Development of a model for perfectionism-related variations in error processing: Testing the optimisation hypothesis and the avoidance hypothesis in a multimodal approach

从理性的角度来看，错误是行动偏离预期目标的结果。因此，错误的表现可以用作优化未来行为的信息。具有高个人标准的完美主义者似乎成功地遵循了这一策略。从情感的角度来看，错误可以被视为个人失败的标志，从而引起大量的担忧，特别是在评估关注完美主义者。因此，完美主义可以是布恩和祸根在同一时间。本项目将调查的变化，在错误处理与多模态的方法。我们提出了一个与完美主义相关的错误加工变异模型，该模型包含两个核心假设：最优化假设和回避假设。将在一系列三项电生理学研究（研究1和4各：N = 84，研究3：N = 134）和一项行为研究（N = 74）中检查假设。我们希望通过考虑（a）几个行为参数（例如反应时间、错误率），（B）事件相关电位的两个错误特异性成分（错误负性、错误正性），以及（c）多变量模式分析的特定指标，系统地检验完美主义相关假设。完美主义相关的误差证据积累的变化，将研究漂移扩散模型分析-数学方法来模拟决策过程。一个新开发的范式与八个响应的替代品将被用作任务，其目的是增加的误差率的方差相比，简单的任务。研究1作为一个概念复制以前的研究结果与更高的任务难度。在研究2和研究3中，我们将更详细地考察回避假设（假设纯粹关注评价的完美主义者尽可能避免错误处理）和优化假设（假设具有高个人标准的完美主义者试图收集尽可能多的关于他们行为的信息）的预测。为此，参与者将有机会避免错误处理或使用尽可能多的信息，从他们的行动的结果。在最后一项研究中，错误接受练习将被用来检查是否减少错误相关的担忧导致减少避免错误，从而改善错误处理，特别是对评价关注的完美主义者。这些研究结果将为基本错误处理机制的变化提供见解，这可能有助于制定干预措施，以减少不健康的完美主义错误处理策略。

From a rational perspective, an error is the result of an action that deviates from the expected goal. Thus, an erroneous performance can be used as information to optimize future behaviour. Perfectionists with high personal standards seem to follow this strategy successfully. From an emotional perspective, an error can be regarded as a sign of personal failure and thus induce a high amount of worrying, especially in evaluative-concerns perfectionists. Thus, perfectionism can be boon and bane at the same time. The present project will investigate variations in error processing with a multimodal approach. We present a model of perfectionism-related variations in error processing with two core hypotheses: optimization hypothesis and avoidance hypothesis. The hypotheses will be examined in a series of three electrophysiological studies (Studies 1 and 4 each: N = 84, Study 3: N = 134) and one behavioural study (N = 74). We want to systematically examine the perfectionism-related hypotheses by considering (a) several behavioural parameters (e.g. response time, error rates), (b) two error-specific components of the event-related potential (error negativity, error positivity), and (c) specific indicators of the multivariate pattern analysis. Perfectionism-related variations in error-evidence accumulation will be examined by drift-diffusion model analyses—a mathematical approach to model decision-making processes. A newly developed paradigm with eight response alternatives will be used as task, which is aimed at increasing the variance of error rates compared to simpler tasks. Study 1 serves as a conceptual replication of previous findings with a higher task difficulty. In Study 2 and Study 3, we will examine the predictions of the avoidance hypothesis (the assumption that pure evaluation-concerned perfectionists avoid error processing if possible) and those of the optimization hypothesis (the assumption that perfectionists with high personal standards are trying to gather as much information about their actions as possible) more detailed. For this purpose, participants will be given the opportunity to either avoid error processing or to use as much information as possible from the outcome of their actions. In the last study, an error acceptance exercise will be used to examine if a reduction of error-related worrying leads to a reduction of the avoidance of errors and thus to an improvement of error processing, especially for evaluative-concerns perfectionists. The results of the studies will provide insights into variations of basic error processing mechanisms, which may be beneficial for the development of interventions to reduce unhealthy perfectionistic error processing strategies.