Expert answer:Maladaptive Perfectionism as a Mediator and Modera
Solved by verified expert:In preparation for this assignment, read the
“Maladaptive Perfectionism as a Mediator and Moderator between Adult
Attachment and Depressive Mood” articleWrite a 750-1,000-word paper about your selected article. Be sure to include the following in your paper: A discussion about the key variables in the selected articleIdentify the validity and reliability reported statistics for the articleThe particular threats to internal validity that were found in the studyThe strengths and limitations of the multivariate models used in the selected articleA reference and in-text citations for the selected article as well as one additional reference REF:Sheperis, C., Young, J., & Daniels, M. (2017). Counseling Research – Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Methods. Boston: Pearson Inc.
maladaptive_perfectionism.docx
multivariate_approaches_rough_draft.docx
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Maladaptive Perfectionism as a Mediator and Moderator
Between Adult Attachment and Depressive Mood.
Acknowledgement: We thank Robyn Zakalik, Shanna Behrendsen, Anne Giusto, and Mike
McGregor for their assistance with data collection.
Throughout the past decade, there has been a growing interest among counseling
psychologists in applying Bowlby’s (1973, 1980, 1988) attachment theory to understanding adult
development and the counseling process (Lopez, 1995; Lopez & Brennan, 2000; Mallinckrodt,
2000). The initial formulations of adult attachment posited four qualitative categories of
attachment based on combinations of positive and negative working models of self and others
(e.g., Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991). However, research has failed to confirm the existence of
qualitative cutoff points, and instead supports two continuous dimensions as the best way to
model adult attachment (Fraley & Waller, 1998). In a factor analysis of data gathered from over
1,000 undergraduates, Brennan, Clark, and Shaver (1998) included all of the extant self-report
measures of adult attachment (14 measures, 60 subscales, 323 items) and identified two
relatively orthogonal dimensions of Anxiety and Avoidance. Adult attachment anxiety is
characterized as an excessive need for approval from others and fear of interpersonal rejection
or abandonment. Adult attachment avoidance involves an excessive need for self-reliance and
fear of interpersonal closeness or dependence. People with high levels of either dimension or
both dimensions in combination are assumed to have an insecure adult attachment orientation.
By contrast, people with low levels of attachment anxiety and avoidance have the capacity for
secure adult attachment, a positive sense of personal competence, and the ability to maintain
supportive attachments (Brennan et al., 1998; Lopez & Brennan, 2000; Mallinckrodt, 2000).
Previous empirical research has provided strong evidence for a link between insecure
attachment and various forms of psychological distress (for reviews, see Lopez & Brennan,
2000; Mikulincer & Shaver, 2003). For example, relative to their secure counterparts, people
with insecure attachment reported greater distress and hostility during a laboratory problemcentered discussion (Simpson, Rholes, & Phillips, 1996), greater affective intensity and
emotionality in their daily life (Pietromonaco & Barrett, 1997), more depressive symptoms
(Roberts, Gotlib, & Kassel, 1996), greater interpersonal problems (Mallinckrodt & Wei, 2003),
and more emotional distress (Collins, 1996). Thus, the link between various forms of insecure
attachment and indices of psychological distress (e.g., depressive mood) has been fairly well
established. More recently, research linking attachment insecurity and distress (e.g., depressive
mood) has been shifting from an examination of simple bivariate linear relationships to
multivariate interactional models that examine the roles of mediators and moderators of these
relationships (Collins, 1996; Lopez, Mitchell, & Gormley, 2002; Roberts et al., 1996; Wei,
Heppner, & Mallinckrodt, 2003).
One example of this new emphasis on multivariate models is recent research that has examined
the relationships among attachment, perfectionism, and adjustment (Rice & Mirzadeh, 2000).
Perfectionism has been conceptualized as a multidimensional construct, with both adaptive and
maladaptive aspects (Flett & Hewitt, 2002). Adaptive perfectionism involves setting high (but
achievable) personal standards, a preference for order and organization, a sense of selfsatisfaction, a desire to excel, and a motivation to achieve positive rewards. Maladaptive
perfectionism involves unrealistically high standards, intense ruminative concern over mistakes,
perceived pressure from others to be perfect, a perceived large discrepancy between one’s
performance and personal standards, compulsive doubting of one’s actions, and motivation to
avoid negative consequences (Enns & Cox, 2002).
Theorists suggest that maladaptive perfectionism results when a child’s need for acceptance
and love from parents is accompanied by a parent’s failure to provide the needed acceptance
and positive regard (Hamachek, 1978). Observational research has shown that if caregivers are
inconsistent and unreliable in responding to the emotional or physical needs of young children,
anxious attachment is frequently the result (Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters, & Wall, 1978). Serious
interpersonal problems may develop in adults whose parents used a love withdrawal style of
discipline involving threats to withhold affection as a means of control (Mallinckrodt & Wei,
2003). Children with attachment anxiety may quickly learn that if they are “perfect” boys or girls,
they may be more likely to gain their parents’ love and acceptance. This pattern of striving for
perfection as a way to earn acceptance that was only intermittently available in childhood may
persist as a maladaptive pattern in adults.
A different dynamic may underlie the connection between perfectionism and attachment
avoidance. Attachment avoidance is believed to involve a negative working model of others
along with a positive working model of self (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991). However, striving
to be “perfect” in the view of others may be an outward defense that masks a deeply wounded
inner sense of self resulting from the inadequate emotional responsiveness of caregivers early
in development (Lapan & Patton, 1986; Robbins & Patton, 1985). Children with avoidant
attachment tend to describe themselves as perfect (Cassidy & Kobak, 1988), but they may drive
themselves to attain perfection to avoid others’ rejection and to manage their own hidden sense
of imperfections. For example, a child may think, “If I am perfect, no one will hurt me” (Flett,
Hewitt, Oliver, & Macdonald, 2002). Thus, initially striving to be perfect may be a positive coping
mechanism for children whose caregivers are unresponsive or inconsistent in their
responsiveness to the child’s needs. However, if striving to be perfect is overused as a coping
strategy, it may lead to depressive mood in adulthood. Therefore, the specific form that the
maladaptive striving for perfection may take might depend on the particular mixture of
attachment avoidance or attachment anxiety experienced in adulthood.
Although several theorists have suggested that the origins of perfectionism are related to
problematic attachment in the parent-child relationship, until recently there were very few
empirical studies of perfectionism and attachment. Among the small number of available
studies, Rice and Mirzadeh (2000) reported that maladaptive perfectionism was related to
insecure attachment, whereas adaptive perfectionism was related to secure attachment in
college students. Similarly, Andersson and Perris (2000) found that perfectionism was positively
associated with insecure attachment. Additionally, Flett et al. (2001) found that persons with
high attachment anxiety and avoidance reported higher perceived pressure from others to be
perfect. Thus, previous studies have provided tentative evidence that attachment avoidance and
attachment anxiety are positively associated with maladaptive perfectionism.
Several studies have shown that perfectionism is positively associated with depression or
hopelessness. For example, perfectionism in college students was associated with greater
depressive symptoms (e.g., Chang, 2002; Chang & Sanna, 2001; Cheng, 2001; Hewitt & Flett,
1991) and suicidal preoccupation (Adkins & Parker, 1996; Chang, 1998). In longitudinal studies,
perfectionism has been linked to both depression and hopelessness over time (Chang & Rand,
2000; Flett, Hewitt, Blankstein, & Mosher, 1995). Also, Hewitt and Flett (2002) reported that
perceived pressure from others to be perfect was associated with hopelessness across different
studies and populations (e.g., Chang & Rand, 2000; Dean, Range, & Goggin, 1996). On the
basis of these previous studies, in the present study we chose to represent the latent variable of
depressive mood with indicators of depression and hopelessness.
It is possible that adults with high attachment anxiety or avoidance are likely to develop
maladaptive perfectionism and, in turn, experience significant depressive mood. Some studies
have examined how maladaptive perfectionism might serve as a mediator between parent-child
interactions and depressive mood. Randolph and Dykman (1998) found that perfectionism fully
mediated the relationship between critical parenting and depression-proneness and partially
mediated the relationship between perfectionistic parenting and depression-proneness in
undergraduate students. Enns, Cox, and Clara (2002) reported that maladaptive perfectionism
mediated the relationship between harsh parenting (e.g., critical parenting, parental
overprotection, and parental lack of care) and depression. However, our search of the literature
could not locate any previous study that examined perfectionism as a mediator between
attachment and depressive mood. If maladaptive perfectionism does serve as a mediator,
interventions could be targeted at adults with attachment anxiety or avoidance to help decrease
their maladaptive perfectionism and in turn decrease their depressive mood.
Hewitt and Flett (2002) argued that perfectionism could serve as a moderator (as well as a
mediator) between insecure attachment and depressive mood. Several studies have found that
specific dimensions of perfectionism (e.g., pressure from others to be perfect) interacted with
general stress (e.g., major life stress or self-appraisal stress) to predict increased depression
symptoms or negative affect (e.g., Chang & Rand, 2000; Cheng, 2001; Dunkley, Zuroff, &
Blankstein, 2003; Flett et al., 1995). That is, greater depression or negative affect was reported
by participants with higher combined levels of perfectionism and perceived stress. In addition,
other studies reported that specific dimensions of perfectionism interacted with specific
stressors to predict higher levels of depression. Hewitt and Flett (1993) found that perfectionism,
particularly in the form of perceived pressure from others to be perfect, interacted with
interpersonal stressors (e.g., relationship problems or lack of intimacy) to predict depression. It
appears that maladaptive perfectionism could serve as a potential moderator of the relationship
between general or specific stressors and psychological distress.
Attachment anxiety or attachment avoidance could be viewed as a source of chronic
interpersonal stress. Perfectionism may lead to depressive mood because it generates core
interpersonal needs that are difficult to satisfy (i.e., the need for others’ approval, or the need to
be perfect to avoid others’ rejection). Maladaptive perfectionism might interact with attachment
anxiety or attachment avoidance to worsen depressive mood (Hewitt & Flett, 2002). From the
standpoint of putative causal links, in a mediating scenario attachment insecurity (x1) is believed
to cause higher levels of maladaptive perfectionism (x2), which in turn causes higher levels of
depressive mood (y). If the mediation is partial rather than complete, there would also be a
significant direct link between (x1) attachment insecurity and (y) depressive mood (Baron &
Kenny, 1986; Holmbeck, 1997). By contrast, in a moderating scenario there is no requirement
that x1 causes x2 and, in fact, the two variables may be uncorrelated. However, the strength of
association between x1 (in this case, attachment insecurity) and y (depressive mood) is
believed to vary for differing levels of x2 (maladaptive perfectionism). Unfortunately, there has
been no empirical research studying how maladaptive perfectionism might interact with
attachment to predict depressive mood.
Because it is possible for maladaptive perfectionism to serve as both an intermediate link in the
causal chain leading from attachment insecurity to depressive mood (i.e., as a mediator) and as
a variable that alters the strength of association between attachment insecurity and depressive
mood (i.e., as a moderator), both types of relationships were explored in this study. Specifically,
the purpose of the present study was to examine whether the maladaptive aspects of
perfectionism (e.g., concern over mistakes, doubts about actions, and perceived discrepancy
between one’s standards and performance) serve as a mediator, as a moderator, or as both in
the context of the relationship between adult attachment insecurity (anxiety and avoidance) and
depressive mood (depression and hopelessness). Figures 1A and 1B depict both of these
hypothesized relationships. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to test the models
depicted in this figure. Slaney, Rice, Mobley, Trippi, and Ashby (2001) argued that the
discrepancy between high standards and perceptions of performance was a defining feature of
maladaptive perfectionism, whereas high standards without perceived discrepancy could
indicate adaptive perfectionism. Therefore, measures of discrepancy between standards and
performance, concern over mistakes, and doubts about one’s actions served as the indicators
for the construct of maladaptive perfectionism, in addition to measures of depression and
hopelessness, which served as indicators of the latent variable depressive mood.
Figure 1. Hypothesized mediating effects
(A) and moderating effects (B) of maladaptive perfectionism on the links between attachment
anxiety and attachment avoidance with depressive mood. The moderating effects (B) of
maladaptive perfectionism on the links between attachment anxiety and attachment avoidance
with depressive mood were examined separately
Method
Participants
Participants were 310 undergraduate students enrolled in introductory psychology classes at a
large midwestern university. The participants were told that the purpose of the research was “to
learn about factors affecting college students’ adjustment.” The sample included 225 (73%)
women and 85 (27%) men. Their mean age was 19.27 years (SD = 1.88, range = 18–30 yrs.).
Approximately 53% of the participants were freshmen. Ethnic identification was predominantly
White/Caucasian (84%), followed by international students of various ethnicities (4.8%), Asian
American (4.2%), African American (2.3%), Hispanic American (2.3%), multiracial American
(1.0%), and others (1.3%). Most participants (98.0%) indicated they were single or never
married. Students received partial credit toward their course grade for participating in this study.
The amount of credit varied depending on their particular section of the course.
Instruments
Experiences in Close Relationships Scale (ECRS; Brennan et al., 1998 )
The ECRS is a 36-item self-report measure of adult attachment containing two 18-item
subscales derived from the factor analysis by Brennan et al. (1998) described previously. The
subscales assess dimensions of adult attachment, Anxiety and Avoidance. Participants use a 7point Likert-type scale (1 = disagree strongly, 7 = agree strongly) to rate how well each
statement describes their typical feelings in romantic relationships. The Anxiety subscale taps
fears of abandonment and rejection. The Avoidance subscale assesses discomfort with
dependence and intimate self-disclosure. Brennan et al.’s reported coefficient alpha was.91
and.94 for the Anxiety and Avoidance subscales, respectively. In the present study, coefficient
alpha was.90 for the Anxiety subscale and.91 for the Avoidance subscale. Brennan et al. also
reported that scale scores were correlated in expected directions with scores on self-report
measures of touch aversion and postcoital emotions. Measured indicators for the two latent
variables of attachment anxiety and attachment avoidance were created from three 6-item
parcels for each subscale. Following the recommendation of Russell, Kahn, Spoth, and Altmaier
(1998), exploratory factor analyses were conducted using maximum-likelihood extraction for the
two factors (Anxiety and Avoidance) separately. The items were then rank-ordered on the basis
of the magnitude of the factor loadings and successively assigned pairs of the highest and
lowest items to each parcel to equalize the average loadings of each parcel on its respective
factor.
Almost Perfect Scale-Revised (APS-R; Slaney et al., 2001 )
The APS-R is a 23-item self-report measure designed to assess levels of perfectionism.
Respondents use a 7-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree) in
responding to the items. The APS-R is made up of three subscales: High Standards, Order, and
Discrepancy. In this study only the 12-item Discrepancy subscale was used. This subscale
measures the degree to which respondents perceive themselves as failing to meet personal
standards for performance. Slaney et al. reported a coefficient alpha of.92 for the Discrepancy
subscale, whereas coefficient alpha was.94 in the present sample. Slaney et al. reported
evidence of construct validity in the form of significant correlations between the Discrepancy
subscale and other perfectionism measures such as Concern Over Mistakes (r =.55) and
Doubts About Actions (r =.62).
Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (FMPS; Frost, Marten, Lahart, & Rosenblate, 1990 )
The FMPS is a 35-item instrument designed to measure perfectionism. Each item uses a 5point Likert-type scale (1 = disagree strongly, 5 = agree strongly). Consistent with Dunkley,
Blankstein, Halsall, Williams, and Winkworth (2000), only two of the six FMPS subscales were
used as indicators of perfectionism in this study: (a) Concern Over Mistakes (9 items) taps a
tendency to interpret mistakes as failures and to believe that one will lose the respect of others
when one fails; and (b) the Doubts About Actions (4 items) subscale, which measures the
tendency to doubt one’s ability to accomplish tasks or the quality of one’s performance. In the
present study, coefficient alphas were.89 and.74 for Concern Over Mistakes and Doubts About
Actions, respectively. Frost, Heimberg, Holt, Mattia, and Neubauer (1993) found that Concern
Over Mistakes and Doubts About Actions not only reflected maladaptive evaluative concerns of
perfectionism, but were also the subscales most strongly related to depression. Criterion-related
validity is evidenced by correlations between FMPS subscales and measures of psychological
symptoms (e.g., Brief Symptom Inventory) and adjustment such as compulsiveness, selfesteem, procrastination, and depression (Frost et al., 1993, 1990).
Beck Depression Inventory (BDI; Beck, Ward, Mendelson, Mock, & Erbaugh, 1961 )
The BDI is a widely used 21-item self-report measure of depressive symptoms. Each item
consists of a depression symptom cluster scored on a 0–3 response scale based on the severity
of the symptom. Scores across the items are summed to obtain a total BDI score, with higher
scores indicating more severe depression. Internal consistency for the BDI for undergraduates
ranges from.78 to.92, with a mean coefficient alpha of.85. In the present study, coefficient alpha
was.86. Test-retest reliabilities for nonpsychiatric participants ranged from.60 (7 days) to.83 (1–
6 hr), with reports of.78 for a 2-week and a 3-week period. Considerable evidence of validity has
been demonstrated for the BDI as a measure of depressive symptoms (Beck, 1967; Bumberry,
Oliver, & McClure, 1978).
Beck Hopelessness Scale (BHS; Beck, Weissman, Lester, & Trexler, 1974 )
The BHS is a 20-item inventory that assesses the degree to which an individual’s cognitive
schemata are characterized by pessimistic expectations. The scale uses a true-false response
format. Scores can range from 0 to 20, with higher scores indicating a greater degree of
hopelessness. Internal consistency of.93 has been reported, along with concurrent validity of.74
with clinical ratings of hopelessness and.60 with other scales of ho …
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
How it works
- Paste your instructions in the instructions box. You can also attach an instructions file
- Select the writer category, deadline, education level and review the instructions
- Make a payment for the order to be assignment to a writer
- Download the paper after the writer uploads it
Will the writer plagiarize my essay?
You will get a plagiarism-free paper and you can get an originality report upon request.
Is this service safe?
All the personal information is confidential and we have 100% safe payment methods. We also guarantee good grades