The present study investigated whether dyadic adjustment of 50 married couples differed with respect to three dimensions of peifectionism, and whether there was a relationship between dyadic adjustment and perfectionism. Couples completed Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS) and Multidimensional Peifectionism Scale (MPS). One-way multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was conducted to figure out whether high adjusted and low adjusted groups differed with regard to dimensions of perfectionism. The relationship between dyadic adjustment and dimensions of peifectionism were computed via Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coeffident formula. The results of the analyses indicated that there were no significant differences between high adjusted and low adjusted groups in terms of three dimensions of perfectionism. Furthermore, no significant relationship was found between marital adjustment and perfectionism.
Among the research related to family and marriage counseling, dyadic adjustment in marital relationships has been one of the most attractive areas for researchers. Marital relationships are so important for both the physical and psychological health of married individuals that many researchers have attempted to investigate the factors related to marital adjustment. There are many variables which have been studied together with marital adjustment. Among these are some demographic variables such as number of children, duration of marriage, or the age difference between partners; some variables related to the relationship itself such as conflict resolutian strategies between partners, or communication skills; or same psychological variables such as depression, anxiety, or loneliness.
Personality variables have also been frequently studied in tenns of their relationship to dyadic adjustment. For instance, neuroticism has been found to be an important indicator of dyadic adjustment. In addition, the similarity between partners in terms of personality variables is also associated with marital adjustment.
Perfectionism is one of the personality variables which has been recently included in the research area of marital relationships. Some researchers define perfectionism as a multidimensional personality variable, According to most frequently usul definition of multidimensional perfectionism, it includes three dimensions, namely, self-oriented, other-oriented and socially prescribed perfectionism.
Perfectionism has been studied with many personality variables; however, there are fewer studies related to the interpersonal problems that perfectionism causes. These studies show that, especially other-oriented and socially prescribed perfectionism are associated with the qualities that are important in interpersonal relationships. For instance, socially prescribed perfectionism has been associated with some problems such as loneliness, shyness, low self-concept, low empathy, social anxiety, difficulty in expressing anger, and fear of being criticized. Most of the studies indicated that socially prescribed perfectionism is the dimension which is found to show the strongest negative association with dyadic adjustment.
In this present study the researchers investigated whether dyadic adjustment differed with respect to three dimensions of perfectionism, and whether there was a significant relationship between dyadic adjustment and dimensions of perfectionism.
Fifty volunteered married couples participated in the study. Participants` ages ranged between 25 and 61. The average year of marriage for couples is 9.35 years. The couples completed two measures, namely, Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS) and Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (MPS). A separate direction page was attached explaining the purpose of the study and requesting not to fill the questionnaires together as partners. DAS assesses the quality of the relationship as perceived by married or cohabiting couples. DAS is comprised of 32 items that gives a total score ranging between 0 and 151. Several studies indicated that DAS has adequate evidence of validity and reliability. The internal-consistency reliability for the Turkish version of DAS was .92 and the split-half reliability coefficient was .86. As for the validity studies, it was found that construct validity of Turkish form was compatible with the original form. Furthermore, as for the evaluation of the criterion validity of Turkish form; the correlation between the translated DAS and the translated Locke-Wallace Marital Adjustment Test was .82.
The other scale, MPS, is a 45-item instrument that assesses individual differences in perfectionism through three different dimensions. It uses 7-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Higher scores reflect greater levels of perfectionism. Several studies indicated that MPS has adequate evidence of validity and reliability. The factor structure of Turkish version of MPS shows similarity with the factor structure of the original scale. Asfor the reliability of the adapted version of the scale, the alpha coefficient for the total scale was .91 and for the subscales it ranged between .73 and .91.
İn the present study, partners were divided into two groups (high-adjusted and low-adjusted) based on the median of the DAS scores (Maximum score = 140; Minimum score = 55; Median =115). in order to figure out whether these two groups differed on the scores of three dimensions of perfectionism, one-way MANOVA was conducted. As for the second purpose of the study, the relationship between participants` DAS scores and perfectionism sub-dimensions scores were computed by employing Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coefficient formula.
The results indicated that there were no significant differences between the two groups with regard to selforiented, socially prescribed, and other-oriented perfectionism scores. Furthermore, no significant correlations were found between participants` total DAS scores and perfectionism sub-dimensions scores.
With regard to our findings about the relationship between partners` marital adjustment and 2 dimensions of perfectionism, namely, self-oriented and other-oriented perfectionism it can be said that results of the present study supported the findings of related studies in the literature (Haring et al., 2003; Flett et al., 2001). However, when our findings regarding the relationship between marital adjustment and socially prescribed perfectionism were considered there seems to be an inconsistency with the findings of studies in which a significant relationship was found between dyadic adjustment and socially prescribed perfectionism (Haring et al.., 2003; Hewitt & Flett, 1995; Ffett et al., 2001).