A Correlational Study Between the Factors of Perfectionism and the Five Factors of Personality

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 [Unpublished]: University of Johannesburg.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.