It has recently been argued that because the major two dimensions of perfectionism (perfectionistic strivings and perfectionistic concerns, PS and PC) can have opposing effects, the “combined effect” should be calculated to understand whether, overall, perfectionism is neutral, adaptive, or maladaptive. In this methodological note we revisit the task of disentangling the overall effects of PS and PC. In doing so, we illustrate a new and alternative approach – calculation of the total unique effect and the relative weights of PS and PC. The total unique effect is the simplest way of ascertaining whether perfectionism is neutral, adaptive, or maladaptive. However, like the combined effect, it does not convey information regarding the relative importance of PS and PC. Calculating the relative weights of PS and PC does so and provides a fuller account of the overall effect of perfectionism and the precise role of each dimension when predicting a given outcome. We close the paper by applying this approach to a range of outcomes reported in recent meta-analyses in this area. In doing so, perfectionism is revealed to be primarily maladaptive and rarely adaptive or neutral, with the relative contribution of perfectionistic concerns being the main reason why this is the case.

最近有人认为，由于完美主义的两个主要维度（完美主义的努力和完美主义的关注，PS 和 PC）可能会产生相反的效果，因此应该计算“组合效果”以了解完美主义总体上是中性的、适应性的还是不适应。在这个方法论说明中，我们重新审视了解开 PS 和 PC 整体影响的任务。在此过程中，我们展示了一种新的替代方法——计算总独特效果以及 PS 和 PC 的相对权重。完全独特的效果是确定完美主义是中性、适应性还是适应不良的最简单方法。然而，就像综合效应一样，它并没有传达关于 PS 和 PC 相对重要性的信息。计算 PS 和 PC 的相对权重可以更全面地说明完美主义的整体影响以及在预测给定结果时每个维度的精确作用。我们通过将这种方法应用于该领域最近的荟萃分析中报告的一系列结果来结束本文。在这样做时，完美主义被揭示主要是适应不良，很少适应或中性，完美主义关注的相对贡献是造成这种情况的主要原因。