Are perfectionistic strivings beneficial or detrimental to well-being and achievement? Tests of procrastination and emotion regulation as moderators.

OBJECTIVE: Researchers have called for an approach that examines the conditions under which perfectionistic strivings (PS) may be beneficial or detrimental to psychological functioning. We adopted a self-regulation perspective and tested whether individual differences in self-regulation (procrastination, emotion regulation) moderate PS's relationships with achievement and well-being in an academic/work-related achievement context. METHOD: A sample of 183 preservice teachers participated in a study that combined "traditional" longitudinal assessment (six performance situations over a 9-month period) with repeated ambulatory assessment (measuring well-being, procrastination, and emotion regulation during a total of 910 preparation phases that preceded performance situations). RESULTS: Mean levels of achievement, well-being, and emotion regulation were found to be stable over time, whereas procrastination decreased on average across preparation phases. Results from latent variable interaction models indicated that individual differences in intraindividual change in procrastination over time moderated the relationship between PS and well-being (but not achievement) in the expected direction: The less individuals decreased in procrastination over time, the more negative the relationship between PS and well-being was. Contrary to expectations, we found no evidence of a moderating effect of emotion regulation. CONCLUSION: The study contributes to a nuanced perspective on the adaptiveness of PS.

Modeling individual differences in emotion regulation repertoire in daily life with multilevel latent profile analysis.

Emotion regulation (ER) repertoire-the range of different ER strategies an individual utilizes across situations-is assumed to enable more adaptive ER and greater well-being. ER repertoire has been operationalized by a quantitative index (sum of ER strategies across situations) or by applying a person-centered approach to global self-reports of dispositional ER. We aimed to assess ER repertoire in daily life by using an experience sampling methodology (ESM) and a person-centered approach that could account for nested data. We used multilevel latent profile analyses of ESM data (N = 179, 9-10 prompts per day over 21 days) to (a) group the occasions into latent profiles of momentary ER strategies, (b) group individuals whose distributions of ER profiles differed across occasions into latent classes, and (c) examine well-being correlates of class membership at the person level. At the occasion level, we identified nine ER profiles that differed in degree of use (e.g., no use of any vs. strong use of all strategies) and in specific combinations of strategies (e.g., situation selection and acceptance vs. suppression and ignoring). At the person level, we identified 5 classes of individuals differing in the degree to which they used various momentary ER profiles versus one predominant profile across situations. Well-being was highest for individuals who used multiple ER profiles of active strategies and lowest for individuals who used ER profiles focused on suppression. Hence, both ER repertoire width and the specific make-up of the ER repertoire were relevant for the relation between ER repertoire and well-being. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).