Cited by 1Perfectionism, Procrastination, Anxiety StudiesAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesBody Image and Dysmorphia Studies

Clinical perfectionism, dissatisfaction with standards, and raising the bar: Validation of the response to goal achievement scale

Krause, Kirstyn L., Stewart, Kathleen E., Cassin, Stephanie E., Antony, Martin M.·2018·Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy

Abstract

Objectives To examine the factor structure and psychometrics of a new self-report scale measuring cognitive and behavioral reactions to goal achievement (Reactions to Goal Achievement Scale; RGAS), and to examine its relationship to other measures of clinical perfectionism in two samples. Self-reported reasons for setting higher standards following successful goal achievement were also examined.Methods The RGAS, Clinical Perfectionism Questionnaire (CPQ) and Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (FMPS) were administered to a sample on Amazon Mechanical Turk (N = 264) and to a sample of overweight individuals (N = 65).Results Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses suggested two factors, entitled dissatisfaction with success (DS) and increase in standards (IS). The RGAS was associated with subscales of the CPQ and FMPS. In addition, participants indicated many reasons for setting higher standards following success.Conclusion The RGAS is a new instrument for measuring both cognitive and behavioral responses to success in clinical perfectionism. Setting higher standards may not be an indication of perfectionism, as there appear to be many reasons people set higher standards.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1891/0889-8391.32.4.241

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The theory proposed that individuals with self-imposed perfectionism raise their standards after they successfully meet them, and this was found to be the case.

    “For example, the theory proposed that individuals with self-imposed perfectionism raise their standards after they successfully meet them and this was found to be the case (Kobori et al., 2009) although the reasons for resetting standards may be multifaceted (Krause et al., 2018).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 45 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Krause, K. L., Stewart, K. E., Cassin, S. E., & Antony, M. M.
Affiliations
Toronto Metropolitan University (CA)
Venue
Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy
Published
2018-10
Volume
32
Issue
4
Pages
241-262
ISSN
  • 0889-8391 (ISSN-L)
  • 1938-887X
OpenAlex
W2902518652
Cited by
1
References
45
Citations by year
2023: 1
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Perfectionism, Procrastination, Anxiety Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Body Image and Dysmorphia Studies
Keywords
clinical perfectionism, scale validation, factor structure, psychometrics, goal achievement, Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale, overweight individuals

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review