Testing self-help interventions for adults with clinical perfectionism: A randomized controlled trial comparing online skills modules to a book.

Résumé fourni par la source

OBJECTIVE: The current randomized controlled trial (preregistered at https://osf.io/8k7xa) compared an online self-help intervention for perfectionism that allowed users to select their own skills modules to a book control condition. METHOD: Participants with clinically significant perfectionism (N = 114; Mage = 33.9, 52.3% White, 58.7% women) were randomly assigned to an online training (app) or active control (self-help book) condition and assessed at baseline, weekly during a 4-week intervention period, at 1-month follow-up, and at 6-month follow-up. RESULTS: We found a smaller decrease in perfectionistic evaluative concerns in the app condition compared to the book condition (Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale-Evaluative; ps = .002 to .007), but no differences were observed for perfectionistic striving (Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale-Striving), psychological distress (Depression Anxiety Stress Scales), quality of life, psychological flexibility (PsyFlex), and self-compassion (Self-Compassion Scale-Short Form) by 6-month follow-up (within-group Cohen's ds for perfectionism subscales = -0.79 to -0.42 for the app, -1.12 to -0.88 for the book). Participants in the app condition rated modules as being more helpful for meeting specific than general needs (t = -2.40, p = .021), suggesting they could "self-personalize" treatment by selecting modules that fit their needs at the time of use. We did not find significant moderation effects for any demographic or clinical variables. CONCLUSIONS: Both interventions showed similar effects over time and may serve as helpful low-intensity treatments for clinical perfectionism. Limitations include lack of a waitlist control condition, which precludes conclusions about efficacy of the study interventions beyond time effects. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.