Interpretive ReportPaul L. Hewitt, Ph.D. & Gordon L. Flett, Ph.D.

Copyright © 2004 Multi-Health Systems Inc. All rights reserved.P.O. Box 950, North Tonawanda, NY 14120-09503770 Victoria Park Ave., Toronto, ON M2H 3M6

This Interpretive Report is intended for the sole use of the test administrator and is not to be shown or presented to the respondent or any other party.

Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale

The Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (MPS) assesses levels of multidimensional perfectionism inadults. This report provides information about the client’s scores and how they compare with the scoresof a normative sample. See the MPS Technical Manual (published by MHS) for more information aboutthe MPS and the interpretation of its results. This computerized report is an interpretive aid and should not be given to clients or used as the solecriterion for clinical diagnosis or intervention. Administrators are cautioned against drawing unsupportedinterpretations. Combining information from this with information gathered from other psychometricmeasures, as well as from interviews and discussions with the client, will give the practitioner or serviceprovider a more comprehensive view of the client than might be obtained from any one source. Thisreport is based on an algorithm that produces the most common interpretations for the scores that havebeen obtained. Administrators should review the client’s responses to specific items to ensure that thesegeneric interpretations apply. This report compares Sarah Smith’s subscale scores to individuals in a normal population. See theAppendix for comparisons to a clinical population.

Introduction

Subscale T-ScoresThe following graph displays Sarah Smith’s T-scores for each of the three MPS subscales: Self-Oriented,Other-Oriented, and Socially Prescribed perfectionism. The error bars in the graph below represent the95% confidence interval for each subscale score. For information on the calculation of confidenceintervals, see the MPS Technical Manual.

MPS Interpretive Report for Sarah Smith Page 2

MPS Interpretive Report for Sarah Smith Page 3

Summary of Subscale ScoresThe following table summarizes Sarah Smith’s scale scores and gives general data about how SarahSmith compares to the group norms. Please refer to the MPS Technical Manual for more information onthe interpretation of these results. An in-depth analysis of the implications of the subscale scores followslater in the report.

MPS Interpretive Report for Sarah Smith Page 4

MPS Subscales: Elevated ResponsesThe following graph shows the number of items for which Sarah Smith answered toward the endpoint of“Strongly Agree;” that is, after reverse scoring, ratings of 6 or 7 were given. These may represent itemsof vulnerability or concern for the client. The answers are grouped by MPS subscales.

Examination of Subscale ScoresSelf-Oriented Subscale: T-Score = 58Moderately Elevated. This subscale consists of 15 items that assess the level of Self-Orientedperfectionism. Self-Oriented perfectionists require themselves to be perfect in many if not all pursuits.The perfectionistic behaviors that derive from the self are directed toward the self. The score on thissubscale suggests that Sarah Smith has moderately elevated levels of Self-Oriented perfectionism andmay demonstrate some vulnerability.

Socially Prescribed Subscale: T-Score = 63Elevated. This subscale consists of 15 items that assess the level of Socially Prescribed perfectionism.Socially Prescribed perfectionists believe that others have unrealistic standards for their behaviors, andthat others will be satisfied only when these standards are attained. The score on this subscale suggeststhat Sarah Smith has an elevated level of Socially Prescribed perfectionism and may demonstratemarked pathological outcomes and vulnerabilities.

Other-Oriented Subscale: T-Score = 57Moderately Elevated. This subscale consists of 15 items that assess the level of Other-Orientedperfectionism. Other-Oriented perfectionists exhibit behaviors similar to Self-Oriented perfectionists, butin this case, the focus of the behavior is on others. They generally have unrealistic expectations forothers and place great importance on whether others attain these expectations. The score on thissubscale suggests that Sarah Smith has moderately elevated levels of Other-Oriented perfectionism andmay demonstrate some vulnerability.

Analysis of Subscale Score PatternsSarah Smith has moderately elevated scores for Self-Oriented and Other-Oriented perfectionism, andhas an elevated Socially Prescribed perfectionism score.Problems Associated with Elevated Self-Oriented, Other-Oriented, and SociallyPrescribed PerfectionismThe following descriptions relate to people with elevated scores on all three scales. Note that theSelf-Oriented and Other-Oriented subscales were only moderately elevated, and Sarah Smith may onlyexhibit milder vulnerabilities in these areas.

Problems Associated with Elevated Self-Oriented PerfectionismPeople who score highly on Self-Oriented perfectionism often evidence perfectionistic behavior thatrelates to, or is directed toward, the self. Individuals who have high levels of Self-Oriented perfectionismoften have very high and/or unrealistic expectations for themselves and place or express an inordinateimportance on successfully attaining these standards. They strive compulsively toward their goals andstandards and constantly demand perfection from themselves in most, if not all, aspects of theirfunctioning.Problems Associated with Elevated Other-Oriented PerfectionismPeople with elevated Other-Oriented scores often evidence perfectionistic behavior that relates to or is

Individuals who score high on all three dimensions usually demonstrate multiple and major problems in avariety of domains of functioning. For example, these individuals will experience the outcomes relevantfor each of the independent perfectionism subscales (profound depression, anxiety, anger, suicidaltendencies, intimate, and work-related interpersonal problems), but in addition, will experience chaoticand highly stressful lives. Stressors in the achievement and social domains are created by thesesindividuals, and the negative impact of stressful occurrences is enhanced dramatically by theperfectionistic behavior. Moreover, interpersonal relationships tend to be very stormy, and boundaryissues are a constant problem. For these individuals, performance is equated with worth and concerns.Fears over identity issues are never far from the surface. Not surprisingly, because no one can ever liveup to the demands, intimate relationships are few and far between. Problems associated with elevatedscores on each specific subscale are described next.

MPS Interpretive Report for Sarah Smith Page 5

MPS Interpretive Report for Sarah Smith Page 6directed not toward the self, but toward others. The “others” can be spouses, children, and co-workers,as well as any other individuals known or unknown to the Other-Oriented perfectionist. Individuals whohave high levels of Other-Oriented perfectionism have very high and/or unrealistic expectations forothers. They place or express an inordinate importance on others successfully attaining these standards.Problems Associated with Elevated Socially Prescribed PerfectionismPeople who score highly on the Socially Prescribed subscale perceive that other people haveperfectionistic standards and expectations for their own behavior and that other people (or groups ofpeople or society as a whole) expect or want them to be perfect. It is important to note that thisperception may or may not be a an accurate judgement of others’ expectations. Self-worth for theindividual with high levels of Socially Prescribed perfectionism is dependent on meeting perceived others’expectations and standards and gaining their approval and acceptance.

MPS Interpretive Report for Sarah Smith Page 7

Correlates of Elevated Perfectionism Subscale ScoresThe following information consists of perfectionism correlates, including maladjustment correlates (thesemay reflect concurrent symptoms or symptoms the perfectionist is vulnerable to), interpersonalcorrelates, achievement correlates, physical correlates, and personality correlates that are relevant forthose scoring highly on a particular dimension of perfectionism. Any number of correlates in this guidelinemay be present—the occurrence of specific correlates does not exclude others.

Correlates of Elevated Self-Oriented PerfectionismPhysicalCorrelates

AchievementCorrelates

InterpersonalCorrelatesMaladjustment Correlates Personality

CorrelatesAchievementhassles

Coping (emotionoriented)

Less positiveemotional coping

Anger Dehabilitatingstress

Activity

Achievementstriving

Demand forapproval

Obsessive/CompulsiveDisorder

Anorexia nervosa Frequency of stress Anger-hostility

CompetitivenessDysfunctionalattitudes

ParanoiaAnxiety Anxiety

Fear of failureEmotionalsensitivity

PhobiasChronic depressionsymptoms

Assertiveness

High selfexpectations

Interpersonalhassles

Privateself-consciousness

Compulsive Authority(narcissism)

ImpatienceInterpersonalsensitivity

PsychoticismDemand forapproval

Conscientiousness

Importance of goalsNo admission ofneed for help

Publicself-consciousness

Fears of feelingangry

Desire for control

Importance ofperformance

Other-directed"shoulds"

Self-blameFears of loss ofcontrol

Entitlement(narcissism)

Importance ofsocial goals

Professionaldistress

Self-directed"shoulds"

Fears of makingmistakes

Frustrationreactivity

Less goalsatisfaction

Socialexpressiveness

Self-disappointmentFrustrationreactivity

Gregariousness

Less happinessSeverity ofdepressionsymptoms

Guilt Less attitudeflexibility

Lowself-involvement

SomatizationHighself-expectations

Neuroticism

Mastery (personalprojects)

Suicidal ideationHopelessness Personal control

OvergeneralizationSuicide thoughtsHostility Self controlPerservationTotal irrationalityHypomania Self efficacySpeed to completetasks

Unipolar depressionLess globalself-esteem

Type A cognitions

MPS Interpretive Report for Sarah Smith Page 8

Correlates of Elevated Other-Oriented PerfectionismPhysicalCorrelates

AchievementCorrelates

InterpersonalCorrelates

MaladjustmentCorrelates Personality Correlates

Drug useExtremecompetitiveness

AssertivenessAwfulizing beliefs Activity Lessagreeableness

Reports of allergiesHigh minimumsocial standards

AuthoritarianismBorderline features Angry/hostile Less attitudeflexibility

Somatic anxietyLess workorientation

Coping (taskoriented)

Hypomania Antisocial Less warmth

Mastery (personalprojects)

DominanceLess positiveemotional coping

Assertiveness Narcissitic

Positive Impressionmanagement

Emotionalexpressiveness

Low frustrationtolerance

Authority(narcissism)

Passive aggressive

Self expectationsEmotionalsensitivity

Narcissism Compulsive Personal control

Less stigmatolerance

Parental distress Conscientiousness Positive emotions

Low confidence inmental healthprofessionals

Phobias Desire for control Self control

Low sexualsatisfaction

Publicself-consciousness

Dominance(narcissism)

Self efficacy

Negative socialinteractions

Self-directed"shoulds"

Entitlement(narcissism)

Type A cognitions

Other blameSelf-worth(irrational)

Exploitiveness(narcissism)

Other directed“shoulds”

Total irrationalbeliefs

Histrionic

Socialexpressiveness

Correlates of Elevated Socially Prescribed PerfectionismPhysicalCorrelates

AchievementCorrelates

InterpersonalCorrelatesMaladjustment Correlates Personality

CorrelatesAchievementhassles

Approval of othersLess parentingsatisfaction

Agoraphobia Alcohol use Avoidant

CompetitivenessDemand forapproval

Less selfacceptance

Anger Biobehavioralmanifestations ofstress

Borderline

Fear of failureDysfunctional helpseeking attitudes

LonelinessAnorexiasymptomatology

Emotionalmanifestation ofstress

Cynicism

Fear of negativeevaluations

Emotional controlLow frustrationtolerance

Anxiety Frequency of stress Lessagreeableness

Frequency ofacademicprocrastination

Interpersonalhassles

Low self-esteemAwfulizing beliefs Less facilitatingstress

Less attitudeflexibility

Higher ideal socialstandards

Interpersonalsensitivity

Obsessive/Compulsive behavior

Body imageavoidance

Physiologicalmanifestation ofstress

Less compulsive

Higher minimumsocial standards

Less behavioralcoping

Overgeneralizationof failure

Bulimiasymptomatology

Somatic anxiety Less extraversion

Higherself-expectations

Less maritalsatisfaction

Parental distressCategorical thinking Less interpersonalcontrol

ImpatienceLess opennessPhobiasDeath anxiety Less self efficacy

MPS Interpretive Report for Sarah Smith Page 9

MPS Interpretive Report for Sarah Smith Page 10PhysicalCorrelates

AchievementCorrelates

InterpersonalCorrelatesMaladjustment Correlates Personality

CorrelatesImportance ofsocial goals

Less stigmatolerance

Privateself-consciousness

Depression Less social efficacy

Less goalsatisfaction

Low confidence inmental healthprofessionals

Psychoticdepression

Dysthymia Neuroticism

Less happinesswhile performing

Low emotionalexpressiveness

Psychotic thinkingEmotionalexhaustion

Passive aggressive

Less perceivedconfidence

Low help seekingPsychoticismFears of adapting tocollege life

Schizoid

Less publicspeakingcompetence

Negative socialinteractions

Publicself-consciousness

Fears of criticism Schizotypal

Less workorientation

Other blameSelf-criticismFears of failure Type A cognitions

Overgeneralizations (standards)

Other directed"shoulds"

Self-directed"shoulds"

Fears of feelingangry

Perservation(standards)

Others as shamersSelf-worth(irrational)

Fears of lookingfoolish

ProcrastinationShynessShameFears of loss ofcontrol

Viewingprocrastination as aproblem

Social Diversion(Coping)

SomatizationFears of makingmistakes

Social sensitivitySuicide attemptsFears of people inauthority

Submissivebehavior

Suicide riskFeelings of socialinadequacy

Suicide thoughtsHopelessnessSuperstitiousthinking

Hostility

Total irrationalbeliefs

Hypomania

Less lifesatisfaction

Item Response Table

*These items require reverse coding for interpretation. See the MPS Technical Manual for moreinformation about reversed-score items.

This table lists Sarah Smith's responses to each item.

Response Key: Item responses are based on a continuum: 1 = “Strongly Disagree” to 7 = “StronglyAgree.”Response FrequenciesThe following chart indicates the frequency with which Sarah Smith endorsed each of the sevenresponse options (reverse scoring is considered).

MPS Interpretive Report for Sarah Smith Page 11

Comparison to Clinical NormsThe following graph displays Sarah Smith’s T-scores for each of the three MPS subscales, as comparedto a clinical population. The error bars in the graph below represent the 95% confidence interval for eachsubscale score. Please see the MPS Technical Manual for more information on this sample.

Appendix

End of ReportDate Printed: August 31, 2004

MPS Interpretive Report for Sarah Smith Page 12