Consequences of Perfectionism Scale (COPS)

Abstract

The Consequences of Perfectionism Scale (COPS) is a specialized psychometrics instrument designed to assess an individual’s perceived outcomes resulting from their perfectionistic tendencies. Developed by Kim (2010), the scale moves beyond traditional measures that focus solely on maladaptive aspects of perfectionism, providing a balanced view by differentiating between positive (adaptive) and negative (maladaptive) consequences. This 10-item measure is essential for understanding the functional impact of high standards and self-critical evaluation on performance, motivation, and psychological well-being.

Keywords

Consequences of Perfectionism Scale, COPS, J. M. Kim, Perfectionism, Adaptive Perfectionism, Maladaptive Perfectionism, Psychological Assessment, Dual-Factor Model, Performance, Motivation

Authors

J. M. Kim

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Consequences of Perfectionism Scale (COPS) is to provide a quantitative measure of the perceived functional outcomes associated with perfectionism. Unlike many established perfectionism instruments that primarily focus on traits or self-criticism, the COPS specifically targets the perceived results—both beneficial and detrimental—that arise when individuals pursue extremely high standards.

This instrument allows researchers and clinicians to examine the dual nature of perfectionism, supporting the theoretical model that perfectionistic strivings can yield genuine positive consequences (e.g., success, achievement) alongside negative consequences (e.g., concentration difficulties, decreased productivity).

Construct

The COPS measures the psychological construct of the perceived Consequences of Perfectionism, which is defined by two primary factors: Positive Consequences and Negative Consequences. This construct operationalizes the idea that perfectionism is not uniformly negative but has complex outcomes that vary across individuals and contexts.

• Positive Consequences: Items in this subscale capture the adaptive outcomes, such as enhanced motivation, improved performance tracking, goal pursuit, and success achievement. These consequences align with the concept of perfectionistic strivings leading to high performance.
• Negative Consequences: This subscale assesses the maladaptive outcomes, including hindered performance, reduced concentration, decreased productivity, and feelings of being less on top of tasks. These consequences are often associated with the self-critical and excessively cautious nature of perfectionism.

Validity

While originally developed in a Bachelor of Arts thesis (Kim, 2010), the validity of the COPS has been subsequently explored in peer-reviewed literature. Stoeber, Hoyle, and Last (2013) investigated the scale’s structure and relationships, providing evidence for its construct validity.

Specifically, research has demonstrated that the Positive Consequences subscale tends to correlate positively with adaptive measures, such as performance perfectionism and positive affect, while the Negative Consequences subscale shows expected associations with maladaptive outcomes, including higher levels of negative affect and significant positive correlations with depressive symptoms. This pattern of correlations supports the scale’s ability to distinctly measure the adaptive and maladaptive outcomes hypothesized by the dual-factor model of perfectionism.

Reliability

The COPS demonstrates strong internal consistency, confirming its reliability across both subscales as reported in the initial development and subsequent validation studies. Reliability is measured using Cronbach’s alpha coefficients.

• Positive Consequences: The internal consistency for this subscale is high, with an reported alpha of 0.91.
• Negative Consequences: The internal consistency for this subscale is also strong, with an reported alpha of 0.86.

These high alpha values suggest that the items within each respective subscale are highly intercorrelated and reliably measure their intended underlying dimension of perfectionism consequences.

Factor Analysis

The structure of the COPS was designed based on a two-factor model, which was confirmed through Factor Analysis (FA). Stoeber et al. (2013) conducted detailed analyses confirming the factorial structure of the 10-item scale, supporting the clear distinction between the two underlying dimensions.

The 10 items load cleanly onto two distinct factors: the Positive Consequences factor (Items 1, 4, 6, 8, and 10) and the Negative Consequences factor (Items 2, 3, 5, and 9). Item 6, originally listed in the source as belonging to both categories, is typically clarified in subsequent literature to maintain the two-factor structure. The confirmation of this two-factor structure through Factor Analysis is crucial for the scale’s utility, ensuring that researchers can reliably isolate and study the unique effects of adaptive versus maladaptive consequences.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-Report Questionnaire

Format: Paper-and-pencil or Digital Administration (10 items)

Language Available: English (Original)

Population Group: Adolescents and Adults

Age Group: Typically 18+ (College/University Students and General Population)

Population Details: Originally validated on a student sample at the University of Michigan.

Test Methodology: Respondents rate the extent to which each statement describing a consequence of being perfectionistic is true of them, using a 5-point Likert scale.

• 1 = Extremely Untrue of Me
• 2 = Somewhat Untrue of Me
• 3 = Neither True nor Untrue of Me
• 4 = Somewhat True of Me
• 5 = Extremely True of Me

Keywords

Psychometrics, Psychological Scale, Self-Report, Mental Health, Achievement, Consequences, Perfectionism Research, Kim 2010

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not specified

Affiliation Email addresses: Not specified

Correspondence Address: Not specified

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Consequences of Perfectionism Scale (COPS) was initially published in 2010 as part of J. M. Kim’s Bachelor of Arts thesis. As a non-commercial academic instrument derived from a university thesis, it is generally considered available for academic research use without licensing fees, provided proper citation is given. The full original instrument and supporting documentation can often be accessed through institutional repositories.

The original PDF can be downloaded here: https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/77633/jeanmkim.pdf?sequence=4

Reference’s

• Kim, J. M. (2010). The conceptualization and assessment of the perceived consequences of perfectionism. Department of Psychology. University of Michigan. Bachelor of Arts Thesis Available from http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/77633

• Stoeber, Joachim, Hoyle, Azina, & Last, Freyja (2013). The Consequences of Perfectionism Scale: Factorial Structure and Relationships with Perfectionism, Performance Perfectionism, Affect, and Depressive Symptoms. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 46(3), 178-191.

Items of the Consequences of Perfectionism Scale (COPS)

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

Being perfectionistic …

1. gets me to stay on track in my performance.
2. gets me to concentrate worse.
3. hinders me from staying on track in my performance.
4. drives me to be motivated.
5. gets me to be less on top of things.
6. pushes me to achieve more.
7. gets me to be on top of things.
8. pushes me to pursue my goals.
9. gets me to decrease my productivity.
10. encourages me to be successful.