This study of university students (64 men and 99 women) examined both dispositional and situational influences of self-critical (SC) perfectionism on stress and coping, which explain its association with high negative affect and low positive affect. Participants completed questionnaires at the end of the day for 7 consecutive days. Structural equation modeling indicated that the relation between SC perfectionism and daily affect could be explained by several maladaptive tendencies associated with SC perfectionism (e.g., hassles, avoidant coping, low perceived social support). Multilevel modeling indicated that SC perfectionists were emotionally reactive to stressors that imply possible failure, loss of control, and criticism from others. As well, certain coping strategies (e.g., problem-focused coping) were ineffective for high-SC perfectionists relative to low-SC perfectionists.
This study of university students (136 men and 307 women) examined the roles of hassles, avoidant and active coping, and perceived available social support in the relation between evaluative concerns and personal standards perfectionism and distress symptoms (i.e., depression, anxiety). Confirmatory factor analysis supported the measurement model used in this study. Structural equation modeling results indicated that hassles, avoidant coping, and perceived social support are each unique mediators that can fully explain the strong relation between evaluative concerns perfectionism and distress. Personal standards perfectionism had a unique association with active coping only. Hassles and social support also moderated the relation between both dimensions of perfectionism and distress. Clinical implications of distinguishing between evaluative concerns and personal standards perfectionism are discussed.
Nonspecific attention was as effective as an early skill-based intervention in reducing maternal anxiety and enhancing sensitive behavior in mothers of VLBW infants.
The present study addressed a fundamental gap between research and clinical work by advancing longitudinal explanatory conceptualizations of stress and coping processes that trigger daily affect in the short- and long-term for individuals with higher levels of personality vulnerability. Community adults completed measures of 2 higher order dimensions of perfectionism (personal standards [PS], self-criticism [SC]), neuroticism, and conscientiousness. Then, 6 months later and again 3 years later, participants completed daily questionnaires of stress, coping, and affect for 14 consecutive days. PS was associated with aggregated daily problem-focused coping and positive reinterpretation, whereas SC was uniquely associated with daily negative social interactions, avoidant coping, negative affect, and sadness at Month 6 and Year 3. Multilevel modeling results demonstrated that both individuals with higher PS and those with higher SC were emotionally reactive to event stress, negative social interactions, and avoidant coping at Month 6 and Year 3 and to less perceived control at Year 3. Positive reinterpretation was especially effective for individuals with higher SC at Month 6 and Year 3. The effects of PS on daily stress reactivity and coping (in)effectiveness were clearly distinguished from the effects of neuroticism and conscientiousness, whereas the SC effects were due to shared overlap with PS and neuroticism. The present findings demonstrate the promise of using repeated daily diary methodologies to help therapists and clients reliably predict future client reactions to daily stressors, which, in turn, could help guide interventions to break apart dysfunctional patterns connected to distress and build resilience for vulnerable individuals.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.