Department of Psychology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA.
Psychol Assess. 2011 Sep;23(3):563-77. doi: 10.1037/a0022482.
A large school-based sample of 9th-grade adolescents (N = 875) completed the Almost Perfect Scale-Revised (APS-R; Slaney, Mobley, Trippi, Ashby, & Johnson, 1996). Decision rules and cut-scores were developed and replicated that classify adolescents as one of two kinds of perfectionists (adaptive or maladaptive) or as nonperfectionists. A four-cluster solution further differentiating nonperfectionists was also evaluated. Criterion-related validity of the cluster solutions was supported by perfectionist and nonperfectionist group differences on select subscales of the Multidimensional Students' Life Satisfaction Scale (MSLSS; Huebner, 1994) and the Behavior Assessment System for Children, Second Edition: Self-Report-Adolescent (BASC-2: SRP-A; Reynolds & Kamphaus, 2004). Adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists were supported in both cluster solutions and validity analyses. In addition to the two types of perfectionists, the four-cluster solution differentiated two types of nonperfectionists from one that seemed similar to maladaptive perfectionists in terms of BASC-2: SRP-A scores. Although the four-cluster solution may have potential value, the three-cluster solution was recommended as more parsimonious for studies attempting to differentiate perfectionists. The findings and straightforward decision rules were generally consistent in principle with other studies attempting to classify perfectionists, although the final APS-R cut-scores differed from those of other studies of adults. The results provided additional descriptive inferences for perfectionistic and nonperfectionistic adolescents. Among other issues, the findings raised the question of whether the label of maladaptive for a subgroup of perfectionists was too broad given that the criterion-related validity scores revealed that the group's problems in adjustment were conspicuous only in the areas of anxiety and social stress.
一项基于 9 年级青少年（N=875）的大型学校样本完成了近乎完美量表修订版（APS-R；Slaney、Mobley、Trippi、Ashby 和 Johnson，1996）。制定并复制了决策规则和切割分数，将青少年分为两种完美主义者（适应性或非适应性）或非完美主义者。还评估了进一步区分非完美主义者的四聚类解决方案。通过多维学生生活满意度量表（MSLSS；Huebner，1994）和儿童行为评估系统，第二版：自我报告青少年（BASC-2：SRP-A；Reynolds 和 Kamphaus，2004）的选择子量表上的完美主义者和非完美主义者群体差异，支持了聚类解决方案的效标关联效度。在聚类解决方案和有效性分析中都支持适应性和非适应性完美主义者。除了两种类型的完美主义者外，四聚类解决方案还区分了两种非完美主义者，其中一种在 BASC-2：SRP-A 分数方面与适应性完美主义者相似。尽管四聚类解决方案可能具有潜在价值，但建议使用三聚类解决方案，因为对于试图区分完美主义者的研究来说，三聚类解决方案更简洁。这些发现和简单的决策规则原则上与其他试图对完美主义者进行分类的研究一致，尽管最终的 APS-R 切割分数与其他成年人研究的分数不同。这些结果为完美主义和非完美主义青少年提供了额外的描述性推论。除其他问题外，研究结果提出了这样一个问题，即对于一个亚组的完美主义者，将他们贴上不适应的标签是否过于宽泛，因为效标关联效度得分表明，该群体在焦虑和社会压力方面的适应问题非常明显。
