Development of a model for perfectionism-related variations in error processing: Testing the optimisation hypothesis and the avoidance hypothesis in a multimodal approach

• Applicant: Professorin Dr. Jutta Stahl
• Subject Area: Personality Psychology, Clinical and Medical Psychology, Methodology
• Term: from 2019 to 2023
• Project identifier: Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) - Project number 422815754

From a rational perspective, an error is the result of an action that deviates from the expected goal. Thus, an erroneous performance can be used as information to optimize future behaviour. Perfectionists with high personal standards seem to follow this strategy successfully. From an emotional perspective, an error can be regarded as a sign of personal failure and thus induce a high amount of worrying, especially in evaluative-concerns perfectionists. Thus, perfectionism can be boon and bane at the same time. The present project will investigate variations in error processing with a multimodal approach. We present a model of perfectionism-related variations in error processing with two core hypotheses: optimization hypothesis and avoidance hypothesis. The hypotheses will be examined in a series of three electrophysiological studies (Studies 1 and 4 each: N = 84, Study 3: N = 134) and one behavioural study (N = 74). We want to systematically examine the perfectionism-related hypotheses by considering (a) several behavioural parameters (e.g. response time, error rates), (b) two error-specific components of the event-related potential (error negativity, error positivity), and (c) specific indicators of the multivariate pattern analysis. Perfectionism-related variations in error-evidence accumulation will be examined by drift-diffusion model analyses—a mathematical approach to model decision-making processes. A newly developed paradigm with eight response alternatives will be used as task, which is aimed at increasing the variance of error rates compared to simpler tasks. Study 1 serves as a conceptual replication of previous findings with a higher task difficulty. In Study 2 and Study 3, we will examine the predictions of the avoidance hypothesis (the assumption that pure evaluation-concerned perfectionists avoid error processing if possible) and those of the optimization hypothesis (the assumption that perfectionists with high personal standards are trying to gather as much information about their actions as possible) more detailed. For this purpose, participants will be given the opportunity to either avoid error processing or to use as much information as possible from the outcome of their actions. In the last study, an error acceptance exercise will be used to examine if a reduction of error-related worrying leads to a reduction of the avoidance of errors and thus to an improvement of error processing, especially for evaluative-concerns perfectionists. The results of the studies will provide insights into variations of basic error processing mechanisms, which may be beneficial for the development of interventions to reduce unhealthy perfectionistic error processing strategies.

• DFG Programme: Research Grants
• International Connection: Australia
• Co-Investigator: Dr. Sebastian Dummel
• Cooperation Partner: Professor Dr. Stefan Bode