COPYRIGHT AND CITATION CONSIDERATIONS FOR THIS THESIS/ DISSERTATION
o Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
o NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
o ShareAlike — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.
How to cite this thesis
Surname, Initial(s). (2012) Title of the thesis or dissertation. PhD. (Chemistry)/ M.Sc. (Physics)/ M.A. (Philosophy)/M.Com. (Finance) etc. [Unpublished]: University of Johannesburg. Retrieved from: https://ujdigispace.uj.ac.za (Accessed: Date).
The Relationship between Perfectionism and
Personality in Secondary School Netball
Players in South Africa
By
Christopher Langefeld
A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of
M.A. (Clinical Psychology)
in the
Faculty of Humanities
at the
University of Johannesburg
Supervisor
Dr Leon van Niekerk
2013
i
Acknowledgements
I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to the following people - without you,
completing this dissertation would not have been possible:
To my supervisor, Dr Van Niekerk, thank you for all the help and support you have
provided me throughout the year. Your expertise in the field of research taught me
more than I could ever have imagined, and for that I have the world of appreciation.
To Professor De Bruin and Dr Taylor for the use of the BTI-S and all the help and
guidance you provided me when I needed it, thank you.
To Kimmy, thank you from the bottom of my heart for all the love, support and
understanding you provided me throughout the duration of this year. More
importantly, thank you for all the editing and proof reading you did, you have my
heartfelt appreciation.
To my parents, thank you for being the best role models that you could have been.
Thank you for all the support you have given me throughout my studies and for all the
interest you showed in my passion. In particular, to my dad, thank you for all the late
night editing and discussions we had over late night cups of tea.
To everyone, not mentioned above, who showed interest in the study, thank you for
keeping me motivated and willing to achieve the outcome of this research.
Finally, thank you to all the secondary school participants who participated in the
study.
ii
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements i
List of Tables iv
List of Figures iv
Abstract v
Chapter
1. Introduction 1
1.1 Introduction 1
1.2 Problem Statement 2
1.3 Aims and Objectives 4
1.4 Chapter Delineation 5
2. Perfectionism and Personality Dynamics in Sport 6
2.1 Introduction 6
2.2 Perfectionism 7
2.2.1 Defining Perfectionism 7
2.2.2 Theoretical Underpinning of Perfectionism 8
2.2.3 The Effect of Perfectionism on Performance 13
2.2.4 Gender Differences in Perfectionism 14
2.2.5 Perfectionism and Performance 15
2.3 Personality 17
2.3.1 Cattell’s Sixteen Personality Factor Model 17
2.3.2 Five Factor Personality Model 18
2.3.3 Extraversion 18
2.3.4 Neuroticism 20
2.3.5 Openness to Experience 22
2.3.6 Agreeableness 24
2.3.7 Conscientiousness 26
2.3.8 Personality Factors of Female Adolescents 27
2.3.9 Personality and Anxiety 28
2.4 The Relationship between Perfectionism and Personality 32
2.4.1 Perfectionism and Neuroticism 32
2.4.2 Perfectionism and Conscientiousness 33
2.4.3 Personality, Perfectionism and Sporting Category 34
2.5 Conclusion 35
iii
3. Methodology 37
3.1 Quantitative Methodology 38
3.2 Research Design 39
3.3 Participants 39
3.3.1 Selection and Description of the Research Sample 39
3.3.2 Ethical Considerations 40
3.4 Instruments 41
3.4.1 The Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale 41
3.4.2 Basic Trait Inventory-Short (BTI-S) 43
3.5 Measuring Personality of Adolescents in South Africa 45
3.6 Data Analysis 46
3.7 Summary 47
4. Results 48
4.1 Descriptive Statistics 48
4.1.1 Level of Participation 48
4.1.2 Grade 49
4.1.3 Language 50
4.2 Inferential Statistics 52
4.2.1 Perfectionism 52
4.2.2 Personality 54
4.2.3 Correlations between Perfectionism and Personality 55
4.3 Canonical Correlations 57
4.3.1 Redundancy Index 60
4.4 Summary 62
5. Discussion of Data 64
5.1 Introduction 64
5.2 Discussion about the Perfectionism Scores of the Sample 64
5.2.1 Implications for Perfectionism Results in Current Analysis 66
5.3 Discussion about the Personality Scores of the Sample 67
5.4 Perfectionism and Personality Correlations 68
5.5 Canonical Correlation Analysis 70
6. Conclusion 73
6.1 Summary 73
6.2 Future Recommendations 74
6.3 Limitations 75
6.4 Closing 75
7. References 77
iv
List of Tables
Table 4.1 Frequency Table Representing the Level of Participation of the
Participants in Sport 49
Table 4.2 Frequency Table Representing the Grades of the Participants 49
Table 4.3 Frequency Table Representing the Languages of the Participants 51
Table 4.4 Table Representing the MPS Subscale Scores of the Participants 53
Table 4.5 Table Representing the BTI-S Subscale Scores of the Participants 55
Table 4.6 Table Representing the Correlations between Overall Perfectionism
and Personality Factors 56
Table 4.7 Table Representing Canonical Correlations and Remaining
Correlations between Set 1 and 2 58
Table 4.8 Table Representing the Standardized Canonical Coefficients for
Personality (Set 1) 59
Table 4.9 Table Representing the Standardized Canonical Coefficients for
Perfectionism (Set 2) 60
Table 4.10 Table Representing the Proportion of Variants for Set 1 and
Set 2 Explained by its Own Canonical Variance 61
Table 4.11 Table Representing the Proportion of Variants for Set 1 and
Set 2 Explained by the Opposite Canonical Variance 62
List of Figures
Figure 4.1 Graph Representing the Grades of the Participants 50
Figure 4.2 Graph Representing the Languages of the Participants 51
v
Abstract
The purpose of the present study was to establish if a relationship exists between the
constructs of perfectionism and personality in female secondary school netball players. Sport,
throughout the world, generally has the label of being male dominated, especially in terms of
relevant academic literature. Subsequently, one of the aims of the present study was to
address the paucity of knowledge of perfectionism, in relation to personality, in female
adolescents.
Perfectionism and personality are both constructs that are made up of multiple dimensions
and factors. Perfectionism is made up of six dimensions, namely Concern Over Mistakes,
Personal Standards, Organisation, Parental Criticism, Parental Expectations and Doubts about
Actions. On the other hand, personality is made up of five factors, namely Neuroticism,
Extraversion, Conscientiousness, Agreeableness and Openness to Experience. The main
objective of the present study was to determine if a relationship exists between each of the
dimensions of perfectionism and each of the factors of personality.
The Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (MPS), as well as the Basic Traits Inventory-Short
(BTI-S) was distributed to a sample of 526 female secondary school netball players who were
attending a schools netball training camp.
The data that was gathered from the two questionnaires was analysed using canonical
correlational analysis. The results of the study suggest that a strong relationship, between
perfectionism and personality exists with a canonical correlation of .647 in the first set and
.592 in the second set. Both canonical sets were significant at a (p = .000) level. Upon further
analysis, Neuroticism and Conscientiousness produced the strongest and most significant
correlations with perfectionism.
vi
The results suggest that there is a strong relationship between Neuroticism and the
maladaptive perfectionism dimensions of Concern Over Mistakes. Therefore, female
secondary school netball players who have high Neuroticism have a tendency to be overly
critical of their mistakes and as a result they often doubt their actions. In contrast,
Conscientiousness was related to Organisation, an adaptive dimension of perfectionism.
The final outcome of the study suggests that a strong relationship exists between
perfectionism and personality. Furthermore, the results of the current study imply that
Neuroticism plays a mediating role in the production of maladaptive perfectionism.
1
Chapter 1
Introduction
1.1 Introduction
Sportsmen and –women, professional and amateur alike, are faced with multiple pressures
that often poses an ultimate hindrance on their performance. Some of these pressures include
performance anxiety, fatigue and burnout, and negative physiological arousal resultant of
performance and perfectionism. The latter, is often a construct that is misunderstood by
athletes, coaches, sport managers and spectators, to have a purely negative consequence on an
athlete’s performance and sports career. Theory (Flett & Hewitt, 2005; Gotwals, Stoeber,
Dunn & Stoll, 2012; Hamachek, 1978) suggests, however, that perfectionism does not only
have a negative consequence, but very often, it has a positive influence on a sporting
performance. Thus, it is assumed that in the sporting society, perfectionism holds a false
ideology.
The constructs of perfectionism and personality often correlates with one another, particularly
because of the theoretical link between the personality trait Neuroticism, and perfectionism.
This ideology is no different among athletes. Sportsmen and -women often strive for
perfection within their performance, which is known to most as a debilitating phenomenon in
which they need to understand and reduce. However, Gotwals et al. (2012) have found this
ideology to be a controversial issue as they have found that in sport, perfectionism is less of a
debilitating phenomenon and more of an adaptive phenomenon. In order to better understand
the entire construct of perfectionism, it becomes necessary to analyse the relationship it has
with personality.
2
1.2 Problem Statement
The construct of perfectionism in sport is the product of a number of heated and controversial
debates among researchers (Gotwals et al., 2012). These debates include whether
perfectionism is maladaptive or adaptive, what the core features of the construct are, and the
development of a stable definition for perfectionism (Hall, 2006). Further debate includes the
contextualisation of perfectionism as a personality construct. Personality is theorised as a
developmental construct that develops as an individual ages and grows (Srivastava, John,
Gosling & Potter, 2003). Therefore, the contextualisation of perfectionism as a
developmental construct implies that as personality develops in an individual, so too does
perfectionism. Recent research (Speirs Neumeister, Kay Williams, & Cross, 2009) reinforces
the implication that perfectionism is a developmental construct by identifying developmental
reasons such as social expectations, social learning as well as family history of perfectionism.
However, there is a large paucity of research that explores this contextualisation by analysing
the relationship between perfectionism and personality in adolescents, which evidently is
identified in psychological personality theory as the key developmental period of personality
in individuals. In order to possibly put this debate to rest, it is important to investigate this
relationship between perfectionism and personality in adolescents in order to understand
whether perfectionism is mediated through personality.
Researchers (Allen, Greenlees, & Jones, 2011; Ulu & Tezner, 2010) in the field of
Psychology have attempted to understand various aspects of perfectionism and personality as
different constructs. Although recent research has not explored this relationship in the field of
Sports Psychology, the concepts of perfectionism and personality have been explored
independently. It is to be noted, however, that sport throughout the world is largely male
dominated and as a result, research in this field often represents the large male dominated
sporting society by selecting male dominated and representative samples, as opposed to
3
equally representing male athletes and female athletes. Consequently, most research
encompassing perfectionism and personality in sport is only generalizable for the male athlete
population.
Internationally recognised sport such as cricket, rugby, football, basketball, golf, ice hockey
and baseball are all represented by both males and females, however, the male version of the
sport often seems to take precedence over the female version of the sport with regard to
publicity (Cunningham, Sagas, Sartore, Amsden, & Schellhase, 2004). In addition, television
rights, big sponsorships and financial backing are all focused upon the male version of the
sporting category (Cunningham et al., 2004). There are sports, however, such as netball,
tennis, track and field, and hockey that are represented adequately by female athletes, but
these sports represent a vast minority compared to sports that are considered to be male
dominated. As a result, female sports lack the publicity that is required to enable them to
thrive and grow in the global sporting arena (Cunningham et al., 2004). Until recently, sports
psychologists had little specified and expert knowledge of any psychological influences,
pressures, and ailments etc. that face female athletes due to the under-representation of
female athletes in academic literature (Oglesby, 2001). Therefore, the field of knowledge
surrounding female athletes is scarce. As a result, one can only rely on the literature that
exists in the field and assume that the results can be generalised to male athletes, as well as
female athletes.
Nevertheless, this under-representation of female athletes in Sport Psychology is in dire need
of rectification in order for sport psychologists to expertly and undoubtedly, understand the
psychology involved with female athletes.
4
1.3 Aims and Objectives
The main and primary aim of the present study is to establish if a relationship exists between
perfectionism and personality in female athletes. More specifically, this study aims at
identifying if a relationship between perfectionism and personality exists within female
adolescent athletes. Indeed, this aim originates from the presenting problem of male
domination in sport, and the paucity of knowledge of perfectionism, in relation to personality,
in adolescents.
The main objectives of the study is to explore the dimensions of perfectionism, namely,
Concern over Mistakes, Doubts about Actions, Organisation, Parental Criticism, Parental
Expectations and Personal Standards, and the Big Five factors of Personality, namely,
Neuroticism, Extraversion, Conscientiousness, Agreeableness and Openness to Experience,
and establish, using statistical procedures, if a relationship exists between each and every
factor.
In order to achieve the main aim of the study, it became an objective to recruit an adequate
sample of female adolescent athletes. Netball is a sport that is predominantly played and
enjoyed by female athletes. As a result, this study recruited an adequate purposive sample of
secondary school netball players. The following list of objectives can be seen to be sub-
objectives that will all ultimately operationalize the main objective:
To define and discuss each construct, and its relevant factors, in terms of its
application to sport.
To broaden the knowledge of the relationship between perfectionism and the
personality of female adolescents in the field of sports psychology.
To provide additional data, and further knowledge for subsequent research on the
Basic Traits Inventory, a South African personality measure that is used in this study.
5
1.4 Chapter Delineation
Chapter 1: Introduction - This chapter will introduce the aims and objectives of the research.
Furthermore, it will present the research question and topic.
Chapter 2: Literature Review - This chapter will provide a theoretical overview of the
relevant literature surrounding the research question. It will serve to better understand and
contextualise the variables, theories and research that are being analysed in the study
critically.
Chapter 3: Methodology - This chapter will give an overview of the methods, procedure and
instruments used in order to obtain the data, and provide analysis for the research question.
Additionally, ethical considerations for the study will be discussed in this chapter.
Chapter 4: Results - This chapter will serve to provide an overview of the results that arise
from the analysis of the data. Statistical tables and graphs will be provided in this chapter to
provide a detailed interpretation of the analysis of the study.
Chapter 5: Discussion - This chapter will serve to discuss, interpret and understand the results
that arise from the study in relation to existing research findings. Moreover, it will theorise
about the reasons for the various outcomes that arose from the study.
Chapter 6: Conclusion - The concluding statements about the research study will be made in
this chapter and the study will be drawn to a conclusion.
6
Chapter 2
Perfectionism and Personality Dynamics in Sport
2.1 Introduction
The construct of perfectionism has a relation with both negative aspects, as well as positive
aspects of an individual’s character (Tashman, Tenenbaum, & Eklund, 2010). This statement
implies that perfectionism is imbedded in one’s character and ultimately personality.
However, studies of perfectionism have merely explored the various relationships that
perfectionism holds with certain Big Five personality factors, such as Neuroticism and
Conscientiousness (Deary & Chalder, 2010; Flett & Hewitt, 2005; Hamacheck, 1978; Ulu &
Tezner, 2010). These explorations identify a strong and positive relationship between
perfectionism and Neuroticism. Consequently, researchers (Gotwals et al., 2012) have
generalised and interpreted these findings in the field of sports psychology.
It is important that a sports psychologist has a understanding of the role that perfectionism
has on an athlete’s performance and day to day life, so too is it important to have an
understanding of the types of personalities that are susceptible to perfectionism. This chapter
will provide a brief overview of the relevant literature and theory surrounding perfectionism
and the Five Factors of personality. Additionally, the overview of perfectionism and
personality will be given through the lens of a sporting context. It will serve to cite the
existing data and knowledge surrounding the relationship between perfectionism and
personality.
7
2.2 Perfectionism
Perfectionism is related to negative aspects, as well as positive aspects in the performance of
sport people (Tashman et al., 2010). Research (Flett & Hewitt, 2005; Ulu & Tezner, 2010;
McArdle & Duda, 2008) has analysed the role and effect that perfectionism plays on
psychological aspects in sport athletes. This section will analyse and discuss the research
related to perfectionism, in sport athletes. More specifically, this section will report on a
variety of themes surrounding perfectionism, such as gender differences, age differences and
developmental differences.
2.2.1 Defining Perfectionism
Perfectionism, prior to the 1970’s was largely misunderstood (Frost, Marten, Larhart, &
Rosenblate, 1990). For many years, perfectionism lacked a concrete definition with concrete
core features. Hamacheck (1978) was one of the first reported and published authors to
analyse perfectionism and explore its possible core features. As a result, Hamacheck (1978)
contextualised perfectionism as having both a positive as well as a negative aspect to the
construct. Further research, conducted in the early 1980’s explored the core features that
surround perfectionism (Frost et al., 1990). These core features were studied around the
extreme high standards that an individual possesses, and ultimately the first feature to be
identified was Concern over Mistakes (Frost et al., 1990). A second core feature was
Organisation, which is an individual’s over emphasis on precision and order in their day to
day tasks (Frost et al., 1990). The literature surrounding perfectionism employs a stable core
features in order to define perfectionism, however, a stable and concrete definition for
perfectionism in literature is elusive (Frost et al., 1990). The first and most prominent core
feature in the literature surrounding perfectionism is the setting of excessively high standards
(Hewitt, Flett, & Ediger, 1995). Further core features of perfectionism include over
8
criticalness of ones actions, extreme organisation, parental pressures and doubts about
actions. These features will be further explored in the duration of this chapter.
In the recent literature, perfectionism is loosely defined as “a personality disposition
characterised by high standards for performance and accompanied by tendencies for overly
critical self-evaluations of one’s behaviour or performance” (Flett & Hewitt, 2005, p.14).
This definition shows that perfectionism is often considered as a self-critical and
predominantly negative personality construct. However, research by Ulu and Tezner (2010)
identified a maladaptive, as well as an adaptive mechanism of perfectionism. Maladaptive
perfectionists, relates to Flett and Hewitt’s (2005) conceptualisation of perfectionism, by
being overly critical of themselves for any mistakes made and subsequently do not give
themselves any credit when they perform well (Ulu & Tezner, 2010). Adaptive perfectionism
is converse to maladaptive perfectionism, as it assists the athletes in achieving optimal results
within their given code (Ulu & Tezner, 2010). Therefore once an adaptive perfectionist
completes a task, he/she may feel satisfied or at ease with the given performance on a given
task. According to Ulu and Tezner (2002) perfectionism is helpful and adaptive for
individuals in achieving their goal in the best possible way. It becomes negative and
maladaptive when an individual’s perfectionism level is extreme, to the point that he or she
overly criticizes himself or herself for making minor mistakes.
2.2.2 Theoretical Underpinning of Perfectionism
Perfectionism can be broken down into six factors namely, Doubt about Actions, Concern
over Mistakes, Parental Criticism, Parental Expectations, Personal Standards and
Organisation (Ulu & Tezner, 2010). Each of these factors can be measured and quantified
using the Multidimensional Perfectionistic Scale (Frost et al., 1990). The six subscales
9
combined test an individual’s perfectionism levels and consequently, one is able to determine
if an individual’s perfectionism is either maladaptive or adaptive.
Perfectionism is known as a multidimensional construct consisting of six factors that all have
influence on an individual’s thinking style, affect and behaviour (Vallance, Dunn &
Causgrove Dunn, 2006). These six subscales can be defined as follows:
The Doubts about Actions factor of perfectionism, represents an individual’s
persistent doubt about the quality of their performance or action (Frost et al., 1990).
These individuals rarely feel that they have performed well enough at a given task.
The Concern over Mistakes factor refers to an individual’s over concern and over-
emphasis on the mistakes that they may have made on route to a given task (Frost et
al., 1990). They are often not able to recover quickly after a mistake has been made,
and as a result, they over-compensate in their rectification attempt.
Parental Expectations refer to the perception of overly high standards that an
individual’s parents place on them (Adams & Govender, 2008).
Similarly, Parental Criticism refers to the criticism that an individual receives from
their parents as a result of their high expectations (Adams & Govender, 2008).
The Personal Standards factor refers to an individual’s setting of overly high
standards for their performances (Frost et al., 1990).
Organisation, as mentioned earlier, refers an individual’s over emphasis on precision
and order in their day to day tasks (Frost et al., 1990).
The study of perfectionism within the field of sports psychology is extremely relevant as it
has potential to either help or hinder athletes in their pursuit of their ultimate performance
(Flett & Hewitt, 2005). However, according to Gotwals et al. (2012) most research
surrounding perfectionism in sport draws to a similar conclusion that athletes who are
10
perfectionists in their pursuit of specific goals tend to enjoy their sporting category more.
Furthermore, these athletes tend to show adaptive perfectionism, as opposed to maladaptive
perfectionism (Gotwals et al., 2012). Adaptive perfectionists have the ability to set
themselves high, yet realistic, goals to achieve and do not overly criticise themselves when
these goals are not fully achieved (Ulu & Tezner, 2010). Gotwals, Dunn, & Wayment (2003)
interpret this as the ability “to accept both personal and environmental limitations” in the
pursuit of a given goal. Therefore, the adaptive form of perfectionism that athletes experience
is the “trademark feature of high performance athletes” (Gotwals et al., 2003, p.19). What
then, is the cause of athletes scoring high on factors of perfectionism, such as, the Concern
over Mistakes, Parental Criticism and Doubts about Actions? These three factors all appear to
be maladaptive consequences on performance perfectionism.
Although Gotwals et al. (2012) suggest that athletes mainly experience adaptive
perfectionism in the pursuit of their goals, McArdle and Duda (2008) identified a relationship
between perceived Parental Criticism and perceived high Parental Expectations, of the
athlete’s performance with maladaptive perfectionism. Perceived criticism and high
expectations from parents of the athletes has shown to contribute to the production of
maladaptive perfectionism within the athlete (McArdle & Duda, 2008). Additionally, it has
also been shown to contribute to the athlete’s inferiority, shame, and lack of self-worth
(McArdle & Duda, 2008). Consequently, the self-esteem of the athlete will decrease which
could have a negative effect on the athlete’s performance (McArdle & Duda, 2008). The
evidence put forward by McArdle and Duda (2008), has a clear suggestion that the effect of
maladaptive perfectionism in sport, is one that cannot be disregarded.
As a result of the incongruence in the literature surrounding perfectionism, Stoeber and Otto
(2006) identify two distinct dimensions of perfectionism. These dimensions can be identified
as Perfectionistic Strivings and Perfectionistic Concerns (Stoeber & Otto, 2006).
11
Perfectionistic Strivings, according to Stoeber and Otto (2006) represent a positive and
healthy dimension of perfectionism and is subsequently the focus of their study. However, by
admission, their work raises questions about the positive and developmental nature of
perfectionism. As a result, this has formed the base for a debate about whether perfectionism
remains adaptive, maladaptive or both.
In an attempt to solve this debate, Sager and Stoeber (2009) furthered the ideas suggested by
Stoeber and Otto (2006) and consequently recommended that researchers refrain from
labelling perfectionism into two evaluative terms, such as maladaptive and adaptive. They
suggested a redefinition of the categories into perfectionistic strivings and perfectionistic
concerns (Sager & Stoeber, 2009). Sager and Stoeber (2009), agrees that perfectionistic
strivings are primarily adaptive in nature, as it shows the biggest correlation with adaptive
characteristics such as Conscientiousness, Organisation and self-orientated perfectionism
(Sager & Stoeber, 2009). Conversely, perfectionistic concerns primarily encompass the
maladaptive nature of perfectionism as it comprises of Concern over Mistakes, Parental
Expectations, Parental Criticisms and Doubts about Actions (Sager & Stoeber, 2009). By
redefining perfectionism into perfectionistic concerns and perfectionistic strivings, it places
an individual’s perfectionism along a continuum as opposed to the set categories of
maladaptive and adaptive perfectionism. Gotwals et al. (2012) however, did not discount that
perfectionistic strivings could encompass certain maladaptive qualities.
With the goal of determining the prevalence of perfectionistic strivings and perfectionistic
concerns in a sporting context, Gotwals et al. (2012), analysed the perfectionistic strivings
among athletes. In order to do the analysis, Gotwals et al. (2012), likewise draws upon the
works of Stoeber and Otto’s (2006) idea that perfectionistic strivings consists of adaptive
perfectionistic dimensions, and perfectionistic concerns consist of maladaptive dimensions.
12
However, Gotwals et al. (2012) challenged this idea put forward by Stoeber and Otto (2006)
and listed three major concerns with the study:
First, Stoeber and Otto’s (2006) review fails to include athletes in their sample.
Secondly, Stoeber and Otto (2006) concluded that perfectionistic concerns are
maladaptive in sport. However, the same conclusions are not stated for perfectionistic
strivings in sport. Indeed, according to Gotwals et al. (2012), this is contrary to the
conclusions that perfectionistic strivings are adaptive in sport when perfectionistic
concerns are controlled (Gotwals et al., 2012).
The third concern is that Stoeber and Otto (2006) did not apply the controls for
perfectionistic concerns appropriately and therefore, the overlap of perfectionistic
concerns and strivings is not appropriately defined. Consequently, Gotwals et al.
(2012) conducted a bivariate analysis to determine whether perfectionistic strivings in
athletes are related to adaptive or maladaptive characteristics. The conclusion of
Gotwals et al. (2012) is that perfectionistic strivings in sport are primarily adaptive.
Gotwals et al. (2012) analysis of perfectionism has challenged the ideology of perfectionistic
concerns and perfectionistic strivings. Indeed, Gotwals et al. (2012) created grounds for
debate surrounding the theory of perfectionism in sportsmen and sportswomen. Moreover,
Gotwals et al. (2012), provide the opportunity for further research into perfectionism within
athletes. It opens the opportunity to analyse adaptive perfectionism in order to help athletes
achieve success
.
13
2.2.3 The Effect of Perfectionism on Performance
The effects of perfectionism on sportsmen and -women, more specifically maladaptive
perfectionism, are often the cause of various destructive states (Flett & Hewitt, 2005). These
destructive states are often the consequence of unrealistic goals and expectations that the
athletes have set for themselves, and often have severe implications for competitive sporting
performance (Anshel, Kim, & Henry, 2009). One such destructive state is chronic fatigue and
burnout (Hill, Hall, Appleton, & Murray, 2010). Athlete burnout is the process of extreme
psychological, emotional and often behavioural detachment from a once proficiently and
enjoyed activity (Hill et al., 2010). Athlete burnout, according to Hill et al. (2010) presents
itself in three separate forms:
First, the athlete experiences a lack of accomplishment in their performance.
Second, the athlete experiences extreme physical and mental exhaustion.
And finally, the “eventual devaluation of participation in the sport” (p. 16).
Development of athlete burnout is often the product of extended psychological stress (Hill et
al., 2010). This psychological stress is one such product of maladaptive perfectionism, more
specifically, the setting of unreasonable performance goals, and perceived high parental
expectations. Certainly, athletes that experience burnout as a result of perfectionism
experience a lack of motivation to participate in their given sport, due to a lack of
accomplishment (Hill et al., 2010). Consequently, it can be assumed that the general self-
esteem and self-worth of the athlete may reduce significantly due to personal and social lack
of accomplishment. Therefore, a further destructive state that maladaptive perfectionism has
on sportsmen-women is a lowered self-esteem (Flett & Hewitt, 2005).
Athletes, who experience maladaptive perfectionism and perfectionistic concerns, score high
on both the Concern Over Mistakes, and the Doubts About Actions dimensions of
14
perfectionism. Such athletes then tend to over-criticise themselves, and therefore find little
satisfaction in their performance (Flett & Hewitt, 2005). As a direct result of the constant
self-criticism and low performance satisfaction, the general self-esteem of the athlete is
reduced (Flett & Hewitt, 2005).
2.2.4 Gender Differences in Perfectionism
Additionally, Anshel et al. (2009) found that female athletes tend to score higher on parental
expectations, as well as parental concerns, when compared to men. Therefore, maladaptive
perfectionist female athletes face the perils of Self-Criticism, Concern over Mistakes, and
perceived high Parental Expectations on their sporting performance, resulting in low self-
esteem (Anshel et al., 2009). Furthermore, high Parental Expectations, coupled with Concern
Over Mistakes and Self-Criticism could lead the athletes to experience feelings of shame
(Anshel et al., 2009). Ashby, Rice and Martin (2006), argued that one is able to understand
the development of perfectionism better by looking into the cognitive conditions of self-
esteem and shame. However, Ashby et al. (2006) admitted that there is a lack of data
surrounding gender differences with regard to sport perfectionism.
An additional study (Antony & Swinson, 1998) of gender differences in sports perfectionism
suggests a positive relationship between perfectionism and body image among female
athletes. According to Krane, Stiles-Shipley, Waldron and Michalenok (2001) perfectionism
has a self-presentational aspect to it, and is a prevalent aspect in sport. Consequently, athletes
often express a need to present themselves positively (Krane et al., 2001). More specifically,
athletes often believe that in order to gain a positive perception by others in the team or
sporting category, they need to present themselves as having a fit, lean and strong body, in so
doing, presenting a perfect body shape (Krane et al., 2001). This notion of self-presentation
and body image has been found by Antony and Swinson (1998), to be higher among females
15
when compared to males. This has relevance in sport, and as a result, it can be concluded that
female athletes are more concerned with avoiding the presentation of an imperfect body.
The notion of presenting a perfect body among female athletes can be hypothesised to be
caused by the attire that the athletes wear in their given sporting category. Hewitt et al.
(1995), suggest that body image and perfectionism suggest that one of the reasons for
perfectionism about one’s body image is high and often unrealistic standards for body
physique. Traditionally, netball, softball, swimming, tennis and hockey are the main sports
that females participate in, however, netball is one of the only female dominated sporting
categories. Female athletes in any given sporting category, in recent years, are required to
wear skin tight clothing as it often improves the athletes’ functionality and performances in
the given activity. This exposes the athletes’ body to the public eye, as well as exposing them
to the judgement and comparison of their peers. Consequently, pressure is placed on the
athletes to possess the perfect body (Krane et al., 2001). By creating perfectionistic
tendencies about their body shape, athletes create a fit, healthy and lean body which in effect
enhances their performances (Krane et al., 2001).
The presented research surrounding perfectionism identifies a relationship between
perfectionism, body image and low self-esteem. One can therefore hypothesise that an
athlete’s maladaptive perfectionism concerning her body image could be a possible result of
low self-esteem, which is originally consequent of maladaptive Concern over Mistakes, Self-
Criticism and perceived high Parental Expectations. However, a theoretical link between
these two perfectionistic concerns is in need of further exploration.
2.2.5 Perfectionism and Performance
Perfectionism has the ability to either enhance or debilitate ones performance. Moreover,
perfectionism can be seen as both desirable and undesirable (Anshel et al., 2009). As
16
discussed above, perfectionism in a maladaptive form causes individuals to be overly critical
of themselves, lose self-esteem and ultimately heighten the risk of body image pathology
(Hill et al., 2010; Anshel et al., 2009; Flett & Hewitt, 2005). Additionally, maladaptive
perfectionism causes an individual to set overly high and unrealistic expectations for their
own performance (Anshel et al., 2009). These unrealistic performance expectations cause an
athlete to over-criticise and ultimately over-compensate on errors (Hill et al., 2010). Over-
compensation results in uncharacteristic behaviour and an eventual decrease in an athlete’s
performance ability. Hence, maladaptive perfectionism is debilitating and often detrimental to
an athlete’s performance.
On the other hand, however, perfectionism often holds adaptive qualities (Gotwals et al.,
2012). The multidimensional nature of perfectionism often helps athletes to set high, yet
realistic goals for their performance outcomes. Moreover, it helps athletes recognise their
mistakes at the roots and in so doing, provides an athlete with the ability to improve on
various aspects, such as technique. This form of perfectionism allows athletes, according to
Hibbard and Davies (2011), to be flexible in their self-evaluations of their performances and
adjust accordingly. Hibbard and Davies (2011) thus state that adaptive perfectionism enables
athletes to produce the perfect performance with regard to the performance goals that the
athlete sets for him or herself.
Much research surrounding perfectionism (e.g. Flett & Hewitt, 2005; Gotwals et al., 2003;
Stoeber & Otto, 2006) suggests, understands and contextualises perfectionism as being a
negative construct. However, a more recent understanding of perfectionism suggests that an
adaptive dimension of perfectionism cannot be discounted, particularly in sport. Therefore, it
becomes imperative to note that both an adaptive, as well as a maladaptive dimension of
perfectionism coexists in sport (Gotwals et al., 2012). Additionally, it is important to
17
understand this coexistence of the perfectionism dimensions in sport to help athletes alleviate
concerns and eventually improve their performance.
2.3 Personality
Various researchers (Allen et al., 2011; Ulu & Tezner, 2010) have attempted to understand
and theorise about personality. Theorists such as Taylor and De Bruin (2004) suggested that
personality can be studied on three different levels, namely the trait level, an individual’s
personal concerns, and an individual’s identity that results from their unique life experience.
Cervone and Pervin (2010) define personality as “psychological qualities that contribute to an
individual’s enduring and distinctive patterns of feeling, thinking and behaving.” (p. 8). Other
theorists define personality in terms of an individual’s genetic composition, together with
their unique cultural, socio-economic, physical and social backgrounds (Ryckman, 2008). For
the layperson, personality is defined as the level of social attractiveness an individual
possesses (Ryckman, 2008). However, fundamental theorists have attempted to define and
ultimately measure personality by defining a number of factors that form part of the
personality construct. This is known as the Trait Level of personality (McCrae & Costa,
2008). Two conventional trait approaches are Cattell’s Sixteen Personality Factor Model and
the Five Factor Model respectively.
2.3.1 Cattell’s Sixteen Personality Factor Model
In 1943, Cattell first published a personality factor questionnaire, known as the Sixteen
Personality Factor (16PF). He believed that a personality measurement should evaluate the
most basic dimension of personality that includes all the characteristics and attributes found
in an individual (Murphy & Davidshofer, 2005). Cattell identified and explored all of the
words in the English language that describe personal characteristics (Murphy & Davidshofer,
2005). Due to the limitations of statistical procedures and understanding, Cattell was forced
18
to index these words into 45 groups based on their linguistic similarities (Murphy &
Davidshofer, 2005). Subsequently, he was able to factor analyse these 45 groups into
approximately 15 personality factors. Additionally, behaviour variables were identified and
explored, and as a result a 16th personality factor was included. (Murphy & Davidshofer,
2005). The 16 factors include, Warmth, Reasoning, Emotional Stability, Dominance,
Liveliness, Rule-Consciousness, Social Boldness, Sensitivity, Vigilance, Abstractedness,
Apprehension, Privateness, Openness to Change, Self-Reliance, Perfectionism and Tension.
(Murphy & Davidshofer, 2005).
2.3.2 Five Factor Personality Model
Early research in 1936 on the theory of traits raised questions concerning the number of traits
needed to realistically describe human personality (Ryckman, 2008). The Five Factor Theory
is dependent on a hierarchical arrangement of traits. The higher a trait is in the hierarchy, the
broader and more abstract the trait is (Ryckman, 2008). Theorists, such as Borgatta (1964),
Digman & Takemoto-Chock (1981) and Tupes and Christal (1961), attempted to explore and
simplify Cattell’s (1943) trait descriptions and ultimately developed five relatively strong
personality factors around these traits. These five factors were, Surgency, Agreeableness,
Conscientiousness, Emotional Stability and Intellect (Ryckman, 2008). However, as a result
of revision, researchers (McCrae & John, 1992; McCrae & Costa, 2008) have identified more
consistency and stability using more revised terminology for the factors. Consequently, the
five factors include Extraversion, Neuroticism, Openness to Experience, Agreeableness and
Conscientiousness.
2.3.3 Extraversion
Extraversion is a personality trait that is characterised by two independent poles, namely
extraversion and introversion. Extraverted individuals are often known and referred to as
19
outgoing individuals (Allen et al., 2011). However, in theory, “extraverts show positive
emotions, higher frequency and intensity of personal interactions, and a higher need for
incentive.” (Ozutku & Altindis, 2011, p. 10466) than introverts. Additionally, extraversion is
holistically connected with optimism and the ability to re-evaluate problems positively
(Ozutku & Altindis, 2011). Conversely, introversion is often known as the opposing
personality characteristic. Thus, introverted individuals are known to be more socially
reserved, enjoy the peaceful and tranquil environments and prefer to be alone as opposed to
going to parties and social events (Allen et al., 2011).
In literature on extraversion, it is noted that extraversion is defined by four central facets,
namely, Affiliation, Positive Affectivity, Energy and Ascendance (Taylor & De Bruin, 2004).
However, as a result of extensive research within a South African context, The Basic Traits
Inventory, defines and identifies extraversion around five central facets (Taylor & De Bruin,
2004). These facets are Gregariousness, Positive Affectivity, Ascendance, Excitement-
Seeking and Liveliness (Cockcroft & Laher, 2013). Gregariousness encompasses the
enjoyment of regular social contact and interaction (Cockcroft & Laher, 2013). Positive
Affectivity, is understood as the frequency experiencing positive emotions and affect
(Cockcroft & Laher, 2013). It is the tendency of an individual to regularly feel happy and
joyful (Taylor & De Bruin, 2004). Ascendance, according to Cockcroft and Laher (2013),
describes an individual who enjoys interacting with and entertaining large groups of people.
Moreover, it describes an individual who enjoys taking the lead role in a group situation. The
Excitement-Seeking facet, describes an individual who actively seeks the thrill of the
unknown situation (Cockcroft & Laher, 2013). Furthermore, it describes individuals who are
known commonly, as those who seek adrenaline enhancing situations (Cockcroft & Laher,
2013). Similarly to Positive Affectivity, Liveliness describes an individual who is happy,
outgoing and experiences a zest for life (Cockcroft & Laher, 2013).
20
On the other end of the extraversion factor continuum, is introversion. An introvert, despite
the common belief, is not the exact opposite of an extravert. Thus, an individual who scores
low on each of the four facets of extraversion, “is not necessarily unhappy, sluggish,
pessimistic or shy” (Taylor & De Bruin, 2004, p. 20). Introverts are happy and content with
being on their own in a quiet environment. More specifically, they are generally content with
a lower amount of social interaction in comparison to extraverts (Ozutku & Altindis, 2011).
These individuals generally tend to have one or two close friends as opposed to having a
large network of friends.
Therefore, based on the above knowledge on the Extraversion-Introversion factor of
personality, it can be hypothesised that extraverts are more inclined to participate in team-
based sports such as rugby, netball, and basketball. Additionally, introverts can be assumed to
participate more in individual-based sports such as golf, tennis, equestrian and track and field
events. Certainly, the individual-based sports are often ideal for introverted individuals
because specific individual sporting categories, such as tennis, bowls and golf require as little
as two individuals to participate. However, further research surrounding the Extraversion-
Introversion factor in sport is required in order to answer these specific assumptions.
2.3.4 Neuroticism
The neuroticism factor within the Big Five personality clusters is known and understood, as a
purely negative factor. In recent literature, neuroticism in individuals is contextualized as
having a tendency to “experience negative, distressing emotions and to possess associated
behavioural and cognitive traits” (Ozutku & Altindis, p. 10466). Furthermore, neurotic
individuals tend to be unstable in their affect, and often possess irrational, debilitating, and
perfectionistic beliefs, and as a result, it is placed in the midst of psychopathology (McCrae
& Costa, 2008; Taylor & De Bruin, 2004). This contextualisation of neuroticism identifies it
21
as one of the core ingredients in explaining impulse control, unstable or irritable moods, a
low ability to cope with stress and the possession of irrational ideas (Taylor & De Bruin,
2004).
Neuroticism, in South African personality assessment, is made up of four facets in its
categorisation. These facets include anxiety, depression, self-consciousness and affective
instability (Cockcroft & Laher, 2013). These facets reinforce the debilitating nature of this
specific personality factor. The anxiety facet of neuroticism represents the extent to which an
individual displays fear and nervousness in a given situation (Taylor & De Bruin, 2004).
Additionally, it represents the lack of coping strategies in stressful and anxiety provoking
situations, such as competing in a sport event, coping with peer pressure and the like (Ozutku
& Altindis, 2011). The depression facet is a representation of an individual’s susceptibility to
feelings of sadness, guilt as a result of underperforming, disappointment and often, feelings
of hopelessness and inadequacy (Taylor & De Bruin, 2004). The self-consciousness facet
represents an individual’s sensitivity to criticism. Furthermore, it represents an individual’s
over sensitivity and awareness of public and social scrutiny and often experiences feelings of
shame and embarrassment (Cockcroft & Laher, 2013). Affective instability represents the
emotionally unstable aspect of an individual (Cockcroft & Laher, 2013). Subsequently, these
individuals are more susceptible to feelings of anger and hostility (Cockcroft & Laher, 2013).
On the other end of the neuroticism scale, are those individuals who score low on each of the
four facets. These individuals are known to be calm, relaxed, emotionally stable and
generally self-confident (Ozutku & Altindis, 2011). Moreover, such individuals are more
composed in stressful situations, and employ better coping strategies in such situations
(Cockcroft & Laher, 2013). These individuals therefore, are better equipped psychologically,
to cope with everyday stress and social pressures, such as competing in sports and social
events, as well as dealing with large amounts of public interaction.
22
High scores on each of the four facets would hinder athletic performance. An athlete
participating in competitive sport is often subject to anxiety-provoking situations, especially
when performing in a competitive competition. According to Barber, Sukhi & White (1999)
constant anxiety has the potential to lead to athlete burnout, discouragement and ultimate
withdrawal from the sport. Similarly, depression often leads to athlete withdrawal, as feelings
of hopelessness, ineptness and constant sadness create a dissatisfaction and lack of desire to
participate in sport (Deary & Chalder, 2010). Therefore, the personality trait Neuroticism has
the potential to have a devastating effect on sporting performance. Subsequently, it has the
potential to cause an athlete to withdraw from participation.
2.3.5 Openness to Experience
The Openness to Experience personality factor has been the subject of copious debate and
scrutiny, from psychological intellects around the world, since it was included as part of the
Five Factor Model (McCrae & John, 1992). At the core of this debate and scrutiny, is the
disparity in language surrounding the key terms, as well as the name of the construct
(McCrae & John, 1992). The English language holds no descriptive word for traits such as
“sensitive to art and beauty” and thus conflict arose in describing such personality traits and
characters (McCrae & John, 1992). As a result, the adjectives “intellect” and “culture” were
used to describe the Openness to Experience factor of personality (Taylor & De Bruin, 2004).
It is important to note, however, that the Openness to Experience factor, holds no measure of
one’s intellectual ability, such as intelligence (McCrae & John, 1992). Subsequently, an effort
was made to solve this debate and the personality factor was eventually labelled “Openness to
Experience” instead of terms such as intellect and culture (Costa & McCrae, 2008).
In South African literature, five facets are used to test and describe Openness to Experience.
These facets are Aesthetics, Actions, Values, Ideas and Imagination (Cockcroft & Laher,
23
2013). Aesthetics represents individuals who enjoy the creativity of art and music, and
appreciate beauty (Cockcroft & Laher, 2013). The action facet implies an individual’s
openness and willingness to explore new and exciting situations. Additionally, it implies an
individual’s eagerness and willingness to participate in new activities (Cockcroft & Laher,
2013). An individual’s openness to values refers to ones willingness to question and “re-
evaluate the values and norms of society, religion and politics” (Taylor & De Bruin, 2004,
p.24). Similarly, the ideas facet of Openness to Experience, refers to an individual’s
willingness to embrace new and unconventional ideas that have an impact on their activity,
culture and understanding of the world (Cockcroft & Laher, 2013). The imagination facet
identifies the imaginative side of an individual. Moreover, it refers to an individual’s
capability of being creative in their thoughts and fantasies (Cockcroft & Laher, 2013).
The above mentioned facets of the Openness to Experience factor enable personality
assessment professionals to state whether an individual scores high or low on this factor.
Individuals who score high on this factor are known to express characteristics such as
curiosity, creativity, originality and openness (Ozutku & Altindis, 2011). In addition, these
individuals are open and willing to experience new and imaginative situations, as well as
invest in a broad variety of hobbies, food types and travel experiences (McCrae & Costa,
2008). On the contrary, individuals who score low on this factor have a tendency to be
conservative in their nature and have a preference for the tried and tested method (Taylor &
De Bruin, 2004). They generally have fewer interests and hobbies, and enjoy less extreme
activities. Furthermore, Ozutku and Altindis (2011) identify these individuals as “unartistic”
and “unanalytical”.
An individual who scores high on this factor and ultimately possess attributes such as
creativity, originality and willingness to experience new ideas has the necessary personality
type to do well in sports. The willingness to be creative and original, provides an athlete with
24
tools to try new and unconventional methods of achieving personal goals. As a result, it is
reasonable to hypothesise that, this has the potential to prohibit an athlete in their
performance because an athlete might become overly creative and ambitious in the pursuit of
their goals. However, it also has the potential to aid an athlete in their performance because
the athlete will not be afraid to adjust their style and technique if the current style and
technique fails to work for the individual. Further research, within sports psychology, is
needed to confirm this hypothesis though.
2.3.6 Agreeableness
The Agreeableness dimension of personality is often understood to be the “humane” aspect of
one’s character (McCrae & John, 1992). It is known and described accordingly due to the
good and positive-natured characteristics that are included in this factor, such as care,
tolerance and emotional support (McCrae & John, 1992). Ozutku and Altindis (2011),
describe Agreeableness traits as good-natured, respectful, caring and approachable.
In South African personality assessment, agreeableness is made up of five facets. These
facets are Straightforwardness, Compliance, Modesty, Tendermindedness, and Prosocial
Tendencies (Cockcroft & Laher, 2013). Straightforwardness is described by Taylor and De
Bruin (2004) as the measure of “frankness” and “sincerity” of an individual (p. 25). The
compliance facet encompasses an individual’s ability to control and manage their anger and
hostility, forgive easily and defer to others (Cockcroft & Laher, 2013). Modesty, refers to the
level of humility that an individual possesses (Cockcroft & Laher, 2013). More specifically,
Modesty refers to an individual’s tendency to accept shortcomings graciously.
Tendermindedness, according to Cockcroft and Laher (2013), refers to the level of sympathy,
empathy, understanding and concern for others and society. The Prosocial Tendency facet is
25
the level of kindness, respect and consideration an individual has for others (Cockcroft &
Laher, 2013).
Individuals who score high on Agreeableness are generally known to be compassionate and
caring individuals (McCrae & John, 1992). They have a tendency to be agreeable and
obliging without being stubborn or strictly independent in their decision making.
Additionally, Ozutku and Altindis (2011) state that agreeable individuals predominantly
display a forgiving nature and are often construed by others as being indecisive and weak.
Individuals who are low in agreeableness have a tendency to be self-centered, stubborn and
sceptical in their decision making (Taylor & De Bruin, 2004). McCrae and John (1992) state
that individuals who score low on Agreeableness, tend to be antagonistic in their demeanour.
In the sporting world, individuals who score high on the Agreeableness personality factor, are
according to Allen et al. (2011), better equipped to cope with their emotions during a stressful
event. This means that these individuals cope with their stress, which result from the risen
stress levels during a sporting event by reinterpreting their emotions actively and cognitively,
(Allen et al., 2011). Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that athletes who are able to
reinterpret their emotions in a stressful situation are well equipped to deal with the
psychological pressures of optimal athletic performance. However, the Agreeableness factor
may not be a purely positive factor for sporting performance, because individuals who score
high, may display an indecisive and agreeable nature in their sporting category. This may
have a negative impact for their performance as these individuals may not display the mental
toughness required to resist negative influence from fellow contenders and spectators
(McCrae & Costa, 2008).
26
2.3.7 Conscientiousness
The Conscientiousness factor of personality is understood to be the mechanism that keeps
impulsive behaviour in order. Effectively, ones “conscience”, can be understood to represent
the diligent and self-disciplined trait of an individual (McCrae & John 1992).
Conscientiousness allows individuals to perform and persevere in a carefully planned,
organised and purposeful way (Taylor & De Bruin, 2004).
In a South African personality assessment with the Basic Trait Inventory, Conscientiousness
is constitutes five facets (McCrae & Costa, 2008). These facets are Order, Self-Discipline,
Dutifulness, Effort and Prudence respectfully (McCrae & Costa, 2008). Order refers to the
level of neatness and tidiness of an individual. The Self-Discipline facet refers to an
individual’s ability to persevere throughout a given task, without stalling or giving up, until
the tasks completion (Taylor & De Bruin, 2004). Dutifulness encompasses an individual’s
“conscience”, as it refers to the level of moral obligation and ethical principles which an
individual possesses (Taylor & De Bruin, 2004). Effort, refers to an individual’s ambition in
setting goals, and the diligence they require to achieve those (Cockcroft & Laher, 2013).
Finally, the Prudence facet refers to the careful and thorough nature of an individual
(Cockcroft & Laher, 2013).
Various contextualisations (Taylor & De Bruin, 2004; McCrae & Costa, 2008; Ozutku &
Altindis, 2011) of the consciousness have described the basic traits of an individual who
scores high on this factor. Individuals who score high on this factor are naturally careful,
hard-working and persist in their pursuit of goals (Ozutku & Altindis, 2011). In addition, they
are well-organised and emphasise order in their possessions and day to day activities (Ozutku
& Altindis, 2011). Individuals who score low, are generally less persistent in the pursuit of
27
their goals, and have a tendency to be less organised and thorough in their day to day
activities (Taylor & De Bruin, 2004).
Individuals, who score high on Conscientiousness, are expected to be hard-working, success-
driven, self-decisive and unconventional in their methods (De Bruin & Rudnick, 2007).
These individuals have been found to show a high integrity level, job success and job-
satisfaction (De Bruin & Rudnick, 2007). Furthermore, it was found that individuals who
score low in Conscientiousness generally procrastinate on academic tasks, and as a result, fail
to make sufficient effort and achieving performance related goals. This finding can be
implemented when attempting to understand Conscientiousness and athletic performance.
Hence, athletes that are Conscientious are predicted to work hard and be self-disciplined in
their sporting category, and ultimately achieve satisfaction and success in their performance.
Athletes who score low on Conscientiousness often possess that talent and skills required to
achieve in their sport, but do not work as hard and are not as self-disciplined in their efforts to
achieve their goals.
2.3.8 Personality Factors of Female Adolescents
Personality traits according to McCrae & Costa (2008) reach full maturity around the age of
30. Therefore, presumably up until the age of 30, personality traits undergo a constant
developmental process. Incidentally, Allik, Laidra, Realo and Pullmann (2004) were curious
about the developmental processes of personality and subsequently analysed the development
of personality of adolescents aged 12 to 18. In this analysis, Allik et al. (2004) found that four
out of the five personality factors, namely, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Neuroticism and
Agreeableness, all hold similar values to that of a young adult’s personality. Only the
Openness to Experience factor of personality differed in that the young adult population tends
to score higher than the adolescent population. According to Markey, Markey, Tinsley &
28
Ericsen (2002), individuals are able to rate themselves accurately on self-report measures of
all five factors in the Five Factor Model, and fully comprehend personality questionnaires at
a preadolescent (between the ages of 10 and 12) level. Subsequently, a lack of cognitive
abilities cannot explain the finding that adolescents do not differ significantly in four out of
the five factors of personality.
In their review of the literature around the development of personality McCrae, Costa,
Terracciano, Parker, Mills, De Fruyt and Mervielde’s (2002) report that adolescent girls
between the ages of 12 and 18 years old are inclined to score higher on the Neuroticism trait
than adolescent boys. Moreover, it is reported by Allik et al. (2004) that Neuroticism scores
among adolescent girls increase between the ages of 12 and 18 years old. As mentioned
earlier, research has stated that Neurotic individuals tend to be unstable in their affect and
possess unreasonable, debilitating and perfectionistic beliefs (McCrae & Costa, 2008).
Leading on from McCrae et al’s. (2002) finding, adolescent girls are more inclined to
experience debilitating and perfectionistic tendencies than adolescent boys between the ages
of 12 and 18. Furthermore, adolescent girls are more likely to experience feelings of anxiety
and self-consciousness (Jylhä & Isometsä, 2006). Consequently, they are likely to carry this
personality type into their everyday activities such as school work and sport.
2.3.9 Personality and Anxiety
Anxiety is understood by Weinberg and Gould (2011) as a negative emotion that is known to
cause feelings of distress, unease and nervousness. Subsequently, it is theorised to be related
to negative constructs such as burnout, depression, stress and neuroticism (Barber et al.,
1999; Ozutku & Altindis, 2011). It is defined as “facing uncertain, existential threat”
(Lazarus, 2000, p. 234). This means that anxiety is the resulting emotion from the appraisal
of one situation and coping resources (Lazarus, 2000). Spielberger (1971) defines anxiety
29
more specifically, as he labels the emotion as multidimensional in that it exists in both a state
as well as a trait form. State anxiety, is the immediate feelings of stress, fear and physical
tension. State anxiety has the ability to either aid or inhibit an athlete’s sporting performance.
It aids an athlete’s performance if the athlete is able to cope effectively with the stress, and
use the stress positively, to enhance his/her focus, concentration and confidence (Lazarus,
2000). It has an inhibiting effect on an athlete’s performance when feelings of anxiety, such
as nervousness, fear and apprehension as well as physiological feelings such as tremors and
sweaty palms, overcomes the athlete, to the point where the functioning of the athlete may
become impaired.
Trait anxiety, according to Athan and Sampson (2013), is embedded in an individual’s
personality and the individual with this form of anxiety tends to view the world as a
“dangerous and threatening place” (p. 2). This definition overlaps with the current
understanding of the personality trait Neuroticism. As mentioned earlier, Neuroticism is a
personality trait that predisposes an individual to anxiety, as anxiety is the first mentioned
facet of Neuroticism (Ozutku & Altindis, 2011; Jylhä & Isometsä, 2006). This overlap can be
used when understanding the personality predisposition of sports athletes and their
subsequent performance.
Hence, one can hypothesise, using the existing data surrounding these constructs, that
neurotic athletes display their specific neurotic characteristics on the sports field. These
characteristics ultimately lead to an athlete experiencing feelings of nervousness, fear and
anxiety, and ultimately, create an anxious state (Jylhä & Isometsä, 2006). Additionally,
neurotic individuals have a tendency to set high and often unrealistic performance tasks
(Ozutku & Altindis, 2011). Considering that competition is a stage for athletes to showcase
their abilities and attempts to achieve these performance goals, neurotic, as well as non-
neurotic athletes often experience pressure to perform well, and consequently view the
30
situation as threatening (Englert & Bertrams, 2012). Athan and Sampson (2013),
contextualises this threatening feeling as “Precompetitive Anxiety”(p. 3), which is defined as
the State Anxiety that an athlete experiences prior to a competitive event as a direct result of
the threatening context, the athlete is prone to experience nervousness, fear and apprehension.
However, many athletes, often those who score low in Neuroticism, view the pressure to
perform well as a facilitating situation on their performance. These athletes are known to
employ adequate coping mechanisms for their anxiety provoking situations.
The experience of anxiety and nervousness is a common occurrence in sport. Thus, an athlete
often needs to engage in coping mechanisms. In theory, three coping strategies exist, namely,
problem-focused coping, emotion-focused coping and avoidance-coping (Allen et al., 2011).
Problem-focused strategies involve actively confronting and dealing with the stressful
situation, and changing it, so that the situation is no longer threatening (Allen et al., 2011).
Avoidance-coping strategies involve “actively removing oneself mentally or physically from
the stressor” (Allen et al., 2011, p. 842). The third coping strategy is emotion-focused coping
which involves coping and managing a stressful situation by venting feelings and frustrations,
and emotionally refocusing (Allen et al., 2011).
In a study of coping mechanisms and the Big Five personality characteristics in sport, Allen
et al. (2011) found that athletes who score low on Openness to Experience, and high on
Neuroticism are in greater need to engage in avoidance coping strategies. Removing oneself
from the stressful situation can be seen as a maladaptive coping strategy that could hinder an
athlete’s performance. Certainly, the reason for the need of a coping mechanism is the
resultant high anxiety levels of Neuroticism. Therefore, it can be deduced from this study that
adolescents scoring high on Neuroticism, will experience a need to engage in a coping
strategy (Allen et al., 2011). A contrasting finding by Allen et al. (2011) is that athletes who
31
score high in Extraversion, Openness and Agreeableness are more likely to engage in
emotion-focused coping strategies.
There is a paucity of data surrounding the Big Five personality traits of sports athletes. Allen
et al. (2011), however, looked into the five factors of personality and the specific coping
mechanisms used by athletes. They found that the coping mechanism used by an athlete was
the result of a combination of specific personality factors (Allen et al., 2011). In Allen et al’s.
(2011) analysis, it was concluded that athletes who have high Extraversion, coupled with a
high degree of Openness to Experience, and low Neuroticism, tend to be emotionally stable
and adopt problem-focussed coping in a stressful situation. Problem-focused individuals
according to Allen et al. (2011) are individuals who are “socially skilled, cool headed, and
happy to try new things.” (p. 874). Therefore, these individuals engage in adaptive and
positive means of dealing with stressful events.
An additional finding by Allen et al. (2011) is that athletes who display a combination of
Extraversion, Openness to Experience and Agreeableness, adopted an emotion-focussed
coping style. This means that individuals in this category are easy-going, kind and empathetic
(Allen et al., 2011). There is no evidence to suggest that emotion focussed coping
mechanisms are solely adaptive or solely maladaptive within a sport context. However, Smith
and Kirby (2009) suggest that an individual implementing an adaptive emotion-focused
coping mechanism has the ability to alter their thought processes and goals, should the
desired outcome not arise. Additionally, individuals who implement maladaptive emotion-
coping mechanisms are more prone to experiencing anxiety, sadness and resignation (Smith
& Kirby, 2009). Therefore, the mentioned research surrounding personality and coping
mechanisms, can be used in the context of sport athlete’s personalities.
32
Much research surrounds the theory of personality and its five factors. Each of the five
factors, Extraversion, Neuroticism, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness and Openness to
Experience have all been studied independently and as a result, correlated with anxiety, stress
and coping strategies (e.g. Allen et al., 2011; Smith & Kirby, 2009). Additionally, the big five
personality traits, specifically Neuroticism and Conscientiousness, have been linked to
various elements of perfectionistic character.
2.4 The Relationship between Perfectionism and Personality
The relationship between perfectionism and personality is one that has been explored by
many researchers (e.g., Flett & Hewitt, 2005; Hewitt, Flett, & Blankstein, 1991; Ulu &
Tezner, 2010). These researchers, have broken down the multiple factors of both personality
and perfectionism and subsequently, have explored each of them in relation to one another.
More specifically, these researchers have explored the relationship between certain
personality factors and perfectionism. This section will serve to cite some of these findings.
2.4.1 Perfectionism and Neuroticism
Researchers (Ulu & Tezner, 2010) studied the dimensions of perfectionism and personality
and consequently found that Perfectionism is positively related to the personality trait,
Neuroticism. This link has existed within literature since Hamachek (1978), suggested a
redefinition of maladaptive perfectionism into neurotic and dysfunctional perfectionism.
Hewitt et al. (1991) studied this aspect specifically and subsequently reinforced the
knowledge that maladaptive perfectionism is positively related to Neuroticism. As a result,
modern researchers (Hall, Kerr & Matthews, 1998; Ulu & Tezner, 2010) integrated the two
constructs and label it “neurotic perfectionism”. Neurotic perfectionism is an individual’s
perfectionistic tendencies that include negative and maladaptive cognitions and emotions that
result in feelings of low self-esteem, guilt, and shame (Mitzman, Slade, & Dewey, 1994).
33
Conversely, adaptive perfectionism has been found to be positively related to
Conscientiousness and negatively related to Neuroticism (Ulu & Tezner, 2010). Therefore,
from the previous literature, it can be concluded that Neuroticism is the key personality trait
in the production of maladaptive perfectionism, and Conscientiousness is the key personality
trait in the production of adaptive perfectionism.
The relationship between Neuroticism and perfectionism was explored in further detail, by
Deary and Chalder (2010), with regards to maladaptive outcomes, such as burnout. In their
analysis they found that individuals who suffer from chronic fatigue syndrome, have a
tendency to score high on maladaptive perfectionism, as well as Neuroticism. Additionally,
maladaptive perfectionism, according to Deary and Chalder (2010), is largely socially
prescribed, and one of its core pathogenic features is an overly-critical self-evaluation. They
understand this overly self-critical state as “Socially prescribed perfectionism” (p. 467).
Socially prescribed perfectionism embraces an individual’s perceived need to meet, and often
exceed, the expectations upheld by significant others. This socially prescribed perfectionism
is the subsequent effect of both the Parental Criticism, as well as the Parental Expectations
and upholds a positive correlation with Neuroticism (Hill, McIntire, Bacharach, 1997).
Consequently, the study by Deary and Chalder’s (2010) identifies Neuroticism to be the key
personality trait in the production of maladaptive perfectionism. However, the question about
the remaining personality factors in regards to the production of perfectionism needs further
analysis, as there is a paucity of data surrounding this topic.
2.4.2 Perfectionism and Conscientiousness
Perfectionism, according to Flett and Hewitt’s (2005) definition, is primarily a personality
disposition. By this definition then, personality is contextualised to play a more integral role
in the production of perfectionism than a mere strong correlation with Neuroticism.
34
Conscientiousness, according to McCrae and Costa (1989), represents hardworking, goal and
achievement orientated individuals. Conscientious individuals possess a strong need for
achievement. It is possible that this need for achievement could become all-encompassing for
that individual and in so doing, creating a goal that is linked purely to achievement.
Furthermore, conscientious individuals are goal-orientated, and it is possible that individuals,
who possess a strong need for achievement, could set unrealistic performance goals.
Therefore, perfectionistic tendencies become apparent. More specifically, a high score in the
Personal Standards dimension of perfectionism could be apparent.
A study by Dunkley, Blankstein and Berg (2011) supported the finding that
Conscientiousness is related to perfectionism and concluded that the Personal Standards
dimension of perfectionism, or Personal Standards perfectionism, is positively related to
Conscientiousness. They reported that Personal Standards perfectionism involves striving for
achievement on extreme levels. Conscientious individuals possess a need for achievement,
and are often not satisfied with their own performance if performance goals are not met.
Therefore, the two factors can be seen to relate (Dunkley et al., 2011). Conscientious sports
athletes experience a need to perform well and meet all the goals that have been set. Often,
these goals are based on extremely high standards. Moreover, conscientious sports athletes,
who score high on personal standards perfectionism, set high standards for their own
individual and often team performance, and thus, have no allowance for errors and mistakes.
Indeed, if mistakes and errors do occur, the athlete often engages in a self-scrutiny and
consequently experiences anger, hostility and self-consciousness (Dunkley et al., 2011).
2.4.3 Personality, Perfectionism and Sporting Category
An additional finding in the study of personality and perfectionism (Dunkley et al., 2011) is
that evaluative concerns perfectionism is positively related to Neuroticism and lowered
35
emotions of trust and perceived competence of others. Evaluative concerns perfectionism
“involves constant and harsh self-scrutiny and self-evaluation” (Dunkley et al., 2011, p. 233).
Therefore, an athlete who scores high on evaluative concerns perfectionism, and ultimately
Neuroticism, is overly critical of their own performance, and as a result, do not derive
enjoyment from the sport. Furthermore, these athletes, in a team sport context, would lack
trust in their teammates in the attainment of the ultimate goals.
Athletes who participate in an individual sport have been shown to differ on personality
scores when compared to individual sport athletes. Behzadi, Mohammadpour,
Hedayatikatooli and Nourollahi (2012) analysed the personality traits in athletes differing in a
team sport or individual sport context. The results of the study showed that athletes who
participate in a team sport, differed significantly in the personality trait Extraversion and
responsibility when compared to athletes who participate in an individual-based sport
(Behzadi et al., 2012). Conversely, athletes who participate in an individual-based sport,
scored significantly higher on Neuroticism, when compared to team-based athletes (Behzadi
et al., 2012). Leading on from Dunkley et al’s. (2011) study, athletes who participate in an
individual-based sport, may be more susceptible to evaluative concerns perfectionism due to
the finding that individual sport based athletes tend to score higher on Neuroticism.
2.5 Conclusion
The multidimensional nature of perfectionism as well as the multifactorial nature of
personality, allows for adequate exploration on the relationship between each dimension and
factor of the constructs. To date, all research exploring the relationship between
perfectionism and personality, correlates each factor of personality, (e.g. Neuroticism,
Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Openness to Experience, and Agreeableness), with
perfectionism as a whole. Therefore, there is a lack of research that identifies the relationship
36
between each perfectionism dimension (Organisation, Parental Expectation, Parental
Criticism, Concern over Mistakes, Personal Standards and Doubts about Actions) and each
personality factor. As mentioned in this chapter, perfectionism is known, in theory, to be
positively related to the personality trait Neuroticism and to Conscientiousness. Additionally,
Conscientiousness has been found to be related to the Personal Standards dimension of
perfectionism.
37
Chapter 3
Methodology
Sport, throughout the world, is generally male dominated. Consequently, most of the research
conducted on sport and personality, uses representative samples of male domination. It
therefore becomes an aim of this study to include females in order to better understand the
relationship between perfectionism and personality among female athletes. Netball is a
constantly growing sport that is played and enjoyed predominantly by the female population.
Subsequently, it became the purpose of the study to attain a sample of netball players to
participate in the study.
Perfectionism and personality are both constructs that can be measured and quantified
according to standardised scales and procedures. Therefore, for the purpose of this study, a
quantitative methodology will be implemented in order to analyse the data to determine the
relationship between perfectionism and personality. This chapter will discuss the relevant
methodology used in order to obtain suitable data. More specifically, a thorough description
will be provided, of the research design including sampling techniques, sampling parameters
and reasons for the specific sample collection. Furthermore, this chapter will provide a
detailed description of the measuring instruments that will be used to collect the data. The
validity and reliability of the measures used will be explored. Finally, this chapter will serve
to identify and explain the statistical techniques that will be implemented to analyse the data.
38
3.1 Quantitative Methodology
The philosophical assumptions underlying this research stem from the positivist paradigm.
This implies that this research will adopt an objective and detached epistemology (Terre
Blanche, Durrheim & Painter, 2010). Epistemology refers to the relationship between the
researcher, who is known as the “knower”, and what can be known and discovered in
research (Terre Blanche et al., 2010). As mentioned in chapter 2, perfectionism and
personality are multidimensional constructs that are identified and measured by their multiple
factors (Frost et al., 1990; Cervone & Pervin, 2010). These two constructs have been tested
and standardised by researchers (Frost et al., 1990; Taylor & De Bruin, 2008; McCrae &
John, 1992) to create objectively measurable psychometric tests to determine their
magnitude. Therefore, an ontological belief that measures of perfectionism and personality
are stable, and law-like, can be assumed (Terre Blanche et al., 2010).
The Positivist paradigm uses an experimental as well as quantitative research methodology in
order to obtain knowledge. According to Gravetter and Forzano, (2009) quantitative research
“is based on measuring variables for individual participants to obtain scores, usually
numerical values, that are submitted to statistical analysis for summary and interpretation” (p.
147). This study will utilise quantitative methodology in a sense that both constructs,
perfectionism and personality, are measured on standardised psychometric scales, and
analysed using standardised statistical techniques.
3.2 Research Design
A school netball training camp was held for primary and secondary schools all over South
Africa, by professional coaches and personnel. Contact was made with these professionals for
permission to request the secondary school learners to participate in the study. The aims and
39
goals of the research were explained to the professional coaches, learners and the teachers
accompanying the learners.
A questionnaire booklet, containing the two standardised measures for the multidimensional
constructs, namely the Basic Traits Inventory- Short version (Taylor & De Bruin, 2008) and
the Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (Frost et al., 1990) was handed out to the
secondary school learners. Additionally, the questionnaire booklet contained questions on the
biographic details of each learner. These biographic details will be addressed in chapter 4. A
large sample of participants was needed for this study, in order to gain an accurate and
representative understanding of female netball players across a range of adolescent age
groups. Moreover, a large sample was needed in order to conduct the parametric statistics,
required to understand and interpret the raw data from the measuring instruments.
3.3 Participants
3.3.1 Selection and Description of the Research Sample
Secondary school netball players, from a national schools training camp, were asked to
participate in the study. Therefore, a purposive sampling strategy was implemented. This
strategy involves purposely selecting a specific sample based on the availability and
willingness of participants to participate in the study (Gravetter & Forzano, 2009). The
purposive sampling technique made it easy to gather the large sample of female adolescent
netball players, between the ages of 13 and 18 years old, that was needed to achieve the aims
and goals of the current study.
The sample consisted of secondary schools from a range of socioeconomic backgrounds such
as a mixture of government funded schools as well as privately funded schools. Every school
that was represented in the sample, was equipped with adequate training facilities, equipment,
40
sports educators and in certain schools, professional coaches. As a result, each athlete in the
sample had the opportunity to improve, master and succeed at their given sporting category.
3.3.2 Ethical Considerations
The major ethical consideration of this study was that minors were included to obtain the
data. Therefore, parental consent was obtained from each of the netball players who
participated in the research. These consent forms provided information about the aims, goals
and procedures of the study. Furthermore, the anonymity of the participants and their results
was emphasized to the athletes, as well as their parents. Participation in the study was strictly
voluntary and this was made clear to the netball players before the questionnaires were
distributed. Additionally, it was emphasized that withdrawal from participation at any stage
of the process will be allowed with no subsequent consequences. The researcher was under
constant supervision of a psychologist for the duration of administering the tests and
interpreting the results. As a result of the ethical concerns taken into consideration, the
researcher was granted ethical clearance from the Academic Ethics Committee of the Faculty
of Humanities at the University of Johannesburg.
3.4 Instruments
Two standardised psychometric measures were used in order to measure perfectionism and
personality. The first instrument was the Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (MPS), which
was created and standardized by Frost et al. (1990). The second instrument was the Basic
Traits Inventory, short form (BTI-S) which is a South African instrument drafted by Taylor
and De Bruin (2004). The description of these two instruments will follow:
41
3.4.1 The Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale.
Participants in the study were asked to complete a self-report measure called the
Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (MPS). The MPS consists of 35 items that is based on
a five-point Likert scale, ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree (Adams and
Govender, 2008). The value of this scale is that it consists of six subscales that serve to
identify separate dimensions of perfectionism (Adams & Govender, 2008). The six
dimensions that the MPS identifies are:
Concern Over Mistakes (Adams & Govender, 2008). This dimension can be defined
as, the level to which individuals fault themselves, even to the ultimate of equating
mistakes with failure (Adams & Govender, 2008). Moreover, the Concern Over
Mistakes dimension of perfectionism is known to cause individuals and athletes to
focus on their goals as a result of the fear of failing, as opposed to striving for ultimate
success (Frost et al., 1990). The Concern Over Mistakes subscale is covered by 9
items, one example, “I feel really disappointed in myself if I make one mistake in the
game, even if my overall performance was good” (Sapieja, Dunn & Holt, 2011, p.28).
The second dimension of perfectionism according to Frost et al. (1990) is Doubt about
Actions. This dimension is defined as the dissatisfaction that people often feel about
the quality of their work (Adams & Govender, 2008). Doubts about Actions,
according to Frost et al. (1990) are less concerned with the mistakes that an individual
makes, and “more concerned with the sense that the job is satisfactorily completed”
(p. 451). Doubts about Actions includes 4 items, such as, “I usually feel uncertain as
to whether or not my training prepares me effectively for competition” (Sapieja et al.,
2011, p.28)
42
The third dimension that the MPS identifies is Personal Standards (Adams &
Govender, 2008). This dimension is defined as the high goals and exceptional
expectations that an individual sets for themselves (Adams & Govender, 2008).
Personal Standards subscale consists of 7 items, e.g., “I have extremely high goals for
myself in sport” (Sapieja et al., p.28).
The fourth dimension that the MPS defines is Parental Expectations (Adams &
Govender, 2008). Parental Expectations refer to the grade of performance that the
parents place on the individuals or athletes (Adams & Govender, 2008).
Perfectionists, according to Frost et al. (1990), place excessive value on their parental
expectations. Therefore, in order to feel satisfaction in their performance,
perfectionists strive to exceed their parent’s expectations of them (Frost et al., 1990).
Parental Expectations covers 5 items, for example, “in competition, I never feel that I
can quite meet my parents’ expectations” (Sapieja et al., 2011, p.28).
Similarly, Parental Criticism makes up the fifth dimension on the MPS. Parental
Criticism can be defined as the negative feelings that the parents direct at the athlete
concerning his or her performance (Adams & Govender, 2008). This dimension goes
together with Parental Expectations in that the perceived judgement of the parents is
valued in high regard by the athlete or individual. Parental Criticism includes 4 items
and identifies negative feelings from the parents directed at the child (Adams &
Govender, 2008).The final dimension of perfectionism encompasses Organisation of
one’s performance (Frost et al., 1990). This dimension measures the importance of
order and neatness with regards to the physical presentation and work ethic (Adams &
Govender, 2008). Organisation items covers 6 measurement items and subsequently
asks questions like, “I have to follow a precompetitive routine” (Sapieja et al., 2011,
p.28).
43
Frost et al. (1990) identifies studies that have tested the internal consistency of the scale and
sub-scales using Cronbach’s alpha, and reported reliability of the MPS to be r=0.90.
Furthermore, Cronbach’s alpha reliability was seen to have a value of 0.88 for Concern Over
Mistakes, 0.83 for Personal Standards subscale, 0.84 for Parental Expectations, 0.84 for
Parental Criticism, 0.77 for Doubts about Actions, and 0.93 for Organisation (Adams &
Govender, 2008, p.555-556). Therefore, as a whole, the MPS has been proven to be a highly
reliable measure of each of the subscales as well as perfectionism as a whole.
3.4.2 Basic Trait Inventory-Short (BTI-S)
The BTI-S is a South African based personality measure that consists of 77 self-report items
(Taylor & De Bruin, 2008). It is a newly tested measure that is designed for use in the South
African population. However, as a result of the BTI-S’s infancy, there is a paucity of
literature encompassing it.
The BTI-S, likewise with the MPS, exists on a five point Likert scale ranging from strongly
disagree to strongly agree. Moreover, the scale is designed to measure the five factors of
personality, namely, Extraversion, Conscientiousness, Openness to Experience,
Agreeableness and Neuroticism (Taylor & De Bruin, 2008). The BTI-S also measures two
additional factors, namely, Dutifulness and Excitement-seeking. However, these two factors
are still in a research phase (Taylor & De Bruin, 2008).
In order to better define the five factors in the BTI-S, Taylor and De Bruin (2008) identified a
number of facets that help define each factor (see chapter 2). Each personality factor within
the BTI-S consists of five facets, with the exception of the personality factor Neuroticism,
which only has four (Cockcroft & Laher, 2013).
44
The five facets that are used to help define Extraversion are, Gregariousness, Positive
Affectivity, Ascendance, Excitement-seeking and Liveliness (Cockcroft & Laher, 2013).
Each of these facets are defining facets in an individual who enjoys social interaction,
excitement and joyful situations (Cockcroft & Laher, 2013). Conscientiousness is the second
personality factor that the BTI-S uses five facets to help define. These five facets are Order,
Self-discipline, Dutifulness, Effort and Prudence (Cockcroft & Laher, 2013). The third
Personality factor that has five facets is Openness to Experience. These facets are Aesthetics,
Actions, Values, Ideas and Imagination (Cockcroft & Laher, 2013). Finally, the five facets
that are used to define Agreeableness in the BTI-S are Straightforwardness, Compliance,
Modesty, Tendermindedness and Prosocial Activities (Cockcroft & Laher, 2013).
The personality factor Neuroticism is the only personality factor in the BTI-S that has only
four facets to help define it. These personality facets are Anxiety, Depression, Self-
consciousness and Affective Instability. The BTI-S describes Neuroticism as a person who
“experiences negative affects in response to their environment” (Cockcroft & Laher, 2013, p.
233). Therefore, by the BTI-S standards, Neuroticism is defined and described primarily as a
negative personality factor.
The BTI-S consists of five subscales, one for each personality factor (Cockcroft & Laher,
2013). Each personality factor in the BTI-S is measured by 12 independent items (Cockcroft
& Laher, 2013). Each of the 12 independent items contains a measure for every facet that
makes up the five personality factors.
The reliability coefficients of the BTI-S are available on each independent sub-scale by
means of Cronbach’s coefficients alpha. Extraversion = 0.80, Openness to Experience = 0.77,
Conscientiousness = 0.85, Agreeableness = 0.75, Neuroticism = 0.86 (Cockcroft & Laher,
45
2013). The reliability results of the BTI-S suggest satisfactory reliabilities for research
purposes (Cockcroft & Laher, 2013).
3.5 Measuring Personality of Adolescents in South Africa
In order for a personality measure to be statistically reliable and valid, it should eliminate, as
far as possible, all factors that have the potential to confound the results. Consequently, it is
mandatory for any personality measurement in South Africa to be cross-culturally valid. In
addition, the personality measure is required to eliminate any possible language bias that may
be present in any one item of the measure. Therefore, culture specific phrases and
understanding, the use of metaphors or specific language cues all need to be standardised
across cultures and languages (Van de Vijver & Leung, 1997). As a result of the broad
arrangement of cultures and languages in South Africa, personality measurement becomes
difficult. Therefore, there is a need for a South African personality measure, to take all of the
above into account when designing and implementing it.
The BTI-S is a South African designed personality measure that has used a total of 1000
South African university students from diverse cultural, linguistic, economic and racial
backgrounds (Cockcroft & Laher, 2013). Vogt and Laher (2009) state that the BTI-S is a
cross culturally valid and linguistically appropriate personality assessment for the South
African population. This is evident because it was designed and standardised for the multi-
cultural South African population.
Further difficulties with personality measurement arise when looking at the age
appropriateness of specific measures. As discussed in Chapter 2, Markey et al. (2002), found
that adolescents have the cognitive ability to fully interpret and recognise their personality
characteristics as well as fully understand and interpret the self-report questionnaire.
Furthermore, Allik et al. (2004) found that personality remains stable between the ages of 12
46
and 18 years of age. Therefore, the researcher can assume that the adolescents used in this
sample, will have the cognitive ability to fully understand and interpret the personality
measure. The personality measure that is used in this study, the BTI-S, has been tested to be
age suitable for children over the age of 15 or with a minimum educational level of Grade 10
and is, therefore, not fully suitable for the convenience sample drawn because the age range
of the sample is 13-18 years old (Vogt & Laher, 2009). However, the BTI-S requires further
research with regards to age appropriateness. This study will provide the opportunity for
further knowledge and research on Personality in young adolescents.
3.6 Data Analysis
One of the main aims of the current study was to identify any possible relationships between
each of the five factors of personality and each of the six dimensions of perfectionism within
the context of athletes. In order to do this, scores were calculated on each subscale of the two
questionnaires. Additionally the researcher made use of canonical correlations to determine
the relationships between the subscales of the two measures. Hair, Anderson, Tatham and
Black (1998) explain a canonical correlation as the “measure of strength of the overall
relationships between the linear composites for the independent and dependent variables.”(p.
6). By this definition, a canonical correlation creates one set of variables that is known as the
independent variable, and another set which is known as the dependent variable (Hair et al.,
1998). Therefore, a linear composite, or canonical variate, is formed for every set of
dependent and independent variable combination (Hair et al., 1998). Canonical correlations,
in this study, are used in order to explore the correlations between sets of multiple
independent variables and multiple dependent variables (Hair et al., 1998). Consequently,
each of the six factors of perfectionism will form one canonical variate, or the dependant
variables, and the five factors of personality will form the other canonical variate, or the
independent variable.
47
3.7 Summary
This chapter has discussed the relevant methodological tools that were used throughout this
study. The instruments that were used included the Basic Trait Inventory, Short version (BTI-
S) (Taylor & De Bruin, 2008) and the Multidimensional Perfectionistic Scale (MPS) (Frost et
al., 1990). The data from these instruments were analysed using a statistical procedure
labelled as canonical correlations, which is a test that measures the relationship between sets
of dependent variables, and sets of independent variables (Hair et al., 1998). It was
emphasised at all times, and to every participant, that participation in the study was strictly
voluntary. Moreover, the parents of each participant were required to complete a consent
form which identified the aims of the research, as well as the voluntary nature of
participation. The consent forms for every participant were mandatory as every participant
that was included in the study, was a minor.
48
Chapter 4
Results
This chapter serves the purpose of displaying the results that were yielded from the various
tests and their statistical analysis. It will be divided into three sections, namely, Descriptive
Statistics, Inferential Statistics and Canonical Correlations. The Descriptive statistics section
will represent the sample from both the categorical data, as well as the continuous data using
descriptive statistics. Descriptive statistics is way of organising data so that it can be
understood with little effort (Bless & Kathuria, 1993). It serves to list and group various data
so that one can analyse the frequency distributions within the sample (Bless & Kathuria,
1993). The Inferential Statistics section will serve to infer knowledge from the raw data, as a
result of statistical procedures. Ultimately, the Canonical Correlation section will display the
result yielded in the correlations between each of the five factors of personality and each of
the six dimensions of perfectionism.
4.1 Descriptive Statistics
A purposive sample of 526 female netball players were asked to participate in the current
study. The sample consisted of secondary school females with a mean age of 15.8 years
(SD = 1.46) of age, ranging between 13 and 19 years old.
4.1.1 Level of Participation
A majority of players n=436 (84.5%) of the sample only represented their school or club in
netball. Therefore, the majority of the participants can be understood to be non-elite athletes.
A total of n=54 (10.5%) have participated on a provincial level, while 26 (5%) of the current
49
sample can be assumed to be elite athletes, as they have participated in a national level. The
sample distribution of the levels of participation is presented in Table 4.1 below.
Table 4.1
Frequency Table Representing the Level of Participation of the Participants in Sport
Level of Participation Frequency Percent
School/Club 436 84.5
Provincial Competition 54 10.5
National Competition 26 5.0
4.1.2 Grade
Three participants in the current study are still in preparatory school, however, due to their
age, they play in the under 14 age group for a secondary school. Table 4.2 represents the
frequency distribution of the various numbers in each grade.
Table 4.2
Frequency Table Representing the Grades of the Participants
Grade Frequency Percent
7 3 .6
8 72 13.8
9 82 15.7
10 104 19.9
11 134 25.6
12 128 24.5
Three participants did not identify their grades on the biographic section of the questionnaire.
As a result, only 523 participants identified their appropriate grades. A total of 72 (13.8%) of
50
participants identified themselves as being in grade 8, 82 (15.7%) were grade 9 students, 104
(19.9%) were grade 10 students, a larger number, 134 (25.6%), were grade 11 students, and a
total of 128 (24.5%) were in grade 12. Therefore, the larger groups of participants were
grades 11 and grade 12 respectively. Figure 4.1 displays a graphical representation of the
respective frequencies in each grade.
Figure 4.1: Graph Representing the Grades of the Participants
4.1.3 Language
The language distribution of the sample was divided into three categories, namely, Afrikaans,
English and Traditional African Language. The traditional African encompasses languages
such as Zulu, Venda, Xhosa, Sotho and any other languages that are indigenous to South
Africa. The frequency distribution, as well as the respective bar graph is provided in Table
4.3 and Figure 4.2.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Grade 7 Grade 8 Grade 9 Grade 10 Grade 11 Grade 12
Percentage
Grades
Grades
51
Table 4.3:
Frequency Table Representing the Languages of the Participants
Languages Frequency Percent
Afrikaans 350 67.2
English 71 13.6
Traditional
African 100 19.2
Figure 4.2: Graph Representing the Languages of the Participants
As Figure 4.2 displays, the majority, 350 (67.2%), of the convenience sample is Afrikaans
speaking. English speaking individuals were the least represented in the sample, with a total
of 71 (13.6%). The balance of the sample, 100 (19.2%) was made up of Traditional African
speaking people.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Afrikaans English Traditional African
Percentage
Language
Language Categories
52
4.2 Inferential Statistics
4.2.1 Perfectionism
The MPS consists of six subscales that determine an individual’s overall perfectionism. The
six subscales consist of Concern Over Mistakes, Organisation, Doubts about Actions,
Parental Criticism, Parental Expectations and Personal Standards (see Chapter 3). A mean
score for each sub-scale is calculated. Each sub-scale is further categorised into three
categories representing a low, moderate and high score for each category. The researcher
subjectively divided the scores of each sub-scale into three equal categories, to provide a low,
moderate and high category for each of the six dimensions of perfectionism. These categories
are tabulated and displayed in Table 4.4.
In the Concern Over Mistakes category, n= 286 (54.4%) of the sample scored low, n= 219
(41.6%) possesses a moderate amount, and a total of n= 21 (4%) scored high in this
dimension. Additional analysis found that a mere n= 20 (3.8%) of the sample reported low
Personal Standards. The majority of the sample, n= 304 (57.8%) of the sample reported a
moderate level of Personal Standards, whereas n= 202 (38.4%) of the sample, scored high on
this dimension.
In the Parental Expectation dimension of perfectionism, n= 140 (26.6%) of the sample scored
low, 62.2% (n=327) reported a moderate amount, and the balance of n= 59 (11.2%) reported
high parental pressure and expectations. The scores in the Parental Criticism dimension,
however, seem converse to Parental Expectations. The majority, n= 367 (69.8%), of the
sample report low Parental Criticism, while n= 141 (26.8%) reported a moderate amount. A
mere n= 18 (3.4%) of the sample, reported a high amount of Parental Criticism
53
Table 4.4
Table Representing the MPS Subscale Scores of the Participants
Category Level Frequency Percent Mean Std. Dev.
Concern
Over
Mistakes
Low 286 54.4
2.3143 .71029 Moderate 219 41.6
High 21 4.0
Personal
Standards
Low 20 3.8
3.4577
.61671 Moderate 304 57.8
High 202 38.4
Parental
Expectations
Low 140 26.6
2.7844 .76631 Moderate 327 62.2
High 59 11.2
Parental
Criticism
Low 367 69.8
2.0377 .76083 Moderate 141 26.8
High 18 3.4
Doubts
About
Actions
Low 150 28.5
2.7827 .70940 Moderate 310 58.9
High 65 12.4
Organisation
Low 13 2.5
3.9607 .73367 Moderate 181 34.4
High 332 63.1
Overall
Perfectionism
Low 43 8.2
2.8894 .43254 Moderate 461 87.6
High 22 4.2
In the Doubts about Actions dimension, n= 150 (28.6%) reported a low amount, n= 310
(59%) reported a moderate amount of doubt, and a minimum of n= 65 (12.4%) reported high
doubts about their specific actions. In the final dimension of perfectionism, Organisation, n=
13 (2.5%) of the sample reported a low amount, and n= 181 (34.4%) reported a moderate
54
amount. The majority of the sample, n= 332 (63.1%) reported a high amount of Organisation
in their activity.
The overall perfectionism level of the sample is made up of a sum of all six perfectionism
dimensions. Three participants in the sample were not measured for overall perfectionism due
to missing data. The bulk of the sample, n= 461 (87.6%), represented a moderate
perfectionism levels, and thus, represent a moderate amount of perfectionism in their netball.
However, a total of n= 22 (4.2%) of the sample reported a high amount of perfectionism, and
n= 43 (8.2%) reported how levels of perfectionism.
4.2.2 Personality
For the purpose of the current study, personality was measured using the BTI-S. The BTI-S is
a personality measure that measures the five core factors of personality, namely, Neuroticism,
Extraversion, Openness to Experience, Conscientiousness and Agreeableness (see chapter 2).
Upon further analysis on the BTI-S assessment, the split half method was used in order to
categorise each personality factor into a low and high score. The results can be seen in Table
4.5.
In the Extraversion factor, a total of n= 291 (55.3%) of the entire sample, scored low,
whereas the remaining n= 235 (44.7%) scored above average and high in Extraversion.
Additional analysis on the factors of personality found that n= 273 (51.9%) of the sample
scored low in Neuroticism. A slightly smaller amount of the sample, n= 253 (48.1%) scored
high in Neuroticism.
55
Table 4.5
Table Representing the BTI-S Subscale Scores of the Participants
Category Frequency Percent Mean Std. Dev
Extraversion Low 291 55.3
43.3612 6.79431 High 235 44.7
Neuroticism Low 273 51.9
32.6616 9.25777 High 253 48.1
Conscientiousness Low 270 51.3
43.0665 7.87433 High 256 48.7
Openness Low 270 51.3
44.6977 6.59508 High 256 48.7
Agreeableness Low 276 52.5
50.1008 7.23058 High 250 47.5
The analysis of the personality factor Conscientiousness identified that n= 270 (51.3%) of the
sample scored low, and n= 256 (48.7%) of the sample scored high in this factor.
Agreeableness yielded similar results to Conscientiousness with a total of n= 276 (52.5%) of
the sample scoring low, and the remaining n= 250 (47.5%) of the sample scoring high. The
analysis of the final factor of personality, Openness to Experience, reflects the same results as
the Conscientiousness factor. Therefore, a total of n= 270 (51.3%) of the sample scored low,
and the remaining n= 256 (48.7%) of the sample scored low in this factor.
4.2.3 Correlations between Perfectionism and Personality
Each of the factors of perfectionism were correlated, using a Pearson Product Moment
Correlation, with each of the five factors of personality. The correlation was conducted using
a statistical software programme, SPSS. Subsequently, the results of the correlations are
tabulated in Table 4.6.
56
Table 4.6
Table Representing the Correlations between Overall Perfectionism and Personality Factors
Category Concern
Over
Mistakes
Personal
Standards
Parental
Expectations
Parental
Criticism
Doubts About
Actions
Organisation
Extraversion -.1595**
(p = .000)
.1719**
(p = .000)
-.0243
(p = .576)
-.1271**
(p = .004)
-.1060*
(p = .015)
.1278**
(p = .004)
Neuroticism .5234**
(p = .000)
.0425
(p = .321)
.1188**
(p = .006)
.3312**
(p = .000)
.5224**
(p = .000)
-.0613
(p = .171)
Conscientious-
ness -.0883*
(p = .043) .3756**
(p = .000) -.0420
(p = .320) -.0566
(p = .195) -.0979*
(p = .025) .5330**
(p = .000)
Openness -.1149**
(p = .008)
.2067**
(p = .000)
.0684
(p = .112)
.0084
(p = .846)
-.0105
(p = .810)
.1626**
(p = .000)
Agreeableness -.1249**
(p = .004)
.1527**
(p = .001)
-.0255
(p = .550)
-.0303
(p = .488)
-.0488
(p = .264)
.2234**
(p = .000)
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
The personality factor Extraversion correlated significantly at a (p < .001) level with both the
Concern Over Mistakes (r= -.1595) as well as the Personal Standards (r= .1719) dimension.
In Addition, it correlated significantly at a (p < .001) level with Parental Criticism (r =-.1271)
and Organisation (r =.1279). Extraversion also correlated significantly at a (p < .005) level
with Doubts about Actions (r = -.1060). Neuroticism, holds the highest correlations with
perfectionism as it produced significant correlations, at a (p < .001) level with Concern Over
Mistakes (r = .5234), Parental Expectations (r = 01188), Parental criticism (r = .3312) and
Doubts about Actions (r = .5224). However, it does not correlate significantly with Personal
Standards (r= .0425) and Organisation (r = -.0613).
Conscientiousness also holds a strong relationship with perfectionism as it correlates
significantly at a (p < .001) level with Personal Standards (r = .3756) and Organisation
(r = .5330). It correlates significantly at a (p < .005) level with Concern Over Mistakes
(r = -.0883) and Doubts about Actions (r = -.0979). This result therefore states that when
Conscientiousness is high, Doubts about Actions and Concern Over Mistakes in an individual
57
is low. Openness to Experience produced significant correlations at a (p < .001) with
Concern Over Mistakes (r = -.1149), Personal Standards (r = .2067) and Organisation (r =
.1626). Openness to Experience did not produce significant correlations with Parental
Criticism (r= .0084), Parental Expectation (r= .0684) and Doubts about Actions (r= -
.0105). Agreeableness correlated significantly at a (r= .000) level with Concern Over
Mistakes (r= -.1249), Personal Standards (r= .1527) and Organisation (r=.2234). However, it
failed to produce a significant correlation with Parental Expectation (r= -.0255), Parental
Criticism (r= -.0303) and Doubts about Actions (r= -.488).
The Pearson Product Moment Correlations, displayed in Table 4.6, suggest that the
personality factors of Neuroticism and Conscientiousness hold the strongest relationship with
perfectionism. They both produced highly significant relationships with the various factors of
perfectionism.
4.3 Canonical Correlations
The MPS and BTI-S produced data that was analysed using canonical correlation analysis, to
test the relationship between perfectionism and personality. In completing the canonical
correlation analysis, personality will include all five factors, namely, Extraversion,
Neuroticism, Conscientiousness, Openness and Agreeableness. Perfectionism will include six
dimensions, namely, Concern Over Mistakes, Personal Standards, Parental Criticism,
Parental Expectation, Doubts about Actions and Organisation. The first two canonical
functions have been selected for interpretation as they were identified as the most significant
correlations with their linear composites. The results of the canonical correlations and their
relevant significant tests are displayed in Table 4.7.
58
Table 4.7
Table Representing Canonical Correlations and Remaining Correlations between Set 1 and 2
Root
Number
Canonical
Correlation
Wilk’s
Lambda Chi-SQ DF Sig.
Root 1 .647 .355 536.465 30.000 .000
Root 2 .592 .611 255.488 20.000 .000
Root 3 .212 .940 31.961 12.000 .001
Root 4 .108 .985 8.065 6.000 .233
Root 5 .063 .996 2.035 2.000 .362
The statistical significance tests that were used included a Wilks’ lambda and a Chi-square
test. The results of these tests indicates that root one, root two and root three are all
statistically significant at a .01 level. Root four and root five do not yield significant results.
The data that was analysed identified that the two canonical correlation coefficients, root one
and root two, produced a high and significant canonical correlation of .647 and .592
respectively. Although root three produced a significant correlation, according to a Wilks’
Lambda and a Chi Square test, at a .001 level, it does not produce a high canonical
correlation at .212. Therefore, one can infer from the product of the canonical correlations
that a significant relationship between personality and perfectionism exists. In order to
interpret the meaning of this relationship, one needs to assess the canonical weight of each
variable in the correlations. This is done by analysing the standardised canonical coefficients
for each variable in each linear opposite.
59
Table 4.8
Table Representing the Standardized Canonical Coefficients for Personality (Set 1)
Category Root 1 Root 2 Root 3 Root 4 Root 5
Extraversion -.068 -.060 -.155 1.084 .391
Neuroticism .761 -.667 -.156 .185 .132
Conscientiousness -.466 -.911 .379 .024 -.349
Openness -.015 .118 -1.036 -.390 -.614
Agreeableness -.003 -.030 .055 -.487 1.107
Table 4.8 represents canonical coefficients for Set 1, which is made of personality factors.
More specifically, it displays the magnitude of the relationship between the personality
factors and its linear composites. Neuroticism produced a strong positive correlation of .761
in the first canonical function, and a strong negative correlation of -.667 in the second
canonical function. Conscientiousness produced a moderate negative correlation in the first
canonical function of -.466, and a strong negative correlation of -.911. The rest of the factors
yielded very small canonical coefficients.
Table 4.9 represents the canonical coefficient values for Set 2, which consists of
perfectionism dimensions. The Concern Over Mistakes dimension produced a strong
correlation of .531 in the first canonical function, and a moderate negative correlation in the
second canonical function, of -.350. The Personal Standards dimension produced a moderate
negative correlation, in both canonical functions, of -.386 and -.356 respectively. The Doubts
about Actions dimension of perfectionism produced a moderate positive correlation of .456 in
the first canonical function, and a weak correlation in the second. Organisation produced a
moderate negative correlation of -.331, in the first canonical function. However, it produced a
strong negative correlation of -.681 in the second canonical function. The Parental
60
Expectations dimension produced a low correlation of -.182 in the first canonical function,
and a moderate correlation of .323 in the second canonical function. The final perfectionism
dimension, Parental Criticism, produced low correlations of .204 and -.197 respectively in
both canonical functions.
Table 4.9
Table Representing the Standardized Canonical Coefficients for Perfectionism (Set 2)
Category Root 1 Root 2 Root 3 Root 4 Root 5
Concern Over
Mistakes .531 -.350 .939 .437 -.548
Personal
Standards -.386 -.356 -.591 .504 -.030
Parental
Expectations -.182 .323 -.463 -.003 -.750
Parental
Criticism .204 -.188 -.163 -.883 .050
Doubts About
Actions .456 -.197 -.669 .040 .690
Organisation -.331 -.681 .386 -.383 -.003
4.3.1 Redundancy Index
Analysing the canonical coefficient values, shown in Table 4.8 and Table 4.9, does not reveal
the amount of variance that is explained by both sets of variables. In order to determine the
proportion of variance in each set of variables, a redundancy index is required for each
canonical variate. A redundancy index is the “amount of variance in a canonical variate
(dependent or independent) explained by the other canonical variate in the canonical
function” (Hair et al., 1998, p. 6). Furthermore, a redundancy index “can be computed for
both the dependent and the independent canonical variates in each canonical function” (Hair
et al., 1998, p. 6). Therefore, it allows the researcher to determine the amount of variance in
perfectionism that is explained by its linear opposite, in this case personality, as well as the
61
amount of variance explained by the measure of perfectionism itself. This is available for
both sets of canonical variates.
Table 4.10
Table Representing the Proportion of Variants for Set 1 and Set 2 Explained by its Own
Canonical Variance
Set 1 Set 2
Canonical Root
Variant
Proportion of
Variance
Canonical Root
Variant
Proportion of
Variance
CV1-1 .314 CV2-1 .248
CV1-2 .185 CV2-2 .231
CV1-3 .233 CV2-3 .128
CV1-4 .131 CV2-4 .129
CV1-5 .137 CV2-5 .188
Table 4.10 displays the proportion of variance in both sets of variables that is explained by its
own canonical variance, which means that the variance displayed here is the amount of
variance in the perfectionism measure, which is explained within the multiple variables of
perfectionism. Likewise, it is the amount of variance in the personality measure, explained by
the personality variables. In order to calculate the variance in the relationship between the
two canonical variates, that is explained by their own variance, the variance of both canonical
functions will be added together in each set. Therefore, 49.9% of the variance in set one, and
47.9% of the variance for set two, is explained by its own canonical variate,
62
Table 4.11
Table Representing the Proportion of Variants for Set 1 and Set 2 Explained by the Opposite
Canonical Variance
Set 1 Set 2
Canonical Root
Variant
Proportion of
Variance
Canonical Root
Variant
Proportion of
Variance
CV2-1 .132 CV1-1 .104
CV2-2 .065 CV1-2 .081
CV2-3 .011 CV1-3 .006
CV2-4 .002 CV1-4 .001
CV2-5 .001 CV1-5 .001
Table 4.11 represents the proportion of variance for set one and two, that is explained by the
opposite canonical variate. In order to work out the proportion of variance in each set, the
first two canonical functions will be calculated into a percentage by multiplying it by 100.
Once completed, the first two canonical functions, in each set will be added together, in order
to determine the proportion. A total of 19.7% of the variance in set one, is explained by its
opposite set 2, and a total of 18.5% of the variance in set two, is explained by set one.
4.4 Summary
This chapter provided the results for the statistical analysis that was completed. The basic
correlations between personality and perfectionism identified a strong relationship between
perfectionism, and the personality traits Neuroticism and Conscientiousness. The canonical
correlation analysis, produced three significant results, of which the first two canonical
functions were high correlations. This shows promising evidence for further exploration of
63
the empirical relationship between personality and perfectionism. The results that were
presented in this chapter will be discussed in further detail, in Chapter 5.
64
Chapter 5
Discussion of Data
5.1 Introduction
The multidimensional nature of Perfectionism was explored in relation to the Big Five factors
of Personality. More specifically, the relationship between the multiple factors of
Perfectionism and personality was explored in a sporting context using secondary school
netball players between the ages of 13 and 18 years old. Hence, the six factors of
Perfectionism, namely, Concern Over Mistakes, Organisation, Parental Criticism, Parental
Expectations, Personal Standards and Doubts about Actions, were explored further in relation
to the five factors of personality, namely, Agreeableness, Extraversion, Neuroticism,
Conscientiousness and Openness to Experience in secondary school athletes, by using
canonical correlations. The results displayed in Chapter 4, specifically Table 4, identifies the
levels of Perfectionism, as well as the scores on each of the personality factors for the sample
of secondary school athletes. Moreover Table 5 in Chapter 4 represents the results of the
Canonical Correlations. These tables identify significant findings, and therefore warrant
further discussion. This chapter will serve the purpose of discussing the significant results,
and hypothesising about the possible causes and implications this study has on the
understanding of Perfectionism and Personality within athletes.
5.2 Discussion about the Perfectionism Scores of the Sample
Literature surrounding the psychometric properties of the MPS (Hawkins, Watt & Sinclair,
2006) identifies weaknesses and critiques in Frost and colleagues (1990) measure of overall
perfectionism. Hawkins et al. (2006) sets out to determine the usefulness of the MPS in
65
determining an individual’s overall perfectionism levels. More specifically, determining “a
distinct typology of healthy perfectionists, unhealthy perfectionists, and non-perfectionists”
(Hawkins et al., 2006, p 1001). In order to do this, the multiple dimensions of Perfectionism,
as suggested by Frost and colleagues (1990), were explored further. Upon their analysis,
Hawkins et al. (2006) identified Concern Over Mistakes, Doubts about Actions, and parental
pressures as negative and maladaptive perfectionism. Additional analysis identified a positive
and adaptive mechanism in the Organisation and Personal Standards dimension of
Perfectionism. Therefore, by this understanding, Frost et al.’s (1990) multidimensions of
Perfectionism, in the MPS, serve to measure both the negative and the positive nature of
Perfectionism. As a result, the effectiveness and validity of the MPS in accurately measuring
Perfectionism may be questionable (Stumpf & Parker, 2000)
In order to solve the debate surrounding the validity of the MPS measure, Stumpf and Parker
(2000) argued for a separation of the two clusters of healthy perfectionists and unhealthy
perfectionists. However, the notion of separating the positive dimension of Perfectionism
results in an even further lack of validity (Hawkins et al., 2006). Recent results suggest that
the Personal Standards dimension of Perfectionism is present in both clusters of healthy and
unhealthy perfectionists (Hawkins et al., 2006). Moreover, the results of Hawkins et al’s.
(2006) study indicated that the difference between healthy and unhealthy perfectionist groups
depends on the various patterns of scores over each of the dimensions of Perfectionism.
Further research is needed in this area in order to accurately determine the difference between
healthy and unhealthy perfectionism clusters.
66
5.2.1 Implications for Perfectionism Results in Current Analysis
Healthy and unhealthy clusters of Perfectionism, as mentioned before, are made up of
specific combinations of scores on each of the six factors of Perfectionism (Parker, 1997).
healthy perfectionism clusters are made up on high scores in the Personal Standards and
Organisation dimension (Hawkins et al., 2006; Parker, 1997). The current sample showed
that most female netball players at a secondary school level have moderate levels of
perfectionism. Further results show that only one in five players struggle with high levels of
perfectionism. However, two in five female secondary school netball players hold high
personal standards for themselves with the majority of these players having high levels of
organisation in their sport and lifestyle. Thus, the majority of female secondary school netball
players display moderate amounts of healthy and adaptive perfectionism (Hawkins et al.,
2006).
On the other hand the remaining four dimensions of perfectionism, namely Concern Over
Mistakes, Doubts about Actions, Parental Criticism and Parental Expectations, on the MPS
are known to measure the maladaptive dimensions of perfectionism (Hawkins et al., 2006).
The results of the current study state that the majority of female secondary school netball
players score low in the Concern Over Mistakes and Parental Criticism dimension of
perfectionism. However, most female secondary school netball players experience moderate
amounts of expectations from their parents, and so too have doubt in their various actions.
This leads one into questioning whether these athletes experience maladaptive or adaptive
perfectionism.
This study suggests that the majority of female secondary school netball players display
moderate levels in three out of the four maladaptive perfectionism dimensions namely,
Concern over Mistakes, Parental Expectations and Doubts about Actions in their sport. The
67
Personal Standards dimension, which Hawkins et al. (2006) understands to have unhealthy
and maladaptive mechanisms, also represents a moderate level among the majority of the
sample. Therefore, the healthiness of the overall perfectionism level becomes questionable
because three out of the four maladaptive dimensions display moderate levels. However,
results show that the two thirds of female secondary school athletes display high
organisational tendencies in their sport. More specifically, Organisation, which Hawkins et
al. (2006) labels as a strictly positive dimension, is the only dimension in which the majority
of these netball players displayed high scores in.
5.3 Discussion about the Personality Scores of the Sample
Using a South African Personality Measure, the BTI-S, the personality of secondary school
netball players was measured. The results of the personality measurement displayed an equal
split of individuals scoring high or low in each independent factor. A little over half of all
secondary school netball players score low in each of the five personality factors.
More than half of all secondary school netball players score low on Extraversion and
therefore display introverted tendencies. In addition, a little more than half of all female
secondary school netball players score low in agreeableness and thus have a tendency to be
more sceptical when making decisions on the netball court. However, on the whole, due to
the equal split of high and low scores in each of the five factors, one is able to assume that
there is no specific personality type, or personality make up for individuals that participate in
sport.
68
5.4 Perfectionism and Personality Correlations
In the analysis, two personality factors were correlated statistically significant with
Perfectionism. These Personality factors are Neuroticism and Conscientiousness. These two
correlations will be discussed independently below.
Neuroticism correlated highly with Concern over Mistakes and the Doubts about Actions,
which are the unhealthy dimensions of perfectionism (Hawkins et al., 2006). This suggests
that adolescent female netball players who have high neurotic tendencies seem to be overly
concerned with their mistakes, and as a result, often doubt their actions. Concern Over
Mistakes is assumed to be highly related to the Doubts about Actions in that an athlete or
individual is often fearful of making mistakes and as a result, they doubt whether they have
performed well or completed a task correctly. Reed (1985) suggested a link between the two
by contextualising Doubts about Actions as the feelings of uncertainty regarding individual’s
actions, in fear of making a mistake. Moreover, one of the facets of Neuroticism is anxiety,
which may explain the relation with Concern over Mistakes and Doubts about Actions. An
individual who is neurotic and therefore constantly concerned about making mistakes, and
constantly doubting their actions, would become anxious in their day-to-day activities.
Subsequently, individuals may become obsessive, and often compulsive in their attempts to
avoid making mistakes, which ultimately results in high perfectionistic tendencies (Frost et
al., 1990; Reed, 1985). This finding reinforces the literature linking the two constructs of
Perfectionism and Neuroticism (Deary & Chalder, 2010; Flett & Hewitt, 2005 Hamacheck,
1978; Ulu & Tezner, 2010).
The results of the study suggest that four in five female secondary school netball players have
moderate amounts of perfectionism. Additionally, close to half of these netball players have
high neurotic tendencies. Notably, the study suggests that more than half of adolescent
69
netball players have a significant amount of doubt over their actions. These athletes also
report that that they have a significant amount of high parental expectations. The analysis
provides substantial evidence that that these two maladaptive aspects of perfectionism holds a
moderate to large relationship with Neuroticism. Therefore, it can be assumed that female
secondary school netball players who score high in Neuroticism, have a high probability of
experiencing moderate amounts of maladaptive perfectionism. This is due to the moderate
scores in each of the the maladaptive dimensions of Perfectionism such as Concern Over
Mistakes, Parental Expectations, and Doubts about Actions. As mentioned above, the
Concern Over Mistakes, as well as the Doubts about Actions correlated significantly with
Neuroticism, both of which a large portion of the sample produced moderate scores in.
The Conscientiousness personality factor correlated highly with Organisation among female
secondary school netball players, suggesting that it is most associated with adaptive and
healthy Perfectionism (Hawkins et al., 2006). Conscientiousness according to Kaplan and
Saccuzzo (2001), describes the degree to which an individual perseveres at their given
activity, displays a responsible attitude, and is organised in their day-to-day activity. Thus,
Kaplan and Saccuza, in their description of Conscientiousness, identify a theoretical link with
the Organisation dimension. Conscientious and organised athletes often benefit the most in
sport as they possess a persevering and hardworking character, who aims to achieve their
goals in an organised and controlled manner. Conscientiousness also produced a significant
correlation with the Personal Standards dimension. Personal Standards, according to Hawkins
et al. (2006), is the other healthy dimension of Perfectionism. This analysis provides an
understanding that conscientious athletes generally display adaptive as opposed to
maladaptive perfectionistic tendencies.
The question can be asked that if close to half of all secondary school netball players
produced moderate levels of maladaptive perfectionism, what then was the percentage of
70
adaptive perfectionism scores in the sample? According to Hawkins et al. (2006), the
Personal Standards and Organisation dimension of Perfectionism is most associated with
adaptive perfectionism. In the current analysis, Organisation produced a high correlation with
Conscientiousness, and a moderate correlation with Personal Standards. Nearly half the
sample, scored high in Conscientiousness. Certainly, a third of secondary school netball
players display high Personal Standards in their sport, and the majority of these players
display high amounts of Organisation in their sport and day to day lives. Additionally, the
scores of both Personal Standards as well as Organisation, were distributed across the
moderate, and high category, and not the low category. This suggests that nearly all female
secondary school netball players show either moderate or high amounts of both adaptive
measures of Perfectionism. Thus, based on this knowledge, nearly half of all female
secondary school netball players have a high probability of experiencing adaptive
perfectionism. Moreover, it can be assumed that the vast majority of the sample display some
form of adaptive perfectionism in their sport and day to day lives.
The above analysis of each of the sub-scales of perfectionism and each of the sub-scales of
personality identifies a relationship between perfectionism and the personality traits of
Neuroticism and Conscientiousness. In order to better understand this relationship, it
important to interpret the results of the canonical correlations.
5.5 Canonical Correlation Analysis
The Canonical Correlation Analysis produced three significant canonical functions at a
0.01% level. Moreover, the Standardised Canonical Coefficient analysis of the two sets of
variables, produced a number of significant results. As a result, the researcher is able to
derive meaning from the significant Canonical Coefficients values between the dimensions of
71
perfectionism, and the factors of personality. This section will explore these statistical
relationships as well as meaning that will be derived from these statistical relationships.
The first canonical function produced a result that identified a strong relationship between
perfectionism and personality. More specifically, it suggests a strong relationship between
each of the sub-scales of perfectionism and each of the sub-scales of personality.
The first canonical function showed high scores in Neuroticism was coupled with low
amounts of Conscientiousness. The perfectionism set, of the first canonical function showed
high scores in the Concern Over Mistakes dimension, moderate scores in the Doubts About
Actions dimension and low scores in the Organisation dimension. From these results, it can
be assumed that neurotic female adolescent netball players who show moderate to low
amounts of Conscientiousness, tend to show over-concern for their mistakes, and so too have
doubts in their ability and performance outcomes. However, these adolescents do not display
much organisation in their day to day activities and lifestyle. This relationship is consistent
with the above discussed relationships between Neuroticism and maladaptive perfectionism.
Subsequently, these individuals, according to Hawkins et al. (2006), possess unhealthy
perfectionistic tendencies. More specifically, these results, the product of adolescent athletes,
show that Neurotic athletic adolescents, who score low in Conscientiousness, have high
amounts of maladaptive perfectionism.
Conversely, set two in the Canonical Correlation analysis also suggests a strong significant
relationship between perfectionism and personality. However, this set produced contrary
results compared to set one. In this Canonical function, adolescent athletes who score
significantly low in Neuroticism and significantly low in Conscientiousness, were shown to
have little concern when they make mistakes, do not possess high and unrealistic personal
standards and have little organisational qualities in their activities. Low scores in each of
72
these dimensions together with little parental criticism and little doubt or worry over whether
they have performed adequately or correctly. Thus, the above results suggest that if a female
adolescent netball player shows little Neuroticism and little conscientiousness in their
personality, it is unlikely that these players will experience neither adaptive nor maladaptive
perfectionism.
73
Chapter 6
Conclusion
6.1 Summary
The main aim of the current study was to establish if a relationship exists between
Perfectionism and Personality in female adolescent athletes. Subsequently, the main objective
of study was to unpack the six dimensions of Perfectionism such as, Concern Over Mistakes,
Doubts About Actions, Personal Standards, Parental Criticism, Parental Expectations and
Organisation, and the five factors of Personality, such as Neuroticism, Conscientiousness,
Agreeableness, Openness to Experience and Extraversion, and using parametric statistics, the
relationship between these constructs.
The current study made use of a Canonical Correlational analysis in order to establish if a
relationship exists between each of the dimensions of Perfectionism and each factor of
Personality. The results the analysis identified a strong positive relationship between
Perfectionism and Personality. More specifically, the personality traits Neuroticism and
Conscientiousness were identified as factors that are most associated with Perfectionism.
Neuroticism and Conscientiousness are related to Concern Over Mistakes, Doubts About
Actions, Personal Standards and Organisation in two very different ways. Individuals who
have high Neuroticism and low Conscientiousness, show high scores in Concern Over
Mistakes and Doubts About Actions, both of which are unhealthy and maladaptive
dimensions of Perfectionism (Hawkins et al., 2006). So too do these individuals score low in
Organisation, which is an adaptive and positive dimension of Perfectionism. These results,
therefore, suggest that individuals high in Neuroticism and low in Conscientiousness display
maladaptive and negative perfectionism. On the other hand, the results in the present study
74
suggest that individuals who score low in both Neuroticism and Conscientiousness produce
low scores in the Concern Over Mistakes, Personal Standards and Organisation dimensions
of perfectionism, suggesting low scores in their overall perfectionism.
The results of both sets of the canonical correlational analysis imply that Neuroticism plays a
mediating role in the production of perfectionism. When a female adolescent netball player
scores high in Neuroticism, they are more likely to experience maladaptive perfectionism
compared to if Neuroticism scores were low. In contrast, when female adolescent athletes
have low Neuroticism, it is unlikely that they will experience perfectionism.
6.2 Future Recommendations
The following recommendations for future research on the relationship between
Perfectionism and personality are:
Using a similar methodology, explore the relationship between Perfectionism and
Personality by assessing the personality factors of Neuroticism and Conscientiousness
on a facet level. This will allow for the knowledge of which facets, that make up
Neuroticism and Conscientiousness, relate best to the dimensions of perfectionism.
Replicate the current study with a sample of male adolescent athletes in order to
compare any gender differences, if any, in the relationship between Perfectionism and
Personality in athletes.
Replicate the current study by using adult participants in order to assess any age
related differences in the relationship between Perfectionism and Personality in
athletes.
The current study produced results that state that athletes who have low Neuroticism
and low Conscientiousness, show low perfectionism levels in all dimensions except
75
the Parental Expectations dimensions of perfectionism. This phenomenon should be
explored further.
6.3 Limitations
Although it was mentioned as one of the objectives of the current study was to provide data
for further research on Personality in adolescents, the Basic Trait Inventory is not fully
reliable for use of adolescents below 15 years old. The mean age of the sample is 15 years
and eight months, however, a portion of the current sample is younger than 15 years old. As a
result, sports psychologists who interpret the current findings need to be aware of this
limitation and possibly explore this current relationship by using a personality inventory that
is suitable for adolescents with a minimum age of 10 years old, and suitable for the South
African population, once one is made available.
A second limitation is that the current sample was drawn using convenience sampling..
Therefore, the majority of the schools that participated in the camp, have the financial
backing required. Therefore, development and underprivileged schools are not included in the
study. Further research in this area will need to take this into account.
6.4 Closing
The relationship between Perfectionism and Personality has been studied in a number of
psychological studies. However, this relationship has not been analysed in athletes. The
importance of understanding this relationship in a sport context is immeasurable. Previously,
sports psychologists did not have the necessary knowledge of the development of
Perfectionism as a Personality characteristic.
The results of this study provides the opportunity for sports psychologists, coaches, team
managers and specialist trainers to understand Perfectionism in terms of an adolescent
76
athletes personality and development as a sportsman –woman. Subsequently, the sports
personnel can help athletes overcome the various ailments of Perfectionism, by helping them
become more conscientious and less neurotic. In so doing, aid the athlete to develop adaptive
forms of perfectionism.
The current study has provided the grounds for further research and understanding in the field
of Personality and Personality measurement. It has shown that Perfectionism is, indeed,
strongly related to Personality and therefore needs to be understood in a developmental
context.
77
References
Adams, L. A., & Govender, K. (2008). “Making a perfect man”: Traditional masculine
ideology and perfectionism among adolescent boys. South African Journal of
Psychology, 38(3), 551-562.
Allen, M. S., Greenlees, I., & Jones, M. (2011). An investigation of the five-factor model of
personality and coping behaviour in sport. Journal of Sports Sciences, 29(8), 841-850.
Allik, J., Laidra, K., Realo, A., & Pullmann, H. (2004). Personality development from 12 to
18 years of age: changes in mean levels and structure of traits. European Journal of
Personality, 18, 445-462.
Anshel, M. H., Kim, J. K., & Henry, R. (2009). Reconceptualising indicants of sport
perfectionism as a function of gender. Journal of Sports Behavior, 32(4), 395-418.
Antony, M. M., & Swinson, R. P. (1998). When perfect isn’t good enough: Strategies for
coping with perfectionism. Oakland, CA: New Harbinger Publications.
Ashby, J. S., Rice, K. G., & Martin, J. L. (2006). Perfectionism, shame, and depressive
symptoms. Journal of Counselling and Development, 84, 148-156.
Athan, A. N., & Sampson, U. I. (2013). Copin with pre-competitive anxiety in sports
competition. European Journal of Natural and Applied Sciences, 1(1), 1-9.
Barber, H., Sukhi, H., & White, S. A. (1999). The influence of parent-coaches on participant
motivation and competitive anxiety in youth sport participants. Journal of Sport
Behavior, 22(2), 162-180.
Behzadi, F., Mohammadpour, A., Hedayatikatooli, A., & Nourollahi, H. (2012). A
description and comparison of personality traits of competitive individual and team
athletes. Annals of Biological Research, 3(1), 36-40.
Bless, C., & Kathuria, R., (1993). Fundamentals of social statistics, an african perspective.
Johannesburg, SA: Juta and Co, Ltd.
Borgatta, E. F. (1964). The structure of personality characteristics. Behavioural Science, 9, 8-
17.
Cattell, R. B. (1943). Description of personality: Basic traits resolved into clusters. Journal of
Abnormal and Social Psychology, 38, 476-506.
Cervone, D., & Pervin, L. A. (2010). Personality: Theory and research (11th ed.). New York,
NY: Wiley.
78
Taylor, N., & de Bruin, G. P. (2013). The basic traits inventory. In K, Cockcroft, & S. Laher,
(Eds.), Psychological assessment in South Africa: Research and applications (pp.
232-243). Johannesburg, SA: Wits University Press.
Cunningham, G. B., Sagas, M., Sartore, M. L., Amsden, M. L., & Schellhase, A. (2004).
Gender representation in the NCAA news: is the glass half full or half empty? Sex
Roles, 50, 861-870.
Deary, V., & Chalder, T. (2010). Personality and perfectionism in chronic fatigue syndrome:
A closer look. Psychology and Health, 25 (4), 465-475.
De Bruin, G.P., & Rudnick, H. (2007). Examining the cheats: The role of conscientiousness
and excitement seeking in academic dishonesty. South African Journal of Psychology,
37(1), 153-164.
Digman, J. M., & Takemoto-Chock, N. K. (1981). Factors in the natural language of
personality: Reanalysis and comparison of six major studies. Multivariate
Behavioural Research, 16, 149-170.
Dunkley, D. M., Blankstein, K. R., & Berg, J. L. (2011). Perfectionism dimensions and the
five factor model of personality. European Journal of Personality, 26, 233-244.
Englert, C., & Bertrams, A. (2012). Anxiety, ego depletion, and sports performance. Journal
of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 34, 580-599.
Flett, G. L., & Hewitt P. L. (2005). The perils of perfectionism in sports and exercise.
Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 14-18.
Frost, R. O., Marten, P., Lahart, C., & Rosenblate, R. (1990). The dimensions of
perfectionism. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 15(5), 449-468.
Gotwals, J. K., Dunn, J. G. H., & Wayment, H. A. (2003). An examination of perfectionism
and self-esteem in intercollegiate athletes. Journal of Sports Behavior, 26, 17-38.
Gotwals, J. K., Stoeber, J., Dunn, J. G. K., Stoll. O. (2012). Are perfectionistic strivings in
sport adaptive? A systematic review of confirmatory, contradictory, and mixed
evidence. Canadian Psychology, 53, 263-279.
Gravetter, F., & Forzano, L. B. (2009). Research methods for the behavioural sciences (3rd
ed) Belmont, USA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
Hair, Jr., J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham ,R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data
analysis.(5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
79
Hall, H. K. (2006). Perfectionism: A hallmark quality of world class performers, or a
psychological impediment to athletic development? In D. Hackfort, & G. Tenenbaum,
(Eds.), Perspectives in sport and exercise psychology; Essentail processes for
attaining peak performance, 1, (pp. 178-2110). Oxford, UK: Meyer & Meyer.
Hall, H. K., Kerr, A. W., & Matthews, J. (1998). Precompetitive anxiety in sport: The
contribution of achievement goals and perfectionism. Journal of Sport & Exercise
Psychology, 20, 194-217.
Hamachek, D. E. (1978). Psychodynamic of normal and neurotic perfectionism. Psychology,
15, 27-33
Hawkins, C. C., Watt, H. M. G., & Sinclair, K. E. (2006). Psychometric properties of the
frost multidimensional perfectionism scale with Australian adolescent girls.
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66 (6), 1001-1022.
Hewitt, P. L., Flett, G. L., & Blankstein, K. R. (1991). Perfectionism and neuroticism in
psychiatric patients and college students. Personality and Individual Differences, 12,
273-279.
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.
Hibbard, D. R., Davies, K. L. (2011). Perfectionism and psychological adjustment among
college students: Does educational context matter? North American Journal of
Psychology, 13(2), 187-200.
Hill, A.P., Hall, H.K., Appleton, P.R., & Murray, J.J. (2010). Perfectionism and burnout in
conoe polo and kayak slalom athletes: The mediating influence of validation and
growth seeking. The Sport Psychologist, 24,16-34.
Hill, W. H., McIntire, K., & Bacharach, V. R. (1997). Perfectionism and the big five factors.
Journal of Social Behaviour and Personality, 12(1), 257-270.
Jylhä, P., & Isometsä, E. (2006). The relationship of neuroticism and extraversion to
symptoms of anxiety and depression in the general population. Depression and
Anxiety, 23, 281-289.
Kaplan, R. M., & Saccuzzo, D. P. (2001). Psychological testing: principles, applications and
issues (5th
ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Krane, V., Stiles-Shipley, J. A., Waldron, J., & Michalenok, J. (2001). Relationships among
body satisfaction, social physique anxiety, and eating behaviours in female athletes
and exercisers. Journal of Sports Behavior, 24, 247-264.
80
Lazarus, R. S. (2000). How emotions can influence performance in competitive sports. The
Sport Psychologist, 14, 229-252.
Markey, P. M., Markey, C. N., Tinsley, B. J., & Ericsen, A. J. (2002). A preliminary
validation of preadolescents’ self-reports using the five factor model of personality.
Journal of Research in Personality, 36, 173-181.
McArdle, S., & Duda, J. L. (2008). Exploring the etiology of perfectionism and perceptions
of self-worth in young athletes. Social Development, 17, 980–997.
McCrae, R.R., & Costa, P.T., Jr. (1989). Reinterpreting the Myers-Briggs type indicator from
the perspective of the five-factor model of personality. Journal of Personality, 57(1),
17-40.
McCrae, R.R., & Costa, P.T., Jr. (2008). The five factor theory of personality. In O. P. John.,
R. W. Robins., & L. A. Pervin, (Eds.), Handbook of personality, theory and research
(3rd
ed.) (pp. 159-181). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
McCrae, R. R., Costa, P. T., Jr., Terracciano, A., Parker, W.D., Mills, C.J., De Fruyt, F., &
Mervielde, I. (2002). Personality trait development from age 12 to age 18:
Longitudinal, cross-sectional, and cross-cultural analysis. Journal of Personality and
Social psychology, 83, 1456-1468.
McCrae, R. R., & John, O. P. (1992). An introduction to the five-factor model and its
applications. Journal of Personality, 60(2), 175-215.
Mitzman, S. F., Slade, P., & Dewey, M. E. (1994). Preliminary development of a
questionnaire designed to measure neurotic perfectionism in the eating disorders.
Journal of Clinical Psychology, 50(4), 516-522.
Murphy, K. R., & Davidshofer, C. O. (2005). Psycholocal testing, principles and
applications (6th ed). Upper Saddle River New Jersey, USA: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Oglesby, C. A. (2001). To unearth the legacy. The Sport Psychologist, 15, 373-385.
Olver, J. M., Mooradian, T. A. (2003). Personality traits and personal values: a conceptual
and empirical integration. Personality and Individual Differences, 35, 109-125.
Ozutku, H., & Altindis, S. (2011). Big five personality factors and other elements in
understanding work stress of Turkish health care professionals. African Journal of
Business Management, 5, 10462-10473.
Parker, W. D. (1997). An empirical typology of perfectionism in academically talented
children. American Educational Research Journal, 34, 545-562.
Reed, G. F. (1985). Obsessional experience and compulsive behaviour: A cognitive-
structural approach. New York, NY: Academic Press.
81
Ryckman, R. M. (2008). Theories of Personality. (9th ed). Belmont, USA: Wadsworth
Sagar, S. S., & Stoeber, J. (2009). Perfectionism, fear of failure, and affective responses to
success and failure: The central role of fear of experiencing shame and
embarrassment. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 31, 602–627.
Sapieja, K. M., Dunn, J. G. H., & Holt, N. L. (2011). Perfectionism and perceptions of
parenting styles in male youth soccer. The Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology,
33(1) 20-39.
Shafran, R., Cooper, Z., & Fairburn, C. (2002). Clinical perfectionism: A cognitive
behavioural analysis. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 40, 773-791.
Smith, C. A., & Kirby, L. D. (2009). Relational antecedents of appraised problem-focused
coping potential and its associated emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 23(3), 481-503.
Speirs Neumeister, K. L., Kay Williams, K., & Cross, T. L. (2009). Gifted high school
students’ perspectives on the development of perfectionism. Roeper Review, 31, 198-
206.
Spielberger, C. D. (1971). Trate-state anxiety and motor behaviour. Journal of Motor
Behaviour, 3, 265-279.
Srivastava, S., John, O. P., Gosling, S. D., & Potter, J. (2003). Development of personality in
early and middle adulthood: Set like plaster or persistent change. Journal of
Psychology and Social Psychology, 84(5), 1041-1053.
Stoeber, J., & Otto, K. (2006). Positive conceptions of perfectionism: Approaches, evidence,
challenges. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 295–319.
Stumpf, H., & Parker, W. D. (2000). A hierarchical structural analysis of perfectionism and
its relation to other personality characteristics. Personality and Individual Differences,
28, 837-852.
Taylor, N., & De Bruin, G. P. (2004). The construction of a South African five-factor
personality questionnaire. Unpublished Master’s thesis. Johannesburg, SA: The
University of Johannesburg
Taylor, N., & De Bruin, G. P. (2008). Basic Traits Inventory-Short version. Johannesburg,
South Africa: JvR Psychometrics (Pty) Ltd.
Tashman, L. S., Tenenbaum,G., & Eklund, R. (2010). The effects of perceived stress on the
relationship between perfectionism and burnout in coaches. Anxiety, Stress and
Coping, 23(2), 195-212.
Terre Blanche, M., Durrheim, K., & Painter (Eds). (2010). Research in practice: Applied
methods for the social sciences. Cape Town, SA: University of Cape town Press.
82
Tupes, E. C., & Christal, R. C. (1961). Recurrent personality factors based on trait ratings.
Lackland, TX: U.S. Air Force.
Ulu, I. P., & Tezner, E. (2010). Adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism, adult attachment,
and Big Five Personality traits. The journal of Psychology, 144(4). 327-340.
Vallance, J. K. H., Dunn, J. G.H., & Causgrove Dunn, J.L. (2006). Perfectionism, anger, and
situation criticality in competitive youth ice hockey. Journal of Sport & Exercise
Psychology, 28, 383-406.
Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Leung, K. (1997). Methods and data analysis of comparative
research. In J. E. Berry, Y. H. Poortinga, & J. Pandey (Eds.), Handbook of Cross-
cultural Psychology (2nd
ed.) (pp. 257-300), Boston, USA: Allyn & Bacon.
Vogt, L., & Laher, S. (2009). The five factor model of personality and individualism/
collectivism in South Africa: An exploratory study. PINS, 39, 39-54
Weinberg, R. S., & Gould, D. (2011). Foundations of sport and exercise psychology (5th ed.).
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.