“If Only I Had Done Better”: Perfectionism and the Functionality of Counterfactual Thinking

Abstract

Although a recent update on the functional theory of counterfactual thinking suggests that counterfactuals are important for behavior regulation, there is some evidence that counterfactuals may not be functional for everyone. Two studies found differences between maladaptive and high personal standards perfectionism in the functionality of counterfactuals and variables relevant to behavior regulation. Maladaptive but not personal standards perfectionism predicted making more upward counterfactuals after recalling a negative event and was linked to a variety of negative markers of achievement. Maladaptive perfectionism was associated with making controllable, subtractive, and less specific counterfactuals. High personal standards perfectionism moderated the effects of maladaptive perfectionism on counterfactual controllability. Generating counterfactuals increased motivation for personal standards perfectionists relative to a noncounterfactual control group but had no effect on motivation for maladaptive perfectionists. The findings suggest a continuum of counterfactual functionality for perfectionists and highlight the importance of considering counterfactual specificity and structure.

Perfectionism and Health Behaviors: A Self- Regulation Resource Perspective

“…Thinking about how one could have avoided negative outcomes elicits negative affect which, for most individuals, fuels motivation for corrective future behavior. Across both studies, PC perfectionism was associated with making a greater number of negative affect generating counterfactuals in response to past failures (Sirois et al, 2010). However, rather than being functional, the upward counterfactuals generated by those scoring high on PC perfectionism were associated with greater distress; which, in turn, had no effect on motivation, possibly because the distress short-circuited the behaviorregulation loop (Sirois et al, 2010).…”

“…PS perfectionism is characterized by the setting and striving for high standards for oneself (Frost et al, 1990;Slaney et al, 2001), but often with limited satisfaction for one's achievements (Hewitt & Flett, 1991). A key distinction between these two broad dimensions of perfectionism is reflected in their characteristic affective and cognitive responses to poor performance and failure, with PC perfectionism associated with an array of more dysfunctional responses including self-blame (Dunkley, Zuroff, & Blankstein, 2003), self-criticism (Stoeber, Hutchfield, & Wood, 2008), and rumination (Flett, Madorsky, Hewitt, & Heisel, 2002;Sirois, Monforton, & Simpson, 2010), in comparison with PS perfectionism.…”

“…For perfectionists, these costs may be further exacerbated by ruminative tendencies (see Flett, Hewitt, & Nepon, 2016, Chap. 6) that contribute to both an inability to disengage from fruitless goals, and a pre-occupation with poor goal progress at the cost of taking instrumental corrective action (e.g., Campbell & Di Paula, 2002;Sirois et al, 2010). As will be discussed in the next section, these negative emotional states may further short-circuit adaptive self-regulation of behavior by depleting the resources necessary to follow through with intended actions (e.g., Tice et al, 2001;Wagner & Heatherton, 2015).…”

“…Given the implications of standard setting and monitoring for self-regulation, it is not surprising that several researchers have suggested that perfectionism may be a liability for self-regulation (e.g., Rudolph, Flett, & Hewitt, 2007), and goal regulation in particular (Eddington, 2013;Sirois et al, 2010). Indeed, one particular form of PC perfectionism, discrepancy as measured by the APSR, is characterized by perceiving large gaps between one's current and desired states (Slaney et al, 2001).…”

“…Further evidence of differential self-regulatory responses distinguishing PC perfectionism and PS perfectionism comes from two experimental studies examining the self-regulatory role of counterfactuals for perfectionists (Sirois et al, 2010). Upward counterfactuals, or thoughts about how negative outcomes could have been better, can serve a behavior-regulating function by activating specific intentions to take corrective actions to improve future outcomes (Epstude & Roese, 2008), similar to implementation intentions (Gollwitzer, 1999).…”