Perfectionism Dimensions and Research Productivity in Psychology Professors: Implications for Understanding the (Mal)Adaptiveness of Perfectionism

By Simon B. Sherry, P. Hewitt, Dayna L. Sherry, Gordon L. Flett, A. R. Graham. 2010

105 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Cognitive Neuroscience, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6f09868f7653462e56c9737c8c266914a0896577

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Clinical Psychology

1. Joachim Stoeber
2. O. Stoll
3. P. Hewitt
4. Gordon L. Flett
5. John K. Gotwals
6. Simon B. Sherry
7. John G. H. Dunn
8. A. Hill

In Cognitive Neuroscience

1. Joachim Stoeber
2. O. Stoll
3. John G. H. Dunn
4. John K. Gotwals
5. Gordon L. Flett
6. P. Hewitt
7. A. Hill
8. Howard K. Hall

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

1. Joachim Stoeber
2. Gordon L. Flett
3. P. Hewitt
4. O. Stoll
5. John K. Gotwals
6. John G. H. Dunn
7. Simon B. Sherry
8. A. Hill

Citations in the corpus

• Multidimensional perfectionism turns 30: A review of known knowns and known unknowns. (2021, background): “…of published journal articles as determined by objective measures, but self-oriented perfectionism is a negative predictor; that is, psychological researchers who are trying to be absolutely perfect in ways that go well beyond conscientiousness tend to produce fewer articles (Sherry et al., 2010).”
• Are perfectionistic strivings in sport adaptive? A systematic review of confirmatory, contradictory, and mixed evidence. (2012, background): “…in sport may have important implications for researchers and psychologists studying similar questions in other achievement domains such as workplace (e.g., Sherry et al., 2010), classroom (e.g., Bieling, Israeli, Smith, & Antony, 2003), or performing-arts settings (e.g., Stoeber & Eismann, 2007).”