Relationship between sport perfectionism and perceived competence as a function of skill level and sport type.

Breeding, Tiffany Watson ; Anshel, Mark H.

Perfectionism has been generally defined as a person's tendency to have unrealistically high self-imposed standards to attain, to demand that others meet the person's unrealistically high standards, and the exaggerated belief that others have expectations of the individual that are impossible to meet (Antony & Swinson, 2009). Perfectionism is a construct that has been categorized as both positive (i.e., adaptive) and negative (maladaptive), or as Gotwals and Spencer-Cavaliere (2014) call, healthy and unhealthy.

Positive forms of perfectionism include setting high personal standards, having high but achievable goals, a strong desire to excel, and enhanced levels of motivation. Stoeber and his colleagues (e.g., Stoeber & Eismann, 2007; Stoeber & Otto, 2006) have categorized perfectionism into positive (i.e., perfectionistic strivings) and negative forms (i.e., perfectionistic concerns). Perfectionistic strivings consist of setting high personal standards and striving for perfection, while perfectionistic concerns address doubts about actions, overly critical evaluations of one's behavior, negative reactions to imperfection, and concerns over mistakes.

Perhaps not surprisingly, perfectionism has been traditionally perceived as negative, undesirable, abnormal, neurotic, maladaptive or dysfunctional (Anshel & Mansouri, 2005; Blatt, 1995; Hamachek, 1978; Flett & Hewitt, 2005; Suddarth & Slaney, 2001). Frost, Marten, Lahart and Rosenblate (1990) contend that perfectionists typically possess undesirable psycho-behavioral characteristics, such as exaggerated self-expectations, high fear of failure, poor coping skills, particularly in challenging situations, and other tendencies that impede rather than promote desirable emotions and performance outcomes. To Enns and Cox

(2002), the source of "poor" coping among perfectionists is unrealistically high self-expectations and self-destructive thinking. Flett and Hewitt, in their review of related literature, concluded that perfectionistic thinking is more often related to maladaptive coping patterns.

One area of the perfectionism in sport literature that has apparently received limited attention is the degree to which this characteristic is consistent across situations, that is, whether perfectionism is stable and persistent under various conditions (i.e., a personality trait) or is situation-specific (i.e., a state construct).

Traditionally, researchers have defined perfectionism as a personality trait rather than a state construct (e.g., Frost et al., 1990; Hamachek, 1978). This assumption assumes that perfectionistic thinking and a person's actions that reflect this thinking is relatively stable over time and across different situations (Anshel & Eom, 2003). According to Hewitt and Flett (1996), "perfectionism is (a) personality construct that involves a high level of achievement motivation ...." (p. 419). Despite the findings that support dispositional (trait) characteristics of perfectionism (e.g., Hewitt, Flett, & Ediger, 1995), researchers argue that perfectionism manifests itself differently across various situations, at least in the non-sport literature (Saboonchi & Lundh, 1999).

One aspect of perfectionism that suggests it is a situational rather than a dispositional construct is that this characteristic can either promote or inhibit sports performance. An athlete, for instance, could manifest desirable qualities of perfectionism in some settings (e.g., with selected sports or various non-sport situations), but not others (e.g., learning new, often difficult information or a complex motor skill). In one sport study, for example, McArdle and Duda (2004) examined the effects of parental influences on perfectionism of their athlete children using cluster analyses. The analyses reflected the young athletes' perceptions of parental expectations, motivational climate, and parents' perfectionist tendencies. They found that perfectionism levels and sources of perfectionism varied as a function of parental behaviors and attitudes about their child's performance quality. The researchers suggest that "It would be interesting to examine the significant social contextual correlates of perfectionistic tendencies among youngsters who vary in their competence and/or investment in different achievement settings" (p. 784). If perfectionism is a function of situational, rather than dispositional, properties, as proposed by Saboonchi and Lundh (1999), than the perfectionism-performance relationship would be changeable, or influenced by clinical interventions. Researchers and practitioners may use cognitive and behavioral strategies to manage maladaptive forms of perfectionistic, with direct implications to competitive sport (Anshel & Eom, 2003). One approach to testing whether perfectionism is cross-situational--a trait versus situation-specific is to compare the athlete's high and low perceived competence for each of two sports.

Perceived competence (PC; Harter, 1978) is related to the individual's belief in his/ her ability to effectively and successfully perform a task. As Alderman, Beighle, and Pangrazi (2006) contend, "The willingness to try new experiences and continue to participate in physical activity often depends on a youngster's perception of her or his ability level, or perceived competence" (p. 42). The authors found, from their review of related literature, a strong relationship between perceived competence and sport participation patterns, levels of enjoyment, and performance quality among young athletes. Level of perceived competence may be more indicative of performance success than any other component of motivational theory (Reinboth, Duda, & Ntoumanis, 2004). Perhaps this is because PC mediates the relationship between ego and task goal orientation and level of intrinsic motivation, both of which predict sports performance quality (Losier & Vallerand, 1995; Reinboth et al.).

Because perfectionism reflects a tendency to set excessively high standards for performance (Flett & Hewitt, 2005), perhaps not surprisingly, perfectionism is significantly correlated with the concept of goal orientation. Goal orientation, in mm, is related to PC (Reinboth et al., 2004). Ostensibly, perfectionism and PC may also be related. Athletes who perceive themselves as highly competent (i.e., high PC) in a particular sport are more likely to set high expectations for future performance quality than athletes who have low PC for a another sport. Athletes with low PC for a particular sport would have reduced expectations of success, and perfectionistic thinking would be less likely. This hypothesis has apparently not been previously tested and forms one objective of the present investigation. Further research is needed to examine the extent to which sport perfectionism has trait-like properties, or is more situation-specific as a function of the athlete's PC.

Thus, three hypotheses were tested in this study: (1) perceived competence and overall perfectionism will be related; (2) when controlling for sport type and level of competition, participants with relatively higher perceived competence will exhibit greater perfectionism than those with lower perceived competence; and (c) when controlling for sport type and level of competition, athletes with relatively low perceived competence will demonstrate significantly lower perfectionism than athletes with higher perceived competence.

Method

Participants

This study consisted of competitive athletes (N=239, 194 males [81% of the sample] and 45 females [19%]), ranging in age from 16 to 25 yrs (M= 19.26, SD = 1.72), who competed at the high school (n = 47), state (n = 64) or college level (n=128) located in the southeastern U.S. State level athletes consisted of individuals outside of and superior to sports competition in secondary school in representing their state in sport competition. Team sports (m=186) included baseball, softball, basketball, and soccer, while individual sports (n=53) were represented by track/cross country, tennis, and swimming. The student-athletes were recruited through convenience sampling from sports coaches employed by three secondary schools and three higher education institutions which were located in the same geographical location as the institution whose Institutional Review Board (IRB) approved this study. After obtaining approval to recruit participants from the appropriate school administrators, all sports coaches were sent (online) a letter and copy of the inventories seeking their permission to allow a researcher to obtain their athletes' involvement. In the case of participants under age 18 yrs, parental assent was secured prior to data collection.

Measures

Perfectionism. The current study generated the Sports Perfectionism Inventory (SPI) based on items from previous empirical sport psychology research, including Anshel and Eom (2003), Dunn, Causgrove Dunn, & Syrotuik (2002), Gotwals, Dunn, and Wayment (2003), Haase and Prapavessis (2004), and Stoeber (1998). The criteria for including each item were that the item had been empirically generated, measures of reliability and validity were reported, and that the inventory in which the item was included had been previously published in the sport perfectionism research literature. In addition, selected items were adapted from the Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (FMPS) to fit a sport framework and, as explained by Dunn et al. (2002), were "modified to make them contextually relevant" (p. 382). Psychometrics of the present SPI are described in the results section. The measure of perfectionism in this study, located in Appendix A, consisted of 35 items using Likert-type responses ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

Perceived Competence. Perceived competence (PC) was the construct used to determine the athletes' self-rating of high (HPC) or low perceived competence (LPC), that is, sports in which they felt most and least skilled, respectively. The instrument used to obtain measures of PC was the perceived competence subscale (PCS) of the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (IMI; McAuley, Duncan & Tammen, 1989). Participants rated their HPC and LPC sport on two identical 6-item Likert-type scales ranging from 1 (very low) to 5 (very high). This scale has been used in previous sport research (Goudas & Biddle, 1994; Vlachopoulos & Biddle, 1996). Alpha values in past related studies have ranged from .81 to .84 (McAuley, et al., 1989; Ntoumanis, 2001; Standage, Duda, & Ntoumanis, 2003).

Procedures

As previously indicated, the athletes completed two measures of PC and one measure of perfectionism in sport reflecting the two sports in which they perceived their sport skill competence as high (HPC) and low (LPC), respectively. Participants were asked to complete the HPC rating scale and the sport perfectionism inventory (SPI) while thinking about a sport in which they "felt highly competent," that is, their "best" sport. Then, in completing the PC measure a second time, the athletes were to think of a sport in which they felt less competent and lower skill, as compared to the first (HPC) situation. Each inventory was then completed in reference to the activity in which participants felt less competent. Moderator variables included level of competition (i.e., high school, state, and college) and sport type (i.e., individual or team).

Results

Perfectionism, PC, level of competition (i.e., high school/community, state, and college) and type of sport (i.e., team and individual) were each assessed twice to differentiate characteristics associated with the two sport domains, reflecting high and low perceived competence, respectively. Perceived competence served as a continuous independent variable, and was entered in the analysis as a covariate. It was important to control for PC so that the effects of the categorical variables could be identified. Level of competition and sport type served as categorical independent variables. Perfectionism was the dependent variable. Table 1 includes descriptive statistics for these variables.

Inventories (SPI, high and low PC) were subjected to Cronbach's alpha to determine measures of intra-reliability. Alpha reliabilities for the SPI were rs = .79 (personal standards), .72 (concern over mistakes), .69 (parental criticism & expectations), .81 (coach criticism & expectations), and .74 (SPI overall). Cronbach alphas for high and low PC on the PCS were .82 and .78, respectively. As discussed later, group differences on perfectionism scores for perceived competence and level of competition confirmed construct validity of the SPI.

Participant response characteristics showed differences between the high and low competence situations. It was essential that participants were responding to inventory items under two different competitive situations, categorized as high and low perceived competence. Means and frequencies validated differences between the two sport domains. When reporting level of sport competition, only two of the participants indicated participation at the community level under the high competence sport. For this reason, the levels of community and high school were combined into the same category, creating three categories for competition level.

Results for competition level in the high perceived competence (HPC) sport indicate that more participants (80%) reported competing at or above the high school level, while in the low competence sport the majority of participants (67%) reported competing at or below the high school level. These findings suggest a noted difference in the level of competition between the high and low perceived competence states. Data on sport type indicated a high level of consistency between responses in the high and low competence domain. In both the high and low competence sport 77% of participants competed in team sports, with the remaining 23% competing in individual sports.

Intraclass correlations were computed to assess the relationship between high and low perceived competence scores and perfectionism scores. Correlation coefficients yielded a positive and significant relationship between average perfectionism scores in the high and low competence states (r = .63). This value suggests that as perfectionism scores in the high competence domain increased, so did the perfectionism scores in the low competence sport.

A paired r-test was conducted to assess the changes in perfectionism between each of the two sport domains, HPC and LPC. The f-value for perfectionism was significant, t (238) = 2.86,p = .001. According to linear regression results, perfectionism scores in the high perceived competence domain were significantly predicted by perfectionism scores in the low perceived competence domain (p < .001). Low competence perfectionism scores accounted for 43% of the variance for overall perfectionism. According to the unstandardized regression coefficient, there was a significant and positive relationship (B = .58, p < .001). In addition, perfectionism in the high perceived competence domain accounted for 42% of the variance in perfectionism in the low perceived competence domain. Thus, as perfectionism in the high perceived competence sport increased, perfectionism in the low perceived competence domain also increased (B = .14, p < .001).

When examining changes in perfectionism between high and low perceived competence sports it was found that perfectionism scores in the two domains were highly correlated. The positive and significant correlation in perfectionism between HPC and LPC conditions suggests that participants with high perfectionism in one domain also displayed high perfectionism in the opposing domain. Similarly, participants who reported low levels of perfectionism in one sport domain tended to report low levels of perfectionism in the other sport domain.

A paired t-test was conducted to assess the changes in perfectionism between each of the two sport domains, HPC and LPC. The results indicates that there was a significant difference in perfectionism scores between the HPC and LPC conditions, with HPC showing superior levels of perfectionism than the LPC condition, t (238) = 3.16, p < .001. Intraclass correlation analysis yielded a negative and significant relationship (r = -.29, p < .05) between HPC and LPC domains. Thus, as a participant's rating of perceived competence increased in one sport domain, it tended to decrease in the other sport domain. Taken together, the correlation coefficients and t-test results suggest that participants were reporting significantly different levels of perceived competence in each of the two sport domains.

Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA)

Perfectionism, perceived competence, level of competition and type of sport were assessed twice to differentiate characteristics associated with the two sport domains. Perceived competence served as a continuous independent variable, and was entered in the analysis as a covariate. It was important to control for perceived competence so that the effects of the categorical variables could be identified. Level of competition (community/high school, state and college) and sport type (team and individual) served as categorical independent variables. Perfectionism, the dependent variable, was measured under the high and low perceived competence sport domains.

A repeated measures MANOVA was used to determine the extent to which perceived competence, level of competition and type of sport differed on perfectionism scores in the high and low competence domains. Parameter estimates in the form of unstandardized partial regression coefficients were also calculated through multivariate and univariate testing to examine the amount of variance in perfectionism scores which is attributable to perceived competence, level of competition and type of sport.

Wilkes' Lambda statistics produced one significant interaction: low perceived competence x level of competition in the low competence situation, F (2, 228) = 6.51, p < .001. Thus, the effect of perceived competence in the low competence domain on perfectionism scores across the two sport situations was a function of the level of competition. To further explain the meaningfulness of the interaction term, separate models were computed using only the variables associated with each competence sport respectively.

High Perceived Competence Model

The variables included in the high competence model were level of competition, sport type, perceived competence logit scores and perfectionism logit scores. Between subjects tests yielded significant main effects for both level (p < .03) and type (p < .02). Table 2 provides a summary of the MANOVA for the high and low competence model of perfectionism. According to the R-squared value, 6.2% of the variance in high competence perfectionism scores can be accounted for by the variables in the model. In order to locate the significance of the main effects of level and type on perfectionism, parameter estimates were examined in the high competence model.

Table 3 reports the unstandardized parameter estimates (B) of both main effects and interactions for the high perceived competence and low perceived competence models. For the high competence model, the parameter estimates indicate that when controlling for level of competition and perceived competence, type of sport was significant (p < .02). Thus, team sport athletes scored significantly higher on perfectionism than individual sport athletes. As type of sport changes, perfectionism among team sport athletes increased.

For level of competition, parameter estimates indicated that when controlling for type of sport and perceived competence, participants who played at the high school/community level were significantly different (M= -.17, SD = .50; p < .01) on perfectionism than participants who played at the collegiate level (M= .10, SD = .49). Participants who competed at the high school/community level displayed significantly lower (B = -.28) levels of perfectionism than did those participants who competed at the college level. State level participants (M = .00, SD = .54) were not significantly different (p = .40) than their collegiate level counterparts (see Table 3).

Low Perceived Competence Model

The variables included in the low competence sport model were level of competition, type of sport, perceived competence logit, and perfectionism logit. The single interaction term from the initial interaction model was also included, perceived competence x level of competition. The interaction term was significant in the low competence model as well, p < .02, thus, the effect of perceived competence on perfectionism depends on level of competition. The variables and interactions in the low competence model explained 5.5 % of the variance in perfectionism in the low competence situation. Level of competition included three categories. Therefore, separate regressions were calculated to locate the significance of the interaction.

Three linear regressions were computed for each level of competition, high school/ community, state, and college. For players who competed at the high school/community level, perfectionism scores varied significantly as a function of perceived competence (B = .05, p < .01). According to the regression coefficient, the relationship between perceived competence and perfectionism among high school or community level athletes was positive and significant. Among athletes who competed at the high school or community level, higher PC scores were related to increased perfectionism. Results of regression analysis for athletes competing at the state level were not significant (p = .58). Among athletes at the college level, perceived competence did not have a significant relationship with perfectionism {p = .07). These findings indicate that the significant interaction is specific to players competing at the high school or community level. Perceived competence was not a significant predictor of perfectionism scores among state or college level athletes.

In summary, based on the complete analysis of the data, the hypotheses were partially supported. It was hypothesized that there would be a significant difference in perfectionism across perceived competence domains. In the correlation analysis and the /-test, it became apparent that perfectionism scores changed significantly across perceived competence domains. This finding contributes to the research question regarding the trait and situational qualities of the perfectionism construct. In addition, the lack of a strong correlation for perceived competence revealed that participants were rating the two perceived competence domains differently, supporting the methodology through which the independent variable of perceived competence was selected.

The results of the ANOVA and regression models provide evidence to explain the extent of the relationship between perceived competence, level of competition, type of sport and perfectionism. Specifically, the effects of perceived competence, level of competition and sport type affected perfectionism scores depending on the domain of perceived competence. The interactions and main effects for level and sport type allow for the interpretation of perfectionism as a situational construct. This is possible because the effects of the independent variables were not consistent in both sport domains, rather, the effects of perceived competence, level and type depended on situational characteristics of the sport domain.

Discussion

The purposes of the present study were to explore the relationship between sport perfectionism and perceived competence as a function of sport type--team and individual and level of competition--high school/community, state, and college. The primary objective of the study was to determine whether perfectionism is a trait (i.e., cross-situational resulting in similar perfectionism scores under high and low perceived competence conditions) versus a state construct (i.e., situation-specific in which perfectionism is different under high and low perceived competence conditions). No significant relationship between level of perceived competence (i.e., sports in which athletes were highly skilled or less skilled) and sport perfectionism was found. Conversely, the relationship between the two sport types in which athletes perceived their competence as high and low was significantly correlated. Athletes' perfectionism was similar for sports that reflected either high or low competence. This finding lends credence to the view that perfectionism is not skill-dependent but, rather, cross-situational. A brief review of the non-sport perfectionism literature might help explain evidence of perfectionism as a condition--usually but not always psychopathological (Egan, Wade, Shafran, & Antony, 2014)--what Egan et al. call a transdiagnostic rather than a situation-specific process.

Egan et al. (2014) define a transdiagnostic process as "an aspect of cognition or behavior that may contribute to the maintenance of a psychological disorder" (p. 40). To Egan et al., perfectionism is a psycholopathological condition that is related to other dysfunctional or undesirable conditions, such as eating disorders, depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and anxiety disorders, that require different treatments for each individual client. Perfectionism, they claim, is not the same condition as these other psychopathologies, but possesses selected psychological and behavioral characteristics as them. Thus, an athlete--or the athlete's coach or parents--may exhibit perfectionistic tendencies in the context of competitive sport, perhaps in combination with other conditions, but may not present the same symptoms under other (non-sport) conditions. Perfectionism, they suggest, is not, by itself, predispositional. As the authors assert, "there is considerable evidence that learning plays a role in the development of problems that are often associated with perfectionism" (p. 9). Thus, whether perfectionism is more apparent in some sports (i.e., sport skills that are perceived by athletes as highly competent, or HPC) than others (i.e., athlete perceptions of low competence, or LPC), particularly in combination with other psychological characteristics, remains speculative.

It was thought that athletes with higher sport PC would also score higher for sport perfectionism, and that athletes with less sport PC would have lower levels of sport perfectionism. These outcomes were partially supported. The findings indicated that changes in sport PC--from high to low--and sport perfectionism was a function of skill level (i.e., high school/community versus college level athletes). Of particular importance was the finding that low sport PC was related to perfectionism as a function of competition level. Among athletes who competed at the high school level, but not at the state or college levels, perfectionism scores were positively related to PC. These results suggest that the

athletes' perception of high PC in sport is more associated with perfectionistic thinking than feelings of low sport PC. It was somewhat surprising that this association held true for high school, but not state (i.e., more advanced than the high school competitor) or college level athletes.

These findings suggest that perfectionistic thinking may be more common and begin sooner in an athlete's career (i.e., high school), and at lower skill level than at more advanced career stages. This conjecture is supported by Flett, Hewitt, Oliver, and Macdonald (2002), who concluded from their review of related literature that the perfectionism level of parents and of their children are closely related. Children of high perfectionistic parents, according to Flett et al., may react with their own perfectionistic thinking and acting to escape from or minimize further abuse for not meeting parental expectations, to reduce exposure to shame and humiliation, and to "establish a sense of control and predictability in an unpredictable environment" (Flett et al., p. 94).

Another possible explanation of the present results may be that the athlete's PC can strongly influence performance standards and expectations for success (Martens, Vealey, Burton, Bump, & Smith, 1990; Pacht, 1984). According to Martens et al., the athletes' actual ability may not be congruent with their "excessively" high self-determined standards. This, in turn, may lead to unrealistic self-expectations which may go unmet. Perhaps the secondary school athletes in this study possessed higher perceived competence than they actually were, and that their performance expectations may have been beyond their skill level. They could have felt incapable of meeting such high performance demands. This discrepancy in perceived, as opposed to actual, skill level can lead to increased perfectionist thinking (Pacht).

The current results showed that perfectionism was unrelated to PC levels among these elite, high-skilled, older (state and college level) athletes. It is possible that higher skilled athletes possess the requisite skills to meet their own and their parents' expectations for success. Their increased PC may not result in unrealistic expectations, but, instead, may serve as motivation to achieve and continue striving for success (Stoeber & Otto, 2006). As PC increases, performance levels may rise to meet self-imposed expectations, thereby avoiding the potentially maladaptive effects of perfectionism. Thus, a lack of belief in one's ability to perform, as indicated by low PC, may leave the athlete more vulnerable to the ill-effects of heightened expectations, fear of failure, and lowered self-concept which are characterized by perfectionism, especially for high school level competitors.

Whereas the LPC condition in this study was associated with higher levels of perfectionism, the HPC condition yielded significant main effects for level of competition and sport type, but no significant interactions. For level of competition, athletes who competed at the high school level reported less perfectionism than their college level counterparts. Thus, as level of competition increased from high school to college level, perfectionism scores increased significantly.

Another finding in the current study was that perceptions of high competence among team sport athletes resulted in higher perfectionism (B = A9,p = .02), as compared to individual sport athletes. It is apparent that perfectionism scores in both high and low perceived competence sports are different for team sport athletes and individual sport athletes. The antecedents and causes of this finding await further research.

Taken together, results of the present study lend credence to the view that perfectionism possesses situational (state) properties. While selected studies support perfectionism as a trait (e.g., Flett, Hewitt, Blankstein, & Dynin, 1994; Hamachek, 1978), it is apparent that components of perfectionism in this study were a function of selected moderator variables such as such as level of competition, sport type, and the athlete's level of perceived competence.

Athletes' perfectionism scores were not consistent across high-skilled and low-skilled situations. Comparisons on perfectionism scores between the two sport domains was significant. However, the high inter-class correlation between perfectionism scores (r = .65), and the percent of variance accounted for in each logit score (R-square = .43) indicates there is some degree of consistency among perfectionism scores in each domain. These results suggest, in support of the interactionist (i.e., person x situation) theory, that perfectionist tendencies are a function of athletes' PC for any given sport.

This study included selected limitations that might be addressed in future sport perfectionism research. For example, participants were asked to recall two sport situations in which their level of perceived competence in performing those sports skills were high or low, respectively. Thus, similar to most perfectionism research, a long-term self-reported retrospective recall technique was used to obtain this information. Inaccuracies are inherent in retrospective recall (Porter & Stone, 1996). Porter and Stone contend that "the more time that has elapsed between the events the subjects report on and the time of assessment, the more subjects will tend toward dispositional rather than actual accounts.... Therefore, shorter time intervals are desirable (to) ... reduce the biases associated with retrospective recall ..." (p. 145). Clearly, however, more research is needed in determining the consistency with which sport perfectionism is exhibited across situational characteristics--supporting trait theory--or is a function of selected personal and situational conditions.

Tiffany Watson Breeding and Mark H. Anshel

Middle Tennessee State University

Address correspondence to: Mark.Anshel@mtsu.edu. Department of Health and Human Performance, Murfreesboro, Tennessee 37132

References

Alderman, B., Beighle, A., & Pangrazi, R.P. (2006). Enhancing physical activity motivation in a quality physical education program. Journal of Physical Education Recreation and Dance. 77,41-45, 51.

Anshel, M. H., & Eom, H. J. (2003). Identifying dimensions of perfectionism in sport. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 34, 255-266.

Anshel, M. H., & Mansouri, H. (2005). Influences of perfectionism on motor performance, affect, and causal attributions in response to critical information feedback. Journal of Sport Behavior, 28, 99-125.

Antony, M. M., & Swinson, R. P. (2009). When perfect isn't good enough: strategies for coping with petfectionism (2nd ed.). Oakland, CA: New Harbinger Publications.

Blatt, S. J. (1995). The destructiveness of depression: Implications for the treatment of depression. The American Psychologist, 50, 1003-1020.

Dunn, J. G. H., Causgrove Dunn, J. L., & Syrotuik, D. G. (2002). Relationship between multidimensional perfectionism and goal orientations in sport. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 24, 376-395.

Egan, S. J., Wade, T. D., Shafran, R., & Antony, M. M. (2014). Cognitive-behavioral treatment of perfectionism. New York: Guilford Press.

Enns, M. W., & Cox, B. J. (2002). The nature and assessment of perfectionism: A critical analysis. In G.L. Flett & P. L. Hewitt (Eds), Perfectionism: Theory, research and treatment (pp. 33-63). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Flett, G. L., & Hewitt, P. L., Oliver, J. M., & McDonald, S. (2002). Perfectionism in children and their parents: A developmental analysis. In G. L. Flett & P. L. Hewitt (Eds.), Perfectionism: Theory, research, and treatment (pp. 89-132). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Flett, G. L., & Hewitt, P. L. (2005). The perils of perfectionism. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 14-18.

Flett, G. L., Hewitt, P. L., Blankstein, K. R., & Dynin, C. B. (1994). Dimensions of perfectionism and type A behavior. Personality and Individual Difference, 16, 477-485.

Frost, R. O., Marten, P., Lahart, C., & Rosenblate, R. (1990). The dimensions of perfectionism. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 4, 449-468.

Gotwals, J. K., & Spencer-Cavaliere, N. (2014). Intercollegiate perfectionistic athletes' perspectives on achievement: Contributions to the understanding and assessment of perfectionism in sport. International Journal of Sport Psychology. 45, (271-297).

Gotwals, J. K, Dunn, G. H., & Wayment, H. A. (2003). An examination of perfectionism and self-esteem in intercollegiate athletes. Journal of Sport Behavior, 26, 17-39.

Goudas, M., & Biddle, S. (1994). Perceived motivational climate and intrinsic motivation in school physical education classes. European Journal of Psychology of Education. 9, 241-250.

Haase, A. M. &, Prapavessis, H. (2004). Assessing the factor structure and composition of the positive and negative perfectionism scale in sport. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 1724-1740.

Hamachek, D. E. (1978). Psychodynamics of normal and neurotic perfectionism. Psychology, 15, 27-33.

Harter, S. (1978). Effectance motivation reconsidered: Toward a developmental model. Annual Human Resources Development Report, 21, 36-64.

Hewitt, P. L., & Flett, G. L. (1996). Personality traits and the coping process. In M. Zeidner & N. S. Endler (Eds.), Handbook of coping (pp. 410-433). London: John Wiley.

Hewitt, P. L., Flett, G. L., & Ediger, E. (1995). Perfectionism traits and perfectionistic self-presentation in eating disorder attitudes, characteristics, and symptoms. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 18, 317-326.

Losier, G. F., & Vallerand, R. J. (1994). The temporal relationship between perceived competence and self-determined motivation. Journal of Social Psychology, 134, 793-801.

Martens, R., Burton, D., Vealey, R. S., Bump, L. A., & Smith, D. E. (1990). Development and validation of the Competitive State Anxiety Inventory-2 (CSAI-2). In R. Martens, R. S. Vealey, & D. Burton (Eds.), Competitive anxiety in sport (pp. 117-213). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

McArdle, S., & Duda, J. L. (2004). Exploring social-contextual correlates of perfectionism in adolescents: A multivariate perspective. Cognitive Therapy & Research, 28, 765-788.

McAuley, E., Duncan, T., & Tammen, V. V. (1989). Psychometric properties of the intrinsic motivation inventory in a competitive sport setting: a confirmatory factor analysis. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 60, 48-58.

Ntoumanis, N. (2001). Empirical links between achievement goal theory and self-determination in sport. Journal of Sports Sciences, 19, 397-409.

Pacht, A. R. (1984). Reflections on perfectionism. American Psychologist, 39, 386-390.

Porter, L. S., & Stone, A. A. (1996). An approach to assessing daily coping. In M. Zeidner & N. S. Endler (Eds.), Handbook of coping: Theory, research, applications (pp. 133-150). New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Reinboth, M., Duda, J. L., & Ntoumanis, N. (2004). Dimensions of coaching behavior, need satisfaction, and the psychological and physical welfare of young athletes. Motivation and Emotion, 28, 297-313.

Saboonchi, F., & Lundh, L. G. (1999). State perfectionism and its relation to trait perfectionism, type of situation, priming and being observed. Scandinavian Journal of Behavior Therapy, 28, 154-166.

Standage, M., Duda, J. L., & Ntoumanis, N. (2003). Predicting motivational regulations in physical education: the interplay between dispositional goal orientations, motivational climate and perceived competence. Journal of Sports Sciences, 21, 631-647.

Stoeber, J. (1998). The Frost Multidimensional Scale: More perfect with four (instead of six) dimensions. Personality and Individual Differences, 24,481-491.

Stoeber, J., & Eismann, U. (2007). Perfectionism in young musicians: Relations with motivation, effort, achievement, and distress. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 2182-2192.

Stoeber, J., & Otto, K. (2006). Positive conceptions of perfectionism: Approaches, evidence, challenges. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 295-319.

Suddarth, B. H., & Slaney, R. B. (2001). An investigation of the dimensions of perfectionism in college students. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 34, 157-165.

Vlachopoulos, S., & Biddle, S. (1996). Achievement goal orientations and intrinsic motivation in a track and field event in school physical education. European Physical Education Review, 2(2), 158-164.

Table 1
Descriptive statistics (N=239)

                            High                    Low
                          Perceived  Competence  Perceived  Competence

Characteristics               M          SD          M          SD
Age                         19.26       1.72       19.26       1.72
Perfectionism               0.02        0.51       -0.07       0.58
Perceived Competence        1.88        2.35       -1.00       2.47
                              n          %           n          %
Sport Type
  Team                       186        77.5        184        76.7
  Individual                 54         22.5        56         23.3
Competition Level
  Community/High School      47         19.7        160        66.9
  Regional/State             64         26.8        44         18.4
  College                    128        53.6        35         14.6

Table 2
MANOVA for Perfectionism for High and Low Perceived Competence Sports
(N = 239)

DV: High Perceived Competence

Variable                        df       F       MS     P

Type (T)                         1    5.52 **   1.39   .02
Level (L)                        2    3.67 **   .93    .03
Perceived Competence (PC)        1      .16     .04    .70
Error                           234     --      .25    --
DV: Low Perceived Competence

Variable                        df       F       MS     P

Type (T)                         1     2.26     .74    .13
Level (L)                        2      .09     .03    .92
Perceived Competence (PC)        1      .05     .02    .82
PC x L                           2    4.18 **   1.38   .02
Error                           232     --      .33    --

* R-squared (high) = .062 (adjusted [R.sup.2] = .046)

* R-squared (low) = .055 (adjusted [R.sup.2] = .031)

** Significant at p < .05

Table 3
Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Predicting Perfectionism
(N = 239)

Variable                            B     SEB     P

Model for High Competence Sport
Main Effects
  Constant                         -.07   .08    .41
Sport Type
    Team Sport                     .19    .08    .01
    Individual Sport                0      --    --
Skill Level
    High School/Community          -.24   .09    .01
    State                          -.07   .08    .40
    College                         --     --    --
  Perceived Competence (PC)        .01    .02    .70
Model for Low Competence Sport
Main Effects
  Constant                         -.14   .12    .23
Sport Type
    Team                           .13    .09    .13
    Individual                      0      --    --
Skill Level
    High School/Community          .02    .11    .84
    State                          -.02   -.13   .88
    College                         0      --    --
Interactions
    High School/Community x PC     .05    .05    .01
    State x PC                     .02    .03    .58
    College x PC                   -.08   .04    .07

Note: R-squared (High, Low) = .62, .55