Can Perfectionism Affect Career Development? Exploring Career Thoughts and Self-Efficacy

Journal of Counseling & Development ■ July 2014 ■ Volume 92270© 2014 by the American Counseling Association. All rights reserved.

Received 01/30/12Revised 01/04/13

Accepted 01/09/13DOI: 10.1002/j.1556-6676.2014.00155.x

Earn CE credit. Visit http://www.prolibraries.com/counseling to purchase and complete the test online.

An individual’s progression through the career development process is affected by many factors, including the presence of perfectionistic traits, negative thinking, and self-efficacy. Re-search has supported difficulties stemming from the presence of these factors in many domains, including health, satisfac-tion, and behavioral outcomes. Research has also begun to demonstrate the connection between these constructs as they relate to career development (e.g., Ganske & Ashby, 2007; Kleiman et al., 2004; Leong & Chervinko, 1996).

The role of negative beliefs in emotional and behavioral difficulties is well established. Individuals whose thinking is characterized by negative beliefs are more likely to experience problems such as depression, anxiety, alcoholism, bulimia, Type A personality, and low self-esteem (Belloch, Morillo, & Garcia-Soriano, 2007; Denoff, 1987; S. Harris, Davies, & Dryden, 2006; Westra & Kuiper, 1996). Not surprisingly, negative thinking also appears to be associated with one’s ability to make career decisions (Sampson, Peterson, Lenz, Reardon, & Saunders, 1996). Specifically, negative career thinking, a means of viewing oneself in a manner that “inhibits career problem solving and decision making” (Sampson et al., 1996, p. 2), was shown to decrease levels of self-esteem and perceived career decision-making self-efficacy (e.g., Bullock-Yowell, Andrews, & Buzzetta, 2011; Kleiman et al., 2004) as well as increase depression (Westra & Kuiper, 1996) and career indecision (Saunders, Peterson, Sampson, & Reardon, 2000).

Perfectionism, once considered a core irrational belief involving the expectation that one’s efforts should be precise and result in excellence (Ellis, 1962; Frost, Marten, Lahart, & Rosenblate, 1990), can be viewed as both a positive qual-

Lindsay M. andrews, emily bullock-Yowell, eric R. Dahlen, and bonnie C. Nicholson, Department of Psychology, The Uni-versity of Southern Mississippi. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Emily Bullock-Yowell, Department of Psychology, The University of Southern Mississippi, 118 College Drive, #5025, Hattiesburg, MS 39406-0001 (e-mail: [email protected]).

Can Perfectionism Affect Career Development? Exploring Career Thoughts and Self-EfficacyLindsay M. Andrews, Emily Bullock-Yowell, Eric R. Dahlen, and Bonnie C. Nicholson

This study identified relationships among career-specific barriers (i.e., perfectionism, negative career thoughts, ca-reer decision-making self-efficacy) in a sample of 300 college students. The authors found relationships among the constructs of interest, prediction of variance in career decision-making self-efficacy, and differences among groups of perfectionists on endorsements of negative career thoughts and career decision-making self-efficacy. The findings suggest that interventions addressing maladaptive perfectionism and dysfunctional career thinking may enhance clients’ confidence in decision making.

Keywords: perfectionism, career thoughts, career decision-making self-efficacy, career development

ity and an unhealthy belief (Hamachek, 1978). For example, when examining different components of perfectionism, Enns and Cox (2002) found that relationships exist with both conscientiousness and neuroticism, providing support for multiple types of perfectionism. Furthermore, research has found correlations between perfectionism and several factors that may influence the career development process, includ-ing anxiety (e.g., Flett, Hewitt, & Dyck, 1989), depression (e.g., Blatt, 1995), self-esteem (e.g., Ashby & Rice, 2002), procrastination (e.g., Flett, Hewitt, Blankstein, & Koledin, 1992), career indecision (Leong & Chervinko, 1996), and career decision-making self-efficacy (Ganske & Ashby, 2007). In addition to relationships with career development, research has also found relationships between overall perfectionism and the more general construct of negative thinking (Flett, Blankstein, Hewitt, & Koledin, 1991); therefore, a similar relationship is expected between perfectionism, which has a heavier emphasis on the maladaptive aspects when viewed as an overall construct, and the more specific construct of negative career thoughts.

Research has supported a multidimensional construct of perfectionism, and many measures of perfectionism assess for the construct’s maladaptive components as supported by the overall scores tending to emphasize maladaptive aspects. Yet, the domain can be divided to examine more adaptive aspects of perfectionism as well. The adaptive component of perfectionism consists of setting high personal standards (Slaney, Ashby, & Trippi, 1995), and individuals identified as adaptive perfectionists have been described as those who gained pleasure from their efforts and felt free to be less than perfect (Hamachek, 1978). Adaptive perfectionists are able

Journal of Counseling & Development ■ July 2014 ■ Volume 92 271

Exploring Career Thoughts and Self-Efficacy

to draw satisfaction from the process and not see their efforts as failures, whereas maladaptive perfectionists are defined as being overly critical and concerned about the views of others (Slaney et al., 1995), with their efforts never meeting their goals (Hamachek, 1978).

Several studies have found differences among the distinct groups of adaptive perfectionists, maladaptive perfectionists, and nonperfectionists. Adaptive perfectionists have been found to have lower feelings of inferiority than maladaptive perfectionists (Ashby & Kottman, 1996) and higher career decision-making self-efficacy than maladaptive perfection-ists and nonperfectionists (Ganske & Ashby, 2007). Both adaptive perfectionists and maladaptive perfectionists have demonstrated higher levels of internal locus of control than nonperfectionists (Periasamy & Ashby, 2002). In addition, the maladaptive components of perfectionism are related to other forms of irrational belief described in Ellis’s theory (Flett et al., 1991); however, little is known about how the components of perfectionism may be related to negative thinking in the career domain.

Career decision-making self-efficacy, which refers to an individual’s beliefs about his or her capability to perform tasks related to the career decision-making process (Taylor & Betz, 1983), has been researched extensively. This research includes relationships with self-efficacy and several positive and negative career and personality variables, including certainty (Betz, Klein, & Taylor, 1996), fear of commitment (Betz & Sterling, 1993), adaptive career beliefs (Luzzo & Day, 1999), conscientiousness, and extraversion (Bullock-Yowell et al., 2011; Hartman & Betz, 2007). Career decision-making self-efficacy has also shown utility in differentiating groups of individuals who are at different places in the career decision-making process, with individuals further along endorsing higher confidence (e.g., Robbins, 1985; Taylor & Popma, 1990).

Despite the great interest career decision-making self-efficacy has received, some important gaps in the research remain. To date, little research has examined how career decision-making self-efficacy may relate to negative career thinking (e.g., the sort of beliefs that may lead to emotional and behavioral difficulties; Bullock-Yowell et al., 2011). Moreover, limited research has addressed the relationship between career decision-making self-efficacy and perfection-ism (Ganske & Ashby, 2007). Although it seems plausible that different types of perfectionists may differ in their career development patterns, this possibility has received insufficient attention in the literature.

As stated, one study found that negative career thoughts, in addition to personality variables, explained significant vari-ance in career decision-making self-efficacy (e.g., Bullock-Yowell et al., 2011). In addition, overall perfectionism has been linked to both negative thinking and career decision-making self-efficacy. Therefore, research supports that these

two constructs (i.e., perfectionism, negative career thinking) may help explain career decision-making self-efficacy. Fur-thermore, given that perfectionism was originally identified as a type of irrational belief (Ellis, 1962) and correlates with other irrational beliefs (Flett et al., 1991; Hewitt & Flett, 1991), it appears that perfectionism can be viewed as a specific type of negative thinking and therefore is likely to explain unique information.

The Present StudyOur study explored the relationships between perfection-ism, negative career thoughts, and career decision-making self-efficacy. These constructs have theoretical links through more general constructs (e.g., irrational beliefs, self-esteem, self-efficacy) as well as shared relationships with other career-related variables, specifically career indecision. In addition to previous research that has demonstrated connec-tions between these constructs, theory has provided links as well. Individuals who are classified as perfectionists are likely to set high standards for performance (Frost et al., 1990) as well as perceive outcomes as never good enough and ideal outcomes as unreachable. Thus, perfectionists are plagued by negative thoughts and hold negative expectations about their abilities. However, no research connects all three constructs in the realm of career development. Therefore, the following hypotheses were tested:

Hypothesis 1: There will be a positive relationship between overall perfectionism and negative career thinking.

Hypothesis 2: There will be a negative relationship be-tween negative career thoughts and career decision-making self-efficacy.

Hypothesis 3: Maladaptive perfectionists will endorse more negative thoughts than adaptive perfectionists and nonperfectionists, and furthermore, nonperfec-tionists will endorse more negative thoughts than adaptive perfectionists.

Hypothesis 4: Adaptive perfectionists will have higher career decision-making self-efficacy than maladaptive perfectionists and nonperfectionists, with maladaptive perfectionists endorsing less career decision-making self-efficacy than nonperfectionists.

Hypothesis 5: Perfectionism will predict significant vari-ance in career decision-making self-efficacy beyond the contribution of negative career thoughts.

For most of the hypotheses, the previous literature presented has provided support between the constructs of interest or a more general form of the construct. Hypoth-esis 3 stems from Hypothesis 2, which replicates previous literature, as well as research that identified negative career-related outcomes associated with aspects of perfectionism

Journal of Counseling & Development ■ July 2014 ■ Volume 92272

Andrews, Bullock-Yowell, Dahlen, & Nicholson

and differences between groups of perfectionists (e.g., Gan-ske & Ashby, 2007; Leong & Chervinko, 1996). The premise of Hypothesis 3 was to further identify differences between groups of perfectionists based on theoretical support, given that previous research has not yet identified differences in the negative career thoughts of individuals varying in aspects of perfectionism. Hypothesis 3, in addition to Hypothesis 4, which was included to replicate the findings of Ganske and Ashby (2007), includes expected differences among adaptive, maladaptive, and nonperfectionists stemming from previous theoretical and empirical literature describing the differences among these groups in terms of career-related outcomes (e.g., Ganske & Ashby, 2007; Hamachek, 1978; Slaney et al., 1995). Hypothesis 5 stemmed from findings by Bullock-Yowell et al. (2011) that negative career thoughts, in addition to the personality variables of openness and conscientiousness, explained significant variance in career decision-making self-efficacy. The hypothesis also stems from literature originally identifying perfectionism as a type of negative thinking (Ellis, 1962), research findings indicating correlations with other irrational beliefs (Flett et al., 1991; Hewitt & Flett, 1991), and evidence of the impact perfectionism has on one’s career development (e.g., Leong & Chervinko, 1996). Together, this research indicates that perfectionism may include some negative thinking but may also have other components, leading to Hypothesis 5, which postulates that perfectionism may predict variance in career decision-making self-efficacy above and beyond that of the more general construct of negative career thinking.

MethodParticipants

A total of 300 students—the number of participants needed to detect a moderate effect with an 80% power to detect differences (Faul, Erdfelder, Land, & Buchner, 2007)—was recruited from a midsized southeastern uni-versity using the university’s psychology department on-line research participant recruitment system. Students in a variety of psychology courses could choose to participate in the study, and the vast majority were incentivized with class extra credit. The total number of students eligible to participate in our study is difficult to estimate given that participation in our study was one option among many, and an unknown number of instructors provided informa-tion specific to research participation in their respective courses. Study participants ranged in age from 18 to 45 years (M = 21.29, SD = 4.46) and represented a diverse sample in terms of ethnicity and university standing, in addition to other demographic variables (see Table 1). Psychology courses tend to have a higher enrollment of women than men, and the participant gender distribu-tion mirrors that distribution. Participants endorsed 64

different majors representing 33 departments across all f ive academic colleges on the university campus. The College of Education & Psychology (45.0%) and the Col-lege of Health (28.7%) were highly represented, whereas the other colleges were lesser represented (Science & Technology 9.0%, Business 7.3%, Arts & Letters 6.7%). Furthermore, seven participants (2.3%) identif ied as double majors, with their majors representing two differ-ent colleges, and three participants (1.0%) reported that they had not yet declared a major. Participants varied in their satisfaction with these majors.

Procedure

After obtaining internal review board approval from the uni-versity, we recruited participants through an online system that offered students in select psychology courses extra credit for participation in research studies. Potential participants are made aware of this option for credit through course instruc-tors. Participants accessed a secure online survey site and were presented with an electronic informed consent docu-ment, demographic form, Career Thoughts Inventory (CTI; Sampson et al., 1996), Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (MPS-F; Frost et al., 1990), and Career Decision Self-Efficacy Scale–Short Form (CDSE-SF; Betz et al., 1996), administered in varied order to account for order effects.

Measures

Demographic form. Participants were given a demographic form that asked them to report their gender, race, age, college status, athlete status, honors status, major, and satisfaction with their major.

TabLe 1

Demographic Characteristics of Sample

Characteristic

Gender Men Women

Class status Freshman Sophomore Junior Senior Other

Ethnicity/race Black/African American Asian/Pacific Islander Chicano/Latino/Hispanic European American Other

Athlete Yes No

Honors student Yes No

n %

47 253

78 73 77 71 1

108 5 4 177 6

34 266

22 278

15.7 84.3

26.0 24.3 25.7 23.7 0.3

36.0 1.7 1.3 59.0 2.0

11.3 88.7

7.3 92.7



Negative career thoughts. The CTI (Sampson et al., 1996) is a 48-item self-report inventory designed to measure study participants’ level of negative career thoughts using a 4-point Likert scale, ranging from 0 (strongly disagree) to 3 (strongly agree). Higher scores indicate more negative career thoughts. The CTI includes items such as “I’ll never understand enough about occupations to make a good choice” and “I’m afraid if I try out my chosen occupation, I won’t be successful.” In addition to a total score, the CTI yields three subscale scores: Decision-Making Confusion, Commitment Anxiety, and External Conflict. Only the total score was used in our study. The CTI has demonstrated high internal consistency among high school students, college students, and adults (α = .93–.97). Test–retest reliability ranged from .86 in a sample of college students measured across 4 weeks (Sampson et al., 1996). Cronbach’s alpha for the total score in our sample was .97. The CTI has demonstrated evidence of construct validity through correlations with measures of indecision (Sampson et al., 1996).

Perfectionism. The MPS-F (Frost et al., 1990) is a 35-item measure assessing six domains of perfectionism: Concern Over Mistakes (CM), Personal Standards (PS), Personal Expectations (PE), Personal Criticism (PC), Doubts About Actions (DA), and Organization (O). In addition, an overall score of perfectionism can be calculated with the major dimension being CM, or a tendency to react negatively to mistakes, interpret mistakes as failure, and believe that one will lose respect of others because of failure (Frost, Heimberg, Holt, Mattia, & Neubauer, 1993). Participants respond to the items on a 5-point Likert-type scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Higher scores indicate higher levels of perfectionism, viewed as a maladaptive trait (Frost et al., 1990). The MPS-F includes items such as “I set higher goals for myself than most people” and “If I fail partly, it is as bad as being a complete failure.”

In addition to yielding a total score and subscale scores, maladaptive and adaptive perfectionism scales can be cre-ated from the MPS-F subscale combinations (Frost et al., 1993; P. W. Harris, Pepper, & Maack, 2008). According to Frost et al. (1993), maladaptive components of perfection-ism measured by the MPS-F include the subscales CM, DA, PE, and PC, whereas adaptive dimensions include PS and O. Frost et al. demonstrated relationships among the PS and O subscales and positive affect, while CM, PC, and DA were correlated with depression and negative affect. Research examining the MPS-F alone or in combination with other perfectionism measures (e.g., Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale; Hewitt & Flett, 1991) has supported a two-factor model. This was the method used in the cur-rent study. The individual subscale scores were not used in further analyses given that the difference between adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists was the research question of interest.

Participants were divided into groups of adaptive perfec-tionists, maladaptive perfectionists, and nonperfectionists using sample cutoff scores on the MPS-F as used in previ-ous research (Frost et al., 1995, 1997). Participants with an adaptive total score greater than the sample adaptive mean (i.e., 49.18) and maladaptive score lower than the sample maladaptive mean (i.e., 60.32) were classified as adaptive perfectionists (n = 67). Maladaptive perfectionists were classified as those participants with a score higher than the sample median on maladaptive factors and lower than the sample median on the adaptive factors (n = 57). Participants not meeting either of these specifications were classified as nonperfectionists (n = 176) and were divided into two groups (i.e., high-scoring nonperfectionists and low-scoring nonper-fectionists) to aid in comparisons. Those scoring above both sample means were labeled as high-scoring nonperfectionists (i.e., those with high adaptive and maladaptive components; n = 82), and those scoring below both means were labeled as low-scoring nonperfectionists (i.e., those with low adaptive and maladaptive components; n = 94). Although perfection-ists have not been classified into these four groups, these groups were formed on the basis of previous studies that have identified a third group, nonperfectionists, as well as previous studies that have differentiated between high and low scorers, dichotomizing them (e.g., Frost et al., 1995, 1997). The means used to classify the groups were similar to those used in previous studies. The adaptive mean of 49.18 in our study compared well with the mean of 49.22 used previ-ously (Bousman, 2008). The maladaptive mean, 60.32, was somewhat higher than previous research (e.g., n = 58.36 in Bousman, 2008; n = 53.74 in Kawamura & Frost, 2004) and a z-test analysis indicated a rejection of the null hypothesis that these samples come from the same population.

Kawamura and Frost (2004) reported coefficient alphas of .91 for the Maladaptive Perfectionism subscale and .84 for the adaptive subscale PS. Internal reliabilities for the combined Maladaptive Perfectionism subscale (i.e., CM, DA, PE, PC) and the combined Adaptive Perfectionism subscale (i.e., PS, O) in our sample were .90 and .88, respectively. The MPS-F demonstrated construct validity when compared with other tests measuring traits related to perfectionism, including psychopathology, depression, and guilt (Frost et al., 1990).

Career decision-making self-efficacy. The CDSE-SF (Betz et al., 1996) is a 25-item measure assessing self-efficacy expectations in completing specific tasks necessary in mak-ing career decisions. Items include “Make a plan of your goals for the next five years” and “Prepare a good résumé.” Responses range from 1 (no confidence at all) to 5 (complete confidence). Higher scores indicate a greater degree of career decision-making self-efficacy. The CDSE-SF total score has demonstrated coefficient alphas ranging from .93 to .95, with an internal consistency of .95 in our sample. Test–retest reli-ability of the CDSE-SF was demonstrated at .83 at a period



of 6 weeks (Luzzo, 1993). The CDSE-SF has demonstrated construct validity when compared with measures of career indecision and vocational identity (Betz et al., 1996).

ResultsTo demonstrate that the groups were distinct, we examined groups of perfectionists using scores on the CM subscale as well as the total score of the MPS-F. Adaptive perfectionists theoretically should have lower CM scores than maladap-tive perfectionists, given that CM refers to the tendency to react negatively to mistakes and is an identified differ-ence between groups of perfectionists (Frost et al., 1990). Adaptive perfectionists, maladaptive perfectionists, and nonperfectionists differed on mean endorsements of both CM, F(3, 296) = 108.85, p < .001, and total, F(3, 296) = 184.40, p < .001, scores on the MPS-F. On the CM sub-scale, maladaptive perfectionists (M = 27.30, SD = 5.20) varied significantly (p < .05) from each of the other groups, whereas adaptive perfectionists (M = 19.31, SD = 4.10) differed significantly from only the maladaptive perfection-ists and high-scoring nonperfectionists (M = 29.90, SD = 5.60). Therefore, no significant differences existed between adaptive perfectionists and low-scoring nonperfectionists (M = 18.89, SD = 4.01) on the CM subscale. All differences varied significantly (p < .05), with adaptive perfectionists (M = 78.45, SD = 8.22), maladaptive perfectionists (M = 93.12, SD = 9.49), low-scoring nonperfectionists (M = 71.55, SD = 8.96), and high-scoring nonperfectionists (M = 103.12, SD = 11.10) all differing from one another on the MPS-F total score.

Correlations, means, standard deviations, and ranges for pertinent scale scores and total scores are presented in Table 2.

In addition, a multivariate analysis of variance was conducted to investigate whether the variables of interest (i.e., overall perfectionism, adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism, nega-tive career thoughts, career decision-making self-efficacy) differed on the basis of demographic-based group differences (i.e., gender, ethnicity, school classification, honors status, athlete status, college of declared major). With regard to ethnicity, only African Americans and European Americans were examined in these preliminary analyses because of the lack of representation of individuals of other ethnicities. No statistically significant differences were found on the com-bined dependent variables. Therefore, these demographic variables were not controlled for in the subsequent analyses. See Table 1 for further information on participants.

As predicted, negative career thinking was positively cor-related with overall perfectionism (r = .28, r2 = .08, p < .01) and negatively correlated with career decision-making self-efficacy (r = –.58, r2 = .34, p < .01). Career decision-making self-efficacy was correlated with adaptive perfectionism (r = .42, r2 = .18, p < .01). These hypotheses were tested using Pearson’s correlations (see Table 2).

Next, we used two one-way analyses of variance to ex-amine differences between the four perfectionism groups on negative career thinking and career decision-making self-efficacy. Assumptions of normality were met for each of the groups on the constructs of interest. Analyses demonstrated that the groups differed with regard to negative career thinking, F(3, 296) = 13.02, p < .001, η2 = .52, and career decision-making self-efficacy, F(3, 296) = 13.72, p < .001, η2 = .35, with eta squared indicating a large effect size. Post hoc comparisons using Tukey’s honestly significant difference test revealed that maladaptive perfectionists (M = 102.44, SD = 20.91) demonstrated higher endorsements of negative career thoughts than either adaptive perfectionists (M = 77.43, SD = 22.89, p < .001) or low-scoring nonperfectionists (M = 91.05, SD = 21.81, p < .05). In addition, both low- and high-scoring (M = 94.17, SD = 25.56) nonperfectionists endorsed higher levels of negative thinking than adaptive perfectionists (p < .05). On endorsements of career decision-making self-efficacy, adaptive perfectionists (M = 105.18, SD = 14.18) endorsed higher levels than either maladaptive perfectionists (M = 90.11, SD = 14.18, p < .05) or low-scoring nonperfec-tionists (M = 93.05, SD = 16.00, p < .05). Also, maladaptive perfectionists had lower levels of career decision-making self-efficacy than high-scoring nonperfectionists (M = 100.02, SD = 15.60, p < .05).

Finally, we conducted a hierarchical multiple regression to examine predicted variance in career decision self-efficacy. A hierarchical multiple regression was used because it was hypothesized that perfectionism would explain career decision-making self-efficacy above and beyond negative career thinking, a factor that has been shown to correlate with career decision-making self-efficacy. By using this analysis,

Note. CTI = Career Thoughts Inventory Dysfunctional Career Thinking; CDSE-SF = Career Decision Self-Efficacy Scale–Short Form; MPS-F = Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale Total Perfectionism; Adaptive Perf. = Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale Adaptive Perfectionism; Maladaptive Perf. = Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale Maladaptive Perfectionism.*p < .01.

TabLe 2

Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations

Characteristic

1. CTI2. CDSE-SF3. MPS-F4. Adaptive Perf.5. Maladaptive Perf.

MSDRangePossible rangeSample alpha

4 5

— .25*

49.18 7.9024–6513–65

.88

—

60.32 13.5029–11022–110 .90

2 3

— .01 .42* –.09

97.11 16.0552–12525–125

.95

— .46* .97*

85.82 16.0845–14529–145

.90

1

— –.58* .28* –.22* .35*

43.03 24.320–1150–144

.97



we can examine the unique and combined contributions of these constructs on the variable of career decision-making self-efficacy. In Step 1, negative career thinking was entered into the model. In Step 2, perfectionism was added to identify any additional variance explained by perfectionism beyond that of negative career thoughts. Perfectionism and negative career thinking were found to predict significant variance in career decision-making self-efficacy, with perfectionism pre-dicting additional variance above the contribution of negative career thoughts. These findings are summarized in Table 3.

DiscussionOur study examined the relationships among perfection-ism, negative career thinking, and career decision-making self-efficacy in college students. Overall endorsements of perfectionism and negative career thinking were positively correlated, which is consistent with research on the more general construct irrational thinking (Flett et al., 1991; Hewitt & Flett, 1991) and adds to the career development literature by linking these constructs within the career domain. Nega-tive thoughts and perfectionism shared 7.8% of variance. This finding also indicates that individuals presenting with one of these concerns are likely to present with the other. Addi-tionally, an inverse relationship was found between negative career thoughts and career decision-making self-efficacy and is consistent with the findings of Bullock-Yowell et al. (2011). Negative career thinking and career decision-making self-efficacy were found to share 33.6% of variance. This finding suggests the presence of low confidence in one’s abilities to complete tasks necessary in the career decision-making process for those with several negative career thoughts. Prior research had not supported a relationship between perfection-ism and career decision-making self-efficacy (Hart, Gilner, Handal, & Gfeller, 1998); however, a positive relationship was found between career decision-making self-efficacy and adaptive perfectionism in our sample.

Participants were divided into four groups: adaptive perfectionists, maladaptive perfectionists, high-scoring non-

perfectionists, and low-scoring nonperfectionists. Differences were found between each of the four groups on concern over mistakes and overall perfectionism, providing support that each of the groups represented a distinct group and that the nonperfectionist groups were not similar to one another or to the adaptive or maladaptive group. There were differences found among groups of perfectionists on both negative career thinking and career decision-making self-efficacy. Maladap-tive perfectionists endorsed higher levels of negative career thinking than either adaptive perfectionists or low-scoring nonperfectionists. Thus, significant differences were found between those who endorsed high levels of the maladaptive components of perfectionism and those low on this construct. Furthermore, both groups of nonperfectionists endorsed greater negative career thoughts than adaptive perfection-ists. Therefore, individuals with high scores on the adaptive component only possessed less negative career thinking. The results of this analysis demonstrate that perfectionists do differ on the amount of negative career thinking entertained and that the types of perfectionistic tendencies possessed influence the presence of negative career thoughts. Individuals with more positive traits of perfectionism (e.g., setting high standards without negative self-appraisal) are less likely to endorse negative thinking. Those endorsing more negative aspects of perfectionism (e.g., setting unattainable goals) are more likely to view additional difficulties to the career decision-making process as evidenced by higher negative career thoughts.

Similarly, adaptive perfectionists endorsed higher levels of career decision-making self-efficacy than either maladaptive perfectionists or low-scoring nonperfectionists. High-scoring nonperfectionists, those scoring above the mean on both adap-tive and maladaptive components of perfectionism, did not differ significantly from adaptive perfectionists. Both groups share an above-average level of the adaptive components of perfectionism but differ on their endorsements of the maladap-tive components. Therefore, the results provide support for theoretical differences between the adaptive and maladaptive components of perfectionism. For example, both high-scoring nonperfectionists and adaptive perfectionists score high on adaptive perfectionism (e.g., setting high standards without negative self-appraisal, approach behaviors). This fits well with the finding that adaptive perfectionists have high con-fidence in completing career decision-making tasks, while maladaptive perfectionists’ lower confidence fits well with those aspects associated with maladaptive perfectionism (e.g., inferiority, external motivation, lower self-efficacy). In addition, high-scoring nonperfectionists endorsed higher levels than maladaptive perfectionists on endorsements of career decision-making self-efficacy. This finding differs from that of Ganske and Ashby (2007) in which maladaptive perfectionists and nonperfectionists did not differ; however, maladaptive perfectionists did not differ from one of the groups of nonperfectionists (i.e., low-scoring nonperfection-

Note. CTI = Career Thoughts Inventory Dysfunctional Career Think-ing; MPS-F = Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale Total Perfectionism.**p < .001.

TabLe 3

Hierarchical Multiple Regression analyses Predicting Career Decision-Making Self-efficacy

Step and Variable

Step 1 CTI

Step 2 CTI MPS-F

R 2 DR 2

.34**

.37** .03

SE B b

.00

.00 .00

–.58**

–.63** .18**

B

–.02

–.02 .01



ists). Using a different measure of perfectionism, the Almost Perfect Scale–Revised (APS-R; Slaney, Rice, Mobley, Trippi, & Ashby, 2001), Ganske and Ashby classified groups of per-fectionists using cluster analysis. Therefore, both the measure used to assess level of perfectionism and the manner of es-tablishing the groups of perfectionists differed between the two studies. Differences found between the two studies may be due to the measures used to assess perfectionism, means of classifying perfectionists, or actual differences between the samples obtained.

Negative career thinking and perfectionism predicted a significant portion of variance in career decision-making self-efficacy. Furthermore, perfectionism predicts a small, yet unique portion of variance above that of negative career thinking. This indicates that perfectionism may be an important aspect or type of negative thinking that is related to career decision-making confidence. Yet, the 3% of unique variance that perfectionism explained in the model leads to some questions about its practical significance. In addition, given that overall perfectionism and negative career thoughts were directly correlated, this relation-ship may have influenced the increased variance explained by negative career thoughts following the addition of perfectionism into the model. Further research is needed to clarify the exact nature of this relationship and the importance of perfectionism in the career decision-making process.

Clinical Implications

Career counselors who are aware of the relationships among perfectionism, negative career thoughts, and career decision-making self-efficacy may find this knowledge useful for identifying the concerns of individuals presenting to career counseling. When working with clients, career counselors may initially notice perfectionistic tendencies prior to fully assessing negative thinking or self-efficacy deficits. Client perfectionism may alert career counselors to attend to these career development issues (i.e., negative career thinking, career decision-making self-efficacy) that have research-informed interventions. In addition, if an individual presents with low career decision-making self-efficacy, the presence of negative thoughts can be assessed and measures enacted to decrease these thoughts. Specifically, identifying the presence of negative career thoughts can assist career counselors in working with clients to modify these irrational beliefs, in ad-dition to assessing for perfectionistic traits and levels of career decision-making self-efficacy. If these concerns are present in addition to negative career thinking, career counselors can enact interventions to additionally alter adverse consequences on decision making. For instance, career counselors can use the CTI to identify specific negative career thoughts and the CTI workbook to challenge and work with clients to alter these thoughts.

Further implications stem from prior studies demonstrat-ing relationships among the constructs of perfectionism,

negative career thoughts, and career decision-making self-efficacy in relation to other difficulties in career decision making. For example, career indecision has been shown to be related to negative career thinking (Saunders et al., 2000) and perfectionism (Leong & Chervinko, 1996). Additionally, differences in levels of career decision-making self-efficacy have been found among students with a declared major, ten-tative major, and those who have not declared a major, with students with declared majors indicating the highest levels of career decision-making self-efficacy (Taylor & Popma, 1990). Such findings demonstrate the important implications these constructs have in the realm of career development. The relationship between adaptive perfectionism and career decision-making self-efficacy further exhibits an important implication for the field, given that it appears to support the assertion by Hart et al. (1998) that “the development of self-efficacy parallels that of perfectionism” (p. 110), suggesting that high personal demands are the formation for both. It is worth noting that our results support that some perfectionistic tendencies seem to aid those in pursuit of making a career-related decision. As the process of making a complex decision can be tedious, those with some adaptive ability to deal with these tasks feel more confident in the process.

Our study demonstrated that by identifying any number of individual factors (i.e., level of perfectionism, type of per-fectionist, negative career thoughts, career decision-making self-efficacy), other insights or directions for intervention can be discovered. For example, a career counselor who identifies that a client has low levels of career decision-making self-efficacy can use an assessment (e.g., CTI, MPS-F) to assess the client’s perfectionistic tendencies as well as negative thinking to gather a more whole picture of the problems that the client is encountering. By identifying these connections, a career counselor can further tailor the treatment to address the client’s multiple barriers through methods shown to alter ca-reer decision-making self-efficacy or negative career thinking.

The results of our study provide further insight into working with individuals with perfectionistic tendencies. Given that differences in both career decision-making self-efficacy and negative career thoughts exist between groups of perfectionists, career counselors can gain insight about a client based on the type of perfectionistic tendencies identi-fied, or if the client’s negative career thinking is particularly defined by his or her perfectionistic thoughts. By identify-ing the differences among groups of perfectionists, career counselors can follow up with assessments and questioning after identifying a client’s adaptive or maladaptive traits of perfectionism. In addition, career counselors can aid clients by introducing them to methods designed to reduce career indecision and other difficulties that may be affecting their progression through the career development process (e.g., career decision-making assistance, career courses). This is especially true for maladaptive perfectionists, who demon-



strated more difficulties in the career development process in our research. Some clients may benefit from being introduced to career decision-making methods such as the CASVE (com-munication, analysis, synthesis, valuing, execution) cycle detailed in the cognitive information-processing approach to career problem solving and decision making (Sampson, Reardon, Peterson, & Lenz, 2004).

In addition, career counselors can aid clients by using methods designed to reduce career development difficulties. Studies have found that career decision-making self-efficacy can be enhanced through several methods related to the four sources of self-efficacy, including verbal persuasion (e.g., Luzzo & Day, 1999; Luzzo, Funk, & Strang, 1996; Luzzo & Taylor, 1993), attributional retraining procedure (Luzzo et al., 1996), and a combination of the four sources of self-efficacy information (i.e., performance accomplishments, vicarious learning, emotional arousal, verbal persuasion; Sullivan & Mahalik, 2000). The metacognitions domain of the cogni-tive information-processing approach (Sampson et al., 2004) can also be used to provide guidance on how to work with and consequently reduce one’s negative career thoughts. For example, a likely negative career thought for a perfectionistic client may be, “I can’t be satisfied unless I find the perfect occupation for me.” Practitioners can help clients to iden-tify, challenge, and alter this negative career thought while encouraging new actions to generate a new way of thinking about their career choice process. In addition, participating in career development courses has been found to be effec-tive in reducing one’s negative career thoughts (e.g., Osborn, Howard, & Leierer, 2007; Reed, Reardon, Lenz, & Leierer, 2001), and thus is another intervention option to consider.

Limitations and Directions for Future Research

Although our study contributes as a new development and an extension of prior research concerning the relationships between personality and career development variables, it does have some limitations. Notably, the sample consisted mostly of female, European American college students. Male and African American participants were represented across each of the four groups of perfectionists: adaptive (6 men, 23 African Americans), maladaptive (12 men, 31 African Americans), low-scoring nonperfectionists (16 men, 54 African Americans), and high-scoring nonperfectionists (13 men, 48 African Americans). Gender and ethnicity did not result in significantly different values on any of the constructs of interest and, therefore, were not controlled for in any of the analyses. However, whether the same findings would be upheld in a more diverse sample is unknown.

An additional limitation of the study is its correlational nature. Given the developmental nature of career decision making and one’s confidence, longitudinal studies would allow for a more accurate view of the relationships between the constructs. Specifically, relationships between the

constructs could be examined in different age groups to determine if the relationships exist across the life span or if developmental events alter these relationships. Although our study found that significant differences did not exist between college students based on their year in school, researchers could gain information about causation by examining individuals earlier.

The means by which groups of perfectionists were estab-lished is also a potential limitation. Given that the groups were identified through the use of mean cutoffs within our sample, different conclusions may be reached depending on the nature of various samples because of the characteristics inherent in each sample (e.g., honors students vs. those on academic probation). Therefore, future research examining mean sample cutoffs and identification of normative means may be beneficial in furthering what is known about these three groups of perfectionists. In addition, the nature and measurement of adaptive perfectionists may be an area of further study due to the important findings of our study with regard to adaptive perfectionists and multiple means of con-ceptualizing this group in the literature.

An area of further study is the disagreement between the findings of this study and those in the literature. Ganske and Ashby (2007) found that differences did not exist between groups of maladaptive perfectionists and nonperfectionists on endorsement of career decision-making self-efficacy; how-ever, the results of our study found that differences did exist. Several differences existed between the two studies, including the measures used to assess perfectionism (MPS-F vs. APS-R) and the methodology for categorizing perfectionists (sample mean cutoffs vs. cluster analysis). Therefore, further research on these relationships should be examined to provide more information on the conflicting results.

An additional area of future research includes further exploration of the relationships among the variables used in our study. Prior research has found that rumination about mistakes mediates the relationship between maladaptive perfectionism and symptoms of depression (P. W. Harris et al., 2008). Thus, further research aimed at identifying the role of thinking in the relationship may be beneficial. That is, does negative thinking mediate the relationship or does a person’s perfectionistic tendencies lead to negative thinking, which influences the person’s level of career decision-making self-efficacy? Examining this line of research may provide further information on the role of these variables and provide further direction for career practitioners.

The results converge with the literature concerning perfectionism and career decision-making self-efficacy, as well as the literature on the more general construct of ir-rational beliefs. Our study, along with previous literature, indicates that perfectionism and negative career thinking play an important part in a person’s confidence in making career-related decisions.



ReferencesAshby, J. S., & Kottman, T. (1996). Inferiority as a distinction between nor-

mal and neurotic perfectionism. Individual Psychology, 52, 237–245.Ashby, J. S., & Rice, K. G. (2002). Perfectionism, dysfunctional at-

titudes, and self-esteem: A structural equations analysis. Journal of Counseling & Development, 80, 197–203.

Belloch, A., Morillo, C., & Garcia-Soriano, G. (2007). Are the dysfunctional beliefs that predict worry different from those that predict obsessions? Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 14, 438–448. doi:10.1002/cpp.551

Betz, N. E., Klein, K. L., & Taylor, K. M. (1996). Evalua-tion of a short form of the Career Decision-Making Self-Efficacy Scale. Journal of Career Assessment, 4, 47–57. doi:10.1177/106907279600400103

Betz, N. E., & Sterling, D. (1993). Construct validity of fear of commitment as an indicator of career indecisiveness. Journal of Career Assessment, 1, 21–34. doi:10.1177/106907279300100104

Blatt, S. J. (1995). The destructiveness of perfectionism: Implica-tions for the treatment of depression. American Psychologist, 50, 1003–1020. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.50.12.1003

Bousman, L. A. (2008). The fine line of perfectionism: Is it a strength or a weakness in the workplace? (Doctoral dissertation). Avail-able from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (AAT 3283907)

Bullock-Yowell, E., Andrews, L., & Buzzetta, M. E. (2011). Explain-ing career decision making self-efficacy: Personality, cognitions, and cultural mistrust. The Career Development Quarterly, 59, 29–58.

Denoff, M. S. (1987). Cognitive appraisal in three forms of adoles-cent maladjustment. Social Casework, 68, 579–588.

Ellis, A. (1962). Reason and emotion in psychotherapy. Oxford, England: Lyle Stuart.

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. 33–62). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Land, A., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis for the social, behavi-oral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191.

Flett, G. L., Blankstein, K. R., Hewitt, P. L., & Koledin, S. (1991). Dimensions of perfectionism and irrational thinking. Journal of Rational-Emotive and Cognitive Behavior Therapy, 9, 185–201. doi:10.1007/BF01061229

Flett, G. L., Hewitt, P. L., Blankstein, K. R., & Koledin, S. (1992). Components of perfectionism and procrastination in college stu-dents. Social Behavior and Personality, 20, 85–94. doi:10.2224/sbp.1992.20.2.85

Flett, G. L., Hewitt, P. L., & Dyck, D. G. (1989). Self-oriented perfectionism, neuroticism and anxiety. Personality and Individual Differences, 10, 731–735. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(89)90119-0

Frost, R. O., Heimberg, R. G., Holt, C. S., Mattia, J. I., & Neubauer, A. L. (1993). A comparison of two measures of perfection-ism. Personality and Individual Differences, 14, 119–126. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(93)90181-2

Frost, R. O., Marten, P., Lahart, C., & Rosenblate, R. (1990). The dimensions of perfectionism. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 14, 449–468. doi:10.1007/BF01172967

Frost, R. O., Trepanier, K. L., Brown, E. J., Heimberg, R. G., Juster, H. R., Makris, G. S., & Leung, A. W. (1997). Self-monitoring of mistakes among subjects high and low in perfectionistic concern over mistakes. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 21, 209–222. doi:10.1023/A:1021884713550

Frost, R. O., Turcotte, T. A., Heimberg, R. G., Mattia, J. I., Holt, C. S., & Hope, D. A. (1995). Reactions to mistakes among subjects high and low in perfectionistic concern over mistakes. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 19, 195–205. doi:10.1007/BF02229694

Ganske, K. H., & Ashby, J. S. (2007). Perfectionism and career decision-making self-efficacy. Journal of Employment Counsel-ing, 44, 17–28.

Hamachek, D. E. (1978). Psychodynamics of normal and neurotic per-fectionism. Psychology: A Journal of Human Behavior, 15, 27–33.

Harris, P. W., Pepper, C. M., & Maack, D. J. (2008). The relationship between maladaptive perfectionism and depressive symptoms: The mediating role of rumination. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 150–160. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2007.07.011

Harris, S., Davies, M. F., & Dryden, W. (2006). An experimental test of a core REBT hypothesis: Evidence that irrational beliefs lead to physiological as well as psychological arousal. Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive-Behavior Therapy, 24, 101–111. doi:10.1007/s10942-005-0019-5

Hart, B. A., Gilner, F. H., Handal, P. J., & Gfeller, J. D. (1998). The relationship between perfectionism and self-efficacy. Personal and Individual Differences, 24, 109–113. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(97)00116-5

Hartman, R., & Betz, N. E. (2007). The Five Factor Model and career self-efficacy. Journal of Career Assessment, 15, 145–161. doi:10.1177/1069072706298011

Hewitt, P. L., & Flett, G. L. (1991). Perfectionism in the self and social contexts: Conceptualization, assessment, and association with psychopathology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychol-ogy, 60, 456–470. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.60.3.456

Kawamura, K. Y., & Frost, R. O. (2004). Self-concealment as a mediator in the relationship between perfectionism and psycho-logical distress. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 28, 183–191. doi:10.1023/B:COTR.0000021539.48926.c1

Kleiman, T., Gati, I., Peterson, G., Sampson, J., Reardon, R., & Lenz, J. (2004). Dysfunctional thinking and difficulties in career decision making. Journal of Career Assessment, 12, 312–331. doi:10.1177/1069072704266673

Leong, F. T., & Chervinko, S. (1996). Construct validity of ca-reer indecision: Negative personality traits as predictors of career indecision. Journal of Career Assessment, 4, 315–329. doi:10.1177/106907279600400306



Luzzo, D. A. (1993). Value of career decision-making self-efficacy in predicting career decision-making attitudes and skills. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 40, 194–199. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.40.2.194

Luzzo, D. A., & Day, M. A. (1999). Effects of Strong Interest Inven-tory feedback on career decision-making self-efficacy and social cognitive career beliefs. Journal of Career Assessment, 7, 1–17. doi:10.1177/106907279900700101

Luzzo, D. A., Funk, D. P., & Strang, J. (1996). Attributional retrain-ing increases career decision-making self-efficacy. The Career Development Quarterly, 44, 378–386.

Luzzo, D. A., & Taylor, M. (1993). Effects of verbal persuasion on the career self-efficacy of college freshman. California Association for Counseling and Development Journal, 14, 31–34.

Osborn, D. S., Howard, D. K., & Leierer, S. J. (2007). The effects of a career development course on the dysfunctional career thoughts of racially and ethnically diverse college freshman. The Career Development Quarterly, 55, 365–377.

Periasamy, S., & Ashby, J. S. (2002). Multidimensional perfection-ism and locus of control: Adaptive vs. maladaptive perfection-ism. Journal of College Student Psychotherapy, 17, 75–86. doi:10.1300/J035v17n02_06

Reed, C. A., Reardon, R. C., Lenz, J. G., & Leierer, S. J. (2001). A cognitive career course: From theory to practice. The Career Development Quarterly, 50, 158–167.

Robbins, S. B. (1985). Validity estimates for the Career Decision Making Self-Efficacy Scale. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 18, 64–71.

Sampson, J. P., Jr., Peterson, G. W., Lenz, J. G., Reardon, R. C., & Saunders, D. E. (1996). Career Thoughts Inventory: Professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

Sampson, J. P., Jr., Reardon, R. C., Peterson, G. W., & Lenz, J. G. (2004). Career counseling & services: A cognitive information processing approach. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Saunders, D. E., Peterson, G. W., Sampson, J. P., Jr., & Reardon, R. C. (2000). Relation of depression and dysfunctional career thinking to career indecision. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 56, 288–298. doi:10.1006/jvbe.1999.1715

Slaney, R. B., Ashby, J. S., & Trippi, J. (1995). Perfectionism: Its measurement and career relevance. Journal of Career Assess-ment, 3, 279–297. doi:10.1177/106907279500300403

Slaney, R. B., Rice, K. G., Mobley, M., Trippi, J., & Ashby, J. S. (2001). The revised Almost Perfect Scale. Measure-ment and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 34, 130–145.

Sullivan, K. R., & Mahalik, J. R. (2000). Increasing career self-efficacy for women: Evaluating a group intervention. Journal of Counseling & Development, 78, 54–62.

Taylor, K. M., & Betz, N. E. (1983). Applications of self-efficacy theory to the understanding and treatment of career indecision. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 22, 63–81. doi:10.1016/0001-8791(83)90006-4

Taylor, K. M., & Popma, J. (1990). An examination of the re-lationships among career decision-making self-eff icacy, career salience, locus of control, and vocational indecision. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 37, 17–31. doi:10.1016/0001-8791(90)90004-L

Westra, H. A., & Kuiper, N. A. (1996). Communality and speci-ficity of dysfunctional cognitions, and the prediction of four different forms of psychological maladjustment. Personality and Individual Differences, 20, 575–588. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(96)00003-7

Documents

Can Perfectionism Affect Career Development? Exploring Career Thoughts and Self-Efficacy