Future perfectionism–achievement research should adopt longitudinal and diary designs and test within-person combinations of the two dimensions¶

Strategy · All strategies
Evidence · no claims cited

Description¶

The article recommends design moves to establish temporal and causal inference and unpack the complex perfectionism–achievement relationship. It suggests "prospective designs, whereby perfectionism is measured at baseline and achievement is repeatedly measured over a period of months or years" and diary studies disaggregating between- and within-person effects. It also recommends testing the 2 × 2 model of perfectionism, which allows within-person combinations of the two dimensions to be examined.

Design Implications¶

Context¶

Requirements¶

• Repeated measurement of achievement over months or years, or daily diary data permitting within-person disaggregation

Constraints¶

• The existing evidence base is predominantly cross-sectional (36 of 37 studies), so current findings cannot support causal claims

Target Learners¶

• students across primary, secondary, and tertiary education

Target Learning Goals¶

• understanding how perfectionism predicts changes in academic achievement over time

Related Strategies¶

• Prioritise longitudinal designs, valid multidimensional measures, and common gifted-identification reporting in future perfectionism research with gifted students
• Adopt a staged research agenda: measure the three belief dimensions, test incremental validity, and run component-level and person-centered tests

Examples¶

-

Key Sources¶

• Madigan, D. J. (2019). A meta-analysis of perfectionism and academic achievement. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09484-2