Multidimensional Perfectionism and Anxiety: Differences Among Individuals With Perfectionism and Tests of a Coping‐Mediation Model

Perfectionism is an important construct that has received considerable attention in the research literature (Stoeber & Otto, 2006). Additionally, perfectionism has been consistently linked to a variety of negative psychological outcomes, such as depression (Argus & Thompson, 2008), obsessive-compulsive disorder (Moretz & McKay, 2009), and anxiety (Saboonchi & Lundh, 1997). Given the possible negative psychological outcomes related to perfectionism, it is important to be aware that a growing empirical literature has offered evidence for viewing perfectionism as having two distinct types: adaptive perfectionism and maladaptive perfectionism (e.g., Rice & Ashby, 2007; Stoeber & Otto, 2006). These two distinct types of perfectionism are based on the early conceptual work of Hamachek (1978), who asserted that both types of perfectionism are related to setting and maintaining high standards. According to Hamachek, what differentiates these two types of perfectionism is the inability of individuals with maladaptive perfectionism to gain a sense of satisfaction from any of their efforts because of their rigid and inflexible belief that they cannot reach their goals successfully. Conversely, individuals with adaptive perfectionism are able to gain a sense of satisfaction and pleasure from their intense efforts along with the ability to be flexible in their pursuits as required. As a result, individuals with maladaptive perfectionism "stew endlessly in emotional juices of their own brewing" (Hamachek, 1978, p. 27) because of the discrepancy between their high standards and their actual efforts. In contrast, individuals with adaptive perfectionism "concentrate on what has been achieved rather than pondering the discrepancy between what has been achieved and what might have been achieved if everything had worked out perfectly" (Stoeber & Otto, 2006, p. 316). The results of several studies have supported these conceptual claims regarding adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism. For instance, recent studies have associated maladaptive perfectionism with higher levels of depression (Ashby, Noble, & Gnilka, 2012; Rice & Stuart, 2010), lower levels of self-esteem (Wang, Slaney, & Rice, 2007), increased levels of perceived stress (Rice & Van Arsdale, 2010), and higher levels of neuroticism (Rice, Ashby, & Slaney, 2007) than both adaptive perfectionism and nonperfectionism. Adaptive perfectionism, in contrast to maladaptive perfectionism and nonperfectionism, has been shown in several studies to be associated with a number of positive outcomes, including higher levels of conscientiousness (Rice et al., 2007), increased levels of hope (Ashby, Dickinson, Gnilka, & Noble, 2011), and lower levels of depression (Ashby et al., 2011). Although there has been considerable research on the relationships between the different types of perfectionism and various psychological states, only a limited number of studies have investigated the mechanisms by which perfectionism results in psychological outcomes. One area of research (e.g., Dunkley, Zuroff, & Blankstein, 2003) has investigated the role of stress and coping in the relationship between perfectionism and outcomes. Hamachek (1978) offered several conceptual ideas about how individuals with adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism may cope with perceived stressors. For instance, maladaptive perfectionists typically "concentrate on how to avoid doing things wrong"; have more "avoidance behavior"; and typically feel "anxious, confused, and emotionally drained before a new task is even begun" (Hamachek, 1978, p. 28). This suggests that maladaptive perfectionists are more likely to use ineffective coping when facing demands. In contrast, adaptive perfectionists "focus on their strengths and concentrate on how to do things right" and feel "excited, clear about what needs to be done, and emotionally charged" (Hamachek, 1978, p. …