The 2×2 model of perfectionism: A critical comment and some suggestions

Perfectionism and Burnout in Junior Soccer Players: A Test of the 2 × 2 Model of Dispositional Perfectionism

“…The 2 × 2 model is a recent development in this area and has already led to healthy debate (Stoeber, 2012). One of its main strengths is that it offers formalized hypotheses regarding the interactive effects of perfectionism dimensions that can be tested.…”

Perfectionism and changes in athlete burnout over three months: Interactive effects of personal standards and evaluative concerns perfectionism

“…Results of a simple slopes analysis showed that the positive slope of evaluative concerns perfectionism was significant only at low levels of personal standards perfectionism, but not at high levels, indicating that personal 1 The 2 × 2 model comprises the further hypothesis that pure personal standards perfectionism does not differ from non-perfectionism (Hypothesis 1c). However, since this is a null hypothesis it was not considered in the present study as it cannot be included in the null hypothesis significance testing framework (see Stoeber, 2012). standards perfectionism buffered the positive effect of evaluative concerns perfectionism on sports devaluation.…”

Self-assessment of the four subtypes of perfectionism in the 2×2 model of perfectionism

“…Socially prescribed perfectionism is a cardinal feature of the social evaluative dimension of perfectionism because it entails the pursuit of perfection to obtain or maintain valuation from significant others and to reach socially desirable standards that are imposed by others who ''have unrealistic standards for them, evaluate them stringently, and exert pressure on them to be perfect'' (Hewitt & Flett, 1991, p. 457). 1 In recent theoretical, empirical, and methodological articles (e.g., Gaudreau, , 2013Gaudreau & Verner-Filion, 2012;Stoeber, 2012), proponents of the 2 Â 2 model of perfectionism have suggested that perfectionism can be conceived as the within-person organizations of two interrelated systems: the personal and social components of perfectionism. Individuals can be distinguished according to four prototypical within-person combinations of perfectionism that can be used to define and differentiate the four distinct subtypes of perfectionism shown in Fig.…”

“…This approach incorporates a key assumption of mixture modeling in which the categorization into a given latent class or subtype is conceived as uncertain and probabilistic rather than known and deterministic (e.g., Nagin, 2005;Roeder et al, 1999). This definitional feature has been and shall remain a core assumption of the 2 Â 2 model (Gaudreau, 2013;Stoeber, 2012).…”