Dimensions of perfectionism and goal orientation have been reported to have differential relationships with test anxiety. However, the degree of inter-relationship between different dimensions of perfectionism, the 2×2 model of goal orientations proposed by Elliot and McGregor, cognitive test anxiety, and academic performance indicators is not known. Based on data from 134 university students, we conducted correlation and regression analyses to test associations between adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism, four types of goal orientations, cognitive test anxiety, and two indicators of academic performance: proximal cognitive performance on a word list recall test and distal academic performance in terms of grade point average. Cognitive test anxiety was inversely associated with both performance indicators, and positively associated with maladaptive perfectionism and avoidance goal orientations. Adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism accounted for significant variance in cognitive test anxiety after controlling for approach and avoidance goal orientations. Overall, nearly 50% of the variance in cognitive test anxiety could be attributed to gender, goal orientations, and perfectionism. Results suggested that students who are highly test anxious are likely to be women who endorse avoidance goal orientations and are maladaptively perfectionistic.

Using a cross-panel design and data from 2 successive cohorts of college students (N = 357), we examined the stability of maladaptive perfectionism, procrastination, and psychological distress across 3 time points within a college semester. Each construct was substantially stable over time, with procrastination being especially stable. We also tested, but failed to support, a mediational model with Time 2 (mid-semester) procrastination as a hypothesized mechanism through which Time 1 (early-semester) perfectionism would affect Time 3 (end-semester) psychological distress. An alternative model with Time 2 perfectionism as a mediator of the procrastination-distress association also was not supported. Within-time analyses revealed generally consistent strength of effects in the correlations between the 3 constructs over the course of the semester. A significant interaction effect also emerged. Time 1 procrastination had no effect on otherwise high levels of psychological distress at the end of the semester for highly perfectionistic students, but at low levels of Time 1 perfectionism, the most distressed students by the end of the term were those who were more likely to have procrastinated earlier in the semester. Implications of the stability of the constructs and their association over time, as well as the moderating effects of procrastination, are discussed in the context of maladaptive perfectionism and problematic procrastination.

A large school-based sample of 9th-grade adolescents (N = 875) completed the Almost Perfect Scale-Revised (APS-R; Slaney, Mobley, Trippi, Ashby, & Johnson, 1996). Decision rules and cut-scores were developed and replicated that classify adolescents as one of two kinds of perfectionists (adaptive or maladaptive) or as nonperfectionists. A four-cluster solution further differentiating nonperfectionists was also evaluated. Criterion-related validity of the cluster solutions was supported by perfectionist and nonperfectionist group differences on select subscales of the Multidimensional Students' Life Satisfaction Scale (MSLSS; Huebner, 1994) and the Behavior Assessment System for Children, Second Edition: Self-Report-Adolescent (BASC-2: SRP-A; Reynolds & Kamphaus, 2004). Adaptive and maladaptive perfectionists were supported in both cluster solutions and validity analyses. In addition to the two types of perfectionists, the four-cluster solution differentiated two types of nonperfectionists from one that seemed similar to maladaptive perfectionists in terms of BASC-2: SRP-A scores. Although the four-cluster solution may have potential value, the three-cluster solution was recommended as more parsimonious for studies attempting to differentiate perfectionists. The findings and straightforward decision rules were generally consistent in principle with other studies attempting to classify perfectionists, although the final APS-R cut-scores differed from those of other studies of adults. The results provided additional descriptive inferences for perfectionistic and nonperfectionistic adolescents. Among other issues, the findings raised the question of whether the label of maladaptive for a subgroup of perfectionists was too broad given that the criterion-related validity scores revealed that the group's problems in adjustment were conspicuous only in the areas of anxiety and social stress.