2012), a small body of research has looked at the association between self-presentation and exercise behaviour/physical activity. Research by Hausenblas, et al, (2004) has identified self-presentation to be an important factor influencing decision to engage in physical activity behaviour. In an exercise context, self-presentational concerns have been found to have the potential to either encourage or deter exercise behaviour, for example a person may be motivated to engage due to a desire to self-present themselves as someone who is healthy, fit and toned. However, if there is any doubt about one’s ability to do this (e.g. they are worried about revealing their imperfections and being perceived as unhealthy, unfit and uncoordinated) then these self-presentational concerns may deter them from engaging (Leary, 1992). In the perfectionism literature this finding has been supported by research by Hewitt et al, (2003) who have suggested that perfectionists may avoid situations that risk exposing a less than perfect image. Furthermore, when investigating the role of perfectionism in eating disturbances, Chang, Ivezaj, Downey et al, 2008 identified an association between perfectionism and poor uptake of health behaviours. The purpose of the present study was to concentrate on the potential role of selfconcealment in the relationship between perfectionism (adaptive and maladaptive) and engagement in preventive health behaviours. There is certainly evidence to suggest that type of perfectionism may influence the motivation to engage in certain preventive health behaviours, such as exercise and physical activity (Longbottom et al, 2010; 2012) and there is also research that has considered the negative implications of high levels of selfconcealment (e.g. increased levels of psychopathology, higher levels of stress and 68 decreased motivation to engage in physical activity and exercise behaviour). It may be the case that self-concealment when coupled with the maladaptive dimensions of perfectionism has the potential to add to the vulnerability of perfectionists and further reduce their desire to engage in preventive health behaviours. The self-presentational need to self-conceal negative personal information relating to the self may lead to an avoidance of engagement in such behaviours, particularly those involving a public display of one’s abilities (e.g. exercise classes and physical activity behaviours) for fear of exposing a less than perfect persona. Previous research has investigated the role of self-concealment as a potential mediator in the relationship between maladaptive perfectionism and psychological distress (Kawamura & Frost, 2004). On this occasion, self-concealment was found to fully mediate the relationship, suggesting that the desire to withhold personally relevant information may be instrumental to the psychological distress experienced by perfectionists. Life-satisfaction and wellbeing were also addressed in the present study. Previous research has identified a negative association between the maladaptive aspect of perfectionism and both life-satisfaction and wellbeing (Park & Jeong, 2015; Greblo, Zrinka, Bosnar & Ksenija, 2008) suggesting that individuals possessing more of the maladaptive perfectionistic traits tend to experience a poorer quality of life and a diminished sense of wellbeing. The adaptive perfectionism dimensions, in contrast, have been associated with higher levels of life-satisfaction (Chang, 2000; Chang et al, 2004; Gilman, Ashby, Sverko, et al, 2005; Greblo et al, 2008). Recent research has identified adaptive perfectionists to possess higher levels of life satisfaction than maladaptive perfectionists and higher levels of psychological wellbeing than both maladaptive and non-perfectionists (Park & Jeong, 2015). The identification of the adaptive perfectionism dimension being related to higher levels of wellbeing than non-perfectionists suggests the possibility of there being some positive and enhancing qualities inherent in adaptive perfectionists. As identified in chapter 2 (part 2), despite the wealth of research linking the negative/maladaptive aspects of the perfectionism construct with various psychological difficulties, and the identification of an association between the self-presentational dimensions of perfectionism and poor health outcomes, there has been little research to establish how well perfectionists look after their health and wellbeing. This study is an attempt to address a gap in the literature concerning the relationships between perfectionism, self-concealment and engagement in preventive health behaviours. The 69 intention is to further research in the area by addressing the mediating role of selfconcealment in the relationship between maladaptive perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours. Whilst supporting previous research that has been instrumental in linking the maladaptive dimension of perfectionism with psychopathology and poor physical health outcomes, the present study does also supports the potentially adaptive side of the perfectionism construct. The positive premise of the thesis postulates (in accordance with previous research) that there may be some inherent advantages to being an adaptive perfectionist in terms of health and wellbeing and therefore the hypotheses reflect a positive bias whereby adaptive perfectionism (when compared to maladaptive perfectionism) is predicted to be associated with more engagement in preventive health behaviours, lower levels of psychological distress and noticeable psychological benefits such as greater satisfaction with life and a greater sense of psychological wellbeing. 3.1.1 Hypotheses 1. Maladaptive perfectionism is predicted to be associated with lower levels of engagement in preventive health behaviours and adaptive perfectionism associated with higher levels of engagement 2. Maladaptive perfectionism is predicted to be positively associated with selfconcealment and self-concealment is proposed to be associated with lower levels of engagement in preventive health behaviours. 3. Both maladaptive perfectionism and self-concealment are predicted to be associated with elevated levels of psychological distress and reduced levels of both life-satisfaction and wellbeing. Adaptive perfectionism is predicted to be associated with lower levels of psychological distress and higher levels of both lifesatisfaction and wellbeing. 4. Self-concealment will be identified as a mediator in the relationships between; maladaptive perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours and self-concealment and psychological distress. 70 3.2 Method Participants and Procedure Participants were students at the University of Surrey, recruited through an email advertisement circulated to all students. Of the final sample (N=370), 287 (77%) were women and 83 were men (23%). Their mean age was 26.72 years (SD = 9.4). Of the sample, 44% were undergraduate students (n = 164) and 51% were postgraduate students (n = 188), the remaining 5% (n = 18) did not specify level of study. Participants completed an online questionnaire that was designed to find out about various aspects of health and wellbeing as well as engagement in preventive health behaviours. 3.2.1 Measures Perfectionism To assess adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism, four of the subscales of the Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (FMPS, Frost et al, 1990) were used (this scale has been summarised in chapter 2, part 1). For adaptive perfectionism, the subscales of Personal Standards (7 items) and Organisation (6 items) were summed to form a total adaptive perfectionism score (Adaptive Perf.). Examples of questions encompassing the adaptive dimension of perfectionism included “I expect higher performance in my everyday tasks than most people” and “Neatness is very important for me”. A high score indicates a higher level of adaptive perfectionism. The use of these two subscales to represent a measure of adaptive perfectionism has been supported by previous research, showing good internal reliability, Cronbach’s alpha, 0.88 (Chang et al, 2004; Harris et al, 2008). For maladaptive perfectionism, the Concern over Mistakes (CM) and Doubts about Actions (DA) subscales of the Frost et al scale were utilised and summed to form a measure of maladaptive perfectionism (Maladaptive Perf.). Examples of questions to assess the maladaptive dimension of the perfectionism construct included, “If I fail partly, it is as bad as being a complete failure” and “I tend to get behind on my work because I repeat things over and over”. A high score denoted a higher level of maladaptive perfectionism. The use of these two subscales to represent a measure of maladaptive perfectionism has been utilised and supported in the research literature (Dunn et al, 2006; 71 Frost et al, 1990; Harris et al, 2008; Wei et al, 2004). Cronbach’s alpha for the two subscales combines has been found to be 0.87 (Harris et al, 2008). Self-Concealment The Self-Concealment Scale (SCS; Larson & Chastain, 1990) was used to assess selfconcealment. The scale consists of ten items addressing an individual’s desire to conceal negative personal information. Examples of questions included; “When something bad happens to me, I tend to keep it to myself” and “I have negative thoughts about myself that I never share with anyone”. Participants are asked to rate their agreement with the various statements on a five point Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). A total score is then derived, with high scores denoting a greater tendency to selfconceal. The scale has been shown to be reliable, with favourable test-retest and interim reliability. Internal consistency has been reported to be good, α = 0.83 (Larson & Chastain, 1990). The scale is generally considered to be a valid means of assessing the tendency to conceal personal information. Engagement in Preventive Health Behaviours This questionnaire was designed for the present study and was an adaptation of the General Preventive Behaviours Checklist (Amir, 1987). It required respondents to rate on a three point scale the frequency with which they carry out a range of preventive health behaviours. Areas addressed included diet, exercise, physical activity, avoidance of cigarettes and alcohol, social interaction, work, and emotional well-being. Examples of questions included; “I eat a balanced diet”, “I do regular aerobic or strenuous exercise”, “I avoid overworking” and “I avoid too much emotional distress”. Responses were summed to form a total engagement score with higher scores indicating a greater amount of engagement in preventive health behaviours. An acceptable level of internal reliability was found for scale in the present study (Chronbach’s alpha, .84). 72 Psychological Distress The Hopkins Symptom Checklist-21 was utilised (HSCL-21; Green, Walkey, McCormick & Taylor, 1988) as a measure of general psychological and symptom distress. This measure gauges the respondent’s current experience of somatic, performance and general distress by asking individuals to indicate how much they have been affected by these types of symptoms in “the past seven days, including today”. The scale consists of 21 items scored on a four point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree). A high score overall, denotes a higher degree of psychological distress. The scale has good internal reliability (α = 0.90; Green, et al, 1988) and has adequate test-retest reliability, construct and concurrent validity (Deane, Leathern & Spicer, 1992). The use of this scale as a valid and reliable method of assessing psychological distress has been supported in the research literature (Harari, Waehler & Rogers, 2005; Komiya, Good & Sherrod, 2000). Life satisfaction To assess life satisfaction, the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS; Diener, Emmons, Larson et al, 1985) was used. This consists of five items rated on a seven point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Higher scores denote greater life satisfaction. An encouraging level of reliability and internal consistency has been found, Cronbach’s alpha, 0.87 (Diener et al, 1985). In terms of validity, the scale correlates moderately well with other subjective well-being scales (Pavot, Diener, Colvin & Sandvik, 1991). Wellbeing To provide a measure of general well-being the WHO-5 WellBeing index (Bech, Gudex & Johansen, 1996) was employed. It covers the following areas; positive mood, vitality and general interest. Each of the five items is rated on a six point Likert scale from 0 (not present) to 5 (constantly present). A total score is derived from summing the five items, with higher scores corresponding to a greater sense of wellbeing. Findings suggest good reliability and validity, Cronbach’s alpha = 0.82, (Bech, Olsen, Kjoller & Rasmussen, 2003; De Wit, Pouwer, Gemke et al, 2007). 73 3.2.2 Data Analysis The research design for the present study was primarily correlational. Mediation analyses were also carried out to determine the importance of self-concealment in the relationship between maladaptive perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours and maladaptive perfectionism and psychological distress. To test for mediation, there needs to be the suggestion of a causal sequence between three variables, i.e. that one variable affects the second variable which will in turn affect a third variable. There are a number of different ways of testing for mediation; one accepted method is to follow the steps proposed by Baron & Kenny (1986) that utilises a series of regression equations. According to these authors, for a variable to be considered a mediator, a number of conditions need to be satisfied; firstly the independent variable must significantly predict the dependent variable, secondly the independent variable must significantly predict the mediator, and thirdly the mediator must significantly predict the dependent variable whilst controlling for the independent variable. The final step is to check for mediation. Full or complete mediation is suggested if the effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable falls close to zero once the mediator has been introduced into the prediction. If the effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable is reduced, but not to zero, partial mediation is indicated. No reduction in the effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable with the addition of the mediator indicates that there is no mediation. The majority of research studies adhere to the Baron and Kenny (1986) steps to establish whether mediation has occurred and do not take this one step further and test the significance of the indirect effect. Such a procedure is considered to be a more stringent test of mediation (Sobel, 1982). In a review of fourteen methods to assess mediation, Mackinnon, Lockwood, Hoffman et al, (2002) have suggested the Sobel test (and its variants) to be superior with respect to power and ease of application. 74 Figure 3.1 Testing the indirect effect using the method outlined by Sobel (1982) M (Sa) (Sb) a IV b c DV To establish mediation using the Sobel Test (1982) you need to find the standard error of a and b (Fig.1). This can be done by performing two steps; firstly carrying out a regression analysis with the independent variable predicting the mediator to give you the unstandardised regression coefficient (a) and the standard error of a (Sa), secondly performing a regression analysis with both the independent variable and the mediator predicting the dependent variable, which will give you the unstandardised regression coefficient of b and the standard error of b (Sb). Finally, the resulting Z value is calculated by performing the following equation; a*b Z= (b2 *Sa 2 + a2 *Sb2 ) Assuming you have a fairly sizable sample, minimal measurement error in the mediator and the dependent variable does not significantly predict the mediator, a result of +/- 1.96 will be considered significant at the 0.05 level. 3.3 Results Analyses are separated into three sections. The first section comprises the preliminary analysis consisting of sample demographics, means (M), standard deviations (SDs) and reliabilities (Cronbach’s alpha α) for all the major variables (Table 3.1). Secondly the results of the correlational analyses are presented in Table 3.2. The results from the mediation analyses are displayed diagrammatically and regression coefficients presented in Table 3.3. 75 Sample Demographics Table 3.1: Sample Demographics; means, standard deviations and reliabilities for all variables n Age 18-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+ Level of Study Undergraduate Postgraduate Not specified Variables Adaptive Perf. (PS and O) Maladaptive Perf. (CM and DA) Self-Concealment (SCS) Engagement in Preventive Health Behaviour Psychological Distress (HSCL-21) Wellbeing (WHO-5) Life-Satisfaction (SWLS) (%) 267 56 33 11 3 (72.2) (15.1) (8.9) (3) (0.8) 164 188 18 (44) (51) (5) (M) (SD) (α) 45.42 8.41 0.88 34.90 9.12 0.89 27.96 8.74 0.89 31.9 8.30 0.84 37.55 9.88 0.90 12.55 6.96 0.87 22.14 6.96 0.88 Adaptive Perf = adaptive perfectionism, PS= personal standards, O= organisation, Maladaptive Perf=maladaptive perfectionism, CM= concern over mistakes, DA= doubts about actions Correlational Analyses As predicted a significant negative association was found between maladaptive perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours (r = -0.330, p<0.01) 76 suggesting that those participants scoring highly on the negative aspects of perfectionism engaged less in behaviours that could potentially benefit their health. A small yet significant correlation was found for adaptive perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours (r = 0.254, p<0.01) suggesting those participants scoring highly on the more adaptive elements of perfectionism may be more inclined to take preventive steps as far as health behaviours are concerned (hypothesis 1). For perfectionism and self-concealment, a positive association was observed between maladaptive perfectionism and self-concealment, (r = 0.471, p<0.01), although, adaptive perfectionism and self-concealment were shown to be uncorrelated. This may suggest that self-concealment is a factor present predominantly in maladaptive perfectionism and not perfectionism per se. When the relationship between self-concealment and engagement was examined, an inverse relationship was found (r = .0.346, p<0.01) suggesting as selfconcealment increases, there is a corresponding decrease in engagement in preventive health behaviours, (hypothesis 2). Addressing the relationship between perfectionism (adaptive and maladaptive) and psychological distress, no relationship was observed for adaptive perfectionism, although a significant positive correlation was observed for maladaptive perfectionism (r = 0.533, p<0.01). Such findings support previous research linking the negative aspects of perfectionism with greater psychological distress. As expected and in support of earlier work, self-concealment and psychological distress were positively correlated (r = 0.486, p<0.01). In consideration of the relationships between perfectionism, life-satisfaction and wellbeing, maladaptive perfectionism was associated with lower levels of both variables (r = -0.376, p<0.01 and r = -0.439, p<0.01 respectively). No relationship was observed between adaptive perfectionism and either life-satisfaction or wellbeing. Similar to maladaptive perfectionism, self-concealment was also associated with diminished levels of both, life-satisfaction and wellbeing, r = -0.361, p<0.01 and r = -0.355, p<0.01 respectively, (hypothesis 3). 77 Table 3.2 Correlation matrix for all major variables Variables 1. Adaptive Perf. 2. Maladaptive Perf. 3. Self-Concealment 4. Engagement 5. Psychological Distress 6. Wellbeing 7. Life-Satisfaction 1 .347** -.011 .254** -.012 .081 .112* 2 .471** -.330** .533** -.439** -.376** 3 -.346** .486** -.355** -.361** 4 -.396** .524** .380** 5 -.562** -.404** 6 7 .563** - Note. Engagement = Engagement in Preventive Health Behaviours *p < .05. **p <.01 78 Mediation Analyses Mediation (hypothesis 4) was tested according to the method outlined by Baron and Kenny (1984) and the significance of the indirect effect calculated using the Sobel Test (Sobel, 1982). Unstandardised regression coefficients were used in the calculations. The results of the Sobel Test are presented diagrammatically to aid understanding, and the regression coefficients presented in Table 3 and 4. Figure 3.2 The Mediating Role of Self-Concealment in the Relationship Between maladaptive Perfectionism and Engagement in Preventive Health Behaviours SelfConcealment (Sa) = .044 (Sb) = .052 a = .451 Maladaptive Perfectionism b = -.232 c Engagement in Preventive Health Behaviours Z = -4.091 79 Table 3.3 Summary of the Regression Analysis for the Variables; Maladaptive Perfectionism, Self-Concealment and Engagement in Preventive Health Behaviours Variable/s Unstandardised (B) Standardised (Beta) Step 1 Mal P X Engagement -.300† -.330† .451† .471† Y Step 2 Mal P X Self-Concealment M Step 3 Mal P + Self-C Engagement X M Y -.195† (Mal P) -.215† (Mal P) -.232† (Self-C) -.244† (Self-C) Note: Step 2 is identical for both mediation analyses and therefore will not appear on the next table. Mal P = maladaptive perfectionism, Self-C = self-concealment, Engagement = engagement in preventive health behaviours. † p<.001 When considering self-concealment as a mediator in the relationship between maladaptive perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours, the result of the Sobel Test was significant (z = -4.091). The regression coefficient (Step 1, B = -.300, p<.001; Step 3, B = -.195, p<0.001), however has not been reduced adequately to suggest full mediation. This result suggests that self-concealment partially mediates the relationship between maladaptive perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours. 80 Figure 3.3 The Mediating Role of Self-Concealment in the Relationship Between maladaptive Perfectionism and Psychological Distress SelfConcealment (Sa) = .044 (Sb) = .054 a = .451 Maladaptive Perfectionism b = .341 Psychological Distress c Z = 5.395 Table 3.4 Summary for the Regression Analysis for the Variables; Maladaptive Perfectionism, Self-Concealment and Psychological Distress Variable/s Unstandardised (B) Standardised (Beta) Step 1 Mal P .577† Psych dist X .533† Y Step 3 Mal P + Self-C Psych dist X M Y .423† (Mal P) .390† (Mal P) .341† (Self-C) .302† (Self-C) Note. Psych dist = psychological distress, † p<.001 Similarly for the relationship between maladaptive perfectionism and psychological distress although the result of the Sobel Test was again significant (z = 5.395), the regression coefficient, was not reduced enough to indicate full mediation (Step 1, B = .557, p<.001; Step 3, B =.423, p<,001), therefore self-concealment can only be considered a partial mediator. 81 3.4 Discussion In accordance with the proposed hypotheses, maladaptive perfectionism was found to be related to lower levels of engagement in preventive health behaviours and adaptive perfectionism related to higher levels of engagement. This finding was consistent with Slade and Owens’ (1998) theory concerning the motivations driving perfectionistic behaviour, specifically the suggestion that adaptive perfectionists may be more inclined to “approach” challenging situations and maladaptive perfectionists more likely to “avoid” or escape from difficult situations (see chapter 2, part 1). Research by Longbottom et al (2010) has also identified adaptive perfectionism being associated with adaptive cognitions and behaviours related to engagement in exercise. Furthermore research by Chang et al (2008) has identified a positive association between the adaptive dimension of perfectionism and increased uptake of health behaviours. There may be many reasons for the lower levels of engagement identified for maladaptive perfectionism. One possible avenue of reasoning for the lower levels of engagement on the part of maladaptive perfectionists may be related to the self-presentational dimension of perfectionism. Avoidance may seem to be the logical and preferred option when there is the fear of exposing one’s imperfections to others. Certain health behaviours do often involve the need to perform in front of others such as exercise classes or attending a gym, and these activities may be particularly challenging for perfectionists as there is the risk that their imperfections may be on public display. This could arguably interfere with their core perception of themselves and specifically their need and ability to maintain a flawless persona. Hewitt et al (2003) have identified that some perfectionists will go to great lengths to avoid negative evaluation and will at all costs endeavour to keep their imperfections hidden. A further explanation for the lack of engagement may involve the use of self-handicapping tendencies such as procrastination, over-committing, not putting effort in and avoiding challenges (Kearns, Forbes & Gardiner, 2007). Self-handicapping behaviour can be described as a type self-presentational strategy that has been associated with a reduced intention to engage in preventive health behaviours (Sirois, 2004) (see chapter 3). Higher levels of perfectionism have also been associated with a greater propensity to use selfhandicapping behaviours (Frost et al, 1990; Hobden & Pliner, 1995) and such behaviours are thought to have an inherent appeal to perfectionists who may feel they have much to 82 lose in evaluative situations. Perfectionism and self-handicapping are thought to share many common features including striving for extremely high standards, dissatisfaction if such standards are not met and an excessive and often debilitating fear of failure. The role of self-handicapping is explored in study 4 (chapter 6) as one of a number of possible obstacles to engagement in exercise behaviours/physical activity. In terms of the relationships between perfectionism (adaptive and maladaptive) and selfconcealment and self-concealment and engagement in preventive health behaviours, maladaptive perfectionism was found to be associated with elevated levels of selfconcealment which was consistent with earlier work in the research literature (Frost, Turcotte, Heimberg et al, 1995; Kawamura & Frost, 2004) suggesting that highly perfectionistic individuals may self-conceal in an attempt to maintain a “flawless image” and avoid negative evaluation. Additionally self-concealment was found to be associated with lower engagement in preventive health behaviours supporting previous research suggesting that the tendency to self-conceal has been associated with a reluctance to engage in certain health related behaviours such as seeking professional help for personal difficulties (Cepeda-Benito & Short, 1998; Kelly & Achter, 1995; Hewitt et al, 2003), less of an inclination to pursue counselling (Cepeda-Benito & Short, 1998) and decreased motivation to engage in exercise behaviours (Leary, 1992). Both maladaptive perfectionism and self-concealment were found to be related to higher levels of psychological distress and lower levels of both life-satisfaction and wellbeing. This supports earlier research that has highlighted the maladaptiveness of both perfectionism and self-concealment. This may also help explain the lower level of engagement associated with maladaptive perfectionism as previous research has identified that psychological distress may affect the likelihood of engaging in various health promoting activities such as attending for health screenings (Lieferman & Pheley, 2006), adhering to preventive health care guidelines (Thorpe, Kalinowski, Patterson et al, 2006) and delaying routine health examinations (Witt, Kahn, Fortuna et al, 2009). Supporting the positive stance set out in chapter 1 and previous research regarding adaptive perfectionism (Kearns et al, 2008; Slade & Owens, 1998) it was hypothesised that adaptive perfectionism would be associated with lower levels of psychological distress and higher levels of life-satisfaction and wellbeing. The present study, however, did not find 83 support for this premise as no relationships were observed between adaptive perfectionism and any of these variables apart from engagement in preventive health behaviours. Self-concealment was identified to be a partial mediator in the relationships between maladaptive perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours and maladaptive perfectionism and psychological distress (hypothesis 4). Previous research by Kawamura and Frost (2004) identified self-concealment to fully mediate the relationship between maladaptive perfectionism and psychological distress and as such discussed the potential for this aspect of self-presentation to play a significant role in the amount of psychological distress experienced by individuals with maladaptive perfectionism. Despite not fully supporting the mediation hypotheses, this study does demonstrate that selfconcealment may be an important factor when considering the health implications of being a maladaptive perfectionist, specifically that it may influence decisions concerning whether or not to engage in preventive health behaviours. Elevated levels of both maladaptive perfectionism and self-concealment may represent an increased vulnerability towards psychological problems and be a toxic combination as far as health and wellbeing are concerned. To summarise, the present study suggests that maladaptive perfectionists may be putting their long-term health and wellbeing at risk for a number of reasons. As maladaptive perfectionism increases there seems to be a corresponding decline in engagement in preventive health behaviours. Engaging in such behaviours is considered an important way of reducing the risks of developing various illnesses and chronic conditions such as heart disease, cancer and diabetes Maladaptive perfectionism seems to be associated with high levels of selfconcealment which itself has been associated with unfavourable health outcomes as well as a decreased desire to engage in preventive health behaviours. Maladaptive perfectionism has consistently been associated with higher levels of psychological distress (which has the potential to lead to various psychological and physical difficulties) and lower levels of life satisfaction and wellbeing. The combination of high levels of; maladaptive perfectionism and self-concealment may be a harmful blend of characteristics and may increase susceptibility to various health difficulties. 84 In terms of the adaptive dimension of perfectionism, it is not possible to make any assumptions about the potential adaptiveness of the construct based on the results of this study. However, the results do point to a disparity between the two dimensions of perfectionism in relation to a number of areas and specifically decision to engage in preventive health behaviours. Clearly more research is required to attempt to discover the precise mechanisms that may be involved in this relationship and that may be instrumental in encouraging higher levels of engagement as well as discouraging engagement. There are several limitations to the present study. A reliance on self-report data and a cross-sectional sample restricted to University students makes generalisations problematic. A positive view of this could be that although the sample was narrow in focus, these individuals do represent the next generation of workers and as such their views may be considered particularly relevant when thinking about preventive measures and protecting the psychological and physical wellbeing of workers in an occupational setting. Another limitation reflects a conceptual difficulty. The present study utilises the conceptualisation of perfectionism supported by Frost et al (1990) and defends the use of a maladaptive/adaptive split to define perfectionism. What has to be remembered is that extreme forms of perfectionism may be characterised by elevated levels of both adaptive and maladaptive traits (Slade and Owens, 1998) and the coexistence of both positive and negative traits may, in itself, have particular health implications. It would be interesting to utilise a different conceptualisation for perfectionism, perhaps one that recognises the within-person combination of the adaptive and maladaptive traits (Gaudreau & Thompson, 2010; Stoeber & Otto, 2006). Additionally more research is needed looking specifically at other variables that have been shown to have a particularly robust association with perfectionism and that have also been associated with low levels of engagement in preventive health behaviours such as perceived stress. 3.5 Conclusion. The present study has aimed to extend previous research in the field of perfectionism and health by highlighting a need to address whether or not maladaptive perfectionists represent a “high risk” group in terms of health and wellbeing. The primary means of gauging this was based on addressing the association between perfectionism (adaptive and maladaptive) and engagement in preventive health behaviours as well as considering the 85 role of self-concealment in this relationship. Additionally the intention was to identify any apparent advantages (in terms of health and wellbeing) associated with the adaptive dimension of perfectionism. The present study highlighted a number of factors that may suggest that maladaptive perfectionists represent a “high risk” group in terms of potential health outcomes and their psychological wellbeing as well as highlighting the important role of self-concealment in the relationship between perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours. Limited evidence was found to suggest any apparent health benefits of being an adaptive perfectionist. To continue to explore the relationship between perfectionism and engagement, the next chapter addresses the relationship between perfectionism and perceived stress in relation to engagement in preventive health behaviours. . 86 Chapter 4 Study 2 The Relationship between Perfectionism and Engagement in Preventive Health Behaviours: The Role of Perceived Stress The previous chapter explored the mediating role of self-concealment in the relationship between perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours. Findings suggested that the desire to conceal sensitive and personal information from others in an attempt to maintain a perfect and flawless image may influence perfectionists’ desire to engage in preventive health behaviours as well increase their levels of psychological distress. The previous study supported the possibility that the combination of high maladaptive perfectionism and high self-concealment may be a dangerous combination and have implications for the health and wellbeing of highly perfectionistic individuals. The present study is considered to be an adjunct to the previous one in that it considers the relationship between perfectionism (adaptive and maladaptive) and engagement in preventive health behaviours as the primary focus, although for this study, the emphasis is on the role of perceived stress. Again, supporting the main aims of the thesis, the present study seeks to provide further support for the suggestion that maladaptive perfectionists may present as a “high risk” client group in terms of their health and wellbeing, by exploring whether the combination of type of perfectionism and level of perceived stress may influence health outcomes. This study aimed to extend the conceptualisation of perfectionism utilised in the previous study by focussing on the interactive effects of the two dimensions of perfectionism (adaptive and maladaptive) rather than focussing on the core facets of perfectionism individually. 4.1 Introduction Research in the field of perfectionism and health has identified a well-established relationship between perfectionism and stress with stress being associated with poorer health outcomes, specifically, psychological problems such as depression and anxiety (Blatt, 1995; Flett & Hewitt, 2002). Perfectionists are considered to have particular difficulty dealing with stress from two sources; firstly from the experience of daily hassles and secondly having to deal with the constant burden of trying to live up to their own high 87 standards (Flett & Hewitt, 2002). The relationship between perfectionism and stress has been reviewed in chapter 2 (part 2). The relationship between perfectionism and stress appears to be a complicated one with perfectionism being implicated in the generation, anticipation, perpetuation and enhancement of stress (Flett & Hewitt, 2002). It would appear that perfectionists may be responsible for generating more stress for themselves and this, according to Hewitt and Flett (2002) may be a product of their unrealistic approach to life. Experiencing little satisfaction from their efforts, possessing an inflexible attitude in relation to adjusting their standards and expectations (Ferrari & Mautz, 1997) and over-estimating the threats associated with everyday situations (Dunkley et al, 2003) can all lead to the generation of greater amounts of stress than for non-perfectionists. In terms of perpetuating a stress response, it would appear that perfectionists have a propensity to draw on maladaptive tendencies that keep a stressful experience going for longer (Hewitt and Flett, 2002). Once a stressful event has occurred, perfectionists then tend to hold these experiences in their memory and ruminate about the consequences. Unfortunately this can act as a constant reminder of the discrepancy between their “actual” and “ideal” self and have the effect of increasing levels of psychological distress (Strauman, 1989). Furthermore it may set up a failure orientation whereby the perfectionist ruminates and experiences anxiety about having similar stressful episodes in the future (Flett & Hewitt, 2002). When addressing the possible differences between adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists and their corresponding responses to stressful experiences, it would appear that maladaptive perfectionists may be at greater risk of developing problems (Flett & Hewitt, 2002). A considerable amount of research has focussed on the particular coping strategy utilised by adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists in response to stressful experiences. Maladaptive perfectionists have a tendency to react to stressful experiences in a more helpless manner and rely on dysfunctional coping styles predominantly concerned with avoidance that are likely to have the effect of exacerbating an already difficult situation (Flett, Hewitt, Blankstein et al, 1996). Adaptive perfectionists, on the other hand seem to engage more readily in problem focussed coping strategies (Dunkley et al, 2000). Some authors have suggested that adaptive perfectionists may possess a type of resiliency factor when dealing with stress (Enns et al, 2005) which may act as a type of psychological buffer to ameliorate the more serious consequences of being highly perfectionistic. Others have proposed that adaptive perfectionists may be just as vulnerable as maladaptive 88 perfectionists and at risk of developing psychological problems in the long-term (Hewitt & Flett, 1993). Adaptive perfectionists may be most at risk when they believe there to be some block to their achievement of personal goals or when they doubt that a positive outcome is possible (Flett & Hewitt, 2006). The diathesis-stress model of perfectionism and depression (Hewitt & Flett, 1993) has proposed that the adaptive qualities of perfectionism may be beneficial up to a point, and particularly when daily stress levels are at a minimum, however, if stress levels increase for a particular reason, individuals may be at risk of developing symptoms of depression or any pre-existing psychopathology may be activated (Hewitt & Flett, 1993; Flett et al, 1995). One of the problems appears to be that even minor hassles can lead to the activation of much deeper beliefs relating to the individuals perception of their own flaws and imperfections (Hewitt & Flett, 2003). The situation may be exacerbated because perfectionists seem to find it harder than non-perfectionists to admit to having personal problems, which seems to affect their ability to ask for or seek help at times of high stress (Hewitt & Flett, 2002). The reluctance according to these authors may be because perfectionists perceive the help seeking as an admission of failure and a sign of weakness. The intention of this study was to explore perfectionists’ engagement in preventive health behaviours as well as attempting to ascertain the role of perceived stress in the relationship between perfectionism and engagement. Previous research exploring the relationship between stress and health behaviours has identified there to be a well-established relationship between perceived stress and engagement in health risk behaviours such as smoking, eating high fat foods and consuming excessive amounts of alcohol (Parrott, 1995; Abbey et al, 1993; Macht & Simons, 2000) with the proposed rationale for engaging in such behaviours being a means of offsetting the stress that one is faced with. Research addressing the relationship between stress and preventive health behaviours has not been so clear cut; some studies suggest levels of physical activity /exercise behaviour increase when stress is perceived to be high (Spillman, 1990) and others proclaiming a reduction in such activities in times of high stress (Adler & Matthews, 1994; Heslop et al, 2001; Stetson, Rahn, Dubbert et al,1997). According to Adler and Matthews (1994) the act of engaging in certain health promoting behaviours at times of high stress may be too overwhelming for the individual due to the additional behavioural demands that are required to carry out such behaviours. This has been supported by research in an academic 89 setting that has addressed how students maintain preventive health behaviours in times of increased academic pressure such as exams. Weidner et al (1996) found that certain behaviours remained unchanged (at times of high stress) such as self-care and driving safely, whereas, those that required additional resources and effort to keep them going (e.g. exercising/physical activity and following a healthy diet) were diminished. As previously stated, one of the main aims of the present thesis was to consider whether maladaptive perfectionists may signify a “high risk” group in terms of their health and wellbeing. The purpose of the present study was to focus on the role of perceived stress in the relationship between adaptive/ maladaptive perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours and to try and establish whether there was an interaction between type of perfectionism and level of perceived stress in terms of affecting engagement in preventive health behaviours. Additionally by addressing a number of other health related variables e.g. perception of general health, reporting of physical symptoms and assessing levels of state and trait anxiety the intention was to gain a better understanding of the health status of the different types of perfectionists. There are no studies to date that have addressed this specific area of research and only a small number of studies that have begun to address the relationship between perfectionism and any form of preventive health behaviours (e.g. Longbottom et al, 2010; Williams & Cropley, 2014). It was felt that addressing the area of perceived stress in relation to perfectionism was important because it may be that level of perceived stress when combined with particular type of perfectionism may have an interactive effect that may affect engagement. Perhaps engaging in such behaviours may place additional demands on individuals who may already be operating at a higher than average baseline level of perceived stress/anxiety and this may be particularly relevant when considering maladaptive perfectionists. As with the previous study and supporting the positive standpoint that has been adopted for the purpose of the present thesis (with regards to adaptive perfectionism), the adaptive dimension of perfectionism is considered to have the potential to provide some type of benefits to the individual that may be beneficial in terms of health and wellbeing. For the present study, it was hoped that the adaptive dimension of perfectionism would be associated with greater engagement as this would support the findings of the previous study as well as the support the ideas set out in chapter 1. To extend the findings of the previous study and hopefully provide more information regarding the relative contribution of both the adaptive and maladaptive dimensions of perfectionism, a more detailed 90 conceptualisation was proposed. Whilst still based on the original dimensions set out by Frost et al (1990) this study proposed four groups of perfectionists (non-perfectionists, adaptive perfectionists and two types of maladaptive perfectionists) based on the conceptualisations of Stoeber and Otto’s (2006) Tripartite Model of Perfectionism and Gaudreau and Thompson’s (2010) 2 x 2 Model of Dispositional Perfectionism. Both these approaches have focussed on the interactive effects of the two dimensions of perfectionism (adaptive and maladaptive) rather than consider the core facets as individual concepts. For a detailed explanation of these two approaches please refer to chapter 2 (part 1). For the present study four groups of perfectionists were proposed; non-perfectionists, adaptive perfectionists and two types of maladaptive perfectionists. The groups were distinguished by their relative levels of adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism traits; non perfectionists were identified as having low levels of both adaptive and maladaptive traits, adaptive perfectionists were characterised by high levels of adaptive traits and low levels of maladaptive traits, maladaptive perfectionist group 1 were identified as having high levels of both adaptive and maladaptive dimensions and maladaptive perfectionist group 2 considered to have high levels of maladaptive traits and low levels of adaptive traits. Based on the ideas of Gaudreau and Thompson (2010), as discussed in chapter 2, the maladaptive perfectionist 2 group were be predicted to have the most negative outcomes as this subgroup lack the potentially protective qualities that high levels of adaptive perfectionism may provide. 4.1.1 Hypotheses 1. Both types of maladaptive perfectionist are predicted to show lower levels of engagement than adaptive perfectionists and non-perfectionists.Maladaptive perfectionism group 2 are predicted to have the lowest level of engagement and adaptive perfectionism, the highest level of engagement. 2. Perceived stress levels are predicted to be higher for both maladaptive groups compared to both adaptive perfectionists and non-perfectionists. The maladaptive perfectionist 2 group (high maladaptive traits/low adaptive traits) is predicted to have the highest level of perceived stress. High perceived stress is also predicted to be associated with less engagement in preventive health behaviours. 3. It is predicted that there will be interactions between type of perfectionism and level of stress (high and low) in relation to engagement in preventive health 91 behaviours as well as a number of other health related variables (e.g. symptom reporting, anxiety levels and perception of general health), although the precise nature and strength of these interactions is not predicted. 4. It is predicted that adaptive perfectionism will be the most adaptive (out of the four perfectionism groups) in terms of the other outcome variables; have lowest levels of perceived stress, lowest levels of symptom reporting, lowest levels of anxiety and the highest rating for general perception of health. 5. It is predicted that the maladaptive perfectionist group 2 will be the most maladaptive (out of the four perfectionism groups) in terms of the other outcome variables; highest levels of perceived stress, highest levels of symptom reporting, highest levels of anxiety and lowest rating for perception of general health. 4.2 Methods Participants and Procedure Participants were students at the University of Surrey recruited through an email advertisement circulated to all students. Participants were invited to participate in an online health and wellbeing questionnaire which consisted of measures to assess perfectionism, perceived stress, current engagement in preventive health behaviours, anxiety, perception of general health and reporting of physical symptoms. Of the final sample (N=875), 593 (68%) were female and 282 (32%) were male. Of the sample 667 (76%) were undergraduate students and 208 (24%) were postgraduate students. 4.2.1 Measures Perfectionism As in the previous study (chapter 3) the Frost Multidimensional perfectionism Scale (FMPS, Frost et al., 1990) was utilised to assess the dimensions of adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism. The subscales of “Concern over Mistakes” and “Doubts about Actions” were summed to form the maladaptive measure and “Personal Standards” and “Organisation” used to assess the dimension of positive perfectionism. This method has been validated in previous research (Chang et al, 2004; Dunn et al, 2006; Frost et al, 1990; Harris et al, 2008; Wei et al, 2004) and shown to have good internal reliability. Four new 92 groups of perfectionism were created from participants’ scores on the adaptive and maladaptive subscales of the Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale. A median split was taken of the scores on both measures to form a high/low adaptive perfectionism score and a high/low maladaptive perfectionism score. These two scores (adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism) were then collapsed to provide four new categories of perfectionism. These four groups were based on the conceptualisations of two models of perfectionism; Stoeber and Otto’s (2006) Tripartite Model of Perfectionism and Gaudreau and Thompson’s (2010) 2 x 2 Model of Dispositional Perfectionism. Whilst there are similarities between the two models, there is one fundamental difference which concerns the respective authors theorising and labelling of the most maladaptive category of perfectionism. Stoeber and Otto (2006) propose the most maladaptive category to be the group identified to have both high maladaptive traits and high adaptive trait (maladaptive perfectionism group 1), whereas Gaudreau and Thompson (2010) have identified the most maladaptive group to have high maladaptive traits but low adaptive traits (maladaptive perfectionism group 2). The reasoning behind the latter is that maladaptive perfectionists are believed to be at a disadvantage when they don’t have high levels of adaptive traits to perhaps buffer and ameliorate the more serious consequences of the maladaptive traits. 93 Table 4.1 The four perfectionism groups formulated for the study MALADAPTIVE PERFECTIONISM LOW HIGH HIGH ADAPTIVE PERFECTIONISM PERFECTIONISM GROUP 1 (according to Stoeber & Otto, 2006, this group represent the most maladaptive) MALADAPTIVE LOW ADAPTIVE PERFECTIONISM MALADAPTIVE NON-PERFECTIONISM PERFECTIONISM GROUP 2 (according to Gaudreau & Thompson, this group represent the most maladaptive) For the purposes of the present study, two conceptualisations of maladaptive perfectionism have been included: the first comprising of high levels of both adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism (Maladaptive perfectionism group 1) which supports the work of Stoeber and Otto (2006) and the second consisting of a low level of adaptive perfectionism and high level of maladaptive perfectionism (Maladaptive perfectionism group 2) which supports the work of Gaudreau and Thompson, (2010). Although both maladaptive categories have been included, the present study supports Gaudreau and Thompson’s (2010) conceptualisation of the most maladaptive category of perfectionism consisting of a combination of high maladaptive traits and low adaptive traits. Perceived Stress To assess perceived stress, The Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) was used (Cohen, Kamarck & Mermelstein, 1983). This is a widely used measure that aims to assess an individual’s appraisal of stress in response to particular situations over the past month. The measure consists of 10 items that ask respondents to rate on a five point Likert scale (ranging from never to very often) how they have been feeling over the last month. Examples of questions include “in the last month, how often have you felt that you were unable to control the important things in your life?” and “In the last month, how often have you felt that things were going your way?” Scoring involves reversing responses to the four 94 positively worded questions and then summing across all responses. A higher score indicates a higher level of perceived stress. Cohen & Williamson (1988) have found the scale to correlate with other stress measures, health behaviour measures and help seeking behaviour. The scale is reported to have reasonable internal reliability, Coefficient alpha of .78 and has been found to be related to other self-report measures aiming to assess the appraisal of stress (Cohen and Williamson, 1988). The reliability and validity of the scale has been confirmed for other student samples (Roberti, Harrington & Storch, 2006). The scores on the perceived stress scale were used to form two new groups; a high stress group and a low stress group. As with perfectionism, a median split was taken of these scores to form two new groups; high and low stress groups. Engagement in Preventive Health Behaviours As utilised in study 1 (chapter 3) to measure Engagement in Preventive Health Behaviours, an adaptation of the General Preventive Behaviours Checklist (Amir, 1987) was used. Respondents were asked to rate the frequency with which they engage in a variety of preventive health behaviours on a three point scale (0 = never do, 1 = sometimes do and 2 = always do). Areas that are dealt with include exercise, diet, avoidance of substances such as cigarettes and alcohol, emotional well-being and social interaction. Examples of questions include “I have avoided too much emotional distress”, “I have friends and maintain a good social life” and “I have been doing regular aerobic exercise”. Responses to the questions are summed to form a total score that represents desire to engage in preventive health behaviours. Physical Symptoms To measure self-reporting of physical symptoms and sensations The Pennebaker Inventory of Limbic Languidness (PILL, Pennebaker, 1982) was employed. This measure assesses the occurrence of various physical symptoms and sensations (54 items). Answers are scored on a five point Likert scale ranging from “have never or almost never experienced” to experiencing “more than once every week”. A total score is achieved by summing all responses across the measure and a higher score indicates more reporting of physical symptoms and sensations. Cronbach alphas for the measure have been reported as ranging from .88 to .91 (Pennebaker, 1982). 95 Perception of General Self Rated Health Perception of general health was identified using a single item measure of general selfrated health that is included in the SF-36 (Ware, Kosinski & Keller, 1996), and asks respondents “In general would you say your health is, “Excellent”, “Very Good”, “Good”, “Fair” or “Poor”. The use of a single measure to assess self-rated health has been supported in the research literature as being comparable to multi-item status measures and deemed a valid way of assessing self-reported general health (DeSalvo, Fisher, Tran et al, 2006; DeSalvo, Fan, McDonnell, & Fihn, 2006). Anxiety Anxiety was assessed using both parts of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI; Spielberger, Gorsuch, Lushene et al, 1983). This is a widely used self-report assessment measure for addressing both the more enduring qualities of “Trait Anxiety” as well an individual’s current experience of anxiety (State Anxiety). The measure consists of two twenty item scales and respondents are asked respond according to how they feel “right now” e.g. “I feel calm”, “I am strained” and “I feel self-confident” and also how they “generally feel” e.g. “I tire easily”, “I am cool, calm and collected” and “I lack selfconfidence”. A total score for each of the scales is calculated by first addressing the reversed scored items and then summing to form two scores, one for “State Anxiety” and “Trait Anxiety” respectively. Test-retest reliabilities have ranged from .65 to .75 over the course of a two month interval and internal reliabilities of between .86 to .95 (Spielberger et al, 1983). 4.2.2 Data Analysis Data analysis included first obtaining descriptive statistics for the sample and the major variables under study then correlational analyses were performed to look at the associations between all the major variables. For the correlations, raw scores were utilised for both perceived stress and adaptive/maladaptive perfectionism as these were on a continuous scale as opposed to the groups (high/low stress; non perfectionist/adaptive/maladaptive 1/maladaptive 2) that were created to carry out the further analyses. To look for interactions and main effects for perfectionism group (nonperfectionism, adaptive perfectionist, maladaptive perfectionist 1, maladaptive perfectionist 2) and stress group (high/low), two way ANOVA’s were carried out on the 96 following dependent variables; engagement in preventive health behaviours, symptom reporting, anxiety, perception of general self-rated health and raw perceived stress scores 4.3 Results Sample demographics All descriptive statistics for the sample and all the variables are displayed in table 4.2 and participant characteristics by perfectionism group are displayed in table 4.3. 97 Table 4.2 Sample Demographics, Means, Standard Deviations and reliabilities for all variables Age (years) 18 – 29 30 – 39 40 – 49 50 – 59 60 – 69 Gender Male Female Level of Study Undergraduate Postgraduate Perfectionist Type Non Perfectionist (NP) Adaptive Perfectionist (AP) Maladaptive Perfectionist 1 (MP1) Maladaptive Perfectionist 2 (MP2) Stress Group High Low Variables Adaptive perfectionism (PS and O) Maladaptive perfectionism (CM and DA) Perceived stress (PSS) Engagement in preventive Health behaviours Symptom reporting (PILL) Anxiety (STAI) State Trait General Health n % 798 44 23 6 4 91.2 5 2.6 .7 .5 282 593 32.2 67.8 667 208 76.2 23.8 253 165 258 199 28.9 18.9 29.5 22.7 402 473 45.9 54.1 (SD) (α) 45.9 8.0 0.86 36.8 9.6 0.91 19.2 7.3 0.77 50.2 7.6 0.84 105.8 26.3 0.91 40.4 44.0 3.4 11.0 10.0 0.9 (M) 0.88 N/A 98 Table 4.3 Participant Characteristics by Perfectionism Group Non Perfectionist (n = 253) Adaptive Perfectionist (n = 165) Maladaptive Perfectionist 1 (n = 258) Maladaptive Perfectionist 2 (n= 199) Engagement in Preventive Health Behaviours 51.0 (7.3)a* 54.1 (6.6) 49.9 (7.6)a 46.4 (7.0) Reporting of Physical Symptoms 97.9 (21.4)a 99.1 (20.5)a 111.8 (27.6)b 113.6 (30.3)b State Anxiety 37.2 (9.3)a 35.6 (9.4)a 43.1 (11.5)b 44.9 (10.6)b Trait Anxiety 40.0 (8.5)a 38.0 (7.7)a 48.0 (9.8)b 48.9 (9.0)b Perception of General Health 3.5 (0.8)a 3.7 (0.9)a 3.4 (0.9)a 3.3 (0.9)a Perceived Stress 17.2 (6.8) 14.9 (6.4) 21.5 (7.2)a 22.2 (6.1)a *Means in the same row that do not share the same subscripts differ at the p<.05 level. Standard Deviations are shown in brackets Correlational Analyses All correlations are displayed in table 4.4. As predicted a significant negative association was found between maladaptive perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours (r = -.284, p<0.01) suggesting that maladaptive perfectionism was related to lower levels of engagement in preventive health behaviours. Maladaptive perfectionism was also predicted to be positively associated to higher levels of perceived stress and results show this to be the case (r = .373, p<0.01). A small but significant association was found between adaptive perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours (r = .170, p<0.01) and a non-significant correlation between adaptive perfectionism and perceived stress. Maladaptive perfectionism was found to be positively associated with symptom reporting (r = .331, p<0.01), state and trait anxiety (r = .397, p>0.01 and r = .582, p<0.01 respectively) and negatively associated with perception of general health (r = -.169, p<0.01) suggesting that maladaptive perfectionism is associated with a higher level 99 of symptom reporting, higher levels of both state and trait anxiety and a poorer perception of general health. Non-significant associations were found for adaptive perfectionism on all these variables. Correlations between all the major variables are displayed in table 4.4 Table 4.4 Correlation Matrix for all Major Variables Variables 1 1. Adaptive Perf - 2 3 4 5 6 7 2. Maladaptive Perf .376* - 3. Perceived Stress .001 .373* 4. Engagement .170* -.284* -.417* - 5. Symptom Reporting .044 .331* .317* -.262* - 6. State Anxiety -.001 .397* .500* -.410* .330* - 7. Trait Anxiety .016 .582* .592* -.493* .458* .658* - 8. Perception Gen Health .097* -.169* -.272* .337* -.297* -.332* -.389* 8 - - Note. Engagement = Engagement in preventive health behaviours. *p < .01 Main effects and interactions Engagement in preventive health behaviours A two way ANOVA was conducted to examine the effect of perfectionism group and perceived stress on engagement in preventive health behaviours. Although the interaction effect was non-significant F(3,867) = 2.204, p = .086, significant main effects were found for both perfectionism group and stress group; F(3, 867) = 19.25, p < .001 and F(1,867) = 107.9, p < .001 respectively. Looking at the means for the two stress groups; low (M = 53.65, SD = 6.9) and high (M = 47.3, SD = 6.9), these results suggest engagement in preventive health behaviours to be significantly higher when stress was perceived to be low. For perfectionism group, post hoc tests showed significant differences between all the combinations of perfectionism groups (at the p < .001 level) with the exception of the nonperfectionism and maladaptive perfectionism 1 group. Specifically, significant differences were found between the following groups; non perfectionist (M = 51, SD = 7.3), and 100 adaptive perfectionist (M = 54.1, SD =6.6), non-perfectionist (M = 51, SD = 7.3). and maladaptive perfectionist 2 (M = 46.4, SD = 7), adaptive perfectionist (M = 54.1, SD =6.6) and maladaptive perfectionist 2 (M = 46.4, SD = 7), adaptive perfectionist (M = 54.1, SD =6.6) and maladaptive perfectionist 1 (M = 49.9, SD = 7.6) and maladaptive perfectionist 2 (M = 46.4, SD = 7) and maladaptive perfectionist 1 (M = 49.9, SD = 7.6). Chart 4.1 Engagement in preventive health behaviours by perfectionism group and stress group 58 56 54 Engagement 52 50 Low Stress 48 High Stress 46 44 42 40 Non Perfectionism Adaptive Perfectionism Maladaptive Perfectionim 1 Maladaptive Perfectionism 2 Physical Symptoms For reporting of physical symptoms, a non-significant interaction effect was found (F(3, 867) = 1.52, p =.207). Main effects for both perfectionism group and perceived stress (high/low) were obtained (F(3, 867) = 10.89, p < .001 and F(1, 867) = 59.68, p < .001 respectively). For perfectionism group, post hoc tests showed significant differences between the following groups (all at the p < .001 level); non perfectionist (M = 97.9, SD = 21.4) and maladaptive perfectionist 1 (M = 111.8, SD = 27.6), non-perfectionist (M = 97.9, SD = 21.4) and maladaptive perfectionist 2 (M = 113.6, SD = 30.3), adaptive perfectionist (M = 99.1, SD = 20.5) and maladaptive perfectionist 2 (M = 113.6, SD = 30.3) and 101 adaptive perfectionist (M = 99.1, SD = 20.5) and maladaptive perfectionist 1 (M = 111.8, SD = 27.6). Significant differences were not found between non perfectionist and adaptive perfectionist or maladaptive perfectionist 1 and maladaptive perfectionist 2. For stress group (low/high), reporting of common physical symptoms was found to be higher when perceived stress was perceived to be higher, (M = 96.4, SD = 19.1 and M = 113.5, SD = 29 respectively). Chart 4.2 Reporting of physical symptoms by perfectionism group and stress group 125 120 Symptom Reporting 115 110 105 Low Stress 100 High Stress 95 90 85 80 Non Perfectionism Adaptive Perfectionism Maladaptive Perfectionism 1 Maladaptive Perfectionism 2 General Health For the perception of general health status, a significant main effect was found for stress group F(1, 867) = 48.02, p < .001, however a non-significant main effect was found for perfectionism group F(3, 867) = 2.199, p = .087 suggesting that perception of health status is influenced by level of stress but not type of perfectionism and that that perception of health status is better for the people who are in the low stress group (low stress, M = 3.68, SD = 0.8 and high stress, M = 3.21, SD = 0.8). A non-significant interaction effect was obtained F(3, 867) = .850, p = .467. Anxiety For state anxiety, significant main effects were found for both perfectionism group and stress group, F(3, 867) = 14.19, p < .001 and F(1, 867) = 195.15, p < .001 respectively, 102 however, a non-significant interaction effect was found, F(3, 867) = 1.85, p = .136. Post hoc tests revealed significant differences in the following combinations of groups; non perfectionist (M = 37.2, SD = 9.3) and maladaptive perfectionist 2 (M = 44.9, SD = 10.6), non-perfectionist (M = 37.2, SD = 9.3) and maladaptive perfectionist 1 (M = 43.1, SD = 11.5), adaptive perfectionist (M = 35.6, SD = 9.4) and maladaptive perfectionist 2 (M = 44.9, SD = 10.6) and finally adaptive perfectionist (M = 35.6, SD = 9.4) and maladaptive perfectionist 1 (M = 43.1, SD = 11.5). Significant differences were not obtained for the combinations of non-perfectionist and adaptive perfectionist and maladaptive perfectionist 1 and maladaptive perfectionist 2. Chart 4.3 State anxiety by perfectionism group and stress group 50 48 46 State Anxiety 44 42 40 Low Stress 38 High Stress 36 34 32 30 Non Perfectionism Adaptive Perfectionism Maladaptive Perfectionism 1 Maladaptive Perfectionism 2 For trait anxiety, again a non-significant interaction effect was found F(3, 867) = 1.253, p = .289 although, significant main affects were obtained for both stress group and perfectionism group; F(1, 867) = 314.08, p < .001 and F(3, 867) = 41.73, p < .001 respectively. For stress group it was observed that higher levels of perceived stress were associated with a higher mean score for trait anxiety (high stress, M = 49.48, SD = 8.83; low stress, M = 37.6, SD = 7.1) and for perfectionism group significant differences were identified between the following (at the p < .001 level); non perfectionist (M = 40, SD = 8.5) and maladaptive perfectionist 2 (M = 48.9, SD = 9), non-perfectionist (M = 40, SD = 8.5) and maladaptive perfectionist 1 (M = 48, SD = 9.8), adaptive perfectionist (M = 38, 103 SD = 7.7) and maladaptive perfectionist 2 (M = 48.9, SD = 9) and finally adaptive perfectionist (M = 38, SD = 7.7) and maladaptive perfectionist 1 (M = 48, SD = 9.8). Chart 4.4 Trait anxiety by perfectionism group 55 Trait Anxiety 50 45 Low Stress 40 High Stress 35 30 Non Perfectionism Adaptive Perfectionism Maladaptive Perfectionism 1 Maladaptive Perfectionism 2 4.4 Discussion Supporting the first hypothesis, and the results of the previous study (study 1, chapter 3), maladaptive perfectionists (both groups) were found to show lower levels of engagement in preventive health behaviours (such as exercising regularly, eating sensibly and taking care of their emotional wellbeing) than either adaptive perfectionists and nonperfectionists. Interestingly the perfectionism group that showed the least amount of engagement was the maladaptive perfectionist group 2 who were identified as having high levels of maladaptive perfectionism coupled with low levels of adaptive perfectionism. Gaudreau and Thompson (2010) have suggested that this combination of perfectionism traits results in these individuals being labelled the ‘most maladaptive’ type of perfectionists. It is believed that such individuals may be at a disadvantage because they do not possess high amounts of the positive and potentially protective traits that are believed to be inherent in adaptive perfectionism (Gaudreau & Thompson, 2010). Adaptive perfectionism was found to have the highest level of engagement in preventive health behaviours. The fact that the adaptive perfectionist group demonstrated the highest level of engagement over and above non-perfectionists suggest there may be something inherently 104 positive (at least from a preventive health perspective) in adaptive perfectionists that makes them more inclined to engage in preventive health behaviours. This result supports previous research by Slade and Owens, 1998, that has proposed adaptive perfectionists are more likely to actively ‘approach’, rather than ‘avoid’ situations and also ties in with previous research by Longbottom at al, (2010) addressing the differences between adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists in terms of physical activity motivation. Adaptive perfectionism was found to be associated with more positive motivational attributes associated with engaging in physical activity such as organisation, perseverance and selfefficacy and maladaptive perfectionism was associated with reduced confidence in relation to exercising, fear of failure and a general reluctance to engage in such activities. In support of hypothesis 2, Perceived stress levels were found to be higher for both the maladaptive perfectionist groups with the maladaptive perfectionist 2 group (high maladaptive/low adaptive perfectionism traits) showing the highest level of perceived stress. This result supports previous research that has identified a relationship between the maladaptive dimension of perfectionism and perceived stress (Flett & Hewitt, 2002). Additionally, in the present study, high perceived stress was identified as being related to a lower level of engagement in preventive health behaviours supporting previous research (Stetson et al, 1997). Overall these results suggest that the ability to engage in preventive health behaviours at times of high stress may be compromised (Adler & Matthews, 1994). Contrary to the predictions for hypothesis 3, No significant interactions were observed between perfectionism group and stress group across all dependent variables. This may have been related to problems with how one or both of the independent variables (perfectionism and perceived stress) were operationalised. Rather than dichotomising perceived stress into two separate groups, it may have been advisable to have more groupings. Although this would have added to the complexity of the research design, it may have avoided some of the common problems associated with dichotomisation (see MacCallum, Zhang, Preacher & Rucker, 2002). There is clearly a relationship between perfectionism and stress (Hewitt & Flett, 2002; also see chapter 3, section 3.3) and perhaps it would have been more prudent to perform regression analyses on the data and consider the effect of perceived stress as a potential mediator/moderator in the relationship between perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours. 105 When considering the main effect of perfectionism group across the dependent variables, with the exception of the reporting of physical symptoms, adaptive perfectionism was associated with the most positive outcomes (hypothesis 4) i.e. the highest level of engagement in preventive health behaviours, the lowest levels of state and trait anxiety, the most positive perception of general health and the lowest level of perceived stress (table 5.3), over and above non-perfectionists. These results support research identifying the presence of a positive and adaptive form of perfectionism that may bring with it benefits to health and wellbeing (Frost et al, 1993; Slade & Owens, 1998). Aside from engagement in preventive health behaviours, the maladaptive perfectionist group 2 was not identified to be more maladaptive (in terms of the results on the other outcome variables) than the maladaptive perfectionist group 1. The results of the present study, therefore, do not fully support the predictions of hypothesis 5 or the theories of Gaudreau and Thompson (2010) and Stoeber and Otto (2006) in terms of identifying the ‘most maladaptive’ category of perfectionists, i.e. having high levels of maladaptive perfectionism coupled with low levels of adaptive traits was not found to be any more maladaptive than possessing high levels of both adaptive and maladaptive traits in relation to the other health related variables. In terms of levels of state and trait anxiety, reporting of physical symptoms and perception of general health, no evidence was found to suggest that either combination of traits (high maladaptive/low adaptive and high maladaptive/high adaptive) were more detrimental in terms of the effects on health and wellbeing. Putting the additional issue of whether there may be a more maladaptive type of perfectionism to one side, there is still the very real issue of whether maladaptive perfectionists may represent a high risk group in terms of health and wellbeing. Both groups of maladaptive perfectionists were related to elevated levels of state and trait anxiety as well as perceived stress suggesting that both maladaptive groups may be functioning with an already elevated baseline level of anxiety/stress which as a consequence may make them more vulnerable to stressful experiences, specifically in terms of leading to further psychological difficulties. This supports previous research by Flett and Hewitt (2002) who have suggested that for certain perfectionists’ increases in stress levels can lead to an activation of pre-existing psychopathology and a greater risk of developing depression. As discussed in chapter 2 (part 2), there is a well-established relationship between perfectionism and a number of anxiety disorders including OCD, social anxiety (Antony et al, 1998) and Generalised Anxiety Disorder (Handley, Egan, 106 Kane & Rees, 2014). Research has also found evidence to suggest that individuals with anxiety disorders have particularly low levels of the positive or achievement striving dimension of perfectionism (Bardone-Cone et al, 2007), which raises the question of whether such individuals may be particularly vulnerable from a health and wellbeing point because they lack the potential psychological buffer that may be present with higher levels of the adaptive perfectionism traits. Maladaptive perfectionists (both groups) were also identified as noticing and reporting more physical symptoms than either non-perfectionists or adaptive perfectionists. Attending and reporting a high level of bodily symptoms has been associated with a greater amount of unhappiness, nervousness and distress (CounsellingResource.com). Methodologically, using a cross-sectional design has limitations as it only provides a snapshot at one time point and therefore it is difficult to make generalisations about the population under investigation. Additionally, as has been mentioned earlier, there may have been issues with the methods utilised to achieve some of the groupings for the predictor variables (perfectionism and perceived stress). Despite the limitations, the present study has endeavoured to further research in this area by exploring the two variables of perceived stress and type of perfectionism in relation to engagement in preventive health behaviours. Future studies may benefit from exploring factors that intervene in the relationship between maladaptive perfectionism and stress as well as stress and engagement in preventive health behaviours. By utilising an alternative conceptualisation (to that used in study 1, chapter 3) it has been possible to gain more specific information regarding the potential role of adaptive perfectionism in the relationship between perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours. The present study supports the possibility of there being some positive benefits attached to being an adaptive perfectionist. It also supports the prospect of identifying a particularly vulnerable group of perfectionists (maladaptive perfectionism group 2) who possess high levels of maladaptive perfectionism and low levels of the adaptive perfectionism traits and who may be at risk of developing health problems in the future. Studies addressing a range of obstacles/barriers to engagement would be useful in trying to pinpoint other variables aside from self-concealment and perceived stress that may influence the relationship between perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours. To gain more detail about the decisions adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists make in relation to looking after their health and wellbeing, qualitative studies may prove to be beneficial. 107 4.5 Conclusion The present study attempted to address how perfectionism and stress may be related to engagement in preventive health behaviours and a number of other health related variables. Although no interactions were found between type of perfectionism and level of perceived stress in relation to engagement, both variables were identified to be key factors that need to be considered in the decision making process of perfectionists, specifically with regards to the steps perfectionists take to look after their own health and wellbeing. The study also provided some useful insights concerning the potential adaptiveness of the perfectionism construct and how utilising a different conceptualisation (based on the interactive power of the two dimensions of perfectionism) may have highlighted some potential benefits that may be associated with the adaptive dimension of perfectionism. These findings support a number of the main aims of the present thesis; that maladaptive perfectionists do seem to engage less in preventive health behaviours, that there may be a distinction between the two dimensions of perfectionism (adaptive and maladaptive) specifically in relation to the adaptive dimension being associated with potential benefits to health and wellbeing. This study also provides support for the premise that maladaptive perfectionism may be associated with an elevated level of health risk, certainly in relation to engagement in preventive health behaviours. To further investigate the area of perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours, the next chapter explores possible obstacles to engagement in a sample of adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists, from a qualitative perspective using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. 108 Chapter 5 Study 3 A Qualitative Study Exploring Engagement in Preventive Health Behaviours and Obstacles to Engagement in Adaptive and Maladaptive perfectionists: An Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis The previous chapter focussed on the associations between type of perfectionism, perceived stress and engagement in preventive health behaviours. Although no interactions were observed between subtype of perfectionism and level of perceived stress (in relation to engagement and a number of other health related variables), type of perfectionism and perceived stress were considered to represent important factors in the perfectionism/health relationship and specifically in relation to engagement. Using a slightly different conceptualisation (i.e. creating four perfectionism groups) it was possible to gain a more thorough insight into the potential role of the two dimensions of perfectionism (adaptive and maladaptive) in relation to engagement and a number of other health related variables. The most maladaptive group (in terms of engagement) was found to be those individuals who possessed high levels of maladaptive perfectionism and low levels of adaptive perfectionism. It was suggested the adaptive dimension of perfectionism may serve to protect or buffer against the maladaptive perfectionistic traits and that the absence of a high level of adaptive perfectionism coupled with high levels of maladaptive perfectionism may be a problematic combination and produce negative consequences in terms of health outcomes The next two studies in the thesis aim to address the area of engagement in preventive health behaviours by exploring in more detail the possible factors that may influence the desire to engage. The present study aims to explore the subject of engagement from a qualitative perspective; specifically trying to gain a deeper understanding of the decisions adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists make in relation to looking after their health and wellbeing whilst trying to identify potential obstacles to engagement. The final study (chapter 6) aims to address perceived barriers/obstacles to engagement from a quantitative perspective whilst looking for potential differences between adaptive, maladaptive and non-perfectionists. 109 5.1 Introduction There is clear research evidence to suggest that engaging in preventive health behaviours protects both physical and psychological health (e.g. Biddle, 2004; Bouchard et al, 2007; Fox et al, 2006; Netz et al, 2005). Research evidence suggests that perfectionists, particularly those identified as possessing high maladaptive traits, may not be readily engaging in preventive health behaviours such as regular exercise/physical activity (Longbottom et al, 2010, 2012; Williams and Cropley, 2014). By not engaging in preventive health behaviours (that address both physical and emotional health needs), it could be argued that highly perfectionistic individuals may be putting themselves at greater risk from experiencing, long-term health problems, particularly when one considers the already well-established links between maladaptive perfectionism and various psychological and physical health problems (for a detailed review please refer to chapter 2, part 2). Added to this, study 1 identified a close relationship between perfectionism and self-concealment, which in itself has been linked to; a greater incidence of psychopathology (Kahn and Hessling, 2001; Cepeda-Benito and Short, 1998), less help seeking behaviours (Cepeda-Benito and Short, 1998; Hewitt et al, 2003; Kawamura and Frost, 2004) and a reduced motivation to engage in preventive health behaviours (Leary, 1992). Study 2 (chapter 4) supported previous research by identifying an association between perfectionism and perceived stress (Flett and Hewitt, 2002) and also perceived stress and a reduction in preventive health behaviours (Adler and Matthews, 1994; Heslop et al, 2001). Considering there may be long-term health risks associated with not engaging in preventive health behaviours, it seems logical to explore in more detail the possible reasons that may prohibit individuals from engaging in these particular activities. Perceived barriers to engagement have received considerable attention in the research literature and been identified as being either internal (e.g. low self-efficacy, lack of motivation or worries about performing exercise behaviour in public) or external (e.g. lack of finances, lack of time and lack of support from family and friends). Other factors that have been considered as possible obstacles to engagement and which may be particularly relevant to perfectionists include self-presentational factors (e.g. Hausenblas et al, 2004), self-handicapping (e.g. Martin and Brawley, 1999), exercise self-efficacy (e.g. Hofstetter, Sallis and Hovell, 1990), physical activity motivation (Longbottom et al, 2010, perceived 110 stress (Adler and Matthews, 1994; Heslop et al, 2001) and psychological distress Leiferman and Pheley (2004). The primary aim of this chapter was to present a qualitative study to explore perfectionists’ beliefs (adaptive and maladaptive) in relation to preventive health behaviours and possible reasons why they might choose to abstain from such activities. There are very few qualitative studies that have focussed on the differential aspects of the perfectionism construct (e.g. Slaney, Ashby and Trippi, 1995; Rice, Bair, Castro et al, 2003) and there are no qualitative studies to date that have examined the adaptive and maladaptive aspects of perfectionism in relation to engagement in preventive health behaviours. The current study therefore addresses a gap in the existing research literature. The main aim of the current study was to explore adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists’ beliefs related to engaging/not engaging in preventive health behaviours and to identify the possible obstacles to engagement. To help capture these beliefs, participants were asked a variety of questions concerning their beliefs and behaviours related to health. They were also asked about factors that may influence their engagement and how they manage to maintain a balance when there are other pressures and distractions that may conflict with their ability to maintain their high standards. As well as providing an insight into the minds of adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists in relation to preventive health behaviours it was expected that such a qualitative exploration of the health behaviours of the different types of perfectionist, may provide important additional information concerning the possible conceptual differences between the two types of perfectionism, an area of research that continues to be debated. The study applied principles of Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) to analyse the transcripts obtained from semi-structured interviews (Smith, 1996; Smith, 2004; Smith and Osborn, 2008). This method is an established qualitative approach that was originally developed for exploring how individuals make sense of their lived experiences and is considered to have particular relevance in the field of health psychology (Smith, Jarman & Osborn, 1999). The theoretical underpinnings of the approach are drawn from three distinct disciplines: phenomenology, symbolic interactionism and hermeneutics. When thinking about a particular event, situation or object, the central idea of phenomenology has been to recognise the unique and invaluable contribution that each individual can make in providing their own personal thoughts and perceptions (see Giorgi, 111 2009 for a review). For IPA, the contribution of phenomenology can be seen in the emphasis and importance that the approach places on individual lived experience, and the need of the researcher to try and enter the individual world of the participant. IPA also draws on the symbolic interactionist perspective (e.g. Denzin, 1995) which emphasises the importance of gaining an understanding of the meanings that individuals assign to events, situations and objects through their interactions and dialogue with their social environment. This is achieved by the researcher entering into a process of interpretation to fully understand the participant’s perspective. The contribution of hermeneutics (Bernstein, 1983) to IPA helps explain this interpretive process which requires the researcher to employ both an empathic hermeneutic (with the researcher empathising with the participant) as well as a questioning hermeneutic (where the researcher is simultaneously trying to make sense of the participant’s ability to make sense of the particular phenomenon). The process of interpretation is also aided by the researcher asking critical questions of the text whilst analysing the participant’s narrative. Pivotal to the philosophy of the IPA approach is the notion that “…a two-stage interpretation process, or a double hermeneutic, is involved. This means that the participants are trying to make sense of their world..(whilst)… the researcher is trying to make sense of the participants trying to make sense of their world” (Smith and Osborn, 2008). According to Smith (2011) the primary reason for analysing the detailed personal accounts of participants is “to learn about the participant’s cognitive and affective reaction to what is happening to them” (p. 10). The task of the researcher is a challenging one, as it requires a need to engage deeply with, and be critical of, the text whilst attempting to interpret a participant’s emotional state and perhaps identify what they may have been trying to say but found it difficult to express in words. 5.2 Method Participants Ten participants (undergraduate and postgraduate students) were purposively selected from an initial sample of 250 on the basis of their scores on a perfectionism screening questionnaire (an adaptation of the Frost et al, 1990 Multidimensional Perfectionism Questionnaire). An advert was placed on the University of Surrey intranet to the student community specifically asking the question “Does being a perfectionist affect your health and wellbeing?” Of the ten participants, five scored highly on the adaptive aspects of 112 perfectionism (adaptive perfectionists) and five scored highly on the maladaptive aspects (maladaptive perfectionists). It has been suggested that it is beneficial to keep sample sizes small when utilising IPA, partly so that it keeps research closely focussed on understanding the perceptions of the particular group under study but also because of the lengthy process of transcribing the interviews (Smith and Osborn, 2007). Table 5.1 Interview participants Name Age Sex Type of perfectionist Hannah 19 Female Adaptive Kate 20 Female Adaptive Mason 21 Male Adaptive Karl 19 Male Adaptive Finn 19 Male Adaptive Sara 20 Female Maladaptive Paul 19 Male Maladaptive Rachel 21 Female Maladaptive James 19 Male Maladaptive Ally 18 Female Maladaptive Procedure Following the screening questionnaire, the participants were invited to attend an interview on the University Campus. Prior to the start of the interview, participants were asked to complete a brief questionnaire requesting demographic information, read through an information sheet explaining briefly the nature of the research project and sign a consent form. The interviewer explained that all information provided would remain confidential and that it would not be possible for participants to be identified from the responses given and the subsequent write up of the study. The interviews were semi-structured (see appendix for interview schedule) and lasted between thirty and forty five minutes. Using semi-structured interviews is often recommended when performing IPA as according to Smith and Osborn (2008) “this form 113 of interviewing allows the researcher and participant to engage in a dialogue whereby initial questions are modified in the light of the participant’s responses and the investigator is able to probe interesting and important areas which arise”. This type of interview allows the researcher the flexibility of being able to deviate from the interview schedule and explore novel areas if thought to be interesting or necessary. The semi-structures interviews consisted of a series of questions designed to tap into perfectionists’ beliefs relating to their current engagement in preventive health behaviours and the factors that might present as obstacles/barriers to their engagement. Examples of the questions in the interview schedule included: “What factors influence your engagement in preventive health behaviours?”, “How do you look after yourself when you have other pressures?” and “describe what you do when you encounter obstacles that may affect how you look after your health and wellbeing?” Additionally to gain an understanding of the value perfectionists place on their own health and wellbeing, participants were also asked questions that addressed whether they consider themselves to be healthy, how important they feel it is to look after both physical and emotional health, whether they have clearly defined health goals, current preventive health behaviours, past behaviours and likelihood that they would seek medical attention if they had a physical/emotional problem. Each interview was digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim. Interviewees were provided with a payment of £10 for their time as well as refreshments during the interview if required. 5.2.1 Data Analysis The full verbatim transcripts were subjected to IPA (Smith, 1996; Smith, 2004; Smith and Osborn, 2008). It is generally recognised that there is no definitive way of performing IPA, although commonly, the first transcript is studied in detail and the emerging themes documented in the margins. The emerging themes are then recorded and as the process continues, attempts are made to see if there are any connections between the developing themes. As the process continues some of the themes naturally cluster together and present themselves as stand-alone superordinate themes. Generally the aim of the process is to identify clusters of themes and to pull them together to represent other superordinate themes (alongside the stand alone ones). According to Smith and Osborn (2008) it is recommended that as the themes begin to emerge, the researcher needs to engage in a continual process of checking back with the transcript to see if the connections accurately 114 reflect the actual words of the interviewee. For the present study, as well as detailing the emerging themes, specific extracts were also written down at this stage to provide examples of the particular themes (verbatim sections from the transcript). The themes that emerged from the first transcript were then used to inform subsequent transcripts. Smith and Osborn (2009) have noted that this a valid means of continuing with the analysis. Once all the transcripts were analysed, all superordinate themes for the group of perfectionists were documented in table 5.2. 5.3 Results The results were organised according to the following superordinate themes (See table 5.2). Within each of the superordinate themes were a number of subthemes which will be discussed and references made to the relevant sections of the transcripts to help illustrate the chosen themes. Table 5.2 The three superordinate themes SUPERORDINATE SUBTHEMES THEMES 1 Taking personal a)Physical and emotional aspects of health responsibility for health and b)Ability to function wellbeing c)Ability to deal with transition to university d)Engaging in preventive health behaviours 2 3 Lack of awareness of a)Actions are never “good enough” limitations b)Significant event to re-establish awareness Control over health and a)Having clearly defined health goals wellbeing b)Not wanting to seek help c)Flexibility to adjust one’s standards i)Ability to adjust standards ii)Inability to adjust standards 115 5.3.1 Taking personal responsibility for health and wellbeing The first superordinate theme to emerge has been identified as “taking personal responsibility for health and wellbeing”. A number of subthemes were considered to represent and embody this major theme; being able to identify the importance of both the physical and emotional aspects of health, ability to function, dealing with the transition to University and engaging in preventive health behaviours. (a) Physical and emotional aspects of health Participants were asked the question “What does the term being healthy mean to you”? It was evident from their responses that all participants were able to acknowledge the importance of both the physical and emotional aspects of health, suggesting that they were aware of the mind-body link; a selection of the responses are included below; ‘You don’t need to worry about your health and you’re mentally and physically fit’. (Hannah; A)4 ‘…I guess overall it means being both in good physical and mental health…mentally keeping your brain healthy….so you don’t start causing yourself problems, you know for your own brain and…physically’. (Mason; A) ‘…..two things, being physically healthy and mentally health….physically healthy is not having any ailments and kind of like fully functional, I guess is the word I think right now, and mental health is similar things, you know….having no mental illness and you can operate within society, like an average amount’.(Karl; A) ‘What comes to mind first would be like the physical readiness or how well you are doing in terms of your body and…..erm…would be the mental psychological afterwards’.(Finn; A) ‘…I think it can have lots of different aspects to it, I think it can be like physically healthy…, like having a healthy body and a good complexion and having clean looking 4 For ease of understanding, an ‘A’ or an ‘M’ appears after each name to denote adaptive or maladaptive perfectionist 116 hair and there is also good mental health as well…like.. being happy, being content with who you are..being able to integrate well with other people, being able to cope with difficult situations…and things like that’. (Ally; M) ‘..being healthy physically and mentally…physically no illness and no pain in your body and mentally it means no stress, no depression, that’s about it’.(Sara; M) ‘I would say it kind of goes with being happy, like I guess when I’m feeling healthy and good about myself then I kind of feel happier and generally physically better, if that makes sense….’ (Paul; M) It is interesting that some of the participants acknowledged what they considered to be necessary for good health/wellbeing, for example, Ally (M) mentioned having a healthy body, being happy and content and able to cope with difficult situations. Others referred to an absence of something as a means to define what being healthy means to them. This was demonstrated by Sara (M) and Karl’s (A) responses suggesting that to be healthy one needs to be free from illness, ailments, pain, stress and depression. When asked more specifically about the relative importance they placed on each of these aspects of health (both physical and emotional) a number of the participants felt that physical problems were less serious and easier to treat than emotional ones. Emotional problems were considered to be more of a problem because they were believed to be harder to assess, less visible than physical problems and have the potential to quietly simmer away relatively undetected. Interestingly only two out of the ten participants (Hannah, A and Kate, A) mentioned emotional health before physical health, which may give insight into participants’ beliefs about which they considered to be more important to them personally. ‘I think your physical health is quite easy to see and you can look at somebody and see how fit they are, but emotional health is very difficult for other people to see and very difficult for you to assess yourself..so you need to look at it in more detail I think… because it is more important. (Mason; A) 117 ‘….it sounds like physical health is less serious in a way and it’s easier to do something about’. (Hannah; A) ‘I think emotional health probably has slightly more importance for me partially for what I want to do in my life. Being physically ill is less of a problem, it’s less inhibitory to what I want to do than if I was stressed all the time. I’m in my second year and at the end of my first year I got quite ill and I didn’t realise at the time but it was because I was stressed because of the exams and so on….so since then particularly, I’ve been a lot more conscious of having to look after my emotional side and just keep an eye on my stress levels and realise that it’s not always that I’ll feel stressed, quite often it’ll come out physically in some other way. So I’m a lot more aware of that now and I feel it’s a lot more important for me to be consciously aware of it and look after that side of things’. (Kate; A) The above section taken from Kate’s transcript provides an insight into the importance that she places on both her emotional and physical health status. Kate was able to reflect that becoming ill was a turning point for her and as a result of her illness episode, she was able to take personal responsibility for her emotional health and adjust her priorities to attend to both aspects of health. (b) Ability to function The awareness of health being linked to an “ability to function” was considered to represent another aspect of taking personal responsibility for health and wellbeing. Interestingly all of the adaptive perfectionists mentioned this aspect of health at some point during their interviews. The importance of being able to function was emphasised by Kate; ‘..functioning is great. Functioning is sort of what most people are aiming for quite often I think. By functioning I mean achieving what you can achieve, not just floating about at a level’. (Kate; A) The above excerpt from Kate suggests that the ability to function is a conscious motive on the part of the individual to take responsibility for their own health and wellbeing. Being able to function was considered to be important because it was viewed as “enabling”. 118 Specifically, enabling them have the resources to cope with situations and tasks, being able to function in society and being able to pursue what they want to do in the future. This was demonstrated from a section of the interview transcript from Finn. ‘Well in the first place I need to stay healthy if I want to perform the things I want to do… I need to have a clear mind and good body to…like worry too much about things in life…..being healthy is like allowing you to continue with what you are doing and to achieve what you want to do in the future’. (Finn; A) Finn describes the need to stay healthy so that he will have the resources to be able to achieve what he wants to do in the future. It was noteworthy that none of the maladaptive perfectionists mentioned “ability to function” in their explanations of what being healthy meant to them. (c) Ability to deal with the transition to university From the transcripts it is clear that starting university was a transition that had a marked effect on potentially reshaping some of the participant’s beliefs and behaviours relating to health, specifically in relation to a shift in awareness of having to take personal responsibility for their own health and wellbeing. Ally (M) talks of her feelings of isolation from her Mum when she left home to begin her studies, and the realisation that she would have to take responsibility for her own personal goals and keeping a sense of balance between her studies and maintaining a healthy lifestyle. ‘When I came to university I realised that I had been completely displaced from my comfort zone, where…when I would panic about things before, I always had my mum to go to,….like she was the one who would say to me, okay let’s sit down and this is what we have to do… this is how we will do it. Then I came to university and I thought….one, my mum isn’t here and two, I have got to move on from that anyway because I am an adult now and….then I realised that I have to take those goals upon myself….when it comes to work, I set myself goals and when it comes to diet I set those goals too’. (Ally; M) 119 When Kate (A) talks about becoming ill during her first year of university she describes how this was the first time that she had to knowingly take personal responsibility for her own health and wellbeing.. ‘I never really thought about consciously stopping myself get ill and that kind of thing because it’d never been an issue before. I had been living with my partner so he had been looking after me in that respect and before that I was living with my parents….. so they were looking after me and last year was the first time I was really on my own. So it was the first time that I had to consciously take responsibility for my own health’. (Kate; A) For Ally (M), the transition to university appears to have empowered her to make decisions about her own health and wellbeing, despite her initial struggle with feelings of isolation. ‘Being away at university, you are kind of more on your own….you are a bit more isolated so learn to deal with things more by yourself, so I am quite good at dealing with things in my own head at the moment’. (Ally; M) These feelings of being empowered and taking control of health have been echoed by Paul (M) who identified that he relied on both school and his parents to keep him healthy before coming to university. He insisted that being away from home had increased his awareness of his own personal responsibility. ‘When I was at school I was involved in loads of sports teams and obviously my parents fed me. I mean they’ve always been quite like….you must have fruit…..you must drink water and….like when it’s them feeding you…..and I was doing all the sport and things, it never really crossed my mind and….like now I’m kind of moving out…when it’s my responsibility, I think it’s made me more aware, it’s made me think about what I eat and making…sure I buy the right things and making sure I go out and exercise’. (Paul; M) Part of the realisation of taking personal responsibility appeared to involve the need to balance the healthy and unhealthy aspects of university life. A number of participants identified there to be certain expectations that were an integral in the university environment that made it difficult to maintain a healthy lifestyle such as frequent 120 socialising, drinking often to excess and eating a poor diet. James identified these factors to have an impact on his ability to engage in preventive health behaviours. ‘To be honest it’s quite difficult sometimes cos things happen like my friend’s birthday last Wednesday…I could’ve gone to the gym…but… instead I went to a Thai restaurant and we ended up eating a lot of food… I do have lots of distractions, so like my friends, you know, I live with my friends from the uni and they don’t really do much exercise…..we’ve got a playstation and we’ll all play on that together. So we’re playing at like 7 o clock for half an hour and it ends up being like nearly two hours and then it’s too late to do anything…..just sit there, get a bit depressed, eating chocolate, you know, watching TV and then you’re like, shall I do some work and you’re like no’.(James; A) Kate (A) and Sara (M) also felt that being at University challenged their ability to look after themselves and maintain a healthy lifestyle. Although not impossible, Kate identified that at University she had to make a conscious effort to engage in healthy behaviours whereas at home it had seemed a much more intuitive process. ‘Since I moved to Guildford and spent more time in the city I have to be more conscious to do more exercise….because, I could just get on a bus, whereas at home that’s not an option and you have to walk. So I have been more conscious of making myself do that rather than just allowing myself to be lazy’. (Kate; A) Sara (M) felt that the sedentary lifestyle, i.e. spending considerable time sitting either in lectures, in her student office or at home studying meant that she felt much less healthy than before she started University. She also identified that it had taken her a while to accept that it was her responsibility to make the effort to engage in healthy behaviours. Paul identified having problems with continuing with healthy behaviours when he started university and acknowledged that he was engaging in more health risk behaviours such as drinking and smoking. It is interesting from this section of Paul’s transcript that he recognises that he wouldn’t want to continue with these behaviours outside of the university environment. ‘I still drink a couple of times a week, which I think is more of the student lifestyle thing. I don’t think it’s something,….I hope it’s not something that’s going to carry on once I 121 finish Uni. It’s not really acceptable behaviour outside the university environment’. (Paul; M) (d) Engaging in preventive health behaviours Perfectionists were asked about their current engagement in preventive health behaviours, specifically the steps they take to look after their physical and emotional health. All of the perfectionists (adaptive and maladaptive) identified engaging in at least some health enhancing behaviours such as going to the gym, running, swimming, playing various sports, eating healthily/limiting intake of junk food, limiting alcohol intake, limiting over the counter medications and trying to ensure that they get enough sleep. Some of the interviewees mentioned that they would like to participate in more activities specifically to address their physical fitness but that work commitments prohibited such engagement. When asked about what they did currently to look after their emotional health, three out of the five adaptive perfectionists mentioned strategies that they employed such as reading and praying (Kate), taking regular breaks from work (Mason) and planning various aspects of work and home life to avoid uncertainty (Karl). Similarly three out of the five maladaptive perfectionists stated that they too had various strategies to help with emotional health and wellbeing e.g. discussing difficulties with friends/family (Ally and Paul), trying to avoid conflicts with other people and avoiding an unhealthy lifestyle (Sara). Feeling happy and contented about life was also mentioned as a positive strategy to looking after emotional health (Paul and Karl) In the following extract, Mason describes his experiences of studying in both the United States and the UK and the different demands that he faced. In describing his strategy of taking regular breaks from his work, this illustrates how he has now taken personal responsibility for looking after his emotional health. ‘I say that occasionally, I am stressed but I don’t take it to extremes. When I was in the United States it was stressful and I always had 100 hours of work to do and it was very stressful over there, but I’ve decided coming back to the UK, that I am going to take it a bit more easy, there’s only a certain amount of work that you can do, if you push yourself too far then results start to become detrimental. So it’s good to sometimes take a break and I do this regularly with my work……if you can’t think of anything original, you’ve got to go 122 away and take a break and do something else, otherwise it will become detrimental to your mental health’. (Mason; A) Four of the perfectionists (Hannah (A), James (M), Finn (A) and Rachel (M) stated that they felt they were (currently) not doing anything to look after their emotional health. The following excerpts from the transcripts of James (M) and Rachel (M) demonstrate an awareness of the importance of looking after the psychological/emotional aspects of health, although this is not accompanied by any engagement in behaviours that could address their emotional needs. ‘I’m really not sure I do anything,…. I just,…. I think I’m more like trying to hide the stuff and not get as stressed….but then I get to the deadline and then when I know that I am too close to a deadline or something I get really stressed about, and then I start panicking a lot and not much happens’. (James; M) ‘I think it’s probably being neglected so far as… because I spend so much time trying to achieve stuff I don’t think as much about the emotional side. (Rachel; M) There seemed to be a discrepancy for some perfectionists between acknowledging the importance of emotional health and taking action to protect themselves when work commitments increased or when participants noticed their stress levels rising. When asked, all participants (both adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists) were able to acknowledge the relevance and value of addressing emotional health, they were able to identify the mind body link and they also acknowledged the importance of engaging in preventive health behaviours to address emotional needs. However, they didn’t seem to be engaging in any behaviour that would support or protect their emotional wellbeing. ‘….I don’t do anything….that’s impossible (laughs), too many things to compromise on…I think right now the stress in my life is one of the highest it’s ever been…it is important because after all it… can affect your physical health as well. You’ve got all the stress, like back problems and stuff….a lot of things going on at work, that it’s very difficult to look after that side of things’. (Hannah; A) 123 Within Hannah’s account there seemed to be the most discrepancy between her beliefs/intentions and her actual behaviours. Hannah was decisive in her view that emotional health was important because of how it influences physical health. She also mentioned her high levels of stress however it sounds like work commitments prohibit her ability to look after this aspect of her life. When Hannah laughs after saying that she doesn’t do anything, it suggests that she is aware of the discrepancy. Throughout the interview she continued to acknowledge the importance of exercising self-care whilst almost simultaneously trying to justify her lack of engagement in such behaviours. ‘It is important to look after yourself (laughs)… I don’t think I take care at all (laughs), I don’t sleep, then I just …I’m getting stressed and being annoyed with my parents.. I try and deal with it until the task is over and then have, maybe a day off and not have to study…then it’s a perfect day, but that doesn’t happen much. If I have things to do then no time to look after myself’. (Hannah; A) 5.3.2 Lack of awareness of limitations There seemed to be a lack of awareness or ability on the part of both adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists in being able to judge when they had pushed themselves too far and/or when they had reached their limits in a given situation. This lack of awareness of limitations was found to be demonstrated in two main ways; beliefs suggesting that actions are never good enough and the occurrence of a significant event that has had the effect of re-establishing awareness. (a) Actions are never good enough A well-established trait of perfectionism appears to be the inability to appreciate one’s personal strivings and evaluate them as being “good enough”. This trait seems to be more pronounced for maladaptive perfectionists. From the interviews it was apparent that a number of the adaptive perfectionists as well as maladaptive perfectionists appeared to doubt the quality of their actions specifically related to their engagement in preventive health behaviours. Hannah (A) does demonstrates a number of examples of her doubting the quality of her actions. Throughout her interview she made frequent references to the preventive health behaviours that she engaged in, such as volley ball, swimming, going to the gym and table tennis, however, she seemed to play down the significance of these 124 activities as not being good enough. Hannah suggested that if she wasn’t so busy with her studies, she could and should do more. When Kate (A) was describing whether or not she considered herself to be healthy, she focussed on the one negative (that she found it difficult to stick to a healthy diet at all times) whilst almost negating all of the health enhancing behaviours that she does engage in, such as walking regularly, being aware of trying to keep stress levels under control and utilising social support networks. James also mentioned his attempts to be healthy as not being good enough in his eyes: ‘I eat quite a lot of fruit and vegetables during the week and I go to the gym maybe 3 or 4 times a week but I know I should be doing more but it’s quite hard with what I do in my course as well…….at the gym we exercise all our muscles, we try and do a bit of cardio, a bit of abs.. it’s a bit limited, I’d like to do more but it’s the time restraint as well’. (James; M) Despite demonstrating that he does take steps to look after his health and wellbeing, James makes two references to wanting to and feeling like he should be doing more if he didn’t have to deal with the time pressures. Finn was the only one of the participants to mention that he experienced a sense of satisfaction when he felt he had done a good job or had achieved what he set out to achieve. ‘Sometimes after I achieve the work and the things I need to do, you feel good and well, you create some value and well….you do something good but on the other hand you feel that you have pushed yourself so hard just for this and those things are not compulsory, you chose to do it but you are pushing yourself to achieve other things so…. But at the end of the day if the job is over you feel proud’. (Finn; A) Research looking at the possible differences between adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism has suggested that adaptive perfectionists are more likely than maladaptive perfectionists to experience a sense of satisfaction from their personal strivings (Hamachek, 1978). Finn (A) described gaining some satisfaction from his actions, although it is noteworthy that he does also refer to the personal sacrifice that accompanied his achievements. 125 (b) A significant event to re-establish awareness A number of perfectionists were able to draw on their personal experiences to identify a significant event that had acted to re-establish their awareness of their own personal limitations with regards to their health and wellbeing. During her interview Kate (A) described an incident where she became very ill at the end of her first year of University. She saw this illness as the result of a build-up of stress surrounding her end of year exams and at the time she described herself as having little awareness of how poorly she was feeling. She described how she virtually stopped eating and lost two stone in weight and as a result she was admitted to hospital and once discharged, returned to her family home where her Mum looked after her and helped her to establish normal eating patterns again. Kate mentioned that it was only after the event that she realised that she had not been aware of how hard she was pushing herself with her work and as a result, had little awareness of her stress levels until they started to affect her physically (i.e. her appetite and weight). She described how she felt annoyed and frustrated with herself that she had allowed it to reach the point where she had become so ill and had not been able to see the warning signs. ‘It annoyed me that I had allowed it to get that far, it felt like it had been, that those health issues had sort of been my fault by not being more sensible about the way I was eating and so on…I had my mum to help me.. it’s a bit like being a child again, but it definitely helped’. (Kate; A) Kate (A) describes this incident as significant in helping to re-establish her awareness of where her own personal limitations were. She also talked about how it opened her eyes to how emotional health can have an impact on physical health and enabled her to put strategies in place to protect herself when she found herself preparing for exams the following year. Kate also described how, following her episode of illness, she now takes steps to look after both her physical and emotional health e.g. making sure she gets enough exercise, following a healthy diet, taking regular breaks from work, utilising the support from family and friends and monitoring her emotional health to ensure that she doesn’t get too stressed and that her physical health doesn’t suffer as a consequence. 126 ‘…..it’s getting towards that time of year again now of sort of the anniversary of when I started to get ill… I am being, I am taking note of how I am feeling and really taking time to make sure that I am emotionally ok…umm, and then physically ok as well….sort of follows that’. (Kate; A) Mason (A) discussed his experiences of living and studying in the United States before coming to the UK to study. He explained how he found the workload much heavier in the US, compared to over here. ‘the UK system is… you do less work during the term (compared to the US) so I think overall, I think it’s less stressful. And then you have exams at the end which you have to prepare for… there’s more stress at the end..but when you live in the US their whole system there is based on erm… continuous work, you know 100 hour weeks.. and over there they basically say… you have to sacrifice your health for work, because if you don’t sacrifice, you fail’. (Mason; A) In further accounts of his time studying in the US, it would seem that the unrealistic expectations that were imposed upon him (in terms of academic work), made it difficult for him to accurately judge where his personal limitations were. This was further exacerbated by his experiences of trying to look after his physical health whilst studying overseas. He described a close friend who pushed himself to extremes in his quest to have the perfect body. It seems like Mason has been able to reflect on his experiences to provide him with the ability to judge where his own personal limitations were, for example he does push himself when he goes to the gym but if he doesn’t meet the targets that he has set himself, he doesn’t get angry (like he may have done previously), instead he plans to try a little harder next time. Additionally he monitors his stress levels so that he doesn’t push himself beyond his limitations with regards to academic work. ‘I’ve decided that over here, coming back to the UK, that I am going to take it a bit more easy. There’s only a certain amount of work that you can do, if you push yourself too far then results start to become detrimental. So it’s good to take a break and I do this regularly with my work…if you can’t think of anything original, you’ve just got to go away and take a break and do something else. Otherwise it will become detrimental to your mental health’ (Mason; A) 127 This extract from Mason’s interview shows how he was able to identify that if he continued to push himself with his academic work and neglect his health and wellbeing (e.g. by not taking regular breaks form his work) then his work and/or health would suffer as a consequence. Ally (M) discussed her experience of having a female friend at college who suffered from depression. She described how her friend kept her feelings and anxieties to herself and didn’t let on to anyone about her problems. Ally also talked about how her friend continued to push herself relentlessly with her studies despite suffering from emotional problems. Ultimately her friend reached the point where she was unable to continue at college and had to leave and try and study for her A Levels at home. Eventually she ran away from home and didn’t go to University. In reflecting on this experience, Ally was able to identify the importance of looking after emotional as well as physical health. Thinking about specific health behaviours that would be beneficial for emotional wellbeing, Ally was also able to see how helpful it would have been had her friend been able to utilise her social support network of friends and family which would have enabled others to offer help. She describes how this experience enabled her to realise where her own personal limitations were as well as the importance of being able to share difficult feelings with friends and family as a means of looking after her emotional health and wellbeing. ‘I feel that I kind of,….I take time when I’m suffering from problems with university work or like a personal problem and I know, I have kind of identified in my head who I can talk to and I know that I have like one friend who will always be there for me and….I always know that my mum is like always on the end of the phone for me to talk to’. (Ally; M) From the interviews it became apparent that how individuals’ dealt with the pressure of work/exams whilst at school represented a significant point which helped raise their awareness of their own personal limitations (in terms of how hard they could push themselves). For some, it was evident that this awareness only became activated when they started university and encountered their first year exams. Hannah (A) discussed how her experiences at school during her GCSE’s made her realise that she would have to adopt a different strategy to most other people in order to achieve 128 her goals. She described how her desire to do everything perfectly meant that she was aware she would have to work for longer on certain tasks to meet her own high standards. When discussing how she dealt with exams at university, Hannah described how this awareness whilst at school helped her to develop a strategy whereby she would allocate more time to tasks such as revising and preparing for exams. Ally (M) described some of the problems that she had encountered when she was studying for her GCSE’s ‘I have always, since GCSE’s.. I have always had this problem of when it gets to exam period I always get really panicky, thinking I am going to completely fail and then somehow that manages to make me do well but I think last year I had quite a tough time, I didn’t really adjust to university that well straight away. When I kind of saw exams approaching and I thought I need to take a new look at this, I need to really think about it so…kind of prevented that from happening… what had always happened before, because before it was always panic, panic, panic… cry…. I am going to fail…and then last year I thought, actually I can see this happening again, it always happens, why would it be different this year?... so I thought..like… I need to get myself calm, I need to tell myself before.. I can do it and just prepare myself and I know that this year… I have liked looked at my second year in a different way… like trying to prevent all that stress’. (Ally; M) In this extract, Ally (M) reflected on the difficulties she faced in the first year of University, specifically when she was approaching her end of year exams. It seemed that at this point she was able to reflect on her experiences that she faced when she had studied for her GCSE’s and make some changes so as not to repeat the same again. Ally (M) described that despite getting panicky around exam time at school, she normally ended up doing well, therefore, it may be the case that she didn’t question her (potentially dysfunctional) strategy as it had always appeared to serve her well. Ultimately it would seem, Ally was able to draw on her school experiences to create a shift in her outlook and her awareness of how else she might tackle the stress surrounding exams. The approaching first year exams appeared to act as a trigger for her to readjust her thinking about her own personal limitations surrounding exams. 129 Sara (M) recalls when she was younger she would push herself with her academic work at the possible detriment of her health. ‘…..when I was younger, would do my work until midnight, maybe until three or four in the morning and it is very exhausting. I really like to push and work to the last minute and it is very exhausting.. but nowadays I pay more attention to my health and don’t do it anymore…maybe the latest time I go to bed is twelve’. (Sara; M) During the interview she was able to reflect how a recent episode of illness enabled her to become aware of how much she was pushing herself. Although her behaviours at the time (when she was at school) did not provide her with the necessary impetus to change the way she dealt with the pressure of work and exams, she was able to draw on those experiences now she was at university to gain a new perspective on creating a balance between working hard but also looking after her health. Paul remembered very clearly his experiences of becoming stressed at the time of his GCSE’s. ‘I didn’t used to be very good at it. I used to get… I think I put a lot of pressure on myself and then when things didn’t go as I’d hoped I used to get really worried. Like with my GCSE’s when I did them, I remember when the results came out, I ended up doing really well but I’d convinced myself I’d done awfully and had like…. For a while… I did get stressed, I’d get like chest pains and then I had to go to hospital for it. But they didn’t know what it was… but I think it was stress related and then since then, like I know when I.. you know.. that rising feeling of panic when you worry about something, I’ve kind of learnt to control it a bit now because I just sit down, stop thinking about it, take deep breaths and it’s not really been a problem since.. I think after having problems with it… I’d know how to deal with it now’. (Paul; M) From this extract it suggests that his experiences of having to deal with the physical consequences of stress enabled him, (with the reassurance from the hospital that there wasn’t a physical reason for his pains) to develop a strategy to deal with the stress surrounding exams. This awareness appears to have enabled him to develop a more functional strategy to deal with his reaction to stress in the future. 130 5.3.3 Control over health and wellbeing Three subthemes were identified under the heading of control over health and wellbeing; health goals, not wanting to seek help and inflexibility to adjust standards. (a) health goals Most definitions of perfectionism place an emphasis on organisation and planning as key characteristics (e.g. Frost et al, 1990). In terms of health goals, research has identified that when individuals have a clear idea about their health goals e.g. what they are going to do and when they are going to do it, then there is a greater chance that individuals will be able to direct their own lives to achieve these goals (Kraus, 2003). When asked whether they had clearly defined health goals, only James and Ally could specify any specific strategies that they had implemented. With regards to general planning, Karl (A) described how he likes to plan out virtually every aspect of his life: ‘….I think the more you plan what you are going to do with your life, from what you are going to do in your day to day life, like waking up in the morning to making sure you get things that you want to get done in a week, to what you want to do with your life in the next three years. If you can do that they you are going to be in a better frame of mind…sort of thing…you’re going to be in better mental health’. (Karl; A) Karl’s descriptions show the importance he places on plans and organisation and how he feels these have a positive impact on his emotional wellbeing, specifically, he suggests that planning puts him in a good place emotionally and gives him a sense of happiness and contentment in his life. Despite having most areas of his life mapped out, he states that he doesn’t have specific goals in terms of looking after his health. ‘I wouldn’t say goals as much as I’m in a place right now and I want to get to a different place… but I do have goals in the sense of a kind of routine that I want to keep going… and obviously I’ll improve as I go along, which will hopefully in turn improve my health’. (Karl; A) 131 Despite all the perfectionists expressing that they felt it was important to have clearly defined health goals, only two felt they had addressed this area of their lives. James (M) explained that he makes weekly plans of what he wants to achieve (e.g. healthy eating and going to the gym) which he believes keeps him on track. Ally (M) felt her health goals were clearly defined and necessary for her to be able to work towards achieving them. ‘I think if I didn’t have them (health goals).. I think I am the sort of person who needs to have goals otherwise I would let myself slip and I wouldn’t achieve what I wanted so…. I think if I didn’t think about things, then I wouldn’t achieve them. I think that is the best way for me to work’.(Ally; M) It would seem that Ally (M) had some doubt surrounding her ability to maintain a healthy lifestyle in the absence of having clearly defined health goals. She suggested that these act as a useful frame of reference for her to organise her behaviour. The majority of the perfectionists (adaptive and maladaptive) seemed to have a more vague idea of what they might like to do to look after their health and wellbeing rather than specific objectives or plans. Sara felt such goals to be more important for people who don’t have a clear idea of how to look after themselves and described that she has a more general approach that didn’t involve writing down or listing what she wanted to achieve. Finn (A) also subscribed to a more general view: ‘I have never really set up goals or like what I want to achieve in terms of health.. but just have a more generic or cloudy objective of staying healthy… I think if you are generally more healthy then it would be more generic to just keep as you are…but…if people are in a more….undergoing a more negative situation I think it is good for them to set a goal for them, knowing how to improve or have the objective to improve the situation’. (Finn; A) From this extract there is the suggestion that Finn (A), although realising the importance of such health goals, felt these are more relevant for other people who perhaps weren’t as healthy as him and who perhaps who were in a more negative emotional state. Such a premise was also supported by Paul (M) who advocated a more general approach to taking care of himself and identified that such goals would have more relevance if he had a particular health concern. He did admit to attempting to set goals but confessed that other factors often get in the way: 132 ‘I’d say I always attempt to set myself goals, like I’ve put on a bit of weight since coming to uni and I’m always like.. oh I’m going to lose it but then it kind of gets lost in the wayside amongst everything else.. like..and never quite happens. But I think if things, if things ever became a problem, I think I would sort it out, but at the moment because I am generally quite healthy and stuff, I’m just kind of quite happy going along as I am because nothing’s wrong yet, if that makes sense..’ (Paul; M) It would seem that Paul (M) would like to have clearly defined health goals, however, when he has tried to implement them, he felt that various obstacles tend to get in the way and then he lost his focus. Mason (A) explains that he was intentionally vague about his health goals. He further elaborated that this was necessary because he felt that planning in this area of his life would have provided him with yet another thing to think about that it would potentially tip the balance in terms of him maintaining a stable emotional state. ‘I plan so many other things in the days throughout my life, there are so many aspects of my life I plan, that if I planned all the other things, it would be a very stressful lifestyle’. (Mason; A) Hannah (A) was the only participant who identified herself as having no health goals at all (general or specific). Similar to Mason (A) she explained that having to deal with that area of her life would put too much strain on her and force her to make compromises in other areas e.g. academic work which she described as an area that she is not prepared to compromise on: ‘I was trying to have but…. It’s impossible really now cos I don’t have any time to do anything extra… I Would like to do it and I made a schedule and I always have to change something because of the work .. if I get the place next year (she is applying to graduate medical school) then I can rest for a bit and I can Think about this stuff, but before that it is not really possible’. (Hannah; A) 133 Although Hannah (A) described herself as trying to have goals related to health, she felt that her heavy workload prohibited her from being able to address this area of her life. (b) Not wanting to seek help When asked how likely it would be that they would seek help for both physical and emotional difficulties, there seemed to be a general reluctance from all participants, both adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists. Reasons given for not wanting to seek professional help or delaying seeking help for physical problems included: heavy workload so no time (Hannah, A), feeling personally responsible for wanting to sorting out own problems (Kate, A, Karl, A, Paul, M), a belief that family and friends could give better advice (Kate, A; Mason, A), inconvenience (Karl, A), the internet being more convenient and quicker to use (Kate, A; Mason, A; Karl, A; Paul, M; Ally, M; Finn, A; Rachel, M), difficulty building up trust in a new doctor (Kate, A) and previous bad experiences with health care providers (Karl, A). Most of the interviewees stated that their decisions to seek help for physical health worries would be influenced by: the severity of the problems, how scared they felt by not going and also whether it was a one off problem or a recurring problem. Ally, M, Finn, A, Rachel, M and Sara (M) explained that they would go quite readily because they could see how putting things off may make the situation worse but Hannah and Paul admitted that they would only go if their problem interfered with their ability to function. For physical problems, most participants suggested that they would use the internet to check out symptoms and general queries that they had in preference to going to see a doctor or other health professional. For emotional problems none of the perfectionists suggested they would readily seek help. Although acknowledging the importance of this type of support many of the participants felt that they would prefer to deal with such difficulties on their own. Some of the participants suggested that they might enlist the help of their social support network (Kate, A, Finn, A, and James, M). Others felt that such matters should be kept private (Paul, M, Mason, A, Karl, A and Sara, M). The majority of participants mentioned the internet as a potential source of support for emotional problems but didn’t admit to using such resources regularly. 134 ‘With the emotion thing, although I want to talk it through with other people, I prefer to keep things private, if I can. I’m not one of those people that would talk about things with anyone, I mean I’d sit down with my Mum and have a chat or with a close friend if something was a problem, but like..I don’t like to umm…. It’s going to sound really awful, but I feel like if I display even extreme emotion, it make me feel kind of……..feel weak and I know that’s a really awful thing to say but I don’t like it’. (Paul; M) This extract from Paul’s transcript shows how his fears about being perceived as weak may stop him from seeking help for emotional problems. Finn (A) and Karl (A) expressed confidence about being able to deal with emotional difficulties on their own. However, others seemed to feel unsure of their ability to accurately judge when emotional problems may need attention (Kate and Ally). Kate, possibly due to her past difficulties dealing with stress, seemed to recognise that personally, individuals’ are not always the best judge of whether they are functioning or not. Ally felt that it was much harder to admit having emotional problems and that individuals may need help and encouragement from others to motivate them to go and seek help. ‘I have actually been like a couple of times to seek help but I didn’t go immediately. That is a different thing to me, I think that is something that is harder to admit to and I think sometimes you need somebody else to encourage you or it is quite hard to say….look at yourself and say, oh I have got this problem, I have got that problem and actually do something about it, I think sometimes you do see it and sometimes you need somebody else to see it, somebody who cares about you to kind of like…make you, like encourage you that you are doing the right thing, that you are not going crazy, that there is something wrong actually wrong …it is quite hard to motivate yourself to do something like that’. (Ally; M) This extract from Ally’s transcript suggests that individuals don’t always recognise emotional problems and emphasised that it is important to have a social support network in place that can help you with decisions regarding when to seek professional advice. 135 (c) Flexibility to adjust standards There are inevitably going to be times when it is necessary to adjust one’s standards and expectations for example when academic pressures increase at exam times and other activities have to take a back seat or perhaps when one is ill and one’s academic goals have to be readjusted. From the interviews it was evident that there was a split between those individuals who possessed the flexibility to adjust their personal standards and those who struggled. The distinction did not seem to be based on type of perfectionism i.e. both adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists were seen to exhibit both flexible and inflexible attitudes towards changing goals and standards. Not surprisingly, for most of the participants this balance seemed to be weighted in favour of being driven to fulfil their academic goals first and foremost and having to give a lower priority to engaging in preventive health behaviours. Through discussions with the interviewees it became apparent that the crucial determining factor, in how successful attempts were to balance the two domains, was not primarily concerned with having the flexibility to be able to adjust one’s standards but rather having the knowledge and confidence that once the situation had returned to normal (i.e. the particular threat or pressure had subsided) a sense of balance would be resumed. The responses of the participants have been distinguished by those individuals who had the flexibility to adjust standards and those who didn’t (i) Ability to adjust standards Kate’s (A) experience of becoming ill at the end of her first year seems to have enabled her to develop the flexibility to deal with situations where she felt there was conflict between work and health (e.g. when assignments are due or around exam time). Before her illness she identified the importance of looking after both physical and emotional health, however, it wasn’t until after this episode that she was able to see how important it was to have strategies in place to safeguard her health and wellbeing: ‘….my health didn’t take priority at all. I think I’d always taken it for granted that I would be ok, sort of regardless of how much I was eating or how much work I was doing or how tired I was making myself. I don’t get ill that much so I never really thought about 136 consciously stopping myself get ill…. and that kind of thing.. because it had never been an issue before’. (Kate; A) Kate (A) explains that when she experienced conflict (between work and health) she took time to acknowledge that she needed to take steps to safeguard her health such as taking regular breaks from her work, rewarding herself with time off when she has worked hard e.g. going out and getting some fresh air, enlisting the help of her friends to remind her to eat and stocking up on healthy foods during busy times. Whilst she had tried to create a balance between these two aspects of her life (university and health) she explained that she was now better equipped to spot the signs when she was pushing herself too hard and when this happened she had to adjust her standards and put her health ahead of her academic work. ‘Where you’ve got that conflict of I need to do both things but one of them has to take priority. I tend to try and balance them rather than give one priority over the other. I try to keep balance, which isn’t always the best thing because sometimes my health has to come first…. But as much as possible I try to keep on top of things and particularly work wise, working steadily is really important to me, just to keep my stress levels down that really helps, it also means that if I do start feeling ill, I can take the time and make myself better because I know that quite often just having time off completely will get me better faster rather than just trying to work through it and the work will suffer anyway’. (Kate; A) As well as acknowledging the health benefits of adopting these strategies, Kate was able to recognise how taking regular breaks was more beneficial to her academic work in the long term. Finn (A) acknowledged that when he experienced conflict, his emotional and physical health had to take a back seat, however, he felt that lowering his engagement in preventive health behaviours, at such times, was justifiable and fell within an acceptable margin. When he experienced increased pressure at University he dealt with it by taking regular breaks from work, actively seeking some entertainment after a long day’s studying, and rewarding himself after he achieved his academic goals. He felt that by allowing himself to temporarily reduce his engagement in preventive health behaviours, this provided him with 137 the extra time that he needed to complete his academic work, as well as enabling him to resume such activities when the work pressure has subsided. Taking regular breaks was also mentioned by Sara (M) to be her main strategy that she adopted to deal with situations where she experiences increasing pressure to perform well with her academic work. ‘I try to escape for a little while and then come back to it and feel like it is not the whole world, it is just work… or something like that…I say it to myself that it is just work. Sometimes I feel that it is just an escape but not that effective or it didn’t solve the problem but sometimes it works, it works because after maybe one night to have a good sleep and in the morning you think…ok.. I can solve it, it is just going to take time’. (Sara; M) In this extract she acknowledged that having the flexibility to step away from work and get a good night’s sleep is a better way of dealing with a difficult situation rather than letting work take over her entire life. By “escaping” she was able to gain the perspective she needed to create a balance between doing well academically but not putting excessive pressure on her health. James (M) was very clear about the need to have a clear mind and a healthy body to accomplish his academic goals. He viewed his engagement in preventive health behaviours such as eating healthily and regularly going to the gym as instrumental in helping him achieve these goals as well as helping him to deal with obstacles that may lead to conflict (in terms of trying to meet his academic goals whilst also maintaining his emotional and physical health). He expressed that he endeavoured to continue to go to the gym and eat healthily even when he had deadlines because he felt this to be beneficial to him physically and emotionally. Despite his commitment to maintaining a sense of balance between the two domains he was able to rationalise that occasionally he had to reduce his gym attendance to deal with the increasing pressures of work. Identifying this as a temporary measure enabled him to have the confidence and knowledge that he would be able to resume normal activities and return to a more balanced lifestyle when the academic pressures had subsided. 138 When dealing with the increasing pressures of work, Mason (A) felt occasionally it was necessary to push himself and that in such situations he would be prepared to adjust his standards (health) and briefly reduce his gym attendance. ‘If I’m on the thread of something, I just have to keep going and I think the health has to sacrifice for that period…erm… when I’m working. Not to a crazy extent where I have to start taking caffeine tablets and things like that, but just to the extent that if there is work to be done, I’ve got to skip going to the gym… I do know that I need at least five hours sleep at night and if it starts to get worse that then I have to cut down on the work’. (Mason; A) From this extract Mason suggests that putting off preventive health behaviours was just a temporary measure until the pressure of work subsided. Similar to James, Mason expressed confidence at being able to return to his normal activities (looking after his health) after the deadline or exam had passed. Karl (A) and Paul (M) also both admitted to putting off preventive health behaviours as a way of dealing with the conflicting pressures of having a deadline or exam whilst still wanting to maintain a healthy lifestyle. ‘I guess I do let things drop, like obviously uni for example, if the work load really does pile on…I’ll kind of drop other things that I know make my life better, like cycling all the time, making sure that I’ve got my packed lunches so that I’m not spending lots of money and I’m eating properly… and all these sorts of things do kind of fall through the cracks a bit I guess. But it doesn’t affect… like… the things it makes me stop doing aren’t kind of going to have an instant effect sort of thing…it’s more, it’s obviously, I want to be doing them long term but I guess I pick them back up again when load eases off.’ Here, Karl (A) identified that he had to put certain things on hold to be able to meet the pressures of university life but was able to tolerate this in the short-term because he felt it would be time limited and not have a lasting impact on his health. In the long-term he was able to see that he would be able to resume his normal activities. 139 Karl (A) also seemed to be accepting of the need to prioritise and temporarily suspend his engagement in preventive health behaviours because he felt that his actions were largely down to personal choice. ‘……those obstacles… are generally, all the obstacles that I’ve kind of put in place anyway, like I chose to do a degree and I’m doing a degree for a reason and I want to be doing it… so I wouldn’t really call it an obstacle so much as more… something that I’m doing at a particular time. Obviously I do have to drop other things, but it doesn’t really affect me emotionally because it’s still like valid and relevant to what I want to be doing’. (Karl; A) From this extract, it would appear that when academic demands increased and conflicted with his desire to keep up with his normal healthy routine, Karl (A) was able to reflect on the self-determined nature of the situation which allowed him to prioritise one domain over the other (in his case work over health). Additionally, Paul was able to rationalise that putting off engaging in preventive health behaviours was only temporary and that this was acceptable because he was young, didn’t have any existing health problems and therefore this decision would not endure any long term damage to his health and wellbeing. (ii) Inability to adjust standards Hannah (A) displayed little flexibility in being able to adjust her standards and expressed having no strategies in place to try and ensure a balance between work and looking after her health and was clear in her intention to always put her academic work before her health. Despite being able to identify that her health was suffering physically (lack of sleep) and emotionally (acknowledging that her stress levels are the highest they have ever been) she seemed unwilling to even consider adjusting her academic goals and standards. As well as an inability to adjust her own standards, even temporarily, Hannah revealed that she was engaging in behaviours that could be putting her health and wellbeing at further risk such as functioning on little sleep and shutting herself away from all sources of social support. The main worry for Hannah appears to be that she has continued to push herself relentlessly in her quest to achieve her academic goals but is doing little to look after her 140 health and wellbeing. Additionally she is also engaging in behaviours that may be putting additional pressure on her physical and emotional health. For Rachel (M), she was clearly trying to balance both work and health by continuing to push herself with her academic studies whilst also trying her best to continue with preventive health behaviours such as going to the gym and going for a run. ‘When it’s coming up to exams a lot of my friends.. like they stop going to the gym cos they think they don’t have enough time but you always have to make time to do something else… so I’ll always make sure I’m doing something else cos as long as you do the work when you plan to do it, you’ve always got… you’re not doing it twenty four hours a day’. (Rachel; M) Rachel expressed in her interview that she would try at all costs to keep both areas going and would always try to find a way to do both. The worry for Rachel is that although she is trying to keep a sense of balance in her life and not let her academic work take priority over her health, it may be that in her attempts to keep everything going and a reluctance to adjust her standards in either area, she could actually be pushing herself too far. This is suggested in the following extract: ‘….all my goals are set because I feel I have to achieve them, like I have to reach the best that I can and if I don’t then it is a failure, there’s no in between. There’s really only one or the other which is probably bad then you don’t reach it….’. (Rachel, M) Although not making it clear which specific domain she is talking about, this extract reveals how she experiences considerable dissatisfaction when she does not reach her goals or achieve her expectations. If she places equal importance on both domains and does not have the flexibility to adjust her standards depending on the situation (e.g. easing off on going to the gym when she has a deadline or exams approaching) then there is the chance that she is setting herself the unrealistic expectation of being able to do everything at all times which could prove detrimental to her long term health. Similarly to Rachel, Ally (M) did seem to employ some adaptive strategies to try and deal with situations where she experienced conflict between work and health e.g. carefully planning her time when there are deadlines and exams so leaving nothing to chance and 141 rewarding herself when she has pushed herself with her academic work. The potential problem, however, is that her rewards tend to be going to the gym and pushing herself physically. Although it is clearly important to continue to look after her health when there are additional pressures from work, there is the danger that she may be pushing herself too far in both areas because of a lack of flexibility in being able to adjust her standards in either domain. Ally (M) does acknowledge that some of her strategies may be maladaptive. In this brief extract she seemed to be questioning the value of one of her strategies. ‘….I think the way I prioritise by starting to worry about everything so far in advance so I have a long time to work it out… I don’t know if that is probably a bad thing in a way because I stress myself out so early…. It is probably unhealthy to be starting to worry that early, I am not sure’. (Ally; M) For both Ally (M) and Rachel (M), the long term consequences of pushing themselves in both domains (health and work) coupled with a lack of flexibility and reluctance to lower their standards in either of these areas, could prove detrimental to both work and health in the long term. 5.4 Discussion The aim of the present study was to explore perfectionists’ beliefs and behaviours related to health and wellbeing as well as gain some insight into engagement in preventive health behaviours and possible obstacles to engagement. The rationale being, that the qualitative nature of the study would allow for a more detailed understanding of how perfectionists manage to balance the demands of increasing academic pressures such as assignments and exams, with the ability to take care of themselves and remain healthy. Ultimately the intention was to try and gain more insight into some of the factors that may prohibit engagement in preventive health behaviours and whether there were any noticeable differences between adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists. As has been identified in the earlier chapters, there may be long-term risks associated with a lack of engagement in preventive health behaviours and maladaptive perfectionists 142 compared to adaptive perfectionists appear to show less engagement in such behaviours (Longbottom et al, 2012; Williams and Cropley, 2014). By implementing a qualitative study it was expected that it would be possible to provide additional evidence to suggest that maladaptive perfectionists particularly, may represent a high risk group based on their level of engagement and the specific ways that they deal with obstacles/barriers to engagement, such as increased academic pressure. Using IPA, three overriding themes were identified; taking personal responsibility for health and wellbeing, lack of awareness of limitations and control over health and wellbeing. Within these themes, however, a clear pattern of differences between adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists was not observed. Nonetheless some interesting findings did emerge from the interviews. Taking personal responsibility for health was identified to be tied in with understanding the importance of attending to both the physical and emotional aspects. The majority of the participants (adaptive and maladaptive) were able to acknowledge the importance of looking after both physical and emotional needs, although physical health was frequently discussed before emotional health, which could perhaps give an insight into priorities. Many of the adaptive perfectionists were able to identify that the value of health, for them, was tied to an “ability to function”, i.e. that health was a precious commodity because it enabled them to do what they had to or wanted to do in the present and also the future in terms of goals and aspirations. Interestingly none of the maladaptive perfectionists made any reference to linking the value of health to an “ability to function”. This may suggest that for maladaptive perfectionists the primary emphasis was not concerned with functioning, rather meeting the required standard or getting the job done. Unfortunately focussing only on the end product (i.e. the set goal or expectation) may have negative implications in terms of personal fulfilment and quality of life. Future work could address this as a potential difference between adaptive and maladaptive types of perfectionism. The transition to university stood out as a key factor for many of the perfectionists in terms of reshaping their ideas about taking personal responsibility for their health and wellbeing. For most, it was the first time they had to make the important decisions relating to how they lived their lives and looked after themselves rather than relying on their parent/s to take care of them. Moving away from home and embarking on a chosen course of study seemed to engender new pressures (e.g. an increase in workload) that had to be negotiated simultaneously with trying to adjust to the expectations and pressures of university life 143 (e.g. socialising, drinking, staying up late etc.). The focus seemed to be on trying to create a sense of balance between meeting the academic demands, socialising themselves into university life as well as trying to look after their health and wellbeing. From a preventive health point of view, it seemed that a number of the participants struggled with trying to remain healthy because university life seemed to present the opportunity for engagement in more health risk behaviours. The main challenge for participants seemed to be the ability to juggle several domains simultaneously. Although the majority of the perfectionists (both adaptive and maladaptive) identified this to be a difficult task and one that they had struggled with at the beginning, a number of the adaptive perfectionists identified these experiences to be empowering, allowing them to have more faith in their decision making abilities. Starting university is known to be a stressful experience for new students (Bewick, Koutsopoulou, Miles et al, 2010; Lunau, 2012) and dealing with this transition is likely to be more challenging for students who possess high levels of the maladaptive traits associated with perfectionism. Although not looking directly at perfectionism, a recent study identified that an alarming number of students (50%) expressed feeling hopeless and overwhelmed by anxiety when they started university (Lunau, 2012) and a longitudinal study (Bewick et al, 2010) in the UK identified that although anxiety and depression scores varied considerable throughout the course of individuals’ time at university, they remained elevated from pre-admission levels throughout their entire university career. Therefore it would seem essential, knowing the specific vulnerabilities of perfectionists that future research focusses on how this group of individuals can be supported through this major transition in their lives. Having to make their own decisions about how to look after themselves whilst at university did appear to have a positive effect on decisions to engage in preventive health behaviours, with all participants (both adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists) able to identify an encouraging range of behaviours that they felt they had participated or continued to participate in whilst at university. The challenge for many, however, was continuing to take personal responsibility for their health when the pressures of work increased and/or stress levels rose. Although demonstrating encouraging levels of engagement (for both adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists) there was the tendency to play down time spent engaging in preventive health behaviours as well as doubting the quality of such engagement. The 144 harsh self-talk expressed by a number of the participants suggested that they felt they could and should be doing more and indeed performing to a higher standard than was currently being achieved. Their lack of awareness or acknowledgement of their current level of engagement could mean that such individuals may be in danger of overdoing it at the potential detriment to their health and wellbeing and perhaps jeopardising their performance in other areas such as with their academic work. Although previous research has suggested doubting the quality of one’s actions is considered one of the more maladaptive perfectionism traits (Frost et al, 1990), the present study found this quality to be present in both adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists. A lack of awareness of physical and emotional limitations may mean that perfectionists have difficulty registering when they have pushed themselves too far in a particular domain (e.g. work or health behaviours). Not being able to recognise that they may need to take a break or perhaps step away from a task, could result in individuals pushing their bodies too hard or not recognising their stress levels mounting. Added to this, there is the danger that maladaptive perfectionists have a tendency to play down their successes. It was interesting to note in the present study that only one of the adaptive perfectionists expressed a sense of satisfaction with regards to his personal achievements. Hamachek (1978) maintained that experiencing satisfaction from one’s personal strivings was an essential component of the positive or adaptive facet of perfectionism. Not being able to recognise when a task has been completed well or when a good grade has been achieved coupled with an inability to recognise when to stop pushing oneself may be a worrying combination for health and wellbeing. Specifically it may prohibit attending to the physical and psychological symptoms that alert us to the fact that we need to slow down and take a break, such as excessive tiredness, body aches, pains and feelings of exhaustion and burnout. For some of the perfectionists, experiencing a significant life event was a catalyst for them to reassess their own personal limitations in relation to addressing their health and wellbeing. Their experiences enabled them to acknowledge that perhaps they were pushing themselves too far and re-evaluate how to create a sense of balance. For the majority of the participants (both adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists), taking exams, particularly GCSE’s was identified as a pivotal point in their lives when they experienced a considerable amount of stress and were able to see that continually pushing themselves to 145 meet their own high standards, whilst neglecting their physical and/or psychological health needs proved to be detrimental for the most part to their academic success as well as their health and wellbeing. For the most part, the participants in the study found that their experiences during their GCSE’s years were instrumental in helping lay the foundations for how they would respond to future pressures such as taking their A Levels and University exams. However, this was not evident for all participants and the analysis of the transcripts highlighted that this may be a critical first point of reference when some of the perfectionists felt vulnerable and unable to balance several domains simultaneously. Denscombe (2000) believes that “GCSE’s constitute a new and distinct source of stress in the already stressful lives of young people”. These findings highlight the need for more research specifically addressing how perfectionists cope with GCSE’s, (or equivalent) to identify whether these exams represent a critical point in the lives of perfectionists and how such individuals manage the academic pressures coupled with their perfectionistic tendencies. All of the perfectionists identified the importance of planning and organisation when discussing the areas of work and health. The primary reasons given for such planning tended to be to avoid uncertainty and to remain in control of the ability to achieve selfimposed standards and expectations. An interesting observation was that despite being organised in many life domains, including with their academic work and also stating the importance of engaging in preventive health behaviours, the majority of participants did not have a clear or organised plan as far as their health goals were concerned. Only two participants (two maladaptive perfectionists) could specify any specific strategies that they used in addressing their health needs, although a number of both adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists reported that did have a vague idea of what they wanted to achieve e.g. getting fit, going to the gym, controlling stress levels etc. It was also evident that some participants experienced frustration because they were aware of the importance of looking after themselves and would ideally have had specific plans in place for doing this, but identified that other pressures often got in the way of their ability to achieve this e.g. lack of time due to increased academic demands. It was also noted for some participants, that having goals and expectations as far as health and wellbeing was concerned was perceived as yet another stress and therefore there was justification for keeping this particular area of their lives intentionally vague. It is interesting that the participants were able to demand perfectionism in an academic domain but not in terms of health goals. Historically 146 perfectionism has been conceptualised and measured from the viewpoint of it being a global rather than a specific personality trait, although more recent empirical studies have emphasised the usefulness of measuring perfectionism from a domain specific perspective (Dunn, Gotwals & Dunn, 2005; McArdle, 2010; Stoeber and Stoeber, 2009). Clearly resolving this issue has implications from a theoretical and conceptual viewpoint as it would influence how perfectionism would be defined and from a treatment point of view in terms of finding the most appropriate treatment strategies for the extreme forms of maladaptive perfectionism. From the interviews it was evident that there was a general reluctance to seek help for either physical or psychological health difficulties. Although there was no obvious distinction between adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists, some of the participants suggested they would consider seeking medical help although it would depend on; the severity of the problem, the fear of what might happen if they didn’t go and whether or not the particular health concern compromised or interfered with their “ability to function”. For emotional problems, all of the participants demonstrated a reluctance to seek help, suggesting that they would prefer to deal with psychological difficulties themselves. There also seemed to be some uncertainty from both the adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists, over their own ability to judge when this type of emotional support might be necessary. The combination of not being able to judge personally that you might need help and not being able to ask for help does raise alarm bells for perfectionists who are often unwaveringly driven to meet and often exceed their often self-determined high standards. As has been discussed in previous chapters, the reluctance to seek help may represent the deeper need of perfectionists to maintain a perfect and flawless public image and research has identified that perfectionists may go to great lengths to hide their imperfections from others (Hewitt et al, 2003). Another point of interest was the tendency for a many of the participants to either use the internet to check out their symptoms or to seek support if or suggest that they would use this type of support in the future. This seemed to be preferred over face to face contact with a medical professional or a counsellor. It would be interesting for future research to investigate the avenue of providing specific support for perfectionists via the internet, as the private nature of this type of support would certainly help alleviate worries associated with the self-presentational needs of perfectionists. 147 In terms of possessing the flexibility to adjust standards in the light of unexpected difficulties or obstacles, it was encouraging that a considerable number of participants (both adaptive and maladaptive) demonstrated an ability to do this, for example when academic pressures increased they were able to adjust their engagement in preventive health behaviours to accommodate the extra time required to devote to their work and studies. Some participants (again both adaptive and maladaptive) displayed a lack of flexibility in being able to adjust their standards in either domain (work and health) and continued to push themselves relentlessly in one or both areas. The concern is that this lack of flexibility and the need to remain in control could potentially put pressure on work and health behaviours as well as lead to a reduction in quality in one or both of these areas. The overriding factor that seemed to determine the amount of flexibility (in being able to adjust standards) was the level of confidence they could resume a sense of balance once the immediate threat had passed i.e. when stress levels returned to normal or when the academic pressure subsided. It was interesting to find that the majority of both adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists were able to rationalise that at times of high stress, standards and goals had to be temporarily readjusted so as to reduce the pressure on them. A minority of the participants displayed little signs of being able to adjust their standards in times of high stress or when academic demands were increased. For such individuals there was the sense that they would continue to push themselves whatever the cost and the idea of reducing their involvement in either the work domain or health domain (in terms of their engagement in preventive health behaviours) seemingly unthinkable. Research has investigated and found a strong association between perfectionism and workaholism (Clark, Lelchook & Taylor, 2010; van Beek, Hu, Schaufeli et al, 2012) as well as the maladaptive perfectionistic traits with burnout (Fairlie and Flett, 2003). Focussing specifically on obstacles to engagement in preventive health behaviours, there appear to be some factors that seem to be linked inherently to the experience of being at university and others that seem to be tied more exclusively with perfectionism and perfectionistic traits. Table 5.3 provides a summary of possible obstacles to engagement; 148 Table 5.3 Possible Obstacles to engagement Factors Inherent in the University Factors Associated more Specifically Environment with Perfectionism Lack of time due to increased amounts Doubting the quality of one’s actions of academic work means that perfectionists may play down their engagement in preventive University life encourages bad health health behaviours as not being good habits (e.g. drinking, smoking, staying enough or the frequency of engagement out late etc.) which interfere with not seen as enough resources and motivation to engage in preventive health behaviours No clearly defined health goals. A lack of clearly defined health goals may Problems associated with balancing lots mean less motivation to engage of domains e.g. work, health, wanting to have fun Lack of flexibility to adjust standards e.g. an exaggerated focus on academic Having to take personal responsibility goals and achievement may mean no for health and wellbeing – often moving time, resources or motivation to engage away to go to university means the first in preventive health behaviours time that individuals have to make their own decisions about how to look after Perfectionists may be operating with a their health higher than average baseline levels of stress which therefore makes it more Increased stress due to new pressures likely that they are going to react in a and targets more extreme way when the demands of university life increase. A Lack of confidence that a sense of balance with be regained if standards have to be adjusted temporarily e.g. when exam time approaches there may be the need to reduce time spent at the 149 gym in favour of doing more work. Some perfectionists find it difficult to let go of their standards because they lack the belief that a sense of balance with be regained after the particular threat/pressure has passed There are some limitations to the present study. The small sample size involved, although considered beneficial to support the practical implications of IPA (Smith and Osborn, 2008) does raise questions about the generalizability of the findings. The other potential difficulty relates to the specificity of the sample; the sample was selected on the basis of type of perfectionism. Smith et al, (2009) have highlighted a preference for a less specific sample as the method then allows for the possibility of gaining a more thorough understanding of a wider context, however, Willig (2001) has suggested that the scope for autonomy and originality inherent in the approach makes it highly appropriate when studying atypical groups. To improve validity, further studies could utilise other methods to support the findings. Casey and Murphy (2009) have suggested the use of a variety of methods (such as diaries as well as interviews) which could further improve the credibility of the findings. Another limitation may be the use of only perfectionists in a university environment. Whilst this enabled a detailed exploration of young people in a university setting, it does rule out any potential differences that could be associated with other demographic variables such as age and work environment. A further limitation may be a lack of objective measures to assess actual engagement in preventive health behaviours. The study relied solely on self-reports of engagement and it would have been interesting to utilise other measures that could perhaps be externally verified, such as recorded attendance at a gym or exercise class. The final potential limitation with the study is the possibility of a response bias in favour of adaptive perfectionists. Adaptive perfectionists were noticeably more willing (than maladaptive perfectionists) to divulge more personal information and were generally more ‘talkative’. It is therefore difficult to accurately compare between the two types of perfectionists. 150 5.5 Conclusion The present study sought to explore adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists’ beliefs related to health and wellbeing and to gain a more thorough understanding of the decisions perfectionists make in relation to whether or not to engage in preventive health behaviours. Additionally it was intended that any factors that might prohibit engagement may be identified. Potential differences between adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists were also of interest. For engagement, both adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists demonstrated encouraging levels of involvement in preventive health activities and were able to identify the benefits of engaging in terms of protecting their health and wellbeing. Less emphasis was given to looking after emotional health than physical health despite all participants emphasising the importance of attending to emotional health needs. Generally, it seemed that there were more similarities than differences between the two types of perfectionists. Rather than being influenced by type of perfectionism, engagement seemed to be affected by a number of factors that were considered relevant in making the transition to University e.g. lack of time due to increased work load, increased stress due to new pressures and targets, the realisation that students had to take personal responsibility for their health and wellbeing and problems associated with balancing a number of domains simultaneously (studying, health and wanting to have fun). There were also a number of factors that were considered to be more closely related to being highly perfectionistic such as ; doubting the quality of ones’ actions so that engagement may be either played down or negated, not having clearly defined health goals when other areas are highly organised, having higher than average baseline levels of stress, how individuals dealt with balancing the demands of work and health previously (e.g. when they did their GCSE’s) and lacking confidence that a sense of balance would be regained if one had to temporarily readjust standards in the face of an immediate threat. The present study highlights the fact that there may be critical points in life that are more difficult for perfectionists to deal with such as GCSE’s and starting university. How successfully an individual deals with these major life transitions may set the tone for future competencies as well as vulnerabilities. The next study addresses potential intervening variables in the relationship between perfectionism and preventive health behaviours from a quanitative perspective. 151 Chapter 6 Study 4 Moderators and Mediators in the Relationship between Perfectionism and Engagement in Preventive Health Behaviours The previous chapter explored adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists’ engagement in preventive health behaviours and potential obstacles to engagement from a qualitative perspective using IPA. Potential obstacles to engagement included a number of factors that seemed to be inherent in the university environment such as more time pressure due to increased work commitments, being tempted by unhealthy behaviours and having to juggle a number of domains simultaneously (e.g. work, social life and looking after one’s health), and a number of other factors that seemed more specific to perfectionism e.g. lack of flexibility to adjust standards in a particular domain, lack of awareness of their own personal limitations and doubting the quality and frequency of their current engagement in health behaviours. In summary the previous study did not identify any noticeable differences between the dimensions of adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism although it did highlight that perfectionists may be particularly vulnerable when dealing with transitions, particularly the transition to university. The final study of the thesis continues with the theme of addressing potential barriers/obstacles to engagement in preventive health behaviours. To expand on the previous studies in the thesis, this study will address two areas of engagement; firstly engagement in general health behaviours (as has been addressed in the previous two quantitative studies, Chapters 4 and 5) and secondly, engagement in physical activity/exercise behaviours. Additionally a general population sample will be utilised which may provide a different perspective from the student samples used in the previous three studies. 6.1 Introduction Research has provided clear evidence that regular amounts of exercise/physical activity are beneficial to health, both psychologically and physically. Psychological benefits include; reduced levels of depression and anxiety (Biddle & Asare, 2011; Carek, Laibstain & 152 Carek, 2011), protecting against the negative effects of stress (Childs & DeWit, 2014) and improvements to self-esteem and cognitive function (Biddle & Asare, 2011). Physical benefits include; improvements to longevity and mortality, preventing chronic illnesses (particularly in relation to cardiovascular disease) and improving treatment outcomes for a number of acute and chronic conditions (e.g. Biddle et al, 2004; Bouchard et al, 2007; Fox et al, 2006; Netz et al, 2005). Despite clear evidence of the benefits of engaging in physical activity/exercise, it seems that many people do not engage in the recommended amount. According to the World Health Organisation and the current UK Department of Health (DH, 2004) recommendations, adults are advised to participate in one hundred and fifty minutes of moderate intensity aerobic activity during a typical week. The Health Survey for England, 2006 (Craig & Mindell, 2008) identified that only 28% of women and 40% of men are meeting the criteria set out by the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) suggesting that adults should exercise for at least 30 minutes on most days. This lack of engagement has led researchers to look into the possible obstacles to engagement in physical activity and exercise, i.e. why some individuals may decide to abstain from engaging despite the clear benefits of participating in such activities. One area of research that has aimed to shed some light on this matter has addressed the presence of perceived barriers to engagement. This was a concept that was first introduced by the Health Belief Model (Becker and Rosenstock, 1984). Within a cognitive behaviourist framework the model postulated that an individual’s willingness to engage in health promoting behaviours was the result of a process of weighing up the relative costs (barriers) and benefits of engagement. Perceived barriers were identified to be either external factors such as a lack of resources (e.g. financial, time) or lack of support from family and friends or internal factors such as low self-efficacy, lack of motivation or worries about performing exercise behaviour in public. Not surprisingly research has suggested that engagement in preventive health behaviours is less likely to occur when the perceived costs outweigh the perceived benefits (Strecher and Rosenstock, 1997). Perceived barriers have been identified as one of the most powerful predictors of health related behaviours (Janz and Becker, 1984; Strecher and Rosenstock, 1997). In terms of research addressing the association between perfectionism and exercise/physical activity, aside from a well-established body of research addressing the 153 role of exercise dependence in perfectionism (e.g. Miller & Mesagno, 2014), only a small amount of research has addressed whether perfectionists may be looking after their health and wellbeing by engaging in preventive health behaviours (Longbottom et al, 2010; 2012; Williams & Cropley, 2014) and findings suggest that maladaptive perfectionists may represent a vulnerable group due to a lower level of engagement. Taking this into consideration, the present study aims to explore some of the factors that may act as barriers/obstacles to engagement. Chapter 2, part 2 (literature review of the area of perfectionism and health) identified a number of areas that may help to further elucidate the relationship between perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours and which may also be potential obstacles or barriers to engagement. Such areas include; self-presentation, self-handicapping behaviours, physical activity motivation, perceived stress and self-efficacy. Self-presentation has been described as a method employed by individuals to try and control other peoples’ impressions of them (Leary et al, 1994) and its relationship with perfectionism has been discussed in the preceding chapters of the thesis. Research into self-presentational processes in relation to exercise behaviour (see Hausenblas et al, 2004) has identified self-presentation to be an important factor influencing decision to engage in physical activity. The way that a person deals with self-presentational motives is likely to leave them feeling either encouraged or discouraged about engaging in such behaviours. Leary, (1992) contended that if an individual feels self-assured about their sporting or athletic ability and fairly certain that they can self-present themselves in a favourable way, then this will increase the likelihood of engaging, however, If an individual lacks confidence about their ability to self-present themselves favourably (i.e. they fear they will be perceived as someone who is not sporty or athletic) then this is likely to discourage and deter them from engaging in exercise activities. Being able to self-present and portray the image of an ‘exerciser’ has been associated with a number of favourable outcomes, such as being viewed as stronger, healthier, more sociable and independent, (Lamarche, Gammage, Sullivan & Gabriel, 2013). A well-established relationship has been identified between perfectionism and selfpresentational tendencies, with maladaptive perfectionists identified as more likely (than adaptive perfectionists) to use such strategies (Hewitt et al, 2003) and particularly in exercise settings (Hausenblas et al, 2004). Self-presentation efficacy is a particular form of self-presentation that relates to the level of confidence that an individual has concerning 154 their ability to present the desired image to others (Maddux, Norton & Leary, 1988) and has been shown to be a relevant and important concept in exercise settings (Gammage, Hall & Ginis, 2004). Self-presentational efficacy may be particularly relevant and challenging for perfectionists because of their inherent need to self-present themselves favourably. In an exercise context there are likely to be many opportunities to publicly display ones’ athletic or sporting ability and for perfectionists their inherent need for positive approval from others and fear that they may self-present in a less than favourable manner may prohibit engagement in such activities. Choosing to avoid or withdrawal from situations has been recognised as a selfpresentational strategy known as self-handicapping (Jones & Berglas, 1978) which is a term used to explain a situation where an individual puts forth an impairment prior to their performance, which will, in the event of failure, protect their self-esteem and self-worth (Snyder, 1990). Examples of self-handicapping behaviours include procrastination, overcommitting, not taking the time to practice, not putting in the required amount of effort (Bailis, 2001; Kimble, Kimble and Croy, 1998), and choosing difficult or impossible goals (Greenberg, 1985). In essesnce what the individual is trying to do by engaging in such behaviours, is to put some distance between them and the potential failure of a task so if things don’t work out, they can rationalise this as being the result of something other than their own ability or skill. Self-handicapping has been identified as a type of selfpresentational strategy often used by individuals in sport and exercise settings (e.g. Martin and Brawley, 1999; 2002). Such situations are thought to evoke such behaviours because they often require individuals to publicly self-present their physical abilities and possible incompetencies to others (Chen, Chen, Lin et al, 2008; Ommundsen, 2001). Perfectionism has been related to a greater desire to engage in self-handicapping behaviours (Hobden and Pliner, 1995) and such behaviours may be utilised by perfectionists because they may fear they have a lot to lose in evaluative situations (Hewitt & Flett, 2002). The relationship between perfectionism and self-handicapping behaviours has been investigated by Kearns et al (2007) who have identified that self-handicapping may be a function of the negative and biased cognitions that are characteristic of some perfectionists. Taking into consideration the close relationship between perfectionism and self-handicapping it would be interesting to see if perfectionists use these behaviours as a means of avoiding engaging in exercise behaviour 155 Decisions to engage in preventive health behaviours may be influenced by motivational factors such as cognitions and behaviours related to engagement. Research has consistently found that the ability to maintain and persevere with exercise/physical activity has been linked to self-determined motivational tendencies (Huberty et al, 2008; Wang and Biddle, 2001). To further explore the role of motivation in exercise, a four factor model of physical activity motivation was developed by encompassing two positive oriented dimensions (adaptive cognitions and adaptive behaviours) and two impeding dimensions (maladaptive cognitions and maladaptive behaviours) which together influence motivation to engage in physical activity. The model has been utilised to explore the relationships between perfectionism and physical activity motivation with results suggesting that the two dimensions of perfectionism (adaptive and maladaptive) map directly onto the adaptive and maladaptive cognitions and behaviours that have been proposed to encompass physical activity motivation (Martin, 2010). Such results lend support to there being two distinct forms of perfectionism, and potentially a positive and healthy subtype. In terms of motivational attributes, a recent study by Longbottom et al (2010) found that adaptive perfectionism was associated with the positive motivational attributes of; perseverance, organisation and self-efficacy and the maladaptive dimension of perfectionism related to the negative aspects of motivation that are thought to encompass; a lack of confidence in exercising, fear of making mistakes and a reluctance to engage. In terms of prohibiting engagement, perhaps high levels of maladaptive cognitions and behaviours prohibit decisions to engage. Perceived stress has also been considered as an important variable that may affect decisions to engage in exercise behaviour as it has been related independently to both perfectionism and engagement. The relationship between perfectionism and stress has been discussed in detail in chapter 3, and stress has been implicated as a key factor linking perfectionism with a wide range of psychological problems (Hewitt and Flett, 2002). Stress has been found to influence the ways in which an individual looks after their health and high levels of stress have been associated with; reduced engagement in preventive health behaviours (Adler and Matthews, 1994) and increased engagement in health risk behaviours such as smoking and alcohol consumption (Kurspahić-Mujćić, HadžagićĆatibušić, Sivić & Hadžović, 2014). The relationship between stress and perfectionism is complex (see chapter 2, part 2) and there may be many ways in which perceived stress affects and is affected by perfectionism. One way may be to act as a possible obstacle to 156 engagement. Previous research has identified that during times of high stress, there is the likelihood that certain health behaviours may be reduced, particularly those requiring more effort on the part of the individual (Weidner et al, 1996). Perhaps it is the case that for certain perfectionists (particularly maladaptive) the joint pressure of having to meet high standards whilst dealing with a higher than average baseline level of stress, may leave the individual with few resources to take care of their health. Self-efficacy is another factor that may act to influence or impede engagement in preventive health behaviours such as exercise/physical activity. Self-efficacy can be explained as cognitions that relate to an individual’s belief that they have the necessary means to carry out a particular behaviour and keep it going despite potential setbacks. A well-established association has been found between self-efficacy and participation and perseverance in physical activity/exercise behaviour (Sallis et al, 1992; Sallis and Hovell, 1990; Sallis et al, 1989) with high self-efficacy being associated with increased effort at mastering health promoting behaviours (Conn, 1998) and low self-efficacy associated with the avoidance of difficult tasks (Bandura, 1993). Perfectionism and self-efficacy are thought to share a close relationship and the adaptive dimension of perfectionism has being associated with higher levels of self-efficacy and the maladaptive with lower levels (LoCicero & Ashby, 2000). High levels of self-efficacy have been associated with a ‘performance-approach orientation’ indicating a greater desire to engage in certain behaviours and low levels of self-efficacy with an ‘approach-avoidance perspective’, reflecting the need to avoid engaging (Wolters et al, 1996). These constructs share similarities with Slade and Owens’ (1998) approach-avoidance perspective for adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists which concerns a greater desire on the part of adaptive perfectionists to actively engage in tasks. Although not addressing engagement in preventive health behaviours directly, the potential differences between the adaptive and maladaptive dimensions of perfectionism in a sport and exercise setting have been explored by a number of authors (e.g. Flett & Hewitt, 2005; Stoeber, Stoll, Pescheck & Otto, 2008). According to Flett and Hewitt (2005), the more adaptive perfectionistic attributes can contribute favourably to performance outcomes provided that individuals have developed a pre-emptive stance on how to deal with setbacks, when they arise. Having the flexibility to adjust standards seems to be a key factor in maintaining adaptive functioning (Flett & Hewitt, 2002). Research by Stoeber et al (2008) and Longbottom et al (2010) has supported the notion that within a sport and 157 exercise setting, the cognitive and behavioural processes motivating the two dimensions of perfectionism are fundamentally different. This has been reinforced by the model developed by Slade and Owens (1998) proposing an approach/avoidance paradigm that reflected the underlying cognitions and behaviours of adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists respectively. Furthermore when addressing the specific area of physical activity motivation, Longbottom et al (2010) found the dimensions of adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism mapped directly onto the adaptive/maladaptive facets of physical activity motivation (Martin et al, 2006) with the result being that adaptive perfectionism was found to be associated with positive motivational tendencies such as higher levels of self-efficacy and perseverance in an exercise setting and maladaptive perfectionism being associated with negative motivational tendencies that reflected a fear of making mistakes and a desire to avoid engagement. The present study seeks to explore the role of a number of variables in the relationship between perfectionism and engagement in both general preventive health behaviours and the specific area of exercise/physical activity. Although the study takes an explorative stance on the precise way that these intervening variables may be involved, it is suggested that maladaptive perfectionism will be associated with more barriers/obstacles to engagement and fewer benefits and adaptive perfectionism to be associated with more benefits and fewer barriers/obstacles to engagement and that the relationship between perfectionism and engagement will be either enhanced or diminished by their involvement. The specific aims of the present study were to explore the potential obstacles/barriers and benefits to engagement in both physical activity/exercise behaviours as well as general preventive health behaviours for both adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists. By identifying potential differences between the two perfectionism dimensions it is thought that this will provide further support for the identification of two distinct subtypes of perfectionism 6.1.1 Hypotheses 1. Maladaptive perfectionism will be associated with lower levels of engagement in physical activity/exercise behaviours and lower levels of engagement in general preventive health behaviours. 2. Adaptive perfectionism will be associated with higher levels of engagement in physical activity/exercise and general preventive health behaviours. 158 3. Maladaptive perfectionism will be associated with more barriers5/obstacles to engagement and less benefits to engagement, specifically; a. lower levels of: i. Self-presentational efficacy expectancy (how confident an individual is to perform the desired behaviours and present the desired image). ii. Adaptive cognitions related to exercise iii Adaptive behaviours related to exercise iv General exercise self-efficacy v. Specific perceived benefits to exercise (consisting of life enhancement, social interaction, psychological outlook, physical performance and preventive health) vi. b. Positive affect higher levels of: i. maladaptive cognitions related to exercise ii. Maladaptive behaviours related to exercise iii. Perceived stress iv. Specific perceived barriers to exercise (consisting of physical exertion, time expenditure, exercise milieu and family discouragement) v. 4. Negative affect Adaptive perfectionism will be associated with greater benefits to engagement and fewer perceived barriers/obstacles to engagement, specifically; a. higher levels of: i. Self-presentational efficacy expectancy ii. Adaptive cognitions related to exercise iii. Adaptive behaviours related to exercise iv. General exercise self-efficacy v. Specific perceived benefits to exercise (consisting of specific benefits associated with life enhancement, social interaction, psychological outlook, physical performance and preventive health) 5 The terms ‘barriers’ and ‘benefits’ are used to refer to a number of variables that may act to either encourage or discourage engagement. the terms ‘specific perceived barriers’ and ‘specific perceived benefits’ are used to refer to the two dimensions of the Exercise Benefits Barriers Scale. 159 vi. b. Positive affect Lower levels of: i. Maladaptive cognitions related to exercise ii. Maladaptive behaviours related to exercise iii. Perceived stress iv. Specific perceived barriers to exercise (consisting of specific barriers such as physical exertion, time expenditure, factors inherent in the exercise environment and family discouragement v. 5. Negative affect Moderation and mediation analyses will be performed to identify whether the potential benefits/barriers to exercise act as moderators/mediators in the relationship between perfectionism (adaptive and maladaptive) and engagement (physical activity/exercise behaviour and engagement in general preventive health behaviours). Variables tested for moderation/mediation will include; specific perceived benefits to exercise, specific perceived barriers to exercise, selfpresentational efficacy expectancy, adaptive cognitions and adaptive behaviours related to exercise, maladaptive cognitions and behaviours related to exercise, perceived stress, exercise self-efficacy and positive/negative affect. Due to the exploratory nature of this part of the analysis, no specific predictions have been formulated about which variables will act as mediators/moderators. 6.2 Methods Participants and Procedure A general population sample was recruited through the Qualtrics survey software. The only requirement was that participants were aged between 18 and 65 years of age. Of the final sample (N=350), 174 (49.7) were males and 176 (51.3) were females. Their mean age was 43 years (SD=13.5). Participants completed an online questionnaire that was designed to find out about current physical activity/exercise behaviours, preventive health behaviours and a number of variables that may act as obstacles/barriers to engagement such as self-presentational efficacy, physical activity motivation, perceived barriers and perceived stress. 160 6.2.1 Measures As utilised in the previous studies (study 1, chapter 4 and study 2, chapter 5) The Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (F-MPS; Frost et al, 1990) was administered as a measure of adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism. Similar to study 1, for adaptive perfectionism the Personal Standards and Organisation subscales were amalgamated to produce a total score for adaptive perfectionism and for maladaptive perfectionism the subscales of Doubts about Actions and Concern over Mistakes were summed to form a total maladaptive perfectionism score. As in the previous studies the parental expectations/parental concerns subsections were excluded as they were not required to formulate an adaptive and maladaptive score. The remaining 26 items (13 adaptive, 13 maladaptive) were scored on Likert scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Scores can range from 26 to 130 and a higher score indicates a higher level of adaptive or maladaptive perfectionism. The use of the four subscales to produce separate measures of adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism has been validated in previous research (Chang et al, 2004; Dunn et al, 2006; Harris et al, 2008; Well et al, 2004) and have been found to have good internal reliability with Coefficient alpha levels of .88 and .87 respectively (Chang et al, 2004; Harris et al, 2008). Exercise behaviour To assess leisure time activity/exercise behaviour, the Godin Leisure-Time Physical Activity Questionnaire (GLTEQ; Godin and Shephard, 1997) was utilised. This is a relatively simple 3 item measure of all physical activity achieved during an individual’s leisure time. Individuals were asked to consider how many times during the past 7 days they had participated in vigorous, moderate and mild activity (of at least 15 minutes duration). The leisure time physical activity score can be computed in two steps: The weekly count of strenuous, moderate and mild activities are multiplied by the values of 9, 5 and 3 respectively. These values are compatible with MET values of the activities listed in the questionnaire (metabolic equivalent of task which represent the intensity of the exercise/physical activity). A total weekly leisure activity score is calculated by adding the three resulting values (9 x strenuous) + (5 x moderate) + (3 x mild). Higher scores indicate participation in a greater amount of physical/activity and exercise in one’s leisure time. Psychometric evaluations of the questionnaire have produced good testretest reliability and the questionnaire has been found to correlate well with other physical 161 activity measures (Godin and Shephard, 1987; Sallis, Buono, Roby et al, 1993; Jacobs, Ainsworth, Hartman & Leon, 1993). Preventive Health Behaviours To retain a sense of consistency across studies, engagement in general preventive health behaviours was assessed using an adaptation of the General Preventive Health Behaviours Checklist (Amir, 1987). The original questionnaire was designed with the intention to represent a comprehensive range of preventive health behaviours considered to be appropriate to a British population. Respondents were asked about the frequency with which they engage in a range of preventive health behaviours and items are scored on a Likert scale with three possible responses (0 = never do, 1 = sometimes do and 2 = always do). Questions address the following areas; physical activity, relaxation, safety practices, personal health practices and risk avoidance. The measure consists of 27 items with a possible range of scores from 0 to 54. Responses are summed to form a total engagement score and higher scores indicate greater engagement in preventive health behaviours. Internal reliability for the amended version of the scale utilised in studies 1 and 2 (chapters 4 and 5) achieved an acceptable result of Coefficient alpha .84. Perceived benefits/barriers Perceived barrier to engagement in physical activity/exercise were assessed using the individual benefits and barriers subsections of the Exercise Benefits/Barriers scale (EBBS; Sechrist, Walker & Pender, 1987). This scale assesses perceptions relating to the benefits and barriers of participating in exercise/physical activity. When utilised as two independent scales, perceived benefits consists of 29 items and the perceived barriers subscale consists of 14 items. Within these two subsections, there are further subdivisions (table 6.1). 162 Table 6.1 The scales and sub-scales of the Exercise Benefits/Barriers Questionnaire Perceived Benefits to Exercise Perceived Barriers to Exercise Life enhancement (8 items) Physical exertion (3 items) Social interaction (4 items) Time expenditure (3 items) Psychological Outlook (6 items) Exercise environment (6 items) Physical performance (8 items) Family discouragement (2 items) Preventive health (3 items) For all the subscales, responses are scored on a Likert scale ranging from 4 (strongly agree) to 1 (strongly disagree). A total score can be derived to encompass both the benefits and barriers scale or the two scales may be scored and utilised as independent entities. Initial psychometric evaluation of the scale yielded favourable results with an internal reliability of .95 for the 43 item scale as well as .94 and .87 for the separate Benefits and Barriers scales respectively. Test-retest reliabilities were also found to be within an acceptable range (Sechrist et al, 1987). More recent studies utilising the scale have reported good internal consistency for both total and individual scores (Lovell, Ansari, & Parker, 2010). For the purposes of the present study the two scales were used independently. Self-Presentational self-efficacy Self-presentation in exercise/physical activity was assessed using the Self-Presentational Efficacy Scale (SPES; Gammage et al, 2004) that assesses the concept of selfpresentational efficacy expectancy. This relates to how confident an individual is of being able to perform the desired behaviours and present the desired image, e.g. of being perceived as fit and healthy. This subscale consists of 5 items and participants are required to indicate their level of confidence (from 0% to 100%) in a number of statements that reflect what other people may think of them in an exercise setting such as “other people will think that your body looks fit and toned” and “other people will think that you have good stamina”. High scores on this scale represent higher levels of efficacy expectancy. Internal reliability for this subscale have been found to be favourable (Cronbach’s alpha = 92, Gammage et al, 2004; Lamarche et al, 2013) 163 Physical activity motivation and self-handicapping behaviour Physical activity motivation and self-handicapping were assessed using the Physical Activity Motivation Scale-Revised (PAMS-R, Martin, 2010a; 2010b). This scale consists of 20 questions addressing four underlying dimensions; adaptive cognitions, adaptive behaviours; maladaptive cognitions and maladaptive behaviours. Adaptive cognition refers to positive attitudes related to the confidence and value placed on engaging in physical activity e.g. “I am able to benefit from regular physical activity in many parts of my life” and “I feel very pleased with myself when I stick at regular physical activity”. Adaptive behaviour considers behaviours that reflect the desire to persist with physical activity as well as encompassing the planning and management aspects of behaviours e.g. “Before I start my physical activity I get it clear what I am going to do” and “I try to have a rough plan for my physical activity before I start it”. Maladaptive cognition refers to negative and inhibiting cognitions that are related to fear of failure, uncertainty and anxiety in relation to engaging in physical activity e.g. “I worry that I don’t do enough physical activity” and “Often the main reason I’m physically active is because I don’t want others to think less of me”. Finally maladaptive behaviours considers maladaptive behaviours related to engagement such as self-handicapping, avoidance and withdrawal e.g. “I sometimes avoid regular physical activity so I have an excuse if I don’t do well at sport/am not good at other physical activities/ or don’t lose weight” and “I’ve pretty much given up doing any regular physical activity”. Responses are rated on a 7 point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree). The scale is scored as four independent scales; adaptive cognitions, adaptive behaviours, maladaptive cognitions and maladaptive behaviours). There is limited evidence addressing the psychometric properties of this scale, although when evaluated as four distinct components, acceptable internal reliabilities have been achieved for the four dimensions of adaptive cognition, adaptive behaviour, maladaptive cognition and maladaptive behaviour (Coefficient alpha levels of .91, .82, .79 and .80 respectively). Exercise Self-Efficacy Exercise self-efficacy was measured using the Exercise Self-Efficacy Scale (ESE; Bandura, 1997). Bandura believed self-efficacy to be context specific and as such, the use of a separate measure (instead of a general measure of self-efficacy) justified in an exercise context. The scale consists of 18 items that address a number of situations that make it difficult for an individual to stick to an exercise routine, e.g. “when I’m feeling 164 tired”, “when I have too much work to do at home”, “after experiencing family problems” and “during a holiday”. Respondents are asked to rate their level of confidence (0% to 100%, with 0% indicating little confidence and 100% indicating complete confidence) in being able to stick to an exercise routine whilst considering the different situations that may pose a problem to their commitment to exercise. Responses are summed to form a total score representing exercise self-efficacy with higher score indicating higher levels of self-efficacy in exercise. High internal consistency has been reported for the scale (Coefficient alpha of .95, Everett, Salamonson & Davidson, 2009) and the scale has been validated by a number of authors (Shin, Jang & Pender, 2001; Everett et al, 2009) as a valuable measure of exercise beliefs as well as an important factor to consider when planning an exercise program (Shin, Hur, Pender et al, 2006). Perceived Stress The Perceived Stress Scale (PSS, Cohen et al, 1983) was used as a measure of perceived stress. This 10 item scale assesses appraisals of stress in response to specific situations over the past month. Examples of questions include; “in the last month, how often have you felt that things were going your way?” and “in the last month, how often have you felt that you were unable to control the important things in your life?”. After reverse scoring the four positively worded questions, a total score is derived from summing all the responses. Higher scores indicate higher levels of perceived stress. Psychometric evaluations of the scale have yielded acceptable internal reliability (Coefficient alpha of .78) and the scale has been found to correlate well with other self-report measures designed to assess stress appraisals (Cohen & Williamson, 1988) Emotions/Mood Due to the well-established relationship between perfectionism and emotional and difficulties (see chapter 2, part 2), it was thought necessary to include a measure to assess affect. For this purpose the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS, Watson et al, 1988b) was utilised. The scale consists of two 10 item scales purporting to address Positive and Negative affect (PA and NA respectively). Individuals are asked to rate the extent to which they have experienced each emotion within a particular time frame. The scale is scored on a 5 point Likert scale (ranging from 1 = very slightly/not at all and 5 = very much). Two separate scores are derived (one for positive affect and one for negative affect). Initial assessment of reliability and validity provided favourable results (Watson et 165 al, 1988b) with good internal reliabilities (Coefficient alphas of .88 for PA and .87 for NA), good test-retest reliability and good internal validity when compared to other measures purporting to assess emotional distress and psychopathology e.g. the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI, Beck, 1961) and the Hopkins Symptom Checklist (HSCL, Derogatis, Lipman, Rickels et al, 1974). 6.2.2 Data Analysis Descriptive statistics were first obtained for the sample as well as means, Standard Deviations and reliabilities for all the major variables contained within the study. Correlational analyses were then performed to establish the associations and directional relationships between the major variables under study as well as to determine the strength of the relationships between the predictor variables (adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism) and the outcome variables (engagement in exercise/physical activity behaviours and engagement in general preventive health behaviours) to establish if the conditions were met to be able to perform moderation and mediation analysis. For both moderation and mediation analysis, there is the assumption that there needs to be a linear relationship between the predictor and outcome variable. Additionally for mediation analysis there are also three other assumptions that need to be adhered to; the predictor variable needs to significantly predict the mediator, the mediator needs to significantly predict the outcome and finally there needs to be a weakening in the relationship between the predictor and the outcome variable with the mediator included. The following variables were tested as potential mediators and moderators; perceived benefits to exercise, perceived barriers to exercise, self-presentational efficacy expectancy, self-presentational outcome expectancy, self-presentational outcome value, adaptive cognitions and adaptive behaviours related to exercise, maladaptive cognitions and behaviours related to exercise, perceived stress, exercise self-efficacy and positive/negative affect. Although study 1 (chapter 4) tested for mediation using the steps set out by Baron and Kenny (1986), which utilises a series of regression equations and the Sobel test as a means of testing the significance of the indirect effect (Sobel, 1982), an alternative method was chosen for this study, which involved the use bootstrapping to generate a confidence interval to demonstrate the indirect effect. Moderation and mediation analysis were carried out on SPSS (version 21) using Hayes’ (2012) PROCESS tool, a computational technique that can compute both simple and complex moderation and mediation models. 166 6.3 Results Analyses were separated into three sections; firstly the preliminary analysis that addresses sample demographics, means (M), standard deviations (SD) and reliabilities (Cronbach’s alpha) for all the major variables (table 6.2), secondly the correlations6 and thirdly the mediation and moderation analysis. Table 6.2 Sample demographics, means, standard deviations and reliabilities for all variables. n % Age 18-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+ 74 72 80 70 54 21.1 20.6 22.9 20 15.4 Gender Males Females 174 176 49.7 50.3 Gym Member Yes No 179 171 51.1 48.9 Variables Perfectionism Adaptive Perfectionism (PS and O) Maladaptive Perfectionism (CM and DA) (M) (SD) (α) 51.1 11.4 0.91 39.1 12.1 0.93 Exercise/Physical activity (GLTEQ) 56.8 22.2 Preventive Health Behs 33.3 8.4 0.87 Exercise Benefits/Barriers (EBBS) Specific perceived barriers 32.3 7.0 0.86 6 Due to the large numbers of correlations, only coefficients of .2 and above are reported in the text. All correlation coefficients are displayed in table 6.3 167 to exercise Specific perceived benefits to exercise 57.8 14.2 0.96 Self-Presentational Efficacy (SPES) Self-Presentational EE 49.1 27.1 0.96 Physical Activity Motivation (PAMS-R) Adaptive cognitions Adaptive behaviours Maladaptive cognitions Maladaptive behaviours 26.5 25.1 17.9 16.0 6.2 6.1 6.4 7.3 0.91 0.90 0.82 0.85 Perceived Stress (PSS) 26.5 7.3 0.85 51.2 21.5 0.95 32.3 18.7 8.5 8.2 0.93 0.92 Exercise Self-Efficacy (ESE) Mood/Affect (PANAS) Positive Affect Negative Affect Correlational Analyses Table 6.3 displays the correlations for all major variables in the present study. A positive association was observed between adaptive perfectionism and engagement in general preventive health behaviours, supporting hypothesis 2, (r = .259, p < .01), however contrary to hypothesis 1, no association was identified between maladaptive perfectionism and engagement in general preventive health behaviours. For engagement in physical activity/exercise behaviours, only very weak correlations were observed for both adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism. In support of hypothesis 3, negative associations were identified between maladaptive perfectionism and specific perceived benefits to exercise (r = -.272, p < .01). To further explore this association the individual factors within the benefits subscale of the Exercise 168 Benefits Barriers Subscale (EBBS; Sechrist et al, 1985) were correlated with adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism and further negative associations were identified for the dimensions of; life enhancement (r = -.241, p < .01), social interaction (r = -.285, p < .01), psychological outlook (r = -.212, p < .01) and preventive health (r = -.250, p < .01). Weak or non-significant correlations were observed for the following variables; selfpresentational efficacy expectancy, adaptive cognitions, adaptive behaviours, exercise selfefficacy and positive affect. Further supporting hypothesis 3, the following positive associations were observed for maladaptive perfectionism; maladaptive cognitions related to exercise (r = .536, p < .01), maladaptive behaviours related to exercise (r = .319, p < .01), perceived stress (r = .384, p < .01), negative affect (r = .453, p < .01) and specific perceived barriers to exercise (r = .311, p < .01). To further explore the significant positive association between maladaptive perfectionism and the specific barriers to exercise dimension, the individual subscales of the EBBS were correlated with the dimensions of perfectionism to give an indication of the factors that maladaptive and adaptive perfectionists may have found the most prohibitive. This additional part of the analysis yielded two additional significant positive associations for maladaptive perfectionists; time expenditure (r = .341, p < .01) and factors inherent within the exercise environment (r = .251, p < .01). In support of hypothesis 4, significant positive associations were identified for adaptive perfectionism and the following variables; adaptive cognitions related to exercise (r = .380, p < .01), adaptive behaviours related to exercise (r = .365, p < .01), exercise selfefficacy (r = .230, p < .01), specific perceived benefits to exercise (r =.352, p < .01) and positive affect (r = .489, p < .01). An interesting finding was that a significant positive correlation was observed between adaptive perfectionism and maladaptive cognitions related to exercise (r = . 223, p < .01), when a negative association was predicted. This may indicate that adaptive perfectionists may also possess elevated levels of maladaptive cognitions (as well as adaptive cognitions) related to exercise/physical activity behaviour. Non-significant associations were identified between adaptive perfectionism and the following variables; maladaptive behaviours related to exercise, perceived stress and negative affect. 169 Table 6.3 Correlation Matrix for all Major Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Adapt P - Mal P .478** - Ex/PA .139** -.141** - Prev H .259** -.010 .286** - Barriers -.113* .311** -.180** -.303** - Benefits -.352** -.272** -.373** -.423** .243** - SPres EE .335** .181** .413** .381** -.225** -.551** - PAM ac .380** .172** .426** .490** -.419** -.736** .502** - PAM ab .365** .186** .410** .461** -.373** -.669** .447** .876** - PAM mc .223** .536** -.005 -.044 .411** -.187** .102* .082 .152** - PAM mb -.026 .319** -.188** -.209** .597** .134** -.101* -.348** -.298** .634** - P Stress -.018 .384** -.052 -.427** .431** .118* -.184** -.231** -.214** .237** .290** - ExSelf Eff .230** .138** .335* .383** -.215** -.428** .545** .418** .406** .034 -.138** -.189** - Positive A .479** .074 .294** .544** -.305** -.510** .470** .516** .484** .089* -.106* -.395** .366** - Negative A .032 .453** .020 -.246** .444** .010 -.095 -.088 -.060 .277** .323** .654** -.091* -.154** 15 - Adapt P = Adaptive Perfectionism, Mal P = Maladaptive Perfectionism, Ex/PA = weekly physical activity/exercise score, Prev H = preventive health behaviours, Barriers = perceived barriers to exercise, Benefit = perceived benefits to exercise, SPres EE = self-presentational efficacy expectance, PAM ac = adaptive cognitions, PAM ab = adaptive behaviours, PAM mc = maladaptive cognitions, PAM mb = maladaptive behaviours, P Stress = perceived stress, ExSelf Eff = exercise self-efficacy, Positive A = positive affect, Negative A = negative affect. *p < .05. **p < .01 170 Moderation and mediation analysis (hypothesis 5) Due to the fact that the correlations between maladaptive perfectionism and both general engagement and engagement in physical activity/exercise behaviour were either very weak or non-significant, maladaptive perfectionism was not utilised as a predictor variable in either the moderation or mediation analysis. Additionally the association between adaptive perfectionism and engagement in physical activity/exercise behaviour was categorised as a weak correlation so was also excluded from the analysis. The following variables were tested as potential moderators and/or mediators in the relationship between adaptive perfectionism and engagement in general preventive health behaviours; specific perceived benefits to exercise, specific perceived barriers to exercise, self-presentational efficacy expectancy, adaptive cognitions and adaptive behaviours related to exercise, maladaptive cognitions and behaviours related to exercise, perceived stress, exercise self-efficacy and positive/negative affect. Only the significant moderators/mediators are reported in the text. 171 Moderation analysis Table 6.4 Table showing predictors of engagement in preventive health behaviours Constant b SE B t p 33.02 0.432 76.43 p < .001 0.030 7.08 p < .001 0.371 2.42 p < .05 0.005 0.002 2.44 p < .05 33.0 0.435 75.79 p < .001 0.066 -3.21 p < .005 0.039 4.94 p < .001 0.006 3.61 p < .001 0.440 75.12 p < .001 0.017 6.00 p < .001 0.039 2.75 p < .05 0.001 2.46 p < .05 (32.17, 33.87) Specific perceived benefits (centred) Adaptive perfectionism (centred) Specific perceived benefits 0.21 (0.27, 0.15) 0.09 (0.02, 0.16) x Adaptive perfectionism Note. R² = .21. Constant (32.14, 33.86) Maladaptive cognitions related to exercise (centred) Adaptive perfectionism (centred) Maladaptive cognitions x Adaptive perfectionism -0.21 (-0.34, -0.08) 0.19 (0.11, 0.27) 0.02 (0.01, 0.03) Note. R² = .11. Constant 33.0 (32.13, 33.86) Self-presentational efficacy expectancy (centred) Adaptive perfectionism (centred) Self-presentational efficacy expectancy x Adaptive 0.10 (0.07, 0.13) 0.11 (0.03, 0.18) 0.003 (0.001, 0.006) perfectionism Note. R² = .18. 172 To further explore and interpret the significant interaction effects, simple slopes analysis was utilised. For specific perceived benefits, using the simple slopes technique, when levels of perceived benefits were low, a non-significant relationship was identified between adaptive perfectionism and engagement (b = 0.014, 95% CI [-0.088, 0,116], t = 0.27, p = .787) and at mean and high levels of this variable, the relationship became significant (b = .090, 95% CI [0.017, 0.163], t = 2.42, p <.05 and b = 0.166, 95% CI [0.078, 0.254], t = 3.71, p < .001 respectively), which was in the expected direction (i.e. as perceived benefits increase, engagement increases). For maladaptive cognitions (negative thoughts associated with exercise/physical activity) simple slopes analysis revealed that at low values of this variable (b = 0.061, 95% CI [-0.050, 0.172], t = 1.09, p = .28), there was a non-significant correlation between adaptive perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours, however, surprisingly at mean and higher levels of maladaptive cognitions, the relationship between adaptive perfectionism and engagement became highly significant (b = 0.190, 95% CI [0.115, 0.266], t = 4.94, p < .001 and b = 0.319, 95% CI [0.224, 0.414], t = 6.61, p < .001, respectively). This suggests that as maladaptive cognitions feature more highly there may be a strengthening in the relationship between adaptive perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours. For self-presentational efficacy expectancy (which relates to the level of confidence in being able to self-present as being fit and healthy), at low levels of this variable the relationship between adaptive perfectionism and engagement was nonsignificant (b = 0.021, 95% CI [-0.092, 0.134], t = 0.36, p = .72), however, at mean and high levels of this variable a positive relationship between adaptive perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours was observed (b = 0.107, 95% CI [0.031, 0.184], t = 2.75, p < .005 and b = 0.194, 95% CI [0.101, 0.287], t = 4.10, p < .001 respectively). This was in the expected direction, with a higher level of confidence (in being able to self-present) strengthening the relationship between adaptive perfectionism and engagement. Mediation analysis A number of variables were identified as mediators in the relationship between adaptive perfectionism and engagement in general preventive health behaviours7. 7 Only significant indirect effects have been reported in the text 173 i. Specific perceived benefits to engagement (e.g. physical functioning, enjoyment, relaxation, social interaction) A significant indirect effect of adaptive perfectionism on engagement through perceived benefits was identified, b = 0.098, BCa CI8 [0.064, 0.143]. which represented a medium effect size, k² = .131, 95% BCa CI [0.088, 0.194]9. This result suggests that the perception of benefits in an exercise setting has a significant effect of influencing the strength of relationship between adaptive perfectionism and engagement. ii. Adaptive behaviours (related to exercise/physical activity) Adaptive behaviours were also found to mediate the relationship between adaptive perfectionism and engagement; a significant indirect effect was found when adaptive behaviours were present in the model, b = 0.114, BCa CI [0.076, 0.162]. This was identified as a medium effect size, k² = .152, 95% BCa CI [0.103, 0.208]. iii. Exercise self-efficacy (the level of confidence at being able to stick to exercise when there are other distractions) Exercise self-efficacy was identified to be an important variable in altering the relationship between adaptive perfectionism and engagement. Figure 6.1 Model of adaptive perfectionism as a predictor of engagement in preventive health behaviours mediated by exercise self-efficacy b=0.435, p = <.001 Exercise selfefficacy b = 0.134, p < .001 Engagement in preventive health behaviours Adaptive perfectionism Direct effect, b = 0.133, p < .001 Indirect effect, b = 0.058, p < .001 8 The confidence interval for the indirect effect is a BCa bootstrapped CI based on 5000 samples 9 Preacher and Kelley (2011) have proposed using a standardised effect size to show the strength of the indirect effect. Effect sizes of 0.01, 0.09 and 0.25 have been considered to be small, medium and large effect sizes respectively 174 As can be seen from figure 6.1, there was a significant indirect effect of adaptive perfectionism on engagement through exercise self-efficacy. This represented a small to medium effect, k² = .80, 95% BCa CI [0.031, 0.091]. Self-presentational efficacy expectancy (the confidence in one’s ability to iv. self-present) Figure 6.2 Model of adaptive perfectionism as a predictor of engagement in preventive health behaviours, mediated by self-presentational efficacy expectancy b = 0.797, p = <.001 Self-presentational efficacy expectancy Adaptive perfectionism b = 0.103, p <.001 Engagement in preventive health behaviours Direct effect, b = 0.109, p < .05 Indirect effect, b = 0.082, p <.05 As shown in figure 6.2, there is a significant mediating effect of self-presentational selfefficacy in the relationship between adaptive perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours. This represented a medium effect size k² = .12, 95% BCa CI [0.070, 0.160]. 6.4 Discussion Contrary to previous research (Longbottom et al, 2010; 2012; Williams & Cropley, 2014), maladaptive perfectionism was found to be unrelated to engagement in general preventive health behaviours and only a weak negative association observed for engagement in physical activity/exercise behaviours, (hypothesis 1). This was an unexpected result considering the findings of the first two studies (chapters 4 and 5). A possible reason for 175 this may be due to the general population sample utilised for the present study. The three previous studies utilised university students and it may be possible that the incidence of maladaptive perfectionism in the general population is lower than in a university population or at least diluted. Maladaptive perfectionism has been identified as a serious problem for individuals entering into university life (Kearns et al, 2008) with incidence rates as high as 25% (Radhu, Daskalakis & Arpin-Cribbie et al, 2012). Universities represent a setting where there is likely to be a disproportionate amount of pressure to perform to exceptionally high standards. Research by Kearns et al, (2008) has suggested academic settings actively encourage perfectionism because students are constantly subjected to assessments, assignments, and exams and to make matters worse, the results of these are often put on public display. Another point of discussion may be the fact that the transition to university is often marked by an increase in health risk behaviours such as smoking, drinking, poor diet and decreased amounts of physical activity (Steptoe, Feldman, Kunz et al, 2002) which may make it more of a challenge to engage in health promoting behaviours. The findings of study 3 (chapter 6) explored some of the challenges that perfectionists faced trying to remain healthy in a university environment when they were faced with the task of having to juggle a number of domains simultaneously. Two main areas emerged; firstly a number of factors that seemed to be more deeply ingrained and representative of their perfectionism, such as doubting their current involvement in preventive health activities (in terms of quality and quantity), not having the flexibility to adjust their standards when other pressures increased (e.g. when an assignment was due or exams were approaching) and lacking confidence that a sense of balance could be achieved once the immediate threat had passed (i.e. that they could resume their normal level of self-care once the deadline had been met). Secondly there were factors inherent in the university environment that participants felt made it more difficult to look after themselves adequately such as, dealing with increased academic pressures, having to take personal responsibility for their own health and wellbeing (when parents had done this for them previously) and wanting to make the most of the university experience which often involved indulging in unhealthy pursuits (e.g. drinking, having a poor diet, partying). It is possible that the demands of university life are particularly difficult for maladaptive perfectionists to deal with and that looking after health and wellbeing may have a lower priority. 176 The finding that adaptive perfectionism was significantly associated with engagement in general preventive health behaviours was in the expected direction (hypothesis 2) and supported previous research identifying the adaptive dimension of perfectionism to be associated with positive motivational tendencies that encourage persistence in engagement (Longbottom et al, 2010). The findings also support the results of the first two studies (chapters 4 and 5) and fits with the proactive desire to ‘approach’ situations that has been described to be characteristic of adaptive perfectionists (Slade and Owens, 1998; Stoeber & Otto, 2006). Interestingly, for this study a higher level of association was identified between adaptive perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours than for the previous studies (chapters 4 and 5). Again this could be a product of the sample chosen for this study and perhaps in the real world, outside of the high pressured demands of the university environment, the high concentration of maladaptive perfectionism is watered down and therefore the adaptive perfectionistic traits appear more prominent. When addressing specific factors that may either discourage or encourage engagement in preventive health behaviours (hypotheses 3 & 4) the majority of the results were in the expected direction. Maladaptive perfectionism was found to be associated with higher levels of perceived stress, supporting previous research (Flett & Hewitt, 2002; Flett et al, 2006) as well as the findings of study 2 (chapter 5). Maladaptive perfectionism was also found to be related to elevated levels of maladaptive cognitions and behaviours related to physical activity/exercise behaviour, which have been identified as having the potential to inhibit engagement in physical activity (Longbottom et al, 2010). In an exercise and physical activity context, maladaptive perfectionism has been found to be associated with higher levels of uncertainty, anxiety and an exaggerated fear of failure (maladaptive cognitions) as well as greater amounts of avoidance, self-handicapping and withdrawal from physical activity (maladaptive behaviours, Longbottom, et al, 2010; 2012). In terms of specific perceived barriers to engagement, for maladaptive perfectionists two factors stood out as potential obstacles to engagement; factors inherent in the exercise environment (such as cost, the inconvenience of exercise, what others might think when in an exercise setting and distance to travel to an exercise location) as well as time. Thinking about how maladaptive perfectionists may be trying to juggle multiple domains simultaneously, it seems logical that lack of time would be perceived as a potential barrier to engagement. Furthermore, one of the areas that maladaptive perfectionists struggle with is doubting the quality of their actions/behaviours, which can result in having to redo tasks 177 over and over (to try and achieve a result that they feel satisfied with) (Frost et al, 1990), which in itself is likely to have implications regarding time management. In terms of perceived benefits to exercise/physical activity, as expected, maladaptive perfectionism was associated with a lower perception of specific perceived benefits to engagement (e.g. life enhancement, social interaction, psychological outlook and preventive health). Specific perceived benefits to engagement (as measured by the EBBS, Sechrist et al, 1987) have been found to be important mediator of behavioural change in a physical activity domain (Nahas, Goldfine & Collins, 2003) and according to the Health Belief Model individuals who perceive there to be greater benefits and fewer barriers are likely to be more actively involved in physical activity than individuals for whom perceived barriers outweigh perceived benefits (Janz & Becker, 1984). Adaptive perfectionism was associated with greater benefits to exercise and fewer barriers. Specifically, higher levels of specific perceived benefits, positive affect, exercise selfefficacy and elevated levels of both adaptive cognitions and adaptive behaviours related to exercise. Possessing a positive attitudes towards exercise (e.g. confidence in one’s ability to maintain regular exercise patterns and belief that one can achieve the desired outcomes) as well as exhibiting positive behaviours associated with exercise (e.g. setting goals and achieving them and persisting with activities) have been found to be associated with increased motivation to engage in physical activity (Longbottom et al, 2010). An interesting and unexpected finding for adaptive perfectionism was a significant positive association with maladaptive cognitions. As well as being associated with elevated levels of adaptive cognitions, adaptive perfectionism was found to be related to cognitions that are considered to impede motivations to engage in physical activity behaviour (maladaptive cognitions; such as uncertainty, lack of control and fear of making mistakes). This may suggest an underlying negative aspect to adaptive perfectionism. Research by Stoeber et al (2008) maintains the contention that (in a competitive sport setting) there are distinct cognitive processes that underpin the different dimensions of perfectionism but maybe in an exercise/physical activity setting or considering engagement in general preventive health behaviours, the cognitions of adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists are more closely related, with adaptive perfectionists possessing high levels of both adaptive and maladaptive cognitions. Perhaps it is the self-determined outlook of adaptive perfectionists to achieve success (Slade & Owens, 1998) that allows them to override the 178 more negative thought patterns to achieve a more positive outcome (i.e. greater engagement). Although the present study identified some similarities in the thought processes of adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists in relation to engagement in preventive health behaviours, there generally appears to be a greater level of disparity than similarity between the two perfectionism dimensions. Adaptive perfectionism was associated with a number of variables that have been associated with positive and functional health outcomes e.g. higher levels of positive affect and exercise self-efficacy. Higher levels of positive affect have been found to be associated with longevity and reduced pain symptoms (Cohen & Pressman, 2006) and higher levels of exercise self-efficacy have been related to an increased willingness to participate and persist with health promoting behaviours (Laffrey, 2000; Sallis & Howell, 1990). In terms of addressing factors that may alter the strength of the relationships between perfectionism and engagement, three variables were found to moderate the relationship between adaptive perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours10 . These were specific perceived benefits, self-presentational efficacy expectancy (the level of confidence in being about to present self-confidently in an exercise setting) and maladaptive cognitions. For both specific perceived benefits and self-presentational efficacy expectancy as one might expect, as levels of both of these variables increased, the relationship between adaptive perfectionism and engagement became stronger and more significant. For maladaptive cognitions, the result was in the opposite to what might have been expected; with the relationship between adaptive perfectionism becoming more significant (in a positive direction) as levels of maladaptive cognitions increased. This suggests that possessing high levels of maladaptive cognitions may create a stronger desire to engage in preventive health behaviours. As has been mentioned earlier, adaptive perfectionism may be characterised by high levels of both adaptive and maladaptive cognitions in an exercise setting and it is possible that having high levels of adaptive traits may have a protective or neutralising effect on the negative thoughts associated with exercise. It could be argued that the moderating effect of maladaptive cognitions may be related to the self-presentational aspect of perfectionism. In the present study, a significant 10 The relationship between adaptive perfectionism and engagement in exercise/physical activity behaviour showed only a very weak correlation, therefore mediation/moderation analyses were only performed for the relationship between adaptive perfectionism and engagement in general preventive health behaviours. 179 positive relationship was found between adaptive perfectionism and self-presentational efficacy expectancy (the belief that one can present the desired image, i.e. that of a proficient exerciser) and perhaps it is the case that possessing strong beliefs about being able to present oneself confidently and proficiently enables adaptive perfectionists to dismiss some of the maladaptive thoughts they may that are associated with engagement. Research has highlighted the fact that perfectionists (both adaptive and maladaptive) have a powerful need to be admired and accepted and therefore will go to great lengths to selfpresent a positive image (Hewitt et al, 2003; Sorotzkin, 1985). Four variables were identified to have a mediating influence on the relationship between adaptive perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours; specific perceived benefits to exercise/physical activity, adaptive behaviours, exercise self-efficacy and selfpresentational efficacy expectancy. Specific perceived benefits have been discussed earlier in this chapter and as well as specific perceived barriers have been found to be an important determinant in decisions concerning whether or not to engage in exercise behaviour (Health Belief Model; Janz & Becker, 1984; Nahas et al, 2003). Elevated levels of self-efficacy have also been identified as playing a pivotal role in influencing a number of other factors (e.g. motivations, and anticipation of possible future outcomes) that have been found to increase the likelihood that a task will be performed (Bandura, 1997). In terms of adaptive behaviours, it was interesting that only adaptive behaviours (and not adaptive behaviours and cognitions) were found to mediate the relationship between adaptive perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours. Both adaptive cognitions and behaviours were found to be significantly associated with adaptive perfectionism and both variables significantly associated with engagement in preventive health behaviours. Martin et al (2006) in their original conceptualisation of physical activity motivation, described adaptive behaviours to be positive behaviours that increased motivation to engage in physical activity such as planning, setting goals as well as strategies to promote maintenance and persistence in exercise. Previous research has emphasised the role of planning and goal setting as being a crucial stage to promote health behaviour change (The Health Action Process Approach; Schwarzer, 1992; Sniehotta, Scholz & Schwarzer, 2005). The planning stage, according to Sniehotta et al (2005) enables the individual to formulate a mental representation of when, where and how health behaviour will occur. Formulating this type of action plan that focuses more specifically 180 on goal attainment has been identified as a powerful predictor of behaviour change (Abraham, Sheeran, Norman et al, 1999). Perhaps for adaptive perfectionists, engaging in adaptive behaviours such as planning and goal setting provides them with greater motivation to engage and therefore this is a more powerful predictor of behavioural change than adaptive cognitions. Self-presentational efficacy expectancy was also identified as a mediator in the relationship between adaptive perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours. This concept refers to the belief that one can present the desired image or carry out the desired behaviour (Gammage et al, 2004). In an exercise setting this may refer to one’s ability to be able to self-present as someone who is fit, healthy and coordinated. According to Gammage et al (2004) self-presentational concerns have been found to affect a multitude of different behaviours in an exercise setting including type of activity chosen, effort expended as well as motivation to engage. Although it has been identified that selfpresentational needs have a positive impact on engagement in an exercise setting (Gammage et al, 2004) little is known about the precise mechanisms involved. Although the present study identified self-presentational efficacy expectancy to be higher for adaptive perfectionism than maladaptive perfectionism and mediation analyses supported this theory showing it to be a mediator in the relationship between adaptive perfectionism and engagement, what has yet to be established is how functional and adaptive this quality is for the individual and how effective it is in producing long-term engagement. Previous research has suggested that self-presentation by its very nature can only be described as a maladaptive trait (Hewitt et al, 2003) because ultimately it is promoting a false sense of self that cannot be maintained in the long-term (Hewitt et al, 2003, Leary et al, 1994). Additionally self-presentational traits have been associated with a reluctance to seek help for personal difficulties (Cepida Benito & Short, 1998; Hewitt et al, 2003) and can impede the development of authentic and trusting relationships (Derlaga et al, 1993). The health implications of the self-presentational aspect of perfectionism have been discussed in more detail in chapter 2, part 2. A limitation to the present study involved only using a general population sample rather than having a student population to compare with. As discussed earlier, there may be fundamental differences between the pressures inherent in a university setting as compared to ‘real life’ settings and universities may encourage a disproportionate amount of maladaptive perfectionism. Future studies could compare different populations in terms of 181 barriers/benefits to engagement in preventive health behaviours with the aim of identifying potentially vulnerable groups that could then be targeted for specific health promotion interventions. A second limitation relates to the wider issue of how to accurately conceptualise adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism. To retain a sense of consistency the same method of defining perfectionism (according to the Frost et al, 1990 conceptualisation) has been continued throughout the thesis but as discussed in chapter 2, this represents only one way of operationalising perfectionism and other methods may differ considerably in how they may dichotomise the adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism traits. Future studies may benefit from using a variety of conceptualisations and comparing the findings. A further limitation involves a reliance on the self-reporting of participants. Previous research has identified that perfectionists, particularly maladaptive perfectionists, frequently engage in self-presentational strategies to try and project and protect a flawless persona (Hewitt et al, 2003), and will go to great lengths to try and conceal information that could potentially jeopardise this image. There is the possibility that the personal recollections of perfectionists may be biased towards providing information that fits with their ideal perception of themselves. A final limitation of the study concerns the large numbers of correlations performed. It has been suggested that performing numerous simultaneous tests may increase the chances of obtaining a large number of false positive results. A potential way of avoiding this is to perform bonferonni corrections on the data, which involves the setting a more stringent p value. Unfortunately the potential problem with this method is that although it can control against obtaining a false positive result, it can also become very conservative and there is the potential that some results may be missed. Although it may have been beneficial to have utilised this test, it was decided that to allow for all potential associations to be observed, this test would not be applied. 6.5 Conclusion The main aims of the present study were to identify variables that may act as potential barriers and benefits to engagement (in general preventive health behaviours and the specific area of physical activity/exercise) for both adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists and also variables that may intervene in the relationship between perfectionism and engagement. Overall adaptive perfectionism was associated with more benefits than barriers to engagement and maladaptive perfectionism was associated with more barriers than benefits to engagement. The study supports the notion that there are two distinct 182 forms of perfectionism (adaptive and maladaptive) with the adaptive dimension being associated with factors that can be construed as being beneficial to health and wellbeing (e.g. a greater perception of specific benefits to engagement, higher levels of adaptive cognitions and behaviours related to physical activity/exercise and positive affect and the maladaptive dimension being associated with factors that may be construed as being detrimental to health (higher levels of perceived stress and higher levels of maladaptive cognitions and behaviours related to exercise behaviour). A number of factors were identified to act as moderators and mediators in the relationship between adaptive perfectionism and engagement in general preventive health behaviours. Although no moderating and mediating variables were able to be identified for maladaptive perfectionism, the results of the study do support associations between maladaptive perfectionism and variables that may be detrimental to health and wellbeing, which supports one of the main aims of the thesis; to identify whether maladaptive perfectionists represent a high risk group in terms of health and wellbeing 183 Chapter 7 General Discussion and Conclusions This thesis was set in the context of the perfectionism and health literature, which has been dominated by studies that have addressed the relationship between maladaptive perfectionism and various psychopathological and physical health concerns. To a lesser extent, research in this field has also examined the possibility that there may be a health enhancing and adaptive type of perfectionism that may potentially buffer or protect against the deleterious consequences of the maladaptive dimension. The primary point of interest was a preventive health perspective; to consider the potential health risks associated with being highly perfectionistic and to find out if perfectionists actively look after their health and wellbeing by engaging in preventive health behaviours. Previous research has not addressed this area in detail and there are only a few studies that have considered the relationship between perfectionism and engagement e.g. Longbottom et al (2010; 2012) looked at the relationship between the dimensions of perfectionism and physical activity/exercise behaviours and Williams and Cropley (2014) have addressed engagement in general preventive health behaviours and the association with maladaptive perfectionism. Both studies found that the maladaptive dimension of perfectionism was associated with a lower level of engagement. Engaging less frequently in preventive health behaviours has been proposed in the present thesis to be a potential risk factor for perfectionists that may compromise their long term health and wellbeing. Added to this risk, previous research in the perfectionism field has highlighted that the self-presentational aspect of perfectionism (i.e. the need to present a perfect and flawless persona at all times) makes it difficult for perfectionists to admit to or seek help when they are having problems (Hewitt et al, 2003). The result of which may be that the health risks of being highly perfectionistic have been seriously underestimated (Flett et al, 2014). Stress also seem to be a particular problem for perfectionists and has been implicated in the generation and maintenance of a variety of psychopathological states associated with perfectionism (Flett & Hewitt, 2002). 184 Specifically this thesis aimed to: 1. To explore engagement in preventive health behaviours (such as exercise, physical activity, diet and looking after their emotional wellbeing) for both adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists and try and establish if there were any differences between the two perfectionism dimensions in terms of engagement. 2. To explore two key areas; self-presentation and perceived stress, that are considered (according to previous research) to play an important role in the relationship between perfectionism and health outcomes and on the basis of this were predicted to influence the relationship between perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours 3. To explore the possible benefits and barriers to engagement, i.e. the factors that might intervene in the relationship between perfectionism and engagement may either encourage or discourage engagement in preventive health behaviours. 4. To generate support for the possibility that maladaptive perfectionists may represent a high risk group in terms of health and wellbeing. 5. To support a distinction between the two dimensions of perfectionism: a maladaptive type of perfectionism related to maladjustment and an adaptive type of perfectionism associated with potential benefits to health and wellbeing. Four studies were conducted to achieve these research aims. In study 1 (chapter 3), the role of self-concealment (a self-presentational style associated with perfectionism) was explored as a potential mediator in the relationship between adaptive/maladaptive perfectionism and engagement in general preventive health behaviours. In study 2 (chapter 4), the role of perceived stress was explored along with type of perfectionism (nonperfectionists, adaptive perfectionists and two types of maladaptive perfectionists) to identify whether both type of perfectionism and level of perceived stress interacted to influence engagement. In study 3 (chapter 5), a qualitative study (using IPA) explored adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists’ engagement in preventive health behaviours. The main aims being; to explore the health behaviours of perfectionists, to try and establish the factors that interfere with perfectionists’ ability to look after their health and wellbeing (e.g. increased workload around exam time) and note any differences between adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists. In study 4 (chapter 6), a number of potential moderators and mediators (e.g. perceived benefits/barriers, self-efficacy, adaptive/maladaptive 185 cognitions and behaviours, perceived stress and affect) were explored in the context of the relationship between perfectionism and engagement. For this study, the specific area of preventive health behaviours was explored (physical activity/exercise) as well as general engagement (as in studies 1 and 2). 7.1 Summary of findings Reviewing the literature concerning perfectionism and health it emerged that perfectionists may be at a greater risk in terms of health and wellbeing because they don’t like to admit to others that they are having problems or difficulties. The consequence of which, according to Flett et al (2014) may be an underestimation of the extent to which perfectionists may be struggling with psychological difficulties. Therefore, the first study (chapter 3), explored the relationship between adaptive/maladaptive perfectionism, selfconcealment (the desire to actively withhold sensitive and personal information from others), engagement in preventive health behaviours as well as life satisfaction and wellbeing. Self-concealment was tested as a potential mediator in the relationship between perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours and supporting earlier work, as a possible mediator in the relationship between perfectionism and psychological distress (Kawamura & Frost, 2004). Using a cross-sectional design, within a sample of university students (N = 370), maladaptive perfectionism (when compared to adaptive perfectionism) was found to be associated with higher levels of self-concealment and psychological distress and lower levels of engagement in preventive health behaviours, supporting previous research (Longbottom et al, 2010; 2012; Williams & Cropley, 2014). Maladaptive perfectionism was also associated with lower levels of life-satisfaction and wellbeing (Park & Jeong, 2015). Adaptive perfectionism was found to be related to lower levels of engagement but contrary to the expected findings, was found to be unrelated to any of the other outcome variables. In terms of mediation analysis, self-concealment was found to be a partial mediator between maladaptive perfectionism and engagement as well as maladaptive perfectionism and psychological distress. Although adaptive perfectionism was related to greater engagement in preventive health behaviours, no other observable benefits were found for this perfectionism dimension. The results of the study provides support for the premise that the combination of high levels of maladaptive perfectionism, 186 high levels of self-concealment and elevated psychological distress may be detrimental for the welfare of certain types of perfectionists. The review of the available literature (chapter 2) also identified stress to be an important variable in the relationship between perfectionism and health outcomes, therefore study 2 (chapter 4) addressed the relationships between adaptive/maladaptive perfectionism, perceived stress, engagement in preventive health behaviours as well as a number of other health related variables (symptom reporting, anxiety, and perception of general health). A cross-sectional design using a larger sample of university students (N = 875) employed a different conceptualisation of perfectionism by allocating participants to one of four groups (non-perfectionists, adaptive perfectionists and two types of maladaptive perfectionist) based on their coexisting levels of adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism traits and supporting conceptualisations that have utilised the within-person combination of both adaptive and maladaptive traits of perfectionism (Gaudreau & Thompson, 2010; Stoeber & Otto, 2006). Although no interactions were found between perfectionist types and level of perceived stress (high/low), results demonstrated across perfectionist groups that maladaptive perfectionists possessing high levels of maladaptive traits coupled with low levels of adaptive traits engaged the least amount in preventive health behaviours. This raises the question of whether this subtype of maladaptive perfectionism (Gaudreau & Thompson, 2010) may be more maladaptive than the subtype possessing high levels of both maladaptive and adaptive perfectionism traits (Stoeber & Otto, 2006). Having high levels of the adaptive perfectionism traits has been suggested to provide individuals with a type of ‘psychological buffer’ (Altstötter-Gleich et al, 2012) that may protect or neutralise some of the maladaptive traits. This was further supported by the finding that adaptive perfectionists had the most positive outcomes across the majority of the outcome variables (i.e. the highest level of engagement, the lowest levels of anxiety and perceived stress and, the most positive perception of general health over and above non-perfectionists, therefore supporting the potential adaptiveness of perfectionism. Study 3 took a different approach by using IPA to explore perfectionists’ engagement in preventive health behaviours. To explore potential factors that may intervene in this relationship, semi-structured interviews were conducted (N = 10; 5 adaptive perfectionists/5 maladaptive perfectionists). Adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists were asked about what they do to look after their health and wellbeing, and how they manage to 187 continue with these practices when there are barriers and obstacles that threaten to divert their attention away (e.g. at exam times or trying to juggle a number of domains simultaneously. Three superordinate themes were identified; taking personal responsibility for health, a lack of awareness of limitations and finally, control over health and wellbeing. Overall, possible obstacles to engagement were identified as falling into one of two categories; factors inherent in the university environment (e.g. lack of time, university life encouraging bad health habits, problems balancing a number of domains simultaneously, having to take personal responsibility for health and increased stress) and factors that seemed to be inherent to perfectionism (e.g. doubting the quality of one’s actions, not having clearly defined health goals, a lack of flexibility to adjust standards and lack of belief that a sense of balance would be regained after the temporary adjustment of standards). No specific differences were observed between adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists. Continuing with the theme of potential obstacles and barriers to engagement, study 4, considered a number of variables (e.g. perceived stress, adaptive and maladaptive cognitions and behaviours, self-efficacy and specific benefits /barriers) as potential moderators and mediators of the relationship between adaptive/maladaptive perfectionism and two avenues of engagement; physical activity/exercise behaviour and general preventive health behaviours. Using a general population sample (N = 350) results identified adaptive perfectionism to be associated with a greater level of engagement in general preventive health behaviours and only a weak association was observed for physical activity/exercise behaviours. Maladaptive perfectionism was not found to be related to engagement in general preventive health behaviours and only a weak association was identified for the specific area of physical activity/exercise. Overall adaptive perfectionism was associated with more benefits to engagement and fewer barriers and for maladaptive perfectionists; more barriers and fewer benefits. A number of factors were identified as potential moderators and mediators in the relationship between adaptive perfectionism and engagement11. The maladaptive dimension was found to be associated with a number of factors that may be detrimental from a health and wellbeing perspective. 11 As explained in chapter 6, because no relationship was identified between maladaptive perfectionism and either type of engagement (general preventive health behaviours and physical activity/exercise behaviour), moderation and mediation analysis was not performed on these variables. 188 Findings suggest that the adaptive perfectionism dimension may be associated with a number of variables that are beneficial to health and wellbeing 7.2 Contribution of research The first aim of the thesis was to explore engagement in preventive health behaviours (such as exercise, physical activity, diet and looking after emotional wellbeing) for both adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists and try and establish if there were any differences between the two dimensions of perfectionism. Clear differences were observed between the dimensions of adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism, with respect to engagement in general preventive health behaviours in studies 1 and 2 (chapters 3 and 4). These studies reported findings consistent with previous research, (i.e. lower engagement for maladaptive perfectionists and higher levels of engagement for adaptive perfectionists). However, for studies 3 and 4, the picture was not so clear. For study 4, in terms of engagement, both adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism dimensions, were only weakly correlated with physical activity/exercise behaviours (a positive correlation for adaptive perfectionism and a negative correlation for maladaptive perfectionism). For engagement in general preventive health behaviours, adaptive perfectionism was found to be positively associated with this outcome variable, however, no relationship was observed for maladaptive perfectionism. For study 3, there were no apparent differences between adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists with respect to engagement in preventive health behaviours, with both types of perfectionists showing an encouraging level of engagement. A possible reason for the lack of an association between maladaptive perfectionism and engagement in general preventive health behaviours in study 4 may have been related to the particular samples selected for the studies; studies 1 and 2 used university students and study 4 used a general population sample. Perhaps it is the case that in a high pressured, highly evaluative environment such as a university, there is a greater concentration of maladaptive perfectionists. This suggestion supports previous research that has explored the incidence of maladaptive perfectionism in a university setting (Kearns et al, 2007; 189 Kearns et al, 2008; Urdan & Midgley, 2001) although none of these studies addressed whether perfectionism was related to engagement in preventive health activities. To try and explain the lower levels of engagement for maladaptive perfectionists’ in studies 1 and 2 (chapters 3 and 4), compared to study 4, there is evidence that health behaviours may already be compromised in a university/college setting (Lowry, Galuska, Fulton et al, 2000). Students often fall short of meeting current standards for recommended amounts of physical activity (Steptoe et al, 2002) and there is also evidence that starting university often leads to an increase in health risk behaviours such as smoking, lack of physical activity, drinking and engaging in risky sexual behaviours (Steptoe et al, 2002). Stress levels may also affect engagement (Adler & Matthews, 1994) and stress levels have been found to be particularly high during the first year of university (Misra, McKean, West et al, 2000). These findings have been supported by the results of study 3 (chapter 5) where participants identified a number of factors inherent in the university environment that they felt interfered with their ability to engage in preventive health behaviours. These included lack of time, high levels of stress, university life encouraging health risk behaviours (e.g. drinking alcohol, poor diet, lack of exercise etc.), having to take personal responsibility for health and wellbeing (often for the first time in their lives) and difficulties balancing the demands of a number of different domains simultaneously (e.g. academic work, socialising and taking care of themselves). To compound the problem, participants also identified factors that were more specific to their perfectionistic traits and that they also felt might compromise engagement such as; a lack of flexibility to adjust their standards when exam pressures increased, doubts about the quality and quantity of their current engagement (current activity levels were frequently played down or dismissed), higher baseline levels of stress (as expressed by verbal self-reports) and a lack of confidence that a sense of balance (between work and health behaviours) could be resumed once the deadline or exam, had passed. These findings suggest that high levels of perfectionism, coupled with the normal challenges of adaptive to university life may present as a particular challenge for some individuals and have the potential to compromise engagement in preventive health behaviours. 190 Adaptive perfectionism was found to be associated with higher levels of engagement across all three quantitative studies (chapter 3, 4 ad 6). These findings support previous research identifying a proactive ’approach’ orientation associated with adaptive perfectionism (Slade & Owens, 1998) and research that has considered that adaptive perfectionists possess motivational tendencies (adaptive cognitions and behaviours; Martin et al, 2006) that encourage them to engage and persist with preventive health behaviours such as physical activity/exercise (Longbottom et al, 2010). It must be noted, however, that simply engaging in preventive health behaviours and demonstrating higher levels of engagement may not always be a positive and healthy experience. Study 3 demonstrated that whilst perfectionists (both adaptive and maladaptive) reported engagement in a range of preventive health behaviours (e.g. frequent trips to the gym, engaging in different sporting activities on campus and eating healthily) what also came across was a lack of awareness when they might be pushing themselves too far, either physically and/or psychologically. A number of the perfectionists interviewed, discussed the need to be performing at a very high level in more than one life domain e.g. in both a work (academic) and exercise setting, which they reported, often led to difficulties (in terms of balancing the various domains). This finding supports previous research that has addressed domain-specificity in perfectionism and identified that more extreme perfectionists often report being highly perfectionistic in more than one life domain (Stoeber & Stoeber, 2009). The second aim of the thesis was to explore two key areas, self-presentation and perceived stress. Both are considered to play a pivotal role in the relationship between perfectionism and health outcomes and on the basis of this are predicted to influence the relationship between perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours. Self-presentational factors (the need to project ones perfectionism as well as conceal or hide personal imperfections; Hewitt et al, 2003) appear to permeate numerous areas within the perfectionism – health literature (chapter 2, part 2). The importance of considering selfpresentation has been exemplified by Flett et al (2014) who suggested that selfpresentational motives, (particularly the desire to conceal personal information) may mean that the seriousness of the relationship between perfectionism and mental health issues such as suicide has been, and continues to be, underestimated. Previous research has 191 consistently associated self-concealment with maladaptive tendencies including higher levels of psychological distress (Kawamura & Frost, 2004), more interpersonal conflicts (Straits-Tröster et al, 1994), difficulties forming authentic and trusting relationships (Derlaga et al, 1993), less utilisation of social support networks (Kawamura & Frost, 2004) and reduced desire to seek help for personal problems (Cepida Benito & Short, 1998; Hewitt et al, 2003), Indirectly, the results of study 3 support an association between self-presentation and a reduced desire to seek help. Both adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists expressed considerable reluctance to consider seeking help for either psychological or physical health problems, however, the majority of participants mentioned utilising online sources of support either as a one-off or on an ad hoc basis when they felt they needed help or support. It is interesting that perfectionists expressed a preference for utilising resources where there was no need for face to face contact. Such services may be easier for perfectionists to deal with because logically, there are fewer expectations and less pressure to self-present in a particular way. Research studies, evaluating online counselling services for maladaptive perfectionists have started to emerge (Arpin-Cribbie, Irvine & Ritvo, 2012; Radhu, Daskalakis, Arpin-Cribbie et al, 2012) with encouraging results. Perhaps the best way to help perfectionists is to develop strategies that circumvent the inherent need to self-present a perfect and flawless image. In doing so it may be possible to get past the façade of perfection and treat the deeper issues. The results of study 1 support the role of self-concealment (an aspect of self-presentation) as an important intervening factor in the relationship between maladaptive perfectionism and psychological distress (Kawamura & Frost, 2004) as well as adding to the current literature by highlighting self-concealment to be an important factor in the relationship between maladaptive perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours. This suggests that the tendency to conceal personal imperfections inhibits engagement, which supports previous research by Leary, (1992) who identified high levels of self-concealment to be related to decreased motivation to engage in physical activity and exercise behaviour. The results of study 1 suggest that the combination of high levels of maladaptive perfectionism and self-concealment may be a particularly toxic combination for health and wellbeing (Williams & Cropley, 2014). 192 Interestingly in study 4, (chapter 6) self-presentational motives were found to increase rather than decrease engagement in preventive health behaviours for adaptive perfectionists. In this study, adaptive perfectionism was found to be related to higher levels of self-presentational efficacy expectancy (SPEE), which has been described as the confidence someone has in being able to present themselves well in an exercise setting (Gammage et al, 2004). Not only was adaptive perfectionism found to be related to this concept, but SPEE was identified as both a moderator and mediator in the relationship between adaptive perfectionism and engagement in general preventive health behaviours. Further exploration of this relationship (simple slopes analysis) revealed that as levels of SPEE increased, there was a corresponding increase in engagement. Although a higher level of engagement does, on the surface seem to be a positive consequence of such actions, one does have to question the apparent adaptiveness of such behaviours. Having the confidence to present well in an exercise setting is not an accurate way of gauging if someone is actually fit and healthy and it is questionable how functional and healthy this type of behaviour might be in the long-term (Hewitt et al, 2003; Leary et al, 1994). Exercise environments by their very nature often involve the need to present ones’ athletic/sporting ability in a very public way e.g. going to the gym or an exercise class. According to Leary (1992) if someone feels confident in their ability to present themselves well (in an exercise/sport setting), then they will be more willing to engage in such activities. For perfectionists, where there is already a predisposition to want to present well (Hewitt et al, 2003), exercise settings may present as a particular challenge. Perfectionists may feel a heightened sense of awareness that they are being judged negatively and have an exaggerated fear of failure in the presence of others. A particular type of self-presentational strategy that has been found to be used frequently in exercise settings is self-handicapping (Martin & Brawley, 1999; 2002), this is a strategy where an individual puts forth an impediment prior to their performance of some task so that if the outcome is less than favourable, they will have been able to put some distance between themselves and the failure, which will help protect their self-esteem and selfworth (Snyder, 1990). Examples of such behaviours include procrastination, overcommitting, not taking time to practice and not putting the required amount of effort into something (Bailis, 2001; Kimble et al, 1998). Study 4 (chapter 6) supported an association between the maladaptive dimension of perfectionism and self-handicapping 193 with maladaptive perfectionism being associated with higher levels of ‘maladaptive cognitions’ and ‘maladaptive behaviours’ related to physical activity/exercise (Martin et al, 2006; Martin, 2010a; 2010b). These are considered to reflect negative thoughts related to exercise such a fear of failure, uncertainty and anxiety as well as behaviours related to selfhandicapping, avoidance and withdrawal. The relationship between perfectionism and stress is well-researched area, with perfectionism being implicated in the generation, anticipation and perpetuation of stress in relation to psychopathology (Hewitt & Flett, 2002, chapter 2). Stress was addressed directly in studies 2 and 4 (chapters 4 and 6) and indirectly in study 3 (chapter 5). In study 2, there was a notable absence of any significant interactions between type of perfectionism and level of perceived stress12 in relation to engagement, which was surprising considering maladaptive perfectionism was found to be related to high levels of perceived stress in both studies 2 and 4, coupled with the fact that in the same two studies, perceived stress was also associated with lower levels of engagement in preventive health behaviours. These findings also supported previous research in this area (e.g. Adler & Matthews, 1994). A lack of interaction could indicate that there are other intervening variables that mediate the maladaptive perfectionism-stress relationship as well as the stress-engagement relationship; clearly more research is required to establish the precise nature of these associations. For the associations between adaptive perfectionism and perceived stress, mixed results were obtained. When perceived stress scores (measured on a continuous scale) were correlated with adaptive perfectionism (as in studies 2 and 4), these two variables were found to be unrelated, however, when four new perfectionism groups were formed and mean scores for perceived stress compared across these groups, adaptive perfectionists were identified as having significantly lower stress scores than all other groups and most notably, non-perfectionists. In the research literature inconsistent findings have been reported with regards to how adaptive perfectionism is related to stress. Some authors have identified adaptive perfectionists to be better placed (than maladaptive perfectionists) to deal with stress 12 For study 2, four groups of perfectionism were generated based on the interactive dimensions of both adaptive and maladaptive traits; 1. Non-perfectionism (low levels of both adaptive and maladaptive traits), adaptive perfectionism (high adaptive/low maladaptive), maladaptive perfectionist group 1 (low adaptive/high maladaptive) and maladaptive perfectionist group 2 (high levels of both adaptive and maladaptive traits. 194 because they tend to use more adaptive coping strategies in response to stressful experiences (Dunkley et al, 2000). It has also been suggested that adaptive perfectionists may possess a type of resiliency factor that protects them from the more serious consequences of stress (Enns, Cox & Clara, 2005). On the other hand some research has identified that adaptive perfectionists are just as vulnerable as maladaptive perfectionists in terms of their reactions to stressful experiences (Hewitt & Flett, 1993) especially when there may be some block to their achievement of personal goals or standards or when they doubt that a positive outcome can be achieved (Blankstein, Flett, Hewitt & Eng, 1993). Although the studies reported in the thesis were not able to further the knowledge base regarding the precise way that perfectionism and stress are related, the findings (studies 2 and 4 and to a lesser extent, study 3) do support the well-established relationship between perfectionism and stress and have potentially highlighted (due to the observed associations between maladaptive perfectionism and perceived stress and perceived stress and engagement) that preventive health behaviours may be a useful avenue for future research concerning the perfectionism-stress relationship. The third aim of the thesis was to explore the factors that might intervene in the relationship between perfectionism (adaptive and maladaptive) and engagement, i.e. factors that may encourage engagement (benefits) and others that might discourage (barriers) engagement. In terms of factors that potentially intervene in the relationship between perfectionism and engagement, studies 1 and 4 (chapters 3 and 6) attempted to address this area directly; study 1 looking at the mediating role of self-concealment and study 4 focussing on a range of potential mediators and moderators between adaptive perfectionism and engagement in general preventive health behaviours. Study 2, although not considering the mediating role of perceived stress, did focus on the contribution of perceived stress in the perfectionism – engagement relationship and Study 3 also explored intervening variables (as potential barriers to engagement) from a qualitative perspective. It has generally been recognised (in the perfectionism-health literature) that an essential and necessary avenue of research is to address the potential mediators/moderators of the relationship between perfectionism and health (e.g. Flett, Molnar, Nepon & Hewitt, 2012; Molnar et al, 2012). 195 For maladaptive perfectionism, as mentioned previously, study 1 was able to test for mediation; identifying self-concealment to be a mediator in the relationships between maladaptive perfectionism and both engagement in preventive health behaviours and psychological distress. For study 4, despite not being able to address the intervening variables directly, maladaptive perfectionism was found to be associated with a number of factors that have identified as being involved in lowering engagement e.g. high levels of perceived stress (Adler & Matthews, 1994), high levels of maladaptive cognitions and behaviours (Longbottom et al, 2010) and low levels of perceived benefits vs high levels of perceived barriers to exercise (Lovell et al, 2010; Strecher & Rosenstock, 1997). Study 1 also identified three factors that were associated with maladaptive perfectionism; higher levels of psychological distress and lower levels of wellbeing and life satisfaction that have also been linked to lower levels of engagement in health behaviours (KoivumaaHonkanen, Honkanen, Viinamaki et al, 2000 and Leiferman & Pheley, 2006, respectively). Study 4 examined a number of potential intervening variables in the relationship between adaptive perfectionism and engagement in general preventive health behaviours. Higher levels of specific perceived benefits were found to have both a moderating and mediating effect and exercise self-efficacy was found to have a mediating effect on the perfectionism-engagement relationship. Adaptive behaviours related to exercise (i.e. behaviours that involve positive activities such as planning and goal setting) were also identified to an important intervening variable. Clearly, planning and setting health goals in advance seems to have a positive effect on engagement (Longbottom et al, 2010). Related to this, an interesting finding from study 3 was that the majority of perfectionists (both adaptive and maladaptive) admitted to having no clear ideas or goals about how they were currently looking after their health or how they planned to look after their health in the future. This seemed surprising since many of their personal accounts included multiple references to planning and goals setting in other areas, specifically in a work/academic domain. Historically, perfectionism has been identified as being highly associated with a high degree or organisation and order (Frost et al, 1990). Another interesting finding was that maladaptive cognitions were found to moderate the relationship between adaptive perfectionism and engagement, in a positive direction, so as levels of maladaptive cognitions increased, there was a corresponding increase in 196 engagement. These findings contradict previous research that has suggested adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists will be motivated by different cognitions and behaviours related to exercise (Longbottom et al, 2010; Stoeber et al, 2008), It has been suggested that adaptive perfectionists will be primarily motivated by adaptive cognitions and behaviours and maladaptive perfectionists by maladaptive cognitions and behaviours. How then can these findings be explained, i.e. how does a high level of maladaptive cognitions (which includes behaviours that inhibit the engagement of exercise, such as self-handicapping, avoidance and withdrawal), lead to greater engagement? Perhaps it is an unrealistic and over simplistic proposition to assume that adaptive perfectionists will only be motivated by adaptive cognitions and behaviours related to exercise, rather than a combination of both adaptive and maladaptive motives. Existing conceptualisations that have focussed on the interactive power of both perfectionism dimensions do recognise that adaptive perfectionists possess qualities that are both adaptive and maladaptive, albeit in varying degrees (i.e. adaptive perfectionists may present as having high adaptive traits and low maladaptive traits), (Gaudreau & Thompson, 2010; Stoeber & Otto, 2006). Perhaps it is the case that the accompanying high levels of adaptive cognitions act as a type of psychological buffer and have the effect of overriding the negative thoughts and behaviours (Altstötter-Gleich et al, 2012) which then leads to greater engagement. The fourth aim of the thesis was to generate support for the possibility that maladaptive perfectionists may represent a high risk group in terms of health and wellbeing. The existing literature in the perfectionism-health field has touched on a number of factors (described in figure 7.1 also presented in the introduction of the thesis) that can be considered potential health concerns for this particular client group. 197 Figure 7.1 Possible reasons why maladaptive perfectionists may represent a high risk group in terms of health and wellbeing Difficult client group to treat Reluctance to seek help Linked to psychopathology Increased risk of suicide Increased risk mortality Maladaptive Perfectionists: A “high risk” group? Lower levels of life satisfaction and wellbeing Linked to physical health problems Stress Conceal personal difficulties The present thesis sought to provide specific support for some of these factors as well as explore another factor; engagement in preventive health behaviours. The intention was that if maladaptive perfectionism was associated with lower levels of engagement across the four studies, then it would be possible to suggest that lack of engagement may be a potential risk factor associated with maladaptive perfectionism. Taken as a whole, as discussed earlier, mixed results were obtained and therefore only partial support has been obtained to suggest that lack of engagement may be a risk factor specifically associated with maladaptive perfectionism. Despite the disparity in findings related to engagement, there were a number of other factors that were identified, as a result 198 of conducting the four studies, that do suggest an increased vulnerability associated with maladaptive perfectionism; The self-presentational aspect of perfectionism (i.e. self-concealment) was found to inhibit engagement in preventive health behaviours for maladaptive perfectionists (study 1). Maladaptive perfectionists were identified to have the highest levels of perceived stress and the highest levels of anxiety when compared to adaptive perfectionists and non-perfectionists (studies 2 and 4). Maladaptive perfectionists may be particularly vulnerable in a university setting and university may represent a particularly risky environment for maladaptive perfectionists due to high levels of perceived stress and low levels of engagement in preventive health activities (studies 1, 2 and 3). Study 3 specifically identified the transition to university to be a time of increased vulnerability for perfectionists (both adaptive and maladaptive). University environments may be particularly challenging for maladaptive perfectionists because often results are publicly displayed which is likely to activate the self-presentational dimension of perfectionism and create even more pressure to achieve exceptionally high standards. Maladaptive perfectionism was found to be related to low levels of exercise selfefficacy. High levels of this variable have been found to increase participation and perseverance in certain preventive health behaviours (Hofstetter et al, 1990; Sallis and Hovell, 1990; Sallis, Hovell, Hofstetter, Faucher, Elder et al, 1989), (study 4) Maladaptive perfectionists (and adaptive perfectionists) were found to refrain from making plans or setting goals related to preventive health activities, which was in contrast to the organisation and order that was shown in relation to academic work and which could suggest a lower priority placed on looking after health and wellbeing, (study 3). Maladaptive perfectionists were identified to express a reluctance to seek help for either psychological or physical health problems (study 3) Maladaptive perfectionists were identified to have higher levels of maladaptive cognitions and behaviours related to exercise which suggests that they may avoid/withdrawal from physical activity and use self-handicapping behaviours as a reason for non-engagement. 199 Maladaptive (and adaptive perfectionists) were found to have a lack of awareness of their own limitations, which could result in them pushing themselves too far because of an inability to gauge when they are doing too much (study 3). A small number of perfectionists (both adaptive and maladaptive) admitted to not looking after their health at all, they stated that they were pushing themselves in multiple life domains, knowing that they were doing too much but justifying this to be an acceptable strategy and ‘hoping’ that their health would not suffer as a consequence, (study 3). The final aim of the thesis was to generate support for the distinction between the two dimensions of perfectionism; a maladaptive type that is related to maladjustment and an adaptive type that has been associated with providing potential benefits to health and wellbeing. Previous research clearly supports the existence of two types of perfectionism and, as stated previously, the majority of research has been focussed on the maladaptive dimension of perfectionism and associations with maladjustment have been observed. Where research is less clear concerns how healthy and functional the adaptive dimension of perfectionism is (if at all) and this is an area that continues to be debated. Chapter 2 provides an overview of the research in this area. Collectively the results of the three quantitative studies (chapters 3, 4 and 6) provide support for there being two clear subtypes of perfectionism; a maladaptive subtype associated with negative outcomes such as higher levels of; psychological distress, perceived stress, anxiety, negative affect, symptom reporting and maladaptive cognitions and behaviours related to exercise and lower levels of; life-satisfaction and wellbeing and an adaptive subtype associated with positive outcomes such as higher levels of; engagement in preventive health behaviours, adaptive cognitions and behaviours related to exercise, exercise self-efficacy, positive affect, perceived benefits associated with exercise/physical activity and a lower perception of perceived barriers to exercise/physical activity. By using a different conceptualisation for defining adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism, study 2 provided some interesting findings that supported a functional and adaptive subtype of perfectionism. By focussing on the within-person combinations of the adaptive and maladaptive dimensions and in accordance with the theoretical models 200 proposed by Stoeber and Otto (2006) and Gaudreau and Thompson (2010)13, four subtypes of perfectionism were developed; non-perfectionism (low levels of both adaptive and maladaptive traits), adaptive perfectionism (high adaptive/low maladaptive), maladaptive perfectionism group 1 (high levels of both adaptive and maladaptive traits) and maladaptive perfectionism group 2 (high maladaptive/low adaptive traits). The most striking finding was that when the four groups were compared, adaptive perfectionists were identified as achieving the most positive outcomes (highest level of engagement, lowest level of anxiety, lowest level of perceived stress and better overall perception of general self-rated health) out of all the groups and most notably, over and above nonperfectionists. This finding supports research that has suggested the adaptive dimension of perfectionism may provide a type of ‘psychological buffer’ (Alstötter-Gleich et al, 2012) that can protect and ameliorate the maladaptive traits. Perhaps it is the case is that the adaptive perfectionism traits may have the potential to cancel out the maladaptive traits and therefore bring the individual back to a state of equilibrium. Interestingly, though, the findings from study 2 suggest there may be something over and above this, a potentially positive quality that actually enhances the experience for adaptive perfectionists. This suggestion can be likened to research that has considered the potentially “enabling” function of conscientiousness (Weiss & Costa, 2005). Previous research has suggested there to be a degree of overlap between the adaptive dimension of perfectionism and conscientiousness (Flett & Hewitt, 2006; Stober, Otto, Dalbert, 2009) and the protective and health enhancing qualities of conscientiousness have received considerable support in the research literature (e.g. Friedman, Tucker, Tomlinson-Keasey et al, 1993; Kern & Friedman, 2008; Roberts, Kuncel, Shiner et al, 2007). Not all the results support the potentially protective aspect of the adaptive dimension of perfectionism. In study 2, the maladaptive perfectionist group 1 who possessed high levels of both adaptive and maladaptive traits were found to be just as ‘unhealthy’14 as the maladaptive perfectionist group 2 who possessed high levels of the maladaptive traits and low levels of the adaptive traits. If high levels of adaptive traits were considered to buffer and protect, then one might expect the maladaptive perfectionist group 1 to be better off 13 Stoeber and Otto (2006) proposed a tripartite model of perfectionism consisting of three subtypes; non-perfectionism (low levels of both adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism), healthy perfectionism (high adaptive and low maladaptive traits) and unhealthy perfectionism (high levels of both maladaptive and adaptive traits). The 2 x 2 model proposed by Gaudreau and Thompson consisted of four subtypes of perfectionism; non-perfectionism (low levels of both adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism), pure personal standards perfectionism (high adaptive traits/low maladaptive traits), mixed perfectionism (high levels of both adaptive and maladaptive traits) and pure evaluative concerns perfectionism (high maladaptive/low adaptive traits. 14 In terms of the outcome variables being studied 201 (in terms of health and wellbeing) due to having high levels of the adaptive traits. Research that has addressed the within person combinations of the adaptive and maladaptive traits in relation to psychopathology and physical health concerns may provide a better indication of how the underlying perfectionism constructs are ordered; for depression and CFS, research has identified elevated levels of both the adaptive and maladaptive traits (Bardone-Cone et al, 2007; Deary & Chalder, 2010) whereas for anxiety disorders, there seems to be a common theme of high levels of the maladaptive traits and low levels of adaptive traits (Bardone-Cone et al, 2007) suggesting that the psychological burden of some disorders may be lessened by having high levels of the adaptive perfectionism traits. Rather than identify potential differences between the two perfectionism dimensions, Study 3 found that perfectionists demonstrated more similarities than differences. In relation to their views concerning engagement in preventive health behaviours and factors that were identified as potential obstacles to engagement, both adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists displayed similarities in the following; level of engagement in preventive health behaviours, tendency to doubt the quality of their actions in relation to engagement, struggling with the transition to university, the challenge faced having to take personal responsibility for health and wellbeing, lack of health goals and problems associated with having to juggle multiple life domains simultaneously. Overall the studies in the thesis do demonstrate some clear differences between the maladaptive and adaptive dimensions of perfectionism. For adaptive perfectionists many of these differences, do seem to be positively oriented and potentially beneficial from a health and wellbeing perspective and for maladaptive perfectionists, the differences seem to reflect a negatively oriented perspective that may increase the vulnerability of some individuals. 7.3 Limitations of the research One of the limitations of the thesis was the specific conceptualisation of perfectionism chosen for the studies. The Frost Multidimensional Scale (Frost et al, 1990) was utilised to determine levels of adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism, however this represents just one of a number of formulations that could have been utilised to assess perfectionism, and specifically, to assess the adaptive and maladaptive dimensions. The downside with this 202 approach is that it only focusses on the self-directed intrapersonal aspects of perfectionism, specifically the self-directed cognitions associated with perfectionism rather than, how individuals may be affected by the interpersonal aspects of perfectionism (as in the Hewitt & Flett, Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (Hewitt & Flett, 1991a). Additionally, many of the studies spoken of in the literature review have utilised the latter scale and although there are similarities between the two scales (e.g. the socially prescribed dimension has been considered to embody more of the maladaptive perfectionism traits and the self-oriented dimension thought to embody both adaptive and maladaptive traits) it is questionable how valid it is to compare research that has utilised different conceptualisations that been developed from essentially different perspectives. For the present thesis, the rationale for choosing the Frost MPS over the Hewitt and Flett scale was that the former provided a more straightforward and decisive way of providing a measure of both perfectionism dimensions, that has been validated for this exact purpose (Chang et al, 2004; Dunn et al, 2006; Frost et al, 1990; Harris et al, 2008; Wei et al, 2004) and importantly seemed to fit best with the main aims of the present thesis. The subject of multiple conceptualisations represents and reflects a deeper issue in the perfectionism field; i.e. the fact that at present there is still no agreed upon definition/conceptualisation. The problem is further complicated by two factors; firstly, there is no standard method of subdividing the perfectionism construct into its component adaptive and maladaptive dimensions, and secondly, there is still a debate in the literature centred on the disparity in findings related to a potentially healthy type of perfectionism. Perhaps as Ben-Shahar (2009) has argued, it may be time to re-establish the concepts of adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism altogether. In his book, “The pursuit of perfect”, he explains that the terms ‘adaptive’ and ‘maladaptive’ perfectionist are so fundamentally different that it is misleading to refer to them both, as types of perfectionism. Instead he talks of ‘optimalists’ and ‘perfectionists’. The fundamental premise differentiating the two categories seems to be the willingness/lack of willingness to accept the reality that sometimes we fail and this is a normal and necessary part of the human condition. According to Ben-Shahar the optimalist is willing to accept and deal with failure whereas for the perfectionist, dealing with failure is inconceivable. As a result, optimalists will lead 203 a more normal, healthy life and perfectionists will be constantly dragged down with the burden that another failure could be just around the corner. It may be the case that, particularly with the emergence of a number of more recent conceptualisations (that are predominantly focussed on the clinical aspects of perfectionism), that it is becoming increasingly difficult to accept the possibility of a positive and healthy form of perfectionism. Although beyond the scope of this thesis, future research could re-visit and re-examine the literature addressing the associations between perfectionism and the big five personality characteristics, particularly in relation to the potential overlap between adaptive perfectionism and conscientiousness (e.g. Flett & Hewitt, 2006; Stober et al, 2009). The similarities between conscientiousness and the adaptive perfectionism dimension have been noted in chapter 2 (part 2) and some authors do maintain that what has been described as an adaptive and functional form of perfectionism could perhaps be more appropriately described as a form of conscientiousness (e.g. Flett & Hewitt, 2006). More research is required within the personality domain to explore whether the adaptive dimension of perfectionism can provide any additional improvements to health and wellbeing over and above the benefits that have been associated with possessing high levels of conscientiousness. The second limitation relates to a methodological concern primarily with study 2. For this study, it was decided, that to test for potential interactions between the two dimensions of perfectionism and perceived stress, it may be helpful to provide four distinct categories of perfectionism based on the within-person combinations of the adaptive and maladaptive traits. As explained more thoroughly in chapter 4, to achieve this, scores on the adaptive and maladaptive dimensions of the Frost MPS (1990) were dichotomised into high and low categories, participants were then identified by their relative level of adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism. Four new categories of perfectionist were created; nonperfectionists (low adaptive/low maladaptive), adaptive perfectionists (high adaptive/low maladaptive), maladaptive perfectionist group 1 (high maladaptive/high adaptive) and maladaptive perfectionist group 2 (high maladaptive/low adaptive). For perceived stress, subjects were assigned to either a ‘high’ or ‘low’ perceived stress category. Whilst this was conceptualised to be an acceptable method for study 4 as it would enable comparisons to be made across the different groups, there were a number of 204 methodological concerns that are associated with dichotomising continuous variables in such a way. These include; splitting data at the median assumes that individuals either side of this division are fundamentally different when in fact they may be very similar. As a result there may be a considerable variability within the newly created groups with it being possible that the differences within the newly formed group being greater than between the two groups (Royston, Altman & Sauerbrei, 2006), which for the groupings in study 2, could mean a misrepresentation of both the stress and the perfectionism categories. Additionally dichotomising continuous variable reduces power because a lot of useful information is lost. Some have suggested that this may be equivalent to throwing away up to a third of all data (MacCallum et al, 2002). And finally, splitting the group may not actually get you the result you want. Who is to say that cut off should be at the median anyway? (MacCallum et al, 2002). Before the analysis an alternative was considered; to divide the results into thirds and to discard the middle third, however, it was decided that this method would have compromised the sample size in the respective groups. Thirdly, Study 4 highlighted a potential problem with the population sample chosen for the study. Using a general population sample appeared to have the outcome of ‘diluting’ the effect that had been observed in studies 1 and 2. In the first two studies, there were significant associations between maladaptive perfectionism and engagement in general preventive health behaviours, however, in study 4, the association between maladaptive perfectionism and engagement in general preventive health behaviours was non-significant and for maladaptive perfectionism and engagement in physical activity/exercise the association was very weak. As a consequence, it was impossible to carry out all of the analyses (as there was little or no relationship between the predictor and outcome variables). Although it was important to examine perfectionism in the general population it would have been beneficial to have utilised a comparison population, ideally from a university setting to explore potential differences between the two groups. Whilst being identified as a limitation of the thesis, what this result did provide, was support for the fact that university settings may be particularly challenging environments for maladaptive perfectionists. A fourth limitation of the thesis concerns the reliance on self-report measures to gather data. All three quantitative studies (chapters 3, 4 and 6) requested that information be gathered via questionnaire presented in an online format. A particular problem that can 205 stem from using self-report measures is ‘common method variance’. This refers to a situation where, in using only one method to gather data e.g. a survey or questionnaire, there is the chance that the potential source of the variance is more to do with the measurement method utilised, rather than the constructs that are being investigated (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee & Podsakoff, 2003). In an attempt to control for common method variance, when designing the format for each of the questionnaires, attempts were made to alter the presentation of the questions by mixing them up as well as using different scale types e.g. some questions required a click in a box and others involved sliding a scale up and down to give a confidence rating. A potential method to improve this further might include utilising other methods as well as self-reports such as objective measures of exercise engagement/engagement in preventive health behaviours such as number of recorded visits to the gym or providing food diaries for participants to record dietary information. Still related to the use of self-reports, another possible limitation involves the accuracy of the information provided by the perfectionists. In using self-reports you are very much relying on the honesty of your participants. A common theme that has been revisited throughout the thesis concerns the self-presentational needs of perfectionists, specifically, the need to present a perfect persona devoid of imperfections and flaws (Hewitt et al, 2003). Study 1 (chapter 3) discovered that the need to keep personal information concealed was so great, that it influenced maladaptive perfectionists’ desire to engage in preventive health behaviours. With this in mind, it is possible that such a deep-seated need to save face and self-present well may even extend to situations where there is minimal risk of exposure, such as questionnaires and surveys. A final limitation relates to the construct validity of two of the measures utilised within the thesis; the Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (Frost et al, 1990) and the health behaviour questionnaire (an adaptation of the health behaviour questionnaire, Amir, 1987). For the Frost MPS, although for the four studies, this scale was not been utilised in its entirety (i.e. only four out of the six dimensions were included; CM, DA, O and PS), there is the assumption that the four dimensions included provided an accurate and valid representation of the underlying factors considered to represent the perfectionism construct. Future work in this area could include the application of confirmatory factor analysis to determine how well the questionnaire accurately reflects the underlying factors 206 that are hypothesised to be the core constructs of perfectionism. Additionally for the health behaviour questionnaire, this measure includes a number of different concepts such as; health risk behaviours, health promotion behaviours and items related to self-care. To improve the construct validity of this measure for future studies, a psychometric assessment of the scale is recommended to establish a clear factor structure within the scale and to provide clear subscales for the different categories of health behaviours. 7.4 Future Research A potential avenue for future research is to re-examine the relationship between perfectionism and stress as well as how stress affects engagement in preventive health behaviours. The methodological problems that have been identified above, specifically concerning the groupings for the variables of perfectionism and perceived stress could be overcome by using alternative methodology e.g. an alternative method to dichotomising variables might be to use a regression model to identify potential intervening variables or perhaps an alternative to linear regression could be to use a quantile regression model which has the advantage over linear regression in that provides estimates of the associations between the predictor and outcome variable at various points. This has been found to be useful for exploring non-linear relationships, which may be particularly useful for this research area where the precise nature of the perfectionism-stress relationship has not been established. The associations identified (in this thesis) between the maladaptive dimension of perfectionism and perceived stress as well as between perceived stress and engagement do suggest that there may be a potential relationship to be found, further research is therefore recommended. Another possible avenue for future research is to conduct more longitudinal studies to explore the health implications of being highly perfectionistic over time. Although longitudinal studies of this nature have begun to emerge (e.g. Flaxman et al, 2012; Fry & Debats, 2009; 2011), there is still a lack of research addressing the long-term consequences of possessing high levels of either adaptive, maladaptive or both types of perfectionism. Being able to follow perfectionists for an extended time would provide opportunities to observe changes over time, specifically, in relation to how adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists deal with difficulties and challenges in their lives. Such observations may contribute to our understanding of the potentially different qualities associated with the two perfectionism dimensions. 207 Study 4 highlighted the potential problems associated with using only one population of participants. A suggestion for future work could be to use a number of comparison populations to firstly identify the incidence of perfectionism. Interestingly, it was virtually impossible to find any figures for the incidence of perfectionism (either general or specifically adaptive/maladaptive) in the general population. A literature search of journal articles in the perfectionism field could not reveal any specific statistics and a general search of the internet seemed to indicate a figure of about 30%, although there were no specific references to support this figure. Finding out about the incidence of perfectionism is in the general population seems to be an essential element of any future research. Still on the subject of sample populations, as discussed earlier, an interesting result that has come out of the present thesis is the finding that engagement in preventive health behaviours may be more compromised in a university setting, perhaps because there is a higher incidence of maladaptive perfectionism in the first place (Kearns et al, 2007; Kearns et al, 2008) and as study 3 demonstrated, both maladaptive and adaptive perfectionists found it difficult to cope with the demands of university life. As such, university environments may present as particularly high risk for vulnerable perfectionists and an important area of research would be to look in more detail at the health and wellbeing (psychological and physical health) of perfectionists in a university environment to find out if they are engaging in an adequate amount of healthy activities to ensure that they can remain healthy and achieve their academic potential. Study 3 identified that perfectionists (adaptive and maladaptive) experienced frustration because lack of time and other demands prevented them from being able to adequately plan their engagement in preventive health behaviours, therefore interventions to help perfectionists with adequate planning may assist them in being able to juggle more than one domain successfully. It is important to remember that just as universities may represent a concentrated environment where it is possible to observe potential problems (psychological and physical) they also represents a very useful and focussed context in which to target and direct interventions. 7.5 Implications for Interventions Although not a primary aim of this thesis, it is felt that it is important to consider possible implications for interventions. As discussed in chapter 2 (part 2) from a treatment and intervention perspective, perfectionists have been identified as a client group that may be more challenging to treat than non-perfectionists (e.g. Blatt & Zuroff, 2002; Scott, 2001). 208 Examples of potential problems include; difficulties forming a good therapeutic relationship, difficulties adhering to treatment guidelines and self-report of disappointing treatment outcomes. These problems may be related to a reluctance or lack of confidence on the part of the perfectionist in being able to discuss and disclose personal difficulties with others or to seek help for personal problems which may reflect a much deeper insecurity that such actions may be perceived as a personal failure or weakness (Habke, 1997; Nadler, 1983). Specifically, perfectionism has been found to inhibit the successful treatment of eating disorders (Sutander-Pinnock et al, 2003), anxiety disorders (Chik, Whittal, & O’Neil, 2008) and depression (Blatt et al, 1995). In the light of these findings, coupled with the extensive body of research that has identified the maladaptive dimension of perfectionism as a potential risk factor in the development of both psychological and physical health problems there seems to be a particular need for future work specifically aimed at identifying and developing successful interventions that are able to address the potentially damaging consequences of extreme forms of perfectionism. Recent research has supported the use of cognitive behavioural techniques in reducing the symptoms of perfectionism. From a recent review of the literature, Lloyd and colleagues have concluded that it may be possible to significantly reduce certain aspects of perfectionism, across a range of disorders by utilising a cognitive behavioural approach specifically involving short-term interventions (Lloyd, Schmidt, Khondoker & Tchanturia (2014). This research supports the clinical model of perfectionism that advocates distorted cognitive processes to be a defining feature in the development and maintenance of perfectionism (Shafran et al, 2002) as well as the transdiagnostic nature of perfectionism (Egan et al, 2011) as there is evidence to suggest that a reduction in symptoms across a range of disorders is achievable by specifically targeting perfectionism. In terms of identifying the specific dimensions of perfectionism that may need to be addressed to achieve long-term change, there is the suggestion that both the maladaptive and adaptive dimensions of perfectionism need to be addressed. This is based on previous research that has identified the adaptive, achievement striving dimension of perfectionism to have the potential to become maladaptive when it is combined with harsh selfevaluation in response to meeting high standards (see chapter 2, part 2). 209 This thesis has provided some insight into the nature of potential future interventions for perfectionism. Study 3, indirectly provided some valuable information that may be useful for health providers in planning treatment interventions specifically aimed at reducing the symptoms of perfectionism. When asked directly about the likelihood that they would seek help for psychological and/or physical health problems, participants stated that although they didn’t feel comfortable doing this face to face, they would readily utilise online services e.g. looking up symptoms on health websites or utilising online counselling services as an alternative. Knowing the importance that perfectionists place on projecting and maintaining a perfect and flawless persona (Hewitt et al, 2003) it may be the case that developing therapeutic services that either bypass or reduce the need to self-present publicly (e.g. in a traditional counselling setting) could provide a useful avenue for treating perfectionists. The thesis also identified that university environments may be particularly challenging environments for maladaptive perfectionists; therefore a potential avenue for future research could be to develop an online counselling resource for university students to access via the university website. Such a service could be based on CBT principles and include information to help perfectionists manage their time so that they are able to make the most of their university experiences and are able to fulfil their academic potential whilst also taking care of their physical and emotional health. It would also be an interesting avenue for future research to compare an online counselling service (with no face to face contact) with a face to face therapeutic modality, with specific attention to self-presentational motives. By removing the pressures associated with self-presentation it would be interesting to find out if a more successful outcome was possible. 210 7.6 Overall conclusions Taken together, the results from this thesis suggest that there are differences between adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists in terms of how much they engage in preventive health behaviours. Across the studies, adaptive perfectionism was consistently associated with increased engagement but the results for maladaptive perfectionism were more dependent on the type of population being studied. Further differences were identified between the two perfectionism dimensions with respect to a number of other health related variables which supports the premise that there may be two distinct subtypes of perfectionism. Studying potential intervening factors in the perfectionism, engagement relationship revealed that maladaptive perfectionists perceive there to be greater barriers (and fewer benefits) to engagement and conversely, for adaptive perfectionists, greater benefits (and fewer barriers). Further work is warranted to explore the perfectionism, engagement relationship in more detail and find out the precise ways that factors such as self-presentation and perceived stress are involved. Additionally, looking at different populations may establish whether maladaptive perfectionists in a university environment represent a particularly vulnerable client group. 211 References Abbey, A., Smith, M., & Scott, R. (1993). The relationship between reasons for drinking alcohol and alcohol consumption: An interactional approach. Addictive Behaviors, 18(6), 659-670. doi:10.1016/0306-4603(93)90019-6 Abraham, C., Sheeran, P., Norman, P., Conner, M., Vries, N., & Otten, W. (1999). When good intentions are not enough: Modeling post decisional cognitive correlates of condom use. J Appl Social Pyschol, 29(12), 2591-2612. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1999.tb00127.x Abramson, L., Metalsky, G., & Alloy, L. (1989). Hopelessness depression: A theory-based subtype of depression. Psychological Review, 96(2), 358-372. doi:10.1037/0033295x.96.2.358 Adler, A., & Ansbacher, H. (1964). The individual psychology of Alfred Adler. New York: Harper Perennial. Adler, N., & Matthews, K. (1994). Health Psychology: Why do some people get sick and some stay well. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 45(1), 229-259. doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.45.020194.001305 Altstötter-Gleich, C., Gerstenberg, F., & Brand, M. (2012). Performing well feeling bad? Effects of perfectionism under experimentally induced stress on tension and performance. Journal of Research in Personality, 46(5), 619-622. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2012.05.010 Amir, D. (1987). Preventive behaviour and health status among the elderly. Psychology & Health, 1(4), 353-378. doi:10.1080/08870448708400337 Antony, M., Purdon, C., Huta, V., & Swinson, S. (1998). Dimensions of perfectionism across the anxiety disorders. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 36(12), 1143-1154. doi:10.1016/s0005-7967(98)00083-7 Arnold, L. (2008). Understanding fatigue in major depressive disorder and other medical disorders. Psychosomatics, 49(3), 185-190. doi:10.1176/appi.psy.49.3.185 Arpin-Cribbie, C., Irvine, J., & Ritvo, P. (2012). Web-based cognitive-behavioral therapy for perfectionism: A randomized controlled trial. Psychotherapy Research, 22(2), 194-207. doi:10.1080/10503307.2011.637242 212 Bailis, D. (2001). Benefits of self-handicapping in sport: A field study of university athletes. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science 33(4), 213-223. doi:10.1037/h0087143 Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117-148. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep2802_3 Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman. Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for creating self-efficacy scales. In T. Urdan & F. Pajares, SelfEfficacy Beliefs of Adolescents (eds). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing, pp. 307-337. Bardone-Cone, A., Wonderlich, S., Frost, R., Bulik, C., Mitchell, J., Uppala, S., & Simonich, H. (2007). Perfectionism and eating disorders: Current status and future directions. Clinical Psychology Review, 27(3), 384-405. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2006.12.005 Baron, R., & Kenny, D. (1986). The moderator mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173 Bastiani, A., Rao, R., Weltzin, T., & Kaye, W. (1995). Perfectionism in anorexia nervosa. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 17(2), 147-152. doi:10.1002/1098108x(199503)17:2<147::aid-eat2260170207>3.0.co;2-x Baumeister, R. (1990). Suicide as escape from self. Psychological Review, 97(1), 90-113. doi:10.1037/0033-295x.97.1.90 Bech, P., Gudex, C., & Johansen, S. (1996). The WHO (Ten) well-being index: Validation in diabetes. Psychother Psychosom, 65(4), 183-190. doi:10.1159/000289073 Bech, P., Olsen, L., Kjoller, M., & Rasmussen, N. (2003). Measuring well-being rather than the absence of distress symptoms: A comparison of the SF-36 Mental Health subscale and the WHO-Five well-being scale. International Journal of Methods In Psychiatric Research, 12(2), 85-91. doi:10.1002/mpr.145 Beck, A. (1976). Cognitve Therapy and the Emotional Disorders. New York: International Universities Press. Beck, A. (1961). An inventory for measuring depression. Arch Gen Psychiatry, 4(6), 561. 213 doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1961.01710120031004 Becker, M., & Rosenstock, I. (1984). Compliance with medical advice. In A. Steptoe & A. Mathews, Health Care and Human Behavior (eds). London: Academic Press. Bem, D. (1972). Self-Perception Theory. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 6, 1-62. Ben-Shahar, T. (2009). The pursuit of perfect. New York: McGraw-Hill. Berkman, L., Glass, T., Brissette, I., & Seeman, T. (2000). From social integration to health: Durkheim in the new millennium. Social Science & Medicine, 51(6), 843-857. doi:10.1016/s0277-9536(00)00065-4 Bernstein, R. (1983). Beyond objectivism and relativism. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Bewick, B., Koutsopoulou, G., Miles, J., Slaa, E., & Barkham, M. (2010). Changes in undergraduate student’s psychological wellbeing as they progress through university. Studies in Higher Education, 35(6), 633-645. doi:10.1080/03075070903216643 Bialosky, J. (2011). History of a suicide. New York: Atria Books. Biddle, S., & Asare, M. (2011). Physical activity and mental health in children and adolescents: A review of reviews. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 45(11), 886-895. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2011-090185 Biddle, S., Gorely, T., & Stensel, D. (2004). Health-enhancing physical activity and sedentary behaviour in children and adolescents. Journal of Sports Sciences, 22(8), 679701. doi:10.1080/02640410410001712412 Bieling, P., Israeli, A., & Antony, M. (2004). Is perfectionism good, bad, or both? Examining models of the perfectionism construct. Personality and Individual Differences, 36(6), 1373-1385. doi:10.1016/s0191-8869(03)00235-6 Bieling, P., Israeli, A., Smith, J., & Antony, M. (2003). Making the grade: the behavioural consequences of perfectionism in the classroom. Personality and Individual Differences, 35(1), 163-178. doi:10.1016/s0191-8869(02)00173-3 Bieling, P., Summerfeldt, L., Israeli, A., & Antony, M. (2004). Perfectionism as an 214 explanatory construct in comorbidity of Axis I disorders. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 26(3), 193-201. doi:10.1023/b:joba.0000022112.27186.98 Bizeul, C., Sadowsky, N., & Rigaud, D. (2001). The prognostic value of initial EDI scores in anorexia nervosa patients: a prospective follow-up study of 5-10 years. European Psychiatry, 16(4), 232-238. doi:10.1016/s0924-9338(01)00570-3 Blankstein, K., Flett, G., Hewitt, P., & Eng, A. (1993). Dimensions of perfectionism and irrational fears: An examination with the fear survey schedule. Personality and Individual Differences, 15(3), 323-328. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(93)90223-p Blatt, S. (1995). The destructiveness of perfectionism: Implications for the treatment of depression. American Psychologist, 50(12), 1003-1020. doi:10.1037/0003066x.50.12.1003 Blatt, S., & Zuroff, D. (2002). Perfectionism in the therapeutic process. In G. Flett & P. Hewitt, Perfectionism: Theory, Research and Treatment (eds). Washington DC: American Psychological Association, pp. 393-406 Blatt, S., Quinlan, D., Pilkonis, P., & Shea, M. (1995). Impact of perfectionism and need for approval on the brief treatment of depression: The national institute of mental health treatment of depression collaborative research program revisited. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63(3), 494-494. doi:10.1037//0022-006x.63.3.494 Blatt, S., Zuroff, D., Bondi, C., Sanislow, C., & Pilkonis, P. (1998). When and how perfectionism impedes the brief treatment of depression: Further analyses of the national institute of mental health treatment of depression collaborative research program. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66(2), 423-428. doi:10.1037/0022-006x.66.2.423 Bogg, T., & Roberts, B. (2004). Conscientiousness and health-related behaviors: A metaanalysis of the leading behavioral contributors to mortality. Psychological Bulletin, 130(6), 887-919. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.130.6.887 Booth-Kewley, S., & Vickers, R. (1994). Associations between major domains of personality and health behavior. Journal of Personality, 62(3), 281-298. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1994.tb00298.x Bottos, S., & Dewey, D. (2004). Perfectionists' appraisal of daily hassles and chronic 215 headache. Headache: The Journal of Head and Face Pain, 44(8), 772-779. doi:10.1111/j.1526-4610.2004.04144.x Bouchard, C., Blair, S., & Haskell, W. (2007). Physical activity and health. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Brown, G., & Harris, T. (1978). Social origins of depression: a reply. Psychological Medicine, 8(04), 577. doi:10.1017/s0033291700018791 Buckley, L., MacHale, S., Cavanagh, J., Sharpe, M., Deary, I., & Lawrie, S. (1999). Personality dimensions in chronic fatigue syndrome and depression. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 46(4), 395-400. doi:10.1016/s0022-3999(98)00120-2 Burns, D. (1980). The perfectionist's script for self-defeat. Psychology Today, 14(6), 3452. Burns, D. (1983). The spouse who is a perfectionist. Medical Aspects of Human Sexuality, 17, 219-230. Carek, P., Laibstain, S., & Carek, S. (2011). Exercise for the treatment of depression and anxiety. The International Journal of Psychiatry in Medicine, 41(1), 15-28. doi:10.2190/pm.41.1.c Carver, C., & Conner-Smith, J. (2010). Personality and coping. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 679-704. Casey, D., & Murphy, K. (2009). Issues in using methodological triangulation in research. Nurse Researcher, 16(4), 40-55. doi:10.7748/nr2009.07.16.4.40.c7160 Caspi, A., Begg, D., Dickson, N., Harrington, H., Langley, J., Moffitt, T., & Silva, P. (1997). Personality differences predict health-risk behaviors in young adulthood: Evidence from a longitudinal study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(5), 10521063. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.73.5.1052 Cassin, S., & Vonranson, K. (2005). Personality and eating disorders: A decade in review. Clinical Psychology Review, 25(7), 895-916. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2005.04.012 Cepeda-Benito, A., & Short, P. (1998). Self-concealment, avoidance of psychological services, and perceived likelihood of seeking professional help. Journal of Counseling 216 Psychology, 45(1), 58-64. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.45.1.58 Chang, E. (2000). Perfectionism as a predictor of positive and negative psychological outcomes: Examining a mediation model in younger and older adults. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47(1), 18-26. doi:10.1037//0022-0167.47.1.18 Chang, E. (2003). On the perfectibility of the individual: Going beyond the dialectic of good versus evil. In E. Chang & L. Sanna, Virtue, vice and personality: The complexity of behavior (eds). Washington DC: American Psychological Association. Chang, E., Ivezaj, V., Downey, C., Kashima, Y., & Morady, A. (2008). Complexities of measuring perfectionism: Three popular perfectionism measures and their relations with eating disturbances and health behaviors in a female college student sample. Eating Behaviors, 9(1), 102-110. doi:10.1016/j.eatbeh.2007.06.003 Chang, E., Watkins, A., & Banks, K. (2004). How adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism relate to positive and negative psychological functioning: Testing a stress-mediation model in black and white female college students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51(1), 93102. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.51.1.93 Chen, L., Chen, M., Lin, M., Kee, Y., Kuo, C., & Shui, S. (2008). Implicit theory of athletic ability and self-handicapping in college students. Psychological Reports, 103(2), 476-484. doi:10.2466/pr0.103.2.476-484 Chik, H., Whittal, M. and O’Neill, M. (2008). Perfectionism and Treatment Outcome in Obsessive-compulsive Disorder. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 35, 376-388. Childs, E., & de Wit, H. (2010). Effects of acute psychosocial stress on cigarette craving and smoking. Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 12(4), 449-453. doi:10.1093/ntr/ntp214 Childs, E., & de Wit, H. (2014). Regular exercise is associated with emotional resilience to acute stress in healthy adults. Front Physiol, 5(161), 1-7. doi:org/10.3389%2Ffphys.2014.00161 Christensen, A., & Smith, T. (1995). Personality and patient adherence: Correlates of the five-factor model in renal dialysis. J Behav Med, 18(3), 305-313. doi:10.1007/bf01857875 Clark, M., Lelchook, A., & Taylor, M. (2010). Beyond the Big Five: How narcissism, perfectionism, and dispositional affect relate to workaholism. Personality and Individual 217 Differences, 48(7), 786-791. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.01.013 Cohen, S., & Pressman, S. (2006). Positive affect and health. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15(3), 122-125. Cohen, S., & Williamson, G. (1988). Perceived stress in a probability sample in the United States. In S. Spacapan & S. Oskamp, The Social Psychology of Health: Claremont Symposium on applied social psychology (eds) Newbury Park CA: Sage. Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure of perceived stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24(4), 385. doi:10.2307/2136404 Conn, V. (1998). Older adults and exercise: Path analysis and self-efficacy related constructs. Nursing Research, 47(3), 180-189. doi:10.1097/00006199-199805000-00009 Costa, P., & McCrae, R. (1992). Four ways five factors are basic. Personality and Individual Differences, 13(6), 653-665. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(92)90236-i CounsellingResource.com: Psychology, Therapy & Mental Health Resources. (2015). CounsellingResource.com, Psychology, Therapy & Mental Health Resources. Retrieved 4 March 2015, from http://counsellingresource.com Cox, B., Enns, M., & Clara, I. (2002). The multidimensional structure of perfectionism in clinically distressed and college student samples. Psychological Assessment, 14(3), 365373. doi:10.1037//1040-3590.14.3.365 Crăciun, B., & Dudău, D. (2014). The relation between perfectionism, perfectionistic selfpresentation and coping strategies in medical employees. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 127, 509-513. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.300 Craig, R., & Mindell, J. (2008). Health & Social Care Information Centre. Hscic.gov.uk. Retrieved 22 March 2015, from http://www.hscic.gov.uk/pubs/HSE06CVDandriskfactors Cumming, J., & Duda, J. (2012). Profiles of perfectionism, body-related concerns, and indicators of psychological health in vocational dance students: An investigation of the 2 x 2 model of perfectionism. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 13(6), 729-738. doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2012.05.004 Davis, C. (1997). Normal and neurotic perfectionism in eating disorders: An interactive 218 model. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 22(4), 421-426. doi:10.1002/(sici)1098108x(199712)22:4<421::aid-eat7>3.3.co;2-l Dean, P., & Range, L. (1996). The escape theory of suicide and perfectionism in college students. Death Studies, 20(4), 415-424. doi:10.1080/07481189608252790 Dean, P., Range, L., & Goggin, W. (1996). The escape theory of suicide in college students: Testing a model that includes perfectionism. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 25, 181-186. Deane, F., Leathern, J., & Spicer, J. (1992). Clinical norms, reliability and validity for the hopkins symptom checklist-21. Australian Journal of Psychology, 44(1), 21-25. doi:10.1080/00049539208260158 Deary, V., & Chalder, T. (2010). Personality and perfectionism in chronic fatigue syndrome: A closer look. Psychology & Health, 25(4), 465-475. doi:10.1080/08870440802403863 Denscombe, M. (2000). Social conditions for stress: Young people's experience of doing GCSEs. British Educational Research Journal, 26(3), 359-374. doi:10.1080/713651566 Denzin, N. (1995). Symbolic Interactionism. In J. Smith, R. Harre & L. van Langenhove, Rethinking Psychology (eds). London: Sage Publications, pp. 43-58 Department of Health,. (2004). At least five a week: Evidence on the impact of physical activity and its relationship to health. Report. Derlega, V., Metts, S., Petronio, S., & Margulis, S. (1993). Self-Disclosure. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Derogatis, L., Lipman, R., Rickels, K., Uhlenhuth, E., & Covi, L. (1974). The Hopkins Symptom Checklist (HSCL): A self-report symptom inventory. Behavioral Science, 19(1), 1-15. doi:10.1002/bs.3830190102 DiBartolo, P., Li, C., & Frost, R. (2008). How do the dimensions of perfectionism relate to mental health? Cognitive Therapy and Research, 32(3), 401-417. doi:10.1007/s10608-0079157-7 DeSalvo, K., Fan, V., McDonell, M., & Fihn, S. (2005). Predicting mortality and 219 healthcare utilization with a single question. Health Services Research, 40(4), 1234-1246. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6773.2005.00404.x DeSalvo, K., Fisher, W., Tran, K., Bloser, N., Merrill, W., & Peabody, J. (2006). Assessing measurement properties of two single-item general health measures. Qual Life Res, 15(2), 191-201. doi:10.1007/s11136-005-0887-2 De Wit, M., Pouwer, F., Gemke, R., Delemarre-van de Waal, H., & Snoek, F. (2007). Validation of the WHO-5 well-being index in adolescents with type 1 Diabetes. Diabetes Care, 30(8), 2003-2006. doi:10.2337/dc07-0447 Donovan, J., Jessor, R., & Costa, F. (1993). Structure of health-enhancing behavior in adolescence: A latent-variable approach. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 34(4), 346. doi:10.2307/2137372 Dunkley, D., Blankstein, K., Halsall, J., Williams, M., & Winkworth, G. (2000). The relation between perfectionism and distress: Hassles, coping, and perceived social support as mediators and moderators. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47(4), 437-453. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.47.4.437 Dunkley, D., Blankstein, K., Masheb, R., & Grilo, C. (2006). Personal standards and evaluative concerns dimensions of “clinical perfectionism”: A reply to Shafran et al. (2002, 2003) and Hewitt et al. (2003). Behaviour Research and Therapy, 44(1), 63-84. doi:10.1016/j.brat.2004.12.004 Dunkley, D., Zuroff, D., & Blankstein, K. (2003). Self-critical perfectionism and daily affect: Dispositional and situational influences on stress and coping. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 84(1), 234-252. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.84.1.234 Dunn, J., Gotwals, J., & Dunn, J. (2005). An examination of the domain specificity of perfectionism among intercollegiate student-athletes. Personality and Individual Differences, 38(6), 1439-1448. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2004.09.009 Dunn, J., Gotwals, J., Dunn, J., & Syrotuik, D. (2006). Examining the relationship between perfectionism and trait anger in competitive sport. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 4(1), 7-24. doi:10.1080/1612197x.2006.9671781 Egan, S., Wade, T., & Shafran, R. (2011). Perfectionism as a transdiagnostic process: A 220 clinical review. Clinical Psychology Review, 31(2), 203-212. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2010.04.009 Elkin, J., Shea, M., Watkins, J., Imber, S., Sotsky, S., & Collins, J. et al. (1989). NIMH treatment of depression collaborative research program: General effectiveness of treatments. Archives of General Psychiatry, 46, 971-983. Ellis, A. (1962). Reason and Emotion in Psychotherapy. New York: Lyle Stuart. Ellis, A. (2002). Overcoming Resistance: A Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy: An Integrative Approach. New York: Springer. Ellis, A., & Knaus, W. (1977). Overcoming procrastination. New York: Institute for Rational Living. Enns, M., & Cox, B. (1999). Perfectionism and depression symptom severity in major depressive disorder. Behaviour Research And Therapy, 37(8), 783-794. doi:10.1016/s0005-7967(98)00188-0 Enns, M., & Cox, B. (2002). The nature and assessment of perfectionism: A critical analysis. In G. Flett & P. Hewitt, Perfectionism: Theory Research and Treatment (eds). Washington DC: American Psychological Association, pp. 33-62. Enns, M., Cox, B., & Clara, I. (2005). Perfectionism and neuroticism: A longitudinal study of specific vulnerability and diathesis-stress models. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 29(4), 463-478. doi:10.1007/s10608-005-2843-04 Enns, M., Cox, B., Sareen, J., & Freeman, P. (2001). Adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism in medical students: a longitudinal investigation. Medical Education, 35(11), 1034-1042. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2001.01044.x Epping-Jordan, J., Compas, B., & Howell, D. (1994). Predictors of cancer progression in young adult men and women: Avoidance, intrusive thoughts, and psychological symptoms. Health Psychology, 13(6), 539-547. doi:10.1037//0278-6133.13.6.539 Everett, B., Salamonson, Y., & Davidson, P. (2009). Bandura's exercise self-efficacy scale: Validation in an Australian cardiac rehabilitation setting. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 46(6), 824-829. doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2009.01.016 221 Fairburn, C., Cooper, Z., & Shafran, R. (2003). Cognitive behaviour therapy for eating disorders: a transdiagnostic theory and treatment. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 41(5), 509-528. doi:10.1016/s0005-7967(02)00088-8 Fairburn, C., Cooper, Z., Doll, H., & Welch, S. (1999). Risk factors for anorexia nervosa. Arch Gen Psychiatry, 56(5), 468. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.56.5.468 Fairburn, C., Cowen, P., & Harrison, P. (1999). Twin studies and the etiology of eating disorders. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 26(4), 349-358. doi:10.1002/(sici)1098-108x(199912)26:4<349::aid-eat1>3.0.co;2-b Fairburn, C., Doll, H., Welch, S., Hay, P., Davies, B., & O'Connor, M. (1998). Risk factors for binge eating disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry, 55(5), 425. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.55.5.425 Fairburn, C., Welsh, S., Doll, H., Davies, B., & O'Conner, M. (1997). Risk factors for bulimia nervosa: A community-based case-control study. Archives of General Psychiatry, 54, 509-517. Fairlie, P., & Flett, G. (2003). Perfectionism at work: Impacts on burnout, job satisfaction and depression. poster presented at the 111th. Annual Convention (pp. 1-24). Toronto, Ontario, Canada: America Psychological Association. Ferrari, J., & Mautz, W. (1997). Predicting perfectionism: Applying tests of rigidity. J. Clin. Psychol., 53(1), 1-6. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-4679(199701)53:1<1::aidjclp1>3.3.co;2-j Flaxman, P., Ménard, J., Bond, F., & Kinman, G. (2012). Academics' experiences of a respite from work: Effects of self-critical perfectionism and perseverative cognition on postrespite well-being. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(4), 854-865. doi:10.1037/a0028055 Flett, G. (2004). Perfectionism Can Lead To Imperfect Health: High Achievers More Prone To Emotional, Physical And Relationship Problems. ScienceDaily. Retrieved 22 February 2015, from http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/06/040614074620.htm Flett, G., & Hewitt, P. (2002). Perfectionism, Theory, Research & Treatment. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Flett, G., & Hewitt, P. (2005). The perils of perfectionism in sports and exercise. Current 222 Directions in Psychological Science, 14(1), 14-18. doi:10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00326.x Flett, G., & Hewitt, P. (2006). Positive versus negative perfectionism in psychopathology: A comment on Slade and Owens's dual process model. Behavior Modification, 30(4), 472495. doi:10.1177/0145445506288026 Flett, G., & Hewitt, P. (2013). Disguised distress in children and adolescents "Flying under the radar": Why psychological problems are underestimated and how schools must respond. Canadian Journal of School Psychology. doi:10.1177/0829573512468845 Flett, G., Baricza, C., Gupta, A., Hewitt, P., & Endler, N. (2011). Perfectionism, psychosocial impact and coping with irritable bowel disease: A study of patients with Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. Journal of Health Psychology, 16(4), 561-571. doi:10.1177/1359105310383601 Flett, G., Hewitt, P., & Heisel, M. (2014). The destructiveness of perfectionism revisited: Implications for the assessment of suicide risk and the prevention of suicide. Review of General Psychology, 18(3), 156-172. doi:10.1037/gpr0000011 Flett, G., Hewitt, P., Blankstein, K., & Gray, L. (1998). Psychological distress and the frequency of perfectionistic thinking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(5), 1363-1381. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.75.5.1363 Flett, G., Hewitt, P., Blankstein, K., & Mosher, S. (1995). Perfectionism, life events, and depressive symptoms: A test of a diathesis-stress model. Current Psychology, 14(2), 112137. doi:10.1007/bf02686885 Flett, G., Hewitt, P., Blankstein, K., & O'Brien, S. (1991). Perfectionism and learned resourcefulness in depression and self-esteem. Personality and Individual Differences, 12(1), 61-68. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(91)90132-u Flett, G., Hewitt, P., Blankstein, K., Solnik, M., & Van Brunschot, M. (1996). Perfectionism, social problem-solving ability, and psychological distress. J Rational-Emot Cognitive-Behav Ther, 14(4), 245-274. doi:10.1007/bf02238139 Flett, G., Molnar, D., Nepon, T., & Hewitt, P. (2012). A mediational model of perfectionistic automatic thoughts and psychosomatic symptoms: The roles of negative affect and daily hassles. Personality and Individual Differences, 52(5), 565-570. 223 doi:10.1016/j.paid.2011.09.010 Flett, L., Besser, A., Davis, R., & Hewitt, P. (2003). Dimensions of perfectionism, unconditional acceptance and depression. Journal of Rational-Emotive and Cognitive Behavior Therapy, 21, 119-138. Fox, K., Stathi, A., McKenna, J., & Davis, M. (2007). Physical activity and mental wellbeing in older people participating in the Better Ageing Project. Eur J Appl Physiol, 100(5), 591-602. doi:10.1007/s00421-007-0392-0 Frasure-Smith, N., Lesperance, F., Gravel, G., Masson, A., Juneau, M., Talajic, M., & Bourassa, M. (2000). Social support, depression, and mortality during the first year after myocardial infarction. Circulation, 101(16), 1919-1924. doi:10.1161/01.cir.101.16.1919 Freudenberger, H. (1974). Staff Burn-out. Journal of Social Issues, 30(1), 159-165. Friedlander, A., Nazem, S., Fiske, A., Nadorff, M., & Smith, M. (2012). Self-concealment and suicidal behaviors. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 42(3), 332-340. doi:10.1111/j.1943-278x.2012.00094.x Friedman, H., & Kern, M. (2014). Personality, well-being and health. Annual Review of Psychology, 65, 719-742. doi:DOI: 10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115123 Friedman, H., Tucker, J., Tomlinson-Keasey, C., Schwartz, J., & et al,. (1993). Does childhood personality predict longevity? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(1), 176-185. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.65.1.176 Frost, R., & Dibartolo, P. (2002). Perfectionism, anxiety and obsessive compulsive disorder. In G. Flett & P. Hewitt, Perfectionism: Theory, research and treatment (eds). Washington DC: American Psychological Association, pp. 341-371 Frost, R., & Henderson, K. (1991). Perfectionism and reactions to athletic competition. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 13(4), 323-335. Frost, R., & Marten, P. (1990). Perfectionism and evaluative threat. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 14(6), 559-572. doi:10.1007/bf01173364 Frost, R., & Steketee, G. (1997). Perfectionism in obsessive-compulsive disorder patients. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 35(4), 291-296. doi:10.1016/s0005-7967(96)00108-8 224 Frost, R., Benton, N., & Dowrick, P. (1990). Self-evaluation, videotape review, and dysphoria. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 9(3), 367-374. doi:10.1521/jscp.1990.9.3.367 Frost, R., Heimberg, R., Holt, C., Mattia, J., & Neubauer, A. (1993). A comparison of two measures of perfectionism. Personality and Individual Differences, 14(1), 119-126. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(93)90181-2 Frost, R., Lahart, C., & Rosenblate, R. (1991). The development of perfectionism: A study of daughters and their parents. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 15(6), 469-489. doi:10.1007/bf01175730 Frost, R., Marten, P., Lahart, C., & Rosenblate, R. (1990). The dimensions of perfectionism. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 14(5), 449-468. doi:10.1007/bf01172967 Frost, R., Novara, C., & Rheaume, J. (2015). Perfectionism in obsessive compulsive disorder. In R. Frost & G. Steketee, Cognitive Approaches to Obsessions and Compulsions: Theory, Assessment, and Treatment (eds). Oxford UK: Elsevier, pp. 91-105 Frost, R., Trepanier, K., Brown, E., Heimberg, R., Juster, H., Makris, G., & Leung, A. (1997). Self-monitoring of mistakes among subjects high and low in perfectionistic concern over mistakes. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 21, 1-14. Frost, R., Turcotte, T., Heimberg, R., Mattia, J., Holt, C., & Hope, D. (1995). Reactions to mistakes among subjects high and low in perfectionistic concern over mistakes. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 19(2), 195-205. doi:10.1007/bf02229694 Fry, P. (1995). Perfectionism, humor and optimism as moderators of health outcomes and determinants of coping styles of women executives. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 121(2), 211-245. Fry, P., & Debats, D. (2009). Perfectionism and the five-factor personality traits as predictors of mortality in older adults. Journal of Health Psychology, 14(4), 513-524. doi:10.1177/1359105309103571 Fry, P., & Debats, D. (2011). Perfectionism and other related trait measures as predictors of mortality in diabetic older adults: A six-and-a-half-year longitudinal study. Journal of Health Psychology, 16(7), 1058-1070. doi:10.1177/1359105311398684 225 Fukuda, K., Strauss, S., Hickie, I., Sharp, M., Dobbins, J., & Komaroff, A. (1994). The chronic fatigue syndrome: A comprehensive approach to its definition and study. Annals of Internal Medicine, 121(12), 953. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-121-12-199412150-00009 Gammage, K., Hall, C., & Ginis, K. (2004). Self-presentation in exercise contexts: Differences between high and low frequency exercisers. J Appl Social Pyschol, 34(8), 1638-1651. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2004.tb02791.x Garner, D., Olmstead, M., & Polivy, J. (1983). Development and validation of a multidimensional eating disorder inventory for anorexia nervosa and bulimia. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 2(2), 15-34. doi:10.1002/1098108x(198321)2:2<15::aid-eat2260020203>3.0.co;2-6 Gaudreau, P., & Thompson, A. (2010). Testing a 2 x 2 model of dispositional perfectionism. Personality and Individual Differences, 48(5), 532-537. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2009.11.031 Gaudreau, P., & Verner-Filion, J. (2012). Dispositional perfectionism and well-being: A test of the 2 x 2 model of perfectionism in the sport domain. Sport, Exercise, and Performance Psychology, 1(1), 29-43. doi:10.1037/a0025747 Gilman, R., Ashby, J., Sverko, D., Florell, D., & Varjas, K. (2005). The relationship between perfectionism and multidimensional life satisfaction among Croatian and American youth. Personality and Individual Differences, 39(1), 155-166. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2004.12.014 Giorgi, A. (2009). The descriptive phenomenological method in psychology. Pittsburgh, Pa.: Duquesne University Press. Gochman, D. (1982). Labels, systems and motives: Some perspective for future research. In D. Gochman & G. Parcel, Children's Health Beliefs and Health Behaviors (eds). Health Education Quarterly 9, 167-174. Godin, G., & Shephard, R. (1997). Godin leisure-time exercise questionnaire. American College of Sports Medicine, 29(Supplement), 36-38. doi:10.1097/00005768-19970600100009 Goldner, E., Cockell, S., & Srikameswaran, S. (2002). Perfectionism and Eating Disorders. 226 In G. Flett & P. Hewitt, Perfectionism: Theory, Research and Treatment (eds). Washington DC: American Psychological Association, pp. 319-340. Greblo, Z., Bosnar, K., Zrinka, & Ksenija,. (2008). Perfectionism and Life-Satisfaction. In 4th European Conference of Positive Psychology. Rijeka: Faculty of Arts and Sciences, University of Rijeka. Green, D., Walkey, F., McCormick, I., & Taylor, A. (1988). Development and evaluation of a 21-Item version of the hopkins symptom checklist with New Zealand and united states respondents. Australian Journal of Psychology, 40(1), 61-70. doi:10.1080/00049538808259070 Greenberg, J. (1985). Unattainable goal choice as a self-handicapping strategy. J Appl Social Pyschol, 15(2), 140-152. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1985.tb02340.x Greenspon, T. (2000). Healthy Perfectionism is an Oxymoron!: Reflections on the psychology of perfectionism and the sociology of science. Journal of Advanced Academics, 11(4), 197-208. doi:10.4219/jsge-2000-631 Habke, A. (1997). The manifestations of perfectionistic self-presentation in a clinical sample. Dissertation Abstracts International, 59, 02B (UMI No. 872). Habke, A., Hewitt, P., & Flett, G. (1999). Perfectionism and sexual satisfaction in intimate relationships. Journal of Psychopathology And Behavioral Assessment, 21(4), 307-322. Habke, M., & Flynn, C. (2002). Interpersonal aspects of trait perfectionism. In G. Flett & P. Hewitt, Perfectionism: Theory, Research and Treatment (eds). Washington DC: American Psychological Association, 151-180. Hall, H., Kerr, A., & Matthews, J. (1998). Precompetitive anxiety in sport: The contribution of achievement goals and perfectionism. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 20, 194-217. Hall, N., Rubin, G., Dougall, A., Hungin, A., & Neeley, J. (2005). The fight for 'healthrelated normality': A qualitative study of the experiences of individuals living with established inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Journal of Health Psychology, 10(3), 443455. doi:10.1177/1359105305051433 Halmi, K., Sunday, S., Strober, M., Kaplan, A., Woodside, D., & Fichter, M. et al. (2000). 227 Perfectionism in anorexia nervosa: Variation by clinical subtype, obsessionality, and pathological eating behavior. AJP, 157(11), 1799-1805. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.157.11.1799 Halmi, K., Tozzi, F., Thornton, L., Crow, S., Fichter, M., & Kaplan, A. et al. (2005). The relation among perfectionism, obsessive-compulsive personality disorder and obsessivecompulsive disorder in individuals with eating disorders. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 38(4), 371-374. doi:10.1002/eat.20190 Hamachek, D. (1978). Psychodynamics of normal and neurotic perfectionism. A Journal of Human Behavior, 15(1), 27-33. Hamilton, T., & Schweitzer, R. (2000). The cost of being perfect: perfectionism and suicide ideation in university students. Aust N Z J Psychiatry, 34(5), 829-835. doi:10.1046/j.1440-1614.2000.00801.x Handley, A., Egan, S., Kane, R., & Rees, C. (2014). The relationships between perfectionism, pathological worry and generalised anxiety disorder. BMC Psychiatry, 14(1), 98. doi:10.1186/1471-244x-14-98 Harari, M., Waehler, C., & Rogers, J. (2005). An empirical investigation of a theoretically based measure of perceived wellness. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(1), 93-103. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.52.1.93 Harris, P., Pepper, C., & Maack, D. (2008). The relationship between maladaptive perfectionism and depressive symptoms: The mediating role of rumination. Personality and Individual Differences, 44(1), 150-160. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2007.07.011 Hart, B., Gilner, F., Handal, P., & Gfeller, J. (1998). The relationship between perfectionism and self-efficacy. Personality and Individual Differences, 24(1), 109-113. doi:10.1016/s0191-8869(97)00116-5 Haskell, W., Lee, I., Pate, R., Powell, K., Blair, S., & Franklin, B. et al. (2007). Physical activity and public health: Updated recommendation for adults from the American college of sports medicine and the American heart association. Circulation, 116(9), 1081-1093. doi:10.1161/circulationaha.107.185649 Hausenblas, H., Brewer, B., & Van Raalte, J. (2004). Self-presentation and exercise. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 16(1), 3-18. doi:10.1080/10413200490260026 228 Hayes, A. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling. Retrieved 22 March 2015, from http://www.afhayes.com/public/process2012.pdf Hazlett-Stevens, H., Craske, M., Mayer, E., Chang, L., & Naliboff, B. (2003). Prevalence of irritable bowel syndrome among university students. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 55(6), 501-505. doi:10.1016/s0022-3999(03)00019-9 Health and Social Care Information Centre,. (2008). Health Survey for England - 2006, CVD and risk factors for adults, obesity and risk factors for children. Health Survey for England. Heimberg, R., Juster, H., Hope, D., & Mattia, J. (1995). Cognitive behavioral group treatment for social phobia: Description, case presentation and empirical support. In M. Stein, Social Phobia: Clinical and Research Perspectives (1st ed., pp. 293-321). Washington DC: American Psychiatric Press, pp. 293-321. Hellerstedt, W., & Jeffery, R. (1997). The association of job strain and health behaviours in men and women. International Journal of Epidemiology, 26(3), 575-583. doi:10.1093/ije/26.3.575 Heslop, P., Smith, G., Carroll, D., Macleod, J., Hyland, F., & Hart, C. (2001). Perceived stress and coronary heart disease risk factors: The contribution of socio-economic position. British Journal of Health Psychology, 6(2), 167-178. doi:10.1348/135910701169133 Hewitt, P., & Flett, G. (1990). Perfectionism and depression: A multidimensional analysis. Journal of Social Behavior And Personality, 5, 423-438. Hewitt, P., & Flett, G. (1991). Dimensions of perfectionism in unipolar depression. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 100(1), 98-101. doi:10.1037/0021-843x.100.1.98 Hewitt, P., & Flett, G. (1991). Perfectionism in the self and social contexts: Conceptualization, assessment, and association with psychopathology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(3), 456-470. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.60.3.456 Hewitt, P., & Flett, G. (1993). Dimensions of perfectionism, daily stress, and depression: A test of the specific vulnerability hypothesis. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 102(1), 58-65. doi:10.1037/0021-843x.102.1.58 229 Hewitt, P., & Flett, G. (2002). Perfectionism and stress enhancement, perpetuation, anticipation and generation in psychopathology. In G. Flett & P. Hewitt, Perfectionism: Theory, Research and Treatment (eds) Washington DC: American Psychological Association. Hewitt, P., & Flett, G. (2004). Multidimensional perfectionism scale (MPS): Technical manual. Toronto, Canada: Multi-Health Systems. Hewitt, P., Caelian, C., Chen, C., & Flett, G. (2014). Perfectionism, stress, daily hassles, hopelessness, and suicide potential in depressed psychiatric adolescents. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 36(4), 663-674. doi:10.1007/s10862-0149427-0 Hewitt, P., Flett, G., & Blankstein, K. (1991). Perfectionism and neuroticism in psychiatric patients and college students. Personality and Individual Differences, 12(3), 273-279. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(91)90113-p Hewitt, P., Flett, G., & Ediger, E. (1996). Perfectionism and depression: Longitudinal assessment of a specific vulnerability hypothesis. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 105(2), 276-280. doi:10.1037/0021-843x.105.2.276 Hewitt, P., Flett, G., & Turnbull-Donovan, W. (1992). Perfectionism and suicide potential. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 31(2), 181-190. doi:10.1111/j.20448260.1992.tb00982.x Hewitt, P., Flett, G., Besser, A., Sherry, S., & McGee, B. (2003). Perfectionism Is Multidimensional: a reply to Shafran, Cooper and Fairburn (2002). Behaviour Research and Therapy, 41(10), 1221-1236. doi:10.1016/s0005-7967(03)00021-4 Hewitt, P., Flett, G., Besser, A., Sherry, S., & McGee, B. (2003). Perfectionism is multidimensional: a reply to Shafran, Cooper and Fairburn (2002). Behaviour Research and Therapy, 41(10), 1221-1236. doi:10.1016/s0005-7967(03)00021-4 Hewitt, P., Flett, G., Sherry, S., & Caelian, C. (2006). Trait perfectionism dimensions and suicidal behavior. In T. Ellis, Cognition and suicide: Theory, research, and therapy (eds). Washington DC: American Psychological Association, pp. 215-235. Hewitt, P., Flett, G., Sherry, S., Habke, M., Parkin, M., & Lam, R. et al. (2003). The 230 interpersonal expression of perfection: Perfectionistic self-presentation and psychological distress. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(6), 1303-1325. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.6.1303 Hewitt, P., Norton, J., Flett, G., Callander, L., & Cowan, T. (1998). Perfectionism and suicide ideation in adolescent psychiatric patients. Abnormal Child Psychology, 25, 95101. Hill, A. (2013). Perfectionism and athlete burnout: A test of the 2 x 2 model of dispositional perfectionism. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 35, 18-29. Hill, A., & Davis, P. (2014). Perfectionism and emotion regulation in coaches: A test of the 2 x 2 model of dispositional perfectionism. Motivation and Emotion, 38(5), 715-726. doi:10.1007/s11031-014-9404-7 Hill, A., Hall, H., Appleton, P., & Kozub, S. (2008). Perfectionism and burnout in junior elite soccer players: The mediating influence of unconditional self-acceptance. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 9(5), 630-644. doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2007.09.004 Hill, R., Huelsman, T., Furr, R., Kibler, J., Vicente, B., & Kennedy, C. (2004). A new measure of Perfectionism: The perfectionism inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 82(1), 80-91. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa8201_13 Hill, R., Mc Intire, K., & Bacharach, V. (1997). Perfectionism and the big five factors. Journal of Social Behavior And Personality, 12, 1-15. Hill, R., Zrull, M., & Turlington, S. (1997). Perfectionism and interpersonal problems. Journal of Personality Assessment, 69(1), 81-103. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa6901_5 Hobden, K., & Pliner, P. (1995). Self-handicapping and dimensions of perfectionism: selfpresentation vs self-Protection. Journal of Research in Personality, 29(4), 461-474. doi:10.1006/jrpe.1995.1027 Hofstetter, C., Sallis, J., & Hovell, M. (1990). Some health dimensions of self-efficacy: Analysis of theoretical specificity. Social Science & Medicine, 31(9), 1051-1056. doi:10.1016/0277-9536(90)90118-c Hollender, M. (1965). Perfectionism. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 6(2), 94-103. doi:10.1016/s0010-440x(65)80016-5 231 Horney, K. (1950). Neurosis and human growth. New York: Norton. Hoyle, R., Feifar, M., & Miller, J. (2000). Personality and sexual risk taking: A quantitative review. Journal of Personality, 68(6), 1203-1231. doi:10.1111/14676494.00132 Huberty, J., Ransdell, L., Sidman, C., Flohr, J., Shultz, B., Grosshans, O., & Durrant, L. (2008). Explaining long-term exercise adherence in women who complete a structured exercise program. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 79(3), 374-384. doi:10.1080/02701367.2008.10599501 Hyatt, L. (2010). A case study of the suicide of a gifted female adolescent: Implications for prediction and prevention. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 33(4), 514-535. doi:10.1177/016235321003300404 Jacobs, D., Ainsworth, B., Hartman, T., & Leon, A. (1993). A simultaneous evaluation of 10 commonly used physical activity questionnaires. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 25(1), 81-91. doi:10.1249/00005768-199301000-00012 Janz, N., & Becker, M. (1984). The health belief model: A decade later. Health Education And Behavior, 11(1), 1-47. Jones, E., & Berglas, S. (1978). Control of attributions about the self through selfhandicapping strategies: The appeal of alcohol and the role of underachievement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4(2), 200-206. doi:10.1177/014616727800400205 Juster, H., Heimberg, R., Frost, R., Holt, C., Mattia, J., & Faccenda, K. (1996). Social phobia and perfectionism. Personality and Individual Differences, 21(3), 403-410. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(96)00075-x Kahn, J., & Hessling, R. (2001). Measuring the tendency to conceal versus disclose psychological distress. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 20(1), 41-65. doi:10.1521/jscp.20.1.41.22254 Kanaan, R., Lepine, J., & Wessely, S. (2007). The association or otherwise of the functional somatic syndromes. Psychosomatic Medicine, 69(9), 855-859. doi:10.1097/psy.0b013e31815b001a 232 Kawamura, K., & Frost, R. (2004). Self-concealment as a mediator in the relationship between perfectionism and psychological distress. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 28(2), 183-191. doi:10.1023/b:cotr.0000021539.48926.c1 Kawamura, K., Hunt, S., & Frost, R. (2001). Perfectionism, anxiety and depression: Are the relationships independent? Cognitive Therapy and Research, 25(3), 291-301. Kaye, W., Strober, M., & Jimerson, D. (2004). The neurobiology of eating disorders. In E. Nestler & D. Charney, Neurobiology of Mental Illness (eds). New York: Oxford Press, pp. 1112-1128. Kearns, H., Forbes, A., & Gardiner, M. (2007). A cognitive behavioural coaching intervention for the treatment of perfectionism and self-handicapping in a nonclinical population. Behaviour Change, 24(03), 157-172. doi:10.1375/bech.24.3.157 Kearns, H., Forbes, A., Gardiner, M., & Marshall, K. (2008). When a high distinction isn't good enough: A review of perfectionism and self-handicapping. Australian Educational Researcher, 35(3), 21-36. Kelly, A. (2002). The psychology of secrets. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum. Kelly, A., & Achter, J. (1995). Self-concealment and attitudes towards counseling in university students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 42(1), 40-46. doi:/10.1037/00220167.42.1.40 Kempke, S., Goossens, L., Luyten, P., Bekaert, P., Van Houdenhove, B., & Van Wambeke, P. (2010). Predictors of outcome in a multi-component treatment program for chronic fatigue syndrome. Journal of Affective Disorders, 126(1-2), 174-179. doi:10.1016/j.jad.2010.01.073 Kempke, S., Luyten, P., Claes, S., Van Wambeke, P., Bekaert, P., Goossens, L., & Van Houdenhove, B. (2013). The prevalence and impact of early childhood trauma in chronic fatigue syndrome. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 47(5), 664-669. doi:10.1016/j.jpsychires.2013.01.021 Kempke, S., Van Houdenhove, B., Luyten, P., Goossens, L., Bekaert, P., & Van Wambeke, P. (2011). Unraveling the role of perfectionism in chronic fatigue syndrome: Is there a distinction between adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism? Psychiatry Research, 233 186(2-3), 373-377. doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2010.09.016 Kern, M., & Friedman, H. (2008). Do conscientious individuals live longer? A quantitative review. Health Psychology, 27(5), 505-512. doi:10.1037/0278-6133.27.5.505 Kimble, C., Kimble, E., & Croy, N. (1998). Development of self-handicapping tendencies. Journal of Social Psychology, 138(4), 524-534. doi:10.1080/00224549809600406 Kirmayer, L., Robbins, J., & Paris, J. (1994). Somatoform disorders: Personality and the social matrix of somatic distress. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 103(1), 125-136. doi:10.1037/0021-843x.103.1.125 Koivumaa-Honkanen, H., Honkanen, R., Viinamaki, H., Heikkila, K., Kaprio, J., & Koskenvuo, M. (2000). Self-reported life satisfaction and 20-year mortality in healthy finnish adults. American Journal of Epidemiology, 152(10), 983-991. doi:10.1093/aje/152.10.983 Komiya, N., Good, G., & Sherrod, N. (2000). Emotional openness as a predictor of college students' attitudes toward seeking psychological help. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47(1), 138-143. doi:10.1037//0022-0167.46.4.524 Kurspahić-Mujćić, A., Hadžagić-Ćatibušić, F., Sivić, S., & Hadžović, E. (2014). Association between high levels of stress and risky health behavior. Medicinski Glasnik, 11(2), 367-372. Laffrey, S. (2000). Physical activity among older Mexican American women. Res. Nurs. Health, 23(5), 383-392. doi:10.1002/1098-240x(200010)23:5<383::aid-nur5>3.0.co;2-s Lamarche, L., Gammage, K., Sullivan, P., & Gabriel, D. (2013). A psychometric evaluation of the self-presentational efficacy scale. Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 17(2), 120-134. doi:10.1080/1091367x.2013.761027 Larson, D., & Chastain, R. (1990). Self-concealment: Conceptualization, measurement, and health implications. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 9(4), 439-455. doi:10.1521/jscp.1990.9.4.439 Lay, C., & Silverman, S. (1996). Trait procrastination, anxiety, and dilatory behavior. Personality and Individual Differences, 21(1), 61-67. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(96)00038-4 234 Leary, M. (1992). Self-presentational processes in exercise and sport. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 14, 339-351. Leary, M., Tchividijian, L., & Kraxberger, B. (1994). Self-presentation can be hazardous to your health: Impression management and health risk. Health Psychology, 13(6), 461470. doi:10.1037/0278-6133.13.6.461 Leiferman, J., & Pheley, A. (2006). The effect of mental distress on women's preventive health behaviors. American Journal of Health Promotion, 20(3), 196-199. doi:10.4278/0890-1171-20.3.196 Lespérance, F., Frasure-Smith, N., Juneau, M., & Théroux, P. (2000). Depression and 1Year prognosis in unstable angina. Archives of Internal Medicine, 160(9), 1354. doi:10.1001/archinte.160.9.1354 Libby, S., Reynolds, S., Derisley, J., & Clark, S. (2004). Cognitive appraisals in young people with obsessive-compulsive disorder. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45(6), 1076-1084. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2004.t01-1-00300.x Liebman, W. (1978). Recurrent abdominal pain in children: A retrospective survey of 119 patients. Clinical Pediatrics, 17(2), 149-153. doi:10.1177/000992287801700208 Lilenfeld, L., Stein, D., Bulik, C., Strober, M., Plotinicov, K., Pollice, C. et al. (2000). Personality traits among currently eating disordered, recovered and never ill first-degree female relatives of bulimic and control women. Psychological Medicine, 30(6), 13991410. doi:10.1017/s0033291799002792 Locicero, K., & Ashby, J. (2000). Multidimensional perfectionism and self-reported selfefficacy in college students. Journal of College Student Psychotherapy, 15(2), 47-56. doi:10.1300/j035v15n02_06 Longbottom, J., Robert Grove, J., & Dimmock, J. (2010). An examination of perfectionism traits and physical activity motivation. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 11(6), 574-581. doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2010.06.007 Longbottom, J., Grove, J., & Dimmock, J. (2012). Trait perfectionism, self-determination, and self-presentation processes in relation to exercise behavior. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 13(2), 224-235. doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2011.11.003 235 Loukas, A., Krull, J., Chassin, L., & Carle, A. (2000). The relation of personality to alcohol abuse/dependence in a high-risk sample. Journal of Personality, 68(6), 1153-1175. doi:10.1111/1467-6494.00130 Lovell, G., El Ansari, W., & Parker, J. (2010). Perceived exercise benefits and barriers of non-exercising female university students in the United Kingdom. IJERPH, 7(3), 784-798. doi:10.3390/ijerph7030784 Lowry, R., Galuska, D., Fulton, J., Wechsler, H., Kann, L., & Collins, J. (2000). Physical activity, food choice, and weight management goals and practices among U.S. college students. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 18(1), 18-27. doi:10.1016/s07493797(99)00107-5 Lunau, K. (2012). Mental health crisis on campus: Canadian students feel hopeless, depressed, even suicidal. Macleans. Luyten, P., Blatt, S., Van Houdenhove, B., & Corveleyn, J. (2006). Depression research and treatment: Are we skating to where the puck is going to be? Clinical Psychology Review, 26(8), 985-999. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2005.12.003 Luyten, P., Van Houdenhove, B., Cosyns, N., & Van den Broeck, A. (2006). Are patients with chronic fatigue syndrome perfectionistic or were they? A case-control study. Personality and Individual Differences, 40(7), 1473-1483. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2005.10.023 Lynd-Stevenson, R., & M. Hearne, C. (1999). Perfectionism and depressive affect: the pros and cons of being a perfectionist. Personality and Individual Differences, 26(3), 549562. doi:10.1016/s0191-8869(98)00170-6 MacCallum, R., Zhang, S., Preacher, K., & Rucker, D. (2002). On the practice of dichotomization of quantitative variables. Psychological Methods, 7(1), 19-40. doi:10.1037//1082-989x.7.1.19 Macedo, M., Marques, M., & Pereira, A. (2014). Perfectionism and psychological distress: A review of the cognitive factors. International Journal Of Clinical Neuroscience And Mental Health, 1(6). Macht, M., & Simons, G. (2000). Emotions and eating in everyday life. Appetite, 35(1), 65-71. doi:10.1006/appe.2000.0325 236 MacKinnon, D., Lockwood, C., Hoffman, J., West, S., & Sheets, V. (2002). A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7(1), 83-104. doi:10.1037/1082-989x.7.1.83 Macrodimitris, S., & Endler, N. (2001). Coping, control, and adjustment in type 2 diabetes. Health Psychology, 20(3), 208-216. doi:10.1037//0278-6133.20.3.208 Maddux, J., Norton, L., & Leary, M. (1988). Cognitive components of social anxiety: An investigation of the integration of self-presentation theory and self-efficacy theory. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 6(2), 180-190. doi:10.1521/jscp.1988.6.2.180 Magnusson, A., Nias, D., & White, P. (1996). Is perfectionism associated with fatigue? Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 41(4), 377-383. doi:10.1016/s0022-3999(96)00189-4 Marsh, H., Richards, G., Johnson, S., Roche, L., & Tremayne, P. (1994). Physical selfdescriptions questionnaire: Psychometric properties and a multitrait-multimethod analysis of relations to existing instruments. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 16, 270305. Martin, A. (2010). Physical activity motivation in late adolescence: Refinement of a recent multidimensional model. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 81(3), 278-289. doi:10.5641/027013610x13088573596104 Martin, A. (2010). Physical activity motivation in the year following high school: Assessing stability and appropriate analytical approaches. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 11(2), 107-113. doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2009.09.001 Martin, A., Tipler, D., Marsh, H., Richards, G., & Williams, M. (2006). Assessing multidimensional physical activity motivation: A construct validity study of high school students. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 28, 171-192. Martin, K., & Brawley, L. (1999). Is the self-handicapping scale reliable in non-academic achievement domains? Personality and Individual Differences, 27(5), 901-911. doi:10.1016/s0191-8869(99)00039-2 Martin, K., & Brawley, L. (2002). Self-handicapping in physical achievement settings: The contributions of self-esteem and self-efficacy. Self and Identity, 1(4), 337-351. doi:10.1080/15298860290106814 237 Martin, T., Flett, G., Hewitt, P., Krames, L., & Szanto, G. (1996). Personality correlates of depression and health symptoms: A test of a self-regulation model. Journal of Research in Personality, 30(2), 264-277. doi:10.1006/jrpe.1996.0017 McArdle, S. (2010). Exploring domain-specific perfectionism. Journal of Personality, 78(2), 493-508. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2010.00624.x McCrae, R., & Costa, P. (1987). Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(1), 81-90. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.52.1.81 McGinnis, J., & Foege, W. (1993). Actual causes of death in the United States. JAMA, 270(18), 2207-2212. doi:10.1001/jama.1993.03510180077038 McHugh, R., Murray, H., & Barlow, D. (2009). Balancing fidelity and adaptation in the dissemination of empirically-supported treatments: The promise of transdiagnostic interventions. Behaviour Research And Therapy, 47(11), 946-953. doi:10.1016/j.brat.2009.07.005 Medved, M., & Brockmeier, J. (2011). Heart stories: Men and women after a cardiac incident. Journal of Health Psychology, 16(2), 322-331. doi:10.1177/1359105310377246 Miller, K., & Mesagno, C. (2014). Personality traits and exercise dependence: Exploring the role of narcissism and perfectionism. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 12(4), 368-381. doi:10.1080/1612197x.2014.932821 Minarik, M., & Ahrens, A. (1996). Relations of eating behavior and symptoms of depression and anxiety to the dimensions of perfectionism among undergraduate women. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 20(2), 155-169. doi:10.1007/bf02228032 Misra, R., McKean, M., West, S., & Russo, T. (2000). Academic stress of college students: Comparison of student and faculty perception. College Student Journal, 34(2), 236-245. Missildine, W. (1963). Perfectionism, if you must strive to "do better". In W. Missildine, Your Inner Child of the Past (eds). New York: Pocket Books, pp. 75-90. Mitchelson, J., & Burns, L. (1998). Career mothers and perfectionism: stress at work and at home. Personality and Individual Differences, 25(3), 477-485. doi:10.1016/s01918869(98)00069-5 238 Molnar, D., Flett, G., Sadava, S., & Colautti, J. (2012). Perfectionism and health functioning in women with fibromyalgia. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 73(4), 295300. doi:10.1016/j.jpsychores.2012.08.001 Molnar, D., Reker, D., Culp, N., Sadava, S., & DeCourville, N. (2006). A mediated model of perfectionism, affect, and physical health. Journal of Research in Personality, 40(5), 482-500. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2005.04.002 Molnar, D., Sadava, S., Flett, G., & Colautti, J. (2012). Perfectionism and health: A mediational analysis of the roles of stress, social support and health-related behaviours. Psychology & Health, 27(7), 846-864. doi:10.1080/08870446.2011.630466 Mor, S., Day, H., Flett, G., & Hewitt, P. (1995). Perfectionism, control, and components of performance anxiety in professional artists. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 19(2), 207225. doi:10.1007/bf02229695 Morris, R. (1961). Effect of the mother of goal-setting behaviour of the asthmatic child. Annals of Allergy, 19, 44-54. Mussell, M., Binford, R., & Fulkerson, J. (2000). Eating disorders: Summary of risk factors, prevention programming, and prevention research. The Counseling Psychologist, 28(6), 764-796. doi:10.1177/0011000000286002 Nadler, A. (1983). Personal characteristics and help seeking. In D. Depaulo, A. Nadler & J. Fisher, New Directions in Help Seeking (Vol 2) (eds). San Diego CA: Academic Press, pp. 303-340. Nahas, M., Goldfine, B., & Collins, M. (2003). Determinants of Physical Activity in Adolescents and Young Adults: The Basis for High School and College Physical Education to Promote Active Lifestyles. Physical Educator, 60(1), 42-57. Netz, Y., Wu, M., Becker, B., & Tenenbaum, G. (2005). Physical activity and psychological well-being in advanced age: A meta-analysis of intervention studies. Psychology and Aging, 20(2), 272-284. doi:10.1037/0882-7974.20.2.272 Ng, D., & Jeffery, R. (2003). Relationships between perceived stress and health behaviors in a sample of working adults. Health Psychology, 22(6), 638-642. doi:10.1037/02786133.22.6.638 239 Norman, R., Davies, F., Nicholson, I., Cortese, L., & Malla, A. (1998). The relationship of two aspects of perfectionism with symptoms in a psychiatric outpatient population. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 17(1), 50-68. doi:10.1521/jscp.1998.17.1.50 Oatley, K., & Bolton, W. (1985). A social-cognitive theory of depression in reaction to life events. Psychological Review, 92(3), 372-388. doi:10.1037//0033-295x.92.3.372 Ommundsen, Y. (2001). Self-handicapping strategies in physical education classes: The influence of implicit theories of the nature of ability and achievement goal orientations. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 2(3), 139-156. doi:10.1016/s1469-0292(00)00019-4 Pacht, A. (1984). Reflections on perfectionism. American Psychologist, 39, 386-390. Page, J., Bruch, M., & Haase, R. (2008). Role of perfectionism and five-factor model traits in career indecision. Personality and Individual Differences, 45(8), 811-815. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2008.08.013 Pak, K., Olsen, L., & Beverly, S. (1999). The relationships of health behaviors to perceived stress, job satisfaction, and role modeling among health professionals in South Korea. The International Quarterly of Community Health Education, 19(1), 65-76. doi:10.2190/xu7n-h2mr-7bhk-513a Pak, S., Olsen, L., & Mahoney, B. (2000). The relationships of health behaviors to perceived stress, job satisfaction, and role modeling among health professionals in South Korea. International Quarterly of Community Health Education, 19(1), 65-76. Park, H., & Jeong, D. (2015). Psychological well-being, life satisfaction, and self-esteem among adaptive perfectionists, maladaptive perfectionists, and nonperfectionists. Personality and Individual Differences, 72, 165-170. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2014.08.031 Parker, W. (1997). An empirical typology of perfectionism in academically talented children. American Educational Research Journal, 34(3), 545-562. doi:10.3102/00028312034003545 Parker, W., & Adkins, K. (1995). A psychometric examination of the multidimensional perfectionism scale. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 17(4), 323334. doi:10.1007/bf02229054 Parker, W., & Stumpf, H. (1995). An examination of the multidimensional perfectionism 240 scale with a sample of academically talented children. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 13(4), 372-383. doi:10.1177/073428299501300404 Parrott, A. (1995). Stress modulation over the day in cigarette smokers. Addiction, 90(2), 233-244. doi:10.1111/j.1360-0443.1995.tb01041.x Pavot, W., Diener, E., Colvin, C., & Sandvik, E. (1991). Further validation of the satisfaction with life scale: Evidence for the cross-method convergence of well-being measures. Journal of Personality Assessment, 57(1), 149-161. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa5701_17 Pennebaker, J. (1982). The psychology of physical symptoms. New York: Springer-Verlag. Podsakoff, P., MacKenzie, S., Lee, J., & Podsakoff, N. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879-903. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 Prapavessis, H., & Grove, J. (1998). Self-handicapping and self-esteem. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 10(2), 175-184. doi:10.1080/10413209808406386 Radhu, N., Daskalakis, Z., Arpin-Cribbie, C., Irvine, J., & Ritvo, P. (2012). Evaluating a web-based cognitive-behavioral therapy for maladaptive perfectionism in university students. Journal of American College Health, 60(5), 357-366. doi:10.1080/07448481.2011.630703 Reuther, E., Davis, T., Rudy, B., Jenkins, W., Whiting, S., & May, A. (2013). Intolerance of uncertainty as a mediator of the relationship between perfectionism and obsessive compulsive symptom severity. Depression and Anxiety, 30(8), 773-777. doi:10.1002/da.22100 Rhéaume, J., Freeston, M., Dugas, M., Latartee, H., & Ladouceur, R. (1995). Perfectionism, responsibility, and obsessive compulsive symptoms. Behaviour, Research and Therapy, 33, 785-794. Rhéaume, J., Freeston, M., Ladouceur, R., Bouchard, C., Gallant, L., Talbot, F., & Vallières, A. (2000). Functional and dysfunctional perfectionists: are they different on compulsive-like behaviors? Behaviour Research and Therapy, 38(2), 119-128. doi:10.1016/s0005-7967(98)00203-4 241 Rice, K., & Mirzadeh, S. (2000). Perfectionism, attachment, and adjustment. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47(2), 238-250. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.47.2.238 Rice, K., Ashby, J., & Slaney, R. (1998). Self-esteem as a mediator between perfectionism and depression: A structural equations analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 45(3), 304-314. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.45.3.304 Rice, K., Bair, C., Castro, J., Cohen, B., & Hood, C. (2003). Meanings of perfectionism: A quantitative and qualitative analysis. J Cogn Psychother, 17(1), 39-58. doi:10.1891/jcop.17.1.39.58266 Riley, C., & Shafran, R. (2005). Clinical perfectionism: A preliminary qualitative analysis. behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 33(3), 369-374. doi:10.1017/s1352465805002122 Roberti, J., Harrington, L., & Storch, E. (2006). Further psychometric support for the 10Item version of the perceived stress scale. Journal of College Counseling, 9(2), 135-147. doi:10.1002/j.2161-1882.2006.tb00100.x Roberts, B., Kuncel, N., Shiner, R., Caspi, A., & Goldberg, L. (2007). The power of personality: The comparative validity of personality traits, socioeconomic status, and cognitive ability for predicting important life outcomes. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2(4), 313-345. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6916.2007.00047.x Roberts, C., Currie, C., Samdal, O., Currie, D., Smith, R., & Maes, L. (2007). Measuring the health and health behaviours of adolescents through cross-national survey research: Recent developments in the health behaviour in school-aged children (HBSC) study. Journal of Public Health, 15(3), 179-186. doi:10.1007/s10389-007-0100-x Roesch, S., Aldridge, A., Vickers, R., & Helvig, L. (2009). Testing personality-coping diatheses for negative and positive affect: a longitudinal evaluation. Anxiety, Stress & Coping, 22(3), 263-281. doi:10.1080/10615800802158419 Royston, P., Altman, D., & Sauerbrei, W. (2005). Dichotomizing continuous predictors in multiple regression: a bad idea. Statist. Med., 25(1), 127-141. doi:10.1002/sim.2331 Saboonchi, F., & Lundh, L. (1997). Perfectionism, self-consciousness and anxiety. Personality and Individual Differences, 22(6), 921-928. doi:10.1016/s0191242 8869(96)00274-7 Saboonchi, F., & Lundh, L. (2003). Perfectionism, anger, somatic health, and positive affect. Personality and Individual Differences, 35(7), 1585-1599. doi:10.1016/s01918869(02)00382-3 Saboonchi, F., Lundh, L., & Ost, L. (1999). Perfectionism and self-consciousness in social phobia and panic disorder with agoraphobia. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 37(9), 799-808. doi:10.1016/s0005-7967(98)00183-1 Saddler, C., & Sacks, L. (1993). Multidimensional perfectionism and academic procrastination: Relationships with depression in university students. Psychological Reports, 73(3), 863-871. doi:10.2466/pr0.1993.73.3.863 Sallis, J., & Hovell, M. (1990). Determinants of Exercise Behavior. Exercise And Sport Sciences Reviews, 18(1), 307-330. doi:10.1249/00003677-199001000-00014 Sallis, J., Buono, M., Roby, J., Micale, F., & Nelson, J. (1993). Seven-day recall and other physical activity self-reports in children and adolescents. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 25(1), 99-108. doi:10.1249/00005768-199301000-00014 Sallis, J., Hovell, ]., Richard Hofstetter, C., Faucher, P., Elder, J., & Blanchard, J. et al. (1989). A multivariate study of determinants of vigorous exercise in a community sample. Preventive Medicine, 18(1), 20-34. doi:10.1016/0091-7435(89)90051-0 Sallis, J., Hovell, M., & Richard Hofstetter, C. (1992). Predictors of adoption and maintenance of vigorous physical activity in men and women. Preventive Medicine, 21(2), 237-251. doi:10.1016/0091-7435(92)90022-a Salzman, L. (1963). The Obsessive Personality. New York: Science House. Sansone, R., Levengood, J., & Sellbom, M. (2004). Psychological aspects of fibromyalgia. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 56(2), 185-188. doi:10.1016/s0022-3999(03)00063-1 Sansone, R., Levitt, J., & Sansone, L. (2004). The prevalence of personality disorders among those with eating disorders. Eating Disorders, 13(1), 7-21. doi:10.1080/10640260590893593 Sassaroli, S., Lauro, L., Ruggiero, G., Mauri, M., Vinai, P., & Frost, R. (2008). 243 Perfectionism in depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder and eating disorders. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 46(6), 757-765. doi:10.1016/j.brat.2008.02.007 Schlenker, B., & Weigold, M. (1992). Interpersonal processes involving impression regulation and management. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 43(1), 133-168. doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.43.020192.001025 Schneider, F., Gruman, J., & Coutts, L. (2012). Applied Social Psychology: Understanding and Addressing Social and Practical Problems (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks CA: Sage Publications. Schwarzer, R. (1992). Self-efficacy in the adoption and maintenance of health behaviors: Theoretical approaches and a new model. In R. Schwarzer, Self-Efficacy: Thought Control of Action (eds). Washington DC: Hemisphere, pp. 217-242. Schwarzer, R., & Leppin, A. (1989). Social support and health: A meta-analysis. Psychology & Health, 3(1), 1-15. doi:10.1080/08870448908400361 Scott, J. (2001). Cognitive therapy for depression. British Medical Bulletin, 57(1), 101113. doi:10.1093/bmb/57.1.101 Sechrist, K., Walker, S., & Pender, N. (1987). Development and psychometric evaluation of the exercise benefits/barriers scale. Res. Nurs. Health, 10(6), 357-365. doi:10.1002/nur.4770100603 Shafran, R., & Mansell, W. (2001). Perfectionism and psychopathology: a review of research and treatment. Clinical Psychology Review, 21(6), 879-906. doi:10.1016/s02727358(00)00072-6 Shafran, R., Cooper, Z., & Fairburn, C. (2002). Clinical perfectionism: a cognitive behavioural analysis. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 40(7), 773-791. doi:10.1016/s0005-7967(01)00059-6 Shafran, R., Cooper, Z., & Fairburn, C. (2003). Clinical perfectionism is not multidimensional perfectionism: A reply to Hewitt, Flett, Besser, Sherry & McGee. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 41(10), 1217-1220. doi:10.1016/s0005-7967(03)000202 Shafran, R., Egan, S., & Wade, T. (2010). Overcoming perfectionism. London: Robinson. 244 Shanmugasegaram, S., Flett, G., Madan, M., Oh, P., Marzolini, S., & Reitav, J. et al. (2014). Perfectionism, Type D personality, and illness-related coping styles in cardiac rehabilitation patients. Journal of Health Psychology, 19(3), 417-426. doi:10.1177/1359105312471571 Shin, Y., Hur, H., Pender, N., Jang, H., & Kim, M. (2006). Exercise self-efficacy, exercise benefits and barriers, and commitment to a plan for exercise among Korean women with osteoporosis and osteoarthritis. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 43(1), 3-10. doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2004.10.008 Shin, Y., Jang, H., & Pender, N. (2001). Psychometric evaluation of the exercise selfefficacy scale among Korean adults with chronic diseases. Res. Nurs. Health, 24(1), 68-76. doi:10.1002/1098-240x(200102)24:1<68::aid-nur1008>3.3.co;2-3 Sica, C., Coradeschi, D., Sanavio, E., Dorz, S., Manchisi, D., & Novara, C. (2004). A study of the psychometric properties of the obsessive beliefs inventory and interpretations of intrusions inventory on clinical Italian individuals. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 18(3), 291-307. doi:10.1016/s0887-6185(03)00013-6 Sirois, F. (2004). Procrastination and intentions to perform health behaviors: The role of self-efficacy and the consideration of future consequences. Personality and Individual Differences, 37(1), 115-128. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2003.08.005 Sirois, F. (2007). I’ll look after my health later: A replication and extension of the procrastination health model with community-dwelling adults. Personality and Individual Differences, 43(1), 15-26. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2006.11.003 Sirois, F., Melia-Gordon, M., & Pychyl, T. (2003). I’ll look after my health, later: an investigation of procrastination and health. Personality and Individual Differences, 35(5), 1167-1184. doi:10.1016/s0191-8869(02)00326-4 Skinner, B. (1968). The technology of teaching. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. Slade, P., & Dewey, M. (1986). Development and preliminary validation of SCANS: A screening instrument for identifying individuals at risk of developing anorexia and bulimia nervosa. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 5(3), 517-538. doi:10.1002/1098108x(198603)5:3<517::aid-eat2260050309>3.0.co;2-6 245 Slade, P., & Owens, R. (1998). A dual process model of perfectionism based on reinforcement theory. Behavior Modification, 22(3), 372-390. doi:10.1177/01454455980223010 Slaney, R., Ashby, J., & Trippi, J. (1995). Perfectionism: Its measurement and career relevance. Journal of Career Assessment, 3(4), 279-297. doi:10.1177/106907279500300403 Slaney, R., Rice, K., Mobley, M., Trippi, J., & Ashby, J. (2001). The revised almost perfect scale. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 34, 130-145. Smith, J. (1996). Beyond the divide between cognition and discourse: Using interpretative phenomenological analysis in health psychology. Psychology & Health, 11(2), 261-271. doi:10.1080/08870449608400256 Smith, J. (2004). Reflecting on the development of interpretative phenomenological analysis and its contribution to qualitative research in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 1(1), 39-54. doi:10.1191/1478088704qp004oa Smith, J. (2011). Evaluating the contribution of interpretative phenomenological analysis. Health Psychology Review, 5(1), 9-27. doi:10.1080/17437199.2010.510659 Smith, J., & Osborn, M. (2008). Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In J. Smith, Qualitative Psychology, A practical guide to research methods (eds). London: Sage, pp. 53-80. Smith, J., Jarman, M., & Osborn, M. (1999). Doing qualitative phenomenological analysis. In M. Murray & K. Chamberlain, Qualitative Health Psychology: Theories and Methods (eds). London: Sage Publications, pp. 218-240. Sniehotta, F., Scholz, U., & Schwarzer, R. (2005). Bridging the intention-behaviour gap: Planning, self-efficacy, and action control in the adoption and maintenance of physical exercise. Psychology & Health, 20(2), 143-160. doi:10.1080/08870440512331317670 Snyder, C. (1990). Self-handicapping processes and sequelae. In R. Higgins, C. Snyder & S. Berglas, Self-Handicapping: The Paradox That Isn't (eds). New York: The Plenum Series in Social/Clinical Psychology, pp. 107-145. Snyder, C., & Smith, T. (1982). Symptoms as self-handicapping strategies: The virtues of 246 old wine in a new bottle. In G. Wery & H. Mirels, Integrations of Clinical and Social Psychology (eds). New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 104-127. Sobel, M. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. Sociological Methodology, 13, 290. doi:10.2307/270723 Sorotzkin, B. (1985). The quest for perfection: Avoiding guilt or avoiding shame?. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 22(3), 564-571. doi:10.1037/h0085541 Sorotzkin, B. (1998). Understanding and treating perfectionism in religious adolescents. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 35(1), 87-95. doi:10.1037/h0087792 Spielberger, C., Gorsuch, R., Lushene, R., Vagg, P., & Jacobs, G. (1983). Manual for the State-trait anxiety inventory (form Y) ("self-evaluation questionnaire"). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Spillman, D. (1990). Survey of food and vitamin intake responses reported by university students experiencing stress. PR, 66(2), 499. doi:10.2466/pr0.66.2.499-502 Srinivasagam, N., Kaye, W., Plotnikov, K., Greeno, C., Weltzin, T., & Rao, R. (1995). Persistent perfectionism, symmetry, and exactness after long-term recovery from anorexia nervosa. AJP, 152(11), 1630-1634. doi:10.1176/ajp.152.11.1630 Staufenbiel, S., Penninx, B., Spijker, A., Elzinga, B., & van Rossum, E. (2013). Hair cortisol, stress exposure, and mental health in humans: A systematic review. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 38(8), 1220-1235. doi:10.1016/j.psyneuen.2012.11.015 Steptoe, A., Feldman, P., Kunz, S., Owen, N., Willemsen, G., & Marmot, M. (2002). Stress responsivity and socioeconomic status. A mechanism for increased cardiovascular disease risk?. European Heart Journal, 23(22), 1757-1763. doi:10.1053/euhj.2001.3233 Stetson, B., Rahn, J., Dubbert, P., Wilner, B., & Mercury, M. (1997). Prospective evaluation of the effects of stress on exercise adherence in community-residing women. Health Psychology, 16(6), 515-520. doi:10.1037/0278-6133.16.6.515 Stöber, J. (1998). The Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale revisited: More perfect with four (instead of six) dimensions. Personality and Individual Differences, 24(4), 481247 491. doi:10.1016/s0191-8869(97)00207-9 Stoeber, J. (2014). How other-oriented perfectionism differs from self-oriented and socially prescribed perfectionism. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 36(2), 329-338. doi:10.1007/s10862-013-9397-7 Stoeber, J., & Otto, K. (2006). Positive conceptions of perfectionism: Approaches, evidence, challenges. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10(4), 295-319. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr1004_2 Stoeber, J., & Stoeber, F. (2009). Domains of perfectionism: Prevalence and relationships with perfectionism, gender, age, and satisfaction with life. Personality and Individual Differences, 46(4), 530-535. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2008.12.006 Stoeber, J., Otto, K., & Dalbert, C. (2009). Perfectionism and the Big Five: Conscientiousness predicts longitudinal increases in self-oriented perfectionism. Personality and Individual Differences, 47(4), 363-368. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2009.04.004 Stoeber, J., Stoll, O., Pescheck, E., & Otto, K. (2008). Perfectionism and achievement goals in athletes: Relations with approach and avoidance orientations in mastery and performance goals. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 9(2), 102-121. doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2007.02.002 Straits-Tröster, K., Patterson, T., Semple, S., Temoshok, L., Roth, P., & McCutchan, J. et al. (1994). The relationship between loneliness, interpersonal competence, and immunologic status in hiv-infected men. Psychology & Health, 9(3), 205-219. doi:10.1080/08870449408407481 Strauman, T. (1989). Self-discrepancies in clinical depression and social phobia: Cognitive structures that underlie emotional disorders? Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 98(1), 1422. doi:10.1037/0021-843x.98.1.14 Straus, E. (1948). On obsession: A clinical and methodological study. Nervous and Mental Disease Monograph, 73. Strecher, V., & Rosenstock, I. (1997). The Health Belief Model. In A. Baum, S. Newman, J. Weinman, R. West & C. McManus, Cambridge Handbook of Psychology, Health and Medicine (eds). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 113-117. 248 Stults-Kolehmainen, M., & Sinha, R. (2014). The effects of stress on physical activity and exercise. Sports Med, 44(1), 81-121. doi:10.1007/s40279-013-0090-5 Stumpf, H., & Parker, W. (2000). A hierarchical structural analysis of perfectionism and its relation to other personality characteristics. Personality and Individual Differences, 28(5), 837-852. doi:10.1016/s0191-8869(99)00141-5 Suddarth, B., & Slaney, R. (2001). An investigation of the dimensions of perfectionism in college students. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 34(3), 157-165. Sutandar-Pinnock, K., Blake Woodside, D., Carter, J., Olmsted, M., & Kaplan, A. (2003). Perfectionism in anorexia nervosa: A 6-24-month follow-up study. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 33(2), 225-229. doi:10.1002/eat.10127 Tachikawa, H., Yamaguchi, N., Hatanaka, K., Kobayashi, J., Sato, S., & Mizukami, K. et al. (2004). The Eating Disorder Inventory-2 in Japanese clinical and non-clinical samples: Psychometric properties and cross-cultural implications. Eating and Weight Disorders Studies On Anorexia, Bulimia And Obesity, 9(2), 107-113. doi:10.1007/bf03325053 Taillefer, S., Kirmayer, L., Robbins, J., & Lasry, J. (2003). Correlates of illness worry in chronic fatigue syndrome. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 54(4), 331-337. doi:10.1016/s0022-3999(02)00332-x Terry-Short, L., Owens, R., Slade, P., & Dewey, M. (1995). Positive and negative perfectionism. Personality and Individual Differences, 18(5), 663-668. doi:10.1016/01918869(94)00192-u The Obsessive Compulsive Cognitions Working Group. (2003). Psychometric validation of the obsessive beliefs questionnaire and the interpretation of intrusions inventory: Part I. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 41(8), 863-878. doi:10.1016/s0005-7967(02)00099-2 Thorpe, J., Kalinowski, C., Patterson, M., & Sleath, B. (2006). Psychological distress as a barrier to preventive care in community-dwelling elderly in the United States. Medical Care, 44(2), 187-191. doi:10.1097/01.mlr.0000196965.54871.d5 Tice, D., & Baumeister, R. (1997). Longitudinal study of procrastination, performance, stress, and health: The costs and benefits of dawdling. Psychological Science, 8(6), 454249 458. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1997.tb00460.x Trobst, K., Herbst, J., Masters, H., & Costa, P. (2002). Personality pathways to unsafe sex: personality, condom use, and HIV risk behaviors. Journal of Research in Personality, 36(2), 117-133. doi:10.1006/jrpe.2001.2334 Uchino, B. (2004). Social Support and Physical Health: Understanding the Health Consequences of Our Relationships. New Haven CT: Yale University Press. Ulu, I., & Tezer, E. (2010). Adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism, adult attachment, and big five personality traits. The Journal of Psychology, 144(4), 327-340. doi:10.1080/00223981003784032 Urdan, T., & Midgley, C. (2001). Academic self-handicapping: What we know and what more there is to learn. Educational Psychology Review, 13(2), 115-138. van Beek, I., Hu, Q., Schaufeli, W., Taris, T., & Schreurs, B. (2011). For Fun, Love, or Money: What Drives Workaholic, Engaged, and Burned-Out Employees at Work?. Applied Psychology, 61(1), 30-55. doi:10.1111/j.1464-0597.2011.00454.x Van Houdenhove, B. (1986). Prevalence and psychodynamic interpretation of premorbid hyperactivity in patients with chronic pain. Psychother Psychosom, 45(4), 195-200. doi:10.1159/000287948 Van Houdenhove, B., & Luyten, P. (2009). Treatment of chronic fatigue syndrome: How to find a new equilibrium. Patient Education and Counseling, 77(2), 153-154. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2009.09.001 Van Houdenhove, B., Kempke, S., & Luyten, P. (2010). Psychiatric aspects of chronic fatigue syndrome and fibromyalgia. Current Psychiatry Reports, 12(3), 208-214. doi:10.1007/s11920-010-0105-y Wang, C., & Biddle, S. (2001). Young people's motivational profiles in physical activity: A cluster analysis. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 23, 1-22. Ware, J., Kosinki, M., & Keller, S. (1996). A 12-Item short-form health survey. Medical Care, 34(3), 220-233. doi:10.1097/00005650-199603000-00003 Watson, D., Clark, L., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief 250 measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063-1070. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.54.6.1063 Wei, M., Mallinckrodt, B., Russell, D., & Abraham, W. (2004). Maladaptive perfectionism as a mediator and moderator between adult attachment and depressive mood. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51(2), 201-212. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.51.2.201 Weidner, G., Kohlmann, C., Dotzauer, E., & Burns, L. (1996). The effects of academic stress on health behaviors in young adults. Anxiety, Stress & Coping, 9(2), 123-133. doi:10.1080/10615809608249396 Weisinger, H., & Lobsenz, N. (1981). Nobody's Perfect. Los Angeles: Stratford. Weiss, A., & Costa, P. (2005). Domain and facet personality predictors of all-cause mortality among medicare patients aged 65 to 100. Psychosomatic Medicine, 67(5), 724733. doi:10.1097/01.psy.0000181272.58103.18 Weissman, A., & Beck, A. (1978). Development and validation of the dysfunctional attitude scale: A preliminary investigation. In (62nd) Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Toronto, Ontario, Canada. White, C., & Schweitzer, R. (2000). The role of personality in the development and perpetuation of chronic fatigue syndrome. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 48(6), 515524. doi:10.1016/s0022-3999(00)00087-8 Williams, C., & Cropley, M. (2014). The relationship between perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours: The mediating role of self-concealment. Journal of Health Psychology, 19(10), 1211-1221. doi:10.1177/1359105313488971 Willig, C. (2008). Introducing qualitative research in psychology. Maidenhead, England: McGraw Hill/Open University Press. Witt, W., Kahn, R., Fortuna, L., Winickoff, J., Kuhlthau, K., Pirraglia, P., & Ferris, T. (2009). Psychological distress as a barrier to preventive healthcare among U.S. women. J Primary Prevent, 30(5), 531-547. doi:10.1007/s10935-009-0190-z Wolters, C., Yu, S., & Pintrich, P. (1996). The relation between goal orientation and students' motivational beliefs and self-regulated learning. Learning and Individual Differences, 8(3), 211-238. doi:10.1016/s1041-6080(96)90015-1 251 Yunus, M. (2007). Fibromyalgia and Overlapping Disorders: The unifying concept of central sensitivity syndromes. Seminars in Arthritis and Rheumatism, 36(6), 339-356. doi:10.1016/j.semarthrit.2006.12.009 Zillmann, D., & Bryant, J. (1985). Selective exposure to communication. Hillsdale, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates. Zuckerman, M., Kieffer, S., & Knee, C. (1998). Consequences of self-handicapping: Effects on coping, academic performance, and adjustment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(6), 1619-1628. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.74.6.1619 252 Appendix A: Unpublished version of article submitted to the Journal of Health Psychology The Relationship between Perfectionism and Engagement in Preventive Health Behaviours: The Mediating Role of Self Concealment Charlotte J Williams and Mark Cropley 253 Abstract If perfectionists avoid engaging in preventive health behaviours they may be putting their long-term health and wellbeing at risk. Correlational analyses based on a sample of 370 university students identified maladaptive perfectionism to be associated with decreased levels of; engagement in preventive health behaviours, life satisfaction and wellbeing and increased levels of self-concealment and psychological distress. Adaptive perfectionism was associated with higher levels of engagement in preventive health behaviours. Selfconcealment was identified as a partial mediator in the relationship between maladaptive perfectionism and both engagement in preventive health behaviours and psychological distress. Implications of the findings are discussed. Keywords: Maladaptive and adaptive perfectionism, preventive health behaviours, self-concealment. Introduction Over the last two decades there has been a striking increase in research concerned with perfectionism. This growth in interest has been beneficial in enhancing our understanding of this personality construct, however, there still remains a lack of consensus regarding 254 how perfectionism has been conceptualised and defined. In the 1990s two research groups independently suggested that perfectionism should be understood as a multidimensional construct, possessing both positive and negative elements (Frost et al. 1990; Hewitt and Flett, 1991). Since then many authors have investigated and supported a two factor model of perfectionism encompassing positive/adaptive/healthy elements as well as negative/maladaptive/unhealthy ones (e.g. Adkins and Parker, 1996; Blankstein and Dunkley, 2002; Enns and Cox, 1999; Frost et al., 1993; Hill et al., 1997; Rheaume et al., 2000; Terry-Short et al., 1995; Rice et al., 1998; Slade, 1982; Slade and Owens, 1998; Slaney et al., 2002; Stumpf and Parker, 2000). Adaptive perfectionism is believed to be driven by a desire for success (Hamachek, 1978) and has been characterised by a high level of organisation, high personal standards, conscientiousness and a desire to achieve personal goals (Slade and Owens, 1998). When compared to maladaptive perfectionism, research suggests adaptive perfectionists; ruminate less, are less susceptibility to negative affectivity and engage in fewer self-critical evaluations in appraisal situations (Beiling et al., 2004; Enns et al., 2001; Rheaume et al., 2000). Hamachek (1978) suggested that although adaptive perfectionists set themselves extraordinarily high standards they do possess the flexibility to allow for occasional mistakes and ultimately derive a real sense of satisfaction from their efforts. Maladaptive perfectionism is believed to be driven by an intense fear of failure (Hamachek, 1978) and has been associated with negative psychological functioning (Blatt, 1995; Chang, 2003; Flett and Hewitt, 2002; Shafran and Mansell, 2001). The negative aspects of perfectionism have been related to a wide variety of psychological and physical disorders including; anxiety (Antony et al., 1998; Flett et al., 1989), substance abuse (Pacht, 1984), chronic pain (Liebman, 1978), coronary heart disease (Pacht, 1984), depression (Blatt, 1995; Chang, 2000; Enns and Cox, 1999; Frost et al., 1990; Frost et al., 1993; Hewitt and Flett, 1991; Kawamura et al., 2001; Pacht, 1984), eating disorders (Fairburn et al., 1999; Pacht, 1984), Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (Antony et al., 1998; Pacht, 1984), Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (Deary and Chalder, 2010), increased fatigue following a period of stress (Dittner et al., 2010) and suicide (Burns, 1980; Hewitt et al., 1992). 255 Additionally maladaptive perfectionism has been linked with self-concealment (Frost et al., 1995; Frost et al., 1997), which can be defined as the active concealment of negative information relating to the self (Larson and Chastain, 1990). The need to conceal mistakes and imperfections seems to be an important aspect of the perfectionism construct and has the potential to exacerbate and perpetuate stress (Hewitt and Flett, 2002). Some authors believe this is tied in with the desire to both present and protect a ‘flawless image’ (Frost et al., 1995, 1997). It is thought that self-concealment may be particularly detrimental to health because of the additional effort required in actively withholding sensitive and potentially embarrassing information from others (Kahn and Hessling, 2001), as well as the fact that it prevents the development of more adaptive coping strategies such as utilising social support (Kawamura and Frost, 2004). Longitudinal research by Fry and Debats (2009), identified perfectionism (as well as neuroticism) to be associated with increased risk of death in later life. These authors identified conscientiousness (often identified as one of the more adaptive elements of the perfectionism construct) to be “enabling”, having a protective function in terms of health and perfectionism and neuroticism to be more “disabling”, having a more detrimental effect on health. Further research by these authors has put forward the suggestion that high levels of self-oriented perfectionism (considered to represent the adaptive perfectionism traits) to be health promoting and linked to a reduced risk of mortality (Fry and Debats, 2011). Despite the wealth of research linking the negative aspects of perfectionism with various psychological and physical difficulties and the association between perfectionism and selfconcealment, there has been little research to establish how well perfectionists look after their health and wellbeing. One way to address this might be to ascertain how frequently perfectionists engage in preventive health behaviours. Such behaviours have been defined as “any activity undertaken by a person believing himself to be healthy for the purpose of preventing disease or detecting it an asymptomatic stage” (Kasl and Cobb, 1966). Investigating such behaviours may be useful as it could provide important information regarding how maladaptive and adaptive perfectionists look after their health and wellbeing. Research, has identified lower levels of socially prescribed perfectionism (considered to reflect the more negative attributes of the perfectionism construct) and higher levels of organisation (a positive attribute of perfectionism) to be associated with increased health behaviours (Chang et al., 2008). 256 The present study seeks to explore the relationship between perfectionism (adaptive and maladaptive) and engagement in preventive health behaviours. It is hypothesised that higher levels of maladaptive perfectionism will be associated with lower engagement and conversely higher levels of adaptive perfectionism will be related to greater engagement in preventive health behaviours (hypothesis 1). Previous research has identified self-concealment as a mediator in the relationship between maladaptive perfectionism and psychological distress (Kawamura and Frost, 2004). The present study seeks to provide evidence for the relationship between perfectionism (adaptive and maladaptive) and self-concealment, as well as, self-concealment and engagement in preventive health behaviours (hypothesis 2). Additionally the purpose of this study is to expand on previous research by identifying the mediating role of selfconcealment in both the relationship between maladaptive perfectionism and psychological distress as well as maladaptive perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours (hypothesis 3). Finally, the variables of psychological distress, life satisfaction and wellbeing will be considered. It is predicted that maladaptive perfectionism and self-concealment will be associated with elevated levels of psychological distress and reduced levels of both life satisfaction and wellbeing. Adaptive perfectionism is hypothesised to be associated with lower psychological distress and increased life satisfaction and wellbeing, (hypothesis 4). Method Participants and Procedure Participants were students at the University of Surrey, recruited through an email advertisement circulated to all students. Of the final sample (N=370), 287 (77%) were women and 83 were men (23%). Their mean age was 26.72 years (SD = 9.4). Of the sample, 44% were undergraduate students (n = 164) and 51% were postgraduate students (n = 188), the remaining 5% (n = 18) did not specify level of study. Participants completed an online questionnaire. Measures 257 Perfectionism To assess adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism, four of the subscales of the Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (FMPS, Frost et al., 1990) were used. For adaptive perfectionism, the subscales of Personal Standards (7 items) and Organisation (6 items) were summed to form a total adaptive perfectionism score (ADAPT-PERF). The use of these two subscales to represent a measure of adaptive perfectionism has been supported by previous research, showing good internal reliability, Cronbach’s alpha, 0.88 (Chang et al., 2004; Harris et al., 2008). For maladaptive perfectionism, the Concern over Mistakes (CM) and Doubts about Actions (DA) subscales have been utilised and summed to form a total maladaptive perfectionism score (MAL-PERF). The use of these two subscales to represent a measure of maladaptive perfectionism has been extensively supported in the research literature (Dunn et al., 2006; Frost et al., 1990; Harris et al., 2008; Wei et al., 2004). Cronbach’s alpha for the two subscales combines has been found to be 0.87 (Harris et al., 2008). Self-Concealment The Self-Concealment Scale (SCS; Larson and Chastain, 1990) was used to assess selfconcealment. The scale consists of ten items addressing an individual’s desire to conceal negative personal information. Participants are asked to rate their agreement with a statement on a five point Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). A total score is then derived, with high scores denoting a greater tendency to selfconceal. The scale has been shown to be reliable, with favourable test-retest and interim reliability. Internal consistency has been reported to be good, α = 0.83 (Larson and Chastain, 1990). The scale is generally considered to be a valid means of assessing the tendency to conceal personal information. Engagement in Preventive Health Behaviours This questionnaire was designed for the present study and is an adaptation of the General Preventive Behaviours Checklist (Amir, 1987). It requires respondents to rate on a three point scale the frequency with which they carry out a range of preventive health 258 behaviours. Areas addressed include diet, exercise, avoidance or harmful substances such as cigarettes and alcohol, social interaction, work, and emotional well-being. Examples of questions include; “I eat a balanced diet”, “I do regular aerobic or strenuous exercise”, “I avoid overworking” and “I avoid too much emotional distress”. Responses were summed to form a total engagement score with higher scores indicating a greater amount of engagement in preventive health behaviours. Psychological Distress The Hopkins Symptom Checklist-21 can be described as a general measure of psychological distress and was utilised to assess general psychological and symptom distress (HSCL-21; Green et al., 1988). This measure gauges the respondent’s current experience of somatic, performance and general distress. The scale consists of 21 items scored on a four point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree). A high score overall, denotes a higher degree of psychological distress. The scale has good internal reliability (α = 0.90; Green et al., 1988) and has adequate test-retest reliability, construct and concurrent validity (Deane et al., 1992). The use of this scale as a valid and reliable method of assessing psychological distress has been supported in the research literature (Harari et al., 2005; Komiya et al., 2000). Life satisfaction To assess life satisfaction, the Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS; Diener et al., 1985) was used. This consists of five items rated on a seven point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Higher scores denote greater life satisfaction. An encouraging level of reliability and internal consistency has been found, Cronbach’s alpha, 0.87 (Diener, 1985). In terms of validity, the scale correlates moderately well with other subjective well-being scales (Pavot et al., 1991). Well-being To provide a measure of general well-being the WHO-5 Well-Being index (Bech et al., 1996) was employed. It covers the following areas; positive mood, vitality and general interest. Each of the five items is rated on a six point Likert scale from 0 (not present) to 5 259 (constantly present). A total score is derived from summing the five items.. Findings suggest good reliability and validity, Cronbach’s alpha = 0.82, (De Wit et al., 2007). The research design for the present study was primarily correlational. Mediation analyses were also carried out to determine the importance of self-concealment in the relationship between maladaptive perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours and maladaptive perfectionism and psychological distress. Results Analyses are separated into three sections. The first section comprises the preliminary analysis consisting of sample demographics, means (M), standard deviations (SDs) and reliabilities (Cronbach’s alpha α) for all the major variables (Table 1). Secondly the results of the correlational analyses are presented in Table 2. The results from the mediation analyses are displayed diagrammatically and regression coefficients presented in Table 3. INSERT TABLE 1 ABOUT HERE Correlational Analyses As predicted a significant negative association was found between maladaptive perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours (r = -0.330, p<0.01) suggesting that those participants scoring highly on the negative aspects of perfectionism engaged less in behaviours that could potentially benefit their health. A small yet significant correlation was found for adaptive perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours (r = 0.254, p<0.01) suggesting those participants scoring highly on the more adaptive elements of perfectionism may be more inclined to take preventive steps as far as health behaviours are concerned (hypothesis 1). INSERT TABLE 2 ABOUT HERE For perfectionism and self-concealment, a positive association was observed between maladaptive perfectionism and self-concealment, (r = 0.471, p<0.01), although, adaptive perfectionism and self-concealment were shown to be uncorrelated. This may suggest that 260 self-concealment is a factor present predominantly in maladaptive perfectionism and not perfectionism per se. When the relationship between self-concealment and engagement was examined, an inverse relationship was found (r = .0.346, p<0.01) suggesting as selfconcealment increases, there is a corresponding decrease in engagement in preventive health behaviours, (hypothesis 2). Addressing the relationship between perfectionism (adaptive and maladaptive) and psychological distress, no relationship was observed for adaptive perfectionism, although a significant positive correlation was observed for maladaptive perfectionism (r = 0.533, p<0.01). Such findings support previous research linking the negative aspects of perfectionism with greater psychological distress. As expected and in support of earlier work, self-concealment and psychological distress were positively correlated (r = 0.486, p<0.01). In consideration of the relationships between perfectionism, life-satisfaction and well-being, maladaptive perfectionism was associated with lower levels of both variables (r = -0.376, p<0.01 and r = -0.439, p<0.01 respectively). No relationship was observed between adaptive perfectionism and either life-satisfaction or well-being. Similar to maladaptive perfectionism, self-concealment was also associated with diminished levels of both life-satisfaction and well-being, r = -0.361, p<0.01 and r = -0.355, p<0.01 respectively, (hypothesis 4). Mediation Analyses Mediation (hypothesis 3) was tested according to the method outlined by Baron and Kenny (1984) and the significance of the indirect effect calculated using the Sobel Test (Sobel, 1982). Unstandardised regression coefficients were used in the calculations. The results of the Sobel Test are presented diagrammatically to aid understanding, and the regression coefficients presented in Table 3 and 4. INSERT FIG. 1 ABOUT HERE INSERT TABLE 3 ABOUT HERE When considering self-concealment as a mediator in the relationship between maladaptive perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours, the result of the Sobel Test was significant (z = -4.091). The regression coefficient (Step 1, B = -.300, p<.001; Step 3, B = -.195, p<0.001), however has not been reduced adequately to suggest full mediation. 261 This result suggests that self-concealment partially mediates the relationship between maladaptive perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours. INSERT FIG. 2 ABOUT HERE INSERT TABLE 4 ABOUT HERE Similarly for the relationship between maladaptive perfectionism and psychological distress although the result of the Sobel Test was again significant (z = 5.395), the regression coefficient, was not reduced enough to indicate full mediation (Step 1, B = .557, p<.001; Step 3, B =.423, p<,001), therefore self-concealment can only be considered a partial mediator. Discussion Adaptive perfectionism was associated with higher levels of engagement, supporting research by Chang et al (2008) identifying elevated levels of organisation to be associated with increased health behaviours. Additionally this may suggest a positive benefit to being adaptive perfectionist. Maladaptive perfectionism was associated with lower levels of engagement in preventive health behaviours. One explanation, for the lack of engagement on the part of maladaptive perfectionists might be that they avoid such activities because it could potentially present a situation where one’s “imperfections” could be highlighted and therefore create the potential of negative evaluation from others. It seems that perfectionists will, at all costs, endeavour to keep such “imperfections” hidden, (Hewitt et al., 2003). A further explanation for a lack of engagement may involve “selfhandicapping” behaviours. These include behaviours such as avoidance, procrastination, over-committing (Kearns et al., 2007), lack of effort (Kimble et al., 1998), choosing difficult goals (Greenberg, 1985) and a range of emotional and physical symptoms (Smith et al., 1983). Perfectionism and self-handicapping are thought to share many common features including striving for extremely high standards, dissatisfaction if such standards are not met and an excessive and often debilitating fear of failure. Such behaviours are thought to have an inherent appeal to perfectionists who are likely to feel most vulnerable in evaluative situations. It is possible that maladaptive perfectionists may use various selfhandicapping behaviours as justification not to engage in preventive health behaviours. It 262 would be useful for future research to investigate the association between perfectionism and self-handicapping in relation to health related behaviours. Both maladaptive perfectionism and self-concealment were found to be related to higher levels of psychological distress and lower levels of both life-satisfaction and well-being. Research in the area of preventive health suggests that psychological distress may affect the likelihood of engaging in various health promoting activities such as attending for health screenings (Lieferman and Pheley, 2006), adhering to preventive health care guidelines (Thorpe et al., 2006) and delaying routine health examinations (Witt et al., 2009). It was hypothesised that adaptive perfectionism would be associated with lower levels of psychological distress and higher levels of life-satisfaction and wellbeing. This would support research suggesting there to be positive benefits attached to being an adaptive perfectionist (Kearns et al., 2008, Slade and Owens 1998). The present study did not identify any relationships between these variables. Further, adaptive perfectionism was also found to be unrelated to self-concealment. These results suggest no apparent benefits to being an adaptive perfectionist, i.e. no associated increase in life satisfaction and wellbeing or noticeable decrease in psychological distress. It would be interesting for future studies to investigate whether a lack of a desire to self-conceal may provide adaptive perfectionists with a type of ‘psychological buffer’ that could potentially protect them from the more harmful maladaptive traits. Consistent with earlier work, maladaptive perfectionism was found to be associated with elevated levels of self-concealment. Additionally, self-concealment was found to be associated with lower engagement in preventive health behaviours. Previous research has identified that highly perfectionistic individuals may self-conceal in an attempt to maintain a ‘flawless image’ and avoid negative evaluation (Frost et al, 1995, 1997; Kawamura & Frost, 2004). Further, a tendency to conceal has also been associated with a reluctance to seek professional help for personal difficulties (Cepeda-Benito and Short, 1998; Kelly and Achter, 1995). When considering the mediating influence of self-concealment in the relationships between maladaptive perfectionism and engagement in preventive health behaviours and maladaptive perfectionism and psychological distress, self-concealment was identified as a partial mediator. Despite not fully supporting the mediation hypotheses, this study does 263 demonstrate that self-concealment may be an important variable when considering the health implications and consequences of being a maladaptive perfectionist. Elevated levels of both maladaptive perfectionism and self-concealment may represent an increased vulnerability towards both psychological and physical problems and be a toxic combination as far as health and wellbeing are concerned. The relationship between perfectionism and self-concealment and the impact of both these factors on health and wellbeing requires further investigation. In summary the present study suggests that maladaptive perfectionists may be putting their immediate and long-term health and wellbeing at risk. Specifically; (i) As maladaptive perfectionism increases there seems to be a corresponding decline in engagement in preventive health behaviours. Engaging in such behaviours is considered to be an important way of reducing the risks of developing various illnesses and chronic conditions such as heart disease, cancer and diabetes, (ii) maladaptive perfectionism seems to be linked to high levels of self-concealment which itself has been associated with various unfavourable health outcomes, (iii) Maladaptive perfectionism has consistently been linked with higher levels of psychological distress, which has the potential to lead to various psychological and physical difficulties and finally (iv) maladaptive perfectionism has been related to lower levels of life-satisfaction and well-being. There is still relatively little research that has addressed the long-term psychological and physical consequences of being a maladaptive perfectionist. Recent research studies have begun to identify the potentially damaging effects of being highly perfectionistic (Fry and Debats, 2009, 2011). Longitudinal studies that aim to investigate the long-term impact of both the adaptive and maladaptive aspects perfectionism in relation to health and wellbeing would be beneficial. Such findings may provide valuable information in the field of health psychology in terms of treating and managing the psychological and physical needs of extreme perfectionists. There are several limitations with the present study. A reliance on self-report data and a cross sectional sample restricted to University students makes generalisations problematic. Future studies may benefit from comparing the health practices of maladaptive, adaptive and non- perfectionists over an extended time period. Another limitation reflects a conceptual difficulty. The present study utilises the conceptualisation supported by Frost et al (1990) and defends the use of a maladaptive/adaptive split to define perfectionism. What 264 has to be remembered is that extreme forms of perfectionism may be characterised by elevated levels of both adaptive and maladaptive traits (Slade and Owens, 1998) and that the coexistence of both positive and negative traits may, in itself, have particular health implications. Another limitation is the method used to assess engagement in preventive health behaviours. The measure utilised provided an aggregate score derived from a number of distinct health behaviours and a more valid means of assessment may be to look at these behaviours separately. Additionally, this measure was limited to addressing more traditional ways of looking after one’s health and wellbeing, and may have overlooked alternative methods e.g. mindfulness, meditation, yoga, kinesiology and homeopathy. Conclusion The present study has aimed to extend previous research in the field of perfectionism and health by highlighting a need to address whether maladaptive perfectionists, do indeed represent a high risk group in terms of their health and wellbeing and whether the associated tendency to self-conceal adds to this vulnerability. Additionally the intention was to identify any apparent advantages (in terms of health and wellbeing) to being an adaptive perfectionist. Previous research has focussed on identifying the negative side of perfectionism, however, little has been done to examine what perfectionists actually do to look after their health and wellbeing. Longitudinal studies designed to gain insight into potential strategies that may be utilised by perfectionists to engage/not engage in preventive health practices would be beneficial as well as qualitative studies looking in more detail at the development of health beliefs and possible barriers to engaging/not engaging. It may also be useful to look the relationship between perfectionism and stress in relation to engagement in preventive health behaviours. Such information would enable health professionals to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the way highly perfectionistic individuals view and make decisions about how to manage their own health and wellbeing. References 265 Adkins KK and Parker W (1996) Perfectionism and suicidal preoccupation. Journal of Personality 64(2): 529-543. Amir D (1987) Preventive behaviour and health status among the elderly. Psychology and Health 1(4): 353-377. Antony MM and Swinson RP (1998) When Perfect Isn’t Good Enough: Strategies for Coping with Perfectionism. Oakland CA: New Harbinger Publications. Antony MM, Purdon CL, Huta V and Swinson RP (1998) Dimensions of perfectionism across the anxiety disorders. Behaviour, Research and Therapy 36(12): 1143-1154. Baron RM and Kenny DA (1986) The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51(6): 1173-1182. Bech P, Gudex C and Staehr Johansen K (1996) The WHO (ten) well-being index: Validation in diabetes. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics 65(4): 183-190. Bieling PJ, Israeli AL and Antony MM (2004) Is perfectionism good, bad or both? Examining models of the perfectionism construct. Personality and Individual Differences 36(6): 1373-1385. Blankstein KR and Dunkley DM (2002). Evaluative concerns, self-critical, and personal standards of perfectionism: A structural equation modelling strategy. In: Flett GL, Hewitt PL (eds) Perfectionism: Theory, Research, and Treatment, Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 285-315. Blatt SJ (1995) The destructiveness of perfectionism: Implications for the treatment of depression. American Psychologist 50(12): 1003-1020. Burns DD (1980) The perfectionist’s script for self-defeat. Psychology Today November: 34-52. Cepeda-Benito A and Short P (1998) Self-concealment, avoidance of psychological services and the perceived likelihood of seeking professional help. Journal of Counseling Psychology 45(1): 58-64. 266 Chang EC (2000) Perfectionism as a predictor of positive and negative psychological outcomes: Examining a mediation model in younger and older adults. Journal of Counseling Psychology 47(1): 18-26. Chang EC (2003) On the perfectibility of the individual: Going beyond the dialectic of good versus evil. In: Chang EC, Sanna LJ (eds), Virtue, Vice and Personality: The Complexity of Behaviour, Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 125144. Chang EC, Ivezaj V, Downey CA, Kashima Y and Morady AR (2008) Complexities of measuring perfectionism: Three popular perfectionism measures and their relations with eating disturbances and health behaviours in a female college sample. Eating Behaviors 9(1): 102-110. Chang EC, Watkins AF and Banks KH (2004) How adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism relate to positive and negative functioning: Testing a stress-mediation model in black and white female college students. Journal of Counseling Psychology 51(1): 93102. Deane FP, Leathem and Spicer (1992) Clinical norms, reliability and validity of the Hopkins Symptom Checklist-21. Australian Journal of Psychology 44(1): 21-25 Deary V and Chalder T (2010) Personality and perfectionism in chronic fatigue syndrome: A closer look. Psychology and Health 25(4): 465-475. de Wit M, Pouver F, Gemke RJBJ, Delemarre-van de Waal HA and Snoek FJ (2007) Validation of the who-5 wellbeing index (WHO-5) in adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care 30(8): 2003-2006. Diener E, Emmons RA, Larson RJ and Griffin S (1985) The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment 49: 71-75. Dittner AJ, Rimes K and Thorpe S (2010) Negative perfectionism increases the risk of fatigue following a period of stress. Psychology and Health 26(3): 253-268. Dunn JC, Whelton WJ and Sharpe D (2006) Maladaptive perfectionism, hassles, coping and psychological distress in university professors. Journal of Counseling Psychology 53(4): 511-523. 267 Enns MW and Cox BJ (1999) Perfectionism and depression symptom severity in major depressive disorder. Behaviour Research and Therapy 37(8): 783-794. Enns MW, Cox BJ, Sareen J and Freeman P (2001) Adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism in medical students: A longitudinal investigation. Medical Education 35(11): 1034-1042. Fairburn CJ, Shafran R and Cooper Z (1999) A cognitive-behavioural theory of anorexia nervosa. Behaviour Research and Therapy 37(1): 1-13. Flett GL, Hewitt PL and Dyck DG (1989) Self-oriented perfectionism, neuroticism and anxiety. Personality and Individual Differences 10(7): 731-735. Frost RO, Marten P, Lahart C and Rosenblade R (1990) The dimensions of perfectionism. Cognitive Therapy and Research 14(5): 449-468. Frost RO, Heimberg RG, Holt CS, Mattia JI and Neubauer AL (1993) A comparison of two measures of perfectionism. Personality and Individual Differences 14(1): 119-126. Frost RO, Trepanier KL, Brown EJ, Heimberg RG, Juster HR, Makris GS and Leung AW (1997) Self-monitoring of mistakes among subjects high and low in perfectionism concern over mistakes. Cognitive Therapy and Research 21(2): 209-222. Frost RO, Turcotte TA, Heimberg RG, Mattia JI, Holt CS and Hope DAJ (1995) Reactions to mistakes among subjects high and low in perfectionistic concern over mistakes. Cognitive Therapy and Research 19(2): 195-205. Fry PS and Debats DL (2009) Perfectionism and the five-factor personality traits as predictors of mortality in older adults. Journal of Health Psychology 14(4): 513-524. Fry PS and Debats DL (2011) Perfectionism and other related trait measures as predictors of mortality in diabetic older adults: A six and a half year longitudinal study. Journal of Health Psychology 17(7): 1058-1070. Green DE, Walkey FH, McCormick IA and Taylor AJW (1988) Development and evaluation of a 21-item version of the Hopkins symptom checklist with New Zealand and United States respondents. Australian Journal of Psychology 40(1): 61-70. 268 Greenberg J (1985) Unattainable goal choice as a self-handicapping strategy. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 15(2): 140-152. Habke AM (1997) The manifestation of perfectionistic self-presentation in a clinical sample. PhD Thesis, University of British Columbia, Canada. Retrieved from http://circle.ubc.ca/handle/2429/6693 Hamachek DE (1978) Psychodynamics of normal and neurotic perfectionism. Psychology 15(1): 27-33. Harari MJ, Waehler CA and Rogers JR (2005) An empirical investigation of a theoretically-based measure of perceived wellness. Journal of Counseling Psychology 52(1): 93-103. Harris PW, Pepper CM and Maack DJ (2008) The relationship between maladaptive perfectionism and depressive symptoms: The mediating role of rumination. Personality and Individual Differences 44(1): 150-160. Hewitt PL and Flett GL (1991a) Dimensions of perfectionism in unipolar depression. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 100(1): 98-101. Hewitt PL and Flett GL (1991b) Perfectionism in the self and social contexts: Conceptualisation, assessment and association with psychopathology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 60(3): 456-470. Hewitt PL and Flett GL (2002) Perfectionism and stress processes in psychopathology. In: Flett GL, Hewitt PL (eds) Perfectionism: Theory, Research, and Treatment, Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 225-284. Hewitt PL, Flett GL and Turnball-Donovan W (1992) Perfectionism and suicide potential. British Journal of Clinical Psychology 31(2): 181-190. Hill RW, McIntire K and Bacherach VR (1997) Perfectionism and the big five factors. Journal of Social Behaviour and Personality 12(1): 1-15. Jones EE and Berglas S (1978) Control of attributions about the self through selfhandicapping strategies: The appeal of alcohol and the role of underachievement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 4(2): 200-206. 269 Kahn JH and Hessling RM (2001) Measuring the tendency to conceal versus disclose psychological distress. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 20(1): 41-65. Kawamura KY and Frost RO (2004) Self-concealment as a mediator in the relationship between perfectionism and psychological distress. Cognitive Therapy and Research 28(2): 183-191. Kawamura KY, Hunt SL, Frost RO and DiBartolo P (2001) Perfectionism, anxiety and depression: Are the relationships independent? Cognitive Therapy and Research 25(3):291-301. Kasl SV and Cobb S (1996) Health behaviour, illness behaviour and sick role behaviour. Archives of Environmental Health 12(2): 246-266, 531-541. Kearns H, Forbes A and Gardiner M (2007) A cognitive-behavioural coaching intervention for the treatment of perfectionism and self-handicapping in a non-clinical population. Behaviour Change 24(3): 157-172. Kearns H, Forbes A, Gardiner M and Marshall K (2008) When a high distinction isn’t good enough: A review of self-handicapping. The Australian Educational Researcher 35(3): 21-36. Kelly AE and Achter JA (1995) Self-concealment and attitudes towards counselling in university students. Journal of Counseling Psychology 42(1): 40-46. Kimble CE, Kimble EA and Croy NA (1998) Development of self-handicapping tendencies. Journal of Social Psychology 138(4): 524-534. Komiya N, Good GE and Sherrod NB (2000) Emotional openness as a predictor of college students’ attitudes towards seeking psychological help. Journal of Counseling Psychology 47(1): 138-143. Larson DG and Chastain RL (1990) Self-concealment: Conceptualisation, measurement and health implications. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 9(4): 439-455. 270 Liebman WM (1978) Recurrent abdominal pain in children: A retrospective study of 119 patients. Clinical Paediatrics 17:149-153. Leiferman JA and Pheley AM (2006) The effect of mental distress on women’s preventive health behaviours. American Journal of Health Promotion 20(3): 196-199. Pacht A (1984) Reflections on perfectionism. American Psychologist 39(4): 386-390. Pavot WG, Diener E, Colvin CR and Sandvik E (1991) Further validation of the satisfaction with life scale: Evidence for the cross-method convergence of well-being measures. Journal of Personality Assessment 57(1): 149-161. Rheaume J, Freeston MH, Ladouceur R, Bouchard C, Gallant L, Talbot F and Vallieres A (2000) Functional and dysfunctional perfectionists: Are they different on compulsive-like behaviours? Behaviour Research and Therapy 38(2):119-128. Rice KG, Ashby JS and Slaney RB (1998) Self-esteem as a mediator between perfections and depression: A structural equation analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology 45(3): 304-314. Shafran R and Mansell W (2001) Perfectionism and psychopathology: A review of research and treatment. Clinical Psychology Review 21(6): 876-906. Slade, P. D. (1982). Towards a functional analysis of anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa. British Journal of Clinical Psychology 21(3): 167-179. Slade PD and Owens RG (1998) A dual process model of perfectionism based on reinforcement theory. Behaviour Modification 22(3): 372-390. Slaney RB, Rice KG and Ashby JS (2002) A programmatic approach to measuring perfectionism: The almost perfect scales. In: Flett GL, Hewitt PL (eds) Perfectionism: Theory, Research, and Treatment. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 63-88. Smith TW, Snyder CR and Perkins SC (1983) The self-serving function of hypochondriacal complaints: Physical symptoms as self-handicapping strategies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 44(4): 787-797. 271 Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. Sociological Methodology 13:290-312. Solomon LJ and Rothblum ED (1984) Academic procrastination: Frequency and cognitive-behavioural correlates. Journal of Counseling Psychology 31(4): 504-510. Stumpf H and Parker WD (2000) A hierarchical structural analysis of perfectionism and its relation to other personality characteristics. Personality and Individual Differences 28(5): 837-852. Terry-Short LA, Owens RG, Slade PD and Dewey ME (1995) Positive and negative perfectionism. Personality and Individual Differences 18(5): 663-668. Thorpe JM, Kalinowski CT, Patterson ME and Sleath BL (2006) Psychological distress as a barrier to preventive care in community-dwelling elderly in the United States. Medical Care 44(2): 187-191. Wei M, Mallinckrodt B, Russell DW and Abraham WT (2004) Maladaptive perfectionism as a mediator and moderator between adult attachment and depressive mood. Journal of Counseling Psychology 51(2): 201-212. Witt WP, Kahn R, Fortuna L, Winickoff J, Kuhlthau K, Pirraglia PA and Ferris T (2009) Psychological distress as a barrier to preventive healthcare among U.S women. Journal of Primary Prevention 30(5): 531-547. 272 TABLES Table 1 Sample Demographics, Means, Standard Deviations and Reliabilities for all Major Variables n Age 18-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+ Marital Status Single Living with partner Married Separated Divorced Level of Study Undergraduate Postgraduate Not specified Variables ADAPT-PERF (PS and O) MAL-PERF (CM and DA) Self-Concealment (SCS) Engagement in Preventive Health Behaviour Psychological Distress (HSCL-21) Well-being (WHO-5) Life-Satisfaction (SWLS) (%) 267 56 33 11 3 (72.2) (15.1) (8.9) (3) (0.8) 269 31 66 8 5 (70.3) (8.4) (17.8) (2.2) (1.4) 164 188 18 (44) (51) (5) (M) (SD) (α) 45.42 8.41 0.88 34.90 9.12 0.89 27.96 8.74 0.89 31.9 8.30 0.84 37.55 9.88 0.90 12.55 6.96 0.87 22.14 6.96 0.88 273 Table 2 Correlation Matrix for all Major Variables Variables 1. ADAPT-PERF 2. MAL-PERF 3. Self-Concealment 4. Engagement 5. Psychological Distress 6. Well-being 7. Life-Satisfaction 1 .347** -.011 .254** -.012 .081 .112* 2 .471** -.330** .533** -.439** -.376** 3 -.346** .486** -.355** -.361** 4 -.396** .524** .380** 5 -.562** -.404** 6 7 .563** - Note. Engagement = Engagement in Preventive Health Behaviours *p < .05. **p <.01 274 Table 3. Summary of the Regression Analysis for the Variables; Maladaptive Perfectionism, SelfConcealment and Engagement in Preventive Health Behaviours Variable/s Unstandardised (B) Standardised (Beta) Step 1 Mal P X Engagement -.300† -.330† .451† .471† Y Step 2 Mal P X Self-Concealment M Step 3 Mal P + Self-C Engagement X M Y -.195† (Mal P) -.215† (Mal P) -.232† (Self-C) -.244† (Self-C) Note: Step 2 is identical for both mediation analyses and therefore will not appear on the next table. Mal P = maladaptive perfectionism, Self-C = self-concealment, Engagement = engagement in preventive health behaviours. † p<.001 Table 4. Summary for the Regression Analysis for the Variables; Maladaptive Perfectionism, SelfConcealment and Psychological Distress Variable/s Unstandardised (B) Standardised (Beta) Step 1 Mal P X Psych dist .577† .533† Y Step 3 Mal P + Self-C Psych dist X M Y .423† (Mal P) .390† (Mal P) .341† (Self-C) .302† (Self-C) Note. Psych dist = psychological distress, † p<.001 275 FIGURES Figure 1. The Mediating Role of Self-Concealment in the Relationship Between maladaptive Perfectionism and Engagement in Preventive Health Behaviours SelfConcealment (Sa) = .044 (Sb) = .052 a = .451 Maladaptive Perfectionism b = -.232 c Engagement in Preventive Health Behaviours Z = -4.091 Figure 2. The Mediating Role of Self-Concealment in the Relationship Between maladaptive Perfectionism and Psychological Distress SelfConcealment (Sa) = .044 (Sb) = .054 a = .451 Maladaptive Perfectionism b = .341 c Psychological Distress Z = 5.395 276 Appendix B: Interview Schedule for study 3 Study 3: Interview Schedule 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. What does the term “being healthy” mean to you? Do you consider yourself to be healthy? What do you do specifically to look after your physical health? How important do you think it is to look after your physical health? What do you to look after your emotional health? How important do you think it is to look after your emotional wellbeing? Do you think that looking after your physical and emotional wellbeing are of equal importance? 8. Do you have clearly defined health goals (ideas about how to look after your health)? 9. What have you done in the past to look after your health and wellbeing? 10. What preventive health behaviours do you engage in (e.g. behaviours that are designed to keep you healthy such as exercising, eating healthily and keeping stress levels under control)? 11. What factors influence your engagement in such behaviours? 12. How do you look after yourself (physically and emotionally) when you have other pressures building up (e.g. exams, assignments etc.)? 13. How do you prioritise when other things interfere with trying to look after your health and wellbeing? 14. What do you do when you encounter obstacles that may affect how you look after your health and wellbeing? 15. Do you ever worry about your health? 16. What sorts of things do you worry about? 17. If you were worried about something physical e.g. and ache or pain, how likely would it be that you would go and see a health professional? 18. If you were finding it difficult to cope emotionally, how likely would it be that you would seek professional help? 277 Appendix C: The Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. My parents set very high standards for me. PE Organization is very important to me. O As a child, I was punished for doing things less than perfect. PC If I do not set the highest standards for myself, I am likely to end up a second-rate person. PS My parents never tried to understand my mistakes. PC It is important to me that I am thoroughly competent in everything I do. PS I am a neat person. O I try to be an organised person. O If I fail at work/school, I am a failure as a person, CM I should be upset if I make a mistake. CM My parents wanted me to be the best at everything. PE I set higher goals than most people. PS If someone does a task at work/school better than I, then I feel like I failed the whole task. CM If I fail partly, it is as bad as being a complete failure. CM Only outstanding performance is good enough in my family. PE I am very good at focussing my efforts on attaining a goal. PS Even when I do something very carefully, I often feel that it is not quite right. DA I hate being less than the best at things. CM I have extremely high goals. PS My parents have expected excellence from me. PE People will probably think less of me if I made a mistake. CM I never felt like I could meet my parents’ expectations. PC If I do not do as well as other people, it means I am an inferior human being. CM Other people seem to accept lower standards than I do. PS If I do not do well all the time, people will not respect me. CM My parents have always had higher expectations for my future than I have. PE I try to be a neat person. O I usually have doubts about the simple everyday things I do. DA Neatness is very important to me. O I expect higher performance in my daily tasks than most people. PS I am an organised person. O I tend to get behind on my work because I repeat things over and over. DA It takes me a long time to do something right. DA The fewer mistakes I make, the more people will like me. CM I never felt like I could meet my parents standards. PC (Subscales - PS = Personal Standards, O = Organisation, DA = Doubts about Actions, CM = Concern over Mistakes, PE = Parental Expectations, PC = Parental Criticisms) 278 Appendix D: Self-Concealment Scale 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. I have an important secret that I haven’t shared with anyone if I shared all my secrets with my friends, they’d like me less there are lots of things about me that I keep to myself some of my secrets have really tormented me when something bad happens to me, I tend to keep it to myself I’m often afraid I’ll reveal something I don’t want to telling a secret often backfires and I wish I hadn’t told it I have a secret that is so private I would lie if anybody asked me about it my secrets are too embarrassing to share with others I have negative thoughts about myself that I never share with anyone total score = In the initial development research for the Self-Concealment Scale, the average score for a group of 306 adults (average age 42, 82% with US college education) was 26, with about 70% scoring between 19 and 33 (Larson and Chastain 1990). A high tendency to conceal was associated with increased physical and psychological illness, even after allowing for the presence or absence of past trauma. Larson, D. G. and R. L. Chastain (1990). "Self-Concealment: Conceptualization. Measurement, and Health Implications." Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 9(4): 439-455. 279 5=strongly agree 4=moderately agree 3=don’t disagree or agree 2=moderately disagree This scale measures self-concealment, defined here as a tendency to conceal from others personal information that one perceives as distressing or negative. Please tick the box, to the right of each of the following 10 statements, that best describes how much you personally agree or disagree with the statement. 1=strongly disagree self-concealment scale (scs) Appendix E: Preventive Health Behaviours Questionnaire Preventive Health Behaviours Questionnaire (adapted from the General Preventive Health Behaviours Checkllist; Amir, 1987) Never 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Sometimes Always I avoid food with additives I take vitamins and supplements I eat bran and other high fibre foods I do regular aerobic or strenuous exercise I get enough sleep I try to drink plenty of water I eat a balanced diet I avoid smoking I avoid salty and processed foods I avoid too much alcohol I avoid too much emotional stress I have friends and maintain a good social life I avoid feelings like anger, anxiety and depression I try to think positively I stay mentally alert and active I get enough relaxation I avoid overworking I regularly eat breakfast I maintain contact with friends and family I try and spend some time outdoors every day I avoid over the counter medication I keep my weight under control I get regular dental check ups I limit certain foods e.g. those high in fat and sugar I control my cholesterol levels I avoid snacking between meals I fix broken things around the home 280 Appendix F: The Hopkins Symptom Checklist - 21 HOPKINS SYMPTOM CHECKLIST – 21 (Green, Walkey & McCormick, 1988 How have you felt during the past seven days including today? Use the following scale to describe how distressing you have found these things over this time. NOT AT ALL = 1 A LITTLE = 2 QUITE A BIT = 3 EXTREMELY = 4 1. Difficulty in speaking when you are excited 2. Trouble remembering things 3. Worried about sloppiness or carelessness 4. Blaming yourself for things 5. Pains in the lower part of your back 6. Feeling lonely 7. Feeling blue 8. Your feelings being easily hurt 9. Feeling others do not understand you or are unsympathetic 10. Feeling that people are unfriendly or dislike you 11. Having to do things very slowly in order to be sure you are doing them right 12. Feeling inferior to others 13. Soreness of your muscles 14. Having to check and double-check what you do 15. Hot or cold spells 16. Your mind going blank 17. Numbness or tingling in parts of your body 18. A lump in your throat 19. Trouble concentrating 20. Weakness in parts of your body 21. Heavy feelings in your arms and legs 281 Appendix G: Satisfaction with Life Scale Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS; Diener, Emmons, Larson & Griffin, 1985) Below are five statements with which you may agree or disagree. Using the 1 – 7 point scale below, please indicate your agreement with each item by placing the appropriate number on the line preceding that item. Please be open and honest in your responding. The 7- point scale is: 1 = strongly disagree 2 = disagree 3 = slightly disagree 4 = neither agree or disagree 5 = slightly agree 6 = agree 7 = strongly agree ____1. In most ways my life is close to ideal ____2. The conditions of my life are excellent ____3. I am satisfied with my life ____4. So far I have got the important things I want in life ____5. If I could have my life over I would change almost nothing 282 Appendix H: Perceived Stress Scale Perceived Stress Scale (PSS; Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., and Mermelstein, R.1983). The questions in this scale ask you about your feelings and thoughts during the last month. In each case, you will be asked to indicate by circling how often you felt or thought a certain way. _____________________________________ 0 = Never 1 = Almost Never 2 = Sometimes 3 = Fairly Often 4 = Very Often 1. In the last month, how often have you been upset because of something that happened unexpectedly?.................................. 0 1 2 3 4 2. In the last month, how often have you felt that you were unable to control the important things in your life? .................................................. 0 1 2 3 4 3. In the last month, how often have you felt nervous and “stressed”? ............ 0 1 2 3 4 4. In the last month, how often have you felt confident about your ability to handle your personal problems? ............................................................. 0 1 2 3 4 5. In the last month, how often have you felt that things were going your way?.................................................................................. 0 1 2 3 4 6. In the last month, how often have you found that you could not cope with all the things that you had to do? ......................................................... 0 1 2 3 4 7. In the last month, how often have you been able to control irritations in your life?................................................................... 0 1 2 3 4 8. In the last month, how often have you felt that you were on top of things?.. 0 1 2 3 4 9. In the last month, how often have you been angered because of things that were outside of your control?................................... 0 1 2 3 4 10. In the last month, how often have you felt difficulties were piling up so high that you could not overcome them? ......................... 0 1 2 3 4 283 Appendix I: The Pennebaker Inventory of Limbic Languidness The Pennebaker Inventory of Limbic Languidness 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 More than once every week Every week or so Every month or so Less than 3 or 4 times per year Have never or almost never experienced (PILL; Pennebaker, 1982) Eyes water Itchy eyes or skin Ringing in ears Temporary deafness or hard of hearing Lump in throat Choking sensations Sneezing spells Runny nose Congested nose Bleeding nose Asthmas or wheezing Coughing Out of breath Swollen ankles Chest pains Racing heart Cold hands or feet even in hot weather Leg cramps Insomnia or difficulty sleeping Toothaches Upset stomachs Indigestion Heartburn or gas Abdominal pain Diarrhoea Constipation Haemorrhoids Swollen joints Stiff or sore muscles Back pains Sensitive or tender skin Face flushes 284 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 More than once every week Every week or so Every month or so Less than 3 or 4 times per year Have never or almost never experienced …PILL continued Tightness in chest Skin breaks out in a rash Acne or pimples on face Acne/pimples other than face Boils Sweat even in cold weather Strong reactions to insect bites Headaches Feeling pressure in head Hot flashes Chills Dizziness Feel faint Numbness or tingling in any part of body Twitching of eyelid Twitching other than eyelid Hands tremble or shake Stiff joints Sore muscles Sore throat Sunburn Nausea 285 Appendix J: The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (form Y) The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory Form Y (STAI-Y; Spielberger, 1983) A number of statements which people have used to describe themselves are given below. Read each statement and then write the number in the blank at the end of the statement that indicates how you feel right now, that is, at this moment. There are no right or wrong answers. Do not spend too much time on any one statement but give the answer which seems to describe your present feelings best. 1 = not at all 2 = somewhat 3 = moderately so 4 = very much so 1. I feel calm ____ 2. I feel secure ____ 3. I am tense ____ 4. I feel strained ____ 5. I feel at ease ____ 6. I feel upset ____ 7. I am presently worrying over possible misfortunes _____ 8. I feel satisfied ____ 9. I feel frightened ____ 10. I feel comfortable ____ 11. I feel self-confident ____ 12. I feel nervous ____ 13. I am jittery ____ 14. I feel indecisive ____ 15. I am relaxed ____ 16. I feel content ____ 17. I am worried ____ 18. I feel confused ____ 19. I feel steady ____ 20. I feel pleasant _____ 286 Please read each statement and then write the number in the blank at the end of the statement that indicates how you generally feel. There are no right or wrong answers. Do not spend too much time on any one statement but give the answer which seems to describe how you generally feel. 1 = not at all 2 = somewhat 3 = moderately so 4 = very much so 21. I feel pleasant ____ 22. I feel nervous and restless ____ 23. I feel satisfied with myself ____ 24. I wish I could be as happy as others seem to be ____ 25. I feel like a failure ____ 26. I feel rested ____ 27. I am “calm, cool, and collected” ____ 28. I feel that difficulties are piling up so that I cannot overcome them ____ 29. I worry too much over something that really doesn’t matter ____ 30. I am happy ____ 31. I have disturbing thoughts ____ 32. I lack self-confidence ____ 33. I feel secure ____ 34. I make decisions easily ____ 35. I feel inadequate _____ 36. I am content ____ 37. Some unimportant thought runs through my mind and bothers me ____ 38. I take disappointments so keenly that I can’t put them out of my mind ____ 39. I am a steady person ____ 40. I get in a state of tension or turmoil as I think over my recent concerns and interests ____ 287 Appendix K: The Godin Leisure-Time Exercise Questionnaire Godin Leisure-Time Exercise Questionnaire (GLTEQ; Godin and Shepherd, 1997) During a typical 7-Day period (a week), how many times on the average do you do the following kinds of exercise for more than 15 minutes during your free time (write on each line the appropriate number). 1. a) STRENUOUS EXERCISE (HEART BEATS RAPIDLY) __________ (e.g., running, jogging, hockey, football, soccer, squash, basketball, cross country skiing, judo, roller skating, vigorous swimming, vigorous long distance bicycling) b) MODERATE EXERCISE (NOT EXHAUSTING) __________ (e.g., fast walking, baseball, tennis, easy bicycling, volleyball, badminton, easy swimming, alpine skiing, popular and folk dancing) c) MILD EXERCISE (MINIMAL EFFORT) __________ (e.g., yoga, archery, fishing from river bank, bowling, horseshoes, golf, snow-mobiling, easy walking) 288 Appendix L: The Exercise Benefits/Barriers Scale EXERCISE BENEFITS/BARRIERS SCALE (Sechrist, Walker & Pender, 1985) Below are statements that relate to ideas about exercise. Please indicate the degree to which you agree or disagree with the statements by circling SA for strongly agree, A for agree, D for disagree, or SD 1. I enjoy exercise. 2. Exercise decreases feelings of stress and tension for me. 3. Exercise improves my mental health. 4. Exercising takes too much of my time. 5. I will prevent heart attacks by exercising. 6. Exercise tires me. 7. Exercise increases my muscle strength. 8. Exercise gives me a sense of personal accomplishment. 9. Places for me to exercise are too far away. 10. Exercising makes me feel relaxed. 11. Exercising lets me have contact with friends and persons I enjoy. 12. I am too embarrassed to exercise. 13. Exercising will keep me from having high blood pressure. 14. It costs too much to exercise. 15. Exercising increases my level of physical fitness. 16. Exercise facilities do not have convenient schedules for me. 17. My muscle tone is improved with exercise. 18. Exercising improves functioning of my cardiovascular system. 19. I am fatigued by exercise. 20. I have improved feelings of wellbeing from exercise. 21. My spouse (or significant other) does not encourage exercising. 22. Exercise increases my stamina. 23. Exercise improves my flexibility. 24. Exercise takes too much time from family relationships. 25. My disposition is improved with exercise. 26. Exercising helps me sleep better at night. 27. I will live longer if I exercise. 28. I think people in exercise clothes look funny. 29. Exercise helps me decrease fatigue. 30. Exercising is a good way for me to meet new people. 31. My physical endurance is improved by exercising. 32. Exercising improves my self-concept. 33. My family members do not encourage me to exercise. 34. Exercising increases my mental alertness. 35. Exercise allows me to carry out normal activities without Becoming tired SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD 289 36. Exercise improves the quality of my work. 37. Exercise takes too much time from my family responsibilities. 38. Exercise is good entertainment for me. 39. Exercising increases my acceptance by others. 40. Exercise is hard work for me. 41. Exercise improves overall body functioning for me. 42. There are too few places for me to exercise. 43. Exercise improves the way my body looks. SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD SA A D SD 290 Appendix M: The WHO-5 Well-being Index WHO (Five) Well-Being Index Please indicate for each of the five statements which is closest to how you have been feeling over the last two weeks. Notice that higher numbers mean better well-being. 3 4 5 4 3 2 1 0 5 4 3 2 1 0 I have felt active and vigorous I woke up feeling fresh and rested My daily life has been filled with things that interest me 5 4 3 2 1 0 5 4 3 2 1 0 5 4 3 2 1 0 At no time 5 Most of the time I have felt cheerful and in good spirits I have felt calm and relaxed All of the time Some of the time 2 Less than half of the time 1 More than half of the time Over the last two weeks 291 Appendix N: Self-Presentational Efficacy Scale Self-Presentational Efficacy Scale (SPES, Gammage, Hall & Ginis, 2004) (self-presentational efficacy expectancy subscale) Think about the last time that you performed exercise/physical activity in public (e.g. gym, exercise class). Using any values from this scale (0% to 100%), please indicate how confident you are for each of the following: How confident are you that….. Other people will think that you have good physical coordination? _______ Other people will think that your body looks fit and toned?_______ Other people will think that you have good stamina?_______ Other people will think that you are someone who works out regularly?_______ Other people will think that you are in good shape?_______ 292 Appendix O: Physical Activity Motivation Scale - Revised Physical Activity Motivation Scale – Revised 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 I’m able to benefit from regular physical activity in many parts of my life I feel very pleased with myself when I do physical activity on a regular basis If I try, I believe I can do physical activity regularly Before I start my physical activity, I get a clear idea what I’m going to do When I’m physically active, it’s usually in places where I can do it best As I get older I’m doing less and less regular physical activity Regular physical activity is important to me I feel very pleased with myself when I stick at regular physical activity Before I start my physical activity, I get it clear how long I’m going to do it for Often the main reason I’m physically active is because I don’t want people to think I’m unhealthy I sometimes avoid physical activity so I have an excuse if I don’t do well at sport, am not good at other physical activities or don’t lose weight Agree strongly Agree Neither agree or disagree Agree somewhat Disagree somewhat Disagree Disagree strongly (Martin, 2010a; 2010b) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 293 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 I try to have a rough plan for my physical activity before I start it Often the main reason I’m physically active is because I don’t want people to think I’m unfit I sometimes do things other than physical activity so I have an excuse if I don’t do well at sport or don’t lose weight I keep working at being physically active until it becomes a regular part of my life I worry that I don’t do enough regular physical activity Often the main reason I’m physically active is because I don’t want others to think less of me I’m unsure how regular physical activity can fit into my life I sometimes put off doing physical activity so I have an excuse if I don’t do well at sport or don’t lose weight I’ve pretty much given up doing any regular physical activity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 294 Appendix P: Exercise Self-Efficacy Scale Self-Efficacy to Regulate Exercise Scale (Bandura, 1997) A number of situations are described below that can make it hard to stick to an exercise routing. Please rate in each of the blanks in the column how certain you are that you can get yourself to perform your exercise routine regularly (three or more times a week). Rate your degree of confidence by recording a number between 0% - 100% with 0% being “cannot do at all” and 100% being “highly certain can do”. (Confidence 0-100%) When I am feeling tired _______ When I am feeling under pressure from work _______ After recovering from an injury _______ During bad weather _______ During or after experiencing personal problems _______ When I am feeling depressed _______ When I am feeling anxious _______ After recovering from an illness _______ When I feel physical discomfort _______ After a holiday _______ When I have too much work to do at home _______ When visitors are present _______ When there are other interesting things to do _______ If I don’t reach my exercise goals _______ Without the support from my family/friends _______ During a holiday _______ When I have other commitments _______ After experiencing family problems _______ 295 Appendix Q: The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS; Watson et al, 1988) This scale consists of a number of words that describe different feelings and emotions. Read each item and then list the number from the scale below next to each word. Indicate to what extent you feel this way right now 1 2 3 4 5 Very slightly A little Moderately Quite a bit Extremely or not at all __________ 1. Interested __________ 11. Irritable __________ 2. Distressed __________ 12. Alert __________ 3. Excited __________ 13. Ashamed __________ 4. Upset __________ 14. Inspired __________ 5. Strong __________ 15. Nervous __________ 6. Guilty __________ 16. Determined __________ 7. Scared __________ 17. Attentive __________ 8. Hostile __________ 18. Jittery __________ 9. Enthusiastic __________ 19. Active __________ 10. Proud __________ 20. Afraid 296