- Email: [email protected]
Perfectionism and academic difficulties in graduate students: Testing incremental prediction and gender moderation
Personality and Individual Differences 123 (2018) 223–228
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Personality and Individual Differences journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid
Perfectionism and academic difficulties in graduate students: Testing incremental prediction and gender moderation
T
⁎
Megan E. Cowiea, Logan J. Nealisa, , Simon B. Sherrya, Paul L. Hewittb, Gordon L. Flettc a
Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, Dalhousie University, Life Sciences Centre, 1355 Oxford Street, PO Box 15000, Halifax, Nova Scotia B3H 4R2, Canada Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia, 2136 West Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia V6T 1Z4, Canada c Department of Psychology, York University, 4700 Keele Street, Toronto, Ontario M3J 1P3, Canada b
A R T I C L E I N F O
A B S T R A C T
Keywords: Perfectionism Perfectionistic self-presentation Graduate students Academic stress Imposter syndrome Communication anxiety
Perfectionism involves impression management concerns, and yet perfectionistic-self presentation is often neglected when studying academic problems (e.g., communication anxiety). Research also focuses predominantly on undergraduate students, despite graduate degrees becoming increasingly common. This study tests incremental prediction of perfectionistic self-presentation on intrapersonal and interpersonal academic problems beyond trait perfectionism in graduate students. Participants (N = 269) completed self-report questionnaires of trait perfectionism, perfectionistic self-presentation, and academic difficulties (academic stress, imposter syndrome, and communication anxiety). A gender-balanced sample (52.4% women) allowed tests of gender moderation, which are often neglected in perfectionism research. Socially prescribed perfectionism uniquely predicted some, but not all, aspects of academic difficulties, and non-display of imperfection incrementally predicted all academic problems beyond trait perfectionism. Other-oriented perfectionism and perfectionistic self-promotion were negatively related to certain academic difficulties. Women showed greater imposter syndrome and academic stress, but results did not support gender moderation. Results support the unique importance of perfectionistic self-presentation in predicting academic problems in graduate students and highlight the need for continued research in this area.
1. Introduction Research on perfectionism and academic performance in undergraduate students is common (Rice, Lopez, & Richardson, 2013; Stoeber, Haskew, & Scott, 2015; Verner-Filion and Gaudreau, 2010); however, high performance does not imply a lack of academic problems (Rice & Dellwo, 2002). Academic problems are also commonly investigated, including emotional adjustment (Verner-Filion & Gaudreau, 2010), procrastination (Rice, Richardson, & Clark, 2012), and evaluation anxiety (Stoeber, Feast, & Hayward, 2009). This research has yielded important findings regarding intrapersonal functioning; however, key elements of perfectionism are interpersonal (Hewitt & Flett, 1991; Hewitt et al., 2003) and interpersonal features of academic problems remain largely overlooked. Most research in this area uses undergraduate students, with graduate students being under-represented in the literature (for an exception, see Witcher, Alexander, Onwuebuzie, Collins, & Witcher, 2007). With many occupations now requiring post-graduate degrees for entrylevel positions or career advancement (Torpey & Terrell, 2015), people are increasingly entering the workforce with graduate degrees. Because ⁎
perfectionistic tendencies can contribute to burnout and workplace dysfunction (e.g., Childs & Stoeber, 2012; Flaxman, Ménard, Bond, & Kinman, 2012), it is important to understand how perfectionism manifests in graduate students to inform ways of helping these people prior to entering the workforce. 1.1. Multidimensional perfectionism and academic problems Research frequently focuses on trait perfectionism—individual differences that remain relatively stable across time and situations. One such model of multidimensional perfectionism (e.g., Hewitt & Flett, 1991) includes self-oriented perfectionism (demanding unreasonably high standards for one's own performance), socially prescribed perfectionism (perceiving others as demanding perfection of the self), and other-oriented perfectionism (demanding unreasonably high standards for others' performance). However, theory and research (Hewitt et al., 2003) suggest perfectionism also manifests interpersonally through patterns of self-presentation, including perfectionistic self-promotion (engaging in behaviours to present an image of perfection to others), non-display of imperfection (concealing imperfection from others), and
Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (L.J. Nealis).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.11.027 Received 18 July 2017; Received in revised form 11 November 2017; Accepted 15 November 2017 0191-8869/ © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Personality and Individual Differences 123 (2018) 223–228
M.E. Cowie et al.
communication anxiety, and academic stress beyond trait perfectionism in a sample of graduate students. Socially prescribed perfectionism is a noted contributor to academic stress (Bardone-Cone, Brownstone, Higgins, Harney, and Fitzsimmons-Craft, 2012), social anxiety (Hewitt et al., 2003; Mackinnon et al., 2014), and imposter syndrome (Henning et al., 1998), while self-oriented perfectionism is frequently associated with positive academic adjustment (Kljajic, Gaudreau, & Franche, 2017). Other-oriented perfectionism often shows little relation to academic problems (Witcher et al., 2007); however, research suggests other-oriented perfectionism is associated with narcissistic traits (Stoeber, Sherry, & Nealis, 2015) that are seemingly incompatible with feelings of fraudulence. We hypothesized socially prescribed perfectionism would positively predict academic problems, self-oriented perfectionism would negatively predict academic problems, and otheroriented perfectionism would negatively predict imposter syndrome, specifically. Second, we hypothesized perfectionistic self-presentation would incrementally predict outcomes beyond trait perfectionism (Hewitt et al., 2003; Mackinnon et al., 2014). Only non-display of imperfection uniquely predicts social anxiety (Hewitt et al., 2003; Mackinnon et al., 2014) and general distress in students (Henning, et al., 1998). We expected similar relations with communication anxiety and academic stress. Consistent with research (Ferrari & Thompson, 2006), we hypothesized perfectionistic self-promotion and non-display of imperfection would predict imposter syndrome. Moderating effects of gender are observed in research, but results are inconsistent (Hassan, Abd-El-Fattah, Abd-El-Maugoud, & Badary, 2012; Rice et al., 2013). Further tests of gender moderation are needed to help clarify this issue. Given inconsistent results, we considered these analyses exploratory and made no specific hypotheses regarding direction of effects.
non-disclosure of imperfection (unwillingness to verbally disclose imperfections to others). Perfectionistic self-presentation involves impression management in the service of appearing perfect to others, while being related to, but distinct from, trait perfectionism (Hewitt et al., 2003). Perfectionistic self-presentation uniquely predicts academic outcomes (Hewitt et al., 2003; Nepon, Flett, & Hewitt, 2016), but research in this area is sparse and few outcomes have been tested (e.g., academic self-esteem and selfimage goals related to academic outcomes). Another study tested perfectionistic self-presentation within a model of impression management and distress in university women (Schrick, Sharp, Zvonkovic, & Reifman, 2012), but did not test incremental prediction beyond trait perfectionism. While these studies represent promising advancements, the role of perfectionistic self-presentation in academic problems remains largely unaddressed. 1.2. Intrapersonal and interpersonal expression of academic problems Research and theory suggest perfectionistic self-presentation plays a role in academic problems beyond trait perfectionism. Perfectionistic self-presentation is regarded as a general vulnerability factor for psychological distress (Hewitt et al., 2003) and has shown incremental prediction of emotional distress beyond trait perfectionism (Besser, Flett, & Hewitt, 2010). With a perceived pressure to perform and a need to prove one's competency, even minor tasks may take on an urgent quality and make people particularly vulnerable to day-to-day stress arising from academic demands. Perfectionistic people use self-presentation to gain validation from others and avoid the criticism and rejection they fear (Flett, Besser, & Hewitt, 2014). Perfectionistic self-presentation may thus be relevant in the study of imposter syndrome—a phenomenon in which a person feels intellectually inferior despite demonstrated competence (Clance & Imes, 1978). Those who experience imposter syndrome hold high standards for their own performance and critically evaluate perceived failures (Hewitt et al., 2003; Thompson, Davis, & Davidson, 1998). The desire to appear perfect to others and conceal flaws from others both independently predict greater feelings of fraudulence, perhaps demonstrating the need to maintain the appearance of perfection (Ferrari & Thompson, 2006). People high in perfectionism may be similarly vulnerable to communication anxiety, which represents a fear of expected or actual oral communication with others (McCroskey, 1970). Research suggests both trait perfectionism and perfectionistic self-presentation are related to social anxiety (Mackinnon, Battista, Sherry, & Stewart, 2014) and doubts about social effectiveness (Besser et al., 2010). Given their desire for validation and fear of rejection (Flett et al., 2014), interpersonal communication may be perceived as a potentially high-stakes situation where successful impression management is at risk.
2. Method 2.1. Participants Our sample included 269 graduate students (141 women; 128 men) from the University of British Columbia, with 72.5% in master programs (55.9% women), 19.0% in Ph.D. programs (47.1% women), 7.8% in other programs (e.g. MD, LLB, MBA; 28.6% women), and 0.7% not disclosing their program. Discipline of study varied widely across our sample, although most were in the area of arts and social sciences (43.1%), sciences (33.1%), and health professions (7.4%). Participants averaged 30.7 years of age (SD = 7.5) and 5.1 years of post-graduate study (SD = 2.5). Participants were mostly Caucasian (59.5%), Asian (15.2%), other ethnicities (12.6%), or not disclosed (12.6%). 2.2. Measures 2.2.1. Trait perfectionism The Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (MPS; Hewitt & Flett, 1991) consisted of three 15-item subscales including self-oriented perfectionism (e.g., “It makes me uneasy to see an error in my work”), socially prescribed perfectionism (e.g., “I find it difficult to meet others' expectations of me”), and other-oriented perfectionism (e.g., “Everything that others do must be of top-notch quality”). Each item was rated on a 7-point scale from 1 (disagree) to 7 (agree). Research supports the reliability and the validity of this scale (Hewitt & Flett, 1991; Hewitt, Flett, Turnbull-Donovan, & Mikail, 1991).
1.3. Gender effects in perfectionism and academic problems Literature examining gender differences in perfectionism and academic difficulties is equivocal. Some studies show gender differences in trait perfectionism and perfectionistic self-presentation (Sherry, Hewitt, Flett, Lee-Baggley, & Hall, 2007) while others have not (Besser et al., 2010). Compared to men, women report greater academic stress (Rice, Ray, Davis, DeBlaere, & Ashby, 2015) and imposter syndrome (Henning, Ey, & Shaw, 1998; Jöstl, Bergsmann, Lüftenegger, Schober, & Spiel, 2012). With both perfectionism and gender seemingly impacting academic functioning, tests of gender moderation become increasingly important.
2.2.2. Perfectionistic self-presentation The Perfectionistic Self-Presentation Scale (PSPS; Hewitt et al., 2003) included three subscales: Perfectionistic self-promotion (10items; e.g., “I always try to present a picture of perfection”), non-display of imperfection (10-items; e.g., “I will do almost anything to cover up a mistake”), and non-disclosure of imperfection (7-items; e.g., “I try
1.4. Objectives and hypotheses We aimed to fill gaps in the literature by testing whether perfectionistic self-presentation incrementally predicts imposter syndrome, 224
Personality and Individual Differences 123 (2018) 223–228
M.E. Cowie et al.
Table 1 Means, standard deviations and ranges. Manifest indicator
Total (N = 269) M
Trait perfectionism
Perfectionistic self-presentation
Academic problems
SOP SPP OOP PSP NC NP GSI-AS CIPS PRCAC
67.12 49.39 55.63 35.18 20.46 38.91 29.87 54.77 54.34
SD
14.52 12.67 10.97 11.10 6.87 11.00 8.58 14.42 15.45
Women (n = 141) Range
M
Possible
Actual
15–105 15–105 15–105 10–70 7–49 10–70 7–49 20–100 20–100
21–105 18–85 24–87 10–66 7–47 11–68 8–47 24–97 20–91
SD
Men (n = 128) Range
M
SD
Actual 68.27 49.33 54.20 35.83 19.61 39.97 31.70 57.79 55.99
13.80 13.05 10.59 11.20 7.14 10.97 8.36 15.16 16.09
Range Actual
31–105 20–85 24–76 12–66 7–47 17–66 8–47 24–97 20–91
65.85 49.46 57.20 34.47 21.40 37.75 27.86 51.44 52.53
15.21 12.30 11.20 10.99 6.45 10.96 8.39 12.81 14.56
21–99 18–80 27–87 10–58 9–40 11–68 8–45 26–81 24–87
Note. SOP = self-oriented perfectionism; SPP = socially prescribed perfectionism; OOP = other-oriented perfectionism; PSP = perfectionistic self-promotion; NC = non-disclosure of imperfection; NP = non-display of imperfection; GSI-AS = academic stress; CIPS = imposter syndrome; PRCAC = communication anxiety.
expectation maximization in SPSS (version 22). Expectation maximization is a valid approach when a small proportion (> 5%) of missing data is present (Graham, 2009). Hierarchical regression analyses tested the influence of trait perfectionism and perfectionistic selfpresentation on each academic outcome. Gender was included in the first step of each model.1 Subscales of trait perfectionism and perfectionistic self-presentation were entered in steps two and three, respectively, to test incremental prediction. Interaction terms between gender and each perfectionism variable were entered in step four. Unique contributions of each predictor to the outcome are indicated by semipartial correlations. Interpretation of effect sizes used Cohen's (1992) recommendations.
to keep my faults to myself”). Each item was rated on a 7-point Likert scale from 1 (disagree strongly) to 7 (agree strongly). Research supports the reliability and the validity of this scale (Hewitt et al., 2003). 2.2.3. Academic stress The Academic Stress subscale of the Graduate Stress Inventory–Revised (GSI-AS; Rocha-Singh, 1994) included 20 items rated according to the stressfulness of each experience (e.g. “Handling the academic workload”) using a 7-point scale from 1 (not at all stressful) to 7 (extremely stressful). Research supports the reliability and the validity of this scale (Rocha-Singh, 1994). 2.2.4. Imposter symptoms The Clance Imposter Phenomenon Scale (CIPS; Clance & Imes, 1978) included 20 items (e.g., “I'm afraid people important to me may find out that I'm not as capable as they think I am”) rated on a 5-point scale from 1 (not at all true) to 5 (very true). Research supports the reliability and the validity of this scale (Chrisman, Pieper, Clance, Holland, & Glickauf-Hughes, 1995).
3. Results 3.1. Descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations Table 1 shows means, standard deviations, and ranges for variables. Table 2 shows bivariate correlations and alpha reliabilities. Alpha reliabilities were adequate for scales. Trait perfectionism subscales were highly inter-correlated with moderate effect sizes (r = 0.47–0.49) and showed no significantly correlations with communication anxiety. Selforiented and socially prescribed perfectionism were correlated with imposter syndrome with small and moderate effect sizes (r = 0.26 and 0.48, respectively), while other-oriented perfectionism showed a small effect (r = 0.12). Socially prescribed perfectionism and self-oriented perfectionism showed small correlations with academic stress (r = 0.15–0.25) but other-oriented perfectionism was unrelated to academic stress (r = 0.01). Perfectionistic self-presentation subscales were highly inter-correlated with large effect sizes (r = 0.55–0.71). Non-display of imperfection and non-disclosure of imperfection were significantly correlated with communication anxiety with small effect sizes (r = 0.14–0.26) but perfectionistic self-promotion showed no relation. All three subscales showed correlations with imposter syndrome of moderate to large effect sizes (r = 0.35–0.51) and correlations with academic stress of small to moderate effect sizes (r = 0.17–0.38).
2.2.5. Communication anxiety The Personal Report of Communication Apprehension for College Students (PRCAC; McCroskey, 1970) included 20 items assessing communication anxiety in commonly encountered academic situations (e.g., “I feel self-conscious when I am called upon to answer a question or give an opinion in class”). Each item was rated on a 5-point scale from 1 (strongly agree) to 5 (strongly disagree). Research supports the reliability and the validity of this scale (Butler, Pryor, & Marti, 2004). 2.3. Procedure Researchers contacted all professors teaching graduate level courses at the University of British Columbia. With the professor's consent, inclass announcements were made informing students of the study and its purpose, which was described as examining personality and academic behaviours in graduate students. Interested students (n = 550) were provided written informed consent and questionnaires and instructed to mail completed forms back to the research team. No compensation was provided. In total, 272 participants (49.5%) returned the completed informed consent and questionnaires. Three students were not current graduate students (e.g. post-doctoral fellow) and were removed from analysis.
3.2. Gender differences in perfectionism We
2.4. Data analytic plan
tested
gender
differences
in
trait
perfectionism
and
1 Because a high proportion of international students attend the University of British Columbia, ethnicity was initially included in step one of the regression model. Including this variable had negligible impact on results. It was subsequently removed for parsimony.
Our data contained 0.4% item-level missing data and 0.2% scalelevel missing data. Item level missing data were imputed using 225
Personality and Individual Differences 123 (2018) 223–228
M.E. Cowie et al.
Table 2 Bivariate correlations and Cronbach's alphas for trait perfectionism, perfectionistic self-presentation, and academic difficulties. Variable
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.
0.88 0.48⁎⁎⁎ 0.47⁎⁎⁎ 0.59⁎⁎⁎ 0.33⁎⁎⁎ 0.45⁎⁎⁎ 0.15⁎⁎⁎ 0.26⁎⁎⁎ −0.05
0.84 0.49⁎⁎⁎ 0.62⁎⁎⁎ 0.57⁎⁎⁎ 0.52⁎⁎⁎ 0.25⁎⁎⁎ 0.48⁎⁎⁎ 0.09
0.76 0.46⁎⁎⁎ 0.37⁎⁎⁎ 0.32⁎⁎⁎ 0.01 0.12⁎ − 0.05
0.88 0.62⁎⁎⁎ 0.71⁎⁎⁎ 0.20⁎⁎⁎ 0.38⁎⁎⁎ 0.06
0.81 0.55⁎⁎⁎ 0.17⁎⁎⁎ 0.35⁎⁎⁎ 0.14⁎
0.86 0.38⁎⁎⁎ 0.51⁎⁎⁎ 0.26⁎⁎⁎
0.82 0.52⁎⁎⁎ 0.31⁎⁎⁎
0.92 0.30⁎⁎⁎
0.93
Self-oriented perfectionism Socially prescribed perfectionism Other-oriented perfectionism Perfectionistic self-promotion Non-disclosure of imperfection Non-display of imperfection Academic stress Imposter syndrome Communication anxiety
Note. Cronbach's alphas are indicated on the diagonal. ⁎ p < 0.05. ⁎⁎ p < 0.01. ⁎⁎⁎ p < 0.001.
as hypothesized. Contrary to hypotheses, self-oriented perfectionism showed no unique effects.
perfectionistic self-presentation using multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA). Perfectionism measures differed between men and women, F(6, 262) = 1592.16, p < 0.001, Wilk's Λ = 0.90, partial η2 = 0.10. Univariate analysis of variance tests showed men had significantly higher levels of other-oriented perfectionism, F(1, 267) = 5.08, p = 0.025, partial η2 = 0.02, and non-disclosure of imperfection, F(1, 267) = 4.63, p = 0.032, partial η2 = 0.02; however, results were not significant after Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons.
3.3.3. Perfectionistic self-presentation Incremental prediction hypotheses were also supported; adding perfectionistic self-presentation subscales in Step 3 significantly improved model fit across outcomes. As expected, non-display of imperfection uniquely predicted all outcomes and showed moderate effect sizes. Contrary to hypotheses, perfectionistic self-presentation uniquely, and negatively, predicted communication anxiety (small effect size); it did not uniquely predict academic stress or imposter syndrome. Nondisclosure of imperfection did not uniquely predict any of our outcomes.
3.3. Hierarchical regression analyses 3.3.1. Gender effects Results are in Table 3. Step 1 showed main effects of gender for academic stress and imposter syndrome, with women reporting higher levels of both outcomes relative to men. Both effects were small. Communication anxiety showed no significant main effect of gender.
3.3.4. Gender moderation Step 4 showed no evidence of gender moderation for academic stress, imposter syndrome, or communication anxiety.
3.3.2. Trait perfectionism As hypothesized, trait perfectionism significantly improved model fit (as indexed by F change scores) in all three analyses (see Step 2). As expected, socially prescribed perfectionism uniquely predicted all three outcomes with small to moderate unique effects. Other-oriented perfectionism also uniquely, and negatively, predicted imposter syndrome
4. Discussion We tested whether perfectionistic self-presentation incrementally predicts academic stress, imposter syndrome, and communication anxiety beyond trait perfectionism. We studied graduate students, who are
Table 3 Hierarchical regression analyses. Communication anxiety ΔR
2
Step1 Gender Step 2 SOP SPP OOP Step 3 PSP NC NP Step 4 SOP × gender SPP × gender OOP × gender PSP × gender NC × gender NP × gender
0.03
ΔF
2
Imposter syndrome β
2.45
0.09
0.02
ΔF
5.53
−0.12 0.18 −0.06
− 0.22⁎ 0.07 0.41⁎⁎⁎
−0.13 0.06 0.29
0.52 − 0.63 0.48 − 0.25 0.16 − 0.21
0.07 −0.09 0.07 −0.03 0.03 −0.03
0.10
0.81
0.02
r
⁎⁎
0.25⁎⁎⁎ 0.23
− 0.14 0.21⁎⁎ − 0.07
Academic stress β
2
0.12
2.95⁎
7.85⁎⁎⁎
ΔR
0.07 0.12
0.04
r
2
ΔF2
0.06 0.51⁎⁎⁎ − 0.15⁎
0.06 0.45 − 0.15
− 0.13 0.03 0.43⁎⁎⁎
− 0.10 0.03 0.35
0.07
5.34
0.08
6.62⁎⁎⁎
0.49 0.38 0.02 − 0.24 − 0.47 0.25
0.08 0.07 < 0.01 − 0.04 − 0.10 0.04
0.10
0.96
0.005
β
r
0.23⁎⁎⁎
0.23
0.03 0.30⁎⁎⁎ −0.12
0.03 0.26 − 0.10
−0.15 −0.06 0.46⁎⁎⁎
− 0.10 − 0.05 0.34
−0.09 −0.22 0.34 −0.08 0.11 0.26
− 0.01 − 0.03 0.05 − 0.01 0.02 0.04
⁎⁎
0.25
24.13⁎⁎⁎
12.29⁎⁎⁎
ΔR2
10.00⁎⁎⁎
0.23
Note. r = semi-partial correlations; SOP = self-oriented perfectionism, SPP = socially prescribed perfectionism, OOP = other-oriented perfectionism, PSP = perfectionistic self-promotion, NC = non-disclosure of imperfection, NP = non-display of imperfection. ⁎ p < 0.05. ⁎⁎ p < 0.01. ⁎⁎⁎ p < 0.001.
226
Personality and Individual Differences 123 (2018) 223–228
M.E. Cowie et al.
from academic problems. Gender moderation may also be specific to certain academic fields (Rice et al., 2013). Overall, gender minimally impacts perfectionism and academic problems compared to other factors.
frequently neglected from research in perfectionism and academic problems yet could benefit from interventions to reduce perfectionism before entering graduate school or the workforce. As hypothesized, perfectionistic self-presentation uniquely predicted academic problems in graduate students. Findings support the unique importance of perfectionistic self-presentation in academic functioning (Hewitt et al., 2003; Nepon et al., 2016; Schrick et al., 2012) while adding to outcomes from extant research. Notably, we rigorously tested associations between perfectionism and imposter syndrome, which were previously tested only in passing (Hewitt et al., 2003; Ferrari & Thompson, 2006). Results suggest perfectionistic selfpresentation is important for understanding academic problems across intrapersonal (e.g., academic stress) and interpersonal domains (e.g., imposter syndrome and communication anxiety). More specifically, and as hypothesized, avoiding outward displays of imperfection was the strongest and most consistent predictor of academic problems in our study. This tendency may relate to a broader pattern of avoidance, which makes perfectionistic people more vulnerable to stress (Dunkley & Blankstein, 2000) and is related to academic motivation that prioritizes performance over mastery (VernerFilion & Gaudreau, 2010). With existing links between non-display of imperfection and social anxiety (Mackinnon et al., 2014), it is unsurprising this form of perfectionistic self-presentation predicted communication anxiety in academic settings. In contrast, fear of disclosing flaws to others, which showed no unique relations in our data, may be primarily relevant in interpersonal contexts where self-disclosure is integral (e.g., psychotherapy; Hewitt et al., 2008). Contrary to hypotheses, actively presenting oneself as perfect was associated with decreased communication anxiety. This may highlight the importance of academic motivation; the desire to demonstrate academic proficiency may relate to more adaptive forms of motivation (e.g., mastery approach and performance approach; Verner-Filion & Gaudreau, 2010). Some have also argued brash self-promotion is associated with narcissistic traits (Hewitt et al., 2003), such that interpersonal interactions provide an opportunity to demonstrate competency and would be something to approach, rather than avoid. Perfectionistic self-presentation is rarely included in studies of goal pursuit and academic motivation, and research integrating these areas could be fruitful. Despite the role for perfectionistic self-presentation, trait perfectionism remains an important contributor to academic problems. As hypothesized and consistent with research, socially prescribed perfectionism represents a maladaptive dimension of perfectionism uniquely and consistently associated with academic problems (Bardone-Cone et al., 2012; Stoeber et al., 2009). Other-oriented perfectionism also showed the hypothesized relation with imposter syndrome, but little association with other outcomes. This supports previous research suggesting other-oriented perfectionism often co-occurs with narcissistic traits (Stoeber et al., 2015), where a more grandiose sense of self may help perfectionistic people avoid the feelings of fraudulence that others might experience. Although we expected self-oriented perfectionism to show protective features (Kljajic et al., 2017), we found no such unique associations in our study. Pursuit of flawless performance is sometimes associated with more adaptive motivation (Stoeber et al., 2009) but increased reactivity following failure (Besser, Flett, & Hewitt, 2004), which may produce a “net-neutral” effect on stress and other problems, consistent with other research (e.g., Bardone-Cone et al., 2012). This possibility may warrant further study. Women demonstrated more vulnerability to academic stress and imposter syndrome as hypothesized, but gender differences in perfectionism were equivocal. Men were slightly higher in other-oriented perfectionism and perfectionistic self-promotion than women; however, the interpretation that perfectionistic men are less vulnerable to communication anxiety and imposter syndrome was not supported by gender moderation analyses. Perhaps only some perfectionistic men (e.g., those high in narcissistic forms of perfectionism) are protected
4.1. Practical implications Graduate students frequently fill professional and leadership roles upon joining the workforce and are likely to bring perfectionistic tendencies with them. It is thus important to recognize perfectionism in graduate students and help them navigate academic demands in a supportive way. Research supports intervention programs for perfectionistic students (e.g., Chand, Chibnall, & Slavin, 2017). However, these programs do not (to our knowledge) target perfectionistic selfpresentation. Given the demonstrated role of perfectionistic self-presentation in academic problems, future research might consider this as an intervention target. 4.2. Limitations and future directions Self-report measures may be biased, particularly among perfectionists with self-presentation concerns who might minimize difficulties or perceived character flaws (Sherry et al., 2013). Informant reports could overcome this limitation. Our data were cross-sectional and not suited to test causal hypotheses regarding perfectionism and academic problems. Longitudinal and experimental designs would allow tests of moderation and mediation. For example, academic stress might exacerbate communication anxiety and imposter syndrome, consistent with a perfectionistic reactivity model (Fletcher & Speirs Neumeister, 2017). Extracurricular responsibilities could influence academic problems in graduate students and should be considered. Lastly, sampling is an important consideration—because participation was voluntary, those who fear being exposed as fraudulent or disclosing imperfection may avoid the scrutiny involved in research participation. 4.3. Conclusions Despite perfectionistic self-presentation being frequently neglected in research on academic problems, it shows unique and important associations with academic functioning in graduate students. The perception of others as expecting perfection and a fear of publicly showing flaws both uniquely contributed to academic stress, feelings of inner fraudulence, and interpersonal anxiety. Further empirical tests of the incremental prediction of perfectionistic self-presentation beyond trait perfectionism are warranted in research on academic functioning. Role of funding sources This work was supported by grants from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada awarded to Paul L. Hewitt and Gordon L. Flett (410-2004-1556) and to Simon B. Sherry (435-20131304). This funding source had no role in the design of the study, collection, analysis or interpretation of data, manuscript writing, or the decision to submit this manuscript for publication. Conflict of interest There are no conflicts of interest to be reported. References Bardone-Cone, A. M., Brownstone, L. M., Higgins, M. K., Harney, M. B., & FitzsimmonsCraft, E. E. (2012). Predicting difficulties controlling overeating and drinking when experiencing negative affect in undergraduate women. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 31, 1051–1073. Besser, A., Flett, G. L., & Hewitt, P. L. (2004). Perfectionism, cognition, and affect in response to performance failure vs success. Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive-
227
Personality and Individual Differences 123 (2018) 223–228
M.E. Cowie et al.
blow my cover? The impostor phenomenon among Austrian doctoral students. Zeitschrift Für Psychologie/Journal of Psychology, 220, 109–120. Kljajic, K., Gaudreau, P., & Franche, V. (2017). An investigation of the 2 × 2 model of perfectionism with burnout, engagement, self-regulation, and academic achievement. Learning and Individual Differences, 57, 103–113. Mackinnon, S. P., Battista, S. R., Sherry, S. B., & Stewart, S. H. (2014). Perfectionistic selfpresentation predicts social anxiety using daily diary methods. Personality and Individual Differences, 56, 143–148. McCroskey, J. C. (1970). Measures of communication-bound anxiety. Speech Monographs, 37, 269–277. Nepon, T., Flett, G. L., & Hewitt, P. L. (2016). Self-image goals in trait perfectionism and perfectionistic self-presentation. Self and Identity, 15, 683–706. Rice, K. G., & Dellwo, J. P. (2002). Perfectionism and self-development: Implications for college adjustment. Journal of Counseling & Development, 80, 188–196. Rice, K. G., Lopez, F. G., & Richardson, C. E. (2013). Perfectionism and performance among STEM students. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 82, 124–134. Rice, K. G., Ray, M. E., Davis, D. E., DeBlaere, C., & Ashby, J. S. (2015). Perfectionism and longitudinal patterns of stress for STEM majors. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 62, 718–731. Rice, K. G., Richardson, C. E., & Clark, D. (2012). Perfectionism, procrastination, and psychological distress. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 59, 288–302. Rocha-Singh, I. A. (1994). Perceived stress among graduate students: Development and validation of the Graduate Stress Inventory. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54, 714–727. Schrick, B. H., Sharp, E. A., Zvonkovic, A., & Reifman, A. (2012). Never let them see you sweat: Silencing and striving to appear perfect among U.S. college women. Sex Roles, 67, 591–604. Sherry, S. B., Hewitt, P. L., Flett, G. L., Lee-Baggley, D. L., & Hall, P. A. (2007). Trait perfectionism and perfectionistic self-presentation in personality pathology. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 477–490. Sherry, S. B., Nealis, L. J., Macneil, M. A., Stewart, S. H., Sherry, D. L., & Smith, M. M. (2013). Informant reports add incrementally to the understanding of the perfectionism-depression connection. Personality and Individual Differences, 54, 957–960. Stoeber, J., Feast, A. R., & Hayward, J. A. (2009). Self-oriented and socially prescribed perfectionism: Differential relationships with intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and test anxiety. Personality and Individual Differences, 47, 423–428. Stoeber, J., Haskew, A. E., & Scott, C. (2015). Perfectionism and exam performance: The mediating effect of task-approach goals. Personality and Individual Differences, 74, 171–176. Stoeber, J., Sherry, S. B., & Nealis, L. J. (2015). Multidimensional perfectionism and narcissism: Grandiose or vulnerable? Personality and Individual Differences, 80, 85–90. Thompson, T., Davis, H., & Davidson, J. (1998). Attributional and affective responses of impostors to academic success and failure outcomes. Personality and Individual Differences, 25, 381–396. Torpey, E. & Terrell, D. (2015, September). Should I get a master's degree? Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/careeroutlook/2015/article/should-i-get-a-masters-degree.htm Verner-Filion, J., & Gaudreau, P. (2010). From perfectionism to academic adjustment: The mediating role of achievement goals. Personality and Individual Differences, 49, 181–186. Witcher, L. A., Alexander, E. S., Onwuebuzie, A. J., Collins, K. T., & Witcher, A. E. (2007). The relationship between psychology students' levels of perfectionism and achievement in a graduate-level research methodology course. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 1396–1405.
Behavior Therapy, 22, 301–328. Besser, A., Flett, G. L., & Hewitt, P. L. (2010). Perfectionistic self-presentation and trait perfectionism in social problem-solving ability and depressive symptoms. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 40, 2121–2154. Butler, J., Pryor, B., & Marti, S. (2004). Communication apprehension and honor students. North American Journal of Psychology, 6, 293–296. Chand, S. P., Chibnall, J. T., & Slavin, S. J. (2017). Cognitive behavioral therapy for maladaptive perfectionism in medical students. Academic Psychiatry. http://dx.doi. org/10.1007/s40596-017-0708-2. Childs, J. H., & Stoeber, J. (2012). Do you want me to be perfect? Two longitudinal studies on socially prescribed perfectionism, stress and burnout in the workplace. Work & Stress, 26, 347–364. Chrisman, S. M., Pieper, W. A., Clance, P. R., Holland, C. L., & Glickauf-Hughes, C. (1995). Validation of the Clance Imposter Phenomenon Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 65, 456–467. Clance, P. R., & Imes, S. A. (1978). The imposter phenomenon in high achieving women. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research & Practice, 15, 241–247. Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155–159. Dunkley, D. M., & Blankstein, K. R. (2000). Self-critical perfectionism, coping, hassles, and current distress. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 24, 713–730. Ferrari, J. R., & Thompson, T. (2006). Imposter fears: Links with self-presentational concerns and self-handicapping behaviours. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 341–352. Flaxman, P. E., Ménard, J., Bond, F. W., & 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, 854–865. Fletcher, K. L., & Speirs Neumeister, K. L. (2017). Perfectionism in school: When achievement is not so perfect. New York, NY: Momentum Press. Flett, G. L., Besser, A., & Hewitt, P. L. (2014). Perfectionism and interpersonal orientations in depression. Psychiatry: Interpersonal And Biological Processes, 77, 67–85. Graham, J. W. (2009). Missing data analysis: Making it work in the real world. The Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 549–576. Hassan, H. K., Abd-El-Fattah, S. M., Abd-El-Maugoud, M. K., & Badary, A. A. (2012). Perfectionism and performance expectations at university: Does gender still matter? European Journal of Education and Psychology, 5, 133–147. Henning, K., Ey, S., & Shaw, D. (1998). Perfectionism, the imposter phenomenon and psychological adjustment in medical, dental, nursing and pharmacy students. Medical Education, 32, 456–464. Hewitt, P. L., & Flett, G. L. (1991). Perfectionism in the self and social contexts: Conceptualization, assessment, and association with psychopathology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 456–470. Hewitt, P. L., Flett, G. L., Sherry, S. B., Habke, M., Parkin, M., Lam, R. W., ... Stein, M. B. (2003). The interpersonal expression of perfection: Perfectionistic self-presentation and psychological distress. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 1303–1325. Hewitt, P. L., Flett, G. L., Turnbull-Donovan, W., & Mikail, S. F. (1991). The Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale: Reliability, validity, and psychometric properties in psychiatric samples. Psychological Assessment, 3, 464–468. Hewitt, P. L., Habke, A. M., Lee-Baggley, D. L., Sherry, S. B., & Flett, G. L. (2008). The impact of perfectionistic self-presentation on the cognitive, affective, and physiological experience of a clinical interview. Psychiatry: Interpersonal and Biological Processess, 71, 93–122. Jöstl, G., Bergsmann, E., Lüftenegger, M., Schober, B., & Spiel, C. (2012). When will they
228
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Personality and Individual Differences journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid
Perfectionism and academic difficulties in graduate students: Testing incremental prediction and gender moderation
T
⁎
Megan E. Cowiea, Logan J. Nealisa, , Simon B. Sherrya, Paul L. Hewittb, Gordon L. Flettc a
Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, Dalhousie University, Life Sciences Centre, 1355 Oxford Street, PO Box 15000, Halifax, Nova Scotia B3H 4R2, Canada Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia, 2136 West Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia V6T 1Z4, Canada c Department of Psychology, York University, 4700 Keele Street, Toronto, Ontario M3J 1P3, Canada b
A R T I C L E I N F O
A B S T R A C T
Keywords: Perfectionism Perfectionistic self-presentation Graduate students Academic stress Imposter syndrome Communication anxiety
Perfectionism involves impression management concerns, and yet perfectionistic-self presentation is often neglected when studying academic problems (e.g., communication anxiety). Research also focuses predominantly on undergraduate students, despite graduate degrees becoming increasingly common. This study tests incremental prediction of perfectionistic self-presentation on intrapersonal and interpersonal academic problems beyond trait perfectionism in graduate students. Participants (N = 269) completed self-report questionnaires of trait perfectionism, perfectionistic self-presentation, and academic difficulties (academic stress, imposter syndrome, and communication anxiety). A gender-balanced sample (52.4% women) allowed tests of gender moderation, which are often neglected in perfectionism research. Socially prescribed perfectionism uniquely predicted some, but not all, aspects of academic difficulties, and non-display of imperfection incrementally predicted all academic problems beyond trait perfectionism. Other-oriented perfectionism and perfectionistic self-promotion were negatively related to certain academic difficulties. Women showed greater imposter syndrome and academic stress, but results did not support gender moderation. Results support the unique importance of perfectionistic self-presentation in predicting academic problems in graduate students and highlight the need for continued research in this area.
1. Introduction Research on perfectionism and academic performance in undergraduate students is common (Rice, Lopez, & Richardson, 2013; Stoeber, Haskew, & Scott, 2015; Verner-Filion and Gaudreau, 2010); however, high performance does not imply a lack of academic problems (Rice & Dellwo, 2002). Academic problems are also commonly investigated, including emotional adjustment (Verner-Filion & Gaudreau, 2010), procrastination (Rice, Richardson, & Clark, 2012), and evaluation anxiety (Stoeber, Feast, & Hayward, 2009). This research has yielded important findings regarding intrapersonal functioning; however, key elements of perfectionism are interpersonal (Hewitt & Flett, 1991; Hewitt et al., 2003) and interpersonal features of academic problems remain largely overlooked. Most research in this area uses undergraduate students, with graduate students being under-represented in the literature (for an exception, see Witcher, Alexander, Onwuebuzie, Collins, & Witcher, 2007). With many occupations now requiring post-graduate degrees for entrylevel positions or career advancement (Torpey & Terrell, 2015), people are increasingly entering the workforce with graduate degrees. Because ⁎
perfectionistic tendencies can contribute to burnout and workplace dysfunction (e.g., Childs & Stoeber, 2012; Flaxman, Ménard, Bond, & Kinman, 2012), it is important to understand how perfectionism manifests in graduate students to inform ways of helping these people prior to entering the workforce. 1.1. Multidimensional perfectionism and academic problems Research frequently focuses on trait perfectionism—individual differences that remain relatively stable across time and situations. One such model of multidimensional perfectionism (e.g., Hewitt & Flett, 1991) includes self-oriented perfectionism (demanding unreasonably high standards for one's own performance), socially prescribed perfectionism (perceiving others as demanding perfection of the self), and other-oriented perfectionism (demanding unreasonably high standards for others' performance). However, theory and research (Hewitt et al., 2003) suggest perfectionism also manifests interpersonally through patterns of self-presentation, including perfectionistic self-promotion (engaging in behaviours to present an image of perfection to others), non-display of imperfection (concealing imperfection from others), and
Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (L.J. Nealis).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.11.027 Received 18 July 2017; Received in revised form 11 November 2017; Accepted 15 November 2017 0191-8869/ © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Personality and Individual Differences 123 (2018) 223–228
M.E. Cowie et al.
communication anxiety, and academic stress beyond trait perfectionism in a sample of graduate students. Socially prescribed perfectionism is a noted contributor to academic stress (Bardone-Cone, Brownstone, Higgins, Harney, and Fitzsimmons-Craft, 2012), social anxiety (Hewitt et al., 2003; Mackinnon et al., 2014), and imposter syndrome (Henning et al., 1998), while self-oriented perfectionism is frequently associated with positive academic adjustment (Kljajic, Gaudreau, & Franche, 2017). Other-oriented perfectionism often shows little relation to academic problems (Witcher et al., 2007); however, research suggests other-oriented perfectionism is associated with narcissistic traits (Stoeber, Sherry, & Nealis, 2015) that are seemingly incompatible with feelings of fraudulence. We hypothesized socially prescribed perfectionism would positively predict academic problems, self-oriented perfectionism would negatively predict academic problems, and otheroriented perfectionism would negatively predict imposter syndrome, specifically. Second, we hypothesized perfectionistic self-presentation would incrementally predict outcomes beyond trait perfectionism (Hewitt et al., 2003; Mackinnon et al., 2014). Only non-display of imperfection uniquely predicts social anxiety (Hewitt et al., 2003; Mackinnon et al., 2014) and general distress in students (Henning, et al., 1998). We expected similar relations with communication anxiety and academic stress. Consistent with research (Ferrari & Thompson, 2006), we hypothesized perfectionistic self-promotion and non-display of imperfection would predict imposter syndrome. Moderating effects of gender are observed in research, but results are inconsistent (Hassan, Abd-El-Fattah, Abd-El-Maugoud, & Badary, 2012; Rice et al., 2013). Further tests of gender moderation are needed to help clarify this issue. Given inconsistent results, we considered these analyses exploratory and made no specific hypotheses regarding direction of effects.
non-disclosure of imperfection (unwillingness to verbally disclose imperfections to others). Perfectionistic self-presentation involves impression management in the service of appearing perfect to others, while being related to, but distinct from, trait perfectionism (Hewitt et al., 2003). Perfectionistic self-presentation uniquely predicts academic outcomes (Hewitt et al., 2003; Nepon, Flett, & Hewitt, 2016), but research in this area is sparse and few outcomes have been tested (e.g., academic self-esteem and selfimage goals related to academic outcomes). Another study tested perfectionistic self-presentation within a model of impression management and distress in university women (Schrick, Sharp, Zvonkovic, & Reifman, 2012), but did not test incremental prediction beyond trait perfectionism. While these studies represent promising advancements, the role of perfectionistic self-presentation in academic problems remains largely unaddressed. 1.2. Intrapersonal and interpersonal expression of academic problems Research and theory suggest perfectionistic self-presentation plays a role in academic problems beyond trait perfectionism. Perfectionistic self-presentation is regarded as a general vulnerability factor for psychological distress (Hewitt et al., 2003) and has shown incremental prediction of emotional distress beyond trait perfectionism (Besser, Flett, & Hewitt, 2010). With a perceived pressure to perform and a need to prove one's competency, even minor tasks may take on an urgent quality and make people particularly vulnerable to day-to-day stress arising from academic demands. Perfectionistic people use self-presentation to gain validation from others and avoid the criticism and rejection they fear (Flett, Besser, & Hewitt, 2014). Perfectionistic self-presentation may thus be relevant in the study of imposter syndrome—a phenomenon in which a person feels intellectually inferior despite demonstrated competence (Clance & Imes, 1978). Those who experience imposter syndrome hold high standards for their own performance and critically evaluate perceived failures (Hewitt et al., 2003; Thompson, Davis, & Davidson, 1998). The desire to appear perfect to others and conceal flaws from others both independently predict greater feelings of fraudulence, perhaps demonstrating the need to maintain the appearance of perfection (Ferrari & Thompson, 2006). People high in perfectionism may be similarly vulnerable to communication anxiety, which represents a fear of expected or actual oral communication with others (McCroskey, 1970). Research suggests both trait perfectionism and perfectionistic self-presentation are related to social anxiety (Mackinnon, Battista, Sherry, & Stewart, 2014) and doubts about social effectiveness (Besser et al., 2010). Given their desire for validation and fear of rejection (Flett et al., 2014), interpersonal communication may be perceived as a potentially high-stakes situation where successful impression management is at risk.
2. Method 2.1. Participants Our sample included 269 graduate students (141 women; 128 men) from the University of British Columbia, with 72.5% in master programs (55.9% women), 19.0% in Ph.D. programs (47.1% women), 7.8% in other programs (e.g. MD, LLB, MBA; 28.6% women), and 0.7% not disclosing their program. Discipline of study varied widely across our sample, although most were in the area of arts and social sciences (43.1%), sciences (33.1%), and health professions (7.4%). Participants averaged 30.7 years of age (SD = 7.5) and 5.1 years of post-graduate study (SD = 2.5). Participants were mostly Caucasian (59.5%), Asian (15.2%), other ethnicities (12.6%), or not disclosed (12.6%). 2.2. Measures 2.2.1. Trait perfectionism The Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (MPS; Hewitt & Flett, 1991) consisted of three 15-item subscales including self-oriented perfectionism (e.g., “It makes me uneasy to see an error in my work”), socially prescribed perfectionism (e.g., “I find it difficult to meet others' expectations of me”), and other-oriented perfectionism (e.g., “Everything that others do must be of top-notch quality”). Each item was rated on a 7-point scale from 1 (disagree) to 7 (agree). Research supports the reliability and the validity of this scale (Hewitt & Flett, 1991; Hewitt, Flett, Turnbull-Donovan, & Mikail, 1991).
1.3. Gender effects in perfectionism and academic problems Literature examining gender differences in perfectionism and academic difficulties is equivocal. Some studies show gender differences in trait perfectionism and perfectionistic self-presentation (Sherry, Hewitt, Flett, Lee-Baggley, & Hall, 2007) while others have not (Besser et al., 2010). Compared to men, women report greater academic stress (Rice, Ray, Davis, DeBlaere, & Ashby, 2015) and imposter syndrome (Henning, Ey, & Shaw, 1998; Jöstl, Bergsmann, Lüftenegger, Schober, & Spiel, 2012). With both perfectionism and gender seemingly impacting academic functioning, tests of gender moderation become increasingly important.
2.2.2. Perfectionistic self-presentation The Perfectionistic Self-Presentation Scale (PSPS; Hewitt et al., 2003) included three subscales: Perfectionistic self-promotion (10items; e.g., “I always try to present a picture of perfection”), non-display of imperfection (10-items; e.g., “I will do almost anything to cover up a mistake”), and non-disclosure of imperfection (7-items; e.g., “I try
1.4. Objectives and hypotheses We aimed to fill gaps in the literature by testing whether perfectionistic self-presentation incrementally predicts imposter syndrome, 224
Personality and Individual Differences 123 (2018) 223–228
M.E. Cowie et al.
Table 1 Means, standard deviations and ranges. Manifest indicator
Total (N = 269) M
Trait perfectionism
Perfectionistic self-presentation
Academic problems
SOP SPP OOP PSP NC NP GSI-AS CIPS PRCAC
67.12 49.39 55.63 35.18 20.46 38.91 29.87 54.77 54.34
SD
14.52 12.67 10.97 11.10 6.87 11.00 8.58 14.42 15.45
Women (n = 141) Range
M
Possible
Actual
15–105 15–105 15–105 10–70 7–49 10–70 7–49 20–100 20–100
21–105 18–85 24–87 10–66 7–47 11–68 8–47 24–97 20–91
SD
Men (n = 128) Range
M
SD
Actual 68.27 49.33 54.20 35.83 19.61 39.97 31.70 57.79 55.99
13.80 13.05 10.59 11.20 7.14 10.97 8.36 15.16 16.09
Range Actual
31–105 20–85 24–76 12–66 7–47 17–66 8–47 24–97 20–91
65.85 49.46 57.20 34.47 21.40 37.75 27.86 51.44 52.53
15.21 12.30 11.20 10.99 6.45 10.96 8.39 12.81 14.56
21–99 18–80 27–87 10–58 9–40 11–68 8–45 26–81 24–87
Note. SOP = self-oriented perfectionism; SPP = socially prescribed perfectionism; OOP = other-oriented perfectionism; PSP = perfectionistic self-promotion; NC = non-disclosure of imperfection; NP = non-display of imperfection; GSI-AS = academic stress; CIPS = imposter syndrome; PRCAC = communication anxiety.
expectation maximization in SPSS (version 22). Expectation maximization is a valid approach when a small proportion (> 5%) of missing data is present (Graham, 2009). Hierarchical regression analyses tested the influence of trait perfectionism and perfectionistic selfpresentation on each academic outcome. Gender was included in the first step of each model.1 Subscales of trait perfectionism and perfectionistic self-presentation were entered in steps two and three, respectively, to test incremental prediction. Interaction terms between gender and each perfectionism variable were entered in step four. Unique contributions of each predictor to the outcome are indicated by semipartial correlations. Interpretation of effect sizes used Cohen's (1992) recommendations.
to keep my faults to myself”). Each item was rated on a 7-point Likert scale from 1 (disagree strongly) to 7 (agree strongly). Research supports the reliability and the validity of this scale (Hewitt et al., 2003). 2.2.3. Academic stress The Academic Stress subscale of the Graduate Stress Inventory–Revised (GSI-AS; Rocha-Singh, 1994) included 20 items rated according to the stressfulness of each experience (e.g. “Handling the academic workload”) using a 7-point scale from 1 (not at all stressful) to 7 (extremely stressful). Research supports the reliability and the validity of this scale (Rocha-Singh, 1994). 2.2.4. Imposter symptoms The Clance Imposter Phenomenon Scale (CIPS; Clance & Imes, 1978) included 20 items (e.g., “I'm afraid people important to me may find out that I'm not as capable as they think I am”) rated on a 5-point scale from 1 (not at all true) to 5 (very true). Research supports the reliability and the validity of this scale (Chrisman, Pieper, Clance, Holland, & Glickauf-Hughes, 1995).
3. Results 3.1. Descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations Table 1 shows means, standard deviations, and ranges for variables. Table 2 shows bivariate correlations and alpha reliabilities. Alpha reliabilities were adequate for scales. Trait perfectionism subscales were highly inter-correlated with moderate effect sizes (r = 0.47–0.49) and showed no significantly correlations with communication anxiety. Selforiented and socially prescribed perfectionism were correlated with imposter syndrome with small and moderate effect sizes (r = 0.26 and 0.48, respectively), while other-oriented perfectionism showed a small effect (r = 0.12). Socially prescribed perfectionism and self-oriented perfectionism showed small correlations with academic stress (r = 0.15–0.25) but other-oriented perfectionism was unrelated to academic stress (r = 0.01). Perfectionistic self-presentation subscales were highly inter-correlated with large effect sizes (r = 0.55–0.71). Non-display of imperfection and non-disclosure of imperfection were significantly correlated with communication anxiety with small effect sizes (r = 0.14–0.26) but perfectionistic self-promotion showed no relation. All three subscales showed correlations with imposter syndrome of moderate to large effect sizes (r = 0.35–0.51) and correlations with academic stress of small to moderate effect sizes (r = 0.17–0.38).
2.2.5. Communication anxiety The Personal Report of Communication Apprehension for College Students (PRCAC; McCroskey, 1970) included 20 items assessing communication anxiety in commonly encountered academic situations (e.g., “I feel self-conscious when I am called upon to answer a question or give an opinion in class”). Each item was rated on a 5-point scale from 1 (strongly agree) to 5 (strongly disagree). Research supports the reliability and the validity of this scale (Butler, Pryor, & Marti, 2004). 2.3. Procedure Researchers contacted all professors teaching graduate level courses at the University of British Columbia. With the professor's consent, inclass announcements were made informing students of the study and its purpose, which was described as examining personality and academic behaviours in graduate students. Interested students (n = 550) were provided written informed consent and questionnaires and instructed to mail completed forms back to the research team. No compensation was provided. In total, 272 participants (49.5%) returned the completed informed consent and questionnaires. Three students were not current graduate students (e.g. post-doctoral fellow) and were removed from analysis.
3.2. Gender differences in perfectionism We
2.4. Data analytic plan
tested
gender
differences
in
trait
perfectionism
and
1 Because a high proportion of international students attend the University of British Columbia, ethnicity was initially included in step one of the regression model. Including this variable had negligible impact on results. It was subsequently removed for parsimony.
Our data contained 0.4% item-level missing data and 0.2% scalelevel missing data. Item level missing data were imputed using 225
Personality and Individual Differences 123 (2018) 223–228
M.E. Cowie et al.
Table 2 Bivariate correlations and Cronbach's alphas for trait perfectionism, perfectionistic self-presentation, and academic difficulties. Variable
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.
0.88 0.48⁎⁎⁎ 0.47⁎⁎⁎ 0.59⁎⁎⁎ 0.33⁎⁎⁎ 0.45⁎⁎⁎ 0.15⁎⁎⁎ 0.26⁎⁎⁎ −0.05
0.84 0.49⁎⁎⁎ 0.62⁎⁎⁎ 0.57⁎⁎⁎ 0.52⁎⁎⁎ 0.25⁎⁎⁎ 0.48⁎⁎⁎ 0.09
0.76 0.46⁎⁎⁎ 0.37⁎⁎⁎ 0.32⁎⁎⁎ 0.01 0.12⁎ − 0.05
0.88 0.62⁎⁎⁎ 0.71⁎⁎⁎ 0.20⁎⁎⁎ 0.38⁎⁎⁎ 0.06
0.81 0.55⁎⁎⁎ 0.17⁎⁎⁎ 0.35⁎⁎⁎ 0.14⁎
0.86 0.38⁎⁎⁎ 0.51⁎⁎⁎ 0.26⁎⁎⁎
0.82 0.52⁎⁎⁎ 0.31⁎⁎⁎
0.92 0.30⁎⁎⁎
0.93
Self-oriented perfectionism Socially prescribed perfectionism Other-oriented perfectionism Perfectionistic self-promotion Non-disclosure of imperfection Non-display of imperfection Academic stress Imposter syndrome Communication anxiety
Note. Cronbach's alphas are indicated on the diagonal. ⁎ p < 0.05. ⁎⁎ p < 0.01. ⁎⁎⁎ p < 0.001.
as hypothesized. Contrary to hypotheses, self-oriented perfectionism showed no unique effects.
perfectionistic self-presentation using multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA). Perfectionism measures differed between men and women, F(6, 262) = 1592.16, p < 0.001, Wilk's Λ = 0.90, partial η2 = 0.10. Univariate analysis of variance tests showed men had significantly higher levels of other-oriented perfectionism, F(1, 267) = 5.08, p = 0.025, partial η2 = 0.02, and non-disclosure of imperfection, F(1, 267) = 4.63, p = 0.032, partial η2 = 0.02; however, results were not significant after Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons.
3.3.3. Perfectionistic self-presentation Incremental prediction hypotheses were also supported; adding perfectionistic self-presentation subscales in Step 3 significantly improved model fit across outcomes. As expected, non-display of imperfection uniquely predicted all outcomes and showed moderate effect sizes. Contrary to hypotheses, perfectionistic self-presentation uniquely, and negatively, predicted communication anxiety (small effect size); it did not uniquely predict academic stress or imposter syndrome. Nondisclosure of imperfection did not uniquely predict any of our outcomes.
3.3. Hierarchical regression analyses 3.3.1. Gender effects Results are in Table 3. Step 1 showed main effects of gender for academic stress and imposter syndrome, with women reporting higher levels of both outcomes relative to men. Both effects were small. Communication anxiety showed no significant main effect of gender.
3.3.4. Gender moderation Step 4 showed no evidence of gender moderation for academic stress, imposter syndrome, or communication anxiety.
3.3.2. Trait perfectionism As hypothesized, trait perfectionism significantly improved model fit (as indexed by F change scores) in all three analyses (see Step 2). As expected, socially prescribed perfectionism uniquely predicted all three outcomes with small to moderate unique effects. Other-oriented perfectionism also uniquely, and negatively, predicted imposter syndrome
4. Discussion We tested whether perfectionistic self-presentation incrementally predicts academic stress, imposter syndrome, and communication anxiety beyond trait perfectionism. We studied graduate students, who are
Table 3 Hierarchical regression analyses. Communication anxiety ΔR
2
Step1 Gender Step 2 SOP SPP OOP Step 3 PSP NC NP Step 4 SOP × gender SPP × gender OOP × gender PSP × gender NC × gender NP × gender
0.03
ΔF
2
Imposter syndrome β
2.45
0.09
0.02
ΔF
5.53
−0.12 0.18 −0.06
− 0.22⁎ 0.07 0.41⁎⁎⁎
−0.13 0.06 0.29
0.52 − 0.63 0.48 − 0.25 0.16 − 0.21
0.07 −0.09 0.07 −0.03 0.03 −0.03
0.10
0.81
0.02
r
⁎⁎
0.25⁎⁎⁎ 0.23
− 0.14 0.21⁎⁎ − 0.07
Academic stress β
2
0.12
2.95⁎
7.85⁎⁎⁎
ΔR
0.07 0.12
0.04
r
2
ΔF2
0.06 0.51⁎⁎⁎ − 0.15⁎
0.06 0.45 − 0.15
− 0.13 0.03 0.43⁎⁎⁎
− 0.10 0.03 0.35
0.07
5.34
0.08
6.62⁎⁎⁎
0.49 0.38 0.02 − 0.24 − 0.47 0.25
0.08 0.07 < 0.01 − 0.04 − 0.10 0.04
0.10
0.96
0.005
β
r
0.23⁎⁎⁎
0.23
0.03 0.30⁎⁎⁎ −0.12
0.03 0.26 − 0.10
−0.15 −0.06 0.46⁎⁎⁎
− 0.10 − 0.05 0.34
−0.09 −0.22 0.34 −0.08 0.11 0.26
− 0.01 − 0.03 0.05 − 0.01 0.02 0.04
⁎⁎
0.25
24.13⁎⁎⁎
12.29⁎⁎⁎
ΔR2
10.00⁎⁎⁎
0.23
Note. r = semi-partial correlations; SOP = self-oriented perfectionism, SPP = socially prescribed perfectionism, OOP = other-oriented perfectionism, PSP = perfectionistic self-promotion, NC = non-disclosure of imperfection, NP = non-display of imperfection. ⁎ p < 0.05. ⁎⁎ p < 0.01. ⁎⁎⁎ p < 0.001.
226
Personality and Individual Differences 123 (2018) 223–228
M.E. Cowie et al.
from academic problems. Gender moderation may also be specific to certain academic fields (Rice et al., 2013). Overall, gender minimally impacts perfectionism and academic problems compared to other factors.
frequently neglected from research in perfectionism and academic problems yet could benefit from interventions to reduce perfectionism before entering graduate school or the workforce. As hypothesized, perfectionistic self-presentation uniquely predicted academic problems in graduate students. Findings support the unique importance of perfectionistic self-presentation in academic functioning (Hewitt et al., 2003; Nepon et al., 2016; Schrick et al., 2012) while adding to outcomes from extant research. Notably, we rigorously tested associations between perfectionism and imposter syndrome, which were previously tested only in passing (Hewitt et al., 2003; Ferrari & Thompson, 2006). Results suggest perfectionistic selfpresentation is important for understanding academic problems across intrapersonal (e.g., academic stress) and interpersonal domains (e.g., imposter syndrome and communication anxiety). More specifically, and as hypothesized, avoiding outward displays of imperfection was the strongest and most consistent predictor of academic problems in our study. This tendency may relate to a broader pattern of avoidance, which makes perfectionistic people more vulnerable to stress (Dunkley & Blankstein, 2000) and is related to academic motivation that prioritizes performance over mastery (VernerFilion & Gaudreau, 2010). With existing links between non-display of imperfection and social anxiety (Mackinnon et al., 2014), it is unsurprising this form of perfectionistic self-presentation predicted communication anxiety in academic settings. In contrast, fear of disclosing flaws to others, which showed no unique relations in our data, may be primarily relevant in interpersonal contexts where self-disclosure is integral (e.g., psychotherapy; Hewitt et al., 2008). Contrary to hypotheses, actively presenting oneself as perfect was associated with decreased communication anxiety. This may highlight the importance of academic motivation; the desire to demonstrate academic proficiency may relate to more adaptive forms of motivation (e.g., mastery approach and performance approach; Verner-Filion & Gaudreau, 2010). Some have also argued brash self-promotion is associated with narcissistic traits (Hewitt et al., 2003), such that interpersonal interactions provide an opportunity to demonstrate competency and would be something to approach, rather than avoid. Perfectionistic self-presentation is rarely included in studies of goal pursuit and academic motivation, and research integrating these areas could be fruitful. Despite the role for perfectionistic self-presentation, trait perfectionism remains an important contributor to academic problems. As hypothesized and consistent with research, socially prescribed perfectionism represents a maladaptive dimension of perfectionism uniquely and consistently associated with academic problems (Bardone-Cone et al., 2012; Stoeber et al., 2009). Other-oriented perfectionism also showed the hypothesized relation with imposter syndrome, but little association with other outcomes. This supports previous research suggesting other-oriented perfectionism often co-occurs with narcissistic traits (Stoeber et al., 2015), where a more grandiose sense of self may help perfectionistic people avoid the feelings of fraudulence that others might experience. Although we expected self-oriented perfectionism to show protective features (Kljajic et al., 2017), we found no such unique associations in our study. Pursuit of flawless performance is sometimes associated with more adaptive motivation (Stoeber et al., 2009) but increased reactivity following failure (Besser, Flett, & Hewitt, 2004), which may produce a “net-neutral” effect on stress and other problems, consistent with other research (e.g., Bardone-Cone et al., 2012). This possibility may warrant further study. Women demonstrated more vulnerability to academic stress and imposter syndrome as hypothesized, but gender differences in perfectionism were equivocal. Men were slightly higher in other-oriented perfectionism and perfectionistic self-promotion than women; however, the interpretation that perfectionistic men are less vulnerable to communication anxiety and imposter syndrome was not supported by gender moderation analyses. Perhaps only some perfectionistic men (e.g., those high in narcissistic forms of perfectionism) are protected
4.1. Practical implications Graduate students frequently fill professional and leadership roles upon joining the workforce and are likely to bring perfectionistic tendencies with them. It is thus important to recognize perfectionism in graduate students and help them navigate academic demands in a supportive way. Research supports intervention programs for perfectionistic students (e.g., Chand, Chibnall, & Slavin, 2017). However, these programs do not (to our knowledge) target perfectionistic selfpresentation. Given the demonstrated role of perfectionistic self-presentation in academic problems, future research might consider this as an intervention target. 4.2. Limitations and future directions Self-report measures may be biased, particularly among perfectionists with self-presentation concerns who might minimize difficulties or perceived character flaws (Sherry et al., 2013). Informant reports could overcome this limitation. Our data were cross-sectional and not suited to test causal hypotheses regarding perfectionism and academic problems. Longitudinal and experimental designs would allow tests of moderation and mediation. For example, academic stress might exacerbate communication anxiety and imposter syndrome, consistent with a perfectionistic reactivity model (Fletcher & Speirs Neumeister, 2017). Extracurricular responsibilities could influence academic problems in graduate students and should be considered. Lastly, sampling is an important consideration—because participation was voluntary, those who fear being exposed as fraudulent or disclosing imperfection may avoid the scrutiny involved in research participation. 4.3. Conclusions Despite perfectionistic self-presentation being frequently neglected in research on academic problems, it shows unique and important associations with academic functioning in graduate students. The perception of others as expecting perfection and a fear of publicly showing flaws both uniquely contributed to academic stress, feelings of inner fraudulence, and interpersonal anxiety. Further empirical tests of the incremental prediction of perfectionistic self-presentation beyond trait perfectionism are warranted in research on academic functioning. Role of funding sources This work was supported by grants from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada awarded to Paul L. Hewitt and Gordon L. Flett (410-2004-1556) and to Simon B. Sherry (435-20131304). This funding source had no role in the design of the study, collection, analysis or interpretation of data, manuscript writing, or the decision to submit this manuscript for publication. Conflict of interest There are no conflicts of interest to be reported. References Bardone-Cone, A. M., Brownstone, L. M., Higgins, M. K., Harney, M. B., & FitzsimmonsCraft, E. E. (2012). Predicting difficulties controlling overeating and drinking when experiencing negative affect in undergraduate women. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 31, 1051–1073. Besser, A., Flett, G. L., & Hewitt, P. L. (2004). Perfectionism, cognition, and affect in response to performance failure vs success. Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive-
227
Personality and Individual Differences 123 (2018) 223–228
M.E. Cowie et al.
blow my cover? The impostor phenomenon among Austrian doctoral students. Zeitschrift Für Psychologie/Journal of Psychology, 220, 109–120. Kljajic, K., Gaudreau, P., & Franche, V. (2017). An investigation of the 2 × 2 model of perfectionism with burnout, engagement, self-regulation, and academic achievement. Learning and Individual Differences, 57, 103–113. Mackinnon, S. P., Battista, S. R., Sherry, S. B., & Stewart, S. H. (2014). Perfectionistic selfpresentation predicts social anxiety using daily diary methods. Personality and Individual Differences, 56, 143–148. McCroskey, J. C. (1970). Measures of communication-bound anxiety. Speech Monographs, 37, 269–277. Nepon, T., Flett, G. L., & Hewitt, P. L. (2016). Self-image goals in trait perfectionism and perfectionistic self-presentation. Self and Identity, 15, 683–706. Rice, K. G., & Dellwo, J. P. (2002). Perfectionism and self-development: Implications for college adjustment. Journal of Counseling & Development, 80, 188–196. Rice, K. G., Lopez, F. G., & Richardson, C. E. (2013). Perfectionism and performance among STEM students. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 82, 124–134. Rice, K. G., Ray, M. E., Davis, D. E., DeBlaere, C., & Ashby, J. S. (2015). Perfectionism and longitudinal patterns of stress for STEM majors. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 62, 718–731. Rice, K. G., Richardson, C. E., & Clark, D. (2012). Perfectionism, procrastination, and psychological distress. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 59, 288–302. Rocha-Singh, I. A. (1994). Perceived stress among graduate students: Development and validation of the Graduate Stress Inventory. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54, 714–727. Schrick, B. H., Sharp, E. A., Zvonkovic, A., & Reifman, A. (2012). Never let them see you sweat: Silencing and striving to appear perfect among U.S. college women. Sex Roles, 67, 591–604. Sherry, S. B., Hewitt, P. L., Flett, G. L., Lee-Baggley, D. L., & Hall, P. A. (2007). Trait perfectionism and perfectionistic self-presentation in personality pathology. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 477–490. Sherry, S. B., Nealis, L. J., Macneil, M. A., Stewart, S. H., Sherry, D. L., & Smith, M. M. (2013). Informant reports add incrementally to the understanding of the perfectionism-depression connection. Personality and Individual Differences, 54, 957–960. Stoeber, J., Feast, A. R., & Hayward, J. A. (2009). Self-oriented and socially prescribed perfectionism: Differential relationships with intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and test anxiety. Personality and Individual Differences, 47, 423–428. Stoeber, J., Haskew, A. E., & Scott, C. (2015). Perfectionism and exam performance: The mediating effect of task-approach goals. Personality and Individual Differences, 74, 171–176. Stoeber, J., Sherry, S. B., & Nealis, L. J. (2015). Multidimensional perfectionism and narcissism: Grandiose or vulnerable? Personality and Individual Differences, 80, 85–90. Thompson, T., Davis, H., & Davidson, J. (1998). Attributional and affective responses of impostors to academic success and failure outcomes. Personality and Individual Differences, 25, 381–396. Torpey, E. & Terrell, D. (2015, September). Should I get a master's degree? Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/careeroutlook/2015/article/should-i-get-a-masters-degree.htm Verner-Filion, J., & Gaudreau, P. (2010). From perfectionism to academic adjustment: The mediating role of achievement goals. Personality and Individual Differences, 49, 181–186. Witcher, L. A., Alexander, E. S., Onwuebuzie, A. J., Collins, K. T., & Witcher, A. E. (2007). The relationship between psychology students' levels of perfectionism and achievement in a graduate-level research methodology course. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 1396–1405.
Behavior Therapy, 22, 301–328. Besser, A., Flett, G. L., & Hewitt, P. L. (2010). Perfectionistic self-presentation and trait perfectionism in social problem-solving ability and depressive symptoms. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 40, 2121–2154. Butler, J., Pryor, B., & Marti, S. (2004). Communication apprehension and honor students. North American Journal of Psychology, 6, 293–296. Chand, S. P., Chibnall, J. T., & Slavin, S. J. (2017). Cognitive behavioral therapy for maladaptive perfectionism in medical students. Academic Psychiatry. http://dx.doi. org/10.1007/s40596-017-0708-2. Childs, J. H., & Stoeber, J. (2012). Do you want me to be perfect? Two longitudinal studies on socially prescribed perfectionism, stress and burnout in the workplace. Work & Stress, 26, 347–364. Chrisman, S. M., Pieper, W. A., Clance, P. R., Holland, C. L., & Glickauf-Hughes, C. (1995). Validation of the Clance Imposter Phenomenon Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 65, 456–467. Clance, P. R., & Imes, S. A. (1978). The imposter phenomenon in high achieving women. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research & Practice, 15, 241–247. Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155–159. Dunkley, D. M., & Blankstein, K. R. (2000). Self-critical perfectionism, coping, hassles, and current distress. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 24, 713–730. Ferrari, J. R., & Thompson, T. (2006). Imposter fears: Links with self-presentational concerns and self-handicapping behaviours. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 341–352. Flaxman, P. E., Ménard, J., Bond, F. W., & 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, 854–865. Fletcher, K. L., & Speirs Neumeister, K. L. (2017). Perfectionism in school: When achievement is not so perfect. New York, NY: Momentum Press. Flett, G. L., Besser, A., & Hewitt, P. L. (2014). Perfectionism and interpersonal orientations in depression. Psychiatry: Interpersonal And Biological Processes, 77, 67–85. Graham, J. W. (2009). Missing data analysis: Making it work in the real world. The Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 549–576. Hassan, H. K., Abd-El-Fattah, S. M., Abd-El-Maugoud, M. K., & Badary, A. A. (2012). Perfectionism and performance expectations at university: Does gender still matter? European Journal of Education and Psychology, 5, 133–147. Henning, K., Ey, S., & Shaw, D. (1998). Perfectionism, the imposter phenomenon and psychological adjustment in medical, dental, nursing and pharmacy students. Medical Education, 32, 456–464. Hewitt, P. L., & Flett, G. L. (1991). Perfectionism in the self and social contexts: Conceptualization, assessment, and association with psychopathology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 456–470. Hewitt, P. L., Flett, G. L., Sherry, S. B., Habke, M., Parkin, M., Lam, R. W., ... Stein, M. B. (2003). The interpersonal expression of perfection: Perfectionistic self-presentation and psychological distress. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 1303–1325. Hewitt, P. L., Flett, G. L., Turnbull-Donovan, W., & Mikail, S. F. (1991). The Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale: Reliability, validity, and psychometric properties in psychiatric samples. Psychological Assessment, 3, 464–468. Hewitt, P. L., Habke, A. M., Lee-Baggley, D. L., Sherry, S. B., & Flett, G. L. (2008). The impact of perfectionistic self-presentation on the cognitive, affective, and physiological experience of a clinical interview. Psychiatry: Interpersonal and Biological Processess, 71, 93–122. Jöstl, G., Bergsmann, E., Lüftenegger, M., Schober, B., & Spiel, C. (2012). When will they
228