Abstract
To provide further generalizability for the results garnered by two previous studies, the authors conducted a methodological replication. In addition to adding to the body of replication research done with gifted students, the purpose of this study was to examine perfectionism differences among gifted adolescents in regards to gender, birth order, and grade level. Gifted adolescents enrolled in a rural middle and high school (N = 96) responded to the Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale. Results revealed differences in regard to birth order, gender, and grade level. These results suggest that more research needs to be conducted to determine the relationship between perfectionism and gender, birth order, and age/grade level. Implications for parents, practitioners, and counselors are discussed.
Hollender (1965, 1978), citing English and English (1958), was among the first to describe perfectionism as “the practice of demanding of oneself or others a higher quality of performance than is required by the situation” (p. 94). Individuals with perfectionism have been described as “setting unrealistically high standards, rigidly adhering to them, and defining their self-worth in terms of their achieving these standards” (Shafran & Mansell, 2001, p. 880). Perfectionism is typically deemed unhealthy, or “neurotic,” which Hamachek (1978) differentiates from healthy, or “normal,” perfectionism (p. 27). While normal perfectionists can derive pleasure from their accomplishments, neurotic perfectionists are “unable to feel satisfaction because in their own eyes they never seem to do things good enough to warrant that feeling” (p. 27). Healthy traits in some perfectionistic people, such as striving for excellence, having high expectations for oneself, and not becoming overly concerned over mistakes, can prove helpful in life (Gnilka, Ashby, & Noble, 2012; Stoeber & Otto, 2006), while unhealthy characteristics of perfectionism can be debilitating, cause anxiety, and can cause performance to suffer (Delegard, 2004; Marano, 2008). Further, unhealthy perfectionism has been linked to anxiety, depression, suicide, and eating disorders, among other forms of psychopathology (Affrunti & Woodruff-Borden, 2014; Bardone-Cone et al., 2007; Kiamanesh, Dyregrov, Haavind, & Dieserud, 2014; Shafran & Mansell, 2001). It is important to note, though, that perfectionism is viewed by some to be only negative and never positive or adaptive (Flett & Hewitt, 2002; Greenspon, 2014). Greenspon (2000) notes that the distinction between healthy and unhealthy perfectionism is problematic, such that (a) “healthy perfectionism” does not actually include seeking perfection, but involves a focus on striving for excellence, and (b) the notion of a distinction between healthy and unhealthy perfectionism is largely just asserted without theoretical or empirical support. Others describe “healthy perfectionism” as simply achievement striving or conscientiousness, and not perfectionism, per se (Hewitt & Flett, 2007).
Another way to view perfectionism is Hewitt and Flett’s (1991) distinction between self-oriented and socially prescribed perfectionism. Self-oriented perfectionism is an internally motivated belief that perfection is important. Socially prescribed perfectionism is an externally motivated belief that perfection is important to others, leading one to believe that others expect him/her to be perfect and that others will be highly critical if he/she is not perfect. Socially prescribed perfectionism is viewed as the more maladaptive variety (Hewitt & Flett, 1991). Most research, then, measures what researchers have termed the “unhealthy” or “maladaptive” aspects of perfectionism (Parker & Adkins, 1995).
Measurement of Perfectionism 1
The Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (MPS; Frost, Marten, Lahart, & Rosenblate, 1990) has been used for more than 20 years to measure perfectionism. Frost et al. (1990) reviewed the literature on perfectionism to derive subscales and wrote test items to address each of them. They administered the instrument to 283 college students to examine the factor structure underlying the items. Findings indicated a six-factor structure best represented the meaningfulness of the scale. The six subscales found were (a) Concern Over Mistakes—reacting negatively to mistakes and equating them with failure (e.g., “People will probably think less of me if I make a mistake”), (b) Doubts About Actions—concerns how often one doubts the quality of their performance (e.g., “I usually have doubts about the simple everyday things I do”), (c) Personal Standards—setting excessively high standards that cannot be met satisfactorily and over-evaluation of these standards (e.g., “I hate being less than best at things”), (d) Parental Expectations—the perception that one’s parents have high expectations (e.g., “My parents expected excellence from me”), (e) Parental Criticism—perception that one’s parents are being excessively critical (e.g., “As a child, I was punished for doing things less than perfectly”), and (f) Organization—how much one overemphasizes the importance of order and organization (e.g., “I try and be a neat person”). Reliability scores of the six subscales ranged from α = .77 to α = .93 (Frost et al., 1990).
Several studies using the MPS have found a five-factor model in their results instead of the six factors found by Frost et al. (1990). Stallman and Hurst (2011) studied 6,449 college students and found five factors (Concern Over Mistakes, Organization, Doubts About Actions, Personal Standards, Parenting). Chan (2009) examined the results of 380 gifted Chinese students and also had five factors emerge (Personal Standards, Parental Expectations, Parental Criticism, Concern About Mistakes and Doubts, and Organization). Other researchers have found a four-factor model of the MPS. For example, Stöber’s (1998) sample included 243 college students and he found four factors (Concerns Over Mistakes and Doubts, Parental Expectations and Criticism, Personal Standards, and Organization).
Some of the subscales of the MPS have been found to correlate with maladaptive traits. For instance, the Parental Expectations and Parental Criticism subscales may be relevant to the development of maladaptive perfectionism. The Concern Over Mistakes and Doubts About Actions subscales have been related to procrastination, depression, and compulsivity (Frost et al., 1990). On the other hand, some subscales may be related to adaptive traits. For example, the Personal Standards subscale was found to be related to high self-efficacy (Frost et al., 1990).
Rice and Richardson (2014) found perfectionism difficult to measure in a gifted sample, as high standards and striving for excellence are generally seen as desirable traits among these individuals. However, the MPS has been used to study perfectionism among gifted populations in multiple empirical investigations (Chan, 2009; Dixon, Lapsley, & Hanchon, 2004; Parker, 2000; Parker, Portešová, & Stumpf, 2001; Parker & Stumpf, 1995; Portešová & Urbánek, 2013; Stumpf & Parker, 2000), which will be discussed next.
Perfectionism in the Gifted
It is important to note that several studies have found gifted children to be no more perfectionistic than their average ability counterparts (LoCicero & Ashby, 2000; Parker, 2000; Parker & Mills, 1996). However, it is generally thought that many gifted children are academic perfectionists and place high personal standards on themselves, particularly in the classroom (Basirion, Majid, & Jelas, 2014; Dixon et al., 2004; Kornblum & Ainley, 2005; Parker & Adkins, 1995; Speirs Neumeister, 2007; Wang, Fu, & Rice, 2012), and some (Portešová & Urbánek, 2013) even suggest rates of perfectionism among gifted students are increasing. Gifted individuals’ lived experiences may be very different from their non-gifted peers (L. J. Coleman, 2012). This difference is acutely felt in adolescence when these students face psychological challenges unique to persons with exceptional talents and abilities. Gifted children may perceive pressure from their parents, peers, or teachers to perform in what they believe is a “perfect” manner (Cross & Cross, 2015; Fletcher & Speirs Neumeister, 2012).
A number of different studies have examined perfectionism among gifted individuals. In a study of gifted seventh and eighth graders, Schuler (2000) found 87.5% of the students exhibited strong perfectionistic tendencies, with almost 30% of the gifted students in this study scoring in the maladaptive range. Similarly, Basirion et al. (2014) conducted a study of gifted adolescents in Malaysia and found only 11.8% were non-perfectionistic. The majority of the students, or 58.7%, were categorized as maladaptive perfectionists. Orange (1997) found 89% of her sample of 109 gifted adolescents scored in the negative perfectionism range. Dixon et al. (2004) examined perfectionism among a sample of 142 adolescents and found 42% of them had scored in the maladaptive perfectionism range. Vandiver and Worrell (2002) found about 10% of their sample of 342 gifted middle school students experienced maladaptive perfectionism. In Chan’s (2012) sample of 251 gifted Chinese adolescents, 29% scored in the unhealthy perfectionism range. In a study of 240 gifted children between the ages of 7 and 14, 43.5% of them were found to have socially prescribed perfectionism. A number of factors may impact whether or not a gifted student is perfectionistic, including gender, age/grade level, and birth order (Siegle & Schuler, 2000).
Gender and Perfectionism
There is little consensus on gender differences among gifted individuals with regard to perfectionism. Kramer (1988) examined an adolescent sample and found females in grades seven, eight, and nine reported higher levels of perfectionism than their male peers. Baker (1996) also found gifted girls to report higher levels of perfectionism than gifted boys. Yet, Chan (2009) found gifted boys more likely to be negative or maladaptive perfectionists than girls. Chan (2007) conducted another study to examine perfectionism in gifted students (n = 317) from Grades 2 to 12. He found girls gave themselves higher ratings than did boys on a measure of positive perfectionism. And, Tsui and Mazzocco (2007) found no differences between sixth grade, mathematically gifted boys and gifted girls on perfectionism scores. Chan (2012) also found no gender differences among gifted Chinese adolescents on any dimension of perfectionism. In examining subscale differences on the MPS (Frost et al., 1990), Parker and Mills (1996) found gender differences on different subscales. Gifted boys scored higher on the Concern Over Mistakes subscale than gifted girls, but gifted girls scored higher on the Organization subscale than gifted boys. On the Parental Expectations subscale, there was no statistically significant difference between gifted girls and gifted boys.
Birth Order and Perfectionism
Research conducted with average ability students has found birth order position to be an important component in shaping a child’s personality. Adler (1963) was among the first to suggest a child’s birth order position impacts the way parents treat and raise the child, resulting in different personality traits based on birth order. First born children typically have a higher need for achievement than later born children (Forer, 1977; Strube & Ota, 1982), which, if exaggerated, can mimic or turn into perfectionistic thinking.
Few studies have been conducted with the gifted population that examined birth order and perfectionism. Schuler (1997) found first born children were more likely to be identified as healthy perfectionists. Parker (1998) found only children more likely to be healthy perfectionists. He also found youngest children least likely to be unhealthy perfectionists or to even experience perfectionism at all. In a study conducted with first year college students of average ability, first born children were found to strive for perfection and to please adults (White, Campbell, Stewart, Davies, & Pilkington, 1997). In another study conducted with the general population, only children were found to have more perfectionistic tendencies (Travis & Kohli, 1995).
Grade Level/Age and Perfectionism
Research that examines perfectionism among gifted individuals across ages or grade levels is also limited. Researchers have examined perfectionism with samples of gifted middle school students (LoCicero & Ashby, 2000; Parker, 1997, 2002; Schuler 2000; Vandiver & Worrell, 2002), gifted high school students (Dixon et al., 2004), and gifted college students (Speirs Neumeister, 2004a, 2004b, 2004c), but comparisons are limited. Middle school and high school are of particular interest to researchers who study perfectionism, because during adolescence, individuals become more self-conscious and this implies an increase of socially prescribed pressures to get things just right (Flett & Hewitt, 2002). Chan (2007, 2009) compared gifted primary and secondary students on measures of perfectionism and did not find any statistically significant differences between the groups. However, Kline and Short (1991) found gifted high school aged girls to report higher levels of perfectionism than gifted girls in lower grades.
The Current Study
The purpose of this study is twofold. First, we wish to examine gender, birth order, and grade level differences among gifted adolescents with regard to scores on a measure of perfectionism. This is of interest to parents and educators, such that some who develop perfectionistic tendencies (e.g., girls vs. boys) may just be more prone to doing so. Knowing the factors that may contribute to perfectionism will help parents and educators to support those gifted children and adolescents for whom perfectionism is interfering with daily life.
Second, we hope to add to the literature on perfectionism among gifted students through the replication of previous research. Makel and Plucker (2015) discuss the need for replication in the field of gifted education, as much research in gifted education is based on general education and needs to be evaluated using a gifted sample. Makel and Plucker (2015) suggest one way of choosing research to replicate is to determine the number of times a study has been cited by other researchers. The original study being replicated, which was conducted by Siegle and Schuler (2000), has been cited more than 70 times, and the first replication, conducted by Sondergeld, Schultz, and Glover (2007), has been cited more than 10 times.
The Original Study
The original study examined the rates of perfectionism among 391 gifted middle school students and also included birth order, grade level, and gender as grouping variables (Siegle & Schuler, 2000). Participants came from three different middle schools in both suburban and urban settings, and across a range of socioeconomics statuses. All participants had been identified by their school as having above average to superior academic ability. The participants were in Grades 6 (n = 154), 7 (n = 135), and 8 (n = 99) (three participants did not indicate a grade level). Participants included 223 females and 164 males (four participants did not report their gender). First born or only children made up the largest group (n = 189), then last born (n = 137), and finally middle children (n = 59).
The first goal of the original study was to determine the appropriateness of the MPS (Frost et al., 1990) with gifted and talented adolescents. Exploratory factor analysis was used to examine the construct validity of the MPS. A principal components analysis with a varimax rotation yielded an eight factor solution accounting for 59% of the variance. Only five of the factors produced Cronbach alpha scores above .70 and were therefore retained: Concern Over Mistakes (α = .82), Organization (α = .87), Personal Standards (α = .78), Parental Criticism (α = .82), and Parental Expectations (α = .74).
The second goal of the study was to examine multidimensional perfectionism differences among gifted adolescents in regards to birth order, gender, and grade level. A between-subjects factorial multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was used to examine differences between participants of various genders, birth orders, and grade levels. First born individuals were found to have higher Parental Criticism subscale scores (d = .33) and Parental Expectations subscale scores (d = .29) than last born individuals. Females reported higher scores on the Organization subscale than males (d = .27). Males reported higher Parental Expectations subscale scores (d = .18). Also found, females’ scores on the Concern Over Mistakes subscale increased from sixth to eighth grade, whereas males’ scores increased in seventh grade and decreased in eighth grade (η2 = .020). Females reported higher levels of Parental Criticism in sixth and eighth grades, but males reported higher levels in seventh grade (η2 = .017)
The First Replication Study
Sondergeld et al. (2007) replicated the Siegle and Schuler (2000) study to add to the body of replication studies in the field of gifted and talented education. Sondergeld et al. (2007) wanted to increase generalizability of the Siegle and Schuler (2000) study by using the same methodology and a similar sample. The researchers examined 402 gifted students in Grades 6 through 8 using the MPS (Frost et al., 1990). Participants came from 26 school districts in the Midwestern United States and were administered the survey by their gifted and talented teachers. The sample population included 223 females and 175 males (four students did not indicate gender) in Grades 6 (n = 122), 7 (n = 118), and 8 (n = 162). The most common birth order was oldest or only child (n = 183), then last born children (n = 125), and finally middle born children (n = 89) (five students did not report their birth order).
To replicate the original study, a principal components analysis with varimax rotation yielded a five-factor solution of the MPS, accounting for 57% of the variance. The five factors included Concern Over Mistakes (α = .87), Organization (α = .90), Personal Standards (α = .82), Parental Pressures (α = .85), and Doubts About Actions (α = .73). A between-subjects factorial MANOVA was used to examine differences between participants of various genders, birth orders, and grade levels on the five factors of perfectionism. Using Wilks’ criterion, perfectionism (five factors combined) was affected by birth order (η2 = .048) and gender (η2 = .034). Statistically significant main effects were found: Females were found to have higher scores on the Organization subscale than males (η2 = .028). Birth order differences were found only with regard to Doubts About Actions subscale scores, such that middle children had higher scores on this subscale than both oldest and youngest children (η2 = .047).
The Current Replication Study
The current study both replicates the previous studies and extends them by including more grade levels (Grades 9, 10, 11, and 12 were added) and by changing the setting to a more rural location. By examining additional grade levels, the researchers hoped to gain insight into further differences during the adolescent period with respect to perfectionism, as some research has shown that perfectionism increases with age (e.g., Cook & Kearney, 2014). A rural environment was chosen because of the lack of research on rural, gifted students and because of the likely difference in parental expectations in rural and urban communities (i.e., rural parents have been found to be more traditional in gender role socialization that urban parents; Scanzoni & Arnett, 1987). The current study attempts to answer the following research questions:
Method
Participants
In this study, data were collected from 96 adolescents (70% Caucasian; 51% male, 49% female) identified as gifted and talented from the south-western region of the United States in a rural school district. There were 47 females and 49 males in the seventh (n = 40), eighth (n = 16), ninth (n = 7), 10th (n = 15), 11th (n = 10), and 12th (n = 8) grades. The largest birth order group was first/only children (n = 39), followed by last born children (n = 32), and finally middle children (n = 25). See Table 1 for a comparison between the sample used in the current study and the samples used in the Siegle and Schuler (2000) and Sondergeld et al. (2007) studies.
Demographic Comparison.
Materials
Demographic questionnaire
A demographic questionnaire was used to collect age, grade level, race, gender, and birth order.
Perfectionism
Perfectionism was measured using the MPS (Frost et al., 1990). The MPS consists of 35 items and responses are measured on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree). Sample items include “It is important to me that I be thoroughly competent in everything I do” and “My parents expect excellence from me.”
After conducting a principal components factor analysis on the MPS, both Siegle and Schuler (2000) and Sondergeld et al. (2007) found five distinct factors, although the five factors differed somewhat between studies. Siegle and Schuler (2000) found the following five factors: Concern Over Mistakes (α = .82), Organization (α = .87), Personal Standards (α = .78), Parental Criticism (α = .82), and Parental Expectations (α = .74). Sondergeld et al. (2007) found the following five factors: Concern Over Mistakes (α = .87), Organization (α = .90), Parental Pressures (α = .85), Personal Standards (α = .82), and Doubts About Actions (α = .73). In the current study, a principal components analysis with varimax rotation was also used, but only four factors emerged: Concern Over Mistakes (α = .93), Organization (α = .95), Parental Expectations (α = .91), and Personal Standards (α = .86). See Table 2 for items and factor loadings. These four factors mirror those found by Stöber (1998).
Principal Component Analysis With Varimax Rotation.
Procedure
An information letter and parental consent form were sent home with gifted students in a rural middle and high school in the Southwestern United States. Students that returned the parental consent form were administered the survey at the student’s school. Participants were informed verbally and in writing that participation was voluntary and consent to participate was obtained from the students. The survey solicited no identifying information to maintain the confidentiality of the participants.
Results
As a result of the factor analysis used with the current sample, four dependent variables were created, namely the following subscales: Concern Over Mistakes, Organization, Personal Standards, and Parental Expectations. A 2 × 3 × 6 between-subject MANOVA was used on the four dependent variables, namely Concern Over Mistakes, Organization, Personal Standards, and Parental Expectations. The independent variables examined were gender (male or female), birth order (oldest child/only child, middle child, or youngest child), and grade level (seventh, eighth, ninth, 10th, 11th, or 12th).
Because the variables failed the Bartlett-Box F test of homogeneity of variance, we used Pillai’s trace criterion to examine the combined dependent variables. The combined dependent variables were statistically significant for birth order and grade level, but not for gender. The interaction effects of gender by birth order and gender by grade level were also statistically significant. No other statistically significant interactions were found. The multivariate results can be found in Table 3.
Pillai’s Trace Multivariate Tests of Significance for Factors of Perfectionism.
p < .05. **p < .01.
Because of the statistically significant main effects and interaction effects found in the MANOVA, further investigation into the differences among the independent variables with respect to the dependent variables using univariate F tests was warranted (see Table 4).
Univariate F-Ratios for Main Effects and Interaction Effects.
p < .05. **p < .01.
Regarding grade level differences, Scheffe post hoc analysis revealed a statistically significant difference between seventh and eighth graders with regard to Concern Over Mistakes, such that seventh graders had lower scores (M = 2.205, SD = .960) than eighth graders (M = 3.062, SD = .928). A statistically significant difference also existed on the Organization subscale, such that seventh graders (M = 3.877, SD = .902) had higher scores than 11th graders (M = 3.350, SD = .396).
Regarding birth order differences, Scheffe post hoc analysis revealed a statistically significant difference with regard to Concern Over Mistakes between first born/only children (M = 2.783, SD = 1.025) and middle children (M = 2.213, SD = .842), as well as between first born/only children (M = 2.783, SD = 1.025) and youngest children (M = 2.375, SD = .770). A statistically significant difference was found with regard to Personal Standards, too, such that there was a difference between first born/only children (M = 4.106, SD = .744) and youngest children (M = 3.688, SD = .720), and between middle children (M = 4.246, SD = .655) and youngest children (M = 3.688, SD = .720).
Scheffe post hoc analysis revealed a statistically significant interaction between gender and birth order with regard to Parental Expectations. Male first born/only children had higher scores on the Parental Expectations subscale than middle and youngest born males, as well as females of all birth orders. Female middle children had higher scores on the Parental Expectations subscale than first born/only children and youngest children. See Figure 1 for a graphical representation.
Interaction between birth order and gender.
Scheffe post hoc analysis revealed a statistically significant interaction between grade level and gender with regard to Parental Expectations. Males reported higher scores on the Parental Expectations subscale at all grades except for eighth and 12th, peaking at the 10th grade. Females showed a significant increase in subscale scores from 11th to 12th grades, peaking at the 12th grade. See Figure 2 for a graphical representation.
Interaction between grade level and gender.
Discussion
The purposes of this study were to examine gender, birth order, and grade level differences among gifted adolescents with regard to scores on a measure of perfectionism and to add to the literature on perfectionism among gifted students through the replication of previous research. In our analysis of the MPS (Frost et al., 1990) with gifted adolescents, four factors emerged, similar to Stöber (1998): Concern Over Mistakes, Parental Expectations, Personal Standards, and Organization.
Regarding the Concern Over Mistakes subscale, seventh graders had lower scores than eighth graders in the current sample. Siegle and Schuler (2000) found an increase in scores from sixth to seventh grade, with this increase continuing for females but declining for males from seventh to eighth grade. In the current sample, first born/only children had higher scores on the Concern Over Mistakes subscale than both middle children and youngest children. Sondergeld et al. (2007) did not find any statistically significant results regarding the Concern Over Mistakes subscale.
Regarding the Personal Standards subscale, first born/only children and middle children had higher scores than youngest children. Neither Siegle and Schuler (2000) nor Sondergeld et al. (2007) found any statistically significant findings on the Personal Standards subscale.
Regarding the Parental Expectations subscale, male first born/only children had higher scores on the Parental Expectations subscale than middle and youngest born males, as well as females of all birth orders. Males also reported higher scores on the Parental Expectations subscale at all grades except for eighth and 12th, peaking at the 10th grade. In the Siegle and Schuler (2000) study, males reported higher Parental Expectations subscale scores than females. And, first born children reported higher Parental Criticism and Parental Expectations subscale scores than last born children. In the Sondergeld et al. (2007) study, middle children had higher Doubts About Actions subscale scores than first born and youngest children.
Regarding the Organization subscale, there was a difference between seventh- and 11th-grade students such that seventh-grade students had higher scores than 11th-grade students. Neither Siegle and Schuler (2000) nor Sondergeld et al. (2007) found grade level differences on the Organization subscale, but both the Siegle and Schuler (2000) study and the Sondergeld et al. (2007) study found females to score higher on the Organization subscale than males.
In examining Siegle and Schuler (2000), Sondergeld et al. (2007), and the current sample, it appears that first born/only children and males are at the highest risk for negative or unhealthy perfectionism. These findings are in line with research on parenting practices and birth order position, particularly in rural communities. Parental expectations and criticisms may be important in the development of perfectionism and can contribute to the development of perfectionistic ways of thinking. Children whose parents have high expectations, strict rules, and a focus on academic perfection, and whose parents criticize their children when they fail to meet their high expectations are at risk for developing perfectionism through negative self-evaluation (L. E. Damian, Stoeber, Negru, & Baban, 2013; Miller, Lambert, & Speirs Neumeister, 2012). Barrow and Moore (1983) describe four types of early experiences that can lead to perfectionism: 1) Overtly critical and demanding parents; 2) Parental expectations and standards of performance are excessively high and criticism is indirect; 3) Parental approval is absent, inconsistent or conditional; and 4) Perfectionistic parents acting as models for perfectionistic attitudes and behaviors. (p. 614)
Indeed, research with gifted adolescents and gifted college students has shown that parents who have excessively high demands on their children correlates with unhealthy or maladaptive perfectionism among said gifted adolescents and college students (Basirion et al., 2014; Miller et al., 2012; Speirs Neumeister & Finch, 2006; Speirs Neumeister, Williams, & Cross, 2009). Further, research on parenting practices in rural and urban families has shown rural parents emphasize intellectual development more than urban parents, and also that parents emphasize intellectual development more for sons than for daughters (M. Coleman, Ganong, Clark, & Madsen, 1989).
The birth order findings in the current study are also in line with some previous findings regarding birth order and personality in the general population. In his meta-analysis, Sulloway (2011) found that when adults are asked to compare themselves against their siblings on various personality traits, first borns are judged as more achieving and conscientious, and later borns are judged as more rebellious and open. R. I. Damian and Roberts (2015) also found first borns to be more conscientious and also less sociable, while Sulloway (1996) found youngest children fill a more easy-going and sociable role within the family. The conscientiousness seen in first borns can be viewed as a type of healthy perfectionism (Hewitt & Flett, 2007) that may or may not turn into unhealthy or maladaptive perfectionism.
Limitations and Directions for Future Research
Although the current study was a replication and should aid in generalizability of findings, it is important to keep in mind that the current sample was obtained in one rural school district and by using a convenience sampling method, both of which naturally limit the generalizability of the findings. Further, the data used for this study were self-reported. As a result, social desirability bias is a possible concern although confidentiality was ensured for the participants. A replication of the current study that also incorporates a comparison group of non-gifted adolescents would further serve to solidify the conclusions drawn from this study and the Siegle and Schuler (2000) and Sondergeld et al. (2007) studies.
Makel and Plucker (2015) explain that replications rarely end the conversation about a topic. Although this replication provides additional information on perfectionism among gifted adolescents, future research should examine a number of topics: parental expectations of gifted children, parenting styles of gifted children, gender and birth order effects with regard to social and emotional variables, and the notion of “conscientiousness” versus perfectionism among the gifted.
Conclusion
By replicating the original study conducted by Siegle and Schuler (2000) twice (Sondergeld et al., 2007, and the current study), we now have a better picture of perfectionism among gifted adolescents. The information gained from all three studies can be used to inform parents, practitioners, and counselors working with these children. Parents of first born gifted children, particularly males, need to examine their expectations and how they respond to the needs of these children. On a positive note, though, several studies have found perfectionism is not a fixed psychological entity, and indeed to be something one can overcome (Greenspon, 2014; Mofield & Chakraborti-Ghosh, 2010). Several models of affective curriculum have even been effective at decreasing student feelings of inadequacy related to perfectionism (Mofield & Chakraborti-Ghosh, 2010; Rule & Montgomery, 2013).
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.