Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 142 (2014) 434 – 438

CIEA 2014

Perfectionism and self-handicapping in adult education

Adina Karner-Hu uleaca*
a
„Alexandru Ioan Cuza” University of Iasi, 11 Carol I Blvd., Iasi, Romania

Abstract

This study analyzes the relationship between perfectionism and self-handicapping at the level of university students.
Maladaptative perfectionism deals with setting high standards, but view themselves as never seeming to meet their own high
expectations (Pacht, 1984). Academic self-handicapping refers to the use of impediments to successful performance on academic
tasks. Most researchers agree that the reason people self-handicap is to protect themselves from the negative implications of
failure. There are no gender differences as regards the use of self-handicapping. The correlations among the variables revealed
that, when the whole sample was considered, self-handicapping was positively related to perfectionism and negatively to
academic achievement. This is in line with previous research (Hobden & Pliner, 1995; Sherry et al., 2001; Zuckerman, Kieffer, &
Knee, 1998). The link between these two constructs is not unexpected since they both deal with people’s concerns about
standards, levels of competence and how people are perceived by others.

© 2014
© 2014 The
Elsevier Ltd. This
Authors. is an open
Published access Ltd.
by Elsevier article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the Alexandru Ioan Cuza University.
Peer-review under responsibility of the Alexandru Ioan Cuza University.
Keywords: perfectionism; self-handicapping; academic achievement

1. Introduction

Because academia is one of the most competitive educational environment, with an explicitly rewards strategy
and where performance depends on out-achieving others, students are likely to set very high standards to gain social
approval.
Perfectionism is an essentially negative construct, involving setting excessively high standards of oneself or the
others (Pacht, 1984; Shafran & Mansell, 2001). In addition, Frost et al. (1990) emphasized that these high standards

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +40 722 614 641.

E-mail address: adinakarner@yahoo.com

1877-0428 © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the Alexandru Ioan Cuza University.
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.07.699
 Adina Karner-Huţuleac / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 142 (2014) 434 – 438 435

are accompanied by tendencies for overly critical evaluations of one's own behavior, expressed in over concern for
mistakes and uncertainty regarding actions and beliefs. Finally, perfectionists have been described to overemphasize
order, organization, and neatness (Stöber, 1998).
Kerns et al. (2008) emphasized that at a sub-clinical level, people who are more perfectionistic have been shown
to be less satisfied with their performance (Frost & Henderson, 1991), experience higher levels of stress (Flett,
Parnes, & Hewitt, 2001), be prone to persistent worry and fear of failure (Flett, Hewitt, Blankstein, & Mosher, 1991;
Frost, Marten, Lahart, & Rosenblate, 1990), and engage in self-handicapping behaviours (Frost et al., 1990; Hobden
& Pliner, 1995; Sherry, Flett, & Hewitt, 2001).
Self-handicapping has also been associated with lower achievement (Garcia, 1995) and poor adjustment and
academic underachievement (Zuckerman, Kieffer, & Knee, 1998) in non-clinical populations.
Self-handicapping means a self-destructive behaviour, used as an excuse for a potential failure or an anticipated
low performance when doing a task. For example, if a student does not appropriately prepare for an exam, he/she
anticipates a low mark, could start complaining about a physical symptom (pain) and/or psychological symptom
(insomnia) which could explain the low performance at the test and without his self-esteem being affected in any
way. It is like the person invents or pretends the existence of an external disturbing factor and then he makes an
external connection for that failure and leave space for an internal connection in case of success (Berglas and Jones,
1978). If the person succeeds in getting a high mark, then he/she demonstrates himself/herself that he/she is smarter
than he/she thought before, thus being successful against illness or insomnia.
Although self-handicapping is a way of preserving one’s self-esteem, this behaviour represents a self-destructive
mechanism because it encourages the lack of responsibility and effort, but also self-awareness. As a consequence, by
using this strategy the person facilitates desirable attributions for success as well as for failure (Hirt, Deppe and
Gordon, 1991).
Other authors consider that the use of self-handicapping has, first of all, the role of manipulating the perception of
others on the person (a self-presentation strategy) and secondly of maintaining self-esteem in the case of a failure
(Covington, 1992; Urdan, 2004).
The mechanisms of self-handicapping are: pro-active, premeditated or conditioned to act before the anxious
event, activated by the importance/meaning that the person gives to the event (the more it is perceived as being
important, the more anxious the event is and the more active becomes self-handicapping mechanism), in individuals
with lack of confidence in their own abilities (Greenberg, 1985).
Ellis and Knaus (1977) have studied the predictors of self-handicapping in the academic field and they have
noticed that the most powerful factors are the level of anxiety related to the task and lack of self-confidence.
Moreover Hirt, Deppe and Gordon (1991) have noticed that men as well as women use self-handicapping strategies
which are self-referential (verbal complaints regarding the appearance or the increase of physical symptoms
(psychosomatic pains, sickness, dizziness etc.), or psychological (tiredness, insomnia, lack of concentration, sadness,
anxiety panic attack, etc.) while men use self-handicapping actions as well (alcohol consumption, drugs
consumption, strategic altruism, lack of punctuality, making a minimum effort by avoiding the practice
opportunities) (Onwuegbuzie, 2004; Rhodewalt, Saltzman and Wittmer, 1984).
Kearns, Forbes, Gardiner and Marshall, (2008) have pointed out that the frequent use self-handicapping
behaviours like: delaying, changing priorities (the individuals considers all the activities as being unimportant and
leaves the important task for the last moment), over-responsibilisation, over-involvement and over-motivation.
Urdan and Midgley (2001) add to this list the lack of seeking help (when they realize they cannot handle the
situation), wasting time (although I have something important to learn, I watch TV or talk with friends on
Facebook), they do not assume the risks and give up easily after the first challenges of the task. All these behaviours
have negative effects on students because they set up difficult objectives and feel extremely disappointed and self-
critical when they do not succeed in achieving the educational targets and this is because their lack of trust in
themselves increases as well as their capacity of not letting themselves be distracted by these distracters and this way
the need to save their self-esteem appears by strengthening their self-handicapping.
Other authors noticed with the help of student subjects that self-handicapping is connected with the low
educational performance in very good individuals, even a tendency towards perfectionism (Frost Marten, Lahart and
Rosenblate, 1990; Garcia, 1995; Hobden and Pliner, 1995; Sherry, Flett and Hewitt, 2001; Zuckerman, Kieffer and
Knee, 1998). Delay is connected to a high level of depression and anxiety and a low self-esteem in clinic population
436 Adina Karner-Huţuleac / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 142 (2014) 434 – 438

as well as non-clinic population (Martin, Flett, Hewitt, Krames and Szanto, 1996). Additionally, Zuckerman et al.
(1998) observed that people, who frequently use self-destructive mechanisms, show a low performance, inefficient
style of learning and a lower self-esteem than the people who do not frequently use these mechanisms and Garcia
(1995) pointed out the fact that self-destructive people have less essential objectives, poor revision strategies and less
time management skills.

2. Present Study

2.1. Purpose of the study

The main aim of the study was to examine the interrelationships between self-handicapping, perfectionism and
academic achievement. Based on previous research (Frost Marten, Lahart i Rosenblate, 1990; Garcia, 1995;
Hobden i Pliner, 1995; Sherry, Flett i Hewitt, 2001; Zuckerman, Kieffer i Knee, 1998; Urdan & Midgley,
2001), we hypothesized that self-handicapping would be positively associated with perfectionism. In the same time,
because the costs of self-handicapping include mental and behavioural withdrawal from school work, a pessimistic
perception of academic performance and perhaps depressed levels of self-esteem (Elliot & Church, 2003; Martin,
Marsh, Williamson, & Debus, 2003; Urdan & Midgley, 2001) we expected that self-handicapping would be
negatively associated with academic achievement (Zuckerman et al., 1998).
As regards gender, we expected boys to engage in more self-handicapping strategies (Anderman & Anderman,
1999; Urdan & Midgley, 2001; Urdan, 2004).

2.2. Participants

The participants included 136 junior and senior students from Psychology Faculty with approximately double
numbers of girls (72%) than boys (28%). The age range was
20 years, 3 months to 16 years 4 months with a mean age of 23 years, 3 months. Grade point average in the last
exams session was used as the indicator of academic achievement.

2.3. Measures

Participants were asked to respond to each item in the questionnaires in relation to the last exams session. Aside
from the demographic data, items on all subscales were responded to using a six- and five-point Likert-type rating
scale (0 = disagree very much to 5 = agree very much). To establish the validity of the scales used in the study, they
were all submitted to principal component analysis with varimax rotation. Internal consistency reliability was tested
using Cronbach’s a coefficient.
Perfectionism
The Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (MPS; Frost, Marten, Lahart, & Rosenblate, 1990) is a 35 item
questionnaire designed to measure six subscales for a multidimensional assessment of perfectionism: Concern over
Mistakes, Personal Standards, Parental Expectations, Parental Criticism, Doubts about actions and Organization.
Respondents indicate how strongly they agree or disagree with each statement on a five-point Likert scale. Higher
scores indicate a greater degree of perfectionism. The MPS demonstrated strong internal consistency (Į = .91).
Self-handicapping
The Self-Handicapping Scale (SHS; Rhodewalt, Saltzman, & Wittmer, 1984) consists of 25 items describing a
range of self-handicapping behaviours and statements. Participants respond on a six point Likert scale (0 = disagree
very much; 5 = agree very much). The full SHS showed moderate reliability (Į = .68).
Academic achievement
Grade point average in the last exams session was used as the indicator of academic achievement. Grades were
collected from the transcript of records. On the front page of the questionnaire, students were asked to indicate their
age and gender.
 Adina Karner-Huţuleac / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 142 (2014) 434 – 438 437

2.4. Results

Pearson correlation coefficients were computed in order to examine the bivariate relationships among the
variables (see Table 1). As hypothesized, self-handicapping was positively correlated to perfectionism.
Perfectionism and self-handicapping were also negatively correlated to academic achievement.

Table 1. Pearson product-moment correlations for the whole sample

Variable 1 2 3
Self-handicapping -
Perfectionism .23* -
Academic achievement - .16** -.48** -

*p< .05; **p< .01.

This is in line with previous research (Hobden & Pliner, 1995; Sherry et al., 2001; Zuckerman, Kieffer, & Knee,
1998). The link between these two constructs is not unexpected since they both deal with people’s concerns about
standards, levels of competence and how people are perceived by others.

3. Conclusion and discussions

The first objective of this study was to examine the association between self-handicapping, perfectionism and
academic achievement. Consistent with the results of other studies, the use of self-handicapping strategies was
found to be positively related to perfectionism (Frost Marten, Lahart & Rosenblate, 1990; Garcia, 1995; Hobden &
Pliner, 1995; Sherry, Flett, & Hewitt, 2001; Zuckerman, Kieffer, & Knee, 1998; Urdan & Midgley, 2001) which
means that students with unjustifiably high academic expectations tend to be overcommitting, taking on too much at
once, feeling an intense anticipatory anxiety and fear of failure. All this complex context determine them to protect
themeselves by a series of self-handicapping bevahiors, such as procrastination, depression, compulsive actions,
dependency, alienation, inferiority, suspiciousness for which they will pay different types of prices: physical
consequences (chronic pain, skin disease, premature aging etc.), psychic consequences (loneliness, shame, loss of
self-respect, loss of energy, rage, bitterness, humiliation, guilt, helplessness, hopelessness, sadness etc.) and missing
opportunities (expressing the self creatively, achieving a sense of inner peace, experiencing the full range of human
emotions, developing friendship etc.). To minimize this price, these students use a lot of techniques: ignoring,
joking, numbing, being chronically busy, nihilizing, adapting, fragmentizing their minds and bodies or embracing
fatalistic conclusions (Cudney & Hardy, 1993).
On the other hand, the negative relation between self-handicapping and academic achievement found in many
studies seems to be reciprocal. Several studies (Midgley & Urdan, 2001) show that students with lower grades use
self-handicapping strategies more than do students with higher grades. In turn, low achievement leads to increased
use of self-handicapping strategies, thus undermining further academic performance by poorer study habits (a low
levels of intrinsic goals, poor rehearsal strategies and poor time management practices), psychological symptoms
(anxiety, depression, low self-esteem) and behavioral difficulties (eating disorders and suicide risk ).
In order to discuss about a self-destructive mechanism, it is necessary for this, somewhere in the timeline, to have
helped the person to overcome a certain difficult situation (from an emotional or physical point of view) and which
at the present times determines the person not to be able to make healthy choices. This means that a behaviour
which functioned as a coping mechanism at a certain time, ends up functioning as a defending mechanism at the
present. When behavior makes fear and lack of comfort disappear from a certain situation (for example in
childhood), this remains memorized as an efficient tool which can be used in other unpleasant situations (even if
now the person is an adult and would have more resources available to cope with the situation). Moreover, the
unpleasant situations have only certain common points and the self-defending reaction which lacks flexibility is
many times considered inappropriate.
What is interesting is that this previous logic (conditioning) seems more powerful than the awareness of the fact
that repetitive usage of the old solution does not simply work anymore.
438 Adina Karner-Huţuleac / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 142 (2014) 434 – 438

As a results of this study show, perfectionism is found to be negatively related to academic performance. Boice
and Jones (1984) found evidence of links between perfectionism and writer’s block, and Phillips (1986) noted that
perfectionists were more likely to experience essay-writing phobia. Sheppard and Arkin (1989) found that
perfectionistic men self-handicapped when they feared they would not perform well on a measure of academic
success.
No gender differences were found in this study in relation to the use of self-handicapping strategies. There has
been some evidence of gender differences in self-handicapping (e.g. Anderman & Anderman, 1999; Berglas &
Jones, 1978; Hirt, McCrea, & Boris, 2003; Midgley & Urdan, 1995), but these findings have not been consistently
replicated.
In conclusion, perfectionism and self-handicapping are widely studied characteristics that can have a significant
negative impact upon academic performance (Kearns, Forbes, Gardiner, & Marshall, 2008).

References

Anderman, L. H., & Anderman, E. M. (1999). Social predictors of changes in students’ achievement goal orientations. Contemporary
Educational Psychology, 25, 21–37.
Berglas, S., & Jones, E. E. (1978). Drug Choice as a Self-Handicapping Strategy in Response to Noncontingent Success. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 36(4), 405-417.
Covington, M. V. (1992). Making the grade: A self-worth perspective on motivation, and school reform. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Cudney, R. M., & Hardy, R. E. (1993). Self-Defeating Behaviors. New York, NY: HarperCollins Publisher.
Elliot, A. J., & Church, M. A. (2003). A motivational analysis of defensive pessimism and selfhandicapping. Journal of Personality, 71(3), 369–
396.
Ellis, A., & Knaus, W. J. (1977). Overcoming Procrastination. New York: Institute for Rational Living.
Flett, G. L., Hewitt, P. L., Blankstein, K. R., & Mosher, S. W. (1991). Perfectionism, self-actualization, and personality adjustment. Journal of
Social Behaviour & Personality, 6(5), 147-160.
Flett, G. L., Parnes, J., & Hewitt, P. L. (2001). Perfectionism and perceived pressure. Manuscript in preparation.
Frost, R. O., & Henderson, K. J. (1991). Perfectionism and reactions to athletic competition. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 13, 323-
335.
Frost, R. O., Marten, P., Lahart, C., & Rosenblate, R. (1990). The dimensions of perfectionism. Cognitive therapy and research, 14, 449-468.
Garcia, T. (1995). The role of motivational strategies in self regulated learning. New Directions in Teaching and Learning, 63, 29-42.
Greenberg, J. (1985). Unattainable goal choice as a self handicapping strategy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 15, 140-152.
Hirt, E. R., Deppe, R. K., & Gordon, L. J. (1991). Self-Reported Versus Behavioural Self-Handicapping: Empirical Evidence for a Theoretical
Distinction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(6), 981-991.
Hobden, K., & Pliner, P. (1995). Self handicapping and dimensions of perfectionism: Self presentation vs self protection. Journal of Research in
Personality, 29, 461-474.
Kearns, H., Forbes, A., Gardiner, M., & Marshall, K. (2008). When a high distinction isn’t good enough: A review of perfectionism and self-
handicapping. The Australian Educational Researcher, 35(3), 21-36. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/EJ837977.pdf
Martin, A. J., Marsh, H. W., Williamson, A., & Debus, R. L. (2003). Self handicapping, defensive pessimism and goal orientation: a qualitative
study of university students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(3), 617-628.
Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Academic procrastination and statistics anxiety. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 29(1), 3-19.
Pacht, A. R. (1984). Reflections on perfectionism. American Psychologist, 39, 386-390.
Rhodewalt, F., Saltzman, A. T., & Wittmer, J. (1984). Self handicapping among competitive athletes: the role of practice in self esteem
protection. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 5(3), 197-209.
Shafran, R., & Mansell, W. (2001). Perfectionism and Psychopathology: A Review of Research and Treatment. Clinical Psychology Review,
21(6), 879-906.
Sherry, S. B., Flett, G. L., & Hewitt, P. L. (2001). Perfectionism and self handicapping (abstract). Canadian Psychology, 2, 78.
Stöber, J. (1998). The Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale: More perfect with four (instead of six) dimensions. Personality and
Individual Differences, 24(4), 481-491.
Urdan, T. (2004) Predictors of Academic Self-Handicapping and Achievement: Examining Achievement Goals, Classroom Goal Structures, and
Culture. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(2), 251-264.
Urdan, T., & Midgley, C. (2001). Academic Self handicapping: What we know, what more there is to learn. Educational Psychology Review,
13(2), 115-138.
Zuckerman, M., Kieffer, S. C., & Knee, C. R. (1998). Consequences of self handicapping: effects on coping, academic performance and
adjustment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1619-1628.