以幾近完美主義量表檢視完美主義的類別

Abstract

傳統上，運用「幾近完美主義量表」可以將問卷的填答人區分成不適應完美主義、適應完美主義和非完美主義三類。但是過去的研究以臺灣大學生為調查對象時，有研究者認為華人社會應該分成四類比較恰當，增加了低標準高落差組，並認為此組非完美主義者跟華人社會的文化特性有關。這一個研究利用統計的方式，檢視利用三類或是四類分類的適切性，並建立效度的檢核，討論是否需要第四類的分組，以及第四類分組是否跟華人的家族文化特性有關。同時，為了便利專業工作運用此量表，根據多變量統計的分析，以ROC曲線檢驗分類錯誤率最低的高標準分數的切分點，以判定受試者是否為完美主義，並根據差異分數的切分點，決定受試者是不適應完美主義或適應完美主義。研究一以幾近完美主義量表修訂版、Frost多向度完美主義量表、貝克憂鬱量表與生活滿意度量表為研究工具，以集群分析與區別分析進行分類，再以ROC曲線檢驗不同切分點的誤判程度。研究結果不認為需要第四類的組別，並設立高標準分數大於35.5分者為完美主義者；完美主義者的落差分數大於51.5分為不適應完美主義者，小於51.5分為適應完美主義者。此外，此研究也利用自我判定的方式，檢視與幾近完美主義量表的相符性。個體自我知覺的完美主義判定與量表的結果有一定的落差。

關鍵詞：完美主義、完美主義的類型、切分點

According to the Almost Perfect Scale-Revised (APS-R), one could be classfied as an adaptive perfectionist, a maladaptive perfectionist, or a non-perfectionist. But the three types of categories were challenged by a study which recruited Chinese students as participants. The fourth type was mentioned as a group with low standard score and high discrepancy score. The fourth group was further implicated as related to Chinese culture. It was suggested that the source of discrepancy was from the difference between parents’ expectation and one’s performance. This study aimed to employ statistical methods to examine whether three-type or four-type categories among Chinese would be appropriate through the Almost Perfect Scale-Revised (APS-R), and to examine what cut-point was more proper in classifying whether one is a perfectionist and further to differentiate whether one is adaptive or maladaptive perfectionist. This study also examined the concordance rate between individuals’ self-consciousness of perfectionism with APSR scale’s classification. In Study 1, the “APS-R”, “Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale”, the “Beck Depression Inventory” and “Satisfaction with Life Scale” were employed. Cluster analyses, discriminant function analyses, and receiver operating characteristic curves for sensitivity and specificity of APS-R cut-scores were used to examine three or four type among Chinese would be appropriate. The result supported the three-cluster solution (maladaptive perfectionism, adaptive perfectionism and nonperfectionism). The cut points were high standards scores of 35.5, and discrepancy scores of 51.5. Based on the results of this study, suggestions were provided to counseling practitioners and researchers for further research in relevant fields.

KEY WORDS: classification, cut-point, perfectionism