<%BANNER%>

Brief, Online Interventions for Perfectionists

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0021110/00001

Material Information

Title: Brief, Online Interventions for Perfectionists
Physical Description: 1 online resource (129 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Aldea, Mirela A
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2007

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: distress, expressive, maladaptive, therapeutic
Psychology -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Counseling Psychology thesis, Ph.D.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: Much of what is known about the treatment of perfectionists has been derived from secondary analyses of the NIMH Treatment of Depression Collaborative Research Program or extrapolated from research on depression, eating disorders, or anxiety disorders. Results of secondary analyses or extrapolated findings generally indicate that perfectionists have not responded well to standard psychological interventions. Based on the research on the effects of therapeutic feedback and expressive writing, two brief, online interventions, provision of feedback and provision of feedback followed by an opportunity to express in writing reactions to the feedback, were tested in the current study on a sample of maladaptive perfectionistic college students. A randomized, pretest-posttest-follow-up control group design was used. In addition to main effects, this study investigated mediational and moderational models to further explore factors that were conducive to therapeutic gains for perfectionists. The results of the study suggest that although perfectionism feedback may be appropriate to use with some maladaptive perfectionists (e.g., those less motivated to change, non-defensive, or with relatively lower standards), it may not be beneficial to others. The results are discussed in light of treatment implications, especially with regard to the manner in which perfectionists respond to therapeutic interventions.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Mirela A Aldea.
Thesis: Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Florida, 2007.
Local: Adviser: Rice, Kenneth G.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2007
System ID: UFE0021110:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0021110/00001

Material Information

Title: Brief, Online Interventions for Perfectionists
Physical Description: 1 online resource (129 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Aldea, Mirela A
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2007

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: distress, expressive, maladaptive, therapeutic
Psychology -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Counseling Psychology thesis, Ph.D.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: Much of what is known about the treatment of perfectionists has been derived from secondary analyses of the NIMH Treatment of Depression Collaborative Research Program or extrapolated from research on depression, eating disorders, or anxiety disorders. Results of secondary analyses or extrapolated findings generally indicate that perfectionists have not responded well to standard psychological interventions. Based on the research on the effects of therapeutic feedback and expressive writing, two brief, online interventions, provision of feedback and provision of feedback followed by an opportunity to express in writing reactions to the feedback, were tested in the current study on a sample of maladaptive perfectionistic college students. A randomized, pretest-posttest-follow-up control group design was used. In addition to main effects, this study investigated mediational and moderational models to further explore factors that were conducive to therapeutic gains for perfectionists. The results of the study suggest that although perfectionism feedback may be appropriate to use with some maladaptive perfectionists (e.g., those less motivated to change, non-defensive, or with relatively lower standards), it may not be beneficial to others. The results are discussed in light of treatment implications, especially with regard to the manner in which perfectionists respond to therapeutic interventions.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Mirela A Aldea.
Thesis: Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Florida, 2007.
Local: Adviser: Rice, Kenneth G.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2007
System ID: UFE0021110:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text





BRIEF, ONLINE INTERVENTIONS FOR PERFECTIONISTS


By
MIRELA A. ALDEA















A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULLFILMENT OF THE
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA

2007

































2007 Mirela A. Aldea











ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am appreciative and profoundly indebted to Dr. Ken Rice who shared his time and

knowledge unselfishly and who encouraged and inspired me to aim high.

I am grateful to my parents who instilled in me the belief that I could do anything or be

anything I wanted and to Mamaia who gave me the courage and self-confidence to take chances.

I am thankful to my wonderful husband who, whenever I took myself too seriously, always

had a way of bringing me back to earth with a smile or a laugh.









TABLE OF CONTENTS

page

A C K N O W L E D G E M EN T S .............................................................................................................3

L IST O F T A B L E S .............. ..... ................ ........................................................... . 6

L IST O F FIG U R E S ............................................................................... 7

ABSTRAC T ...........................................................................................

CHAPTER

1 IN T R O D U C T IO N .................................................................................. 9

2 L IT E R A T U R E R E V IE W ................................................................ ...............................14

The Concept of Perfectionism and Its Assessment .........................................................14
P perfection ism an d D stress ............................................................................................... 19
Treatment of Perfectionism ......................................... ................... ..........24
F e e d b a c k ................................ ........................................................................................... 3 4
Internet Psychological Services ..................................... ......... .. ....... ................. 39
P resent Study ............................................................. 43
Research Questions and Hypotheses .............................................. ........ 47

3 M E T H O D ...................................................................................................................4 9

Participants .................................................... ...................... 49
D design and Procedure ............................................................................................... 52
In stru m en ts .........................................................................5 3

4 R E SU L T S .............. ... ................................................................58

Descriptive Statistics and Preliminary Analyses .......................................58
Treatment Effects Analyses .................................................................................59
M edition A naly ses ................................................................6 1
Interaction A n aly ses ...................................................................................................62
E effects on D stress .................................................... ............. ..................................62
Effects on Readiness for Change................................................. ...............63
Effects on Perfectionism ....................................................................... 63
E effects on D efensiveness................................................................ .... ......................65
Effects of Pretest Readiness for Change, Defensiveness and Condition Interaction
on the Outcome Variables at Posttest and Follow-up...............................................65
Exploratory A analyses ............................................ .. .. .... ........ ......... 66






4










5 D IS C U S S IO N ........................................................................................................7 9

C clinical C onsiderations....... .......................................................................... ........ .. ... 88
Lim stations and Future D directions .......................................................... ............... 93
C onclu sions.......... ..........................................................95

APPENDIX

A INFORMED CONSENT FORM 1............................................................................. 97

B IN FO RM ED CON SEN T FO R M 2.............................................................. .....................98

C DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION ......................................................... ..............99

D PERFECTIONISM FEEDBACK ............................................................ ...............102

E W R ITIN G IN STR U C TIO N S .................................................................. .... ...................104

F EARLY H ISTORY OF FLORID A ......................................................................... ...... 105

G THE ALMOST PERFECT SCALE REVISED (APS-R) .............. ...........................106

H UNIVERSITY OF RHODE ISLAND CHANGE ASSESSMENT (URICA) ........................107

I MARLOWE-CROWNE SOCIAL DESIRABILITY SCALE SHORT VERSION
(M C S D ) ...........................................................................10 9

J OUTCOME QUESTIONNAIRE (OQ-45)................................................ ............... 110

REFEREN CE LIST ........................................ .................. ................... ........... .. 12

B IO G R A PH IC A L SK E T C H ......................................................................... .. ...................... 129










LIST OF TABLES


Table page

4-1 Overall M eans and Standard D eviations....................................... ......................... 69

4-2 Within-Time and Across-Time Scale Correlations and Reliability Estimates ..................70

4-3 M eans and Standard Deviations by Group ............................................. ............... 71

4-4 Regression Analyses of the Effects of Condition on Mediator Variables. ........................71

4-5 Regression Analyses of the Effects of Pretest Readiness for Change x Pretest
Defensiveness x Condition Interaction on Outcome Variables. ......................................72









LIST OF FIGURES


Figure p e

3-1 R research D esign................................................... 57

4-1 Pretest Readiness for Change x Condition Interaction Effect Predicting Follow-up
D istre ss ............................................................................................7 3

4-2 Pretest Readiness for Change x Condition Interaction Effect Predicting Posttest High
Standards ........................................................................................... ...... 74

4-3 Pretest Readiness for Change x Condition Interaction Effect Predicting Follow up
H ig h Stan d ard s ......................................................................7 5

4-4 Pretest Defensiveness x Condition Interaction Effect Predicting Change in Readiness
for Change from Pretest to Posttest. .............................................................................76

4-5 Pretest Defensiveness x Condition Interaction Effect Predicting Change in Distress
from Pretest to Follow -up. ...... ........................... ............................................ 77

4-6 Pretest High Standards x Condition Interaction Effect Predicting Change in Distress
from Pretest to Follow -up. ...... ........................... ............................................ 78










Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

BRIEF, ONLINE INTERVENTIONS FOR PERFECTIONISTS

By

Mirela A. Aldea

August 2007

Chair: Kenneth G. Rice
Major: Counseling Psychology

Much of what is known about the treatment of perfectionists has been derived from

secondary analyses of the NIMH Treatment of Depression Collaborative Research Program or

extrapolated from research on depression, eating disorders, or anxiety disorders. Results of

secondary analyses or extrapolated findings generally indicate that perfectionists have not

responded well to standard psychological interventions. Based on the research on the effects of

therapeutic feedback and expressive writing, two brief, online interventions, provision of

feedback and provision of feedback followed by an opportunity to express in writing reactions to

the feedback, were tested in the current study on a sample of maladaptive perfectionistic college

students. A randomized, pretest-posttest-follow-up control group design was used. In addition to

main effects, this study investigated mediational and moderational models to further explore

factors that were conducive to therapeutic gains for perfectionists. The results of the study

suggest that although perfectionism feedback may be appropriate to use with some maladaptive

perfectionists (e.g., those less motivated to change, non-defensive, or with relatively lower

standards), it may not be beneficial to others. The results are discussed in light of treatment

implications, especially with regard to the manner in which perfectionists respond to therapeutic

interventions.









CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

Perfectionism has emerged as a topic of considerable interest in the counseling and

personality literature in the past two decades. The results of a very brief search I have done on

PsyclNFO using the term "perfectionism" point to the remarkable increased attention the subject

has received. Thus, between 1980 and 1990, 126 articles containing the term "perfectionism"

were published, whereas 492 studies were published between 1991 and 2000 and 453 since 2001.

The amplified consideration of perfectionism in the psychological literature led to a better

understanding of the construct, and also to numerous, and sometimes contradictory, ways of

conceptualizing it.

Flett and Hewitt (2002) reviewed the definitions used in the field of perfectionism

research. They listed 21 terms and their definitions that occurred in the literature in relation with

the perfectionism concept. Thus, "neurotic perfectionism" refers to strivingss for excessively

high standards due to fears of failure and concerns about disappointing others" (p. 14), "concern

over mistakes" is "a tendency to a have a negative reaction to mistakes, anticipate disapproval,

and interpret mistakes as equivalent to failure" (p. 14), whereas "normal perfectionism" is

defined as "striving for reasonable and realistic standards that leads to self-satisfaction and

enhanced self-esteem" (p. 14). Despite differences in the definition and conceptualization of

perfectionism, there has been increasing agreement that perfectionism is a multidimensional

construct (Frost, Marten, Lahart, & Rosenblate, 1990; Hewitt & Flett, 1991; Slaney, Rice,

Mobley, Trippi, & Ashby, 2001), can be operationalized and understood as dimensional or

categorical (Rice & Mirzadeh, 2000; Rice, Ashby, & Slaney, 1998), and involves relatively

adaptive aspects as well as clearly maladaptive aspects (Chang, 2000; Frost, Heimberg, Holt,

Mattia, & Neubauer, 1993; Rice et al., 1998).









Factor analyses of several measures of perfectionism have found consistently multi-factor

solutions organized around adaptive and maladaptive aspects of perfectionism (Bieling, Israeli,

& Antony, 2004; Frost, et.al., 1993; Suddarth & Slaney, 2001). Maladaptive perfectionism is

characterized by unrealistic and rigid high standards for performance combined with overly

critical and harsh self-evaluations. Maladaptive perfectionists define their self-worth in terms of

achieving their extremely high standards and, at the same time, seem to have an inability to be

satisfied with successful performance. Because of an intense fear of failure and a desire to reach

impossible standards, completing a task becomes hard and unpleasant; for this reason,

procrastination is common among maladaptive perfectionists (Flett, Blankstein, Hewitt, &

Koledin, 1992). In other words, maladaptive perfectionists simultaneously view themselves as

being responsible for reaching their goals and achieving their standards, yet do not expect that

their efforts are likely to bring about the outcomes they want.

Adaptive perfectionism includes very high personal standards, a need for order and

organization, and an unwillingness to procrastinate. Unlike maladaptive perfectionists, adaptive

perfectionists seem able to be satisfied with and enjoy their successes and achievements. In

general, perceived failures to meet high standards and goals are tolerated and do not lead to

major internal or interpersonal problems. Maladaptive perfectionism has been associated with

numerous psychological difficulties (Blatt, 1995; Flett & Hewitt, 2002) including different types

of mood and performance concerns. For example, Brown, Heimberg, Frost, Makris, Juster, and

Leung (1999) found perfectionism to be related to educational outcomes such as concern over

course difficulty, increased anxiety, and increased negative mood. Indeed, research supports that,

when compared with adaptive or non-perfectionists, maladaptive perfectionists evidence lower

self-esteem, lack self-confidence, have insecure relationships, and perceive they are not doing









well academically (Ashby, Rice, & Martin, 2006; Brown, et al., 1999; Grzgorek, Slaney, Franze,

& Rice, 2004; Parker, 1997; Rice & Dellwo, 2002; Rice, Lopez, & Vergara, 2005). Adaptive

perfectionists report lower stress and anxiety than maladaptive perfectionists, better academic

and social adjustment to college, more secure relationships and better overall emotional and

psychological well-being (Ashby & Rice, 2002; Rice & Dellwo, 2002). Maladaptive

perfectionists are more likely than non-perfectionists to suffer from depression (Blatt, 1995;

Hewitt & Dick, 1986), eating disorders (Bastiani, Rao, Weltzin, & Kaye, 1995), anxiety

(Kawamura, Hunt, Frost, & DiBartolo, 2001), obsessive-compulsive disorder (Frost & Steketee,

1997), and somatic symptoms (Martin, Flett, Hewitt, Krames, & Szanto, 1996).

Despite the well-established relation between maladaptive perfectionism and psychological

distress, very few studies investigated therapeutic interventions for treating perfectionism and

maladjustment coupled with perfectionism. With the exception of a very limited number of

studies (DiBartolo, Frost, Dixon, & Almovodar, 2001; Ferguson & Rodway, 1994) that directly

examined treatment interventions for perfectionists, much of what is known about the treatment

of perfectionists has been derived from secondary analyses of the National Institute of Mental

Health Treatment of Depression Collaborative Research Program, or other studies directed at

treating different issues such as eating disorder or obsessive-compulsive disorder (Blatt, 1995;

Blatt, Zuroff, Bondi, Sanislow, & Pilkonis, 1998; Zuroff, Blatt, Sotsky, et al., 2000). Based on

these studies, it has been concluded that perfectionism impairs the therapeutic alliance, interferes

with the successful treatment outcomes, that perfectionists, as well as their therapists, are rather

dissatisfied with treatment gains, and, overall, perfectionists do not benefit as well as other

clients from standard psychological interventions. For these reasons, Blatt (1995) suggested that

for perfectionistic clients long-term and intensive psychoanalytic therapy (rather than brief









treatments) would be required in order to produce the desired therapeutic change. A different

perspective is taken in this study, that perfectionists might benefit from brief and novel targeted

interventions such as provision of online feedback and provision of feedback combined with

writing about the reactions the feedback elicits.

Feedback has received attention in the counseling and more general psychological

assessment literature. In the context of increased pressure for efficiency and efficacy within the

mental health care field, it has been argued that providing feedback to clients within the

framework of therapy or personality assessment constitutes a brief, yet cost-effective

intervention (Newman & Greenway, 1997; Quirk, Strosahl, Kreilkamp, & Erdberg, 1995). In a

review of research on the outcomes of feedback as a therapeutic intervention in the contexts of

individual therapy, couple and family therapy, group therapy, and personality testing, Claibom,

Goodyear, and Horner (2004) found that, in general, feedback is an effective intervention,

leading to positive outcomes such as behavior change and symptomatic improvement.

In addition, the usage of the Internet within the psychological domain has started being

embraced by psychologists (Gosling, Vazire, Srivastava, & John, 2004). An increased number of

psychologists are using the Internet not only for research purposes but also to provide counseling

and therapy to the public. For example, behavioral health care practitioners are using a wide

variety of Internet technologies, including E-mail (Borowitz & Wyatt, 1998), chat rooms

(Sampson, Kolodinsky, & Greeno, 1997), and interactive video (Huston & Burton, 1997; Stamm,

1998), to deliver counseling and therapy. There are obvious advantages of using computer-

assisted therapy as opposed to traditional face-to-face therapy such as the reduced cost, increased

availability to large numbers of people, and potential anonymity for individuals who would









otherwise feel too embarrassed to seek out therapy. Initial studies using this approach show

promising results (Klein & Richards, 2001).

The present study aims to address the paucity of systematic research on the treatment of

perfectionism by investigating a potentially brief and cost effective treatment intervention:

provision of online feedback based on a measure of perfectionism. More specifically, using a

randomized, pretest-posttest-follow-up control group design, the study examines whether

feedback alone has different therapeutic effects from providing feedback and allowing

participants to express reactions to the feedback. Additionally, the presumed mechanisms that

lead to improvement following feedback will be explored. Although there is increasing evidence

that perfectionism is a multidimensional construct, with adaptive and maladaptive aspects, given

its deleterious consequences, maladaptive perfectionism will be the focus in this study.

This paper will be structured in the following way: First the concept of perfectionism will

be examined along with its assessment because there are different ways in which the construct

has been conceptualized and several different scales of perfectionism are currently used

throughout the literature. Next, empirical studies linking perfectionism and distress will be

reviewed, followed by an investigation of the literature on the treatment of perfectionism. The

literature on feedback provision, including online feedback, and its therapeutic effects will be

considered and ethical concerns pertaining to the utilization of the internet to provide

psychological services will be examined as well. Finally, the subsequent sections will focus on

the description of the present study, planned methodology to test the hypotheses of this research,

results, and discussion.









CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW

The Concept of Perfectionism and Its Assessment

Perfectionism and its costs have been described for many years. For example, Freud's

concept of the superego includes two aspects: an introjected social conscience and an ego-ideal

that is an idealized image consisting of approved and rewarded behaviors (Freud, 1933). The

ego-ideal contains an ideal of personal excellence toward which a person strives and thus

provides a concept of who one thinks s/he should be. Later, Karen Homey (1950) revised

Freud's concept of ego-ideal. She distinguished between the real self and the idealized self. The

real self represents what we are, the inner core of personality including the potential for growth

and self-realization. The idealized self represents what we think we should be and is used as a

model to assist us in developing our potential and achieving self-actualization. In the average

individual, the idealized self and the real self largely coincide because the idealized self is based

on a realistic assessment of one's abilities and potentials. However, in some individuals (called

neurotics by Homey) the real self and the idealized self are discrepant or separated. These

individuals believe that there are certain ideals they should be living up to. "To be this idealized

self is all that matters. You should be able to endure everything, to understand everything, to like

everybody, to be always productive..." (Homey, 1950, pp. 64-65). Homey (1950) referred to this

pursuit of perfection as a neurotic "striving for glory" or "the tyranny of the shoulds. She

considered that the striving to achieve an ideal of perfection is impossible and, in fact, deters one

from being what s/he could become.

The conceptualizations of perfectionism over the years have varied, ranging from

unidimensional characteristics that focus on its maladaptive aspects, to multidimensional

standpoints that focus on different facets of a broad perfectionism construct. As a result of such









an array of viewpoints, definitions of perfectionism have changed, though often writers described

perfectionism as negative, neurotic, and problematic. Hollender (1978) was among the first to

provide a definition of perfectionism as demanding of oneself or others a higher quality of

performance than is required by the situation. Burns (1980) described perfectionistic individuals

as setting unrealistically high standards, rigidly adhering to them, and defining their self-worth in

terms of achieving these standards. Pacht (1984) referred to "the insidious nature of

perfectionism" (p. 387) and Blatt (1995) referred to the "destructiveness of perfectionism" (p.

1003).

Some authors (Frost et al., 1993; Slaney, Ashby, & Trippy, 1995) noted that, like

psychology in general, perfectionism research tends to focus on negative aspects while ignoring

the positive aspects of the construct. Thus, it has been suggested that perfectionism can also be

"normal" or "adaptive" (Slaney et al., 1995) and attempts have been made to identify positive

aspects of perfectionism. Individuals with normal or adaptive perfectionism set high standards,

but unlike persons with negative perfectionism, are satisfied when the standards have been

achieved. As mentioned earlier, in the more recent literature there is an emphasis on

perfectionism as multidimensional rather than unidimensional, that is it has both personal and

interpersonal aspects. Various perfectionism measures bring into play these aspects along with

both adaptive features and features associated with maladjustment.

For example, Frost et al. (1990) identified six dimensions of perfectionism and developed a

Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (MPS). The Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale taps

the dimensions of high personal standards, concerns about meeting parental expectations, doubts

about one's actions, preference for organization and order, excessive concern about making

mistakes, and parental criticism. According to Frost et al. (1990), perfectionists are often









excessively self-critical as well. Hewitt and Flett (1991) contributed to the existing

conceptualizations of perfectionism by adding interpersonal aspects that are important to

personal adjustment. They described three dimensions of perfectionism and operationalized them

as subscales in their Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (MPS): self-oriented perfectionism,

other-oriented perfectionism, and socially prescribed perfectionism. Self-oriented perfectionists

tend to set high, unrealistic personal standards with which they evaluate themselves. They are

critical of themselves and maintain unrealistic self-expectations in the face of failure. This scale

reflects strivings to attain perfection in one's own endeavors as well as strivings to avoid failure.

Other-oriented perfectionists require others to be perfect in many areas of functioning. This scale

reflects lack of trust and feelings of hostility toward others. Socially prescribed perfectionists

believe that other people hold high, unrealistic expectations of them and exert pressure on them

to be perfect. They believe that the standards imposed are excessive and uncontrollable and thus,

socially prescribed perfectionists believe that they are unable to meet the perceived

perfectionistic demands and expectations imposed by others.

Johnson and Slaney (1996) developed the Almost Perfect Scale. Analyses from a large

sample of participants yielded a 4-factor structure of the measure, and these factors were named

Standards and Order, Anxiety, Relationship, and Procrastination. To better understand what

perfectionism entails from the perspective of perfectionists themselves, two studies used the APS

in interview format. Slaney and Ashby (1996) interviewed a sample of 37 self-described

perfectionists at an U.S. university and Slaney, Chadha, Mobley, and Kennedy (2000)

interviewed five students and faculty members at the University of Delhi, India who regarded

themselves as perfectionists. When participants in both samples defined perfectionism and

features associated with it, they emphasized having high personal standards for performance and









many also referred to a sense of orderliness or neatness. They viewed their high standards and

order as important contributors to their success. Although most participants indicated that their

perfectionism is often accompanied by distress, they also reported that they would not give up

their perfectionism if given the chance. These results seemed to provide support for the assertion

that perfectionism has not only negative aspects, but also positive features. It has been concluded

that high standards and order exemplify positive aspects. Based on the observation that some

perfectionists reported a perceived inability to meet their own high standards, it was proposed

that the discrepancy between high standards and perceived performance constitutes a negative

aspect of perfectionism. Thus, the revised version of the APS (APS-R), developed by Slaney,

Mobley, Rice, Trippi, and Johnson (1996), included a Discrepancy subscale specifically

designed to tap negative or maladaptive aspects of perfectionism along with the revised High

Standards and Order designed to tap adaptive characteristics of perfectionism.

Indeed, a significant body of evidence has supported the validity of a two-factor model of

perfectionism. Factor analyses of several measures of perfectionism have found robust multi-

factor solutions organized around adaptive and maladaptive aspects of perfectionism (Bieling et

al., 2004; Frost et al., 1993; Suddarth & Slaney, 2001). For instance, factor analytic studies of the

Multidimensional Perfectionism Scales developed by Hewitt and Flett (MPS; 1991) and Frost

and his colleagues (FMPS; Frost et al., 1990) have yielded two higher order factors that

correspond to these two dimensions of perfectionism. Frost et al. (1993) factor analyzed the two

MPS scales and identified two primary factors, which they referred to as maladaptive evaluative

concerns and positive achievement striving. The maladaptive evaluative concerns factor reflected

concerns over making mistakes, doubts about the quality of one's actions, and concerns about

other people's evaluation or criticism. They found that this was the dimension that was









significantly related to depression and negative affect. Dunkley, Zuroff, and Blankstein (2003)

conceptualized the adaptive and maladaptive dimensions of perfectionism as personal standards

perfectionism and self-critical perfectionism, respectively. Personal standards perfectionism

involves setting high standards and goals for oneself, whereas self-critical perfectionism involves

harsh self-scrutiny and self-criticism and an inability to derive satisfaction from success. Slaney

et al. (1995) included the APS (Slaney & Johnson, 1992) in their analyses, and like Frost et al.

(1993) found support for a higher order two-factor structure. Rice, Ashby, and Slaney (1998)

performed a confirmatory factor analysis of the FMPS and the APS (Slaney & Johnson, 1992)

and, consistent with previous results, found support for two factors, which they labeled

Maladaptive Perfectionism and Adaptive Perfectionism. Maladaptive Perfectionism was

composed of measures tapping concern over mistakes, doubts about actions, difficulty in

relationships, and anxiety and is similar to evaluative concerns perfectionism. Adaptive

Perfectionism was most highly indicated by standards and order, organization, and personal

standards and resembles personal standards perfectionism.

Independent of how the two factors are labeled, maladaptive aspects of perfectionism seem

to typically include self-evaluations that are excessively critical and emphasize personal

shortcomings in living up to often unrealistically high standards for performance. Similar to the

maladaptive aspects, adaptive perfectionistic aspects emphasize high personal standards and

desires to excel in performance to meet such standards, yet these desires and standards are

experienced as motivational and encouraging. Perceived failures to meet such standards are

tolerated and do not lead to intra- and interpersonal distress. Rice, Bair, Castro, Cohen, and Hood

(2003), in a combined qualitative and quantitative study, found a particularly discouraging

worldview of maladaptive perfectionists. Maladaptive perfectionists simultaneously view









themselves as being responsible for reaching their goals and achieving their standards, yet do not

expect that their efforts are likely to bring about the outcomes they want. Consistent with Slaney

and Ashby (1996) and Slaney et al. (2000) findings, the discrepancy between high standards and

perceived performance emerged as an appropriate criterion that distinguishes adaptive from

maladaptive perfectionism.

A few studies have investigated differences between adaptive and maladaptive

perfectionism using an Adlerian approach (Ashby & Kottman, 1996; Kottman & Ashby, 1999).

The findings suggest that an important distinction between adaptive and maladaptive

perfectionism may come from the way in which individuals use their perfectionism. Thus, in

their strivings for high standards, adaptive perfectionists may experience less distress related to

perfectionism, and consequently they may be appropriately pursuing superiority, which

according to Adler is a sign of mental health (Adler, 1956). In contrast, maladaptive

perfectionists may actually pursue high standards in order to avoid feelings of inferiority, the

result being higher levels of psychological anguish. Although what is adaptive about adaptive

perfectionism is not always clear (Rice et al., 1998), an impressive literature reveals rather

unambiguously that maladaptive perfectionism is clearly maladaptive and associated with

numerous psychological difficulties (Blatt, 1995; Flett & Hewitt, 2002). The next section is

devoted to the examination of the relationship between perfectionism and psychological

concerns.

Perfectionism and Distress

A great number of studies investigated the direct and indirect association between the two

facets of perfectionism (adaptive and maladaptive) and psychological ailments. Brown et al.

(1999) found perfectionism to be related to pedagogical outcomes such as concern over course

difficulty, increased anxiety, and increased negative mood. Perfectionistic students tend to









procrastinate and express increased negative affect related to evaluated tasks (Flett et al., 1992).

When compared with adaptive or non-perfectionists, maladaptive perfectionists evidence lower

self-esteem, lack self-confidence, and perceive they are not doing well academically (Brown et

al., 1999; Parker, 1997; Rice & Lapsley, 2001). Adaptive perfectionists report lower stress and

anxiety than maladaptive perfectionists, better academic and social adjustment to college, more

secure relationships and better overall emotional and psychological well-being (Ashby & Rice,

2002; Rice & Dellwo, 2002; Rice, Leever, Christopher, & Porter, 2006).

As well, maladaptive perfectionism has been linked to problematic coping and emotional

reactivity, that is maladaptive perfectionists tend to respond with emotional liability and

hypersensitivity to environmental stimuli (Dunkley et al., 2003). Hewitt, Flett, and Endler (1995)

found that perfectionism (operationalized as self-oriented perfectionism) was associated with

increased levels of emotion-oriented coping. Blankstein and Dunkley (2002) established that

maladaptive perfectionists have poor strategies for coping with perceived distressing events, and

that such a mediating mechanism accounted for the relationship between perfectionism and

distress. In other research, emotion-focused or avoidant coping (e.g., denial and disengagement)

have been associated with maladaptive aspects of perfectionism, whereas less avoidant and more

problem-focused coping styles have been related to adaptive perfectionism (Dunkley, Blankstein,

Halsall, Williams, & Winkworth, 2000; Flett, Hewitt, Blankstein, Solnik, & Van Brunschot,

1996). Rice and Lapsley (2001) reported that dysfunctional coping (e.g., denial, inappropriate

avoidance, and substance abuse) predicted emotional adjustment for maladaptive perfectionists.

However, dysfunctional coping did not predict emotional adjustment for adaptive perfectionists.

In a study exploring the mediating role of emotional regulation in the relationship between

perfectionism and psychological distress, Aldea and Rice (2006) reported that maladaptive









perfectionism was positively associated with both emotional regulation (operationalized with

measures of emotional reactivity and psychological splitting) and distress whereas adaptive

perfectionism was found to have inverse and significant associations with emotional regulation

and psychological distress. They also found support for full mediation effects of emotional

regulation. Another indicator of self-regulation, self-esteem, has been significantly and

negatively related to maladaptive perfectionism (Rice & Slaney, 2002). In addition, other studies

(Preusser, Rice, & Ashby, 1994) found that self-esteem mediated the relation between socially

prescribed perfectionism (maladaptive perfectionism) and depression in women and men.

It becomes clear that maladaptive perfectionists seem to be driven by a strong necessity to

avoid failure which, combined with their inability to acknowledge success, leads to perceiving

themselves as worthless and inadequate. Therefore, they tend to be more emotionally reactive to

stressors that imply possible failure, loss of control, and criticism from others. In the event of

perceived failure, they tend to engage in a form of self-reflection that is defeatist and further

affects their self-worth. Thus, perfectionism may cause feelings of inferiority and vulnerable

self-esteem leading to increased anxiety, feelings of failure, and general psychological

discomfort. A relatively minor failure or even a perceived failure becomes magnified, resulting

in negative affect and further increase in reactivity to stimuli and events in their lives. Thus,

faulty coping and emotion regulation strategies (and most likely other factors) prevent

maladaptive perfectionists from moving beyond the distress associated with perceived stressful

situations and exacerbate rather than ameliorate their symptoms. Consequently, maladaptive

perfectionists are more likely than non-perfectionists to suffer from a variety of psychological

problems including, but not limited to, depression (Blatt, 1995; Hewitt & Dick, 1986), suicidal

ideation (Hewitt, Flett, & Turnbull-Donovan, 1992), eating disorders (Bastiani et al., 1995),









anxiety (Johnson & Slaney, 1996, Kawamura et al., 2001), obsessive-compulsive disorder (Frost

& Steketee, 1997), and somatic symptoms (Martin et al., 1996).

For example, with regard to eating disorders, several studies have examined perfectionism

and eating disorders and have identified perfectionism as a specific risk factor for the

development of eating disorders in large-scale community studies as well as in college student

samples (Fairbum, Cooper, Doll, & Welch, 1998; Franco-Paredes, Mancilla-Dyaz, Vazquez-

Arevalo, Lopez-Aguilar, & Alvarez-Rayon, 2005; Joiner, Heatherton, Rudd, & Schmidt, 1997).

Elevated perfectionism has been found in small samples of underweight patients and in weight-

restored patients with anorexia nervosa and high levels of perfectionism were found to persist

after long-term recovery from anorexia nervosa, suggesting that perfectionism is not a function

of low weight (Bastiani et al., 1995; Srinivasagam, Kaye, & Plotnicov, 1995).

In addition, perfectionism has been shown to be associated with anxiety disorders (Antony,

Purdon, Huta, & Swinson, 1998; Ashby & Brunner, 2005; Flett, Hewitt, & Dick, 1989;

Tomohiro, 2005), with the association being most fully investigated in obsessive-compulsive

disorder (OCD). Individuals with OCD have been described as tormented by an inner drive for

certainty and perfection and thus perfectionism has been suggested to be a risk factor for the

development of obsessive-compulsive disorder (Rheaume, Freeston, Dugas, Letarte, &

Ladouceur, 1995). In both clinical and non-clinical samples individuals with OCD symptoms

scored higher than normal controls on the MPS (Frost et al., 1990) subscales Concern over

mistakes and Doubts about actions (Antony et al. 1998; Frost & Steketee, 1997; Tomohiro,

2005). The research on perfectionism and depression is quite abundant. Perfectionism is one of

the personality factors that seems to be relatively consistent in predicting depression (Hewitt &

Flett, 1991; Hewitt, Flett, Ediger, Norton, & Flynn, 1998). Early research on perfectionism









focused on the direct association between perfectionism and depression. However, a more

complicated set of relationships between perfectionism and depression has emerged lately:

depression seems to result not so much from the direct effects of perfectionism but from the

effects that different dimensions of perfectionism have on other factors such self-esteem,

emotional reactivity, or stress. For instance, path model analyses have revealed that, although

adaptive perfectionism was not directly or indirectly (through self-esteem) associated with

depression, maladaptive perfectionism was negatively associated with self-esteem and positively

associated with depression, with self-esteem buffering the effects of maladaptive perfectionism

on depression (Rice et al., 1998). In a qualitative interview study, Rice et al. (2003) found that a

general impression of perfectionists is that they are under considerable stress. It appears that,

through self-imposed pressure, maladaptive perfectionists play an active role in creating and

generating stress for themselves. Indeed, a growing body of research indicates that stress is a risk

factor for depression and therefore vulnerability associated with perfectionism, when activated

by stress, results in depression (Hewitt and Dyck, 1986; Hewitt & Flett, 1993; Hewitt et al.,

1995; O'Connor, & O'Connor, 2003; Rice & Lapsley, 2001).

Not all dimensions of perfectionism, however, are equally important as factors in

depression. Self-oriented perfectionism and socially prescribed perfectionism were found to

interact with stress conceptualizedd for example as achievement stress or negative life events) to

predict concurrent levels of depressive symptoms, but only self-oriented perfectionism was

associated with significant increase in depression over time (Flett & Hewitt, 1995; Hewitt &

Flett, 1993; Hewitt, Flett, & Ediger, 1996). These results indicate that high standards, in and of

themselves, are not automatically associated with depression, but stress (generated by a life event

or by perceived failure to meet those standards) is necessary for these individuals to experience









depression. Other studies indicated that maladaptive dimensions of perfectionism represent

enduring psychological vulnerabilities (trait stability) that are significant predictors of later

depression (Cox & Enns, 2003; Rice & Aldea, 2006).

A variety of reasons were provided to explain why perfectionists seem to be prone to

experiencing distress. It has been emphasized that maladaptive perfectionists impose

unrealistically high standards on themselves, are unlikely to achieve them, and engage in

excessively critical self-evaluations (Alden, Ryder, & Mellings, 2002; Blatt, 1995; Blatt,

Quinlan, Pilkonis, & Shea, 1995). This continual dissatisfaction with themselves most likely

leads to psychological distress often expressed in a variety of psychological problems (including

stress, hopelessness, helplessness, depression, and anxiety).

Treatment of Perfectionism

Despite the evident association between perfectionism and psychological concerns,

research on therapeutic interventions for treating perfectionism and maladjustment coupled with

perfectionism is very scarce. On the same lines, very little is known about what types of

therapeutic interventions are effective in decreasing maladaptive aspects of perfectionism while

increasing or enhancing adaptive aspects. To my knowledge, few empirical studies directly

examined treatment interventions for perfectionists. Ferguson and Rodway (1994) took a

cognitive-behavioral approach to treating perfectionism. They utilized an ABA design and

perfectionism was measured with Burns Perfectionism Scale (Burns, 1980). The treatment

focused on issues associated with perfectionism such as self-criticism, difficulty dealing with

feedback, procrastination, and unrealistic goal setting. The authors reported that the cognitive-

behavioral treatment was successful for eight of the nine participants; however, these participants

showed variable degrees of reduction in perfectionism. DiBartolo et al. (2001) investigated the

utility of a brief cognitive restructuring intervention in affecting perfectionists' typical negative









responses to evaluative threat. Participants in their study were 60 female undergraduates who had

to deliver a speech before a small audience. Participants high and low in perfectionistic concern

over mistakes (CM) were randomly assigned to receive either a cognitive restructuring or

distraction intervention prior to the speech task. Participants high in CM reported significantly

more negative cognitive and affective responses to the evaluative task than low CM participants.

Cognitive restructuring was successful in that all participants (high and low CM) reported lower

estimates of the most feared predictions for the impending speech, reduced anxiety, and

increased ability to cope with the most feared predicted outcome. Thus, although based on a

small and homogeneous sample, the results of this study provide some preliminary support for

the effectiveness of cognitive restructuring in the treatment of perfectionism.

In addition to cognitive therapy, it has been suggested that emotion-focused therapy may

be effective in helping perfectionists dealing with their emotional distress. Greenberg and Bolger

(2001) presented a case study of a woman, who, among other issues (i.e. abusive and alcoholic

parents, loss of a child) presented with perfectionistic tendencies (e.g. need for control, high

standards). The authors employed an emotion-focused approach with this client, following a

three-step treatment process. The first step was to facilitate emotional awareness that "provides

access to the information and the tendency toward action implicit in the emotion, and promotes

assimilation of experience into a person's ongoing self-narrative" (p. 210). The second step

addressed emotional arousal and its regulation, the goal being for the client to learn to sooth and

comfort him/herself. The final step was to replace maladaptive emotions with more adaptive

ones. Following this process, highly self-critical maladaptive perfectionist who is prone to

experiencing disappointment or anger with him/herself may gradually learn self-acceptance,

compassion, or even self-forgiveness. The case study and the approach presented by Greenberg









and Bolger (2001) provide a promising foundation for the use of emotion-focused therapy in

treating perfectionistic clients, however experimental research is warranted to further investigate

the effectiveness of this form of treatment.

With the exceptions noted above, in the great majority of studies, perfectionism was not

the explicit focus of the therapeutic intervention, but it was examined in the context of specific

therapeutic approaches geared toward treating certain psychological issues such as depression,

eating disorders, or obsessive-compulsive disorder. For example, a series of such studies

conducted by Blatt and his colleagues (Blatt et al., 1995, 1998; Zuroff et al., 2000) revealed that

perfectionism plays an important role in the treatment of depression. Blatt and his colleagues

analyzed the data from the National Institute of Mental Health Treatment of Depression

Collaborative Research Program, which compared four treatments for depression (cognitive-

behavioral therapy, interpersonal psychotherapy, pharmacotherapy, and a pill-placebo plus

clinical management). These studies showed that, across all intervention conditions,

perfectionism interfered with the successful treatment of depression. More specifically, patients'

pretreatment levels of perfectionism affected therapeutic outcome at termination and satisfaction

with the treatment process independent of the treatment modality. In other words, patients high

in perfectionism had reduced treatment gains and were overall less satisfied with the treatment

received. Moreover, this effect was observed not only during treatment and at termination, but

also at 18 months follow-up.

A merit of these studies is that they did not rely only on patients' self-reports. Ratings of

therapeutic progress were also made by therapists and clinical evaluators. Based on these

findings, it was concluded that highly perfectionistic clients not only feel subjectively

dissatisfied with what they achieved in treatment, but also are perceived as less improved by









objective evaluators at termination and at follow-up. Therefore, the results cannot simply be

attributed to perfectionistic patients perceiving that they failed to meet the high standards they

themselves set. One explanation for the negative impact of perfectionism was that perfectionism

affected therapeutic outcome by disrupting the therapeutic relationships. Zuroff et al. (2000)

found support for this hypothesis. More specifically, their results revealed that the effect of

pretreatment perfectionism on treatment outcome at termination was mediated by the patients',

but not the therapists', contributions to the therapeutic alliance. For a better understanding of

when the disruptions in alliance takes place, the therapeutic process was assessed every 4 weeks

during the 16-week treatment process. It was found that highly perfectionistic individuals, but

not those low in perfectionism, discontinued their active participation in the development of the

therapeutic alliance particularly in the latter half of the therapeutic process (weeks 8-16) thus

providing support for the notion that perfectionism interferes with forming a strong therapeutic

alliance that in turns leads to poor therapeutic outcomes (Blatt et al., 1998; Zuroff et al., 2000).

In addition, it has been found that perfectionists have difficulty with social relations in general,

not only with their therapist, and that it is the impaired social support that is conducive to poor

treatment outcome (Sharar, Blatt, Zuroff, Krupnik, & Sotsky, 2001). In conclusion, highly

perfectionistic individuals appear to have interpersonal difficulties in and outside the therapy

session that damage the therapeutic alliance and eventually negatively affect their ability to fully

benefit from therapy (Blatt & Zurrof, 2002).

Taking a psychoanalytic perspective, Blatt (1995; Blatt & Zuroff, 2002) suggested that the

interaction of perfectionism with the quality of the therapeutic relationship is consistent with the

theoretical formulations of the introjective configuration of psychopathology. "Introjective

psychopathology involves preoccupation with issues of self-definition at the expense of









development of capacities for interpersonal relatedness" (Blatt & Zuroff, 2002, p. 394). Blatt

(1995) speculated that these individuals are less concerned about the quality of their

interpersonal relations and achieving feelings of trust, warmth, and affection. Their main focus is

on establishing, protecting, and maintaining a viable self-concept and, to achieve this goal, they

engage in counteractive defenses (e.g. projection, denial, reaction formation, and

overcompensation). The need for perfection and self-criticism was attributed to stem from

relationship with parents who were intrusive, controlling, and punitive. Thus, one of the primary

tasks in treating highly perfectionistic individuals would be to enable them to relinquish aspects

of their identification with harsh and judgmental parental figures that eventually would allow

them to become able to define themselves "independent of their highly critical and demanding

introjects while maintaining contact with the more benign and nurturant dimensions of their

parental introjects" (Blatt, 1995, p. 1014). For these reasons, Blatt (1995) suggested that for

perfectionistic, introjected clients long-term and intensive psychoanalytic therapy (rather than

brief treatments) would be required in order to enable patients to form a strong therapeutic

relationship and to begin to change deeply-seated negative mental representations of self and

others.

Other theorists (Brown & Beck, 2002; Ellis, 2002; Sorotzkin, 1998) take a cognitively-

oriented approach. They believe that the difficulties in treating perfectionistic clients stem, not

from past dysfunctional parent-child interactions, but from perfectionists' dichotomous thinking

and irrational beliefs. Thus, these clients are unable to recognize small improvements and, in

addition, their tendency to strive for perfection surfaces in their striving for achieving

perfectionistic therapeutic goals. Over the years, research and theory on rational emotive

behavioral therapy (Ellis, 1957, 1962, 2002) have emphasized that irrational and self-defeating









beliefs involving perfectionism (i.e., irrational fear of failure, conditional self-acceptance, pursuit

of extreme and unrealistic goals) play a significant role in a wide variety of personal adjustment

problems, including anxiety, depression, and in interpersonal difficulties that highly

perfectionistic individuals experience. Thus, cognitive theorists argue that long-term emotional

and past-oriented therapeutic approaches Blatt advocated are not all necessary. Instead, treatment

could embark upon attenuating "the tyranny of the should" (Homey, 1950) or challenging,

disputing, and finally replacing maladaptive and dysfunctional perfectionistic thinking. Shafran

Cooper, and Frairburn (2002) proposed a cognitive-behavioral treatment of perfectionism that

has four components: The first component is to help clients identify perfectionism as a problem

and to recognize that part of the problem is that their self-evaluation and self-worth are a

function of achieving overly demanding standards. The second component is helping clients

identify and adopt alternative ways of thinking and behaving that will expand the way they self-

evaluate. The third component of treatment involves using behavioral experiments to test

competing hypotheses (e.g., a client can compare the quality of her social interactions with peers

when attempts to have the 'perfect' social interaction to the situation when the client simply tries

to focus on having fun). Finally, the fourth component consists of using cognitive-behavioral

techniques to address the clients' personal standards and self-criticism in general. In practice, this

involves helping clients identify and change dichotomous thinking and addressing cognitive

biases that maintain perfectionism, particularly selective attention to the possibility of failure and

to the hypervigilant monitoring of performance.

Lundh (2004) observes, however, that addressing the client's perfectionism as a problem

may be met with resistance, because perfectionists often perceive their perfectionistic strivings as

being associated with various benefits and rewards (e.g. higher achievements at school and









work). This author notes that if the client's perfectionistic strivings are not questioned and

challenged directly much less resistance on the part of the client may occur. From Lundh's

perspective, the therapist should help the client to distinguish between perfectionistic strivings

and perfectionistic demands, while at the same time validating the client's perfectionistic

strivings as something healthy and functional, and discussing the pros and cons of perfectionistic

demands from a more critical perspective. The goal of this approach is to facilitate client's

"striving for perfection, while being able to accept non-perfection" (p. 265). Hence, this

treatment strategy focuses on helping the client develop more self-acceptance, without

necessarily confronting the client's perfectionistic beliefs and demands. Such development of

more accepting attitudes "may serve as a corrective to an unbalanced perfectionism, and may

thereby also produce a more healthy dialectic between change and acceptance in the therapeutic

process" (Lundh, 2004, p.265).

In summary, there is support that perfectionism impedes the successful treatment of

psychological problems such as depression and that perfectionism itself is very difficult to treat.

Despite these concerning findings and even though theoretical models of perfectionism exist and

tentative treatment protocols for perfectionism have been proposed, no controlled clinical trials

have been conducted. Moreover, most research on perfectionism is correlational in nature and

the perfectionist has been placed in a generally passive role in much of this research. To my

knowledge, studies that involve the perfectionistic participants in a more active and reflective

manner beyond the completion of study questionnaires has been the exception rather than rule,

despite the potential benefits such approach might reveal about ways to understand and

effectively treat perfectionism.









In addition, acknowledging that clinical trials of perfectionism treatment might be time

consuming, expensive, and overall more difficult to implement, other types of interventions

aiming at decreasing maladaptive aspects of perfectionism and improving psychological

functioning of perfectionists can be developed. For example, it is not to be ignored that several

measures of perfectionism with impressive psychometric qualities have been developed, but their

direct clinical utility has not been a focus for their use. Therefore, a possible brief and effective

therapeutic intervention is to provide perfectionists with feedback about their perfectionism and

the aspects of perfectionism that are detrimental to their well-being. Furthermore, a significant

number of studies has shown that writing about upsetting experiences improves mental and

physical health (Francis & Pennebaker, 1992; Greenberg & Stone, 1992; Pennebaker, Kiecolt-

Glaser, & Glaser, 1988; Sloan & Marx, 2004; Smyth, 1998). Thus, a more comprehensive, yet

still easy to implement, variant of providing feedback to perfectionists would be to provide them

with perfectionism feedback and then allow them to process the information received by writing

about the reactions, thoughts, and emotions the feedback elicited.

Results across various studies are consistently showing that the writing paradigm has

clinically meaningful effects as evidenced by positive changes in cognitions, self-esteem, and

adaptive behavior (Donnelly & Murray, 1991; Smyth, 1998). An explanation for the beneficial

effects of writing is that writing brings about cognitive changes. For example, communication of

ideas requires coherence, self-reflection, and use of multiple perspectives that "forces a structure

on an otherwise overwhelming and oftentimes chaotic experience" leading to a better

understanding of one's experiences as well as self-understanding (Esterling, L'Abate, Murray,

& Pennebaker, 1999, p. 85). Moreover, translating emotions into language alters unclear feeling









states into conscious verbal labels and the mere labeling of an emotion appear to actually reduce

its perceived intensity (Berkowitz & Troccoli, 1990; Keltner, Locke, & Audrain, 1993).

Although it has been suggested that long-term therapy would be necessary to treat

perfectionists, it can be argued that short-term approaches, like those proposed above, might be

effective at least in terms of increasing perfectionists' desire to relinquish negative aspects

associated with perfectionism. First, a brief encounter with a mental health professional might be

perceived as less threatening by perfectionistic clients and thus it would be less likely to elicit

defensive responses. Second, a brief intervention in which the therapeutic relationship is not the

focus might prevent perfectionists from trying to be "the perfect client" by giving the kind of

responses they may believe are appropriate and expected. Third, a brief intervention may

increase awareness regarding both the psychological costs of perfectionism, particularly

maladaptive perfectionism, and the benefits of high standards. Increased awareness might be a

primary step in initiating motivation for change in what appears to be a population at risk

(Prochaska & Norcross, 2001).

A brief treatment intervention does not seem long or intensive enough to teach new skills

or alter personality, but it seems plausible that it could stimulate motivation for change. Frank

and Frank (1991) indicate that a powerful component of therapy is the fact that it provides a

rationale, a plausible explanation for the patient's symptom. Brief treatment interventions, such

as providing perfectionism feedback to perfectionistic individuals or providing feedback and an

opportunity to process reactions to the feedback received, may help these individuals better

understand themselves and their struggles which may sparkle their desire and willingness to

change. The notion that behavior change involves a process that occurs in increments is at the

core of the transtheoretical model developed by Prochaska and DiClemente (DiClemente &









Prochaska, 1985; Prochaska & DiClemente, 1983, 1992). In this model, change is viewed as a

progression from an initial precontemplation stage, to contemplation, action, and finally

maintenance stage. Underlying the precontemplation stage is the individual's belief that she or he

does not have a problem, whereas in the contemplation stage, one considers the pros and cons of

altering the behavior. In the action stage, the individual undertakes efforts to change, and in the

maintenance stage, one focuses on sustaining improvement. Sometimes a preparation stage,

intermediary to contemplation and action, is also described (Prochaska, DiClemente, &

Norcross, 1992). In other words, individuals move from being unaware or unwilling to do

anything about their problem, to considering the possibility of change, and finally to taking

action and maintaining that change over time.

The purpose of the present study is to blend interests in clinically-meaningful

perfectionism research with perfectionism assessment. More specifically, the intention is to

understand whether empirically-grounded structured internet feedback provided (either alone or

in combination with an opportunity to react to the feedback) to perfectionists about results on a

perfectionism measure affects their readiness and motivation for change and, as a result

psychological distress often associated with perfectionism. The basic assumption is that brief

treatment interventions, such as provision of feedback and provision of feedback combined with

the opportunity to process the information provided, may speed or facilitate perfectionists'

motivation for change thus providing clinicians with a relatively simple and cost-effective

approach to help clients transition from a contemplative stage to a more action-oriented stage

that would allow them, in further therapy, to eventually modify maladaptive behaviors associated

with perfectionism. Maladaptive perfectionists may not want to be lectured to or given "action"

suggestions when they are not ready to change; as well, even if they are considering the









possibility of making a change (e.g., lowering standards) but are not quite ready to make a

commitment, they may be resistant to traditional approaches that encourage (or even push) them

to make changes for which they are not yet ready. For these reasons, provision of feedback

seems to be a relatively neutral and non-threatening approach that would allow perfectionists to

examine their particular situations and make their own decision with regard to whether they want

to change anything about themselves.

Feedback

Kurt Lewin, who borrowed the term feedback from electrical engineering, apparently was

the first to apply it in the social sciences. Generally accepted definitions of feedback in

psychology emphasize that feedback involves information given to an individual by an external

source about the person's behavior or its consequences. Feedback intervention research in

psychology dates back almost 100 years. Several experiments in the beginning of the century

suggested that knowledge of results interventions a form of feedback increases performance

(Arps, 1920; Book & Norvell, 1922; Brand, 1905; Elwell & Grindley, 1938-1939; Manzer,

1935; Thomdike, 1927).

In the field of performance appraisal, feedback refers to how well a person performs a task

relative to some goal or standard. The single most influential theory in this area is Thorndike's

(1913) law of effect. Based on the law of effect, a positive feedback was equated with

reinforcement and a negative feedback with punishment. Reinforcement and punishment

facilitate learning and hence performance. Both a positive feedback and a negative feedback

should improve performance because one reinforces the correct behavior and the other punishes

the incorrect behavior. Although there is no theory dedicated to feedback intervention, several

theories and research paradigms contain the concept of feedback as a central component (Kluger

and DeNisi, 1996): control theory, also known as cybernetics, (Annett, 1969; Podsakoff & Farh,









1989), goal setting theory (Locke & Latham, 1990), multiple-cue probability learning paradigm

(MCPL; Balzer, Doherty, & O'Connor, 1989), social cognition theory (Bandura, 1991), and a

variant of learned helplessness theory (Mikulincer, 1994). These theories have been used to test

feedback effects and, although results are at times contradictory (Kluger & DeNisi, 1996), there

is general support for the positive effects of feedback.

The giving and receiving of performance feedback is ubiquitous in organizations, and the

design and maintenance of feedback systems are considered essential for both individual and

organizational performance (Fedor, 1991). This awareness led to studies aiming to identify

processes and factors that affect the relationship between the receipt of performance feedback

and an individual's response to feedback. Such studies examined relationships between

individuals' response to feedback and the power and credibility of the feedback source (e.g.,

Fedor, Davis, Maslyn, & Mathieson, 2001), the sign, specificity, and consistency of feedback

(e.g., Podsakoff& Farh, 1989; Stone & Stone, 1985), and the acceptance of feedback (e.g.,

Fletcher, Taylor, & Glanfield, 1996). In a recent study Kinicki, Prussia, Wu, and McKee-Ryan

(2004) analyzed a sequential chain of cognitive variables proposed to mediate an individual's

response to feedback. The authors reported that a feedback-rich environment, source credibility,

and desire to respond to feedback (i.e. performance) were positively associated with perceived

accuracy of feedback, i.e., recipients perceived feedback as being more accurate and were

willing to respond to it when it was characterized as specific and frequent and was coming from

trustworthy and competent managers. They concluded that an individual's response to feedback

(i.e., performance) is more contingent upon the cognitive processing of feedback (i.e., perceived

accuracy) than the characteristics of the feedback itself (i.e., positive or negative feedback).









It is evident that feedback has been researched and broadly utilized in the industrial-

organizational realm, however the investigation of its effects in clinical work is sparse. In the

context of increased pressure for efficiency and efficacy within the mental health care field, it

has been argued that providing feedback to clients within the framework of therapy or

personality assessment constitutes a brief, yet cost-effective intervention (Newman & Greenway,

1997; Quirk et al., 1995). In a review of research on the outcomes of feedback as a therapeutic

intervention in the contexts of individual therapy, couple and family therapy, group therapy, and

personality testing, Claiborn et al. (2004) found that, in general, feedback is an effective

intervention. Specifically, provision of feedback led to positive outcomes such as behavior

change and symptomatic improvement.

Despite potential positive implications, feedback has received little attention in the

counseling literature. Although, most people who are psychologically assessed are interested in

receiving feedback about their assessment results (Graham, 2000), practitioners may be reluctant

to review psychological test results with clients. This reluctance has relatively early origins and

may stem from the view that providing test feedback may be potentially harmful to clients.

Indeed, Klopfer (1954) cautioned psychologists that, "giving a written report to a patient is an

extremely dangerous and harmful thing to do" (p. 603). If a client was particularly interested in

his/her test results, he recommended giving "fairly superficial kinds of interpretation" (p. 603)

that are not anxiety-provoking for the client. It has been argued that clients may not necessarily

understand the information in the way the examiner intended it to be understood and that the

sheer amount of information derived from such assessments, even if restricting information

deemed most relevant, may be difficult for the client to integrate in the best of circumstances.

The view that client's access to their results is potentially detrimental to clients seemed to have









persisted in psychological practice. Two large studies (Pope, Tabachnick, & Keith-Spiegel, 1987,

1988) concerning psychologists' beliefs about and compliance with ethical principles revealed

that 45% of practitioners did not allow clients' access to testing reports and more than 50%

viewed such practice as unethical. Butcher (1992) provided an additional explanation for the

hesitation of sharing with clients their results: many practitioners are unaware of or have not

been trained in providing feedback. Indeed, there are important considerations in providing

feedback, such as matching the quantity and quality of the information to what the client can be

expected to reasonably comprehend and integrate in a feedback session. Butcher (1992), Clair

and Prendergast (1994), Finn (1996), Graham (2000), and Pope (1992) all recommend that an

important component of feedback is assessing what the client has learned from the feedback.

Despite practitioners' hesitations to share results with clients, it has been recognized that

clients have legal rights to information in their records (Brodsky, 1972). According to the Ethical

Principles and Code of Conduct of Psychologists (American Psychological Association [APA],

2002), psychological assessment results should be explained to clients except under some

circumstances (e.g., pre-employment security screening). The movement in both law and ethics

over the past two decades has been toward an expansion of client autonomy, notwithstanding

what may be in the client's best clinical interest. This trend can be seen on the federal level, on

the state level, in state statutes, and in court rulings. For example, under the Health Insurance

Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), patients are granted access to their records, with the

exception of psychotherapy notes. The work of the APA Ethics Code Task Force is consistent

with, and firmly in the context of, this trend. The Ethics Code Task Force gives priority to the

exercise of client autonomy which entails providing clients with information related to their

mental health, such as test data, that the individual wants and requests.









In addition to this mandate, there exists some compelling theoretical and empirical

evidence that sharing results based on different measures can be clinically beneficial (Graham,

2000). For example, Lewak, Marks, and Nelson (1990) proposed that sharing test results can

improve clients' mental health when they are encouraged to actively participate in Minnesota

Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) feedback sessions. Finn and Tonsager (1992) and

Newman and Greenway (1997) provided direct evidence that receiving MMPI-2 feedback is

associated with positive effects. In Finn and Tonsager's (1992) study, college students seeking

psychological services from a university counseling center either received MMPI-2 feedback or

examiner attention only. Compared with clients receiving only examiner attention, those who

completed the MMPI-2 and heard their test results reported a significant decline in symptomatic

distress, a significant increase in self-esteem, and felt more hopeful about their problems, both

immediately following the feedback session and at a 2-week follow-up. Newman and Greenway

(1997), using an improved design and slightly different measures, replicated Finn and Tonsager's

(1992) results.

Although psychologists routinely administer other assessments much briefer than the

MMPI-2, it is apparent that research on the therapeutic benefits of test feedback has been limited

mostly to tests that are used most often by psychologists, such as the MMPI-2. To my

knowledge, there has been extremely scant systematic study of the effects of providing feedback

to clients based on responses to shorter instruments. Miller, Benefield, and Tonigan (1993)

demonstrated that alcoholic clients provided feedback based on two alcoholism screening

measures showed greater reduction in drinking than the control group. Worthington,

McCullough, Shortz et al. (1995) found that, as compared to a control group, couples receiving

feedback based on a battery of brief instruments showed improvement in dyadic satisfaction and









commitment. As well, Neighbors, Larimer, and Lewis (2004) found that computer-delivered

personalized normative feedback was effective in changing perceived norms and alcohol

consumption.

Although some speculate that personality or adjustment factors mediate feedback (McCrae

& Costa, 1991), not much is known about such factors and the roles they play in examiner-

examinee feedback processes. Employing a randomized, pretest-posttest control group design,

Aldea, Rice, & Gormley (under review) examined the therapeutic effects of providing

perfectionism feedback to maladaptive perfectionists. Using hierarchical linear modeling the

effects of perfectionism over time on outcome ratings such as emotional reactivity and

psychological distress and the effects of treatment condition and gender on the relationship

between perfectionism and outcomes (in general and after feedback) were observed. Results

revealed that providing feedback helped reduce emotional reactivity and global symptomatic

distress, including by reducing maladaptive perfectionism, for most of the participants in the

study.

Internet Psychological Services

Rapid and far-reaching technological advances are revolutionizing the ways in which

people relate, communicate, and live their daily lives. Technologies that were hardly used a few

years ago, such as the Internet, e-mail, and video teleconferencing, are becoming familiar

methods for modern communication. The Internet in particular has grown exponentially from its

original conception and now takes the form of a vast network of interconnected computers. It

encompasses such a wide arena within science that its impact cannot be ignored and has the

potential to have as great an impact on society and human behavior as the telephone and the

television (Jerome, DeLeon, James, Folen, Earles, & Gedney, 2000). Use of the Internet within

the psychological domain has many advantages and recently started being embraced by









psychologists (Gosling et al., 2004). A growing number of people are using the Internet for

research purposes and to provide counseling and therapy to the public. For example, behavioral

health care practitioners are using a wide variety of Internet technologies to deliver counseling

and therapy, including E-mail (Borowitz & Wyatt, 1998; Eysenbach & Diepgen, 1998; Shapiro

& Schulman, 1996; Stein, 1997), chat rooms (Sampson et al., 1997), the World Wide Web

(Maheu, 1997), and interactive video (Baer, Cukor, Jenike, Leahy, O'Laughlen, & Coyle, 1995;

Huston & Burton, 1997; Stamm, 1998; Troster, Paolo, Glatt, Hubble, & Koller, 1995). Within

this context, Internet-based services have been taken into consideration and have been

specifically addressed in state and federal legislation regulating delivery of"telehealth" services

(Alexander, 1999; Nickelson, 1998). Telehealth is defined as "the use of telecommunications and

information technology to provide access to health assessment, diagnosis, intervention,

consultation, supervision, education, and information across distance" (Nickelson, 1998, p. 527).

EHealth is the new general term being used to refer to Internet delivery of health care services,

including direct care such as counseling or psychotherapy. Behavioral eHealth is a more specific

term that best captures the variety of psychological services being offered, ranging from

psychoeducational information to psychotherapy. Funded and developed by private corporations,

eHealth has grown dramatically in the past years (Allen, 1999).

Ethical concerns have been raised regarding the utilization of the internet to provide

psychological services (Barak, 1999; Jerome et al., 2000, Maheu & Gordon, 2000). For example,

while conducting such interventions, clients may believe that the Internet is secure or video

teleconferencing is always completely confidential and private. To safeguard against a breach in

confidentiality, practitioners should fully inform clients of the limits of confidentiality associated

with such forms of telecommunications (Jerome et al., 2000). Shapiro and Schulman (1996)









discussed legal and ethical issues common in e-mail therapy and proposed guidelines and

standards when using this medium. Specific concerns include the delineation of the professional

relationship and the responsibilities that accompany that role, the scope of competence, informed

consent, treatment of minors, confidentiality, and the duty to warn and protect (Jerome et al.,

2000; Maheu & Gordon, 2000). In addition, other authors (King, 1996a, 1996b; Naglieri,

Drasgow, Schmit, Handler et. al, 2004) delineated ethical problems associated with the collecting

and reporting of data culled from the Internet and proposed guidelines for research conducted in

Internet communities.

There are obvious advantages of using computer-assisted therapy as opposed to traditional

face-to-face therapy such as the reduced cost, increased availability to large numbers of people,

and potential anonymity for individuals who would otherwise feel too embarrassed to seek out

therapy (Hill, Rochlen, Zack, McCready, & Dematatis, 2003). In addition, there is evidence that

suggests that individuals orient towards, and respond to, computers much as they orient socially

towards, and respond to, other humans (Reeves and Nass, 1996; Nass and Moon, 2000).

Although effectiveness of remote consultation in psychotherapy has not been fully assessed,

initial studies show promising results. For example, Klein and Richards (2001) investigated the

effectiveness of an Internet-based intervention for panic disorders. Participants meeting criteria

for panic disorders were randomly assigned to either the intervention or a self-monitoring control

condition. The treatment condition was associated with significant reductions in measures of

panic, body vigilance, and self-efficacy in managing panic. Richards and Alvarenga (2002)

developed and expanded this internet-based program and reported that the use of the program

was associated with significant reductions in panic disorder severity, specifically, panic

frequency and distress during panic attacks in the experimental group. Murdoch and Connor-









Greene (2000) reported two clinical cases in which e-mail was used as an adjunctive therapy to

enhance patients' involvement in treatment. In both cases, patients' reports suggest that

therapeutic alliance and therapeutic impact improved with the use of e-mail homework reporting.

The authors suggested that the improvement might be due to some patients being less inhibited

discussing personal issues using e-mail than in a face-to-face setting. The disinhibiting effect of

e-mail may enhance self-disclosure independent of the therapist's responsiveness. Yager (2001)

used e-mail as a therapeutic adjunct in the outpatient treatment of anorexia nervosa. Results of

this study showed a clinical improvement for all patients in the experimental group. Furthermore,

patients accepted the rationale of using e-mail as a therapeutic adjunct, and they considered it

helpful.

Bouchard, Payeur, and Rivard (2000) used videoconference to deliver cognitive-behavior

therapy (CBT) to patients suffering from panic disorders with agoraphobia. Participants received

several sessions of CBT by trained therapists according to a standardized treatment manual.

According to the authors, e-therapy demonstrated statistically and clinically significant

improvements in the target symptoms of frequency of panic attacks, panic apprehension, severity

of panic disorder, and perceived self-efficacy and general improvement in measures of global

functioning, such as trait anxiety. Furthermore, a very good therapeutic alliance was established

after only the first session. Lange, Van de Ven, Schrieken, Bredeweg, and Emmelkamp (2000)

developed an Internet system for the treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder. The treatment

comprised 10 writing sessions (45 min each) over five weeks. Participants were assessed on-line

before treatment, after treatment and after six-week follow-up. The results showed that following

treatment participants improved significantly in terms of post-traumatic stress symptoms and

general psychological functioning, and this was sustained at follow-up. Moreover, they reported









that reduction in post-traumatic stress symptoms compared favorably to changes in control and

experimental groups in trials of similar but face-to-face treatment. Lange, Rietdijk, Hudcovicova,

van de Ven, Schrieken, and Emmelkamp (2003) reported results of a controlled trial on the

Internet-driven treatment of posttraumatic stress and grief in a group of people who manifested

mild to relatively severe trauma symptoms. They found that participants in the treatment

condition improved significantly more than participants in the waiting-list control condition on

trauma-related symptoms and general psychopathology.

The great advantage of the Internet is that enables clients who engage in computer-

mediated therapy to interact with their therapists without the necessity of face-to-face contact. In

contrast to computer-guided therapy, where the computer itself both determines and provides the

feedback to the client (Marks, 2000), in Internet-mediated therapy or assessment, the therapist

determines and provides the feedback (tailored to client's needs) via the computer.

Present Study

Although much is known about perfectionism and its deleterious consequences, with very

few exceptions, perfectionism has not been the explicit focus of the intervention in the literature.

The limited knowledge with regard to the treatment of perfectionists comes from secondary

analyses of the National Institute of Mental Health Treatment of Depression Collaborative

Research Program, or other studies directed at treating different psychological disorders. Based

on these studies (Blatt & Zurrof, 2002) it has been argued that perfectionism and the problems

stemming from perfectionism are particularly difficult to treat and that in-depth long-term

therapy is necessary to produce therapeutic effects. A different perspective is taken in this study,

that perfectionists might benefit from brief and novel targeted treatment interventions such as

feedback and feedback combined with writing. Feedback, including provision of feedback using

the internet, has received attention in the counseling and more general psychological assessment









literature and demonstrated promising positive outcomes. Writing, used alone or in combination

with different forms of therapy, showed significant positive effects on both mental and physical

health.

The present study aims to investigate whether two brief experimental interventions,

provision of structured online feedback and provision of feedback combined with an opportunity

to express reactions to the feedback in writing, affect perfectionists' motivation for change and,

as a result, psychological problems often associated with perfectionism. Although there is

increasing evidence that perfectionism is a multidimensional construct, with adaptive and

maladaptive aspects, given its deleterious consequences, I focused on maladaptive perfectionism

in this study. In addition, given that much of the literature concerning perfectionism describes

data relevant to college students, the focus of the present study was on that population. It is

noteworthy that, in a series of studies, Rice and his colleagues found that more than a half of the

college student samples were clustered into the perfectionism groups, suggesting that

perfectionism is a pervasive characteristic among college students. In addition, different studies

have indicated that approximately 20-30% of the students within various samples of college

populations can be classified as maladaptively perfectionistic (Grzegorek et al., 2004; Rice &

Mirzadeh, 2000). Studies based on college students have generally found greater levels of

perfectionism to be associated with more psychological symptoms and greater suicidal risk

(Chang, 1998; Rice et al., 1998). Moreover, Hewitt, Flett, & Weber (1994) found that college

students who had a strong tendency to set unrealistically high standards for themselves or

believed that others expected only excellence in their performance, reported higher scores on

measures of hopelessness and suicidal ideation. As the results of a variety of studies point out,









college students represent a group that is at considerable risk of silently suffering or, perhaps,

coming to the attention of campus counseling or other treatment services.

In sum, the present study represents an attempt to address the relative paucity of systematic

research on the treatment of perfectionism and the alleged difficulty in effectively helping

maladaptive perfectionists based on brief interventions. It is the result of extending seminal

works of Finn (Finn & Tonsager, 1992; Newman & Greenway, 1997) and Pennebaker (1997,

2004) on the therapeutic benefits of providing clients with MMPI-2 feedback and on favorable

outcomes of writing, respectively. The current study also builds on a previous study (Aldea et al.,

under review) in which interactive verbal feedback provided to maladaptive perfectionistic

college students has been shown to have some therapeutic benefits.

The present study differs from the latter study in three important aspects. First, the present

study does not examine only the direct results of the experimental interventions on the outcome

measures, but rather aims to understand the mechanisms that may come into play when feedback

is provided. It is possible that the interventions themselves do not have a direct effect on distress,

but may result in shifting participants' readiness for change (Prochaska & DiClemente, 1992).

Results from qualitative studies showed clearly that perfectionists are reluctant to change,

particularly because their excessive standards are highly valued by them (Slaney & Ashby, 1996;

Slaney et al., 2000). Thus increasing their motivation for change is a key issue in treatment that

might be targeted through these relatively simple and inexpensive methods. For example,

feedback, either alone or combined with writing, may help perfectionists become aware of and/or

acknowledge their problems that may lead them to the next stage involving consideration of

change; those already considering change may become better able to understand the problems









associated with perfectionism, start thinking about possible solutions, and perhaps even engage

in actions conducive to change resulting in decreased distress.

Second, in the Aldea et al. study, the feedback was provided verbally following an

individual interview aimed at developing an empathic relationship with the participants. It is not

unlikely that the participants might have tried to please the experimenter from whom they

experienced support and understanding by giving the kind of responses they thought were

appropriate and expected, i.e. reports of reduced emotional reactivity and psychological

problems. In the present study, it was deemed crucial to set the conditions of feedback so that the

participant would be able to hear, tolerate, and own the information, while being minimally or

not at all influenced by the experimenter. In this context, including a measure of social

desirability and using a computer-delivered personalized internet feedback instead of a face-to-

face interaction seem viable solutions. Third, in Aldea et al. study it is unclear what the

mechanisms that facilitated change in participants were and whether the feedback or the initial

interview had specific therapeutic value. The design of the present study would permit

deciphering which experimental intervention is beneficial and whether the simple provision of

feedback has a different therapeutic impact than providing feedback and allowing participants to

express their reactions to the information provided. It is likely that those participants who were

given the opportunity to react to feedback will show greater gains than those receiving feedback

alone. There is some limited evidence from qualitative research that maladaptive perfectionists

may be keenly sensitive to their perfectionism and tend to be "inflexible to other's views" (Rice

et al., 2003, p. 51). Given maladaptive perfectionists' sensitivity, receiving feedback might be a

stressful event for them. It might be expected that maladaptive perfectionists would not be able

to hear and respond to feedback without defensiveness. At the same time, there has been a great









emphasis in the literature on the benefits of treatments that discourage clients from being passive

recipients of treatment (Frank, 1961; Horvath & Symonds, 1991). Thus, receiving feedback and

writing about the reactions the feedback elicits may gradually facilitate perfectionists (who, as

implied above, are likely to be resistant to, or ambivalent about, change) producing their own

arguments for change. Incorporating perfectionists' participation by providing an opportunity to

process the information received may make the feedback more personally relevant, meaningful,

and easier to be accepted which would be more likely to be conducive to improvement (Finn &

Tonsager, 1992).

Research Questions and Hypotheses

Although it has been demonstrated that feedback and writing have therapeutic benefits,

very little is known with regard to whether this conclusion holds true for maladaptive

perfectionists. The questions that guided this research were: Does telling perfectionists about

their perfectionism benefit them (e.g., by reducing their distress)? Do perfectionists benefit more

if they receive feedback only or if they receive feedback and are given the opportunity to react to

the feedback? If benefits do not initially occur, do they occur later? If benefits do occur, do they

persist? If participants do benefit, what are the mechanisms that lead to psychological

improvement following feedback? In conclusion, the purpose of the current study is to identify

whether feedback combined with the opportunity to react to feedback has more therapeutic

benefits in terms of general level of distress than feedback alone or no feedback. In addition, this

study investigates mediational and moderational models to explore factors that are conducive to

therapeutic gains for perfectionists. The design of the study permits determining the persistence

of any therapeutic effects two weeks after the experiment.

The study uses a randomized, pretest-posttest-follow-up control group design and

investigates hypotheses related to condition intervention effects. In addition, mechanisms that are









conducive to therapeutic gains for perfectionists will be explored. With regard to condition

effects, it is expected that:

1. When compared with no feedback control, participants receiving either experimental
condition (feedback alone or feedback combined with opportunity for written reaction) will
experience (a) a significant increase in motivation (readiness) for change, (b) a significant
decrease in distress, (c) a significant decrease in defensiveness, and (d) a significant decrease
in perfectionism.

2. Participants who are given the opportunity to react to feedback will show (a) significantly
higher levels of readiness for change, (b) significantly lower levels of defensiveness, (c)
significantly lower levels of distress, and (d) significantly lower levels of perfectionism when
compared to participants receiving feedback alone or no feedback.

It is expected that these effects would be maintained at follow-up.

Exploratory hypotheses:

1. Participants who show low levels of readiness for change would also exhibit high
defensiveness. In other words, a significant negative correlation between defensiveness and
readiness to change is anticipated.

2. Readiness for change may play the role of mediator in the relationship between conditions
and outcome. More specifically, the experimental conditions would impact participants'
readiness for change which in turn would affect their distress level, perfectionism, and
defensiveness. It is expected that this effect would be particularly apparent for those who
receive feedback and are given the opportunity to react to the information provided.

3. The relationship between condition and distress may be mediated by defensiveness.
Particularly, feedback combined with reaction to feedback may lead to decreased
defensiveness which in turn would lead to decreased distress, whereas feedback alone may
lead to increased defensiveness that would further increase distress.

4. Readiness for change may have a moderational effect. More precisely, participants who are
highly motivated to change will show the greatest therapeutic benefits. Participants who have
reduced motivation to change will not benefit as much from the experimental interventions,
in terms of changes in psychological distress.

5. Defensiveness may significantly influence outcomes. More specifically, participants who
exhibit high defensiveness would demonstrate the least therapeutic gains whereas those
exhibiting low defensiveness would show significant therapeutic improvement.

6. Defensiveness may interact with participants' readiness to change to predict distress level.
More exactly, highly defensive individuals who also have a low motivation level (low
readiness for change) would show the highest levels of distress whereas participants
motivated to change and less defensive would demonstrate reduced distress.









CHAPTER 3
METHOD

Participants

Participants were college students at two public universities in southeastern United States

and were recruited through advertisements in various psychology classes such as introductory

psychology, abnormal psychology, research methods, and personality psychology. A brief

description and the weblink for the first part of the study (prescreening) were provided in those

advertisements. At the website, and prior to completing the perfectionism measure, participants

received an Informed Consent form (see Appendix A) with information about the general

purpose of the study. Participants were informed that if they chose to participate, they had the

freedom to withdraw from the study at any time without any penalty. If, after reading the consent

document, the student was still interested in participating, she or he provided consent by clicking

"I Agree" button, which served as an electronic signature.

Those who decided to participate were initially prescreened for perfectionism based on The

Almost Perfect Scale-Revised (APS-R; Slaney et al., 1996; 2001). Maladaptive perfectionists

were identified based on their scores on the APS-R and through classification rules derived from

predictive discriminant function analyses (Ashby, Rice, Timmons, et al., 2004; Rice & Ashby,

2007). More specific details regarding the selection criteria appear below, in the description of

measures.

A total of 821 students completed the prescreening (demographic information was not

collected at this point). Enrollment figures for the sections of psychology courses were not

collected, therefore participation rates could not be calculated. Of the 821 participants, 242 (50

males, 186 females, and 6 participants with missing gender data) were selected. They were

directed to another secure website where they read and electronically signed a second Informed









Consent form that detailed the purpose, methods, and risks and benefits of the study (see

Appendix B). Afterwards, participants completed a demographics questionnaire (see Appendix

C) and the pretest measures: the University of Rhode Island Change Assessment Questionnaire

(URICA), the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale (MCSD), and the Outcome

Questionnaire (OQ-45). These participants ranged in age from 18 to 27 (M= 19.95, SD = 1.60).

Approximately 67% of the sample was White/European American, 9.5% Black/African

American, 9.9% Latino/a, 7.5% Asian/Asian American, and about 6% described themselves as

multicultural mixed race/ethnicity or "other." The mean self-reported grade point average, based

on a 1.0 to 4.0 scale for the sample was 3.32 (SD = 0.48) and ranged from 1.8 to 4.0. Because

participants came from two universities, a multivariate analysis of variance was conducted to

assess potential differences between students at the two universities on the study variables. The

analysis revealed no significant differences, Wilks's A = .84, F(6, 36) = 1.04, p = .36.

One week later, participants returned to the website for the intervention session. At that

point, they were randomly assigned (electronically) to the experimental conditions: feedback

alone, feedback and writing, and no feedback control. Immediately following the experimental

conditions, they filled out the outcome measures (the URICA, the MCSD, the OQ-45, and the

APS-R). There were 167 participants who completed this second phase of the study. Two weeks

later, the follow-up session took place in which participants completed the dependent measures

again (see Figure 3-1). Based on randomization, any differences between participants were

expected to be the result of exposure to one of the three conditions in the experiment (see below).

A sample of 154 participants completed the Pretest, Posttest, and the Follow-up. Three of

these participants were suspected of random or careless responding as evidenced by answering

items such "Leave this item blank" and were eliminated from further analyses. Forty eight









participants were in the control condition, 55 in the feedback condition, and 48 in the feedback

and writing condition. The sample size matched the targeted sample size of approximately 150

participants (or about 50 participants per group) that was established based on a power analysis

to detect significant mean differences on the magnitude of a medium effect size, with alpha at

.05, and power at .80 (Cohen, 1992). A multivariate analyses of variance (MANOVA) revealed

no differences between conditions on any of the pretest study variables, Wilks's A = .93, F(6,

12) = 1.00, p = .45 (Readiness for Change Index RCI, MCSD, High Standards, Discrepancy,

Order, and OQ-45 were the dependent variables). As well, there were no differences among

conditions in terms of sex, x2 (2, N = 178) = 1.36, p = .51, race/ethnicity, x2 (12, N = 181) =

13.82,p = .31, age, F(2, 184) = 2.73,p = .07 or GPA, F(2, 161) = 1.99,p = .14, Students were

also asked to report whether they were currently seeing a counselor. There were no differences

between conditions on this variable as well, X2 (2, N = 181) = .60, p = .74.

To assess attrition effects, a MANOVA was used to compare the Pretest data for the

longitudinal sample with the Pretest data for the participants who dropped out at Posttest and

Follow-up (RCI, MCSD, High Standards, Discrepancy, Order, and OQ-45 were the dependent

variables). This analysis revealed no significant differences between the longitudinal and attrition

groups on the questionnaires scores, Wilks's A = .96, F(6, 215) = 1.51,p = .18. In addition, there

were not significant differences between the longitudinal and attrition group with regard to the

proportion of men and women, x2 (1, N = 147) = .02, p = .54, race/ethnicity, x2 (6, N = 238) =

4.0,p = .67, age F(1, 238) = .27,p = .60, GPA, F(1, 208) = .39,p = .53 or whether the student

was currently seeing a counselor, X2 (1, N = 238) = .47, p = .49.









Design and Procedure

The prescreening as well as the pretest, posttest, and follow-up took place online. All

participants completed the online perfectionism prescreening instrument (i.e., the APS-R).

Experimental condition 1: Participants receiving feedback alone. One week subsequent to

the pretest, participants in this condition received feedback based on their APS-R results (see

Appendix D for the sample feedback). The feedback was specific to maladaptive perfectionists.

Subsequent to receiving feedback participants completed the dependent measures. Two weeks

following the receipt of feedback, participants returned to the website and completed the

dependent measures again.

Experimental condition 2: Participants receiving perfectionism feedback and writing their

reactions to the feedback. One week following the pretest, participants in this group received

specific feedback based on their APS-R results (the same feedback received by the participants

in the feedback only condition). Subsequent to receiving feedback, participants were asked to

respond to the feedback received by giving in writing their reactions and feelings. Consistent

with other studies on expressive writing (Pennebaker, 2004), participants were instructed to write

their "deepest thoughts and feelings about perfectionism and performance expectations" and to

try to let themselves "go and to write continuously" about emotions and thoughts the feedback

may have elicited (see Appendix E). Following this step, participants completed the dependent

measures. Two weeks following the feedback session, participants completed the dependent

measures again.

Control condition: Participants not receiving feedback. One week after the pretest,

participants in this group received a brief description of the History of Florida, similar in length

to the text participants in the experimental conditions received (see Appendix F). Next, they









completed the dependent measures. Two weeks later, participants completed the dependent

measures again.

In order to control for order effects, the measures were counterbalanced. A MANOVA

revealed no differences on the study variables based on the order of the questionnaires, Wilks's

A = .92, F(6, 214) = .98, p = .48.

Instruments

The Almost Perfect Scale-Revised (APS-R), developed by Slaney et al. (1996) was used to

assess dimensions of perfectionism. The final version of APS-R consists of 24 items that are

responded to using a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly

agree (see Appendix G). The APS-R contains three subscales: (1) Discrepancy, (2) High

Standards, and (3) Order. High Standards represent an individual's level of expectations related

to his/her performance. Discrepancy represents "the perception that one consistently fails to meet

the high standards one has set for oneself' (Slaney, Rice & Ashby, 2002, p. 69). Order represents

an individual's need for structure and neatness. Higher scores across each subscale correspond

with higher levels of each dimension. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses results

support the three hypothesized subscales (Slaney et al., 2001). The structure coefficients ranged

from .49 to .83. Cronbach's coefficient alphas from the confirmatory factor analysis were .92 for

Discrepancy, .85 for Standards, and .86 for Order. The subscales relate in expected directions

with other measures of perfectionism and with measures of psychological adjustment (Rice &

Slaney, 2002; Slaney, et al., 2001). The High Standards subscale taps adaptive aspects of

perfectionism and the Discrepancy subscale taps maladaptive aspects of perfectionism.

Individuals are categorized as maladaptive perfectionists based on a combination of High

Standards and Discrepancy scores (i.e., High Standards scores equal or greater than 37 and

Discrepancy scores equal or greater than 45) (Ashby et al, 2004; Rice & Ashby, 2007).









The University of Rhode Island Change Assessment Questionnaire (URICA;

McConnaughy, Prochaska, & Velicer, 1983) consists of 32 statements that participants endorse

on a 5-point scale that ranges from 1 = strongly agree to 5 = strongly disagree (see Appendix H).

The items were written to determine how individuals perceive, contemplate, and respond to a

"problem." URICA taps four stages of change precontemplationn, contemplation, action, and

maintenance) with 8 items measuring each of the four stages of change. For example, "I have a

problem and I really think I should work on it" loads on the Contemplation scale, and "It worries

me that I might slip back on a problem I have already changed" loads on the Maintenance scale.

Several studies support the four-factor structure of the URICA, and internal consistency

coefficient alphas for the scales were reported to have ranged from .88 to .89 (McConnaughy,

DiClemente, Prochaska, & Velicer, 1989; McConnaughy et al., 1983). The URICA is one of the

most commonly used instruments for assessing change (McConnaughy et al., 1983) and it has

been validated in various settings and with different populations, including cigarette smokers

(Prochaska & DiClemente, 1985; Prochaska et al., 1992), alcohol abusers (Carbonari &

DiClemente, 2000; Project MATCH Research Group, 1997), illicit drug users (Belding, Iguchi &

Lamb, 1996), and dual-diagnosis patients (Pantalon, Nich, Frankforter, & Carroll, 2002;

Valesquez, Carbonari, & DiClemente, 1999). A modified version of the URICA (Prochaska &

DiClemente, 1986) was used for the present study. Instructions were modified to specifically

address problems with perfectionism rather than with other issues. Although URICA has been

used with samples of college students to assess readiness to changing problems such as substance

abuse, internal consistency coefficients were not provided (Hufford, Shields, Shiffman, Paty, &

Balabanis, 2002). The URICA administered online in a sample of college students showed









adequate validity and test-retest reliability of the subscales that ranged from .78 to .85 (Miller,

Neal, Roberts, Baer, et al., 2002).

With regard to scoring, the stages are considered to be continuous and not discreet and to

date there have been no cut-off norms established to determine what constitutes high, medium or

low on a particular stage. Cluster analyses often are used to classify participants with respect to

their stage-of-change profile across the different dimensions. An alternative method of scoring

the URICA, of interest for the purpose of the present study, was popularized by the Project

MATCH Research Group (1997). The measure was scored as a single continuous measure of

readiness to change. A readiness for change index (RCI) was used in the present study. The RCI

was derived by summing scores from the contemplation, action, and maintenance factors and

then subtracting precontemplation scores. The primary advantage of this method is that

additional statistical analyses are not necessary to group participants in unique subgroups and

readiness scores are easy to calculate and interpret (Carey, Purnine, Maisto, & Carey, 1999).

The Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale (MCSD; Crowne & Marlowe, 1960;

Reynolds, 1982) is a 13-item self-report short version of the 33-item MCSD (see Appendix I).

The 13-item version developed by Reynolds (1982) has a very strong relation with the longer

version of the MCSD (>.90), a significant relation with the Edwards Social Desirability Scale

(O'Grady, 1988), and an acceptable level of internal consistency. For example, Gelso, Kelley,

Fuertes, Marmarosh, et al. (2005) reported internal consistency of .70 in a sample of students.

The MCSD uses a true-false format and has been used extensively to assess social desirability as

a response tendency in studies implementing self-report formats. In addition, MCSD has been

used as a measure of defensiveness, with high scores indicating defensiveness and tendency to

engage in self-protective behavior (Paulhus, 1991; Pauls & Stemmler, 2003). For example, it has









been suggested that high-scoring participants are intensely afraid of rejection, are less likely to

report justified feelings of hostility and anger, and are more likely to change their privately held

attitudes as a function of dissonance induction (Sedikides, Rudich, Gregg, Kumashiro, &

Rusbult, 2004; Winters, Latimer, Stichfield, & Egan, 2004).

The Outcome Questionnaire (OQ-45; Lambert, Burlingame, Umphress, Hansen,

Vermeersch,, Clouse, & Yanchar, 1996) is a 45-item self-report measure of distress that is

sensitive to changes in psychological distress over short periods of time. It uses a 5-point Likert-

type response format ranging from 0 = never to 4 = almost always (see Appendix J). Higher

scores are indicative of more perceived distress. A sample item is "I have difficulty

concentrating." A total score or three subscales can be calculated: Symptom Distress (SD, 25

items), Interpersonal Relationships (IR, 11 items), and Social Roles (SR, 9 items). On the basis

of a normative sample that included university students (Lambert et al., 1996), internal

consistency and test-retest reliability (3-week) estimates were .92 and .84, respectively. For each

scale, higher scores indicate greater negativity or dysfunction on the dimension being measured

(Lambert et al., 1996). Reported test-retest reliabilities for these subscales are .78, .80, and .82,

respectively, and internal consistency reliabilities are .91, .74, and .71. (Lambert et al., 1996),

The OQ-45 has also been demonstrated to have very good concurrent validity coefficients with a

variety of self-report scales (e.g., Beck Depression Inventory, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory,

Symptom Checklist-90; Umphress, Lambert, Smart, Barlow, Clouse, & Hansen, 1997; Seggar,

Lambert, & Hansen, 2002).











Experimental Condition 1


Pretest

URICA
SDS
OQ-45
APS-R


One week


Complete measures


Posttest

URICA
SDS
OQ-45
APS-R


Feedback
Complete measures


Follow-up
One week URICA
SDS
0- OQ-45
APS-R


Complete measures
s


Experimental Condition 2


Pretest

URICA
SDS
OQ-45
APS-R


One week


Complete measures


Posttest

URICA
SDS
OQ-45
APS-R


Feedback + Writing
Complete measures


Follow-up
One week URICA
SDS
OQ-45
APS-R


Complete measures


Control Condition


Pretest

URICA
SDS
OQ-45
APS-R


One week


Complete measures


Posttest

URICA
SDS
OQ-45
APS-R


Complete measures


Follow-up
One week URICA
SDS
0- OQ-45
APS-R


Complete measures


Figure 3-1. Research Design









CHAPTER 4
RESULTS

Descriptive Statistics and Preliminary Analyses

Table 4-1 displays the range of scores and the means and standard deviations for the scale

scores. Table 4-2 presents the within- and across-time correlations among scores and the

Cronbach's coefficient alpha estimate of score reliability for each measure. All scores showed

adequate internal consistency coefficients, consistent with those found in other studies using the

same measures with a similar population. For example, in a sample of maladaptive

perfectionistic college students, Aldea & Rice (2006) reported a range of Discrepancy and High

Standards scores similar to those found in this sample and reliability estimates of .89 and .86,

respectively. For the MCSD in a sample of college students, Reynolds (1982) reported a mean of

5.67, standard deviation of 3.29, and internal consistency of .76, parameters comparable to those

found in the current sample. Although the reliability of OQ45 in this study is similar to that

reported by Lambert et al., the current mean is substantially higher than that usually reported in

college students (M = 46.37, SD = 19.70) and closer to the mean found in college counseling

centers clients (M = 75.16, SD = 16.74), suggesting that maladaptively perfectionistic college

students tend to experience higher levels of distress than typical students.

The data were checked for normality and results revealed univariate normality for all

measured variables skewnesss and kurtosis values less than 2). Multivariate normality was

assessed using the Mahalanobis distances for the 5 pretest variables (RCI, MCSD, High

Standards, Discrepancy, OQ-45) and the critical chi-square for this test was 20.52. None of the

participants had Mahalanobis distance values that exceeded this critical value.

The correlations among the scales within time were generally low to moderate and, as

expected, high across time for the same measures, except for the two subscales of the APS-R









(see Table 4-2). Although previous studies reported across time Discrepancy and High Standards

correlations ranging from .76 to .85 (Rice & Aldea, 2006), in the present study they were lower

from Pretest to Posttest and Pretest to Follow-up, ranging from.39 to .53. At pretest and posttest,

but not at follow-up, the correlation between Distress (as measured by OQ-45) and Readiness for

Change was significant and positive, suggesting that individuals who are willing to consider

change also tend to endorse higher levels of distress. The relationship between Distress and

Defensiveness was significant and negative across the 3 time points, implying that students with

lower levels of Defensiveness are more likely to admit to symptomatic distress. In addition,

although the correlation between Distress and High Standards was not significant, the link

between Distress and Discrepancy was significant and positive, suggesting that individuals with

high levels of Discrepancy (maladaptive perfectionism) also tend to manifest high levels of

Distress. Discrepancy was also positively associated with Readiness for Change and negatively

with Defensiveness at posttest and follow-up, indicating that people who endorse high

Discrepancy are also more ready for change and less defensive. Contrary to my expectation, the

association between Readiness for Change and Defensiveness was not significant at any point in

time.

Treatment Effects Analyses

To test the differences in the three treatment effects on the outcome variables, a 3

(Feedback/Writing/Control) x 3 (Pretest/Posttest/Follow-up) repeated-measures design was used.

Five separate repeated measures analyses of variance (ANOVA) were used in which the

dependent variables were Distress (measured with OQ-45), Readiness for Change (URICA),

Defensiveness (MCSD), and Perfectionism (High Standards and Discrepancy), respectively.

Time (Pretest, Posttest, and Follow-up) was the within-subjects variable in each analysis. With

multiple outcome variables, the typical analysis approach used in the group-comparison context









is to either conduct multiple univariate ANOVAs or conduct a multivariate analysis of variance

(MANOVA). Huberty and Morris (1989) suggested that multiple ANOVAs are more appropriate

when the interest is on how a treatment variable affects each of the outcome variables and when

the research conducted is exploratory in nature, as in when new treatment and outcome variables

are studied. The current study is the first of its kind to examine whether the provision of

feedback and feedback combined with expressive writing has therapeutic benefits in terms of

increasing Readiness for Change and decreasing Distress, Defensiveness, and Perfectionism. The

focus was on exploring which specific outcome variables these experimental conditions affect,

thus a univariate analysis appeared to be the most appropriate approach to test the main

hypotheses. Whenever multiple statistical analyses are performed, there is the potential problem

of Type I error across all of the tests. Bonferroni corrections were used to control for Type I error

inflation resulting from the number of tests conducted. The Bonferroni-corrected p value for the

following five analyses was .01.

For RCI, the ANOVA showed a nonsignificant Condition x Time interaction, Wilks's A=

.99, F (4, 264) = .33,p = .86, 1r2 = .005, and a non-significant Time effect, Wilks's A = .99, F (2,

132) = .40, p = .67, 1r2 = .006. The same pattern of non-significant results was revealed for

MCSD, Wilks's A = .98, F (4, 262) = .71,p = .59, r12 = .01 (Condition x Time), Wilks's A = .99,

F (2, 131) = .70, p = .50, 12 = .01 (Time) and OQ-45, Wilks's A = .99, F (4, 270) =.18,p = .95,

r12 = .003 (Condition x Time), Wilks's A = .99, F (2, 135) = .86, p = .43, r12 = .01 (Time).

For High Standards, the repeated measures ANOVA showed a non-significant Condition x

Time interaction, Wilks's A = .98, F (4, 276) = .66, p = .62, 1r2 = .009, and a significant effect for

Time, Wilks's A = .93, F (2, 138) = 4.99, p = .008, 12 = .07. The results indicated that there was a









significant decreasing linear trend over time, F (1, 139) = 9.96, p < .002, 12 = .07, with scores at

the Follow-up significantly lower than scores at the Pretest.

For Discrepancy, the results revealed a non significant effect of Time, Wilks's A = .98, F

(2, 138) = 1.14, p = .32, 1r2 = .02, but a marginally significant Condition x Time interaction,

Wilks's A = .98, F(4, 276) = 2.13, p = .07, r12 = .03. Follow-up pairwise comparisons showed a

decrease in Discrepancy from pre- to posttest for the control group and no meaningful change for

any of the experimental groups (See Table 4-3 for all means and standards deviations by group).

In addition, a separate MANOVA was carried with the three OQ-45 subscales as the

dependent variables, but no significant Condition x Time effect was found, Wilks's A = .97, F

(12, 260)= .33,p = .98, 12 = .02.

Mediation Analyses

A sensitive data analysis process was used to test whether Readiness for Change and

Defensiveness mediate the relationship between treatment and outcome (Frazier, Tix, & Barron,

2004; MacKinnon, Fairchild, & Frits, 2007; MacKinnon, Lockwood, Hoffman, West, & Sheets,

2002; Shrout & Bolger, 2002). In order to establish mediation, two conditions must be met: (a)

the predictor (e.g., condition) is significantly associated with the mediators (e.g., Readiness for

Change and Defensiveness, respectively) and (b) the mediator is associated with the outcome

variable (e.g., Distress) (MacKinnon et al., 2007; MacKinnon et al., 2002). Separate sets of

analyses were conducted for each proposed mediator (i.e., Readiness for Change and

Defensiveness). The associations between the predictor (e.g., condition) and the mediators were

not significant, revealing that neither Readiness for Change nor Defensiveness mediated the

relationship between experimental conditions and outcome (See Table 4-4). The results remained

non significant even when the effects of Readiness for Change and Defensiveness, respectively,

at the Pretest were partialled. In other words, support was not found for the hypotheses that the









experimental conditions would lead to change in Defensiveness and/or Readiness for change,

which in turn would affect outcome.

Interaction Analyses

In the next set of analyses, the moderational role of Readiness for Change and

Defensiveness in the relation between experimental conditions and outcomes at both Posttest and

Follow-up was investigated. Hierarchical multiple regressions were used to examine the Distress,

Readiness for Change, Defensiveness, and Perfectionism (High Standards and Discrepancy)

scores at Posttest and Follow-up as a function of experimental condition and Pretest Readiness

for Change and Defensiveness, respectively (Aiken & West, 1991; Baron & Kenny, 1986;

Cohen, Cohen, West, & Aiken, 2003; Frazier, Tix, & Barron, 2004). Condition was dummy-

coded, with the control condition designated as the reference group, resulting in two sets of

dummy-code variables for condition (Aiken & West, 1991; Cohen, Cohen, West, & Aiken,

2003). The predictor and the moderator variables were centered thus reducing problems

associated with multicollinearity among predictor and moderator variables and the interaction

terms created from them. Variables were entered in the regression equation in blocks: the

centered Pretest predictor and the two dummy-coded variables for condition were entered first,

followed by the product terms between the predictor and each of the dummy-coded variables

(Aiken & West, 1991; Holmbeck, 1997).

Effects on Distress

The purpose of the analyses is to examine whether the two potential moderators, Readiness

for Change and Defensiveness, interacted with condition to predict the outcome, Distress level.

First, the effect of Pretest RCI predicting Distress at Posttest and Follow-up as a function of

condition was examined. The procedure outlined above was followed. More specifically, the

Pretest RCI score and the dummy-coded variables were entered first and the product terms









between Pretest RCI and each of the dummy-coded variables were entered next. There were no

significant main or interaction effects of the Pretest RCI predicting Posttest Distress, AR 2 = .01,

F(2, 159) = 1.20, p = .30. The set of interaction terms, however, explained an additional 4% of

the variance in Distress at Follow-up above and beyond the variance explained by the first-order

effects, AR2 = .04, F(2, 145) = 3.17, p = .05. More importantly, the Pretest RCI x feedback

condition interaction was significant in predicting Distress at Follow-up, 3 = .31,p = .01. The

plotted interaction revealed that participants receiving feedback alone who had high Readiness

for Change at Pretest also had high Distress scores at follow-up, whereas those low in Readiness

for Change at Pretest had decreased Distress two weeks after the experiment (See Figure 4-1).

The participants in the control condition with low levels of Pretest Readiness for Change showed

a slight decrease in Distress at Follow-up compared to participants highly motivated to change at

the onset of the treatment condition.

Next, the effects of Pretest Defensiveness on Distress at Posttest and Follow-up were

examined using a similar procedure as above. However, no significant main effects or

interactions were found in the respective analyses, AR 2 = .001, F(2, 152) = .06, p = .94

(Posttest), AR 2 = .02, F(2, 139) = 1.28, p = .28 (Follow-up).

Effects on Readiness for Change

I examined the effects of Pretest Defensiveness predicting Readiness for Change at Posttest,

AR 2 = .008, F(2, 152) = .63, p = .53, and Follow-up, AR 2 = .003, F(2, 135) = .18, p = .84, as a

function of condition. None of the effects were significant, revealing that Defensiveness does not

moderate the relation between experimental intervention and Readiness for Change.

Effects on Perfectionism

To examine the moderational role of Readiness for Change and Defensiveness,

respectively, in the condition-perfectionism link, the effects of Pretest Defensiveness and Pretest









Readiness for Change predicting Posttest and Follow-up High Standards and Discrepancy were

investigated. Analyses revealed no significant main or interaction effect of Pretest Defensiveness

predicting High Standards, AR 2 = .02, F(2, 151) = 1.55, p = .22, or Discrepancy, AR 2 = .02, F(2,

151) = 1.29, p = .28. However, the Pretest Readiness for Change x condition interaction had a

significant impact on High Standards at both Posttest and Follow-up, but not on Discrepancy.

Although the set of interaction terms was significant only at .11 level and explained 3% of the

variance in Posttest High Standards above and beyond the variance explained by the first-order

effects, AR2 = .03, F(2, 158) = 2.19, p = .11, particularly relevant was that the Pretest Readiness

for Change x feedback condition interaction was significant in predicting Posttest High

Standards scores, P = -.23, p = .05 (See Figure 4-2). When the effects of Pretest Readiness for

Change and condition interaction on High Standards at Follow-up were explored, the results

showed that the set of interaction terms was significant and explained an additional 6% of the

variance in Follow-up High Standards above and beyond the variance explained by the first-

order effects, AR 2 = .06, F(2, 143) = 4.37, p = .01. Further examination of the results evidenced

significant effects of both Pretest Readiness for Change x feedback condition interaction, 3 = -

.26, p = .04, and Pretest Readiness for Change x writing condition interaction, P = -.31, p = .005

in predicting Follow-up High Standards scores (See Figure 4-3). The plotted interactions suggest

that participants receiving feedback who had low Readiness for Change at Pretest showed scores

on High Standards at both Posttest and Follow-up that were approximately half of a standard

deviation lower than participants receiving feedback who started off more motivated to change.

The same pattern was observed for the participants in the control group. Although the difference

in High Standards scores between participants in the feedback condition with high Pretest

Readiness for Change and those in the control condition was minor (with those in the feedback









condition having slightly lower High Standards scores than control participants), the opposite

was true for participants with low motivation for change at the beginning of the study. More

specifically, at both Posttest and Follow-up, participants with reduced motivation to change

receiving feedback exhibited High Standards scores that were about half of a standard deviation

higher than the scores of the participants in the control group. Although the effect of the

interaction between Readiness for Change at Pretest and the writing condition was not significant

in predicting Posttest High Standards, it became apparent in predicting Follow-up High

Standards. More specifically, individuals who had high levels of motivation to change at Pretest,

and who received feedback and expressed their reactions in writing, showed decreased High

Standards scores at Follow-up when compared to those who had a lower desire to change at the

beginning of the study. In addition, those with high Pretest Readiness for change in the writing

condition manifested lower High Standards than participants in the control group.

Effects on Defensiveness

There were no significant main effects or interactions of Pretest Readiness for Change, AR2

=.004, F(2, 157) = .33, p = .72 (Posttest), AR 2 = .01, F(2, 146)= .88,p = .42 (Follow-up), and

Pretest Defensiveness, AR 2 = .001, F(2, 151) = .22, p = .80 (Posttest), AR 2 = .01, F(2, 140) =

2.10, p = .13 (Follow-up), predicting Posttest or Follow-up Defensiveness scores. These results

suggest that these two variables did not moderate the association between the experimental

conditions and participants' level of Defensiveness at Posttest and Follow-up.

Effects of Pretest Readiness for Change, Defensiveness and Condition Interaction on the
Outcome Variables at Posttest and Follow-up

To test the effect of Pretest Readiness for Change x Pretest Defensiveness x condition

interaction on Distress, Readiness for Change, Defensiveness, and Perfectionism at Posttest and

Follow-up hierarchical multiple regressions were used. As in previous analyses, variables were









entered in the regression equation in blocks: the centered Pretest predictors and the two dummy

coded variables for condition were entered first, the product terms between each of the two

predictors and each of the code variables were entered next, and the 3-way interaction terms

were entered in the third block (Aiken & West, 1991; Holmbeck, 1997). The results showed that

none of the 3-way interactions were significant in predicting any of the outcome variables (See

Table 4-5).

Exploratory Analyses

It is possible that participants' level of distress at the onset of the study may have

influenced how they responded to the conditions. Next, the effects of the interaction between

Pretest Distress and condition on the outcome variables were investigated; however the results

revealed that the Pretest Distress x condition interaction did not have a significant impact on any

of the study variables.

Blat and his colleagues (Blatt et al., 1995, 1998) found support for the hypothesis that

perfectionism interferes with the success of treatment. Next, I explored whether the two

dimensions of perfectionism, High Standards and Discrepancy at Pretest interacted with the

conditions to predict Distress, Readiness for Change, and Defensiveness, respectively, at Posttest

and Follow-up. As before, none of the interactions were significant in predicting the outcome

variables.

Finally, following a procedure suggested by Santor, Bagby, and Joffe (1997), I analyzed

whether any of the Pretest variables interacted with the treatment conditions to predict change in

Readiness for Change and Distress scores from Pretest to Posttest and from Pretest to Follow-up.

Change scores in Readiness for Change were calculated by subtracting the Pretest Readiness for

Change scores from the Posttest and Follow-up Readiness for change scores, respectively. Thus,

positive values indicate an increase in Readiness for Change from Pretest to Posttest and from









Pretest to Follow-up. The change in Distress was calculated by subtracting Posttest and Follow-

up scores from the Pretest scores; thus, positive values indicate change in Distress in the desired

direction (i.e., decrease in Distress from Pretest to Posttest and from Pretest to Follow-up).

Results revealed that the interaction between Pretest Defensiveness and the writing condition

was significant in predicting change in Readiness for Change scores from Pretest to Posttest, 3 =

-.29, p = .04 (See Figure 4-4). The plotted interaction illustrated that participants with low

Defensiveness levels at the onset of the study who received feedback and expressed in writing

their reactions to the feedback received showed a more significant change (i.e., increase) in

Readiness for Change from Pretest to Posttest than control participants with low Pretest

Readiness for change and than participants in the feedback and writing condition who were

highly defensive at the Pretest.

Moreover, the Pretest Defensiveness x feedback condition interaction was significant in

predicting change in Distress from Pretest to Follow-up, P = .28, p = .03 (See Figure 4-5). The

plotted interaction showed that participants with high Pretest Defensiveness scores who received

feedback manifested the most change (i.e., decrease) in Distress scores from Pretest to Follow-up

when compared with control participants with high Defensiveness at Pretest and when compared

with participants in the feedback condition who had low Defensiveness at the onset of the study.

Lastly, the interaction between Pretest High Standards and the feedback and writing

conditions was significant in predicting change in Distress from Pretest to Follow-up, P = .24, p

= .04 (Pretest High Standards x writing) and P = .26, p = .05 (Pretest High Standards x feedback)

(See Figure 4-6). The plotted interaction suggests that participants who had relatively low Pretest

High Standards and who were in either experimental condition showed more change (i.e.,

decrease) in Distress scores from Pretest to Follow-up than those who had high Pretest High









Standards. In addition, for participants with High Standards at the beginning of the study, those

who received either experimental condition demonstrated more change (i.e., decrease) in Distress

than those in the control condition.









Table 4-1. Overall Means and Standard Deviations
Measure Pretest Posttest Follow-up
Min. Max. M SD Min. Max. M SD Min. Max. M SD
RCI 5 88 51.16 16.98 4 108 51.14 20.69 5 108 51.40 21.26
MCSD 0 12 5.25 2.68 0 12 4.82 2.58 0 11 4.75 2.55
HS 37 49 43.69 3.73 12 49 42.10 5.82 15 49 41.81 5.31
Discrep 45 84 59.03 10.19 13 84 57.03 13.57 14 83 56.93 13.66
OQ 12 136 66.15 23.36 8 126 64.83 25.93 13 128 64.92 23.30


Note: RCI = Readiness for Change Index, MCSD


Defensiveness, HS


High Standards, Discrep


= Discrepancy, OQ


Distress.










Table 4-2. Within-Time and Across-Time Scale Correlations and Reliability Estimates
Time Measure Pretest Posttest Follow-up
______RCI MCSD HS Discrep OQ RCI MCSD HS Discrep OQ RCI MCSD HS Discrep OQ
Pretest RCI
MCSD -.11 .66
HS .05 .01 .84
DISCREP .06 -.06 .07 .94
OQ .22** -.27** -.06 .26** .92
Posttest RCI .74** -.03 .07 .11 .13
MCSD -.15 .71** .09 -.08 -.29** -.04 .64
HS .26** -.11 .39** .02 -.05 .19* -.09 .88
DISCREP .28** -.25** -.07 .53** .48** .36** -.29** .22** .95
OQ .19* -.26** -.03 .24** .81** .21** -.34** -.06 .54** .95
Follow- RCI
.78** -.09 .06 .01 .08 .88** -.07 .12 .22** .13
up
MCSD -.06 .74** .07 -.05 -.26** .02 .83** -.09 -.30** -.25** .01 .61
HS .15 -.08 .42** -.03 -.02 .09 -.08 .77** .15 .03 .04 -.10 .83
DISCREP .23** -.31** -.09 .39** .50** .23** -.39** .10 .78** .56** .25** -.30** .13 .97
OQ .16* -.29** .03 .18* .77** .15 -.34** -.06 .51** .82** .15 -.31** -.01 .57** .93
Note: Cronbach's coefficients alphas appear in italics on the diagonal. RCI = Readiness for Change Index, MCSD = Defensiveness,
HS = High Standards, Discrep = Discrepancy, OQ = Distress. Given that the RCI was calculated based on URICA subscales by
subtracting the Precontemplation score from the sum of Contemplation, Action, and Maintenance, the reliability coefficient for RCI
could not be calculated.









Table 4-3. Means and Standard Deviations by Group
Measure
Time Writing Feedback Control
M SD M SD M SD
Pretest RCI 48.54 16.70 49.84 18.86 55.26 17.101
MCSD 5.00 2.23 5.43 2.88 4.85 2.84
HS 43.16 3.81 43.34 4.21 43.53 3.50
Discrep 58.59 10.00 58.40 9.37 59.95 10.50
OQ 67.02 20.64 67.48 25.83 63.21 23.62
Postest RCI 47.57 21.41 51.15 21.26 53.03 19.47
MCSD 4.98 2.60 5.06 2.62 4.42 2.44
HS 42.00 6.13 42.42 5.44 42.00 5.99
Discrep 59.45 13.29 56.97 14.27 54.73 13.60
OQ 65.36 23.22 66.57 26.27 61.57 27.35
Follow-up RCI 48.20 19.41 51.77 23.87 52.85 20.57
MCSD 4.71 2.03 4.98 2.98 4.40 2.524
HS 41.78 5.18 42.46 5.01 41.40 5.815
Discrep 59.58 11.45 55.63 15.55 55.85 13.82
OQ 64.17 21.76 64.20 25.43 65.49 23.43


Table 4-4. Regression Analyses of the Effects of Condition on Mediator Variables.
Criterion Predictor B SE B 3 p
RCI2 Condition 2.69 2.02 .10 .19
MCSD2 -.30 .25 -.09 .23
RCI3 2.33 2.17 .09 .29
MCSD3 -.15 .25 -.05 .55
Note: RCI2 = Readiness for Change Index at Posttest, MCSD2 = Defensiveness at Posttest,
RCI3 = Readiness for Change Index at Follow-up, MCSD3 = Defensiveness at Follow-up.









Table 4-5. Regression Analyses of the Effects of Pretest Readiness for Change x Pretest
Defensiveness x Condition Interaction on Outcome Variables.
Predictor Criterion AR 2 F df p
RCI x MCSD x condition OQ2 .009 .76 2, 146 .76
MCSD2 .002 .30 2, 145 .74
RCI2 .002 1.03 2, 146 .36
Discrep2 .01 .98 2, 145 .38
HS2 .001 .12 2, 145 .88
OQ3 .02 1.28 2, 139 .28
MCSD3 .002 .32 2, 134 .73
RCI3 .008 1.42 2, 130 .25
Discrep3 .01 .82 2, 131 .44
HS3 .03 2.25 2, 131 .11
Note: RCI = Readiness for Change Index at Pretest, MCSD = Defensiveness at Pretest, OQ2 =
Distress at Posttest, RCI2 = Readiness for Change Index at Posttest, MCSD2 = Defensiveness at
Posttest, Discrep2 = Discrepancy at Posttest, HS2 = High Standards at Posttest, OQ3 = Distress
at Follow-up, MCSD3 = Defensiveness at Follow-up, RCI3 = Readiness for Change Index at
Follow-up, Discrep3= Discrepancy at Follow-up, HS3 = High Standards at Follow-up.













00000


High


Figure 4-1. Pretest Readiness for Change x Condition Interaction Effect Predicting Follow-up
Distress.


80.00

70.00

60.00

50.00

40.00

30.00

20.00

10.00

0.00


- Control
- Writing
- Feedback


Low


Mean


Pretest RCI










45.00
44.00
43.00
42.00
41.00
40.00
39.00
38.00
37.00
36.00
35.00


High


Figure 4-2. Pretest Readiness for Change x Condition Interaction Effect Predicting Posttest High
Standards.


- Control
- Writing
- Feedback


Low


Mean


Pretest RCI














woo
0
r^

'
___

r^
-, '
'


Mean

Pretest RCI


44.00

43.00

42.00

41.00

40.00

39.00

38.00

37.00

36.00

35.00


High


Figure 4-3. Pretest Readiness for Change x Condition Interaction Effect Predicting Follow up
High Standards.


- Control

- Writing
- Feedback


Low

















- Control
- Writing
- Feedback


High


Figure 4-4. Pretest Defensiveness x Condition Interaction Effect Predicting Change in Readiness
for Change from Pretest to Posttest.


5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
-1.00
-2.00
-3.00
-4.00
-5.00
-6.00


Low


Mean


Pretest MCSD











5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
-1.00
-2.00
-3.00
-4.00
-5.00


Low


Mean


4f

/
/

?--4
_ _____________^_______


High


Pretest MCSD


Figure 4-5. Pretest Defensiveness x Condition Interaction Effect Predicting Change in Distress
from Pretest to Follow-up.


o
C.
0
0
U-


- Control
- Writing
- Feedback










10.00

8.00

6.00

4.00

2.00

0.00

-2.00

-4.00

-6.00

-8.00

-10.00


Low


Mean


4
$


4
$


^$


4 a

4
4
^$


---
4p^
4
-------------------4
4
------------^------


High


Pretest High Standards


Figure 4-6. Pretest High Standards x Condition Interaction Effect Predicting Change in Distress
from Pretest to Follow-up.


o
o0
0
U_


- Control

- Writing
- Feedback









CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION

The purpose of this study was to provide empirical support for the potential therapeutic

impact of sharing test results with maladaptively perfectionistic individuals and to examine the

mechanisms contributing to change. The study represents an attempt to address the relative

scarcity of systematic research on the treatment of perfectionism and the difficulty in effectively

helping maladaptive perfectionists (Blatt & Zuroff, 2002). The study proposed two brief, online

experimental interventions (provision of feedback alone and provision of feedback accompanied

by the opportunity to express in writing reactions to the feedback received) and was the result of

broadening Finn's efforts on therapeutic benefits of providing clients with MMPI-2 feedback

(Finn & Tonsager, 1992; Newman & Greenway, 1997) and Pennebaker's (1997, 2004) work on

the benefits of expressive writing. The primary goal of the present study was to examine whether

the provision of feedback alone and feedback combined with the opportunity to react to feedback

have immediate and/or longer-term therapeutic benefits in terms of general level of distress,

readiness for change, defensiveness, and perfectionism in a sample of maladaptively

perfectionistic college students. In addition, this study explored various factors that may interact

with the treatment conditions in predicting therapeutic outcome.

With regard to treatment effects, results revealed that, when compared to the control group,

neither participants receiving perfectionism feedback alone, nor those receiving feedback and

given the opportunity to write about the reactions the feedback elicited showed a significant

change in distress, defensiveness, or readiness for change, at the posttest or at the 2-weeks

follow-up. In addition, no differences were found between the two experimental groups on the

respective variables. The only significant findings related to perfectionism. More specifically,

participants in both control and experimental groups exhibited a significant decrease in high









standards over time. In addition, and contrary to my expectations, participants in the control

condition exhibited a marginally significant decrease in discrepancy from pretest to posttest. The

results concerning the decrease in high standards perfectionism over time are noteworthy given

that perfectionism has been found to be a relatively stable characteristic (Rice & Aldea, 2006).

Although the major distinction between the control and the experimental groups was that the

latter received feedback, all participants completed measures inquiring about perfectionism (e.g.,

APS-R and URICA). A possibility is that all participants experienced something similar to direct

exposure: they had to ponder a topic perfectionists might otherwise prefer to avoid (Rice et al.,

2003). The question that still remains is why the change across groups occurred in high standards

but not discrepancy. In their quantitative and qualitative study, Rice et al. (2003) found that the

great majority of the participants identified standards as a core feature of perfectionism. Thus,

standards may be more salient to the concept of perfectionism and more available to participants'

awareness, whereas self-criticism and self-doubt (characteristics of the discrepancy dimension)

may be not only subtle, but also automatic core perceptions and beliefs that may be less

penetrable to alterations without a more sustained effort. Nevertheless, participants in the control

group showed a very slight, marginally significant decrease in discrepancy perfectionism at the

posttest, change that was not maintained at the 2-weeks follow-up. It is likely that participants in

the experimental conditions may have been overwhelmed by the feedback received.

Perfectionistic individuals tend to be sensitive (Rice et al., 2003) and the feedback's attempt to

increase awareness regarding the negative aspects of perfectionism and how perfectionism

negatively impacts a person may have been perceived as either threatening or too "pushy" and

thus generated resistance in those receiving it, whereas the control participants, simply filling out

questionnaires, may have pondered their perfectionism and reached their own conclusions with









regard to what, if anything, they need to change. Participants in the experimental conditions may

have simply dismissed the feedback received on the bases of the introductory paragraph to the

feedback that stated: "Scores have some degree of error or imperfection, which means that,

although your scores suggest the following description might fit, it is possible that, as a result of

measurement error, the scores and interpretation could be wrong or partially wrong."

Although disappointing, the failure of this study to provide support for the effectiveness of

feedback as a therapeutic intervention for perfectionists can be understood in the light of the

perfectionism literature, the writing paradigm research, and the general outcome research. The

findings regarding the way in which maladaptive perfectionistic characteristics might affect

otherwise therapeutic interventions have not been very encouraging. For instance, extensive

secondary analyses of the data from the Treatment of Depression Collaborative Research

Program showed that highly perfectionistic individuals tended to respond poorly when receiving

short-term therapy or medication in the treatment of depression (Blatt & Zuroff, 2002; Zuroff et

al., 2000). The small number of studies that have examined perfectionism as an a priori

consideration in study design have reported mixed findings. Shafran, Lee, Payne, & Fairburn,

(2006) found positive effects on problematic eating behavior by addressing personal standards in

an intervention, though longer-term effects on trait perfectionism were not apparent from their

research. Although they found that perfectionists receiving a brief cognitive restructuring

intervention reported decreased anxiety ratings, DiBartolo et al. (2001) failed to find significant

effects on negative automatic thoughts.

In addition to explanations regarding the nature of the population being the focus of the

study, another possible account for the lack of significant differences between participants who

received feedback alone and those who wrote about their reactions to the feedback received may









be found in the writing paradigm. In the studies that provided support for the benefits of writing,

the intervention was administered repeatedly, for at least three sessions, at different time

intervals. The repeated writing may force people to process topics they may otherwise avoid in

their everyday life, and thus may be conducive to making changes in the way they think about

the events in the short term and the long term (Pennebaker, 2004). The students in the present

study completed only one brief writing session and this dosage may have been too limited to

allow sufficient exposure to otherwise avoided issues. Even if one session of writing may have

been adequate, perhaps positive effects could not be observed for at least two other reasons.

First, the most common benefits of expressive writing have been on health and these effects tend

not to be evident in the first 2-3 weeks of writing but rather tend to emerge in the months

afterward (Pennebaker, 2004; Smyth, Stone, Hurewitz, & Kaeli, 1999). Thus, if positive effects

did occur in the current sample, they may have been either evident on variables that were not

measured or might take place at a later point in time. Second, in some studies, the writing

method has not been particularly effective in influencing participants' self-reports, although

changes were obvious to others (Pennebaker, 2004). This may be the case with this sample.

Perfectionistic individuals tend to engage in all-or nothing thinking and may be likely to

minimize and/or overlook small improvements.

In addition, data from forty years of outcome research provides strong empirical support

that different therapeutic approaches appear equal in effectiveness and that pantheoretical factors

play a significant role in the change process (Hubble, Duncan, & Miller, 1999; Rosenzweig,

1936; Wampold, 2001). In their empirical review of outcome research, Hubble et al. (1999) point

out that the therapeutic relationship and client factors account for approximately 70% of change

in therapy. One very likely explanation for the results of the current study is that the









experimental manipulation did not include these two crucial ingredients conducive to

improvement. Based on their review of therapy outcome, Orlinsky, Grawe, and Parks (1994)

reported that the client's role investment in therapy was associated with positive outcome in 70%

of the studies examined and the client's collaborative style was linked with positive outcome in

64% of the studies. The participants in the current study were not therapy clients, but college

students who participated in the study mostly in exchange for course extra credit. Important

factors in treatment outcome, such as participants' expectations, goals, level of involvement and

engagement, and openness (Orlinsky et al., 1994; Wampold, 2001) may not have been present in

the sample who, despite being screened for maladaptive perfectionism, may have treated the

experience simply as "another research study" rather than a therapeutic opportunity. Garfield

(1994) cited studies that revealed that individuals who are interested in, and come to therapy

have more specific formulations of their problems and what they want to accomplish than those

who make an appointment and do not show up, and in turn, clear goals were associated with

positive outcomes (Orlinsky et al, 1994). In addition, "the client has a uniquely personal theory

waiting for discovery, a framework for change to be unfolded and used for a successful

outcome" (Duncan, Miller, & Sparks, 2004, p. 73). Although the association between

maladaptive perfectionism and a vast realm of psychological problems has been demonstrated in

the literature, nothing was known with regard to how, specifically, the individuals in the present

study viewed their struggles and what their theories and ideas of change were. It is possible that

what the treatment conditions offered did not match or complement participants' preexisting

beliefs about their problems and the change process. Moreover, given the way in which the study

was carried out (i.e., via the internet) neither the participants, nor the feedback provider were

able to take a collaborative and interactive role in the process. This becomes relevant given what









individuals at the receiving end of therapeutic interventions tend to find important. Thus, Phillips

(1984), through interviewing clients involved in different therapy modalities, found that

important factors for clients were to have a time and a place to focus on themselves and have

someone listen, care, and understand. Gold (1994) reported that clients rated the relationship

with the therapist as equal to or more important than the specific therapeutic techniques used.

Clinicians and researchers alike have acknowledged the central role of the therapist-client

relationship in the process of change, with the definition of the alliance focusing on the

collaborative and interactive elements in the relationship (Duncan et al., 2004; Gelso & Carter,

1985; Horvarth & Symonds, 1991; Wampold, 2001). Incorporating students' participation with

an emphasis on respect for the participant in accordance with client-centered principles, may

have made the feedback more personally relevant, meaningful, and easier to be accepted by

participants, and perhaps, ultimately leading to positive outcomes with regard to distress,

readiness for change, and defensiveness.

Although the differences between the two experimental groups and the control group on

the study variables were not obvious, the results of this study shed light on some of the potential

mechanisms that may facilitate or hinder the effect of these interventions for maladaptively

perfectionistic college students. Thus, the effects of feedback alone or feedback combined with

the opportunity to express in writing the reactions that the feedback elicited appeared to be

influenced by the pretreatment levels of mainly two variables: readiness for change and

defensiveness. The study revealed that participants' readiness for change at pretest interacted

with the experimental condition to predict distress level at the 2-weeks follow-up and high

standards scores at both posttest and follow-up. Interestingly, participants who received feedback

alone and were motivated to change at the pretest (high readiness for change scores) showed









more distress two weeks after the intervention that those who received feedback and had low

levels of readiness for change. The opposite pattern was observed in the control group. In other

words, it appears that maladaptively perfectionistic students who have more desire to change

benefit the least from receiving perfectionism feedback, whereas those with reduced readiness

for change benefit the most. It is possible that the students motivated to change may have

become more aware of, and discontented with some of the issues they were experiencing as a

result of the feedback received. They may know what they need to change but their goals may be

too unrealistic to be achieved which, in turn, is more likely to lead to frustration and

disappointment with self and, ultimately to increased distress. Sorotzkin (1998) pointed out that

perfectionistic individuals tend to engage in all-or-nothing thinking, strive for perfectionistic

therapeutic goals, and are unable to recognize and be satisfied with small improvements. That the

expectations of participants highly motivated to change may increase as a result of receiving

feedback is a very likely explanation in light of the present study's finding related to the role of

readiness for change and impact on participants' high standards perfectionism.

Similar to the effects on distress, participants' level of readiness for change at pretest

interacted with the experimental conditions to predict high standards scores at both posttest and

follow-up. Individuals who were motivated to change and received feedback showed higher

levels of high standards immediately after the intervention and at the 2-week follow-up than the

students who received feedback and had low readiness for change at the onset of the study. The

participants in the control group with low motivation to change exhibited the lowest standards

scores at both posttest and follow-up. Although the effect of the readiness for change x writing

condition interaction was not evident immediately following the experimental manipulation, it

became apparent two weeks later. Thus, students with high readiness for change who received









feedback and wrote their reactions demonstrated lower standards at follow-up than those with

low readiness for change in the same experimental condition. It appears that for maladaptive

perfectionistic individuals who are willing to consider change, the simple provision of feedback

is associated with elevated standards, while the provision of feedback and the opportunity to

write reactions to the feedback has a more beneficial effect in terms of lowering standards.

Participants motivated to change may already be aware of some of the issues they are

experiencing and they may already be immersed in a process of assessing the pros and cons of

their personal change. The feedback simply informs individuals of what is wrong or ineffective

about themselves, but does not provide suggestions of how to go about change, which may lead

to the students feeling stressed, overwhelmed, and inadequate. Because they may not have other

tools readily available to respond to stress, students may react by developing unrealistic coping

goals and standards and increasing self-expectations in regard to how to manage the issues they

are facing. Writing after receiving feedback may represent an opportunity to process, label,

organize, and restructure thought and reactions surrounding an emotionally charged issue; indeed

it is this very issue which may prevent perfectionists who are highly motivated to change to

increase their standards and expectations regarding how fast or profound the change should be.

Indeed, based on their research with individuals who underwent traumatic events, Klein and

Boals (2001) suggest that one of the effects of writing is that in the weeks following the writing

sessions, but not immediately after, participants were more likely to think less about their trauma

and focus on other issues in their lives.

High standards in the current sample were not only affected by the interventions, but also

played a significant role in how individuals responded to the interventions. Thus, it was found

that individuals in both experimental conditions who had lower standards at the pretest showed a









more significant change in their distress level from pretest to follow-up than those with high

standards to begin with. It is also noteworthy that participants in the control condition with lower

standards at the pretest exhibited the most change in distress, whereas control participants with

elevated high standards demonstrated the least change in distress. Although all participants had

high standards (maladaptive perfectionists were selected based on a combination of elevated

High Standards and Discrepancy scores), it appears that even slightly lower high standards help

participants benefit more from feedback. Maladaptive perfectionists with excessive high

standards may hold themselves to very rigid self-expectations and self-evaluations that,

combined with the stress the content of the feedback might have elicited, hinders implementation

of change and is associated with higher levels of distress. The results of the present study also

suggest that for maladaptive perfectionists with extremely high standards, feedback (either alone

or combined with the opportunity to write) is a better intervention than no intervention at all with

regard to facilitating some reduction in the distress level, whereas for maladaptive perfectionists

with relatively low standards a more indirect approach rather than provision of direct feedback

appears to be more useful.

Another set of results regarding the role of defensiveness merits consideration.

Participants' level of defensiveness at pretest interacted with the interventions to predict change

in readiness for change from pretest to follow-up and change in distress from pretest to follow-

up, respectively. With regard to the former, participants with reduced defensiveness at the onset

of the study who received feedback and wrote about their reactions showed the most significant

change in readiness for change two weeks after the intervention, whereas defensive participants

in the feedback and writing condition showed the least change. Surprisingly, defensive

participants in the control condition demonstrated more change in readiness for change than their









counterparts in the feedback and writing condition. Already defensive individuals are more likely

to feel threatened by the content of the feedback and thus more probable to reject the information

received and close off to the idea of change. Again, an indirect, non-threatening intervention may

be more effective for these individuals. The less defensive students may also be more open and,

through processing the information received by writing their thoughts and reactions they may

become more willing to consider the relevance of the feedback and, ultimately, consider change.

The results of the interaction between defensiveness at pretest and intervention in

predicting change in distress from pretest to follow-up were perplexing and not all expected.

Highly defensive students who received feedback showed the most positive change in distress

level two weeks after the intervention as did the control participants low in defensiveness at

pretest. A possible explanation for the results is that highly defensive individuals, following

feedback, may become concerned about being perceived as people with problems, an image in

direct opposition to their desired image as "the best" or "perfect." Consequently, they may try to

put on a facade and minimize their difficulties (Rice et al., 2003). Nondefensive control

participants may have shown positive change in distress because they were more open to self-

examination, perhaps stimulated by engaging in the less threatening (as compared to receiving

feedback) task of completing questionnaires inquiring about perfectionism and distress.

Clinical Considerations

Although the provision of feedback in the current study did not bring about support for its

effectiveness as a free standing therapeutic intervention, its potential positive and beneficial role

within the context of therapy warrants further exploration. Within the framework of a strong

therapeutic alliance in which client's theory of change is taken into consideration and client's

input and reactions are processed, provision of feedback based on personality assessment can be

a powerful tool (Finn & Tonsager, 1992; Newman & Greenway, 1997). Indeed, maladaptive









perfectionists, although a population at risk, might be difficult to treat. In the field of therapy,

some types of clients often have been portrayed as "pathological monsters of epic proportions

(e.g., borderlines)" (Duncan et al., 2004, p. 49) and my concern is that maladaptive perfectionists

may, sooner or later, end up in the same category. Indeed, maladaptive perfectionists may not

respond well to standard therapeutic interventions, but mental health professionals more typically

accommodate and adjust to the client rather than expect the client to fit what they have to offer.

As the results above illustrate, and similar to challenges with diagnostic labels, within-

group variations in the category of maladaptive perfectionists should be carefully considered in

clinical contexts; although more similar than different from each other in terms of perfectionism,

these participants responded differently to the same interventions, based on their readiness for

change, defensiveness, and high standards. This was not a comprehensive study and most likely

there are many other client variables to be taken into consideration. A client-oriented or client-

informed approach that is organized around client's perceptions, views, resources, and

experiences may work best for these individuals. Thus, counselors encountering clients with

maladaptive perfectionistic tendencies might be advised to assess clients' desire and readiness

for change, level of defensiveness, and high standards. Clients who hardly consider significant

changes in their lives, who have fewer self-protective mechanisms in place, and relatively low

and more flexible standards may benefit from a more direct intervention to help them realize

when and how their perfectionism negatively impacts their lives. However, maladaptive

perfectionistic clients with a strong defensive armor, who are more aware of the issues affecting

them and want to be better, or those with extreme high standards have to be approached with

carefulness. Instead of telling these clients that they have a problem, the counselor may ask them

to talk about their own perceptions of what is going on with them. Instead of challenging clients'









defensiveness the counselor may respond largely in a reflective manner, "rolling with client's

'resistance' or 'denial' instead of challenging it head-on" (Miller, 1995, p. 95).

In addition, the counselor may inquire about client's expectations and goals for therapy

and help the client adjust the goals to be realistic and achievable Reasonable objectives or sub-

goals to be achieved can be set as steps toward larger aspirations. The therapist may want to help

the client acknowledge small achievements and improvements by recognizing client resources,

resilience, strengths, and circumstances in and outside of therapy in which the client is capable

and successful, but the client is reluctant to, or for other reasons does not, acknowledge those

successes. The therapist can listen for and validate accomplishments and changes otherwise

overlooked by clients and create a context in which to explore and develop new or different

perspectives, behaviors, and experiences. With patient prompting, the counselor may direct

attention to changes taking place not only in therapy, but between sessions as well, by asking

questions that elicit further elaboration on the part of the client on the change that did occur and

the client's contribution in bringing it about. Such an approach may increase awareness of gains,

large or small, that may assist the client in attributing change to personal efforts, valuing the

power of small improvements, and viewing change as resulting from something the client did

and can repeat in the future (Berg & Miller, 1992).

In addition to the current findings, research outcomes regarding the mediational and

moderational role of different factors in the relationship between perfectionism and distress can

provide helpful insights for the development of effective therapeutic interventions targeted for

maladaptive perfectionists. Rather than focusing on perfectionism or the distress associated with

it, which may elicit defensiveness and desires to achieve unrealistic therapeutic goals, the

therapist can address the factors that could reduce the effects of maladaptive perfectionism on









symptoms. Using structural equations analyses on a large sample of college students, Aldea and

Rice (2006) found support for the mediational role of emotional dysregulation, operationalized

with measures of emotional reactivity and splitting, in the relationship between perfectionism

and distress. Their findings suggest that maladaptive perfectionism leads to difficulty regulating

emotional responses that consequently leads to increased levels of psychological distress. Thus,

counselors working with maladaptive perfectionists are recommended to assess for emotion

regulation concerns and employ strategies directed at helping clients to better regulate their

emotional arousal, diminish their susceptibility to experience events or incidents as either

"perfect" or "bad," and increase adaptive and appropriate responses to various situations.

Other authors (Blankstein & Dunkley, 2002; Dunkley et al., 2002; Rice et al., 2006) found

evidence regarding the role of stress and coping in the relation between perfectionism and

different forms of distress. Stress (often self-induced) and inappropriate coping mechanisms

maintain perfectionists' anguish and prevent them from moving beyond the distress associated

with perceived stressful situations. Stress management and coping strategies techniques can be

incorporated in the counseling of maladaptive perfectionists. Addressing both primary and

secondary stress appraisal processes (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984) may enable clients to deal more

effectively with situations that trigger stress. A goal of treatment can be the development of

strategies and skills that facilitate problem-focused, task-oriented, active, and adaptive coping to

replace maladaptive coping mechanisms such as avoidance, overgeneralization, rumination,

disengagement, and denial (Blankstein & Dunkley, 2002). Such interventions aimed at the

development of coping skills and reduction of perceived stress may also be helpful in terms of

facilitating client's participation in therapy. First, these relatively straightforward techniques may

provide concrete tools and some relief which may instill hope and trust in the therapy process.









Second, addressing client's appraisal of situations and increasing ability to cope with stress, may

provide client the necessary proficiency to cope with the stress the therapeutic process

sometimes entails when addressing sensitive issues (such as perfectionism, high standards, self-

criticism).

Additionally, lack of social support or connectedness, was found to play an important part

in the link between perfectionism and distress (Blankstein & Dunkley, 2002, Rice et al., 2006).

Clinicians, therefore, may want to assess both quality and quantity of perfectionists' social

support and use interventions that help clients reconceptualize and reframe their relations and

maximize social support. Process-oriented group therapy in which members provide support and

feedback to each other may be a useful adjunct to individual counseling. As well, interpersonal

therapeutic approaches that address and process client-therapist interactions in the here-and-now

may improve the therapeutic alliance and prevent at least some of clients' disappointment or

impatience with the process and preclude them from prematurely dropping out of counseling

(Blatt et al., 1998).

Perfectionism is a pervasive personality characteristic relatively impermeable to change

(Rice & Aldea, 2006). Perfectionistic individuals do not want to give up their perfectionism

altogether (Rice et al., 2003). In addition to the strategies outlined so far and in order to prevent

frustration from both client (who may want to hold on at least some aspects of their

perfectionism) and therapist (who may be tempted, in a desire to help the client, to try to

eradicate perfectionistic tendencies), the counselor may consider assisting clients pursue the

positive, adaptive, and motivational aspect of their perfectionism in a constructive manner while

diminishing the harmful effects of maladaptive perfectionism. An approach drawing from client-

centered, cognitive-behavioral, interpersonal, and motivational interviewing therapies and









integrating the various strategies outlined above, might be well-suited for treating maladaptively

perfectionistic clients. However, as the results of this study point out, the one-approach-fits-all

strategy may undermine treatment outcome. Careful assessment and consideration of clients'

pre-treatment level of readiness and motivation for change, defensiveness, and high standards,

monitoring client's perceptions of, and reactions to the process itself and the therapeutic alliance,

and therapist's flexibility in calibrating therapy to the client's individual needs may be essential

factors in effectively helping people who experience significant distress in different areas of their

lives as a result of their maladaptive perfectionistic tendencies.

Limitations and Future Directions

There are certain limitations of the current study that must be acknowledged and addressed

in future research. The nature of the sample needs to be taken into consideration. The sample

consisted of college students attending two large universities in the Southeast United Stated. The

findings may not generalize to college students in other areas of the country or to students

attending universities outside the U.S. Even though the sample size was large and relatively

diverse it was comprised predominantly of White women. Although preliminary analyses

revealed no significant differences between women and men on any of the pretest variables, it is

possible that the results would have revealed different responses to feedback depending on

gender, as well as other factors such as family history, socioeconomic status, or race/ethnicity.

However, exploring such hypotheses with this sample would have necessitated examining

models with group sizes too small for the analyses. Future work with larger and more diverse

samples could examine, for instance, whether provision of feedback is more beneficial for some

racial/ethnic, gender, or socioeconomic groups than others. In addition, the intervention may

have a more significant impact on a sample of maladaptive perfectionists seeking therapeutic

services, and receiving those services from trained professional counselors, versus those









participating in an online psychology experiment for course credit. It appears especially

important to replicate these findings in clinical samples.

A related issue is that of diagnosis or presenting concerns. Although evidence indicates

that maladaptive perfectionism is associated with a variety of specific psychological disorders

such as depression, eating disorders, anxiety, social phobia, obsessive-compulsive problems, and

substance abuse (Flett & Hewitt, 2002), only general level of distress was assessed in the current

study. Future research needs to ensure that participants are adequately screened for specific

presenting distress and could also examine whether the findings generalize to specific areas of

psychological impairment. The presence of comorbid personality disorders also needs to be

taken into account. Moreover, participants' desire to receive feedback was not assessed although

it might have significantly influenced the results. Snyder, Ingram, Handelsman, Wells, and

Huwieler (1982) examined the therapeutic consequences of the desire for feedback and found

that individuals with higher desire for feedback were more willing to participate in therapy,

showed more hope for positive change, and were more responsive to feedback.

Another limitation pertains to the fact that the study relied entirely on self-report measures.

Future studies could improve on the present efforts by collecting reports of perfectionism and

psychological distress from other informants and diversify methodologies, such as by including

the use of interview data (Slaney et al., 2000). As well, it appears important to replicate current

findings using multiple measures of the constructs in order to ensure validity and generalizability

of the results to related measures and constructs. One may wonder whether similar results would

be reached if other measures of perfectionism, distress, readiness for change, and defensiveness

were used. Collecting data over longer time intervals and having multiple writing sessions after

receiving feedback would generate more insight into the long-term effects of the treatment









conditions and would help better decipher the effects of feedback alone versus receiving

feedback and processing the information received.

On the same lines, the nature and the delivery of feedback warrants further discussion.

Future studies could examine which portions of the feedback maladaptive perfectionists identify

with and find most relevant, whether the length of the feedback or the wording has an influence

on how it is received, and in which contexts does feedback have specific therapeutic value.

Future research may consider studying the effects of providing information that includes coping

skills strategies and recommendations along with the perfectionism feedback. It should be kept in

mind that the feedback was not interactive and it lacked the relational component imperative in

the therapy encounter. The outcome therapy data shows that therapy works if there is a strong

therapeutic alliance experienced positively by the client, the clients perceive therapy to be

relevant to their concerns, and clients are active participants in the process (Wampold, 2001).

Future studies might examine whether specific perfectionism feedback provided within the

context of an ongoing therapy relationship produces more positive effects on distress and other

variables than were observed here and identify underlying factors as predictors of therapeutic

change.

Conclusions

Maladaptive perfectionism has been clearly linked with a plethora of significant

psychological concerns, but less apparent from the current literature is the effectiveness of

interventions aimed at helping maladaptively perfectionistic individuals reduce their

psychological distress and improve their functioning. Much of the limited research that does

exist is not necessarily supportive of typical therapeutic intervention efforts and it was suggested

that long-term psychodynamic therapy is necessary to help this population (Blat et al., 1995,

1998). The question still remains whether it is possible to help maladaptive perfectionists









relinquish some of the distress they are experiencing without resorting to long-term therapy.

Based on the research on the effects of therapeutic feedback (Finn & Tonsager, 1992) and

expressive writing (Pennebaker, 1997, 2004), two brief, online interventions, provision of

feedback and provision of feedback followed by an opportunity to express in writing reactions

the feedback elicited, were tested in the current study on a sample of maladaptive perfectionistic

college students. It was believed that providing perfectionists with perfectionism feedback

pointing out the negative consequences that can be associated with perfectionism may have

beneficial effects in terms of distress, readiness for change, defensiveness, and ultimately

perfectionism.

Although support was not found for the therapeutic benefits of feedback, the study

nevertheless offered important insights regarding the relevance of individual characteristics on

how perfectionists respond to interventions. More specifically, participants with high levels of

pre-intervention readiness for change, defensiveness or high standards tended to show less gains

from feedback in terms of distress and readiness for change than their counterparts with low pre-

intervention scores on those measures. This study suggests that although perfectionism feedback

may be appropriate to use with some maladaptive perfectionists (e.g., those unmotivated to

change, non-defensive, or with relatively lower standards), it may be detrimental to others. The

broader implication of the current study is the necessity to include client dimensions in studies of

therapeutic interventions for perfectionists and to evaluate the interaction of individual/client

variables with treatment factors in predicting outcome. In searching for a way of better serving

maladaptive perfectionistic individuals perhaps researchers and clinicians alike could revisit

Paul's (1967) question: "What treatment, by whom, is most effective for this individual with that

specific problem under which set of circumstances?"









APPENDIX A
INFORMED CONSENT FORM 1

The purpose of this study is to investigate different personality characteristics. It is anticipated
that the completion of the questionnaire to follow will take approximately 5 minutes of your
time. After completing the questionnaire, you may be selected to participate further in the study.
If selected, more information regarding the next steps for participation will be provided.

You can only participate if you are 18 years of age, or older. Your participation in this study is
completely voluntary. There is no penalty for not participating and you have the right to
withdraw from the study at anytime without consequence.

If you have any questions concerning the survey, you may contact Mirela Aldea, Department of
Psychology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-2250, ph. 352-392-0601,
adinaald@yahoo.com or Dr. Ken Rice, Department of Psychology, University of Florida,
Gainesville, FL 32611-2250, kgrl@ufl.edu.

Any questions or concerns about your rights in this study can be directed to the UFIRB Office,
Box 112250, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-2250. The study has been approved
by the UFIRB (protocol # 2006-U-0158).

By checking the box below I certify that I have read the procedure described above, that I
understand its contents, and that I have voluntarily agreed to participate in this research study.









APPENDIX B
INFORMED CONSENT FORM 2

The purpose of this study is to investigate the way in personality characteristics may affect how
psychological test feedback is understood. There are three phases in the study. In the first phase,
you will complete a set of questionnaires. These questionnaires concern certain attitudes you
have about problems people sometimes have and about yourself. The second phase will occur
about one week later. In the second phase, you will receive some information and then you will
complete a set of questionnaires. In the third phase, about 2 weeks later, you will complete
another set of questionnaires. It is anticipated that complete participation in all three phases
combined will take approximately 212 hours or less.

There are no known risks involved in completing the study and many students may find that they
learn something about themselves from participating. Nonetheless, if being part of the study
makes you feel uncomfortable, you may consider speaking to a counselor who may be able to
help you with your reactions. You can contact a counselor through the University of Florida
Counseling Center (P301 Peabody Hall, 392-1575). You may benefit by participating in this
study through increased awareness and self-understanding. You will also be contributing to
knowledge regarding researchers' ability to understand psychological factors involved in the
process of feedback.

Your identity will be kept confidential to the extent provided by law. Your responses on the
questionnaires will be assigned a code number. The list connecting your name to this number
will be kept in a password-protected computer file. When the study is completed and the data
have been analyzed, the list will be destroyed. Your name will not be used in any report.

You can only participate if you are 18 years of age, or older. Your participation in this study is
completely voluntary. There is no penalty for not participating and you have the right to
withdraw from the study at anytime without consequence.

If you have any questions concerning the survey, you may contact Mirela Aldea, Department of
Psychology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-2250, ph 392-0601,
adinaald@yahoo.com or Dr. Ken Rice, Department of Psychology, University of Florida,
Gainesville, FL 32611-2250, ext. 246, kgrl@ufl.edu.

Any questions or concerns about your rights in this study can be directed to the UFIRB Office,
Box 112250, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-2250.


By typing my name below, I certify that I have read the procedure described above, that I
understand its contents, and that I have voluntarily agreed to participate in this research study.









APPENDIX C
DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION

1. Please click the number next to your gender:


(1) MALE


(2) FEMALE


How old are you? years
Please click the number next to your Race/Ethnicity or please describe the specific group that
you identify with the most in the blank next to your ethnicity (for example, Chinese American,
German, Navajo, Alaskan Aleut):


(1) Asian or Asian-American
(2) Black, African-American
(3) Hispanic, Latino, Mexican-Am
(4) Pacific Islander
(5) Native American or American
(6) White, European American
(7) Multicultural Mixed Race
(8) Other, please specify


Indian


4. How many official organizations are you involved with at school
(for example, clubs, athletics, fraternities/sororities, etc.) organizations

5. Please click the number next to your current living situation while attending UF:
(1) live on campus in a residence hall
(2) live in a fraternity or sorority
(3) live off-campus in an apartment or house (includes Married Student Housing)
(4) live off-campus with parents)
(5) cooperative house


6. Please click the number next to your college:
(1) Agricultural & Life Sciences
(2) Business Administration
(3) Dentistry
(4) Design, Construction, & Planning
(5) Education
(6) Engineering
(7) Fine Arts
(8) Health Professions
(9) Health & Human Performance


(10) Journalism & Communications
(11) Law
(12) Liberal Arts & Sciences
(13) Medicine
(14) Natural Resources & Environment
(15) Nursing
(16) Pharmacy
(17) Veterinary Medicine
(18) Undecided, Undeclared


7. How many semesters have you completed at UF? (don't count
the current semester, put 0 if you are a first semester student) UF Semesters


8. How many semesters of college have you completed altogether
(at UF or elsewhere)?

9. Please indicate your undergraduate Grade Point Average:
(skip this if you don't have a GPA yet)


Total Semesters


GPA (4.0 scale)









10. Please click the number next to your parents' marital status:
(1) Married and living together (4) Divorced and one or both parents remarried
(2) Separated (5) Widowed, or one parent deceased
(3) Divorced and neither parent remarried (6) Single-parent (never been married)
*****The following 2 questions ask about your MOTHER or the person who is or was the
primary female caregiver in your family.

11. How much education has she completed?
(1) less than high school
(2) high school degree (or GED)
(3) post high school (e.g., trade, technical, secretarial)
(4) some college (e.g., one year, associate's degree)
(5) completed college (e.g., bachelor's degree)
(6) some graduate or post-bachelor's training
(7) completed graduate or post-bachelor's training

12. What is her current employment status?
(1) she works full-time
(2) she works part-time (less than 30 hours per week)
(3) she does not work outside the home because she is employed full-time in home-making
(4) she does not work because she is laid off or unemployed
(5) she does not work because she is disabled
(6) she does not work because she is retired
(7) other (describe)
*****The following 2 questions ask about your FATHER or the person who is or was the
primary male caregiver in your family.

13. How much education has he completed?
(1) less than high school
(2) high school degree (or GED)
(3) post high school (e.g., trade, technical, secretarial)
(4) some college (e.g., one year, associate's degree)
(5) completed college (e.g., bachelor's degree)
(6) some graduate or post-bachelor's training
(7) completed graduate or post-bachelor's training

14. What is his current employment status?
(1) he works full-time
(2) he works part-time (less than 30 hours per week)
(3) he does not work outside the home because he is employed full-time in home-making
(4) he does not work because he is laid off or unemployed
(5) he does not work because he is disabled
(6) he does not work because he is retired
(7) other (describe)









15. Have you ever been in therapy/counseling?
(1) Yes (2) No

16. If you answered yes to the question above, please specify the number of sessions you had.
sessions

17. Are you currently seeing a therapist/counselor?
(1) Yes (2) No

18. If yes, how many sessions have you had? sessions









APPENDIX D
PERFECTIONISM FEEDBACK

General Introduction
One of the questionnaires you completed measures three things: personal standards or
expectations for performance, the degree to which you see yourself living up to those standards,
and your preferences for order and organization. All three of these vary across individuals, with
some people scoring high on all three, some scoring low, and others having a mixture of scores,
with some higher than others. Although the questionnaire has been used in several ways, in much
of the research the measure is used to identify perfectionists and non-perfectionists.
Your results have been compared to a large sample of over 3000 college students ranging in age
from 17 to 57 (average age was almost 21 years). However, tests such as the one you completed
are not, pardon this expression, perfect, and people are variable too. Scores have some degree of
error or imperfection, which means that although your scores suggest the following description
might fit you well, some elements of the description below may be more fitting than others.
Your results
The combination of your scores suggests that you constantly strive for perfection. You have the
tendency to impose extremely high standards upon yourself. At the same time, you engage in
self-evaluations that are very critical and emphasize personal shortcomings in living up to often
extremely high standards for performance. You tend to view yourself as responsible for
achieving your standards, yet you doubt your efforts will bring about the results you want. You
are hardly satisfied with what others might consider successful or even superior achievement.
Thus, you may be prone to perceiving and emphasizing your failures rather than your
achievements, which often results in stress and in feelings of self-worthlessness. You may
experience feelings of failure, helplessness, and hopelessness and these are often associated with
depression.
You may feel you are not doing well academically even though your grades, by other standards,
would be good. You may experience concerns over course difficulty, may tend to procrastinate,
and express increased anxiety and worry related to being evaluated on different tasks (such as
exams).
You may experience social difficulties because you may try to live up to the perceived standards
and expectations imposed by others, many times seeking the approval and acceptance of
significant people in your life. At the same time, you tend to be afraid of negative social
evaluations, criticism, and rejection. Your stress level, self-esteem, and overall comfort in social
situations may be negatively affected because you may be more sensitive to possible criticism
from others, possible failure, or loss of control. In the event that you perceived that you failed in
some way, you tend to become even harsher and more critical of yourself, which may further
affect your self-worth, self-esteem, or social comfort.
In short, you emphasize high personal standards and a desire to excel in performance to meet
those standards. You expect a lot of yourself but you are rather inflexible in those expectations.
You are harsh when you evaluate yourself and extremely self-critical, and you have difficulty
being fully satisfied with, and enjoying your performance and achievements. You seem to be
driven by a strong need to avoid failure which, combined with your difficulty acknowledging
success, leads to more stress, worry, and perhaps perceiving yourself as worthless. In other









words, you are striving for perfection and are unable to accept anything less than perfection.
Although high standards in and of themselves may be motivational and adequate, the
combination of high standards and self-criticism might set you up for problems, both in terms of
how you feel about yourself and in terms of how effectively or pleasantly you are able to interact
with others.









APPENDIX E
WRITING INSTRUCTIONS

Please think about the reactions, thoughts, and feelings you have had in response to the feedback
you just received. Your task is to write for 20 minutes about your very deepest reactions,
thoughts, and feelings to the feedback. In your writing, try to let yourself go and to write
continuously about your emotions and thoughts related to perfectionism, performance
expectations, and self-criticism that the feedback may have brought up.










APPENDIX F
EARLY HISTORY OF FLORIDA

Please take a few minutes and read the following text regarding the early history of Florida.

People first reached Florida at least 12,000 years ago. The rich variety of environments in
prehistoric Florida supported a large number of plants and animals. The animal population
included most mammals that we know today. In addition, many other large mammals that are
now extinct (such as the saber-tooth tiger, mastodon, giant armadillo, and camel) roamed the
land. The Florida coastline along the Atlantic Ocean and the Gulf of Mexico was very different
12,000 years ago. The sea level was much lower than it is today. As a result, the Florida
peninsula was more than twice as large as it is now. The people who inhabited Florida at that
time were hunters and gatherers, who only rarely sought big game for food. Modem researchers
think that their diet consisted of small animals, plants, nuts, and shellfish. These first Floridians
settled in areas where a steady water supply, good stone resources for tool making, and firewood
were available. Over the centuries, these native people developed complex cultures. During the
period prior to contact with Europeans, native societies of the peninsula developed cultivated
agriculture, traded with other groups in what is now the southeastern United States, and
increased their social organization, reflected in large temple mounds and village complexes.

Written records about life in Florida began with the arrival of the Spanish explorer and
adventurer Juan Ponce de Le6n in 1513. Sometime between April 2 and April 8, Ponce de Le6n
waded ashore on the northeast coast of Florida, possibly near present-day St. Augustine. He
called the area la Florida, in honor of Pascua florida ("feast of the flowers"), Spain's Eastertime
celebration. Other Europeans may have reached Florida earlier, but no firm evidence of such
achievement has been found.

On another voyage in 1521, Ponce de Le6n landed on the southwestern coast of the peninsula,
accompanied by two-hundred people, fifty horses, and numerous beasts of burden. His
colonization attempt quickly failed because of attacks by native people. However, Ponce de
Le6n's activities served to identify Florida as a desirable place for explorers, missionaries, and
treasure seekers.

In 1539 Hernando de Soto began another expedition in search of gold and silver, which took him
on a long trek through Florida and what is now the southeastern United States. For four years, de
Soto's expedition wandered, in hopes of finding the fabled wealth of the Indian people. De Soto
and his soldiers camped for five months in the area now known as Tallahassee. De Soto died
near the Mississippi River in 1542. Survivors of his expedition eventually reached Mexico.

No great treasure troves awaited the Spanish conquistadores who explored Florida. However,
their stories helped inform Europeans about Florida and its relationship to Cuba, Mexico, and
Central and South America, from which Spain regularly shipped gold, silver, and other products.











APPENDIX G
THE ALMOST PERFECT SCALE REVISED (APS-R)

The following items are designed to measure certain attitudes people have toward themselves,
their performance, and toward others. It is important that your answers be true and accurate for
you. In the space next to the statement, please enter a number from 1 ("strongly disagree") to 7
("strongly agree") to describe your degree of agreement with each item.

STRONGLY DISAGREE SLIGHTLY NEUTRAL SLIGHTLY AGREE STRONGLY
DISAGREE DISAGREE AGREEE AGREE
1 2 3 4 5 6 7


1. I have high standards for my performance at work or at school.
2. I am an orderly person.
3. I often feel frustrated because I can't meet my goals.
4. Neatness is important to me.
5. If you don't expect much out of yourself you will never succeed.
6. My best just never seems to be good enough for me.
7. I think things should be put away in their place.
8. I have high expectations for myself.
9. I rarely live up to my high standards.
10. I like to always be organized and disciplined.
11. Doing my best never seems to be enough.
12. I set very high standards for myself.
13. I am never satisfied with my accomplishments.
14. I expect the best from myself.
15. I often worry about not measuring up to my own expectations.
16. My performance rarely measures up to my standards.
17. I am not satisfied even when I know I have done my best.
18. I am seldom able to meet my own high standards for performance.
19. I try to do my best at everything I do.
20. I am hardly ever satisfied with my performance.
21. I hardly ever feel that what I've done is good enough.
22. I have a strong need to strive for excellence.
23. I often feel disappointment after completing a task because I know I could have done better.
24. Using the scale above, please rate the degree to which you agree that you are perfectionistic.











APPENDIX H
UNIVERSITY OF RHODE ISLAND CHANGE ASSESSMENT (URICA)

Each statement describes how a person might feel when approaching problems in their lives.
Please indicate the extent to which you tend to agree or disagree with each statement. In each
case, make your choice in terms of how you feel right now, not what you have felt in the past or
would like to feel.

There are FIVE possible responses to each of the items in the questionnaire:

1 = Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree
3 = Undecided 4 = Agree
5 = Strongly Agree

1. As far as I'm concerned, I don't have any perfectionism-related problems that need changing.

2. I think I might be ready for some self-improvement. |

3. I am doing something about the perfectionism-related problems) that had been bothering me. |

4. It might be worthwhile to work on my perfectionism-related problemss. |

5. I'm not the problem one. It doesn't make much sense for me to seek help. E

6. It worries me that I might slip back on a perfectionism-related problem I have already changed, so I want -
to seek help. Li
7. I am finally doing some work on my perfectionism-related problemss. |

8. I've been thinking that I might want to change something about myself.

9. I have been successful in working on my perfectionism-related problems) but I'm not sure I can keep up -
the effort on my own.
10. At times my perfectionism-related problem is difficult, but I'm working on it. |

11. Seeking help would pretty much be a waste of time for me because the problem doesn't have to do with
me. L
12. I'm hoping to better understand myself.

13. I guess I have faults, but there's nothing that I really need to change. E

14. I am really working hard to change. E

15. I have a perfectionism-related problem and I really think I should work at it. E










16. I'm not following through with what I had already changed as well as I had hoped, and I want to prevent a |
relapse of any perfectionism-related problems.
17. Even though I'm not always successful in changing, I am at least working on my perfectionism-related
problemss. U
18. I thought once I had resolved my perfectionism-related problems) I would be free of it, but sometimes I -
still find myself struggling with it.
19. I wish I had more ideas on how to solve the perfectionism-related problemss. U

20. I have started working on my perfectionism-related problems) but I would like help. U

21. Maybe somebody will be able to help me. U

22. I may need a boost right now to help me maiainain the changes I've already made. U

23. I may be part of the perfectionism-related problemss, but I don't really think I am. i

24. I hope that someone will have some good advice for me. U

25. Anyone can talk about changing; I'm actually doing something about it. U

26. All this talk about psychology is boring. Why can't people just forget about their problems? U

27. I want to prevent myself from having a relapse of my perfectionism-related problemss. U

28. It is frustrating, but I feel I might be having a recurrence of a perfectionism-related problem I thought I
had resolved. LJ
29. I have worries but so does the next person. Why spend time thinking about them? E

30. I am actively working on my perfectionism-related problemss. U

31. I would rather cope with my faults than try to change them. U

32. After all I had done to try to change my perfectionism-related problem, every now and again it comes
back to haunt me. LJ










APPENDIX I
MARLOWE-CROWNE SOCIAL DESIRABILITY SCALE SHORT VERSION (MCSD)

Listed below are a number of statements concerning personal attitudes and traits. Read each item
and decide whether the statement is true or false as it pertains to you personally.


T F 1. It is sometimes hard for me to go on with my work if I am not encouraged.
T F 2. I sometimes feel resentful when I don't get my way.
T F 3. On a few occasions, I have given up doing something because I thought too little of
my ability.
T F 4. There have been times when I felt like rebelling against people in authority even
though I knew they were right.
T F 5. No matter who I'm talking to, I'm always a good listener.
T F 6. There have been occasions when I took advantage of someone.
T F 7. I'm always willing to admit it when I make a mistake.
T F 8. I sometimes try to get even, rather than forgive and forget.
T F 9. I am always courteous, even to people who are disagreeable.
T F 10. I have never been irked when people expressed ideas very different from my own.
T F 11. There have been times when I was quite jealous of the good fortune of others.
T F 12. I am sometimes irritated by people who ask favors of me.
T F 13. I have never deliberately said something that hurt someone's feelings.









APPENDIX J
OUTCOME QUESTIONNAIRE (OQ-45)

Using the scale below, click the number which best describes how you felt during the past week.


ALMOST
NEVER ALWAYS
1 2 3 4 5


1. I get along well with others.
2. I tire quickly.
3. I feel no interest in things.
4. I feel stressed at work/school.
5. I blame myself for things.
6. I feel irritated.
7. I feel unhappy in my marriage/significant relationship.
8. I have thoughts of ending my life.
9. I feel weak.
10. I feel fearful.
11. After heavy drinking, I need a drink the next morning to get going (if you do not drink, mark
"never").
12. I find my work/school satisfying.
13. I am a happy person.
14. I work/study too much.
15. I feel worthless.
16. I am concerned about family troubles.
17. I have an unfulfilling sex life.
18. I feel lonely.
19. I have frequent arguments.
20. I feel loved and wanted.
21. I enjoy my spare time.
22. I have difficulty concentrating.
23. I feel hopeless about the future.
24. I like myself.
25. Disturbing thoughts come into my mind that I cannot get rid of.
26. I feel annoyed by people who criticize my drinking (or drug use). (If not applicable, mark
"never").
27. I have an upset stomach.
28. I am not working/studying as well as I used to.
29. My heart pounds too much.
30. I have trouble getting along with friends and close acquaintances.
31. I am satisfied with my life.
32. I have trouble at work/school because of drinking or drug use (If not applicable, mark
"never").
33. I feel that something bad is going to happen.
34. I have sore muscles.









35. I feel afraid of open spaces, or driving, or being on buses, subways, and so forth.
36. I feel nervous.
37. I feel my love relationships are full and complete.
38. I feel that I am not doing well at work/school.
39. I have too many disagreements at work/school.
40. I feel something is wrong with my mind.
41. I have trouble falling asleep or staying asleep.
42. I feel blue.
43. I am satisfied with my relationships with others.
44. I feel angry enough at work/school to do something I may regret.
45. I have headaches.









REFERENCE LIST


Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.

Aldea, M. A. & Rice, K. G. (2006). The role of emotional dysregulation in perfectionism and
psychological distress. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53, 498-510.

Alden, L. E., Ryder, A. G., & Mellings, T. M. (2002). Perfectionism in the context of social
fears: Toward a two-component model. In G. L. Flett & P. L. Hewitt (Eds.), Perfectionism:
Theory, research, and treatment (pp. 5-31). Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.

Allen, A. (1999). When the ship.com comes in. Telemedicine Today, 7, 7.

Alexander, G. (1999). Regulation of psychology as telemedicine. The California Psychologist,
17, 26-27.

American Psychological Association (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists. American
Psychologist, 57, 1060-1073.

Annett, J. (1969). Feedback and human behaviour. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England:
Penguin Books.

Antony, M.M., Purdon, C.L., Huta, V., & Swinson, R.P. (1998). Dimensions of perfectionism
across the anxiety disorders. Behavior, Research and Therapy, 36, 1143-1154.

Arps, G. F. (1920). Work with knowledge of results versus work without knowledge of
results. Psychological Monographs, 28, 1-41.

Ashby, J. S. & Bruner, L. P. (2005). Multidimensional Perfectionism and Obsessive-Compulsive
Behaviors. Journal of College Counseling, 8, 31-40.

Ashby, J. & Kottman, T. (1996). Inferiority as a distiction between normal and neurotic
perfectionism. Individual Psychology, 52, 237-245.

Ashby, J. S., & Rice, K. G. (2002). Perfectionism, dysfunctional attitudes, and self-esteem: A
structural equations analysis. Journal of Counseling and Development, 80, 197-203.

Ashby, J. S., Rice, K. G., & Martin, J. (2006). Perfectionism, shame, and depression. Journal of
Counseling and Development.

Ashby, J. S., Rice, K. G., Timmons, D., Dickinson, W. L., Brasfield, C., & Ganske, K. H. (2004,
August). Refining the classification ofperfectionists. Paper presented at the Annual
Convention of the American Psychological Association, Honolulu, Hawaii.









Baer, L., Cukor, P., Jenike, M., Leahy, B., O'Laughlen, J., & Coyle, J. (1995). Pilot studies of
telemedicine for patients with obsessive compulsive disorder. American Journal of
Psychiatry, 152, 1383-1385.

Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitive theory of self regulation. Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Processes, 50, 248-287.

Balzer, W. K., Doherty, M. E., & O'Connor, R. Jr. (1989). Effects of cognitive feedback on
performance. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 410-433.

Barak, A. (1999). Psychological applications on the Internet: A discipline on the threshold of a
new millennium. Applied and Preventive Psychology, 8, 231-246.

Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social
psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of
Personality & Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182.

Bastiani, A.M., Rao, R., Weltzin, T. & Kaye, W.H., (1995). Perfectionism in anorexia nervosa.
International Journal ofEating Disorders, 17, 147-152.

Belding, M. A., Iguchi, M. Y., & Lamb, R. J. (1996). Stages of change in methadone
maintenance: Assessing the convergent validity of two measures. Psychology of Addictive
Behaviors, 10, 157-166.

Berg, I. K. & Miller, S. D. (1992). Wol king n ith the problem drinker: A solution-focused
approach. New York, NY: W W Norton & Co.

Berkowitz, L., & Troccoli, B. T. (1990). Feelings, direction of attention, and expressed
evaluations of others. Cognition and Emotion, 4, 305-325.

Bieling, P. J., Israeli, A. L., & Antony, M. M. (2004). Is perfectionism good, bad, or both?
Examining models of the perfectionism construct. Personality and Individual Differences,
36, 1373-1385.

Blankstein, K. R., & Dunkley, D. M. (2002). Evaluative concerns, self-critical, and personal
standards perfectionism: A structural equation modeling strategy. In G. L. Flett & P. L.
Hewitt (Eds.), Perfectionism: Theory, research, and treatment (pp. 285-315). Washington,
DC: American Psychological Association).

Blatt, S. J. (1995). The destructiveness of perfectionism. American Psychologist, 50, 1003-1020.

Blatt, S. J., Quinlan, D. M., Pilkonis, P. A., Shea, M. T. (1995). Impact of perfectionism and
need for approval on the brief treatment of depression: The National Institute of Mental
Health Treatment of Depression Collaborative Research Program revisited. Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63, 125-132.









Blatt, S. J., & Zuroff, D. C. (2002). Perfectionism in the therapeutic process. In G. L. Flett & P.
L. Hewitt (Eds.), Perfectionism: Theory, research, and treatment (pp. 393-406).
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Blatt, S. J., Zuroff, D. C., Bondi, C. M., Sanislow, C. A., III, & Pilkonis, P. (1998). When and
how perfectionism impedes the brief treatment of depression: Further analyses of the
National Institute of Mental Health Treatment of Depression Collaborative Research
Program. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66, 423-428.

Book, W. F., & Norvell, L. (1922). The will to learn, an experimental study of incentives in
learning. The Pedagogical Seminary, 29, 305-362.

Borowitz, S. M., & Wyatt, J. C. (1998). The origin, content, and workload of email
consultations. Journal of the American Medical Association, 280, 1321-1324.

Bouchard, S., Payeur, R., Rivard, V. (2000). Cognitive behavior therapy for panic disorder with
agoraphobia in videoconference: Preliminary results. CyberPsychology and Behavior,3, 999-
1007.

Brand, J. E. (1905). The effect of verbal suggestion upon the estimation of linear
magnitudes. Psychological Review, 12, 41-49.

Brodsky, S. L. (1972). Shared results and open files with the client. Professional Psychology, 3,
362-364.

Brown, G. P., & Beck, A. T. (2002). Dysfunctional attitudes, perfectionism, and models of
vulnerability to depression. In G. L. Flett & P. L. Hewitt (Eds.), Perfectionism: Theory,
research, and treatment (pp. 231-251), Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.

Brown, E. J., Heimberg, R. G., Frost, R. O., Makris, G. S., Juster, H. R., & Leung, A. W. (1999).
Relationship of perfectionism to affect, expectations, attributions and performance in the
classroom. Journal of Social & Clinical Psychology, 18, 98-120.

Burns, D. D. (1980). The perfectionist's script for self-defeat. Psychology Today, 34-51.

Butcher, J. N. (1992). Introduction to the special section: Providing psychological test feedback
to clients. Psychological Assessment, 4, 267.

Carbonari, J. P., & DiClemente, C. C. (2000). Using transtheoretical model profiles to
differentiate levels of alcohol abstinence success. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology, 68, 810-817.

Carey, K. B., Purine, D. M., Maisto, S. A., & Carey, M. P. (1999). Assessing readiness to change
substance abuse: A critical review of instruments. Clinical Psychology: Science and
Practice, 6, 245-266.










Chang, E. C. (1998). Cultural differences, perfectionism, and suicidal risk: Does social problem
solving still matter? Cognitive Therapy and Research, 22, 237-254.

Chang, E. C. (2000). Perfectionism as a predictor of positive and negative psychological
outcomes: Examining a mediational model in younger and older adults. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 47, 18-26.

Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation
analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd Ed.). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Clair, D. & Prendergast, D. (1994). Brief psychotherapy and psychological assessments entering
a relationship, establishing a focus, and providing feedback. Professional Psychology:
Research and Practice, 25, 46-49.

Claiborn, C. D., Goodyear, R. K., & Horner, P. A. (2001). Feedback. P.yiht,,iiwpyI 38, 401-
405.

Cohen, J. (1992). Statistical power analysis. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1, 98-
101

Cox, B. J., & Enns, M. W. (2003). Relative stability of dimensions of perfectionism in depression.
Canadian Journal ofBehavioral Science, 35, 124-132.

Crowne, D. P. & Marlowe, D. (1960). A new scale of social desirability independent of
psychopathology. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 24, 349-354.

DiBartolo, P. M., Frost, R. O., Dixon, A., & Almovodar, S. (2001). Can cognitive restructuring
reduce the disruption associated with perfectionistic concerns? Behavior Tharapy, 32, 167-
184.

DiClemente, C. C., & Prochaska, J. 0. (1985). Processes and stages of change: Coping and
competence in smoking behavior change. In T. A. Wills (Ed.), Coping and substance use (pp.
319-343). New York: Academic Press.

Donnelly, D. A., & Murray, E. J. (1991). Cognitive and emotional changes in written essays and
therapy interviews. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 10, 334-350.

Duncan, B. L., Miller, S.D. & Sparks, J.A (2004). The heroic client. A revolutionary way to
improve effectiveness through client-centered, outcome-informed therapy. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.

Dunkley, D. M., Blankstein, K. R., Halsall, J., Williams, M., & Winkworth, G. (2000). The
relation between perfectionism and distress: Hassles, coping, and perceived social support as
mediators and moderators. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47, 437-453.









Dunkley, D. M., Zuroff, D. C., & Blankstein, K. R. (2003). Self-critical perfectionism and daily
affect: Dispositional and situational influences on stress and coping. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology. 84, 234-252.

Ellis, A. E. (1957). How to live i ith a neurotic: At work and at home. New York: Crown.

Ellis, A. E. (1962). Reason and emotion in pyi1i ,1thei'jpy. Secaucas, NJ: The Citadel Press.

Ellis, A. (2002). The role of irrational beliefs in perfectionism. In G. L. Flett & P. L. Hewitt
(Eds.), Perfectionism: Theory, research, and treatment (pp. 217-229), Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.

Elwell, J. L., & Grindley, G. C. (1938-1939). The effect of knowledge of results on learning and
performance. British Journal ofPsychology, 39, 39-54.

Esterling, B. A., L'Abate, L., Murray, E. J., Pennebaker, J. W. (1999). Empirical foundations for
writing in prevention and psychotherapy: Mental and physical health outcomes. Clinical
Psychology Review, 19, 79-96.

Eysenbach, G., & Diepgen, T. L. (1998). Responses to unsolicited patient email requests for
medical advice on the World Wide Web. Journal of the American Medical Association, 280,
1333-1335.

Fairbum, C. G., Cooper, Z., Doll, H. A., & Welch, S. L. (1999). Risk factors for anorexia
nervosa: three integrated case-control comparisons. Archives of General Psychiatry, 56, 468-
76.

Fedor, D. B. (1991). Recipient responses to performance feedback: A proposed model and its
implications. In G. R. Ferris & K. M. Rowland (Eds.), Research in personnel and human
resources management (Vol. 9, pp. 73-120). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Fedor, D. B., Davis, W. D., Maslyn, J. M., & Mathieson, K. (2001). Performance improvement
efforts in response to negative feedback: The roles of source power and recipient self-esteem.
Journal ofManagement, 27, 79-97.

Ferguson, K. L. & Rodway, G. R. (1994). Cognitive behavioral treatment of perfectionism:
initial evaluation studies. Research and Social Work Practice, 4, 283-308.

Finn, S. E. (1996). Using the MIMPI-2 as a therapeutic intervention. Minneapolis: University of
Minnesota Press.

Finn, S. E., & Tonsager, M. E. (1992). Therapeutic effects of providing MMPI-2 test feedback to
college students awaiting therapy. Psychological Assessment, 4, 278-287.









Fletcher, C., Taylor, P., & Glanfield, K. (1996). Acceptance of personality questionnaire
feedback: The role of individual difference variables and source of interpretation. Personality
and Individual Differences, 20, 151-156.

Flett, G. L., Blankstein, K. R., Hewitt, P. L., & Koledin, S. (1992). Components of perfectionism
and procrastination in college students. Social Behavior and Personality, 20, 85-94.

Flett, G. L, & Hewitt, P. L. (2002). Perfectionism and maladjustment: An overview of
theoretical, definitional, and treatment issues. In G. L. Flett & P. L. Hewitt (Eds.),
Perfectionism: Theory, research, and treatment (pp. 5-31). Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.

Flett, G. L., Hewitt, P. L., Blankstein, K. R., Solnik, M., & Van Brunschot, M. (1996).
Perfectionism, social problem solving ability, and psychological distress. Journal of
Rational-Emotive and Cognitive Behavior Therapy, 14, 245-274.

Flett, G.L., Hewitt, P.L., & Dyck, D.G. (1989). Self oriented perfectionism, neuroticism and
anxiety. Personality and Individual Differences, 10, 731-735.

Francis, M. E., & Pennebaker, J. W. (1992). Putting stress into words: The impact of writing on
physiological, absentee, and self-reported emotional well-being measures. American Journal
ofHealth Promotion, 6, 280-287.

Franco-Paredes, K., Mancilla-Dyaz, J. M., Vazquez-Arevalo, R., Lopez-Aguilar, X., & Alvarez-
Rayon, G. (2005). Perfectionism and eating disorders: A Review of the literature. European
Eating Disorders Review, 13, 61-70.

Frank, J. D. & Frank, J. B. (1991). Persuasion and healing: A comparative study of
psychotherapy (3rd ed.). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Frazier, P. A., Tix, A. P. & Barron, K. E. (2004). Testing Moderator and Mediator Effects in
Counseling Psychology Research. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51, 115-134.

Freud (1933/1953). New introductory lectures on psychoanalysis. In J. Strachey (Ed.), The
complete psychological works: Standard edition (vol. 22). London: Hogarth Press.

Frost, R. O., Heimberg, R. G., Holt, C. S., Mattia, J. I., & Neubauer, A. L. (1993). A comparison
of two measures of perfectionism. Personality andIndividual Differences, 14, 119-126.

Frost, R. O., Marten, P. A., Lahart, C., & Rosenblate, R. (1990). The dimensions of
perfectionism. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 14, 449-468.

Frost, R. O., Steketee, G. (1997). Perfectionism and obssessive compulsive disorder. Behavior
Research and Therapy, 35, 291-296.









Garfield, S. L. (1994). Eclecticism and integration in psychotherapy: Developments and issues.
Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 1, 123-137.

Gelso, C., & Carter, J. (1994) Components of the psychotherapy relationship: Their interaction
and unfolding during treatment. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 41, 296-306.

Gelso, C. J., Kelley, F. A., Fuertes, J. N., Marmarosh, C., Holmes, S. E., Costa, C., & Hancock,
G. R. (2005). Measuring the Real Relationship in Psychotherapy: Initial Validation of the
Therapist Form. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52, 640-649.

Gold, J. R. (1994). When the patient does the integrating: Lessons for theory and practice.
Journal of PE~ hc h, ihei /, Integration, 4, 133-158.

Gosling, S. D., Vazire, S., Srivastava, S., & John, O. P. (2004). Should we trust web-based
studies? A comparative analysis of six preconceptions about internet questionnaires.
American Psychologist, 59, 93-104.

Graham, J. R. (2000). lMMPI-2: Assessing Personality and Psychopathology (3rd ed.). New York:
Oxford University Press.

Greenberg, L. S. & Bolger, E. (2001). An emotion-focused approach to the overregulation of
emotion and emotional pain. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 57, 197-211. Special issue:
Treating emotion regulation problems in psychotherapy.

Greenberg, M. A., & Stone, A. A. (1992). Writing about disclosed versus undisclosed traumas:
Immediate and long-term effects on mood and health. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 63, 75-84.

Grzegorek, J. L., Slaney, R. B., Franze, S., & Rice, K. R. (2004). Self-Criticism, dependency,
self-esteem, and grade-point average satisfaction among clusters of perfectionists and
nonperfectionists. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51, 192-200.

Hewitt, P. L., & Dick, D. G. (1986). Perfectionism, stress, and vulnerability to depression.
Cognitive Therapy and Research, 10, 137-142.

Hewitt, P. L., & Flett, G. L. (1991). Perfectionism in the self and social contexts:
Conceptualization, assessment, and association with psychopathology. Journal ofPersonality
and Social Psychology, 60, 456-470.

Hewitt, P. L., Flett, G. L., & Ediger, E. (1996). Perfectionism and depression: Longitudinal
assessment of a specific vulnerability hypothesis. Journal ofAbnormal Psychology, 105,
276-281.

Hewitt, P. L., Flett, G. L., Ediger, E., Norton, G. R., Flynn, C. A. (1998). Perfectionism in chronic
and state symptoms of depression. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 30, 234-242.









Hewitt, P. L., Flett, G. L., & Endler, N. S. (1995). Perfectionism, coping, and clinical depression.
Journal of Clinical Psychology and P \ y hii/,1i ,j y, 2, 47-58.

Hewitt, P. L., Flett, G. L., & Tumbull-Donovan, W. (1992). Perfectionism and suicide potential.
British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 31, 181-190.

Hewitt, P. L., Flett, G. L., & Weber, C. (1994). Dimensions of perfectionism and suicide ideation.
Cognitive Therapy and Research, 18, 439-460.

Hill, C. E., Rochlen, A. B., Zack, J. S., McCready, T., & Dematitis, A. (2003). Working with
dreams using the Hill Cognitive-Experiential Model: A comparison of computer-assisted,
therapist empathy, and therapist empathy + input conditions. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 50, 211-220.

Hollender, M. H. (1978). Perfectionism: A neglected personality trait. Journal of Clinical
Psychiatry, 39, 384-394.

Holmbeck, G. N. (1997). Toward terminological, conceptual, and statistical clarity in the study
of mediators and moderators: Examples from the child-clinical and pediatric psychology
literatures. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 65, 599-610.

Homey, K. (1950). Neurosis and human gi ,,i ith New York: Norton.

Horvath, A. O. & Symonds, B. D. (1991). Relation between working alliance and outcome in
psychotherapy: A meta-analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 38, 139-149.

Hubble, M. A., Duncan, B. L., & Miller, S. D. (1999). Directing attention to what works. In M.
A. Hubble, M. A., Duncan, B. L., & Miller, S. D. (Eds.), The heart and soul of change:
What works in therapy (pp. 407-448). Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.

Huberty, C. J. & Morris, J. D. (1989). Multivariate analysis versus multiple univariate analyses.
Psychological Bulletin, 105, 302-308.

Hufford, M. R., Shields, A. L., Shiffman, S. Paty, J., & Balabanis, M. (2002). Reactivity to
ecological momentary assessment: An example using undergraduate problem drinkers.
Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 16, 205-211.

Huston, J. L., & Burton, D. C. (1997). Patient satisfaction with multispecialty interactive
teleconsultations. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, 3, 205-208.

Jerome, L. W., DeLeon, P. H., James, L. C., Folen, R.; Earles, J., & Gedney, J. J. (2000). The
coming age of telecommunications in psychological research and practice. American
Psychologist, 55, 407-421.









Jonhson, D. P. & Slaney, R. B. (1996). Perfectionism: Scale development and a study of
perfectionists in counseling. Journal of College Student Development, 37, 29-41.

Joiner Jr., T.E., Heatherton, T.F., Rudd, M.D., & Schmidt, N.B. (1997). Perfectionism, perceived
weight status, and bulimic symptoms: two studies testing a diathesis stress model. Journal of
Abnormal Psychology, 106, 145-153.

Kawamura, K. Y., Hunt, S. L., Frost, R. O., & DiBartolo, P. M. (2001). Perfectionism, anxiety,
and depression: Are the relationships independent? Cognitive Therapy and Research, 25,
291-301.

Keltner, D., Locke, K. D., & Audrain, P. C. (1993). The influence of attributions on the
relevance of negative feelings to personal satisfaction. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 19, 21-29.

Kinicki, A. J., Prussia, G. E., Wu, B., & McKee-Ryan, F. M. (2004). A Covariance Structure
Analysis of Employees' Response to Performance Feedback. Journal of Applied Psychology,
89, 1057-1069.

King, S. A. (1996a). Commentary on responses to the proposed guidelines. Information Society,
12, 199-201.

King, S. A. (1996b). Researching Internet communities: Proposed ethical guidelines for the
reporting of results. Information Society, 12, 119-127.

Klein, K. & Boals, A. (2001). Expressive writing can increase working memory capacity.
Journal ofExperimental Psychology: General, 130, 520-533.

Klein, B. & Richards, J. C. (2001). A brief internet-based treatment for panic disorder.
Behavioural and Cognitive P ) hi ,ihel /1 3 -, 29, 131-136.

Klopfer, W. G. (1954). Principles of report writing. In B. Klopfer, M.D. Ainsworth, W. G.
Klopfer, & R. R. Holt (Eds.), Developments in the Rorschach technique: Vol. 1. Technique
and Theory. New York: Collins.

Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A
historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention
theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 254-284.

Kottman, T. & Ashby, J. (1999). Social interest and multidimensional perfectionism. Journal of
Individual Psychology, 55, 176-185.

Lambert, M. J., Burlingame, G. M., Umphress, V., Hansen, N. B., Vermeersch, D. A., Clouse, G.
C., & Yanchar, S. C. (1996). The reliability and validity of the Outcome Questionnaire.
Clinical Psychology and P% hIwthl /1), 3, 249-258.









Lange, A., Van de Ven, J-P., Schrieken, B., Bredeweg, B., & Emmelkamp, P. M.
G. (2000). Internet-mediated, protocol-driven treatment of psychological dysfunction.
Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, 6, 15-21.

Lange, A., Rietdijk, D., Hudcovicova, M., Van de Ven, J. P., Schrieken, B., & Emmelkamp, P.
M. (2003). Interapy: A controlled randomized trial of the standardized treatment of
posttraumatic stress through the Internet. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 71,
901-909.

Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal and coping. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Lewak, R. W., Marks, P. A., & Nelson, G. E. (1990). Therapist guide to the MAIPI & MMPI-2.
Muncie, IN: Accelerated Development.

Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). A theory of goal setting and task performance.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Lundh, L-G. (2004). Perfectionism and acceptance. Journal of Rational-Emotive and Cognitive
Behavior Therapy. 22, 255-269.

MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J. & Frits, M. S. (2007). Mediation analysis. AnnualReview in
Psychology, 58, 593-614.

MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G., & Sheets, V. (2002). A
comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects.
Psychological Methods, 7, 83-104.

Maheu, M. (1997). Will online services for consumer self-help improve behavioral
healthcare? Behavioral Healthcare Tomorrow Journal, 6, 32-36, 53.

Maheu, M. M., & Gordon, B. L. (2000). Counseling and therapy on the Internet. Professional
Psychology: Research and Practice, 31, 484-489.

Manzer, C. W. (1935). The effect of knowledge of output on muscular work. Journal of
Experimental Psychology, 8, 80-90.

Marks, I. (2000). Forty years of psychosocial treatment. Behavioural and Cognitive
Py~htL heiy, 28, 323-334.

Martin, T. R., Flett, G. L. Hewitt, P. L., Krames, L., & Szanto, G. (1996). Personality correlates
of depression and health symptoms: A test of a self-regulation model. Journal of Research in
Personality, Vol 30, 264-277.

McCrae, R. R. & Costa, P. T. (1991). The NEO Personality Inventory: Using the five-factor
model in counseling. Journal of Counseling and Development, 69, 367-372.









McConnaughy, E. A., DiClemente, C. C., Prochaska, J. O., & Velicer, W. F.
(1989). Stages of change in psychotherapy: A follow-up report. Py)1i hitheiqy,
26, 494-503.

McConnaughy, E. A., Prochaska, J. O., & Velicer, W. F. (1983). Stages of change
in psychotherapy: Measurement and sample profiles. P\y Ihitheliq, Theory,
Research and Practice, 20, 368-375.

Mikulincer, M. (1994). Human learned helplessness: A coping perspective. New York: Plenum
Press.

Miller, W. R. (1995). Increasing motivation for change. In R. K. Hester & W. R. Miller (Eds.),
Handbook of alcoholism treatment approaches: Effective alternatives (pp. 89-104). Boston:
Allyn & Bacon.

Miller, W. R., Benefield, R. G., & Tonigan, J. S. (1993). Enhancing motivation for change in
problem drinking: A controlled comparison of two therapist styles. Journal of Consulting
and Clinical Psychology, 61, 455-461.

Miller, E. T., Neal, D. J., Roberts, L. J., Baer, J. S., Cressler, S. O., Metrik, J., & Marlatt, G. A.
(2002). Test-retest reliability of alcohol measures: Is there a difference between Internet-
based assessment and traditional methods? Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 16, 56-63.

Murdoch, J. W. & Connor-Greene, P. A. (2000). Enhancing therapeutic impact and therapeutic
alliance through electronic mail homework assignments. Journal ofP y1 hI ,thel /q Practice
and Research, 9, 232-237.
Naglieri, J. A., Drasgow, R., Schmit, M., Handler, L., Prifitera, A., Margolis, A., & Velasquez,
R. (2004). Psychological testing on the Internet: New problems, old issues. American
Psychologist, 59, 150-162.
Nass, C. & Moon, Y. (2000). Machines and mindlessness social responses to computers. Journal
of Social Issues, 56, 81-103.

Neighbors, C., Larimer, M. E., & Lewis, M. A. (2004). Targeting Misperceptions of Descriptive
Drinking Norms: Efficacy of a Computer-Delivered Personalized Normative Feedback
Intervention. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 72, 434-447.

Newman, M. L. & Greenway, P. (1997). Therapeutic effects of providing MMPI-2 test feedback
to clients at a university counseling service: a collaborative approach. Psychological
Assessment, 9, 122-131.

Nickelson, D. W. (1998). Telehealth and the evolving health care system: Strategic opportunities
for professional psychology. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 29, 527-535.

O'Connor, R. C. & O'Connor, D. B. (2003). Predicting hopelessness and psychological distress:
The role of perfectionism and coping. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 50, 362-372.









Orlinsky, D. E., Grawe, K. & Parks, B. K. (1994). Process and outcome in psychotherapy: Noch
einmal. In A. G. Bergin & 1. E. Sol (Eds.) Handbook ofpsychotherapy and behavior change
(pp. 270-3764). Oxford, England: John Wiley & Sons.

Pacht, A. R. (1984) Reflections on perfectionism. American Psychologist, 39, 386-390.

Pantalon, M. V., Nich, C., Frankforter, T., & Carroll, K. M. (2002). The URICA as a measure of
motivation to change among treatment-seeking individuals with concurrent alcohol and
cocaine problems. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 16, 299-307.

Parker, W. D. (1997). An empirical typology of perfectionism in academically talented children.
American Educational Research Journal, 34, 545-562.

Paul, L. (1967). Insight versus desensitization in psychotherapy two years after termination.
Journal of Consulting Psychology, 31, 333-348.

Paulhus, D. L. (1991). Measurement and control of response bias. In J. B. Robinson, P. R.
Shaver, & L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measure ofpersonality and socialpsychological
attitudes (pp. 17-59). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Pauls, C. A. & Stemmler, G. (2003). Repressive and defensive coping during fear and anger.
Emotion, 3, 284-302.

Pennebaker, J. W. (1997). Writing about emotional experiences as a therapeutic process.
Psychological Science, 8, 162-166.

Pennebaker, J. W. (2004). Theories, Therapies, and Taxpayers: On the Complexities of the
Expressive Writing Paradigm. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 11, 138-142.

Pennebaker, J. W., Kiecolt-Glaser, J., & Glaser, R. (1988). Disclosure of traumas and immune
function: Health implications for psychotherapy. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology, 56, 239-245.

Phillips, J. R. (1984). Influences on personal growth as viewed by former psychotherapy clients.
Dissertation Abstracts International, 44, 441A.

Podsakoff, P. M., & Farh, J. H. (1989). Effects of feedback sign and credibility on goal setting
and task performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 44, 45-67.

Pope, K. S.(1992). Responsibilities in providing psychological test feedback to clients.
Psychological Assessment, 4, 268-271.

Pope, K. S., Tabachnick, B., & Keith-Spiegel, P. C.(1987). Ethics of practice: Beliefs and
behaviors of psychologists as therapists. American Psychologist, 42, 993-1006.









Pope, K. S., Tabachnick, B.,& Keith-Spiegel, P. C.(1988). Good and Poor Practices in
Psychotherapy: National Survey of Beliefs of Psychologists. Professional Psychology:
Research andPractice, 19, 547-552.

Preusser, K. J., Rice, K. G., Ashby, J. S. (1994). The role of self-esteem in mediating the
perfectionism-depression connection. Journal of College Student Development, 35, 88-93.

Prochaska, J. O., & DiClemente, C. C. (1983). Stages and processes of self-change of smoking:
Toward an integrative model of change. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 51,
390-395.

Prochaska, J. O., & DiClemente, C. C. (1992). Stages of change in the modification of problem
behaviors. Progress in Behavior Modification, 28, 183-218.

Prochaska, J. O., DiClemente, C. C., & Norcross, J. C. (1992). In search of how people change:
Applications to addictive behaviors. American Psychologist, 47, 1102-1114.

Prochaska, J. O. & Norcross, J. C. (2001). Stages of change. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research,
Practice, Training, 38, 443-448.

Project MATCH Research Group (1997). Matching alcoholism treatments to client
heterogeneity: Project MATCH post-treatment drinking outcomes. Journal of Studies on
Alcohol, 58, 7-29.

Quirk, M. P., Strosahl, K., Kreilkamp, T., & Erdberg, C. M. (1995). Personality feedback
consultation to families in managed mental health care practice. Professional Psychology:
Research and Practice, 26, 27-32.

Reeves, B. & Nass, C. (1996). The Media Equation How People Treat Computers, Television,
and New Media Like Real People and Places, Cambridge University Press, New York.

Reynolds, W. M. (1982). Development of reliable and valid short forms of the Marlowe-Crowne
Social Desirability Scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 38, 119-125.

Rheaume, J., Freeston, M.H., Dugas, M.J., Letarte, H., & Ladouceur, R. (1995). Perfectionism,
responsibility and obsessive compulsive symptoms. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 33,
785-794.

Richards, J. C., & Alvarenga, M. E. (2002). Extension and replication of an internet-based
treatment for panic disorder. Scandinavian Journal of Behaviour Therapy, 30, 1-7.

Rice, K.G. & Aldea, M. A. (2006). State Dependence and Trait Stability of Perfectionism: A
Short-Term Longitudinal Study. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53, 205-213.

Rice, K. G. & Ashby, J. S. (2007). An efficient method for classifying perfectionists. Journal of
Counseling Psychology.









Rice, K. G., Ashby, J. S., & Slaney, R. B. (1998). Self-esteem as a mediator between
perfectionism and depression: A structural equations analysis. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 45, 304-314.

Rice, K.G., Bair, C., Castro, J., Cohen, B. & Hood, C. (2003). Meanings of perfectionism: A
quantitative and qualitative analysis. Journal of Cognitive Pssychology, 17, 39-58.

Rice, K. G., & Dellwo, J. P. (2002). Perfectionism and self-development: Implications for
college adjustment. Journal of Counseling and Development, 80, 188-196.

Rice, K. G., & Lapsely, D. K. (2001). Perfectionism, coping, and emotional adjustment. Journal
of College Student Development, 42, 157-168.

Rice, K. G., Leever, B. A., Christopher, J., & Porter, J. D. (2006). Perfectionism, Stress, and
Social (Dis)Connection: A Short-Term Study of Hopelessness, Depression, and Academic
Adjustment Among Honors Students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53, 524-534.

Rice, K. G., Lopez, F. G., & Vergara, D. (2005). Parental/social influences on perfectionism and
adult attachment orientations. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 24, 580-605.

Rice, K. G., & Mirzadeh, S. A. (2000). Perfectionism, attachment, and adjustment. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 47, 238-250.

Rosenzweig, S. (1936). Some implicit common factors in diverse methods of psychotherapy.
American Journal of 01 thi/1i hii, iny, 6, 412-415.

Santor, D. A., Bagby, R. M., & Joffe, R. T. (1997). Evaluating stability and change in personality
and depression. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 73, 1354-1362.

Sampson, J., Kolodinsky, R., & Greeno, B. (1997). Counseling on the information highway:
Future possibilities and potential problems. Journal of Counseling and Development, 75,
203-212.

Sedikides, C., Rudich, E. A., Gregg, A. P., Kumashiro, M., & Rusbult, C. (2004). Are normal
narcissists psychologically healthy?: Self-esteem matters. Journal ofPersonality and Social
Psychology, 87, 400-416.

Seggar, L. B., Lambert, M. J., & Hansen, N. B. (2002). Assessing clinical significance:
Application to the Beck Depression Inventory. Behavior Therapy, 33, 253-269.

Shafran, R., Cooper, Z., & Fairburn, C. G. (2002). Clinical perfectionism: a cognitive-behavioral
analysis. Behavior Research and Therapy, 40, 773-791.

Shafran, R., Lee, M., Payne, E., & Fairbum, C. G. (2006). The impact of manipulating personal
standards on eating attitudes and behavior. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 44, 897-906.









Shapiro, D. E., & Schulman, C. E. (1996). Ethical and legal issues in e-mail therapy. Ethics &
Behavior, 6, 107-125.

Shrout, P. E. & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New
procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7, 422-445.

Slaney, R. B., & Ashby, J. S. (1996). Perfectionists: Study of a criterion group. Journal of
Counseling & Development, 74, 393-398.

Slaney, R. B., Ashby, J. S., & Trippi, J. (1995). Perfectionism: it's measurement and career
relevance. Journal of Career Assessment, 3, 279-297.

Slaney, R. B., Chadha, N., Mobley, M., & Kennedy, S. (2000). Perfectionism in Asian Indians:
Exploring the meaning of the construct in India. Counseling Psychologist, 28, 10-31.
Slaney, R. B., Mobley, M., Trippi, J., & Ashby, J. S., & Johnson, D. G. (1996). The Almost
Perfect Scale-Revised. Unpublished manuscript, Pennsylvania State University.

Slaney, R. B. & Johnson, D. G. (2002). The Almost Perfect Scale. Unpublished manuscript,
Pennsylvania State University, State College.

Slaney, R. B., Rice, K. G., & Ashby, J. S. (2002). A programmatic approach to measuring
perfectionism: The Almost Perfect Scales. In G. L. Flett & P. L. Hewitt (Eds.),
Perfectionism: Theory, research, and treatment (pp. 63-88).

Slaney, R. B., Rice, K. G., Mobley, M., Trippi, J., & Ashby, J. S. (2001)._The Almost Perfect
Scale-Revised. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 34, 130-145.

Sloan, D. M., & Marx, B. P. (2004b). A closer examination of the structured written disclosure
procedure. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 72, 165-175.

Smyth, J. M. (1998). Written emotional expression: Effect sizes, outcome types, and moderating
variables. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66, 174-184.

Smyth, J., Stone, A. A., Hurewitz, A., & Kaell, A. (1999). Effects of writing about stresstul
experiences on symptom reduction in patients with asthma or rheumatoid arthritis: a
randomized trial. Journal of the American Medical Association, 1304-1309.

Snyder, C. R., Ingram, R. E., Handelsman, M. M., Wells, D. S., & Huwieler, R.(1982). Desire
for personal feedback: Who wants it and what does it mean for psychotherapy? Journal of
Personality, 50, 316-330.

Sorotzkin, B. (1998). Understanding and Treating Perfectionism in Religious Adolescents.
Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 35, 87-95.









Srinivasagam, N. M., Kaye, W. H., & Plotnicov, K. H. (1995). Persistent perfectionism,
symmetry, and exactness after long-term recovery from anorexia nervosa. American Journal
ofPsychiatry, 152, 1630-1634.

Stamm, B.(1998). Clinical applications of telehealth in mental health care. Professional
Psychology: Research and Practice, 29, 536-542.

Stein, D. J. (1997). Psychiatry on the Internet: Survey of an OCD mailing list. Psychiatric
Bulletin, 21, 95-98.

Stone, D. L. & Stone, E. F. (1985). The effects of feedback consistency and feedback
favorability on self-perceived task competence and perceived feedback accuracy.
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 36, 167-185.

Suddarth, B.H., & Slaney, R.B. (2001). An investigation of the dimensions of perfectionism in
college students. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 34, 157-165.

Thomdike, E. L. (1913). Educational psychology. Volume I: The original nature of man. New
York: Columbia University, Teachers College.

Thomdike, E. L. (1927). The law of effect. American Journal of Psychology, 39, 212-222.

Tomohiro, S. (2005). Relationship Between Two Aspects of Perfectionism and Obsessive-
Compulsive Symptoms. Psychological Reports, 96, 299-305.

Troster, A., Paolo, A., Glatt, S., Hubble, J., & Koller, W. (1995). Interactive video conferencing
in the provision of neuropsychological services to rural areas. Journal of Community
Psychology, 23, 85-88.

Umphress, V. J., Lambert, M. J., Smart, D. W., Barlow, S. H., Clouse, G. C., & Hansen,N. B.
(1997). Concurrent and construct validity of the Outcome Questionnaire. Journal of
Psychoeducational Assessment, 15, 40-55.

Valesquez, M. M., Carbonari, J. P., & DiClemente, C. C. (1999). Psychiatric severity and
behavior change in alcoholism: The relation of the trans-theoretical model variables to
psychiatric distress in dually diagnosed patients. Addictive Behaviors, 24, 481-496.

Yager, J. (2001). E-mail as a therapeutic adjunct in the outpatient treatment of anorexia nervosa:
Illustrative case material and discussion of the issues. International Journal ofEating
Disorders, 29, 125-138.

Wampold, B. E. (2001). The great p, 1Ihet/,1ipy debate: Models, methods, andfindings.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.









Winters, K. C., Latimer, W. W., Stinchfield, R. D. & Egan, E. (2004). Measuring sdolescent
drug abuse and psychosocial factors in four ethnic groups of drug-abusing boys.
Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 12, 227-236.

Worthington, E. L., MCCulough, M. E., Shotz, J. L., Mindes, E. J., Sandage, S. J., & Chartrand,
J. M. (1995). Can couples assessment and feedback improve relationships? Assessment as a
brief relationship enrichment procedure. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 42, 466-475.

Zuroff, D. C., Blatt, S. J., Sotsky, S. M., Krupnick, J. L., Martin, D. J., Sanislow, C. A., &
Simmens, S. (2000). Relation of therapeutic alliance and perfectionism to outcome in brief
outpatient treatment of depression. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68,
114-124.









BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Mirela Aldea was born on May 29, 1973 in Iasi, Romania. An only child, she grew up

mostly in Iasi, a city in the eastern part of Romania where she earned a degree in psychology and

one in law from Al. I. Cuza University. She worked for three years as a visiting faculty at a small

private university in Iasi and as a consultant for non-governmental organizations providing social

services. In august 2000 she came to the United States where she earned a master's degree in

clinical psychology from Appalachian State University. Upon completion of her Ph.D., Mirela

will complete a postdoctoral program in the Psychiatry Department at the University of Florida

where she will be involved in research and clinical work primarily with clients with obsessive-

compulsive disorder.





PAGE 1

1 BRIEF, ONLINE INTERVENTIONS FOR PERFECTIONISTS By MIRELA A. ALDEA A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULLFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2007

PAGE 2

2 2007 Mirela A. Aldea

PAGE 3

3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am appreciative and profoundly indebted to Dr. Ken Rice who shared his time and knowledge unselfishly and who encourag ed and inspired me to aim high. I am grateful to my parents who instilled in me the belief that I could do anything or be anything I wanted and to Mamaia who gave me the courage and self -confidence to take chances. I am thankful to my wonderful husband who, wh enever I took myself too seriously, always had a way of bringing me back to earth with a smile or a laugh.

PAGE 4

4 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS............................................................................................................ .3 LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................................. ..........6 LIST OF FIGURES................................................................................................................ .........7 ABSTRACT....................................................................................................................... ..............8 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................9 2 LITERATURE REVIEW.......................................................................................................14 The Concept of Perfectionism and Its Assessment.................................................................14 Perfectionism and Distress.....................................................................................................19 Treatment of Perfectionism....................................................................................................24 Feedback....................................................................................................................... ..........34 Internet Psychological Services..............................................................................................39 Present Study.................................................................................................................. ........43 Research Questions and Hypotheses......................................................................................47 3 METHOD......................................................................................................................... ......49 Participants................................................................................................................... ..........49 Design and Procedure........................................................................................................... ..52 Instruments.................................................................................................................... .........53 4 RESULTS........................................................................................................................ .......58 Descriptive Statistics an d Preliminary Analyses....................................................................58 Treatment Effects Analyses....................................................................................................59 Mediation Analyses............................................................................................................. ...61 Interaction Analyses........................................................................................................... ....62 Effects on Distress...........................................................................................................62 Effects on Readiness for Change.....................................................................................63 Effects on Perfectionism..................................................................................................63 Effects on Defensiveness.................................................................................................65 Effects of Pretest Readiness for Change Defensiveness and Condition Interaction on the Outcome Variables at Posttest and Follow-up..................................................65 Exploratory Analyses......................................................................................................66

PAGE 5

5 5 DISCUSSION..................................................................................................................... ....79 Clinical Considerations........................................................................................................ ...88 Limitations and Future Directions..........................................................................................93 Conclusions.................................................................................................................... .........95 APPENDIX A INFORMED CONSENT FORM 1.........................................................................................97 B INFORMED CONSENT FORM 2.........................................................................................98 C DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION......................................................................................99 D PERFECTIONISM FEEDBACK.........................................................................................102 E WRITING INSTRUCTIONS...............................................................................................104 F EARLY HISTORY OF FLORIDA......................................................................................105 G THE ALMOST PERFECT SC ALE REVISED (APS-R)..................................................106 H UNIVERSITY OF RHODE ISLAND CHANGE ASSESMENT (URICA)........................107 I MARLOWE-CROWNE SOCIAL DESIRABILITY SCALE SHORT VERSION (MCSD)......................................................................................................................... .......109 J OUTCOME QUESTIONNAIRE (OQ-45)...........................................................................110 REFERENCE LIST................................................................................................................. ....112 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH.......................................................................................................129

PAGE 6

6 LIST OF TABLES Table page 4-1 Overall Means and Standard Deviations............................................................................69 4-2 Within-Time and Across-Time Scale Co rrelations and Reliability Estimates..................70 4-3 Means and Standard Deviations by Group........................................................................71 4-4 Regression Analyses of the Effect s of Condition on Mediator Variables.........................71 4-5 Regression Analyses of the Effects of Pretest Readiness for Change x Pretest Defensiveness x Condition Inter action on Outcome Variables.........................................72

PAGE 7

7 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 3-1 Research Design............................................................................................................ .....57 4-1 Pretest Readiness for Change x Conditi on Interaction Effect Predicting Follow-up Distress....................................................................................................................... ........73 4-2 Pretest Readiness for Change x Condition Interaction Effect Predicting Posttest High Standards...................................................................................................................... ......74 4-3 Pretest Readiness for Change x Conditi on Interaction Effect Predicting Follow up High Standards................................................................................................................. ..75 4-4 Pretest Defensiveness x C ondition Interaction Effect Pred icting Change in Readiness for Change from Pretest to Posttest...................................................................................76 4-5 Pretest Defensiveness x C ondition Interaction Effect Pred icting Change in Distress from Pretest to Follow-up..................................................................................................77 4-6 Pretest High Standards x Condition Interac tion Effect Predicting Change in Distress from Pretest to Follow-up..................................................................................................78

PAGE 8

8 Abstract of Dissertation Pres ented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy BRIEF, ONLINE INTERVENTIONS FOR PERFECTIONISTS By Mirela A. Aldea August 2007 Chair: Kenneth G. Rice Major: Counseling Psychology Much of what is known about the treatment of perfectionists has been derived from secondary analyses of the NIMH Treatment of Depression Collaborative Research Program or extrapolated from research on depression, eating disorders, or anxiety disorders. Results of secondary analyses or extrapolated findings ge nerally indicate that pe rfectionists have not responded well to standard psychological interven tions. Based on the resear ch on the effects of therapeutic feedback and expressive writing, tw o brief, online interventions, provision of feedback and provision of feedback followed by an opportunity to express in writing reactions to the feedback, were tested in th e current study on a sample of mala daptive perfectionistic college students. A randomized, pretest-posttest-followup control group design was used. In addition to main effects, this study investigated mediati onal and moderational models to further explore factors that were conducive to therapeutic gains for perfectioni sts. The results of the study suggest that although perfectionism feedback may be appropriate to use with some maladaptive perfectionists (e.g., those less motivated to cha nge, non-defensive, or with relatively lower standards), it may not be benefi cial to others. The results are discussed in light of treatment mplications, especially with regard to the manne r in which perfectionists respond to therapeutic interventions.

PAGE 9

9 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Perfectionism has emerged as a topic of c onsiderable interest in the counseling and personality literature in the pa st two decades. The results of a very brief search I have done on PsycINFO using the term perfec tionism point to the remarkable increased attention the subject has received. Thus, between 1980 and 1990, 126 arti cles containing the term perfectionism were published, whereas 492 studies were publ ished between 1991 and 2000 and 453 since 2001. The amplified consideration of perfectionism in the psychological literature led to a better understanding of the construct, and also to numerous, and some times contradictory, ways of conceptualizing it. Flett and Hewitt (2002) reviewed the definitio ns used in the field of perfectionism research. They listed 21 terms and their definitions th at occurred in the literature in relation with the perfectionism concept. Thus, neurotic perfectionism refers to strivings for excessively high standards due to fears of failure and concer ns about disappointing others (p. 14), concern over mistakes is a tendency to a have a nega tive reaction to mistakes anticipate disapproval, and interpret mistakes as equivalent to failu re (p. 14), whereas normal perfectionism is defined as striving for reasonable and realistic standards that leads to self-satisfaction and enhanced self-esteem (p. 14). Despite differen ces in the definition a nd conceptualization of perfectionism, there has been increasing agreement that perfectionism is a multidimensional construct (Frost, Marten, Laha rt, & Rosenblate, 1990; Hewitt & Flett, 1991; Slaney, Rice, Mobley, Trippi, & Ashby, 2001), can be operati onalized and understood as dimensional or categorical (Rice & Mirzadeh, 2000; Rice, Ashby, & Slaney, 1998), and involves relatively adaptive aspects as well as clearly maladaptive aspects (Chang, 2000; Frost, Heimberg, Holt, Mattia, & Neubauer, 1993; Rice et al., 1998).

PAGE 10

10 Factor analyses of several measures of perfectionism have found consistently multi-factor solutions organized around adaptive and maladaptiv e aspects of perfectioni sm (Bieling, Israeli, & Antony, 2004; Frost, et.al., 1993; Suddarth & Slaney, 2001). Maladaptiv e perfectionism is characterized by unrealistic and rigid high standards for performance combined with overly critical and harsh self-e valuations. Maladaptive perfectionists de fine their self-worth in terms of achieving their extremely high standards and, at the same time, seem to have an inability to be satisfied with successful performan ce. Because of an intense fear of failure and a desire to reach impossible standards, completing a task b ecomes hard and unpleasant; for this reason, procrastination is common among maladaptive perfectionists (F lett, Blankstein, Hewitt, & Koledin, 1992). In other words, maladaptive perf ectionists simultaneously view themselves as being responsible for reaching their goals and ach ieving their standards, yet do not expect that their efforts are likely to bri ng about the outcomes they want. Adaptive perfectionism includes very high pe rsonal standards, a need for order and organization, and an unwillingness to procrastinate. Unlike malada ptive perfectionists, adaptive perfectionists seem able to be satisfied with and enjoy their successes and achievements. In general, perceived failures to meet high standa rds and goals are tolerated and do not lead to major internal or interpersonal problems. Malada ptive perfectionism has been associated with numerous psychological difficulties (Blatt, 1995; Flett & Hewitt, 2002) including different types of mood and performance concerns. For example, Brown, Heimberg, Frost, Makris, Juster, and Leung (1999) found perfectionism to be related to educational outcomes such as concern over course difficulty, increased anxi ety, and increased negative mood. I ndeed, research supports that, when compared with adaptive or non-perfectioni sts, maladaptive perfect ionists evidence lower self-esteem, lack self-confidence, have insecure relationships, and perceive they are not doing

PAGE 11

11 well academically (Ashby, Rice, & Martin, 2006; Brown, et al., 1999; Grzgorek, Slaney, Franze, & Rice, 2004; Parker, 1997; Rice & Dellwo, 2002; Rice, Lopez, & Vergara, 2005). Adaptive perfectionists report lower stress and anxiety than maladaptive perfectioni sts, better academic and social adjustment to college, more secure relationships and better overall emotional and psychological well-being (As hby & Rice, 2002; Rice & Dellwo, 2002). Maladaptive perfectionists are more likely than non-perfectionists to suffe r from depression (Blatt, 1995; Hewitt & Dick, 1986), eating disorders (Bas tiani, Rao, Weltzin, & Kaye, 1995), anxiety (Kawamura, Hunt, Frost, & DiBartolo, 2001), obse ssive-compulsive disorder (Frost & Steketee, 1997), and somatic symptoms (Martin, Flett, Hewitt, Krames, & Szanto, 1996). Despite the well-established relation between maladaptive perfectionism and psychological distress, very few studies investigated therapeu tic interventions for treating perfectionism and maladjustment coupled with perfectionism. With the exception of a very limited number of studies (DiBartolo, Frost, Dixon, & Almovodar, 2001; Ferguson & Rodway, 1994) that directly examined treatment interventions for perfectionist s, much of what is kno wn about the treatment of perfectionists has been derived from secondary analyses of the National Institute of Mental Health Treatment of Depression Collaborative Res earch Program, or other studies directed at treating different issues such as eating disorder or obsessive-c ompulsive disorder (Blatt, 1995; Blatt, Zuroff, Bondi, Sanislow, & Pilkonis, 1998; Zuroff, Blatt, Sotsky, et al., 2000). Based on these studies, it has been conclude d that perfectionism impairs the therapeutic alliance, interferes with the successful treatme nt outcomes, that perfectionists, as well as their therapists, are rather dissatisfied with treatment gains, and, overall, perfectionists do not benefit as well as other clients from standard psychologi cal interventions. For these reas ons, Blatt (1995) suggested that for perfectionistic clients long-term and intens ive psychoanalytic therapy (rather than brief

PAGE 12

12 treatments) would be required in order to produce the desired th erapeutic change. A different perspective is taken in this st udy, that perfectionists might benef it from brief and novel targeted interventions such as provision of online feedback and provision of feedback combined with writing about the reactions the feedback elicits. Feedback has received atte ntion in the counseling and more general psychological assessment literature. In the cont ext of increased pressure for e fficiency and efficacy within the mental health care field, it has been argued th at providing feedback to clients within the framework of therapy or personality assessm ent constitutes a brief, yet cost-effective intervention (Newman & Greenway, 1997; Quirk, Strosahl, Kreilkamp, & Erdberg, 1995). In a review of research on the outcome s of feedback as a therapeutic intervention in the contexts of individual therapy, couple and family therapy, group therapy, and persona lity testing, Claiborn, Goodyear, and Horner (2004) found that, in genera l, feedback is an effective intervention, leading to positive outcomes such as behavi or change and symptomatic improvement. In addition, the usage of the Internet within the psychologi cal domain has started being embraced by psychologists (Gosling, Vazire, Sriv astava, & John, 2004). An increased number of psychologists are using the Internet not only for re search purposes but also to provide counseling and therapy to the public. For example, behavioral health care practitioners are using a wide variety of Internet technologies, including E-mail (Borowitz & Wyatt, 1998), chat rooms (Sampson, Kolodinsky, & Greeno, 1997), and intera ctive video (Huston & Burton, 1997; Stamm, 1998), to deliver counseling and therapy. There are obvious advantages of using computerassisted therapy as opposed to traditional face-to -face therapy such as the reduced cost, increased availability to large numbers of people, a nd potential anonymity for individuals who would

PAGE 13

13 otherwise feel too embarrassed to seek out ther apy. Initial studies usi ng this approach show promising results (Klein & Richards, 2001). The present study aims to address the paucity of systematic research on the treatment of perfectionism by investigating a potentially brief and cost effective treatment intervention: provision of online feedback based on a measur e of perfectionism. More specifically, using a randomized, pretest-posttest-follow-up contro l group design, the study examines whether feedback alone has different therapeutic e ffects from providing feedback and allowing participants to express reactions to the feedb ack. Additionally, the pres umed mechanisms that lead to improvement following feedback will be explored. Although there is increasing evidence that perfectionism is a multidimensional construct, with adaptive and maladaptive aspects, given its deleterious consequences, maladaptive perfectionism will be the focus in this study. This paper will be structured in the following way: First the concept of perfectionism will be examined along with its assessment because th ere are different ways in which the construct has been conceptualized and se veral different scales of perf ectionism are currently used throughout the literature. Next, empirical studies linking perfec tionism and distress will be reviewed, followed by an investigation of the lit erature on the treatment of perfectionism. The literature on feedback provision, including online f eedback, and its therapeutic effects will be considered and ethical concerns pertaining to the utilization of the internet to provide psychological services will be examined as well. Finally, the subsequent sections will focus on the description of the present study, planned met hodology to test the hypotheses of this research, results, and discussion.

PAGE 14

14 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW The Concept of Perfection ism and Its Assessment Perfectionism and its costs have been desc ribed for many years. For example, Freuds concept of the superego includes two aspects: an introjected social conscience and an ego-ideal that is an idealized image consisting of a pproved and rewarded behaviors (Freud, 1933). The ego-ideal contains an ideal of personal exce llence toward which a person strives and thus provides a concept of who one thinks s/he s hould be. Later, Karen Horney (1950) revised Freuds concept of ego-ideal. She distinguished be tween the real self and the idealized self. The real self represents what we are, the inner core of personality including the potential for growth and self-realization. The id ealized self represents what we th ink we should be and is used as a model to assist us in devel oping our potential and achieving se lf-actualization. In the average individual, the idealized self and the real self largely coincide b ecause the idealized self is based on a realistic assessment of ones abilities and potentials. However, in some individuals (called neurotics by Horney) the real self and the idea lized self are discrepa nt or separated. These individuals believe that there ar e certain ideals they should be liv ing up to. To be this idealized self is all that matters. You should be able to endure everything, to understand everything, to like everybody, to be always productive (Horney, 1950, pp. 64-65). Horney (1950) referred to this pursuit of perfection as a neurotic "striving fo r glory" or "the tyra nny of the shoulds". She considered that the striving to achieve an ideal of perfection is impossible and, in fact, deters one from being what s/he could become. The conceptualizations of perfectionism over the years have varied, ranging from unidimensional characteristics that focus on its maladaptive aspects, to multidimensional standpoints that focus on different facets of a broa d perfectionism construct. As a result of such

PAGE 15

15 an array of viewpoints, definitions of perfectio nism have changed, though often writers described perfectionism as negative, neurotic, and probl ematic. Hollender (1978) was among the first to provide a definition of perfectionism as demandi ng of oneself or others a higher quality of performance than is required by the situation. Burns (1980) descri bed perfectionistic individuals as setting unrealistically high stan dards, rigidly adhering to them, and defining their self-worth in terms of achieving these standa rds. Pacht (1984) referred to the insidious nature of perfectionism (p. 387) and Blatt (1995) referred to the destruc tiveness of perf ectionism (p. 1003). Some authors (Frost et al., 1993; Slane y, Ashby, & Trippy, 1995) noted that, like psychology in general, perfectionism research te nds to focus on negative aspects while ignoring the positive aspects of the constr uct. Thus, it has been suggested that perfectionism can also be normal or adaptive (Slaney et al., 1995) a nd attempts have been made to identify positive aspects of perfectionism. Individuals with normal or adaptive perfectionism set high standards, but unlike persons with negative perfectionism, are satisfied wh en the standards have been achieved. As mentioned earlier, in the more recent literature there is an emphasis on perfectionism as multidimensional rather than un idimensional, that is it has both personal and interpersonal aspects. Various pe rfectionism measures bring into play these aspects along with both adaptive features and features associated with maladjustment. For example, Frost et al. (1990) identified six dimensions of perfectionism and developed a Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (MPS). The Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale taps the dimensions of high personal standards, concer ns about meeting parent al expectations, doubts about one's actions, preference for organizati on and order, excessive concern about making mistakes, and parental criticism. According to Frost et al. (1990), pe rfectionists are often

PAGE 16

16 excessively self-critical as well. Hewitt a nd Flett (1991) contributed to the existing conceptualizations of perfectionism by adding interpersonal aspects that are important to personal adjustment. They described three dimens ions of perfectionism and operationalized them as subscales in their Multidimensional Perfecti onism Scale (MPS): self-o riented perfectionism, other-oriented perfectionism, and socially prescribed perfectioni sm. Self-oriented perfectionists tend to set high, unrealistic persona l standards with which they ev aluate themselves. They are critical of themselves and maintain unrealistic self-expectations in the face of failure. This scale reflects strivings to attain perfec tion in ones own endeavors as we ll as strivings to avoid failure. Other-oriented perfectionist s require others to be perfect in many areas of functioning. This scale reflects lack of trust and feeli ngs of hostility toward others. So cially prescribed perfectionists believe that other people hold hi gh, unrealistic expectations of them and exert pressure on them to be perfect. They believe that the standards imposed are excessive and uncontrollable and thus, socially prescribed perfectionists believe th at they are unable to meet the perceived perfectionistic demands and expectations imposed by others. Johnson and Slaney (1996) developed the Almo st Perfect Scale. Analyses from a large sample of participants yielded a 4-factor struct ure of the measure, and these factors were named Standards and Order, Anxiety, Relationship, and Procrastination. To better understand what perfectionism entails from the perspective of perfectionists themselves, two studies used the APS in interview format. Slaney and Ashby (1996) interviewed a sample of 37 self-described perfectionists at an U.S. university and Slaney, Chadha, Mobley, and Kennedy (2000) interviewed five students and facu lty members at the University of Delhi, India who regarded themselves as perfectionists. When participan ts in both samples defined perfectionism and features associated with it, they emphasized having high personal standards for performance and

PAGE 17

17 many also referred to a sense of orderliness or neatness. They viewed their high standards and order as important contributors to their success. Although most par ticipants indicated that their perfectionism is often accompanied by distress, they also reported that they would not give up their perfectionism if given the chance. These results seemed to provide support for the assertion that perfectionism has not only negative aspects, but also positive features. It has been concluded that high standards and order exemplify positive aspects. Based on the observation that some perfectionists reported a perceive d inability to meet their own high standards, it was proposed that the discrepancy between high standards a nd perceived performance constitutes a negative aspect of perfectionism. Thus, the revised vers ion of the APS (APS-R), developed by Slaney, Mobley, Rice, Trippi, and J ohnson (1996), included a Discre pancy subscale specifically designed to tap negative or ma ladaptive aspects of perfectioni sm along with the revised High Standards and Order designed to tap adap tive characteristics of perfectionism. Indeed, a significant body of evidence has s upported the validity of a two-factor model of perfectionism. Factor analyses of several meas ures of perfectionism have found robust multifactor solutions organized around adaptive and maladaptive aspects of perfectionism (Bieling et al., 2004; Frost et al., 1993; Suddart h & Slaney, 2001). For instance, fa ctor analytic studies of the Multidimensional Perfectionism Scales develo ped by Hewitt and Flett (MPS; 1991) and Frost and his colleagues (FMPS; Frost et al., 1990) have yielded two higher order factors that correspond to these two dimensions of perfectionism. Frost et al. (1993) factor analyzed the two MPS scales and identified two primary factors, which they referred to as maladaptive evaluative concerns and positive achievement striving. The mala daptive evaluative concerns factor reflected concerns over making mistakes, doubts about the quality of one's actions, and concerns about other people's evaluation or criticism. They found that this was the dimension that was

PAGE 18

18 significantly related to depressi on and negative affect. Dunkley, Zuroff, and Blankstein (2003) conceptualized the adaptive and maladaptive dime nsions of perfectionism as personal standards perfectionism and self-critica l perfectionism, respectively. Pe rsonal standards perfectionism involves setting high standards and goals for oneself whereas self-critical perfectionism involves harsh self-scrutiny and self -criticism and an inability to derive satisfaction from success. Slaney et al. (1995) included the APS (S laney & Johnson, 1992) in their an alyses, and like Frost et al. (1993) found support for a higher order two-factor structure. Rice, Ashby, and Slaney (1998) performed a confirmatory factor analysis of the FMPS and the APS (Slaney & Johnson, 1992) and, consistent with previous results, found support for two factors, which they labeled Maladaptive Perfectionism and Adaptive Perfectionism. Maladaptive Perfectionism was composed of measures tapping concern over mi stakes, doubts about actions, difficulty in relationships, and anxiety and is similar to evaluative concerns perfectionism. Adaptive Perfectionism was most highly indicated by standards and orde r, organization, and personal standards and resembles pers onal standards perfectionism. Independent of how the two factors are labele d, maladaptive aspects of perfectionism seem to typically include self-evaluations that are excessively critical and emphasize personal shortcomings in living up to of ten unrealistically high standards for performance. Similar to the maladaptive aspects, adaptive perfectionistic aspects emphasize high personal standards and desires to excel in performance to meet such standards, yet these desires and standards are experienced as motivational and encouraging. Per ceived failures to meet such standards are tolerated and do not lead to intr aand interpersonal distress. Rice, Bair, Castro, Cohen, and Hood (2003), in a combined qualitative and quantit ative study, found a partic ularly discouraging worldview of maladaptive perf ectionists. Maladap tive perfectionists simultaneously view

PAGE 19

19 themselves as being responsible for reaching thei r goals and achieving their standards, yet do not expect that their efforts are like ly to bring about the outcomes they want. Consistent with Slaney and Ashby (1996) and Slaney et al. (2000) finding s, the discrepancy between high standards and perceived performance emerged as an appropriate criterion that disti nguishes adaptive from maladaptive perfectionism. A few studies have investigated differe nces between adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism using an Adlerian approach (Ashby & Kottman, 1996; Kottman & Ashby, 1999). The findings suggest that an important di stinction between adap tive and maladaptive perfectionism may come from the way in which individuals use their perfectionism. Thus, in their strivings for high standards, adaptive perfec tionists may experience less distress related to perfectionism, and consequently they may be appropriately pursui ng superiority, which according to Adler is a sign of mental hea lth (Adler, 1956). In contrast, maladaptive perfectionists may actually pursue high standards in order to avoid feelings of inferiority, the result being higher levels of psychological anguish. Although wh at is adaptive about adaptive perfectionism is not always clear (Rice et al., 1998), an impressive lite rature reveals rather unambiguously that maladaptive perfectionism is clearly maladaptive and associated with numerous psychological difficulties (Blatt, 1995; Flett & Hewitt, 2002). The next section is devoted to the examination of the relations hip between perfectionism and psychological concerns. Perfectionism and Distress A great number of studies investigated the dir ect and indirect associ ation between the two facets of perfectionism (adaptive and maladaptiv e) and psychological ailments. Brown et al. (1999) found perfectionism to be related to peda gogical outcomes such as concern over course difficulty, increased anxiety, a nd increased negative mood. Perf ectionistic students tend to

PAGE 20

20 procrastinate and express increase d negative affect related to ev aluated tasks (Flett et al., 1992). When compared with adaptive or non-perfectioni sts, maladaptive perfect ionists evidence lower self-esteem, lack self-confidence, and perceive they are not doi ng well academically (Brown et al., 1999; Parker, 1997; Rice & Lapsley, 2001). Adap tive perfectionists report lower stress and anxiety than maladaptive perfectionists, better academic and so cial adjustment to college, more secure relationships and better overall emoti onal and psychological well-being (Ashby & Rice, 2002; Rice & Dellwo, 2002; Rice, Leev er, Christopher, & Porter, 2006). As well, maladaptive perfectionism has been linked to problematic coping and emotional reactivity, that is maladaptiv e perfectionists tend to respond with emotional lability and hypersensitivity to environmental stimuli (Dunkley et al., 2003). Hewitt, Fle tt, and Endler (1995) found that perfectionism (operationalized as sel f-oriented perfectionism) was associated with increased levels of emotion-oriented coping. Bl ankstein and Dunkley (2 002) established that maladaptive perfectionists have poor strategies for coping with perceive d distressing events, and that such a mediating mechanism accounted fo r the relationship between perfectionism and distress. In other research, emotion-focused or avoidant coping (e.g., denial and disengagement) have been associated with maladaptive aspects of perfectionism, whereas less avoidant and more problem-focused coping styles have been related to adaptive pe rfectionism (Dunkley, Blankstein, Halsall, Williams, & Winkworth, 2000; Flett, He witt, Blankstein, Solnik, & Van Brunschot, 1996). Rice and Lapsley (2001) repo rted that dysfunctional copi ng (e.g., denial, inappropriate avoidance, and substance abuse) predicted emoti onal adjustment for mala daptive perfectionists. However, dysfunctional coping did not predict emotional adjustment for adaptive perfectionists. In a study exploring the mediati ng role of emotional regulation in the relationship between perfectionism and psychological distress, Ald ea and Rice (2006) reported that maladaptive

PAGE 21

21 perfectionism was positively associated with bo th emotional regulation (operationalized with measures of emotional reactiv ity and psychological splitting) and distress whereas adaptive perfectionism was found to have inverse and si gnificant associations with emotional regulation and psychological distress. They also found s upport for full mediation effects of emotional regulation. Another indicator of self-regulation, self-esteem, has been significantly and negatively related to maladaptive perfectionism (Rice & Slaney, 2002). In addition, other studies (Preusser, Rice, & Ashby, 1994) found that self-e steem mediated the rela tion between socially prescribed perfectionism (maladaptive perfect ionism) and depression in women and men. It becomes clear that maladaptive perfectionist s seem to be driven by a strong necessity to avoid failure which, combined with their inabi lity to acknowledge success, leads to perceiving themselves as worthless and inadequate. Therefore, they tend to be more emotionally reactive to stressors that imply possible failur e, loss of control, and criticis m from others. In the event of perceived failure, they tend to engage in a form of self-reflection that is defeatist and further affects their self-worth. Thus, perfectionism may cause feelings of inferi ority and vulnerable self-esteem leading to increased anxiety, f eelings of failure, and general psychological discomfort. A relatively minor failure or even a perceived failure becomes magnified, resulting in negative affect and further in crease in reactivity to stimuli and events in their lives. Thus, faulty coping and emotion regulation strategi es (and most likely other factors) prevent maladaptive perfectionists from moving beyond the distress associated with perceived stressful situations and exacerbate rather than ameliora te their symptoms. Consequently, maladaptive perfectionists are more likely th an non-perfectionists to suffer from a variety of psychological problems including, but not limited to, depression (Blatt, 1995; Hewitt & Dick, 1986), suicidal ideation (Hewitt, Flett, & Tu rnbull-Donovan, 1992), eating disord ers (Bastiani et al., 1995),

PAGE 22

22 anxiety (Johnson & Slaney, 1996, Kawamura et al ., 2001), obsessive-compulsive disorder (Frost & Steketee, 1997), and somatic symp toms (Martin et al., 1996). For example, with rega rd to eating disorders, several studies have examined perfectionism and eating disorders and have identified perfect ionism as a specific risk factor for the development of eating disorders in large-scale community studies as well as in college student samples (Fairburn, Cooper, Doll, & Welch, 1998; Franco-Paredes, Mancilla-Daz, VazquezArevalo, Lopez-Aguilar, & Alvarez-Rayon, 2005; Joiner, Heatherton, Rudd, & Schmidt, 1997). Elevated perfectionism has been found in small samples of underweight pa tients and in weightrestored patients with anorexia nervosa and hi gh levels of perfectionism were found to persist after long-term recovery from anorexia nervosa, suggesting that perfectionism is not a function of low weight (Bastiani et al., 1995; Sr inivasagam, Kaye, & Plotnicov, 1995). In addition, perfectionism has been shown to be associated with anxiety disorders (Antony, Purdon, Huta, & Swinson, 1998; Ashby & Brunner, 2005; Flett, Hewitt, & Dick, 1989; Tomohiro, 2005), with the association being most fully investigated in obsessivecompulsive disorder (OCD). Individuals with OCD have been described as tormented by an inner drive for certainty and perfection and thus perfectionism has been suggested to be a risk factor for the development of obsessive-compulsive disord er (Rhaume, Freeston, Dugas, Letarte, & Ladouceur, 1995). In both clinical and non-clini cal samples individuals with OCD symptoms scored higher than normal controls on the M PS (Frost et al., 1990) subscales Concern over mistakes and Doubts about actions (Antony et al. 1998; Frost & Steketee, 1997; Tomohiro, 2005). The research on perfectionism and depressi on is quite abundant. Perfectionism is one of the personality factors that seems to be relativ ely consistent in predicting depression (Hewitt & Flett, 1991; Hewitt, Flett, Ediger, Norton, & Flynn, 1998). Early research on perfectionism

PAGE 23

23 focused on the direct association between pe rfectionism and depression. However, a more complicated set of relationships between perf ectionism and depression has emerged lately: depression seems to result not so much from the direct effects of perfectionism but from the effects that different dimensions of perfectio nism have on other factors such self-esteem, emotional reactivity, or stress. For instance, path model analys es have revealed that, although adaptive perfectionism was not directly or indi rectly (through self-esteem) associated with depression, maladaptive perfectionism was negativ ely associated with self-esteem and positively associated with depression, with self-esteem buf fering the effects of maladaptive perfectionism on depression (Rice et al., 1998). In a qualitative interview study, Rice et al. (2003) found that a general impression of perfectionists is that they are under considerable st ress. It appears that, through self-imposed pressure, maladaptive perfec tionists play an active role in creating and generating stress for themselves. Indeed, a growing body of research indicates that stress is a risk factor for depression and therefor e vulnerability associated with perfectionism, when activated by stress, results in depression (Hewitt and Dy ck, 1986; Hewitt & Flett, 1993; Hewitt et al., 1995; OConnor, & OConnor, 2003; Rice & Lapsley, 2001). Not all dimensions of perfectionism, howev er, are equally important as factors in depression. Self-oriented perfectio nism and socially prescribed perfectionism were found to interact with stress (conceptualized for example as achievement stress or negative life events) to predict concurrent leve ls of depressive symptoms, but onl y self-oriented perfectionism was associated with significant increase in depr ession over time (Flett & Hewitt,1995; Hewitt & Flett, 1993; Hewitt, Flett, & Ediger, 1996). These re sults indicate that high standards, in and of themselves, are not automatically associated with depression, but stress (generated by a life event or by perceived failure to meet those standards) is necessary fo r these individuals to experience

PAGE 24

24 depression. Other studies indicate d that maladaptive dimensions of perfectionism represent enduring psychological vulnerabilities (trait stability) th at are significant predictors of later depression (Cox & Enns, 2003; Rice & Aldea, 2006). A variety of reasons were pr ovided to explain why perfectionists seem to be prone to experiencing distress. It has been emphasi zed that maladaptive perfectionists impose unrealistically high standards on themselves, ar e unlikely to achieve them, and engage in excessively critical self-evalu ations (Alden, Ryder, & Mell ings, 2002; Blatt, 1995; Blatt, Quinlan, Pilkonis, & Shea, 1995). This continual dissatisfaction with th emselves most likely leads to psychological distress of ten expressed in a variety of psychological problems (including stress, hopelessness, helplessnes s, depression, and anxiety). Treatment of Perfectionism Despite the evident association between perfectionism and psychological concerns, research on therapeutic interven tions for treating perfectionism and maladjustment coupled with perfectionism is very scarce. On the same lin es, very little is know n about what types of therapeutic interventions are effective in decreas ing maladaptive aspects of perfectionism while increasing or enhancing adaptive aspects. To my knowledge, few empirical studies directly examined treatment interventions for perfect ionists. Ferguson and Rodway (1994) took a cognitive-behavioral approach to treating perfectionism They utilized an ABA design and perfectionism was measured with Burns Perf ectionism Scale (Burns, 1980). The treatment focused on issues associated with perfectionism su ch as self-criticism, difficulty dealing with feedback, procrastination, and unrealistic goal setting. The author s reported that the cognitivebehavioral treatment was successful for eight of th e nine participants; however, these participants showed variable degrees of reduction in perfectio nism. DiBartolo et al. (2001) investigated the utility of a brief cognitive restru cturing intervention in affecting perfectionists typical negative

PAGE 25

25 responses to evaluative threat. Pa rticipants in their study were 60 female undergraduates who had to deliver a speech before a small audience. Part icipants high and low in perfectionistic concern over mistakes (CM) were randomly assigned to receive either a cognitive restructuring or distraction intervention prior to the speech task. Participants hi gh in CM reported significantly more negative cognitive and affective responses to the evaluative task than low CM participants. Cognitive restructuring was successful in that al l participants (high and low CM) reported lower estimates of the most feared predictions for the impending speec h, reduced anxiety, and increased ability to cope with the most fear ed predicted outcome. Thus, although based on a small and homogeneous sample, the results of th is study provide some preliminary support for the effectiveness of cognitive restructuring in the treatment of perfectionism. In addition to cognitive therapy, it has been suggested that emotion-focused therapy may be effective in helping perfectionists dealing with their emotional distress. Greenberg and Bolger (2001) presented a case study of a woman, who, am ong other issues (i.e. abusive and alcoholic parents, loss of a child) presented with perfec tionistic tendencies (e.g. need for control, high standards). The authors employed an emotion-fo cused approach with this client, following a three-step treatment process. The first step was to facilitate emotional awareness that provides access to the information and the tendency toward action implicit in the emotion, and promotes assimilation of experience into a persons ongoing self-narrative (p. 210). The second step addressed emotional arousal and its regulation, the goal being for the client to learn to sooth and comfort him/herself. The final step was to re place maladaptive emotions with more adaptive ones. Following this process, highly self-criti cal maladaptive perfecti onist who is prone to experiencing disappointment or anger with him/ herself may gradually learn self-acceptance, compassion, or even self-forgiveness. The case study and the approach presented by Greenberg

PAGE 26

26 and Bolger (2001) provide a promising foundation for the use of emotion-focused therapy in treating perfectionistic clients, how ever experimental research is warranted to further investigate the effectiveness of this form of treatment. With the exceptions noted above, in the great majority of studies, perfectionism was not the explicit focus of the therap eutic intervention, but it was examined in th e context of specific therapeutic approaches geared to ward treating certain psychologi cal issues such as depression, eating disorders, or obsessive-compulsive disord er. For example, a series of such studies conducted by Blatt and his coleagues (Blatt et al., 1995, 1998; Zuroff et al., 2000) revealed that perfectionism plays an important role in the treatment of depression. Blatt and his colleagues analyzed the data from the National Institut e of Mental Health Treatment of Depression Collaborative Research Program, which compared four treatments for depression (cognitivebehavioral therapy, interpersonal psychothe rapy, pharmacotherapy, and a pill-placebo plus clinical management). These studies show ed that, across all intervention conditions, perfectionism interfered with th e successful treatment of depre ssion. More specifically, patients' pretreatment levels of perfectionism affected th erapeutic outcome at termination and satisfaction with the treatment process independent of the tr eatment modality. In other words, patients high in perfectionism had reduced treatment gains an d were overall less satisfied with the treatment received. Moreover, this effect was observed not only during treatment and at termination, but also at 18 months follow-up. A merit of these studies is that they did not rely only on patients se lf-reports. Ratings of therapeutic progress were also made by therapists and clinical evaluators. Based on these findings, it was concluded that highly perfectio nistic clients not onl y feel subjectively dissatisfied with what they achieved in treatme nt, but also are percei ved as less improved by

PAGE 27

27 objective evaluators at termina tion and at follow-up. Therefore, the results cannot simply be attributed to perfectionistic pati ents perceiving that they failed to meet the high standards they themselves set. One explanation for the negative impact of perfectionism was that perfectionism affected therapeutic outcome by disrupting the therapeutic relationships Zuroff et al. (2000) found support for this hypothesis. Mo re specifically, thei r results revealed that the effect of pretreatment perfectionism on treatment outcome at termination was mediated by the patients, but not the therapists, contribu tions to the therapeutic allian ce. For a better understanding of when the disruptions in alliance takes place, th e therapeutic process was assessed every 4 weeks during the 16-week treatment process. It was f ound that highly perfectioni stic individuals, but not those low in perfectionism, di scontinued their active participat ion in the development of the therapeutic alliance particularly in the latter half of the therap eutic process (weeks 8-16) thus providing support for the notion that perfectionism interferes with forming a strong therapeutic alliance that in turns leads to poor therapeutic outcomes (Blatt et al., 1998; Zuroff et al., 2000). In addition, it has been found that perfectionists have difficulty with social relations in general, not only with their therapist, and that it is the impaired social support th at is conducive to poor treatment outcome (Sharar, Blatt, Zuroff, Krupnik, & Sotsky, 2001). In conclusion, highly perfectionistic individuals appear to have interpersonal difficulti es in and outside the therapy session that damage the therapeutic alliance and even tually negatively affect their ability to fully benefit from therapy (Blatt & Zurrof, 2002). Taking a psychoanalytic perspec tive, Blatt (1995; Blatt & Zuro ff, 2002) suggested that the interaction of perfectionism with the quality of the therapeutic relationship is consistent with the theoretical formulations of the introjective configuration of psychopathology. Introjective psychopathology involves preoccupation with issues of self-definition at the expense of

PAGE 28

28 development of capacities for interpersonal relatedness (B latt & Zuroff, 2002, p. 394). Blatt (1995) speculated that these individuals ar e less concerned about the quality of their interpersonal relations and achieving feelings of trust, warmth, and affection. Their main focus is on establishing, protecting, and maintaining a viable self-concept and, to ach ieve this goal, they engage in counteractive defenses (e.g. pr ojection, denial, reaction formation, and overcompensation). The need for perfection and se lf-criticism was attributed to stem from relationship with parents who were intrusive, co ntrolling, and punitive. Thus, one of the primary tasks in treating highly perfectioni stic individuals would be to en able them to relinquish aspects of their identification wi th harsh and judgmental parental figures that eventually would allow them to become able to define themselves i ndependent of their highl y critical and demanding introjects while maintaining contact with the more benign and nurturant dimensions of their parental introjects (Blatt, 1995, p. 1014). For these reasons, Bla tt (1995) suggested that for perfectionistic, introjected clients long-term a nd intensive psychoanalytic therapy (rather than brief treatments) would be required in order to enable patients to form a strong therapeutic relationship and to begin to cha nge deeply-seated negative mental representations of self and others. Other theorists (Brown & Bec k, 2002; Ellis, 2002; Sorotzki n, 1998) take a cognitivelyoriented approach. They believe that the difficulties in treating perfectionistic clients stem, not from past dysfunctional parent-chi ld interactions, but from perfec tionists dichotomous thinking and irrational beliefs. Thus, these clients are unable to recognize small improvements and, in addition, their tendency to strive for perfec tion surfaces in their striving for achieving perfectionistic therapeutic goals. Over the ye ars, research and theory on rational emotive behavioral therapy (Ellis, 1957, 1962, 2002) have em phasized that irrational and self-defeating

PAGE 29

29 beliefs involving perfectionism (i .e., irrational fear of failure, c onditional self-acceptance, pursuit of extreme and unrealistic goals) play a significant role in a wide variety of personal adjustment problems, including anxiety, depression, and in interpersonal difficulties that highly perfectionistic individuals experience. Thus, c ognitive theorists argue that long-term emotional and past-oriented therapeutic approaches Blatt a dvocated are not all nece ssary. Instead, treatment could embark upon attenuating the tyranny of the shoulds (Horney, 1950) or challenging, disputing, and finally replacing maladaptive and dysfunctional perfectionist ic thinking. Shafran Cooper, and Frairburn (2002) proposed a cognitive -behavioral treatment of perfectionism that has four components: The first component is to help clients identify perfectionism as a problem and to recognize that part of the problem is that their self-evaluation and self-worth are a function of achieving overly demanding standards. The second component is helping clients identify and adopt alternative ways of thinking and behaving that will expand the way they selfevaluate. The third component of treatment i nvolves using behavioral experiments to test competing hypotheses (e.g., a client can compare the qua lity of her social interactions with peers when attempts to have the perfect social interac tion to the situation when the client simply tries to focus on having fun). Finally, the fourth comp onent consists of using cognitivebehavioral techniques to address the clients' personal standards and self-criticism in general. In practice, this involves helping clients identify and change dichotomous thinking and addressing cognitive biases that maintain perfectionism particularly selective attention to the possibility of failure and to the hypervigilant monitoring of performance. Lundh (2004) observes, however, th at addressing the clients perfectionism as a problem may be met with resistance, because perfectionists often perceive th eir perfectionistic strivings as being associated with various benefits and rewards (e.g. higher achievements at school and

PAGE 30

30 work). This author notes that if the clients perfectionistic strivings are not questioned and challenged directly much less resistance on the pa rt of the client may occur. From Lundhs perspective, the therapist should help the client to distinguish between pe rfectionistic strivings and perfectionistic demands, while at the same time validating the clients perfectionistic strivings as something healthy and functional, and discussing the pr os and cons of perfectionistic demands from a more critical pers pective. The goal of this appro ach is to facilitate clients striving for perfection, while being able to accept non-perfection (p. 265). Hence, this treatment strategy focuses on helping the clie nt develop more self-acceptance, without necessarily confronting the clie nts perfectionistic beliefs an d demands. Such development of more accepting attitudes may serve as a correcti ve to an unbalanced perfectionism, and may thereby also produce a more hea lthy dialectic between change and acceptance in the therapeutic process (Lundh, 2004, p.265). In summary, there is suppor t that perfectionism impedes the successful treatment of psychological problems such as depression and that perfectionism itself is very difficult to treat. Despite these concerning findings and even though theoretical models of perfectionism exist and tentative treatment protocols for perfectionism have been proposed, no contro lled clinical trials have been conducted. Moreover, most research on perfectionism is correlational in nature and the perfectionist has been placed in a generally pa ssive role in much of this research. To my knowledge, studies that involve the perfectionistic participants in a more active and reflective manner beyond the completion of study questionnaires has been the excepti on rather than rule, despite the potential benefits such approach might reveal about ways to understand and effectively treat perfectionism.

PAGE 31

31 In addition, acknowledging that c linical trials of perfectioni sm treatment might be time consuming, expensive, and overall more difficult to implement, other t ypes of interventions aiming at decreasing maladaptive aspects of perfectionism and improving psychological functioning of perfectionists can be developed. For example, it is no t to be ignored that several measures of perfectionism with impressive psycho metric qualities have been developed, but their direct clinical utility has not been a focus for th eir use. Therefore, a possible brief and effective therapeutic intervention is to pr ovide perfectionists with feedback about their pe rfectionism and the aspects of perfectionism that are detrimental to their well-b eing. Furthermore, a significant number of studies has shown that writing a bout upsetting experiences improves mental and physical health (Francis & Pennebaker, 1992; Greenberg & Stone, 1992; Pennebaker, KiecoltGlaser, & Glaser, 1988; Sloan & Marx, 2004; Sm yth, 1998). Thus, a more comprehensive, yet still easy to implement, variant of providing feed back to perfectionists would be to provide them with perfectionism feedback and then allow them to process the information received by writing about the reactions, thoughts, and emotions the feedback elicited. Results across various studies are consistently showing that the writing paradigm has clinically meaningful effects as evidenced by positive changes in cognitions, self-esteem, and adaptive behavior (Donnelly & Murray, 1991; Smyt h, 1998). An explanation for the beneficial effects of writing is that writing brings about cognitive changes. For example, communication of ideas requires coherence, self-reflection, and use of multiple perspectives that forces a structure on an otherwise overwhelming and oftentimes chaotic experience leading to a better understanding of ones experiences as well as self-understanding (Esterling, LAbate, Murray, & Pennebaker, 1999, p. 85). Moreover, translating emotions into la nguage alters unclear feeling

PAGE 32

32 states into conscious verbal labe ls and the mere labeling of an emotion appear to actually reduce its perceived intensity (Berkowitz & Trocco li, 1990; Keltner, Locke, & Audrain, 1993). Although it has been suggested that long-te rm therapy would be necessary to treat perfectionists, it can be argued that short-term approaches, like those proposed above, might be effective at least in te rms of increasing perfectionists de sire to relinquish negative aspects associated with perfectionism. First, a brief encount er with a mental health professional might be perceived as less threatening by perfectionistic cl ients and thus it would be less likely to elicit defensive responses. Second, a brief intervention in which the therapeutic relationship is not the focus might prevent perfectionists from trying to be the perfect client by giving the kind of responses they may believe are appropriate and expected. Third, a brief intervention may increase awareness regarding both the psychological costs of perfectionism, particularly maladaptive perfectionism, and the benefits of high standards. Increased awareness might be a primary step in initiating motiva tion for change in what appear s to be a population at risk (Prochaska & Norcross, 2001). A brief treatment intervention does not seem long or intensive enough to teach new skills or alter personality, but it seem s plausible that it could stimul ate motivation for change. Frank and Frank (1991) indicate that a powerful component of therapy is the fact that it provides a rationale, a plausible explanation for the patients symptom. Brief treatment interventions, such as providing perfectionism feedb ack to perfectionistic individual s or providing feedback and an opportunity to process reactions to the feedback received, may help these individuals better understand themselves and their struggles which may sparkle their desire and willingness to change. The notion that behavior change involves a process that oc curs in increments is at the core of the transtheoretical model develope d by Prochaska and DiClemente (DiClemente &

PAGE 33

33 Prochaska, 1985; Prochaska & DiClemente, 1983, 1992) In this model, change is viewed as a progression from an initial precontemplation stage, to contemplation, action, and finally maintenance stage. Underlying the precontemplation stage is the indi viduals belief that she or he does not have a problem, whereas in the contempla tion stage, one considers the pros and cons of altering the behavior. In the acti on stage, the individual undertakes efforts to change, and in the maintenance stage, one focuses on sustaining improvement. Sometimes a preparation stage, intermediary to contemplation and action, is also described (Prochaska, DiClemente, & Norcross, 1992). In other words, individuals move from being unaware or unwilling to do anything about their problem, to considering th e possibility of change, and finally to taking action and maintaining that change over time. The purpose of the present study is to bl end interests in cl inically-meaningful perfectionism research with perfectionism asse ssment. More specifically, the intention is to understand whether empirically-grounde d structured internet feedba ck provided (either alone or in combination with an opportuni ty to react to the feedback) to perfectionists about results on a perfectionism measure affects their readiness and motivation for change and, as a result psychological distress often associated with perf ectionism. The basic assu mption is that brief treatment interventions, such as provision of fee dback and provision of feedback combined with the opportunity to process the information provi ded, may speed or facilitate perfectionists motivation for change thus providing clinicians with a relatively simple and cost-effective approach to help clients transition from a cont emplative stage to a more action-oriented stage that would allow them, in further therapy, to even tually modify maladaptive behaviors associated with perfectionism. Maladaptive perfectionists may not want to be lectured to or given action suggestions when they are not ready to change ; as well, even if they are considering the

PAGE 34

34 possibility of making a change (e.g., lowering st andards) but are not qu ite ready to make a commitment, they may be resistant to traditional approaches that encourage (or even push) them to make changes for which they are not yet r eady. For these reasons, provision of feedback seems to be a relatively neutral and non-threatening approach that would allow perfectionists to examine their particular situations and make their own decision with regard to whether they want to change anything about themselves. Feedback Kurt Lewin, who borrowed the term feedback fr om electrical engineer ing, apparently was the first to apply it in the social sciences. Generally accepted definitions of feedback in psychology emphasize that feedback involves inform ation given to an indi vidual by an external source about the persons behavior or its cons equences. Feedback intervention research in psychology dates back almost 100 years. Several experiments in the beginning of the century suggested that knowledge of resu lts interventions a form of feedback increases performance (Arps, 1920; Book & Norvell, 1922; Brand, 1905; Elwell & Grindl ey, 1938; Manzer, 1935; Thorndike, 1927). In the field of performance appraisal, feedback refers to how well a person performs a task relative to some goal or standard. The single most influential theory in this area is Thorndike's (1913) law of effect. Based on the law of ef fect, a positive feedback was equated with reinforcement and a negative feedback with punishment. Reinforcement and punishment facilitate learning and hence performance. Both a positive feedback and a negative feedback should improve performance because one reinforces the correct behavior and the other punishes the incorrect behavior. Although th ere is no theory dedicated to feedback intervention, several theories and research paradigms contain the concept of feedback as a central component (Kluger and DeNisi, 1996): control theory, also known as cybernetics, (Annett, 19 69; Podsakoff & Farh,

PAGE 35

35 1989), goal setting theory (Locke & Latham, 1990) multiple-cue probability learning paradigm (MCPL; Balzer, Doherty, & O'Connor, 1989), so cial cognition theory (Bandura, 1991), and a variant of learned helple ssness theory (Mikulincer, 1994). These theories have been used to test feedback effects and, although results are at time s contradictory (Kluger & DeNisi, 1996), there is general support for the positive effects of feedback. The giving and receiving of performance feedba ck is ubiquitous in organizations, and the design and maintenance of feedback systems are considered essential fo r both individual and organizational performance (Fedor, 1991). This awareness led to studi es aiming to identify processes and factors that affect the relationship between the r eceipt of performance feedback and an individual's response to feedback. Such studies examined relationships between individuals response to feedb ack and the power and credibilit y of the feedback source (e.g., Fedor, Davis, Maslyn, & Mathieson, 2001), the sign, specificity, and consistency of feedback (e.g., Podsakoff & Farh, 1989; Stone & Stone, 1985), and the acceptance of feedback (e.g., Fletcher, Taylor, & Glanfield, 1996). In a recent study Kinicki, Prussia, Wu, and McKee-Ryan (2004) analyzed a sequential chai n of cognitive variables propos ed to mediate an individual's response to feedback. The authors reported that a feedback-rich e nvironment, source credibility, and desire to respond to feedback (i.e. performa nce) were positively associated with perceived accuracy of feedback, i.e., recipients perceive d feedback as being more accurate and were willing to respond to it when it was characterized as specific a nd frequent and was coming from trustworthy and competent managers. They conclude d that an individual's response to feedback (i.e., performance) is more cont ingent upon the cognitive processing of feedback (i.e., perceived accuracy) than the characteristics of the feedb ack itself (i.e., positive or negative feedback).

PAGE 36

36 It is evident that feedback has been resear ched and broadly utili zed in the industrialorganizational realm, however the in vestigation of its effects in clinical work is sparse. In the context of increased pressure for efficiency a nd efficacy within the ment al health care field, it has been argued that providing feedback to clients within the framework of therapy or personality assessment constitutes a brief, yet cost-effective intervention (Newman & Greenway, 1997; Quirk et al., 1995). In a revi ew of research on the outcomes of feedback as a therapeutic intervention in the contexts of individual ther apy, couple and family therapy, group therapy, and personality testing, Claiborn et al. (2004) found that, in general, feedback is an effective intervention. Specifically, provisi on of feedback led to positive outcomes such as behavior change and symptomatic improvement. Despite potential positive implications, fee dback has received little attention in the counseling literature. Al though, most people who are psychologi cally assessed are interested in receiving feedback about their as sessment results (Graham, 2000), practitioners ma y be reluctant to review psychological test results with clients. This reluctance has relatively early origins and may stem from the view that providing test feed back may be potentially harmful to clients. Indeed, Klopfer (1954) cautioned ps ychologists that, giving a writte n report to a patient is an extremely dangerous and harmful thing to do (p. 603) If a client was partic ularly interested in his/her test results, he recommended giving fairl y superficial kinds of interpretation (p. 603) that are not anxiety-provoking for the client. It has been argued that clients may not necessarily understand the information in the way the examin er intended it to be understood and that the sheer amount of information derived from such assessments, even if restricting information deemed most relevant, may be difficult for the clie nt to integrate in the best of circumstances. The view that clients access to their results is potentially detrimental to clients seemed to have

PAGE 37

37 persisted in psychological practice. Two large studies (Pope, Tabachnick & Keith-Spiegel, 1987, 1988) concerning psychologists be liefs about and compliance with ethical principles revealed that 45% of practitioners did not a llow clients access to testing reports and more than 50% viewed such practice as unethic al. Butcher (1992) provided an additional explanation for the hesitation of sharing with clients their results: many practitioners are unaware of or have not been trained in providing feedback. Indeed, th ere are important considerations in providing feedback, such as matching the qua ntity and quality of the informa tion to what the client can be expected to reasonably comprehe nd and integrate in a feedback session. Butcher (1992), Clair and Prendergast (1994), Finn (1996), Graham (20 00), and Pope (1992) all recommend that an important component of feedback is assessing what the client ha s learned from the feedback. Despite practitioners hesitations to share results with client s, it has been recognized that clients have legal rights to information in th eir records (Brodsky, 1972). According to the Ethical Principles and Code of Conduc t of Psychologists (American Ps ychological Association [APA], 2002), psychological assessment results should be explained to clients except under some circumstances (e.g., pre-employment security scr eening). The movement in both law and ethics over the past two decades has been toward an expansion of client autonomy, notwithstanding what may be in the client's best clinical intere st. This trend can be seen on the federal level, on the state level, in state statutes, and in cour t rulings. For example, unde r the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), patients are granted access to th eir records, with the exception of psychotherapy notes. The work of the APA Ethics Code Task Force is consistent with, and firmly in the context of, this trend. Th e Ethics Code Task Force gives priority to the exercise of client autonomy which entails prov iding clients with information related to their mental health, such as test data, th at the individual wants and requests.

PAGE 38

38 In addition to this mandate, there exists some compelling theoretical and empirical evidence that sharing results base d on different measures can be clinically beneficial (Graham, 2000). For example, Lewak, Marks, and Nelson (1990) proposed that shar ing test results can improve clients mental health when they are encouraged to actively participate in Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventor y-2 (MMPI-2) feedback sessions Finn and Tonsager (1992) and Newman and Greenway (1997) provided direct ev idence that receiving MMPI-2 feedback is associated with positive effects. In Finn and Tonsagers (1992) study, college students seeking psychological services from a university counse ling center either received MMPI-2 feedback or examiner attention only. Compared with client s receiving only examin er attention, those who completed the MMPI-2 and heard their test result s reported a significant decline in symptomatic distress, a significant increase in self-esteem, and felt more hopeful about their problems, both immediately following the feedback session and at a 2-week follow-up. Newman and Greenway (1997), using an improved design and slightly diff erent measures, replicated Finn and Tonsagers (1992) results. Although psychologists routinely administer other assessments much briefer than the MMPI-2, it is apparent that research on the therap eutic benefits of test feedback has been limited mostly to tests that are used most often by psychologists, such as the MMPI-2. To my knowledge, there has been extremely scant systema tic study of the effects of providing feedback to clients based on responses to shorter inst ruments. Miller, Benefield, and Tonigan (1993) demonstrated that alcoholic clients provide d feedback based on tw o alcoholism screening measures showed greater reduction in dr inking than the control group. Worthington, McCullough, Shortz et al. (1995) found that, as co mpared to a control gr oup, couples receiving feedback based on a battery of brief instrument s showed improvement in dyadic satisfaction and

PAGE 39

39 commitment. As well, Neighbors, Larimer, a nd Lewis (2004) found that computer-delivered personalized normative feedback was effectiv e in changing perceived norms and alcohol consumption. Although some speculate that personality or ad justment factors mediate feedback (McCrae & Costa, 1991), not much is known about such f actors and the roles they play in examinerexaminee feedback processes. Employing a rand omized, pretest-posttes t control group design, Aldea, Rice, & Gormley (under review) examin ed the therapeutic e ffects of providing perfectionism feedback to maladaptive perfectio nists. Using hierarchi cal linear modeling the effects of perfectionism over time on outcome ratings such as emotional reactivity and psychological distress and the effects of treat ment condition and gender on the relationship between perfectionism and outcomes (in genera l and after feedback) were observed. Results revealed that providing feedback helped redu ce emotional reactivity and global symptomatic distress, including by reducing maladaptive perfectio nism, for most of the participants in the study. Internet Psychological Services Rapid and far-reaching technological advances are revolutionizing the ways in which people relate, communicate, and live their daily lives. Technologies that were hardly used a few years ago, such as the Internet, e-mail, a nd video teleconferencing, are becoming familiar methods for modern communication. The Internet in particular ha s grown exponentially from its original conception and now takes the form of a vast network of interconnected computers. It encompasses such a wide arena within science that its impact cannot be ignored and has the potential to have as great an impact on soci ety and human behavior as the telephone and the television (Jerome, DeLeon, James, Folen, Earles & Gedney, 2000). Use of the Internet within the psychological domain has many advantages and recently started being embraced by

PAGE 40

40 psychologists (Gosling et al., 2004) A growing number of people are using the Internet for research purposes and to provide counseling and therapy to the public. For example, behavioral health care practitioners are usi ng a wide variety of Internet t echnologies to deliver counseling and therapy, including E-mail (Borowitz & Wyatt, 1998; Eysenbach & Diepgen, 1998; Shapiro & Schulman, 1996; Stein, 1997), chat rooms (S ampson et al., 1997), the World Wide Web (Maheu, 1997), and interactive video (Baer, Cukor, Jenike, Lea hy, O'Laughlen, & Coyle, 1995; Huston & Burton, 1997; Stamm, 1998; Troster, Paolo, Glatt, Hubble, & Koller, 1995). Within this context, Internet-based services have been ta ken into consideration and have been specifically addressed in state a nd federal legislation regulating de livery of telehealth services (Alexander, 1999; Nickelson, 1998). Telehealth is defined as the use of telecommunications and information technology to provide access to he alth assessment, diagnosis, intervention, consultation, supervision, education, and in formation across distance (Nickelson, 1998, p. 527). EHealth is the new general term being used to refer to Internet delivery of health care services, including direct care such as counseling or psychotherapy. Behavioral eHealth is a more specific term that best captures the variety of psychological servic es being offered, ranging from psychoeducational information to psychotherapy. Funded and developed by private corporations, eHealth has grown dramatically in the past ye ars (Allen, 1999). Ethical concerns have been raised regardi ng the utilization of the internet to provide psychological services (Barak, 1999; Jerome et al., 2000, Maheu & Gordon, 2000). For example, while conducting such inte rventions, clients may believe that the Internet is secure or video teleconferencing is always comple tely confidential and private. To safeguard against a breach in confidentiality, practitioners shoul d fully inform clients of the lim its of confidentiality associated with such forms of telecommunications (Jer ome et al., 2000). Shapiro and Schulman (1996)

PAGE 41

41 discussed legal and ethical i ssues common in e-mail therapy and proposed guidelines and standards when using this medium. Specific con cerns include the delinea tion of the professional relationship and the responsibilities that accompany that role, the scope of competence, informed consent, treatment of minors, confidentiality, an d the duty to warn and protect (Jerome et al., 2000; Maheu & Gordon, 2000). In addition, ot her authors (King, 1996a, 1996b; Naglieri, Drasgow, Schmit, Handler et. al, 2004) delineated ethical problems associat ed with the collecting and reporting of data culled from the Internet and proposed guidelines for research conducted in Internet communities. There are obvious advantages of using comput er-assisted therapy as opposed to traditional face-to-face therapy such as the re duced cost, increased availability to larg e numbers of people, and potential anonymity for individuals who would otherwise feel too embarrassed to seek out therapy (Hill, Rochlen, Zack, McCready, & Dematatis, 2003). In a ddition, there is evidence that suggests that individuals orient towards, and respond to, comput ers much as they orient socially towards, and respond to, other humans (R eeves and Nass, 1996; Nass and Moon, 2000). Although effectiveness of remote consultation in psychotherapy has not been fully assessed, initial studies show promising re sults. For example, Klein and Ri chards (2001) investigated the effectiveness of an Internet-based intervention fo r panic disorders. Participants meeting criteria for panic disorders were randomly assigned to either the interven tion or a self-monitoring control condition. The treatment condition was associated with significant reducti ons in measures of panic, body vigilance, and self-efficacy in ma naging panic. Richards and Alvarenga (2002) developed and expanded this internet-based prog ram and reported that the use of the program was associated with significant reductions in panic disorder severity, specifically, panic frequency and distress during panic attacks in the experimental gr oup. Murdoch and Connor-

PAGE 42

42 Greene (2000) reported two clinical cases in which e-mail was used as an adjunctive therapy to enhance patients' involvement in treatment. In both cases, patients' reports suggest that therapeutic alliance and therap eutic impact improved with the use of e-mail homework reporting. The authors suggested that the improvement migh t be due to some patients being less inhibited discussing personal issues using e-mail than in a face-to-face setting. The di sinhibiting effect of e-mail may enhance self-disclosure independent of the therapist's responsiveness. Yager (2001) used e-mail as a therapeutic adjunct in the outpat ient treatment of anorexia nervosa. Results of this study showed a clinical improvement for all patients in the experime ntal group. Furthermore, patients accepted the rationale of using e-mail as a therapeutic adjunct, and they considered it helpful. Bouchard, Payeur, and Rivard (2000) used vi deoconference to deliver cognitivebehavior therapy (CBT) to patients suffering from panic di sorders with agoraphobia. Participants received several sessions of CBT by trai ned therapists according to a standardized treatment manual. According to the authors, e-therapy demonstrat ed statistically and clinically significant improvements in the target symptoms of frequency of panic attacks, panic apprehension, severity of panic disorder, and perceived self-efficacy an d general improvement in measures of global functioning, such as trait anxiet y. Furthermore, a very good therapeutic alliance was established after only the first se ssion. Lange, Van de Ven, Schrieke n, Bredeweg, and Emmelkamp (2000) developed an Internet system for the treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder. The treatment comprised 10 writing sessions (45 min each) over five weeks. Participants were assessed on-line before treatment, after treatment and after sixweek follow-up. The results showed that following treatment participants improved significantly in terms of post-traumatic stress symptoms and general psychological functioning, and this was sustained at fo llow-up. Moreover, they reported

PAGE 43

43 that reduction in post-traumatic stress symptoms compared favorably to changes in control and experimental groups in trials of similar but f ace-to-face treatment. Lange Rietdijk, Hudcovicova, van de Ven, Schrieken, and Emmelkamp (2003) re ported results of a c ontrolled trial on the Internet-driven treatment of posttraumatic stress and grief in a group of people who manifested mild to relatively severe trauma symptoms. They found that participants in the treatment condition improved significantly more than partic ipants in the waiting-list control condition on trauma-related symptoms and general psychopathology. The great advantage of the Internet is that enables clients who engage in computermediated therapy to interact with their therapists without the necessity of face-to-face contact. In contrast to computer-guided ther apy, where the computer itself both determines and provides the feedback to the client (Marks, 2000), in Internet-med iated therapy or assessment, the therapist determines and provides the f eedback (tailored to client's needs) via the computer. Present Study Although much is known about perfectionism and its deleterious consequences, with very few exceptions, perfectionism has not been the exp licit focus of the intervention in the literature. The limited knowledge with regard to the treatme nt of perfectionists comes from secondary analyses of the National Institute of Mental Health Treatment of Depression Collaborative Research Program, or other studies directed at treating different psycholog ical disorders. Based on these studies (Blatt & Zurrof, 2002) it has been argued that perfectionism and the problems stemming from perfectionism are particularly di fficult to treat and that in-depth long-term therapy is necessary to produce therapeutic effects. A different perspective is taken in this study, that perfectionists might benefit from brief and novel targeted treatment interventions such as feedback and feedback combined with writing. F eedback, including provision of feedback using the internet, has received atte ntion in the counseling and more general psychological assessment

PAGE 44

44 literature and demonstrated promising positive ou tcomes. Writing, used alone or in combination with different forms of therapy, showed signifi cant positive effects on both mental and physical health. The present study aims to investigate whet her two brief experimental interventions, provision of structured online feedback and provi sion of feedback combined with an opportunity to express reactions to the feedback in writing, affect perfectionists motivation for change and, as a result, psychological problems often asso ciated with perfectionism. Although there is increasing evidence that perfectionism is a mu ltidimensional construct, with adaptive and maladaptive aspects, given its deleterious cons equences, I focused on maladaptive perfectionism in this study. In addition, give n that much of the literature co ncerning perfectionism describes data relevant to college student s, the focus of the present stud y was on that population. It is noteworthy that, in a series of studies, Rice and his colleagues found that more than a half of the college student samples were clustered into the perfectionism groups, suggesting that perfectionism is a pervasive characteristic amon g college students. In addition, different studies have indicated that approximately 20-30% of th e students within various samples of college populations can be classified as maladaptively perfectionistic (Grzegor ek et al., 2004; Rice & Mirzadeh, 2000). Studies based on college students have genera lly found greater levels of perfectionism to be associated with more ps ychological symptoms and greater suicidal risk (Chang, 1998; Rice et al., 1998). Moreover, Hewitt, Flett, & Weber (199 4) found that college students who had a strong tendency to set unrealistically high standards for themselves or believed that others expected only excellence in their performance, re ported higher scores on measures of hopelessness and suicid al ideation. As the results of a variety of studies point out,

PAGE 45

45 college students represent a group th at is at considerable risk of silently suffering or, perhaps, coming to the attention of campus c ounseling or other treatment services. In sum, the present study represents an attemp t to address the relative paucity of systematic research on the treatment of perfectionism and the alleged difficulty in effectively helping maladaptive perfectionists based on brief interven tions. It is the result of extending seminal works of Finn (Finn & Tonsager, 1992; Ne wman & Greenway, 1997) and Pennebaker (1997, 2004) on the therapeutic benefits of providing clients with MMP I-2 feedback and on favorable outcomes of writing, respectively. The current study also builds on a previous study (Aldea et al., under review) in which interactive verbal fee dback provided to malada ptive perfectionistic college students has been shown to have some therapeutic benefits. The present study differs from the latter study in three important aspects. First, the present study does not examine only the direct results of the experimental interv entions on the outcome measures, but rather aims to understand the mechan isms that may come into play when feedback is provided. It is possible that the interventions themselves do not have a direct effect on distress, but may result in shifting partic ipants readiness for change (Prochaska & DiClemente, 1992). Results from qualitative studies showed clearly that perfectionists are reluctant to change, particularly because their excessive standard s are highly valued by them (Slaney & Ashby, 1996; Slaney et al., 2000). Thus increasing their motivati on for change is a key issue in treatment that might be targeted through these relatively simple and inexpensive methods. For example, feedback, either alone or combined with writing, may help perfectionists become aware of and/or acknowledge their problems that may lead them to the next st age involving consideration of change; those already consideri ng change may become better ab le to understand the problems

PAGE 46

46 associated with perfectionism, start thinking ab out possible solutions, and perhaps even engage in actions conducive to change re sulting in decreased distress. Second, in the Aldea et al. study, the feedb ack was provided verbally following an individual interview aimed at deve loping an empathic relationship w ith the participants. It is not unlikely that the participants might have trie d to please the experime nter from whom they experienced support and understanding by giving the kind of responses they thought were appropriate and expected, i.e. reports of re duced emotional reactivity and psychological problems. In the present study, it was deemed crucial to set the conditions of feedback so that the participant would be able to he ar, tolerate, and own the information, while being minimally or not at all influenced by the experimenter. In this context, including a measure of social desirability and using a computer-delivered pers onalized internet feedback instead of a face-toface interaction seem viable solutions. Third, in Aldea et al. study it is unclear what the mechanisms that facilitated change in participan ts were and whether the feedback or the initial interview had specific therap eutic value. The design of the present study would permit deciphering which experimental intervention is be neficial and whether th e simple provision of feedback has a different therapeutic impact than providing feedback and a llowing participants to express their reactions to the info rmation provided. It is likely that those participants who were given the opportunity to react to feedback will sh ow greater gains than those receiving feedback alone. There is some limited evidence from qualitative research that maladaptive perfectionists may be keenly sensitive to their perfectionism an d tend to be inflexible to others views (Rice et al., 2003, p. 51). Given maladaptive perfectionist s sensitivity, receiving feedback might be a stressful event for them. It might be expected th at maladaptive perfectionists would not be able to hear and respond to feedback without defensiveness. At the sa me time, there has been a great

PAGE 47

47 emphasis in the literature on the be nefits of treatments that disc ourage clients from being passive recipients of treatment (Frank, 1961; Horvath & Symonds, 1991). Thus, receiving feedback and writing about the reactions the feedback elicits may gradually facilitate perfectionists (who, as implied above, are likely to be resistant to, or ambivalent about, ch ange) producing their own arguments for change. Incorporating perfectionist s participation by provi ding an opportunity to process the information received may make the f eedback more personally relevant, meaningful, and easier to be accepted which would be more likely to be conducive to improvement (Finn & Tonsager, 1992). Research Questions and Hypotheses Although it has been demonstrated that feedback and writing have therapeutic benefits, very little is known with regard to whethe r this conclusion holds true for maladaptive perfectionists. The questions that guided this research were: Does tel ling perfectionists about their perfectionism benefit them (e.g., by reducing their distress)? Do perfectionists benefit more if they receive feedback only or if they receive feedb ack and are given the opportunity to react to the feedback? If benefits do not initially occur, do they occur la ter? If benefits do occur, do they persist? If participants do benefit, what are the mechanisms that lead to psychological improvement following feedback? In conclusion, th e purpose of the current study is to identify whether feedback combined with the opportunity to react to feedback has more therapeutic benefits in terms of general leve l of distress than feedback alone or no feedback. In addition, this study investigates mediational and moderational models to explore factors that are conducive to therapeutic gains for perfectionists. The design of the study permits dete rmining the persistence of any therapeutic effects tw o weeks after the experiment. The study uses a randomized, pretest-pos ttest-follow-up control group design and investigates hypotheses related to condition interven tion effects. In addition, mechanisms that are

PAGE 48

48 conducive to therapeutic gains for perfectionist s will be explored. With regard to condition effects, it is expected that: 1. When compared with no feedback control, participants receiving either experimental condition (feedback alone or feedback combined with opportunity for written reaction) will experience (a) a significant increase in motiva tion (readiness) for change, (b) a significant decrease in distress, (c) a signifi cant decrease in defensiveness, and (d) a significant decrease in perfectionism. 2. Participants who are given the opportunity to react to feedback will show (a) significantly higher levels of readiness for change, (b) sign ificantly lower levels of defensiveness, (c) significantly lower levels of dist ress, and (d) significantly lower levels of perfectionism when compared to participants receiving feedback alone or no feedback. It is expected that these effect s would be maintained at follow-up. Exploratory hypotheses: 1. Participants who show low levels of read iness for change would also exhibit high defensiveness. In other words, a significant negative correlation betw een defensiveness and readiness to change is anticipated. 2. Readiness for change may play the role of me diator in the relationship between conditions and outcome. More specifically, the experime ntal conditions would impact participants readiness for change which in turn would a ffect their distress level, perfectionism, and defensiveness. It is expected that this effect would be particularly apparent for those who receive feedback and are given the opportuni ty to react to the information provided. 3. The relationship between condition and dist ress may be mediated by defensiveness. Particularly, feedback combined with reaction to feedback may lead to decreased defensiveness which in turn would lead to de creased distress, whereas feedback alone may lead to increased defensiveness th at would further increase distress. 4. Readiness for change may have a moderational effect. More precisely, participants who are highly motivated to change will show the greatest therapeutic benefits. Participants who have reduced motivation to change will not benefit as much from the experimental interventions, in terms of changes in psychological distress. 5. Defensiveness may significantly influence outco mes. More specificall y, participants who exhibit high defensiveness woul d demonstrate the least therapeutic gains whereas those exhibiting low defensiveness would show significant therapeutic improvement. 6. Defensiveness may interact with participants re adiness to change to predict distress level. More exactly, highly defensive individuals w ho also have a low mo tivation level (low readiness for change) would show the highest levels of distress whereas participants motivated to change and less defensiv e would demonstrate reduced distress.

PAGE 49

49 CHAPTER 3 METHOD Participants Participants were college stude nts at two public universities in southeastern United States and were recruited through advertisements in various psychology classes such as introductory psychology, abnormal psychology, research met hods, and personality psychology. A brief description and the weblink for th e first part of the st udy (prescreening) were provided in those advertisements. At the website, and prior to co mpleting the perfectionism measure, participants received an Informed Consent form (see Appendix A) with information about the general purpose of the study. Participants were informed that if they chose to par ticipate, they had the freedom to withdraw from the study at any time without any penalty. If, af ter reading the consent document, the student was still interested in pa rticipating, she or he pr ovided consent by clicking I Agree button, which served as an electronic signature. Those who decided to participat e were initially prescreened for perfectionism based on The Almost Perfect Scale-Revised (APS-R; Slaney et al., 1996; 2001). Maladaptive perfectionists were identified based on their sc ores on the APS-R and through cl assification rules derived from predictive discriminant function analyses (A shby, Rice, Timmons, et al., 2004; Rice & Ashby, 2007). More specific details regardin g the selection criteria appear below, in the description of measures. A total of 821 students completed the pres creening (demographic information was not collected at this point). Enrollment figures fo r the sections of psychology courses were not collected, therefore participation rates could not be calcu lated. Of the 821 participants, 242 (50 males, 186 females, and 6 participants with missing gender data) were selected. They were directed to another secure website where they re ad and electronically signed a second Informed

PAGE 50

50 Consent form that detailed the purpose, met hods, and risks and bene fits of the study (see Appendix B). Afterwards, partic ipants completed a demographi cs questionnaire (see Appendix C) and the pretest measures: the University of Rhode Island Change Assessment Questionnaire (URICA), the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desi rability Scale (MCSD), and the Outcome Questionnaire (OQ-45). These participan ts ranged in age from 18 to 27 ( M = 19.95, SD = 1.60). Approximately 67% of the sample was Wh ite/European American, 9.5% Black/African American, 9.9% Latino/a, 7.5% Asian/Asian Amer ican, and about 6% described themselves as multicultural mixed race/ethnicity or other. Th e mean self-reported grade point average, based on a 1.0 to 4.0 scale for the sample was 3.32 (SD = 0.48) and ranged from 1.8 to 4.0. Because participants came from two universities, a multivar iate analysis of variance was conducted to assess potential differences betw een students at the two universi ties on the study variables. The analysis revealed no significant differences, Wilkss = .84, F (6, 36) = 1.04, p = .36. One week later, participants returned to the website for th e intervention session. At that point, they were randomly assigne d (electronically) to the expe rimental conditions: feedback alone, feedback and writing, and no feedback cont rol. Immediately following the experimental conditions, they filled out the outcome measur es (the URICA, the MCSD, the OQ-45, and the APS-R). There were 167 participants who comp leted this second phase of the study. Two weeks later, the follow-up session took place in which participants completed the dependent measures again (see Figure 3-1). Based on randomization, any differences between participants were expected to be the result of exposure to one of the three conditions in the experiment (see below). A sample of 154 participants completed the Pr etest, Posttest, and the Follow-up. Three of these participants were suspected of random or careless responding as evidenced by answering items such Leave this item blank and were eliminated from further analyses. Forty eight

PAGE 51

51 participants were in the cont rol condition, 55 in the feedback condition, and 48 in the feedback and writing condition. The sample size matched th e targeted sample size of approximately 150 participants (or about 50 participants per group) that was es tablished based on a power analysis to detect significant mean differences on the magn itude of a medium effect size, with alpha at .05, and power at .80 (Cohen, 1992). A multivariate analyses of variance (MANOVA) revealed no differences between conditions on any of the pretest study variables, Wilkss = .93, F (6, 12) = 1.00, p = .45 (Readiness for Change Index RCI MCSD, High Standards, Discrepancy, Order, and OQ-45 were the dependent variable s). As well, there were no differences among conditions in terms of sex, 2 (2, N = 178) = 1.36, p = .51, race/ethnicity, 2 (12, N = 181) = 13.82, p = .31, age, F(2, 184) = 2.73, p = .07 or GPA, F(2, 161) = 1.99, p = .14, Students were also asked to report whether they were currentl y seeing a counselor. There were no differences between conditions on this variable as well, 2 (2, N = 181) = .60, p = .74. To assess attrition effects, a MANOVA was us ed to compare the Pretest data for the longitudinal sample with the Pretest data for th e participants who droppe d out at Posttest and Follow-up (RCI, MCSD, High Standards, Discre pancy, Order, and OQ-45 were the dependent variables). This analysis reveal ed no significant differences between the longitudinal and attrition groups on the questionnaires scores, Wilkss = .96, F (6, 215) = 1.51, p = .18. In addition, there were not significant differences between the long itudinal and attrition group with regard to the proportion of men and women, 2 (1, N = 147) = .02, p = .54, race/ethnicity, 2 (6, N = 238) = 4.0, p = .67, age F(1, 238) = .27, p = .60, GPA, F(1, 208) = .39, p = .53 or whether the student was currently seeing a counselor, 2 (1, N = 238) = .47, p = .49.

PAGE 52

52 Design and Procedure The prescreening as well as the pretest, posttest, and follow-up took place online. All participants completed the online perfectionism prescreening instrument (i.e., the APS-R). Experimental condition 1 : Participants receiving feedback alone. One week subsequent to the pretest, participants in th is condition received feedback based on their APS-R results (see Appendix D for the sample feedback). The feedback was specific to maladaptive perfectionists. Subsequent to receiving feedback participants completed the dependent measures. Two weeks following the receipt of feedback, participants returned to the website and completed the dependent measures again. Experimental condition 2 : Participants receiving perfectionism feedback and writing their reactions to the feedback. One week following the pretest, part icipants in this group received specific feedback based on their APS-R results (the same feedback received by the participants in the feedback only condition). Subsequent to receiving feedback, participants were asked to respond to the feedback received by giving in wr iting their reactions and feelings. Consistent with other studies on expressive writing (Pennebake r, 2004), participants were instructed to write their deepest thoughts and feelings about perfectionism and perf ormance expectations and to try to let themselves go and to write conti nuously about emotions and thoughts the feedback may have elicited (see Appendix E). Following this step, participants completed the dependent measures. Two weeks following the feedback se ssion, participants completed the dependent measures again. Control condition : Participants not receiving feedback. One week after the pretest, participants in this group received a brief descri ption of the History of Florida, similar in length to the text participants in the experimental conditions received (see Appendix F). Next, they

PAGE 53

53 completed the dependent measures. Two weeks later, participants completed the dependent measures again. In order to control for order effects, th e measures were counterbalanced. A MANOVA revealed no differences on the st udy variables based on the order of the questionnaires, Wilkss = .92, F (6, 214) = .98, p = .48. Instruments The Almost Perfect Scale-Revi sed (APS-R), developed by Slaney et al. (1996) was used to assess dimensions of perfectionism. The final ve rsion of APS-R consists of 24 items that are responded to using a 7-point Li kert scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree (see Appendix G). The APS-R contains th ree subscales: (1) Discrepancy, (2) High Standards, and (3) Order. High Standards represent an individual's level of expectations related to his/her performance. Discrepanc y represents the perception that one consistently fails to meet the high standards one has set for oneself (S laney, Rice & Ashby, 2002, p. 69). Order represents an individual's need for structure and neatne ss. Higher scores across each subscale correspond with higher levels of each dimension. Explorator y and confirmatory factor analyses results support the three hypothesized subscales (Slaney et al., 2001). The structure coefficients ranged from .49 to .83. Cronbachs coefficient alphas from the confirmatory factor analysis were .92 for Discrepancy, .85 for Standards, and .86 for Order. The subscales relate in expected directions with other measures of perfec tionism and with measures of psychological adjustment (Rice & Slaney, 2002; Slaney, et al., 2001). The High St andards subscale taps adaptive aspects of perfectionism and the Discrepancy subscale ta ps maladaptive aspects of perfectionism. Individuals are categorized as maladaptive perfectionists based on a combination of High Standards and Discrepancy scores (i.e., High Standards scores e qual or greater than 37 and Discrepancy scores equal or greater than 45) (Ashby et al, 2004; Rice & Ashby, 2007).

PAGE 54

54 The University of Rhode Island Chan ge Assessment Questionnaire (URICA; McConnaughy, Prochaska, & Velicer, 1983) consists of 32 statements that participants endorse on a 5-point scale th at ranges from 1 = strongly agree to 5 = strongly disagree (see Appendix H). The items were written to determine how indivi duals perceive, contemplate, and respond to a problem. URICA taps four stages of cha nge (precontemplation, contemplation, action, and maintenance) with 8 items measuring each of the f our stages of change. For example, I have a problem and I really think I should work on it lo ads on the Contemplation scale, and It worries me that I might slip back on a problem I have already changed loads on the Maintenance scale. Several studies support the fou r-factor structure of the URICA, and internal consistency coefficient alphas for the scales were repor ted to have ranged from .88 to .89 (McConnaughy, DiClemente, Prochaska, & Velicer, 1989; McC onnaughy et al., 1983). The URICA is one of the most commonly used instruments for assess ing change (McConnaughy et al., 1983) and it has been validated in various settings and with different populations, incl uding cigarette smokers (Prochaska & DiClemente, 1985; Prochaska et al., 1992), alcohol abusers (Carbonari & DiClemente, 2000; Project MATCH Research Group, 1997), illicit dr ug users (Belding, Iguchi & Lamb, 1996), and dual-diagnosis patients (Pan talon, Nich, Frankforte r, & Carroll, 2002; Valesquez, Carbonari, & DiClemente, 1999). A m odified version of the URICA (Prochaska & DiClemente, 1986) was used for the present study. Instructions were modified to specifically address problems with perfectionism rather th an with other issues. Although URICA has been used with samples of college students to assess r eadiness to changing problems such as substance abuse, internal consistency coefficients were not provided (Hufford, Shields, Shiffman, Paty, & Balabanis, 2002). The URICA administered onlin e in a sample of co llege students showed

PAGE 55

55 adequate validity and test-retest reliability of the subs cales that ranged fr om .78 to .85 (Miller, Neal, Roberts, Baer, et al., 2002). With regard to scoring, the stages are consider ed to be continuous and not discreet and to date there have been no cut-off norms establishe d to determine what constitutes high, medium or low on a particular stage. Cluster analyses often are used to classi fy participants with respect to their stage-of-change profile acr oss the different dimensions. An alternative method of scoring the URICA, of interest for the purpose of the present st udy, was popularized by the Project MATCH Research Group (1997). The measure was scored as a single continuous measure of readiness to change. A readiness for change i ndex (RCI) was used in the present study. The RCI was derived by summing scores from the contem plation, action, and maintenance factors and then subtracting precontemplation scores. The primary advantage of this method is that additional statistical analyses are not necessary to group participants in unique subgroups and readiness scores are easy to cal culate and interpret (Carey, Pu rnine, Maisto, & Carey, 1999). The Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale (MCSD; Crowne & Marlowe, 1960; Reynolds, 1982) is a 13-item self-report short ve rsion of the 33-item MCSD (see Appendix I). The 13-item version developed by Reynolds (1982) has a very strong relation with the longer version of the MCSD (>.90), a si gnificant relation with the Edwa rds Social Desirability Scale (O'Grady, 1988), and an acceptable level of intern al consistency. For example, Gelso, Kelley, Fuertes, Marmarosh, et al. (2005) reported internal consistency of .70 in a sample of students. The MCSD uses a true-false format and has been us ed extensively to assess social desirability as a response tendency in studies implementing self -report formats. In addition, MCSD has been used as a measure of defensiveness, with high scores indicating defensiveness and tendency to engage in self-protective beha vior (Paulhus, 1991; Pauls & Stem mler, 2003). For example, it has

PAGE 56

56 been suggested that high-scoring participants are intensely afraid of rejection, are less likely to report justified feelings of hostility and anger, an d are more likely to change their privately held attitudes as a function of di ssonance induction (Sedikides, Rudich, Gregg, Kumashiro, & Rusbult, 2004; Winters, Latimer, Stichfield, & Egan, 2004). The Outcome Questionnaire (OQ; Lamb ert, Burlingame, Umphress, Hansen, Vermeersch,, Clouse, & Yanchar, 1996) is a 45item self-report measure of distress that is sensitive to changes in psychologi cal distress over short periods of time. It uses a 5-point Likerttype response format ranging from 0 = never to 4 = almost always (see Appendix J). Higher scores are indicative of more perceived dist ress. A sample item is I have difficulty concentrating. A total score or three subscales can be calcu lated: Symptom Distress (SD, 25 items), Interpersonal Relationships (IR, 11 items), and Social Roles (SR, 9 items). On the basis of a normative sample that included university students (Lambert et al., 1996), internal consistency and test-retest reliability (3-week) estimates were .92 and .84, respectively. For each scale, higher scores indicate greater negativity or dysfunction on the dimension being measured (Lambert et al., 1996). Reported testretest reliabilities for th ese subscales are .78, .80, and .82, respectively, and internal consistency reliab ilities are .91, .74, and .71. (Lambert et al., 1996), The OQ-45 has also been demonstrated to have ve ry good concurrent validity coefficients with a variety of self-report scales (e.g., Beck Depre ssion Inventory, State-Tr ait Anxiety Inventory, Symptom Checklist; Umphress, Lambert, Smar t, Barlow, Clouse, & Hansen, 1997; Seggar, Lambert, & Hansen, 2002).

PAGE 57

57 Experimental Condition 1 Pretest Posttest Follow-up Complete measures Feedback Complete measures Complete measures Experimental Condition 2 Pretest Posttest Follow-up Complete measures Feedback + Writing Complete measures Complete measures Control Condition Pretest Posttest Follow-up Complete measures Complete m easures Complete measures Figure 3-1. Research Design URICA SDS OQ-45 APS-R URICA SDS OQ-45 APS-R URICA SDS OQ-45 APS-R One week One week URICA SDS OQ-45 APS-R URICA SDS OQ-45 APS-R URICA SDS OQ-45 APS-R One week One week URICA SDS OQ-45 APS-R URICA SDS OQ-45 APS-R URICA SDS OQ-45 APS-R One week One week

PAGE 58

58 CHAPTER 4 RESULTS Descriptive Statistics a nd Preliminary Analyses Table 4-1 displays the range of scores and th e means and standard deviations for the scale scores. Table 4-2 presents th e withinand across-time corre lations among scores and the Cronbachs coefficient alpha estimate of score re liability for each measure. All scores showed adequate internal consistency coefficients, consis tent with those found in other studies using the same measures with a similar population. Fo r example, in a samp le of maladaptive perfectionistic college students, Aldea & Rice (2006) reported a range of Discrepancy and High Standards scores similar to those found in this sample and reliability estimates of .89 and .86, respectively. For the MCSD in a sample of colle ge students, Reynolds (1982) reported a mean of 5.67, standard deviation of 3.29, and internal consistency of .76, parameters comparable to those found in the current sample. Althoug h the reliability of OQ45 in th is study is similar to that reported by Lambert et al., the current mean is s ubstantially higher than th at usually reported in college students (M = 46.37, SD = 19.70) and clos er to the mean found in college counseling centers clients (M = 75.16, SD = 16.74), suggesting that maladaptively perfectionistic college students tend to experience higher levels of distress than typical students. The data were checked for normality and results revealed univariate normality for all measured variables (skewness and kurtosis valu es less than 2). Multivariate normality was assessed using the Mahalanobis distances for the 5 pretest variable s (RCI, MCSD, High Standards, Discrepancy, OQ-45) a nd the critical chi-square for this test was 20.52. None of the participants had Mahalanobis distance values that exceeded this critical value. The correlations among the scales within time were generally low to moderate and, as expected, high across time for the same measur es, except for the two subscales of the APS-R

PAGE 59

59 (see Table 4-2). Although previous studies report ed across time Discrepancy and High Standards correlations ranging from .76 to .85 (Rice & Aldea, 2006), in the present study they were lower from Pretest to Posttest and Pretest to Follo w-up, ranging from.39 to .53. At pretest and posttest, but not at follow-up, the correlation between Dist ress (as measured by OQ-45) and Readiness for Change was significant and positive, suggesting th at individuals who are willing to consider change also tend to endorse hi gher levels of distress. The re lationship between Distress and Defensiveness was significant and negative across the 3 time points, implying that students with lower levels of Defensiveness are more likely to admit to symptomatic distress. In addition, although the correlation between Distress and High Standards wa s not significant, the link between Distress and Discrepancy was significant a nd positive, suggesting th at individuals with high levels of Discrepancy (maladaptive perfect ionism) also tend to manifest high levels of Distress. Discrepancy was also positively associated with Read iness for Change and negatively with Defensiveness at posttest and followup, indicating that people who endorse high Discrepancy are also more ready for change and less defensive. Contrary to my expectation, the association between Readiness for Change and De fensiveness was not signi ficant at any point in time. Treatment Effects Analyses To test the differences in the three treatment effects on the outcome variables, a 3 (Feedback/Writing/Control) x 3 (Pretest/Posttes t/Follow-up) repeated-measures design was used. Five separate repeated measures analyses of variance (ANOVA) were used in which the dependent variables were Distress (measured with OQ-45), Readiness for Change (URICA), Defensiveness (MCSD), and Perfectionism (Hig h Standards and Discrepancy), respectively. Time (Pretest, Posttest, and Follow-up) was the w ithin-subjects variable in each analysis. With multiple outcome variables, the typical analysis approach used in the group-comparison context

PAGE 60

60 is to either conduct multiple uni variate ANOVAs or conduct a multivar iate analysis of variance (MANOVA). Huberty and Morris (1 989) suggested that multiple ANOVAs are more appropriate when the interest is on how a treatment variable affects each of the outcome variables and when the research conducted is explorat ory in nature, as in when new treatment and outcome variables are studied. The current study is the first of its kind to exam ine whether the provision of feedback and feedback combined with expressive writing has therapeutic benefits in terms of increasing Readiness for Change and decreasing Di stress, Defensiveness, and Perfectionism. The focus was on exploring which specific outcome vari ables these experimental conditions affect, thus a univariate analysis appeared to be the most appropriate appro ach to test the main hypotheses. Whenever multiple statistical analyses are performed, there is the potential problem of Type I error across all of the tests. Bonferroni corrections we re used to control for Type I error inflation resulting from the number of tests condu cted. The Bonferroni-corrected p value for the following five analyses was .01. For RCI, the ANOVA showed a nonsignificant Condition x Time interaction, Wilkss = .99, F (4, 264) = .33, p = .86, = .005, and a non-significant Time effect, Wilkss = .99, F (2, 132) = .40, p = .67, = .006. The same pattern of non-signi ficant results was revealed for MCSD, Wilkss = .98, F (4, 262) = .71, p = .59, = .01 (Condition x Time), Wilkss = .99, F (2, 131) = .70, p = .50, = .01 (Time) and OQ-45, Wilkss = .99, F (4, 270) = .18, p = .95, = .003 (Condition x Time), Wilkss = .99, F (2, 135) = .86, p = .43, = .01 (Time). For High Standards, the repeated measur es ANOVA showed a non-significant Condition x Time interaction, Wilkss = .98, F (4, 276) = .66, p = .62, = .009, and a significant effect for Time, Wilkss = .93, F (2, 138) = 4.99, p = .008, = .07. The results indicated that there was a

PAGE 61

61 significant decreasing linear tre nd over time, F (1, 139) = 9.96, p < .002, = .07, with scores at the Follow-up significantly lower than scores at the Pretest. For Discrepancy, the results revealed a non significant effect of Time, Wilkss = .98, F (2, 138) = 1.14, p = .32, = .02, but a marginally significant Condition x Time interaction, Wilkss = .98, F (4, 276) = 2.13, p = .07, = .03. Follow-up pairwise comparisons showed a decrease in Discrepancy from pr eto posttest for the control gr oup and no meaningful change for any of the experimental groups (See Table 4-3 for all means and standards deviations by group). In addition, a separate MANO VA was carried with the th ree OQ-45 subscales as the dependent variables, but no significant Condition x Time effect was found, Wilkss = .97, F (12, 260) = .33, p = .98, = .02. Mediation Analyses A sensitive data analysis process was used to test whether Readiness for Change and Defensiveness mediate the relationship between treatment and outcome (Frazier, Tix, & Barron, 2004; MacKinnon, Fairchild, & Frits, 2007; Ma cKinnon, Lockwood, Hoffman, West, & Sheets, 2002; Shrout & Bolger, 2002). In order to establ ish mediation, two conditions must be met: (a) the predictor (e.g., condition) is significantly associated with the mediators (e.g., Readiness for Change and Defensiveness, respectively) and (b) the mediator is associated with the outcome variable (e.g., Distress) (MacK innon et al., 2007; MacKinnon et al ., 2002). Separate sets of analyses were conducted for each proposed me diator (i.e., Readiness for Change and Defensiveness). The associations between the pr edictor (e.g., condition) and the mediators were not significant, revealing that neither Readiness for Change nor Defensiveness mediated the relationship between experimental conditions and outcome (See Table 4-4). The results remained non significant even when the effects of Readin ess for Change and Defensiveness, respectively, at the Pretest were partialled. In other words, support was not found for the hypotheses that the

PAGE 62

62 experimental conditions would l ead to change in Defensiveness and/or Readiness for change, which in turn would affect outcome. Interaction Analyses In the next set of analyses, the modera tional role of Readiness for Change and Defensiveness in the relation betw een experimental conditions a nd outcomes at both Posttest and Follow-up was investigated. Hierarchical multiple regressions were used to examine the Distress, Readiness for Change, Defensiveness, and Perf ectionism (High Standards and Discrepancy) scores at Posttest and Follow-up as a function of experimental condition and Pretest Readiness for Change and Defensiveness, respectiv ely (Aiken & West, 1991; Baron & Kenny, 1986; Cohen, Cohen, West, & Aiken, 2003; Frazier, Tix, & Barron, 2004). Condition was dummycoded, with the control condition designated as the reference group, result ing in two sets of dummy-code variables for condition (Aiken & West, 1991; Cohen, Cohen, West, & Aiken, 2003). The predictor and the moderator variab les were centered thus reducing problems associated with multicollinearity among predicto r and moderator variable s and the interaction terms created from them. Variables were ente red in the regression equation in blocks: the centered Pretest predictor and the two dummy-code d variables for condition were entered first, followed by the product terms between the pred ictor and each of the dummy-coded variables (Aiken & West, 1991; Holmbeck, 1997). Effects on Distress The purpose of the analyses is to examine wh ether the two potential moderators, Readiness for Change and Defensiveness, interacted with condition to predict the outcome, Distress level. First, the effect of Pretest RCI predicting Distress at Posttest and Follow-up as a function of condition was examined. The procedure outlined above was followed. More specifically, the Pretest RCI score and the dummy-coded variable s were entered first and the product terms

PAGE 63

63 between Pretest RCI and each of the dummy-code d variables were entered next. There were no significant main or interacti on effects of the Pretest RCI predicting Posttest Distress, R 2 = .01, F (2, 159) = 1.20, p = .30. The set of interaction terms, how ever, explained an additional 4% of the variance in Distress at Follow-up above and beyond the variance explained by the first-order effects, R 2 = .04, F (2, 145) = 3.17, p = .05. More importantly, the Pretest RCI x feedback condition interaction was significant in predicting Distress at Follow-up, = .31, p = .01. The plotted interaction revealed that participants receiving feedba ck alone who had high Readiness for Change at Pretest also had high Distress scores at followup, whereas those low in Readiness for Change at Pretest had decreased Distress tw o weeks after the experiment (See Figure 4-1). The participants in the control condition with low levels of Pret est Readiness for Change showed a slight decrease in Distress at Follow-up compared to participants highly motivated to change at the onset of the treatment condition. Next, the effects of Pretest Defensiveness on Distress at Posttest and Follow-up were examined using a similar procedure as above. However, no significant main effects or interactions were found in the respective analyses, R 2 = .001, F (2, 152) = .06, p = .94 (Posttest), R 2 = .02, F (2, 139) = 1.28, p = .28 (Follow-up). Effects on Readiness for Change I examined the effects of Pretest Defensivenes s predicting Readiness for Change at Posttest, R 2 = .008, F(2, 152) = .63, p = .53, and Follow-up, R 2 = .003, F(2, 135) = .18, p = .84, as a function of condition. None of the effects were si gnificant, revealing that Defensiveness does not moderate the relation between experimental intervention and Readiness for Change. Effects on Perfectionism To examine the moderational role of R eadiness for Change and Defensiveness, respectively, in the condition-pe rfectionism link, the effects of Pr etest Defensiveness and Pretest

PAGE 64

64 Readiness for Change predicting Posttest and Follow-up High Standards and Discrepancy were investigated. Analyses revealed no significant main or interaction effect of Pretest Defensiveness predicting High Standards, R 2 = .02, F (2, 151) = 1.55, p = .22, or Discrepancy, R 2 = .02, F (2, 151) = 1.29, p = .28. However, the Pretest Readiness for Change x condition interaction had a significant impact on High Standards at both Pos ttest and Follow-up, but not on Discrepancy. Although the set of interaction terms was significa nt only at .11 level an d explained 3% of the variance in Posttest High Sta ndards above and beyond the variance explained by the first-order effects, R 2 = .03, F (2, 158) = 2.19, p = .11, particularly relevant wa s that the Pretest Readiness for Change x feedback condition interaction was significant in pred icting Posttest High Standards scores, = -.23, p = .05 (See Figure 4-2). When the e ffects of Pretest Readiness for Change and condition interacti on on High Standards at Followup were explored, the results showed that the set of interaction terms was si gnificant and explained an additional 6% of the variance in Follow-up High Standards above an d beyond the variance e xplained by the firstorder effects, R 2 = .06, F (2, 143) = 4.37, p = .01. Further examination of the results evidenced significant effects of both Pret est Readiness for Change x f eedback condition interaction, = .26, p = .04, and Pretest Readiness for Ch ange x writing condition interaction, = -.31, p = .005 in predicting Follow-up High Sta ndards scores (See Figure 4-3). Th e plotted interactions suggest that participants receiving fee dback who had low Readiness for Ch ange at Pretest showed scores on High Standards at both Posttest and Follow-up that were approximately half of a standard deviation lower than participants receiving feed back who started off more motivated to change. The same pattern was observed for the particip ants in the control group. Although the difference in High Standards scores between participants in the feedb ack condition with high Pretest Readiness for Change and those in the control condition was minor (with those in the feedback

PAGE 65

65 condition having slightly lower Hi gh Standards scores than contro l participants), the opposite was true for participants with low motivation for change at the beginning of the study. More specifically, at both Posttest a nd Follow-up, participants with reduced motivation to change receiving feedback exhibited High Standards scores that were about half of a standard deviation higher than the scores of the participants in the control group. Alt hough the effect of the interaction between Readiness for Change at Pr etest and the writing cond ition was not significant in predicting Posttest High Standards, it became apparent in predicting Follow-up High Standards. More specifically, indi viduals who had high levels of mo tivation to change at Pretest, and who received feedback and expressed thei r reactions in writing, showed decreased High Standards scores at Follow-up when compared to those who had a lower desire to change at the beginning of the study. In addition, those with high Pretest Readiness for ch ange in the writing condition manifested lower Hi gh Standards than participan ts in the control group. Effects on Defensiveness There were no significant main effects or interactions of Pretest Readiness for Change, R2 = .004, F (2, 157) = .33, p = .72 (Posttest), R 2 = .01, F (2, 146) = .88, p = .42 (Follow-up), and Pretest Defensiveness, R 2 = .001, F (2, 151) = .22, p = .80 (Posttest), R 2 = .01, F (2, 140) = 2.10, p = .13 (Follow-up), predicting Posttest or Fo llow-up Defensiveness scores. These results suggest that these two variable s did not moderate the association between the experimental conditions and participants level of De fensiveness at Posttest and Follow-up. Effects of Pretest Readiness for Change, Defe nsiveness and Condition Interaction on the Outcome Variables at Posttest and Follow-up To test the effect of Pret est Readiness for Change x Pretest Defensiveness x condition interaction on Distress, Readiness for Change, De fensiveness, and Perfectionism at Posttest and Follow-up hierarchical multiple regressions were us ed. As in previous analyses, variables were

PAGE 66

66 entered in the regression equation in blocks: the centered Pretest predic tors and the two dummy coded variables for condition were entered firs t, the product terms between each of the two predictors and each of the code variables were entered next, and the 3-way interaction terms were entered in the third bloc k (Aiken & West, 1991; Holmbeck, 1997). The results showed that none of the 3-way interactions we re significant in predicting any of the outcome variables (See Table 4-5). Exploratory Analyses It is possible that particip ants level of distress at th e onset of the study may have influenced how they responded to the conditions. Next, the effects of the interaction between Pretest Distress and condition on th e outcome variables were inve stigated; however the results revealed that the Pretest Distre ss x condition interaction did not have a significant impact on any of the study variables. Blat and his colleagues (Blatt et al., 1995, 1998) found support for the hypothesis that perfectionism interferes with the success of treatment. Next, I explored whether the two dimensions of perfectionism, Hi gh Standards and Discrepancy at Pretest interacted with the conditions to predict Distress, Readiness for Change and Defensiveness, respectively, at Posttest and Follow-up. As before, none of the interactions were significant in predicting the outcome variables. Finally, following a procedure suggested by Santor, Bagby, and Joffe (1997), I analyzed whether any of the Pretest variables interact ed with the treatment conditions to predict change in Readiness for Change and Distress scores from Pr etest to Posttest and fr om Pretest to Follow-up. Change scores in Readiness for Change were ca lculated by subtracting th e Pretest Readiness for Change scores from the Posttest and Follow-up R eadiness for change scores, respectively. Thus, positive values indicate an increase in Readiness for Change from Pretest to Posttest and from

PAGE 67

67 Pretest to Follow-up. The change in Distress wa s calculated by subtracting Posttest and Followup scores from the Pretest scores; th us, positive values indicate chan ge in Distress in the desired direction (i.e., decrease in Dist ress from Pretest to Posttest and from Pretest to Follow-up). Results revealed that the interaction between Pretest Defensiveness and the writing condition was significant in predicting change in Readine ss for Change scores from Pretest to Posttest, = -.29, p = .04 (See Figure 4-4). The pl otted interaction illustrated that participants with low Defensiveness levels at the onset of the study who received feedback and expressed in writing their reactions to the feedback received showed a more significant change (i.e., increase) in Readiness for Change from Pretest to Posttest than control participants with low Pretest Readiness for change and than participants in the feedback and wr iting condition who were highly defensive at the Pretest. Moreover, the Pretest Defensiveness x feedb ack condition interaction was significant in predicting change in Distress from Pretest to Follow-up, = .28, p = .03 (See Figure 4-5). The plotted interaction showed that participants with high Pretest Defensivene ss scores who received feedback manifested the most ch ange (i.e., decrease) in Distress scores from Pretest to Follow-up when compared with control participants with high Defensiveness at Pretest and when compared with participants in th e feedback condition who had low Defe nsiveness at the onset of the study. Lastly, the interaction between Pretest Hi gh Standards and the feedback and writing conditions was significant in predicting change in Distress from Pretest to Follow-up, = .24, p = .04 (Pretest High Standards x writing) and = .26, p = .05 (Pretest High Standards x feedback) (See Figure 4-6). The plotted intera ction suggests that participants who had relatively low Pretest High Standards and who were in either experi mental condition showed more change (i.e., decrease) in Distress scores from Pretest to Follow-up than those who had high Pretest High

PAGE 68

68 Standards. In addition, for participants with Hi gh Standards at the beginning of the study, those who received either experimental condition demonstr ated more change (i.e., decrease) in Distress than those in the control condition.

PAGE 69

69Table 4-1. Overall Means and Standard Deviations Pretest Posttest Follow-up Measure Min. Max. M SD Min. Max. M SD Min. Max. M SD RCI 5 88 51.1616.98410851.1420.69 510851.4021.26 MCSD 0 12 5.252.680124.822.58 0114.752.55 HS 37 49 43.693.73124942.105.82 154941.815.31 Discrep 45 84 59.0310.19138457.0313.57 148356.9313.66 OQ 12 136 66.1523.36812664.8325.93 1312864.9223.30 Note: RCI = Readiness for Change Index, MCSD = Defensiveness, HS = High Standards, Discre p = Discrepancy, OQ = Distress.

PAGE 70

70Table 4-2. Within-Time and Across-Time Scal e Correlations and Reliability Estimates Note: Cronbachs coefficients alphas appear in italics on the diagonal. RCI = Readiness for Change Index, MCSD = Defensiveness, HS = High Standards, Discrep = Discrepa ncy, OQ = Distress. Given that the RCI wa s calculated based on URICA subscales by subtracting the Precontemplation score from the sum of Contemplation, Action, and Maintenance, the reliability coefficient for RCI could not be calculated. Pretest Posttest Follow-up Time Measure RCI MCSD HS Discrep OQ RCI MCSD HS Discrep OQ RCI MCSD HS Discrep OQ Pretest RCI MCSD -.11 .66 HS .05 .01 .84 DISCREP .06 -.06 .07 .94 OQ .22** -.27** -.06 .26** .92 Posttest RCI .74** -.03 .07 .11 .13 MCSD -.15 .71** .09 -.08 -.29** -.04 .64 HS .26** -.11 .39** .02 -.05 .19* -.09 .88 DISCREP .28** -.25** -.07 .53** .48** .36** -.29** .22** .95 OQ .19* -.26** -.03 .24** .81** .21** -.34** -.06 .54** .95 Followup RCI .78** -.09 .06 .01 .08 .88** -.07 .12 .22** .13 MCSD -.06 .74** .07 -.05 -.26** .02 .83** -.09 -.30** -.25** .01 .61 HS .15 -.08 .42** -.03 -.02 .09 -.08 .77** .15 .03 .04 -.10 .83 DISCREP .23** -.31** -.09 .39** .50** .23** -.39** .10 .78** .56** .25** -.30** .13 .97 OQ .16* -.29** .03 .18* .77** .15 -.34** -.06 .51** .82** .15 -.31** -.01 .57** .93

PAGE 71

71 Table 4-3. Means and Sta ndard Deviations by Group Writing Feedback Control Time Measure M SD M SD M SD Pretest RCI 48.54 16.7049.8418.8655.2617.101 MCSD 5.00 2.235.432.884.852.84 HS 43.16 3.8143.344.2143.533.50 Discrep 58.59 10.0058.409.3759.9510.50 OQ 67.02 20.6467.4825.8363.2123.62 Postest RCI 47.57 21.4151.1521.2653.0319.47 MCSD 4.98 2.605.062.624.422.44 HS 42.00 6.1342.425.4442.005.99 Discrep 59.45 13.2956.9714.2754.7313.60 OQ 65.36 23.2266.5726.2761.5727.35 Follow-up RCI 48.20 19.4151.7723.8752.8520.57 MCSD 4.71 2.034.982.984.402.524 HS 41.78 5.1842.465.0141.405.815 Discrep 59.58 11.4555.6315.5555.8513.82 OQ 64.17 21.7664.2025.4365.4923.43 Table 4-4. Regression Analyses of the Effect s of Condition on Mediator Variables. Criterion Predictor B SE B p RCI2 2.692.02.10.19 MCSD2 -.30.25-.09.23 RCI3 2.332.17.09.29 MCSD3 Condition -.15.25-.05.55 Note: RCI2 = Readiness for Change Index at Pos ttest, MCSD2 = Defensiveness at Posttest, RCI3 = Readiness for Change Index at Followup, MCSD3 = Defensiveness at Follow-up.

PAGE 72

72 Table 4-5. Regression Analyses of the Effects of Pretest Readiness for Change x Pretest Defensiveness x Condition Inter action on Outcome Variables. Predictor Criterion R 2 F df p OQ2 .009.762, 146 .76 MCSD2 .002.302, 145 .74 RCI2 .0021.032, 146 .36 Discrep2 .01.982, 145 .38 HS2 .001.122, 145 .88 OQ3 .021.282, 139 .28 MCSD3 .002.322, 134 .73 RCI3 .0081.422, 130 .25 Discrep3 .01.822, 131 .44 RCI x MCSD x condition HS3 .032.252, 131 .11 Note: RCI = Readiness for Change Index at Pret est, MCSD = Defensiveness at Pretest, OQ2 = Distress at Posttest, RCI2 = Readiness for Change Index at Posttest, MCSD2 = Defensiveness at Posttest, Discrep2 = Discrepancy at Posttest, HS2 = High Standard s at Posttest, OQ3 = Distress at Follow-up, MCSD3 = Defensiveness at Foll ow-up, RCI3 = Readiness for Change Index at Follow-up, Discrep3= Discrepa ncy at Follow-up, HS3 = High Standards at Follow-up.

PAGE 73

73 0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00 LowMeanHigh Pretest RCIFollow-up OQ45 Control Writing Feedback Figure 4-1. Pretest Readiness for Change x C ondition Interaction Eff ect Predicting Follow-up Distress.

PAGE 74

74 35.00 36.00 37.00 38.00 39.00 40.00 41.00 42.00 43.00 44.00 45.00 LowMeanHigh Pretest RCIPosttest High Standards Control Writing Feedback Figure 4-2. Pretest Readiness for Change x Condition Interaction E ffect Predicting Posttest High Standards.

PAGE 75

75 35.00 36.00 37.00 38.00 39.00 40.00 41.00 42.00 43.00 44.00 LowMeanHigh Pretest RCIFollow-up High Standards Control Writing Feedback Figure 4-3. Pretest Readiness for Change x C ondition Interaction Eff ect Predicting Follow up High Standards.

PAGE 76

76 -6.00 -5.00 -4.00 -3.00 -2.00 -1.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 LowMeanHigh Pretest MCSDRCI change from Pre to Posttest Control Writing Feedback Figure 4-4. Pretest Defensiveness x Condition Interaction Effect Pr edicting Change in Readiness for Change from Pretest to Posttest.

PAGE 77

77 -5.00 -4.00 -3.00 -2.00 -1.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 LowMeanHigh Pretest MCSDOQ 45 change from Pretest to Follow-up Control Writing Feedback Figure 4-5. Pretest Defensiveness x Condition Interaction Effect Pr edicting Change in Distress from Pretest to Follow-up.

PAGE 78

78 -10.00 -8.00 -6.00 -4.00 -2.00 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 LowMeanHigh Pretest High StandardsOQ 45 change from Pretest to Follow-up Control Writing Feedback Figure 4-6. Pretest High Standard s x Condition Interaction Effect Predicting Change in Distress from Pretest to Follow-up.

PAGE 79

79 CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION The purpose of this study was to provide em pirical support for the potential therapeutic impact of sharing test results with maladaptivel y perfectionistic individuals and to examine the mechanisms contributing to change. The study repr esents an attempt to address the relative scarcity of systematic research on the treatment of perfectionism and the difficulty in effectively helping maladaptive perfectionists (Blatt & Zuro ff, 2002). The study proposed two brief, online experimental interventions (provision of feedb ack alone and provision of feedback accompanied by the opportunity to express in wr iting reactions to the feedback received) and was the result of broadening Finns efforts on therapeutic benefits of providing clients with MMPI-2 feedback (Finn & Tonsager, 1992; Newman & Greenwa y, 1997) and Pennebakers (1997, 2004) work on the benefits of expressive writ ing. The primary goal of the pres ent study was to examine whether the provision of feedback alone and feedback combined with the opportunity to reac t to feedback have immediate and/or longer-term therapeutic benefits in terms of general level of distress, readiness for change, defensiveness, and pe rfectionism in a sample of maladaptively perfectionistic college students. In addition, this study explored various fact ors that may interact with the treatment conditions in predicting therapeutic outcome. With regard to treatment effects, results reve aled that, when compared to the control group, neither participants receiving perfectionism feedback alone, no r those receiving feedback and given the opportunity to write about the reactions the feedback elicited showed a significant change in distress, defensiveness, or readine ss for change, at the posttest or at the 2-weeks follow-up. In addition, no differences were f ound between the two experimental groups on the respective variables. The only significant findings related to perfectionism. More specifically, participants in both control and experimental gr oups exhibited a signifi cant decrease in high

PAGE 80

80 standards over time. In addition, and contrary to my expectations participants in the control condition exhibited a marginally si gnificant decrease in discrepanc y from pretest to posttest. The results concerning the decrease in high standards perfectionism over time are noteworthy given that perfectionism has been found to be a relati vely stable characterist ic (Rice & Aldea, 2006). Although the major distinction between the contro l and the experimental groups was that the latter received feedback, all pa rticipants completed measures inquiring about perfectionism (e.g., APS-R and URICA). A possibility is that all participants experienced something similar to direct exposure: they had to ponder a to pic perfectionists might otherwise prefer to avoid (Rice et al., 2003). The question that still remains is why the change across groups occu rred in high standards but not discrepancy. In their qua ntitative and qualita tive study, Rice et al. (2003) found that the great majority of the participants identified stan dards as a core feature of perfectionism. Thus, standards may be more salient to the concept of perfectionism and more available to participants awareness, whereas self-criticism and self-doubt (characteristics of the discrepancy dimension) may be not only subtle, but also automatic co re perceptions and beliefs that may be less penetrable to alterations without a more sustained effort. Neverthele ss, participants in the control group showed a very slight, marginally significan t decrease in discrepancy perfectionism at the posttest, change that was not maintained at the 2-w eeks follow-up. It is likely that participants in the experimental conditions may have been overwhelmed by the feedback received. Perfectionistic individuals tend to be sensitive (R ice et al., 2003) and the feedbacks attempt to increase awareness regarding the negative aspe cts of perfectionism and how perfectionism negatively impacts a person may have been perceive d as either threatening or too pushy and thus generated resistance in those receiving it, wh ereas the control participants, simply filling out questionnaires, may have pondered their perfecti onism and reached their own conclusions with

PAGE 81

81 regard to what, if anything, they need to change Participants in the experimental conditions may have simply dismissed the feedback received on the bases of the introductory paragraph to the feedback that stated: Scores have some degr ee of error or imperfection, which means that, although your scores suggest the follo wing description might fit, it is possible that, as a result of measurement error, the scores and interpre tation could be wrong or partially wrong. Although disappointing, the failure of this study to provide su pport for the effectiveness of feedback as a therapeutic intervention for perf ectionists can be understood in the light of the perfectionism literature, the writing paradigm research, and the general outcome research. The findings regarding the way in which maladaptive perfectionistic characteristics might affect otherwise therapeutic interventions have not b een very encouraging. For instance, extensive secondary analyses of the data from the Tr eatment of Depression Collaborative Research Program showed that highly perfectionistic in dividuals tended to respond poorly when receiving short-term therapy or medication in the treatment of depression (Blatt & Zuroff, 2002; Zuroff et al., 2000). The small number of studies that have examined perfectionism as an a priori consideration in study design have reported mi xed findings. Shafran, Lee, Payne, & Fairburn, (2006) found positive effects on problematic eating behavior by addressing personal standards in an intervention, though longer-term e ffects on trait perfectionism we re not apparent from their research. Although they found that perfectioni sts receiving a brief cognitive restructuring intervention reported decreased a nxiety ratings, DiBartolo et al. (2001) failed to find significant effects on negative automatic thoughts. In addition to explanations regarding the na ture of the population be ing the focus of the study, another possible account for the lack of si gnificant differences between participants who received feedback alone and those who wrote about their reactions to the feedback received may

PAGE 82

82 be found in the writing paradigm. In the studies that provided support for the benefits of writing, the intervention was administered repeatedly, for at least three sessi ons, at different time intervals. The repeated writing may force people to process topics they may otherwise avoid in their everyday life, and thus may be conducive to making change s in the way they think about the events in the short term and the long term (Pennebaker, 2004). The students in the present study completed only one brief writing session a nd this dosage may have been too limited to allow sufficient exposure to otherwise avoided is sues. Even if one session of writing may have been adequate, perhaps positive effects could not be observed for at least two other reasons. First, the most common benefits of expressive writing have been on health and these effects tend not to be evident in the first 2-3 weeks of writing but rather tend to emerge in the months afterward (Pennebaker, 2004; Smyth, Stone, Hure witz, & Kaeli, 1999). Thus if positive effects did occur in the current sample, they may have been either evident on va riables that were not measured or might take place at a later point in time. Second, in some studies, the writing method has not been particularly effective in influencing participan ts self-reports, although changes were obvious to others (Pennebaker, 20 04). This may be the case with this sample. Perfectionistic individuals tend to engage in all-or nothing thinking and may be likely to minimize and/or overlook small improvements. In addition, data from forty years of outcome research pr ovides strong empirical support that different therapeutic approach es appear equal in effectiveness and that pantheoretical factors play a significant role in the change proce ss (Hubble, Duncan, & Mill er, 1999; Rosenzweig, 1936; Wampold, 2001). In their empiri cal review of outcome resear ch, Hubble et al. (1999) point out that the therapeutic relations hip and client factor s account for approximately 70% of change in therapy. One very likely explanation for th e results of the current study is that the

PAGE 83

83 experimental manipulation did not include these two crucial ingredients conducive to improvement. Based on their review of thera py outcome, Orlinsky, Grawe, and Parks (1994) reported that the clients role investment in th erapy was associated with positive outcome in 70% of the studies examined and the clients collaborative style was linked with positive outcome in 64% of the studies. The participan ts in the current study were not therapy clients, but college students who participated in the study mostly in exchange for course extra credit. Important factors in treatment outcome, such as participan ts expectations, goals, level of involvement and engagement, and openness (Orlins ky et al., 1994; Wampold, 2001) ma y not have been present in the sample who, despite being screened for ma ladaptive perfectionism, may have treated the experience simply as another research study ra ther than a therapeutic opportunity. Garfield (1994) cited studies that revealed that individuals who are intere sted in, and come to therapy have more specific formulations of their proble ms and what they want to accomplish than those who make an appointment and do not show up, and in turn, clear goals were associated with positive outcomes (Orlinsky et al, 1994). In addition, the client has a uniquely personal theory waiting for discovery, a framework for change to be unfolded and used for a successful outcome (Duncan, Miller, & Sparks, 2004, p. 73). Although the association between maladaptive perfectionism and a vast realm of psychological problems has been demonstrated in the literature, nothing was known with regard to how, specifica lly, the individuals in the present study viewed their struggles and what their theories and ideas of change we re. It is possible that what the treatment conditions offered did not match or complement participants preexisting beliefs about their problems and the change proc ess. Moreover, given the way in which the study was carried out (i.e., via the inte rnet) neither the participants, nor the feedback provider were able to take a collaborative and interactive role in the process. This becomes relevant given what

PAGE 84

84 individuals at the receiv ing end of therapeutic interventions tend to find important. Thus, Phillips (1984), through interviewing clie nts involved in different th erapy modalities, found that important factors for clients were to have a ti me and a place to focus on themselves and have someone listen, care, and understand. Gold (1994) reported that clients rated the relationship with the therapist as equal to or more important than the specific therapeutic techniques used. Clinicians and researchers alik e have acknowledged the central role of the therapist-client relationship in the process of change, with the definition of the alliance focusing on the collaborative and interactive elements in the re lationship (Duncan et al ., 2004; Gelso & Carter, 1985; Horvarth & Symonds, 1991; Wampold, 2001). In corporating students participation with an emphasis on respect for the participant in a ccordance with client-centered principles, may have made the feedback more personally rele vant, meaningful, and easier to be accepted by participants, and perhaps, ultimately leading to positive outcomes with regard to distress, readiness for change, and defensiveness. Although the differences between the two expe rimental groups and the control group on the study variables were not obvious, the results of this study shed light on some of the potential mechanisms that may facilitate or hinder the e ffect of these interven tions for maladaptively perfectionistic college students. Thus, the effects of feedback alone or feedback combined with the opportunity to express in writ ing the reactions that the feedb ack elicited appeared to be influenced by the pretreatment levels of mainly two variables: readiness for change and defensiveness. The study revealed that participan ts readiness for change at pretest interacted with the experimental condition to predict di stress level at the 2-weeks follow-up and high standards scores at both posttest and follow-up. Interestingly, part icipants who received feedback alone and were motivated to change at the pret est (high readiness for change scores) showed

PAGE 85

85 more distress two weeks after the intervention that those who received feedback and had low levels of readiness for change. The opposite patt ern was observed in the control group. In other words, it appears that maladaptively perfectionis tic students who have mo re desire to change benefit the least from receiving perfectionism fe edback, whereas those with reduced readiness for change benefit the most. It is possible th at the students motivated to change may have become more aware of, and discont ented with some of the issues they were experiencing as a result of the feedback received. They may know what they need to change but their goals may be too unrealistic to be achieved which, in turn, is more likely to lead to frustration and disappointment with self and, ultimately to incr eased distress. Sorotzkin (1998) pointed out that perfectionistic individuals tend to engage in a ll-or-nothing thinking, stri ve for perfectionistic therapeutic goals, and are unable to recognize and be sati sfied with small improvements. That the expectations of participants highly motivated to change may increase as a result of receiving feedback is a very likely explanation in light of the present studys finding related to the role of readiness for change and impact on part icipants high standa rds perfectionism. Similar to the effects on distress, participants level of readiness for change at pretest interacted with the experimental conditions to predict high standard s scores at both posttest and follow-up. Individuals who were motivated to change and received feedback showed higher levels of high standards immediat ely after the intervention and at the 2-week follow-up than the students who received feedback and had low read iness for change at the onset of the study. The participants in the control group with low motivation to change exhibited the lowest standards scores at both posttest and follow-up. Although the effect of the readiness for change x writing condition interaction was not evident immediat ely following the experimental manipulation, it became apparent two weeks later. Thus, students with high readiness for change who received

PAGE 86

86 feedback and wrote their reactions demonstrated lower standards at follow-up than those with low readiness for change in the same experime ntal condition. It appear s that for maladaptive perfectionistic individuals who ar e willing to consider change, th e simple provision of feedback is associated with elevated st andards, while the provision of feedback and the opportunity to write reactions to the feedback has a more beneficial effect in terms of lowering standards. Participants motivated to change may already be aware of some of the issues they are experiencing and they may already be immersed in a process of assessing the pros and cons of their personal change. The feedback simply info rms individuals of what is wrong or ineffective about themselves, but does not provide suggestio ns of how to go about change, which may lead to the students feeling stressed, overwhelmed, and inadequate. Because they may not have other tools readily available to respond to stress, students may react by developing unrealistic coping goals and standards and increasing self-expectations in regard to how to manage the issues they are facing. Writing after receiving feedback may represent an opportunity to process, label, organize, and restructure thought and reactions surrounding an emoti onally charged issue; indeed it is this very issue which may prevent perfect ionists who are highly motivated to change to increase their standards and expectations rega rding how fast or profound the change should be. Indeed, based on their research with individua ls who underwent traumatic events, Klein and Boals (2001) suggest that one of the effects of writing is that in the weeks following the writing sessions, but not immediately after, participants were more likely to think less about their trauma and focus on other issues in their lives. High standards in the current sample were not only affected by the interventions, but also played a significant role in how individuals responded to th e interventions. Thus, it was found that individuals in both experi mental conditions who had lower st andards at the pretest showed a

PAGE 87

87 more significant change in their distress level from pretest to followup than those with high standards to begin with. It is al so noteworthy that participants in the control condition with lower standards at the pretest exhibited the most change in distress, wh ereas control participants with elevated high standards demonstrated the least ch ange in distress. Althou gh all participants had high standards (maladaptive perfectionists were selected based on a combination of elevated High Standards and Discrepancy scores), it appear s that even slightly lower high standards help participants benefit more from feedback. Maladaptive perfect ionists with excessive high standards may hold themselves to very rigid self-expectations and self-evaluations that, combined with the stress the c ontent of the feedback might have elicited, hinders implementation of change and is associated with higher levels of distress. The results of the present study also suggest that for maladaptive perf ectionists with extremel y high standards, f eedback (either alone or combined with the opportunity to write) is a be tter intervention than no intervention at all with regard to facilitating some reduction in the distre ss level, whereas for maladaptive perfectionists with relatively low standards a more indirect appr oach rather than provision of direct feedback appears to be more useful. Another set of results regarding the role of defensiveness merits consideration. Participants level of defensiveness at pretest inte racted with the interventions to predict change in readiness for change from pretest to followup and change in distre ss from pretest to followup, respectively. With regard to the former, partic ipants with reduced defensiveness at the onset of the study who received feedback and wrote about their reactions showed the most significant change in readiness for change two weeks after the intervention, whereas defensive participants in the feedback and writing condition showed the least change. Surprisingly, defensive participants in the cont rol condition demonstrated more change in readiness for change than their

PAGE 88

88 counterparts in the feedback and writing condition. Already defensive individuals are more likely to feel threatened by the content of the feedback and thus more pr obable to reject the information received and close off to the idea of change. Again, an indirect, non-thre atening intervention may be more effective for these individuals. The le ss defensive students may also be more open and, through processing the information received by writing their thoughts and reactions they may become more willing to consider the relevance of the feedback and, ultimately, consider change. The results of the interacti on between defensiveness at pretest and intervention in predicting change in distress from pretest to follow-up were perplexing and not all expected. Highly defensive students who received feedback showed the most positive change in distress level two weeks after the intervention as did th e control participants low in defensiveness at pretest. A possible explanation for the results is that highly defensiv e individuals, following feedback, may become concerned about being per ceived as people with problems, an image in direct opposition to their desired image as the best or perfect. Consequently, they may try to put on a faade and minimize their difficulties (Rice et al., 2003). Nondefensive control participants may have shown positive change in distress because they were more open to selfexamination, perhaps stimulated by engaging in th e less threatening (as compared to receiving feedback) task of completing questionnaires inquiring about perfectionism and distress. Clinical Considerations Although the provision of feedback in the current study did not bring about support for its effectiveness as a free standing therapeutic interv ention, its potential positive and beneficial role within the context of therapy warrants further exploration. Within the framework of a strong therapeutic alliance in which client s theory of change is taken into consideration and clients input and reactions are processed, provision of feedback based on personality assessment can be a powerful tool (Finn & Tons ager, 1992; Newman & Greenway, 1997). Indeed, maladaptive

PAGE 89

89 perfectionists, although a population at risk, might be difficult to treat. In the field of therapy, some types of clients often have been portrayed as pathological monsters of epic proportions (e.g., borderlines) (Duncan et al ., 2004, p. 49) and my concern is that maladaptive perfectionists may, sooner or later, end up in the same cate gory. Indeed, maladaptive perfectionists may not respond well to standard therapeuti c interventions, but mental heal th professionals more typically accommodate and adjust to the client rather than expect the client to fit what they have to offer. As the results above illustrate, and similar to challenges with dia gnostic labels, withingroup variations in the category of maladaptive pe rfectionists should be carefully considered in clinical contexts; although more similar than different from each other in terms of perfectionism, these participants responded diffe rently to the same interventi ons, based on their readiness for change, defensiveness, and high standards. This was not a comprehensiv e study and most likely there are many other client variab les to be taken into considera tion. A client-oriented or clientinformed approach that is organized around clients perceptions, views, resources, and experiences may work best for these individuals. Thus, counsel ors encountering clients with maladaptive perfectionistic tendenc ies might be advised to assess clients desire and readiness for change, level of defensiveness, and high stan dards. Clients who hardly consider significant changes in their lives, who have fewer self-prote ctive mechanisms in place, and relatively low and more flexible standards may benefit from a more direct intervention to help them realize when and how their perfectionism negatively impacts their lives. However, maladaptive perfectionistic clients with a strong defensive armo r, who are more aware of the issues affecting them and want to be better, or those with extr eme high standards have to be approached with carefulness. Instead of telling thes e clients that they have a prob lem, the counselor may ask them to talk about their own percepti ons of what is going on with them. Instead of challenging clients

PAGE 90

90 defensiveness the counselor may respond largely in a reflective manner, rolling with clients resistance or denial instead of cha llenging it head-on (Miller, 1995, p. 95). In addition, the counselor may inquire about c lients expectations and goals for therapy and help the client adjust the goals to be re alistic and achievable Reas onable objectives or subgoals to be achieved can be set as steps toward larger aspirations. The ther apist may want to help the client acknowledge small achievements and improvements by recognizing client resources, resilience, strengths, and circumstances in and outs ide of therapy in which the client is capable and successful, but the client is reluctant to, or for other r easons does not, acknowledge those successes. The therapist can listen for and va lidate accomplishments and changes otherwise overlooked by clients and create a context in which to explore and develop new or different perspectives, behaviors, and experiences. With patient prompting, the counselor may direct attention to changes taking place not only in th erapy, but between sessions as well, by asking questions that elicit further ela boration on the part of the client on the change that did occur and the clients contribution in bri nging it about. Such an approach may increase awareness of gains, large or small, that may assist the client in at tributing change to personal efforts, valuing the power of small improvements, and viewing change as resulting from something the client did and can repeat in the futu re (Berg & Miller, 1992). In addition to the current findings, research outcomes regarding the mediational and moderational role of different factors in the re lationship between perfectionism and distress can provide helpful insights for the development of ef fective therapeutic interventions targeted for maladaptive perfectionists. Rather than focusing on perfectionism or the di stress associated with it, which may elicit defensiveness and desires to achieve unrealistic therapeutic goals, the therapist can address the factors that could redu ce the effects of mala daptive perfectionism on

PAGE 91

91 symptoms. Using structural equatio ns analyses on a large sample of college students, Aldea and Rice (2006) found support for the mediational role of emotional dysregu lation, operationalized with measures of emotional reactivity and spli tting, in the relationship between perfectionism and distress. Their findings suggest that maladaptive perfectionism leads to difficulty regulating emotional responses that consequently leads to increased levels of psyc hological distress. Thus, counselors working with maladaptive perfectio nists are recommended to assess for emotion regulation concerns and employ stra tegies directed at helping c lients to better regulate their emotional arousal, diminish their susceptibility to experience events or incidents as either perfect or bad, and increase adaptive and appropriate responses to various situations. Other authors (Blankstein & Dunkley, 2002; D unkley et al., 2002; Ri ce et al., 2006) found evidence regarding the role of stress and coping in the rela tion between perfectionism and different forms of distress. Stress (often se lf-induced) and inappropria te coping mechanisms maintain perfectionists anguish and prevent them from moving beyond the distress associated with perceived stressful situati ons. Stress management and coping strategies techniques can be incorporated in the counseling of maladaptiv e perfectionists. Addr essing both primary and secondary stress appraisal processes (Lazarus & Fo lkman, 1984) may enable clients to deal more effectively with situations that trigger stress. A goal of treatm ent can be the development of strategies and skills that facilitate problem-fo cused, task-oriented, active, and adaptive coping to replace maladaptive coping mech anisms such as avoidance, overgeneralization, rumination, disengagement, and denial (Blankstein & Dunkl ey, 2002). Such interventions aimed at the development of coping skills and reduction of perceived stress may also be helpful in terms of facilitating clients part icipation in therapy. First, these re latively straightforw ard techniques may provide concrete tools and some relief which may instill hope and trust in the therapy process.

PAGE 92

92 Second, addressing clients appraisa l of situations and in creasing ability to cope with stress, may provide client the necessary pr oficiency to cope with the stress the therapeutic process sometimes entails when addressing sensitive issues (such as perfectionism, high standards, selfcriticism). Additionally, lack of social s upport or connectedness, was found to play an important part in the link between perfectionism and distre ss (Blankstein & Dunkley, 2002, Rice et al., 2006). Clinicians, therefore, may want to assess both qu ality and quantity of perfectionists social support and use interventions that help clients reconceptualize and reframe their relations and maximize social support. Proce ss-oriented group therapy in wh ich members provide support and feedback to each other may be a useful adjunct to individual c ounseling. As well, interpersonal therapeutic approaches that address and process c lient-therapist interactions in the here-and-now may improve the therapeutic alliance and prevent at least some of clie nts disappointment or impatience with the process a nd preclude them from prematur ely dropping out of counseling (Blatt et al., 1998). Perfectionism is a pervasive personality charac teristic relatively impermeable to change (Rice & Aldea, 2006). Perfectionistic individuals do not want to give up their perfectionism altogether (Rice et al., 2003). In addition to the strategies outlined so far and in order to prevent frustration from both client (who may want to hold on at least some aspects of their perfectionism) and therapist (who may be tempted, in a desire to help the client, to try to eradicate perfectionistic tendenc ies), the counselor may consider assisting clients pursue the positive, adaptive, and motivational aspect of their perfectionism in a constructive manner while diminishing the harmful effects of maladaptive pe rfectionism. An approach drawing from clientcentered, cognitive-behavioral, interpersonal, and motivational interviewing therapies and

PAGE 93

93 integrating the various strategies outlined above might be well-suited fo r treating maladaptively perfectionistic clients. However, as the result s of this study point out, the one-approach-fits-all strategy may undermine treatment outcome. Carefu l assessment and consideration of clients pre-treatment level of readiness and motivation for change, defensiveness, and high standards, monitoring clients perceptions of and reactions to the process its elf and the therapeutic alliance, and therapists flexibility in calib rating therapy to the clients i ndividual needs may be essential factors in effectively helping pe ople who experience significant dist ress in different areas of their lives as a result of their maladap tive perfectionistic tendencies. Limitations and Future Directions There are certain limitations of the current st udy that must be acknowledged and addressed in future research. The nature of the sample n eeds to be taken into consideration. The sample consisted of college students a ttending two large universities in the Southeast United Stated. The findings may not generalize to co llege students in other areas of the country or to students attending universities outside the U.S. Even though the sample size was large and relatively diverse it was comprised predominantly of White women. Although preliminary analyses revealed no significant differences between women and men on any of the pretest variables, it is possible that the results would have revealed different res ponses to feedback depending on gender, as well as other factors such as family history, socioeconomic stat us, or race/ethnicity. However, exploring such hypotheses with this sample would have necessitated examining models with group sizes too small for the analyses. Future work with larger and more diverse samples could examine, for instance, whether provis ion of feedback is more beneficial for some racial/ethnic, gender, or socioeconomic groups than others. In addition, the intervention may have a more significant impact on a sample of maladaptive perfectionists seeking therapeutic services, and receiving those se rvices from trained profession al counselors, versus those

PAGE 94

94 participating in an online psychology experiment for course credit. It appears especially important to replicate these fi ndings in clinical samples. A related issue is that of diagnosis or presenting concerns. Although evidence indicates that maladaptive perfectionism is associated w ith a variety of specific psychological disorders such as depression, eating disord ers, anxiety, social phobia, obse ssive-compulsive problems, and substance abuse (Flett & Hewitt, 2002), only genera l level of distress was assessed in the current study. Future research needs to ensure that par ticipants are adequately screened for specific presenting distress and could also examine whether the findings generalize to specific areas of psychological impairment. The presence of comorb id personality disorders also needs to be taken into account. Moreover, par ticipants desire to receive feedback was not assessed although it might have significantly influenced the re sults. Snyder, Ingram, Handelsman, Wells, and Huwieler (1982) examined the therapeutic conse quences of the desire for feedback and found that individuals with higher desire for feedb ack were more willing to participate in therapy, showed more hope for positive change, and were more responsive to feedback. Another limitation pertains to the fact that th e study relied entirely on self-report measures. Future studies could improve on the present effo rts by collecting reports of perfectionism and psychological distress from other informants and diversify methodologies, such as by including the use of interview data (Slane y et al., 2000). As well, it appear s important to replicate current findings using multiple measures of the constructs in order to ensure validity and generalizability of the results to related measures and construc ts. One may wonder whether similar results would be reached if other measures of perfectionism, distress, readiness for change, and defensiveness were used. Collecting data over longer time inte rvals and having multiple writing sessions after receiving feedback would genera te more insight into the long-term effects of the treatment

PAGE 95

95 conditions and would help better decipher the effects of fee dback alone versus receiving feedback and processing the information received. On the same lines, the nature and the deliver y of feedback warrants further discussion. Future studies could examine which portions of the feedback maladaptive perfectionists identify with and find most relevant, whether the length of the feedback or the wording has an influence on how it is received, and in wh ich contexts does feedback ha ve specific therapeutic value. Future research may consider studying the effects of providing information that includes coping skills strategies and recommendations along with the perfec tionism feedback. It should be kept in mind that the feedback was not interactive and it lacked the relational co mponent imperative in the therapy encounter. The outcome therapy data shows that therapy works if there is a strong therapeutic alliance experienced positively by the client, the clients perceive therapy to be relevant to their concerns, and clients are ac tive participants in th e process (Wampold, 2001). Future studies might examine whether specific perfectionism feedback provided within the context of an ongoing therapy relationship produ ces more positive effects on distress and other variables than were observed here and identify underlying factors as predictors of therapeutic change. Conclusions Maladaptive perfectionism has been clea rly linked with a plethora of significant psychological concerns, but less ap parent from the current literature is the effectiveness of interventions aimed at helping maladaptivel y perfectionistic indi viduals reduce their psychological distress and improve their function ing. Much of the limited research that does exist is not necessarily supportive of typical ther apeutic intervention effo rts and it was suggested that long-term psychodynamic therapy is necessa ry to help this population (Blat et al., 1995, 1998). The question still remains whether it is possible to help mala daptive perfectionists

PAGE 96

96 relinquish some of the distress they are experiencing without resorting to long-term therapy. Based on the research on the effects of ther apeutic feedback (Finn & Tonsager, 1992) and expressive writing (Pennebaker, 1997, 2004), two brief, online interventions, provision of feedback and provision of feedback followed by an opportunity to express in writing reactions the feedback elicited, were tested in the current study on a sample of maladaptive perfectionistic college students. It was believe d that providing perfectionists with perfectionism feedback pointing out the negative consequences that can be associated with pe rfectionism may have beneficial effects in terms of distress, readiness for change, defensiveness, and ultimately perfectionism. Although support was not found for the therap eutic benefits of feedback, the study nevertheless offered important insights regardi ng the relevance of indi vidual characteristics on how perfectionists respond to inte rventions. More specifically, part icipants with high levels of pre-intervention readiness for change, defensiven ess or high standards tended to show less gains from feedback in terms of dist ress and readiness for change than their counterparts with low preintervention scores on those measures. This study suggests that although perfectionism feedback may be appropriate to use with some malada ptive perfectionists (e.g., those unmotivated to change, non-defensive, or with re latively lower standards), it ma y be detrimental to others. The broader implication of the current study is the necessity to incl ude client dimensions in studies of therapeutic interventions for perfectionists and to evaluate the interact ion of individual/client variables with treatment factors in predicting out come. In searching for a way of better serving maladaptive perfectionistic individuals perhaps researchers and clinicians alike could revisit Pauls (1967) question: What treatm ent, by whom, is most effective for this individual with that specific problem under which set of circumstances?

PAGE 97

97 APPENDIX A INFORMED CONSENT FORM 1 The purpose of this study is to investigate different personality characteris tics. It is anticipated that the completion of the questionnaire to fo llow will take approximately 5 minutes of your time. After completing the questionnaire, you may be selected to particip ate further in the study. If selected, more information regarding the next steps for pa rticipation will be provided. You can only participate if you are 18 years of age, or older. Your pa rticipation in this study is completely voluntary. There is no penalty for not participating and you have the right to withdraw from the study at anytime without consequence. If you have any questions concerning the surve y, you may contact Mirela Aldea, Department of Psychology, University of Florid a, Gainesville, FL 32611-2250, ph. 352-392-0601, adina_ald@yahoo.com or Dr. Ken Rice, Departme nt of Psychology, Univer sity of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-2250, kgr1@ufl.edu. Any questions or concerns about your rights in this study can be directed to the UFIRB Office, Box 112250, University of Florida, Gainesvi lle, FL 32611-2250. The study has been approved by the UFIRB (protocol # 2006-U-0158). By checking the box below I certify that I have read the procedure described above, that I understand its contents, and that I have voluntarily agreed to part icipate in this research study.

PAGE 98

98 APPENDIX B INFORMED CONSENT FORM 2 The purpose of this study is to investigate the way in personality characteristics may affect how psychological test feedback is understood. There are three phases in the st udy. In the first phase, you will complete a set of questionnaires. Thes e questionnaires concern certain attitudes you have about problems people sometimes have a nd about yourself. The second phase will occur about one week later. In the second phase, you will receive some information and then you will complete a set of questionnaires. In the thir d phase, about 2 weeks later, you will complete another set of questionnaires. It is anticipated that complete pa rticipation in all three phases combined will take approximately 2 hours or less. There are no known risks involved in completing the study and many students may find that they learn something about themselves from particip ating. Nonetheless, if being part of the study makes you feel uncomfortable, you may consider sp eaking to a counselor who may be able to help you with your reactions. You can contact a counselor through the Un iversity of Florida Counseling Center (P301 Peabody Hall, 392-1575). You may benefit by participating in this study through increased awareness and self-unde rstanding. You will also be contributing to knowledge regarding researchers ability to understand psychol ogical factors involved in the process of feedback. Your identity will be kept confidential to the extent provided by law. Your responses on the questionnaires will be assigned a code number. The list connecting your name to this number will be kept in a password-protected computer file. When the study is completed and the data have been analyzed, the list will be destroyed. Your name will not be used in any report. You can only participate if you are 18 years of age, or older. Your pa rticipation in this study is completely voluntary. There is no penalty for not participating and you have the right to withdraw from the study at anytime without consequence. If you have any questions concerning the surve y, you may contact Mirela Aldea, Department of Psychology, University of Florid a, Gainesville, FL 32611-2250, ph 392-0601, adina_ald@yahoo.com or Dr. Ken Rice, Departme nt of Psychology, Univer sity of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-2250, ext. 246, kgr1@ufl.edu. Any questions or concerns about your rights in this study can be directed to the UFIRB Office, Box 112250, University of Flor ida, Gainesville, FL 32611-2250. By typing my name below, I certify that I ha ve read the procedure described above, that I understand its contents, and that I have voluntarily agreed to partic ipate in this research study.

PAGE 99

99 APPENDIX C DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION 1. Please click the number next to your gender: (1) MALE (2) FEMALE 2. How old are you? years 3. Please click the number next to your Race/Et hnicity or please describe the specific group that you identify with the most in the blank next to your ethnicity (for example, Chinese American, German, Navajo, Alaskan Aleut): (1) Asian or Asian-American (2) Black, African-American (3) Hispanic, Latino, Mexican-American (4) Pacific Islander (5) Native American or American Indian (6) White, European American (7) Multicultural Mixed Race (8) Other, please specify 4. How many official organizations are you involved with at school (for example, clubs, athletics, fraternities/sororities, etc.) organizations 5. Please click the number next to your current living situation while attending UF: (1) live on campus in a residence hall (2) live in a fraternity or sorority (3) live off-campus in an apartment or house (includes Married Student Housing) (4) live off-campus with parent(s) (5) cooperative house 6. Please click the number next to your college: (1) Agricultural & Life Sciences (10) Journalism & Communications (2) Business Administration (11) Law (3) Dentistry (12) Liberal Arts & Sciences (4) Design, Construction, & Planning (13) Medicine (5) Education (14) Natural Resources & Environment (6) Engineering (15) Nursing (7) Fine Arts (16) Pharmacy (8) Health Professions (17) Veterinary Medicine (9) Health & Human Performance (18) Undecided, Undeclared 7. How many semesters have you completed at UF? (dont count the current semester, put 0 if you are a first semester student) UF Semesters 8. How many semesters of college have you completed altogether (at UF or elsewhere)? Total Semesters 9. Please indicate your undergraduate Grade Point Average: (skip this if you dont have a GPA yet) GPA (4.0 scale)

PAGE 100

100 10. Please click the number next to your parents marital status: (1) Married and living together (4) Divorced and one or both parents remarried (2) Separated (5) Widowed, or one parent deceased (3) Divorced and neither parent remarried (6) Single-parent (never been married) *****The following 2 questions ask about your MO THER or the person who is or was the primary female caregiver in your family. 11. How much education has she completed? (1) less than high school (2) high school degree (or GED) (3) post high school (e.g., trade, technical, secretarial) (4) some college (e.g., one year, associates degree) (5) completed college (e.g., bachelors degree) (6) some graduate or post-bachelors training (7) completed graduate or post-bachelors training 12. What is her current employment status? (1) she works full-time (2) she works part-time (less than 30 hours per week) (3) she does not work outside the home becaus e she is employed full-time in home-making (4) she does not work because she is laid off or unemployed (5) she does not work because she is disabled (6) she does not work because she is retired (7) other (describe) *****The following 2 questions ask about your FATHER or the person who is or was the primary male caregiver in your family. 13. How much education has he completed? (1) less than high school (2) high school degree (or GED) (3) post high school (e.g., trade, technical, secretarial) (4) some college (e.g., one year, associates degree) (5) completed college (e.g., bachelors degree) (6) some graduate or post-bachelors training (7) completed graduate or post-bachelors training 14. What is his current employment status? (1) he works full-time (2) he works part-time (less than 30 hours per week) (3) he does not work outside the home because he is employed full-time in home-making (4) he does not work because he is laid off or unemployed (5) he does not work because he is disabled (6) he does not work because he is retired (7) other (describe)

PAGE 101

101 15. Have you ever been in therapy/counseling? (1) Yes (2) No 16. If you answered yes to the question above, pl ease specify the number of sessions you had. ________ sessions 17. Are you currently seeing a therapist/counselor? (1) Yes (2) No 18. If yes, how many sessions have you had? _______ sessions

PAGE 102

102 APPENDIX D PERFECTIONISM FEEDBACK General Introduction One of the questionnaires you completed measur es three things: pers onal standards or expectations for performance, the degree to whic h you see yourself living up to those standards, and your preferences for order a nd organization. All thr ee of these vary across individuals, with some people scoring high on all three, some scor ing low, and others having a mixture of scores, with some higher than others. A lthough the questionnaire has been us ed in several ways, in much of the research the measure is used to id entify perfectionists and non-perfectionists. Your results have been compared to a large sa mple of over 3000 college students ranging in age from 17 to 57 (average age was almost 21 years) However, tests such as the one you completed are not, pardon this expression, perf ect, and people are variable too. Scores have some degree of error or imperfection, which means that although your scores suggest th e following description might fit you well, some elements of the descri ption below may be more fitting than others. Your results The combination of your scores suggests that yo u constantly strive for perfection. You have the tendency to impose extremely high standards up on yourself. At the same time, you engage in self-evaluations that are very cr itical and emphasize personal shor tcomings in living up to often extremely high standards for performance. You tend to view yourself as responsible for achieving your standards, yet you doubt your effo rts will bring about th e results you want. You are hardly satisfied with what ot hers might consider successful or even superior achievement. Thus, you may be prone to perceiving and emphasizing your failures rather than your achievements, which often results in stress a nd in feelings of self -worthlessness. You may experience feelings of failure, helplessness, and hopelessness and these are often associated with depression. You may feel you are not doing well academically even though your grades, by other standards, would be good. You may experience concerns over course difficulty, may tend to procrastinate, and express increased anxiety and worry related to being evaluated on different tasks (such as exams). You may experience social difficulties because y ou may try to live up to the perceived standards and expectations imposed by others, many ti mes seeking the approva l and acceptance of significant people in your life. At the same ti me, you tend to be afraid of negative social evaluations, criticism, an d rejection. Your stress level, self-e steem, and overall comfort in social situations may be negatively affected because y ou may be more sensitive to possible criticism from others, possible failure, or loss of control. In the event that you perceived that you failed in some way, you tend to become even harsher and more critical of yourself, which may further affect your self-worth, self-esteem, or social comfort. In short, you emphasize high personal standards a nd a desire to excel in performance to meet those standards. You expect a lo t of yourself but you are rather in flexible in those expectations. You are harsh when you evaluate yourself and ex tremely self-critical, and you have difficulty being fully satisfied with, and enjoying your pe rformance and achievements. You seem to be driven by a strong need to avoid failure wh ich, combined with your difficulty acknowledging success, leads to more stress, worry, and perh aps perceiving yourself as worthless. In other

PAGE 103

103 words, you are striving for perfection and are un able to accept anything less than perfection. Although high standards in and of themselves may be motivational and adequate, the combination of high standards a nd self-criticism might set you up fo r problems, both in terms of how you feel about yourself and in terms of how e ffectively or pleasantly you are able to interact with others.

PAGE 104

104 APPENDIX E WRITING INSTRUCTIONS Please think about the reactions, t houghts, and feelings you have ha d in response to the feedback you just received. Your task is to write fo r 20 minutes about your ve ry deepest reactions, thoughts, and feelings to the f eedback. In your writing, try to let yourself go and to write continuously about your emotions and thought s related to perfectionism, performance expectations, and self-c riticism that the feedback may have brought up.

PAGE 105

105 APPENDIX F EARLY HISTORY OF FLORIDA Please take a few minutes and read the following text regarding the early history of Florida. People first reached Florida at least 12,000 years ago. The rich variety of environments in prehistoric Florida supported a large number of plants and animals. The animal population included most mammals that we know today. In addition, many other large mammals that are now extinct (such as the saber-tooth tiger, mastodon, giant armadillo, and camel) roamed the land. The Florida coastline along th e Atlantic Ocean and the Gulf of Mexico was very different 12,000 years ago. The sea level was much lower th an it is today. As a result, the Florida peninsula was more than twice as large as it is now. The people who inha bited Florida at that time were hunters and gatherers, who only rarely sought big game for fo od. Modern researchers think that their diet consisted of small animals, plants, nuts, and shellfish. These first Floridians settled in areas where a steady water supply, goo d stone resources for tool making, and firewood were available. Over the centuries, these nati ve people developed complex cultures. During the period prior to contact with Europeans, native so cieties of the peninsula developed cultivated agriculture, traded with other groups in what is now the southeastern United States, and increased their social organiza tion, reflected in large temple mounds and village complexes. Written records about life in Florida began with the arrival of the Spanish explorer and adventurer Juan Ponce de Len in 1513. Sometim e between April 2 and April 8, Ponce de Len waded ashore on the northeast coast of Florida, possibly near present-day St. Augustine. He called the area la Florida, in honor of Pascua flor ida ("feast of the flowers"), Spains Eastertime celebration. Other Europeans may have reached Fl orida earlier, but no firm evidence of such achievement has been found. On another voyage in 1521, Ponce de Len landed on the southwestern coas t of the peninsula, accompanied by two-hundred people, fifty horse s, and numerous beasts of burden. His colonization attempt quickly failed because of attacks by native people. However, Ponce de Lens activities served to identify Florida as a desirable place for explorers, missionaries, and treasure seekers. In 1539 Hernando de Soto began another expedition in search of gold and silver, which took him on a long trek through Florida and what is now the southeastern United States. For four years, de Sotos expedition wandered, in hopes of finding the fabled wealth of the Indian people. De Soto and his soldiers camped for five months in the area now known as Tallahassee. De Soto died near the Mississippi River in 1542. Survivors of his expedition eventually reached Mexico. No great treasure troves awaited the Spanish co nquistadores who explor ed Florida. However, their stories helped inform Europeans about Fl orida and its relationshi p to Cuba, Mexico, and Central and South America, from which Spain regularly shipped gold, silver, and other products.

PAGE 106

106 APPENDIX G THE ALMOST PERFECT SCALE REVISED (APS-R) The following items are designed to measure certa in attitudes people have toward themselves, their performance, and toward othe rs. It is important that your answers be true and accurate for you. In the space next to the statement, please enter a number from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree) to describe your degree of agreement with each item. STRONGLY DISAGREE 1 DISAGREE 2 SLIGHTLY DISAGREE 3 NEUTRAL 4 SLIGHTLY AGREEE 5 AGREE 6 STRONGLY AGREE 7 _____ 1. I have high standards for my performance at work or at school. _____ 2. I am an orderly person. _____ 3. I often feel frustrated because I cant meet my goals. _____ 4. Neatness is important to me. _____ 5. If you dont expect much out of yourself you will never succeed. _____ 6. My best just never seems to be good enough for me. _____ 7. I think things should be put away in their place. _____ 8. I have high expectations for myself. _____ 9. I rarely live up to my high standards. _____ 10. I like to always be organized and disciplined. _____ 11. Doing my best never seems to be enough. _____ 12. I set very high standards for myself. _____ 13. I am never satisfied with my accomplishments. _____ 14. I expect the best from myself. _____ 15. I often worry about not measuring up to my own expectations. _____ 16. My performance rarely measures up to my standards. _____ 17. I am not satisfied even when I know I have done my best. _____ 18. I am seldom able to meet my own high standards for performance. _____ 19. I try to do my best at everything I do. _____ 20. I am hardly ever satisfied with my performance. _____ 21. I hardly ever feel that what Ive done is good enough. _____ 22. I have a strong need to strive for excellence. _____ 23. I often feel disappointment after comp leting a task because I know I could have done better. _____ 24. Using the scale above, please rate the de gree to which you agree that you are perfectionistic.

PAGE 107

107 APPENDIX H UNIVERSITY OF RHODE ISLAND CHANGE ASSESMENT (URICA) Each statement describes how a person might feel when approaching problems in their lives. Please indicate the extent to which you tend to agree or disagree with each statement. In each case, make your choice in terms of how you feel right now, not what you have felt in the past or would like to feel. There are FIVE possible responses to each of the items in the questionnaire: 1.As far as I'm concerned, I don't have any pe rfectionism-related problems that need changing. 2.I think I might be ready for some self-improvement. 3.I am doing something about the perfectionism-related problem(s) that had been bothering me. 4.It might be worthwhile to work on my perfectionism-related problem(s). 5.I'm not the problem one. It doesn't make much sense for me to seek help. 6.It worries me that I might slip back on a perfectioni sm-related problem I have already changed, so I want to seek help. 7.I am finally doing some work on my perfectionism-related problem(s). 8.I've been thinking that I might want to change something about myself. 9.I have been successful in working on my perfectioni sm-related problem(s) but I'm not sure I can keep up the effort on my own. 10.At times my perfectionism-related problem is difficult, but I'm working on it. 11.Seeking help would pretty much be a waste of time for me because the problem doesn't have to do with me. 12.I'm hoping to better understand myself. 13.I guess I have faults, but there's nothing that I really need to change. 14.I am really working hard to change. 15.I have a perfectionism-related problem and I really think I should work at it.

PAGE 108

108 16.I'm not following through with what I had already changed as well as I had hoped, and I want to prevent a relapse of any perfectionism-related problems. 17.Even though I'm not always successful in changing, I am at least working on my perfectionism-related problem(s). 18.I thought once I had resolved my perfectionism-related problem(s) I would be free of it, but sometimes I still find myself struggling with it. 19.I wish I had more ideas on how to solve the perfectionism-related problem(s). 20.I have started working on my perfectionism-related problem(s) but I would like help. 21.Maybe somebody will be able to help me. 22.I may need a boost right now to help me maintain the changes I've already made. 23.I may be part of the perfectionism-related problem(s), but I don't really think I am. 24.I hope that someone will have some good advice for me. 25.Anyone can talk about changing; I'm actually doing something about it. 26.All this talk about psychology is boring. Why can't people just forget about their problems? 27.I want to prevent myself from having a relapse of my perfectionism-related problem(s). 28.It is frustrating, but I feel I might be having a recurrence of a perfectionism-related problem I thought I had resolved. 29.I have worries but so does the next person. Why spend time thinking about them? 30.I am actively working on my perfectionism-related problem(s). 31.I would rather cope with my faults than try to change them. 32.After all I had done to try to change my perfectionism-related problem, every now and again it comes back to haunt me.

PAGE 109

109 APPENDIX I MARLOWE-CROWNE SOCIAL DESIRABILITY SCALE SHORT VERSION (MCSD) Listed below are a number of statements concerni ng personal attitudes and traits. Read each item and decide whether the statement is true or false as it pertai ns to you personally. T F 1. It is sometimes hard for me to go on with my work if I am not encouraged. T F 2. I sometimes feel resentful when I don't get my way. T F 3. On a few occasions, I have given up doing something because I thought too little of my ability. T F 4. There have been times when I felt li ke rebelling against people in authority even though I knew they were right. T F 5. No matter who I'm talking to, I'm always a good listener. T F 6. There have been occasions when I took advantage of someone. T F 7. I'm always willing to admit it when I make a mistake. T F 8. I sometimes try to get ev en, rather than forgive and forget. T F 9. I am always courteous, even to people who are disagreeable. T F 10. I have never been irked when peopl e expressed ideas very different from my own. T F 11. There have been times when I wa s quite jealous of the good fortune of others. T F 12. I am sometimes irritated by people who ask favors of me. T F 13. I have never deliberately said something that hurt someone's feelings.

PAGE 110

110 APPENDIX J OUTCOME QUESTIONNAIRE (OQ-45) Using the scale below, click the number which be st describes how you felt during the past week. NEVER 1 2 3 4 ALMOST ALWAYS 5 1. I get along well with others. 2. I tire quickly. 3. I feel no interest in things. 4. I feel stressed at work/school. 5. I blame myself for things. 6. I feel irritated. 7. I feel unhappy in my marri age/significant relationship. 8. I have thoughts of ending my life. 9. I feel weak. 10. I feel fearful. 11. After heavy drinking, I need a drink the next morning to get going (i f you do not drink, mark never). 12. I find my work/school satisfying. 13. I am a happy person. 14. I work/study too much. 15. I feel worthless. 16. I am concerned about family troubles. 17. I have an unfulfilling sex life. 18. I feel lonely. 19. I have frequent arguments. 20. I feel loved and wanted. 21. I enjoy my spare time. 22. I have difficulty concentrating. 23. I feel hopeless about the future. 24. I like myself. 25. Disturbing thoughts come into my mind that I cannot get rid of. 26. I feel annoyed by people who criticize my dri nking (or drug use). (If not applicable, mark never). 27. I have an upset stomach. 28. I am not working/studying as well as I used to. 29. My heart pounds too much. 30. I have trouble getting along with friends and close acquaintances. 31. I am satisfied with my life. 32. I have trouble at work/school because of dr inking or drug use (If not applicable, mark never). 33. I feel that something bad is going to happen. 34. I have sore muscles.

PAGE 111

111 35. I feel afraid of open spaces, or driving, or being on buses, subways, and so forth. 36. I feel nervous. 37. I feel my love relationships are full and complete. 38. I feel that I am not doing well at work/school. 39. I have too many disagreem ents at work/school. 40. I feel something is wrong with my mind. 41. I have trouble falling asleep or staying asleep. 42. I feel blue. 43. I am satisfied with my relationships with others. 44. I feel angry enough at work/school to do something I may regret. 45. I have headaches.

PAGE 112

112 REFERENCE LIST Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testi ng and interpreting interactions Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc. Aldea, M. A. & Rice, K. G. (2006). The role of emotional dysregul ation in perfectionism and psychological distress. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53, 498-510 Alden L. E., Ryder A. G., & Mellings T. M (2002). Perfectionism in the context of social fears: Toward a two-component model. In G. L. Flett & P. L. Hewitt (Eds.), Perfectionism: Theory, research, and treatment (pp. 5-31). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Allen, A. (1999). When the ship.com comes in. Telemedicine Today, 7, 7. Alexander, G. (1999). Regulation of psychology as telemedicine. The California Psychologist, 17, 26-27. American Psychological Association (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists. American Psychologist, 57, 1060-1073. Annett, J. (1969). Feedback and human beha viour. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England: Penguin Books. Antony, M.M., Purdon, C.L., Huta, V., & Swinson, R.P. (1998). Dimensions of perfectionism across the anxiety disorders. Behavior, Research and Therapy, 36, 1143-1154. Arps, G. F. (1920). Work with knowledge of results versus work without knowledge of results. Psychological Monographs, 28, 1-41. Ashby, J. S. & Bruner, L. P. (2005). Multidimen sional Perfectionism and Obsessive-Compulsive Behaviors. Journal of College Counseling, 8, 31-40. Ashby, J. & Kottman, T. (1996). Inferiority as a distiction between normal and neurotic perfectionism. Individual Psychology, 52, 237-245. Ashby, J. S., & Rice, K. G. (2002). Perfectionism dysfunctional attitude s, and self-esteem: A structural equations analysis. Journal of Counseling and Development, 80 197-203. Ashby, J. S., Rice, K. G., & Martin, J. ( 2006). Perfectionism, shame, and depression. Journal of Counseling and Development. Ashby, J. S., Rice, K. G., Timmons, D., Dickins on, W. L., Brasfield, C., & Ganske, K. H. (2004, August). Refining the classifica tion of perfectionists. Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the American Psychol ogical Association, Honolulu, Hawaii.

PAGE 113

113 Baer, L., Cukor, P., Jenike, M., Leahy, B., O'Laughl en, J., & Coyle, J. (1995). Pilot studies of telemedicine for patients with obsessive compulsive disorder. American Journal of Psychiatry, 152, 1383-1385. Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitiv e theory of self regulation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 248-287. Balzer, W. K., Doherty, M. E., & O'Connor, R. Jr. (1989). Effects of cognitive feedback on performance. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 410-433. Barak, A. (1999). Psychological applications on th e Internet: A discipline on the threshold of a new millennium. Applied and Preventive Psychology, 8, 231-246. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderato r-mediator variable di stinction in social psychological research: Con ceptual, strategic, and st atistical considerations. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 51 (6), 1173-1182. Bastiani, A.M., Rao, R., Weltzin, T. & Kaye, W.H ., (1995). Perfectionism in anorexia nervosa. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 17 147-152. Belding, M. A., Iguchi, M. Y., & Lamb, R. J. (1996). Stages of change in methadone maintenance: Assessing the convergent validity of two measures. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 10, 157-166. Berg I. K. & Miller, S. D. (1992). Working with the problem drinker: A solution-focused approach. New York, NY: W W Norton & Co. Berkowitz, L., & Troccoli, B. T. (1990). Feelin gs, direction of attention, and expressed evaluations of others. Cognition and Emotion, 4 305. Bieling, P. J., Israeli, A. L., & Antony, M. M. (2004). Is perfectionism good, bad, or both? Examining models of the perfectionism construct. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 1373-1385. Blankstein, K. R., & Dunkley, D. M. (2002). Evaluative concer ns, self-critical, and personal standards perfectionism: A stru ctural equation modeling strate gy. In G. L. Flett & P. L. Hewitt (Eds.), Perfectionism: Theory, research, and treatment (pp. 285). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association). Blatt, S. J. (1995). The dest ructiveness of perfectionism. American Psychologist, 50, 1003-1020. Blatt, S. J., Quinlan, D. M., Pilkonis, P. A., Shea, M. T. (1995). Impact of perfectionism and need for approval on the brief treatment of de pression: The National Institute of Mental Health Treatment of Depression Collabor ative Research Program revisited. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63, 125-132.

PAGE 114

114 Blatt, S. J., & Zuroff, D. C. ( 2002). Perfectionism in the therapeuti c process. In G. L. Flett & P. L. Hewitt (Eds.), Perfectionism: Theory, research, and treatment (pp. 393-406). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Blatt, S. J., Zuroff, D. C., Bondi, C. M., Sani slow, C. A., III, & Pilkonis, P. (1998). When and how perfectionism impedes the brief treatmen t of depression: Further analyses of the National Institute of Mental Health Treatme nt of Depression Collaborative Research Program. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66, 423-428. Book, W. F., & Norvell, L. (1922). The will to learn, an experimental study of incentives in learning. The Pedagogical Seminary, 29, 305-362. Borowitz, S. M., & Wyatt, J. C. (1998). The origin, content, a nd workload of email consultations. Journal of the American Medical Association, 280, 1321-1324. Bouchard, S., Payeur, R., Rivard, V. (2000). Cogn itive behavior therapy for panic disorder with agoraphobia in videoconfere nce: Preliminary results. CyberPsychology and Behavior,3 9991007. Brand, J. E. (1905). The effect of verb al suggestion upon the estimation of linear magnitudes. Psychological Review, 12, 41-49. Brodsky, S. L. (1972). Shared result s and open files with the client. Professional Psychology, 3, 362-364. Brown, G. P., & Beck, A. T. (2002). Dysfunctiona l attitudes, perfectio nism, and models of vulnerability to depression. In G. L. Flett & P. L. Hewitt (Eds.), Perfectionism: Theory, research, and treatment (pp. 231-251), Washington, DC : American Psychological Association. Brown, E. J., Heimberg, R. G., Frost, R. O., Ma kris, G. S., Juster, H. R., & Leung, A. W. (1999). Relationship of perfectionism to affect, expect ations, attributions and performance in the classroom. Journal of Social & Clinical Psychology, 18 98-120. Burns, D. D. (1980). The perfectio nist's script for self-defeat. Psychology Today 34-51. Butcher, J. N. (1992). Introduction to the special section: Providing psychological test feedback to clients. Psychological Assessment, 4 267. Carbonari, J. P., & DiClemente, C. C. (2000) Using transtheoretical model profiles to differentiate levels of alcohol abstinence success. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68, 810-817. Carey, K. B., Purine, D. M., Maisto, S. A., & Ca rey, M. P. (1999). Assessi ng readiness to change substance abuse: A critical review of instruments. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 6, 245-266.

PAGE 115

115 Chang, E. C. (1998). Cultural differences, perfecti onism, and suicidal risk: Does social problem solving still matter? Cognitive Therapy and Research, 22 237-254. Chang, E. C. (2000). Perfectionism as a pred ictor of positive and negative psychological outcomes: Examining a mediational model in younger and older adults. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47 18-26. Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd Ed.). Mahwah, New Jers ey: Lawrence Erlbaum. Clair, D. & Prendergast, D. (1994). Brief psyc hotherapy and psychological assessments entering a relationship, establishing a focus, and providing feedback. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 25 46-49. Claiborn, C. D., Goodyear, R. K., & Horner, P. A. (2001). Feedback. Psychotherapy, 38 401405. Cohen, J. (1992). Statistical power analysis. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1, 98101 Cox, B. J., & Enns, M. W. (2003). Relative stability of dimensions of perfec tionism in depression. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 35 124-132. Crowne, D. P. & Marlowe, D. (1960). A new s cale of social desirabi lity independent of psychopathology. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 24, 349-354. DiBartolo, P. M., Frost, R. O ., Dixon, A., & Almovodar, S. (2001) Can cognitive restructuring reduce the disruption associated with perfectionistic concerns? Behavior Tharapy, 32 167184. DiClemente, C. C., & Prochaska, J. O. (1985). Processes and stages of change: Coping and competence in smoking behavior change. In T. A. Wills (Ed.), Coping and substance use (pp. 319-343). New York: Academic Press. Donnelly, D. A., & Murray, E. J. (1991). Cognitive and emotional changes in written essays and therapy interviews. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 10 334. Duncan, B. L., Miller, S.D. & Sparks, J.A (2004). The heroic client. A revolutionary way to improve effectiveness th rough client-centered, ou tcome-informed therapy San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Dunkley, D. M., Blankstein, K. R., Halsall, J., Williams, M., & Winkworth, G. (2000). The relation between perfectionism and distress: Hass les, coping, and perceived social support as mediators and moderators. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47, 437-453.

PAGE 116

116 Dunkley, D. M., Zuroff, D. C., & Blankstein, K. R. (2003). Self-critical perfectionism and daily affect: Dispositional and situational influences on stress and coping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 84 234-252. Ellis, A. E. (1957). How to live with a neurotic: At work and at home. New York: Crown. Ellis, A. E. (1962). Reason and emotion in psychotherapy Secaucas, NJ: The Citadel Press. Ellis, A. (2002). The role of irrational beliefs in perfectionism. In G. L. Flett & P. L. Hewitt (Eds.), Perfectionism: Theory, research, and treatment (pp. 217-229), Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Elwell, J. L., & Grindley, G. C. (1938). The effect of knowledge of results on learning and performance. British Journal of Psychology, 39, 39-54. Esterling, B. A., LAbate, L., Murray, E. J., Pe nnebaker, J. W. (1999). Empirical foundations for writing in prevention and psychotherapy: Mental and physical health outcomes. Clinical Psychology Review, 19 79-96. Eysenbach, G., & Diepgen, T. L. (1998). Respons es to unsolicited patient email requests for medical advice on the World Wide Web. Journal of the American Medical Association, 280, 1333-1335. Fairburn, C. G., Cooper, Z., Doll, H. A., & We lch, S. L. (1999). Risk factors for anorexia nervosa: three integrated case-control comparisons. Archives of General Psychiatry, 56 46876. Fedor, D. B. (1991). Recipient responses to pe rformance feedback: A proposed model and its implications. In G. R. Ferris & K. M. Rowland (Eds.), Research in personnel and human resources management (Vol. 9, pp. 73). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Fedor, D. B., Davis, W. D., Maslyn, J. M., & Mathieson, K. (2001). Performance improvement efforts in response to negative feedback: The ro les of source power and recipient self-esteem. Journal of Management, 27, 79-97. Ferguson, K. L. & Rodway, G. R. (1994). Cogniti ve behavioral treatme nt of perfectionism: initial evaluation studies. Research and Social Work Practice, 4, 283-308. Finn, S. E. (1996). Using the MMPI-2 as a therapeutic intervention. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Finn, S. E., & Tonsager, M. E. (1992). Therapeutic effects of providing MMPI-2 test feedback to college students awaiting therapy. Psychological Assessment, 4, 278-287.

PAGE 117

117 Fletcher, C., Taylor, P., & Glanfield, K. ( 1996). Acceptance of personality questionnaire feedback: The role of individual differen ce variables and source of interpretation. Personality and Individual Differences, 20, 151-156. Flett, G. L., Blankstein, K. R ., Hewitt, P. L., & Koledin, S. (1992). Components of perfectionism and procrastination in college students. Social Behavior and Personality, 20 85-94. Flett, G. L, & Hewitt, P. L. (2002). Perf ectionism and maladjustment: An overview of theoretical, definitional, and treatment issues In G. L. Flett & P. L. Hewitt (Eds.), Perfectionism: Theory, resear ch, and treatment (pp. 5-31). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Flett, G. L., Hewitt, P. L., Blankstein, K. R., Solnik, M., & Van Brunschot, M. (1996). Perfectionism, social problem solving ability, and psychological distress. Journal of Rational-Emotive and Cognitive Behavior Therapy, 14, 245-274. Flett, G.L., Hewitt, P.L., & Dyck, D.G. (1989). Self oriented perfectionism, neuroticism and anxiety. Personality and Individual Differences, 10, 731-735. Francis, M. E., & Pennebaker, J. W. (1992). Put ting stress into words: The impact of writing on physiological, absentee, and self-rep orted emotional we ll-being measures. American Journal of Health Promotion 6 280. Franco-Paredes, K., Mancilla-Daz, J. M., Vaz quez-Arevalo, R., Lopez-Aguilar, X., & AlvarezRayon, G. (2005). Perfectionism and eating disorders: A Review of the literature. European Eating Disorders Review, 13, 61-70. Frank J. D. & Frank J. B. (1991). Persuasion and h ealing: A comparative study of psychotherapy (3rd ed.). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. Frazier, P. A., Tix, A. P. & Barron, K. E. (2004) Testing Moderator and Mediator Effects in Counseling Psychology Research. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51, 115-134. Freud (1933/1953). New introductor y lectures on psychoanalysis. In J. Strachey (Ed.), The complete psychological works: Standard edition (vol. 22). London: Hogarth Press. Frost, R. O., Heimberg, R. G., Holt, C. S., Ma ttia, J. I., & Neubauer, A. L. (1993). A comparison of two measures of perfectionism. Personality and Individual Differences, 14 119-126. Frost, R. O., Marten, P. A., Lahart, C., & Rosenblate, R. (1990). The dimensions of perfectionism. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 14 449-468. Frost, R. O., Steketee, G. (1997). Perfectionism and obssessive compulsive disorder. Behavior Research and Therapy, 35, 291-296.

PAGE 118

118 Garfield, S. L. (1994). Eclecticism and integrat ion in psychotherapy: Developments and issues. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 1, 123-137. Gelso, C., & Carter, J. (1994) Components of th e psychotherapy relationshi p: Their interaction and unfolding during treatment. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 41 296-306. Gelso, C. J., Kelley, F. A., Fuertes, J. N., Marm arosh, C., Holmes, S. E., Costa, C., & Hancock, G. R. (2005). Measuring the Real Relationship in Psychotherapy: Ini tial Validation of the Therapist Form. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52 640-649. Gold, J. R. (1994). When the patient does the in tegrating: Lessons for theory and practice. Journal of Psychotherapy Integration, 4, 133-158. Gosling, S. D., Vazire, S., Srivastava, S., & John, O. P. (2004). Should we trust web-based studies? A comparative analysis of six pr econceptions about internet questionnaires. American Psychologist, 59 93-104. Graham, J. R. (2000). MMPI-2: Assessing Persona lity and Psychopathology (3rd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. Greenberg, L. S. & Bolger, E. (2001). An emo tion-focused approach to the overregulation of emotion and emotional pain. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 57 197-211. Special issue: Treating emotion regulation problems in psychotherapy. Greenberg, M. A., & Stone, A. A. (1992). Writing about disclosed versus undisclosed traumas: Immediate and long-term effects on mood and health. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 63 75. Grzegorek, J. L., Slaney, R. B., Franze, S., & Rice, K. R. (2004). Self-Criticism, dependency, self-esteem, and grade-point average satisfa ction among clusters of perfectionists and nonperfectionists. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51 192-200. Hewitt, P. L., & Dick, D. G. (1986). Perfectionism, stress, and vulnerability to depression. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 10, 137-142. Hewitt, P. L., & Flett, G. L. (1991). Perfec tionism in the self and social contexts: Conceptualization, assessment, a nd association with psychopathology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 456-470. Hewitt, P. L., Flett, G. L., & Ediger, E. ( 1996). Perfectionism and depression: Longitudinal assessment of a specific vulnerability hypothesis. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 105 276-281. Hewitt, P. L., Flett, G. L., Ediger, E., Norton, G. R., Flynn, C. A. (1998). Perfectionism in chronic and state symptoms of depression. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 30, 234-242.

PAGE 119

119 Hewitt, P. L., Flett, G. L., & Endler, N. S. (1995). Perfectionism, coping, and clinical depression. Journal of Clinical Psyc hology and Psychotherapy, 2 47-58. Hewitt, P. L., Flett, G. L., & Turnbull-Donovan, W. (1992). Perfectionism and suicide potential. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 31 181-190. Hewitt, P. L., Flett, G. L., & Weber, C. (1994). Dimensions of perfectionism and suicide ideation. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 18 439-460. Hill, C. E., Rochlen, A. B., Zack, J. S., McCready, T., & Dematitis, A. (2003). Working with dreams using the Hill Cognitive-Experiential Model: A comparison of computer-assisted, therapist empathy, and therapis t empathy + input conditions. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 50 211-220. Hollender, M. H. (1978). Perfectioni sm: A neglected personality trait. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 39 384-394. Holmbeck, G. N. (1997). Toward terminological, c onceptual, and statistical clarity in the study of mediators and moderators: Examples from the child-clinical and pediatric psychology literatures. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 65, 599-610. Horney, K. (1950). Neurosis and human growth New York: Norton. Horvath, A. O. & Symonds B. D. (1991). Relation between working alliance and outcome in psychotherapy: A meta-analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 38 139-149. Hubble, M. A., Duncan, B. L., & Miller, S. D. (1 999). Directing attention to what works. In M. A. Hubble, M. A., Duncan, B. L., & Miller, S. D. (Eds.), The heart and soul of change: What works in therapy (pp. 407-448). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Huberty, C. J. & Morris, J. D. (1989). Multivariate analysis versus multiple univariate analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 105 302-308. Hufford, M. R., Shields, A. L., Shiffma n, S. Paty, J., & Balabanis, M. (2002). Reactivity to ecological momentary assessment: An exampl e using undergraduate problem drinkers. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 16 205-211. Huston, J. L., & Burton, D. C. (1997). Patient satisfaction with multispecialty interactive teleconsultations. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, 3, 205-208. Jerome, L. W., DeLeon, P. H., James, L. C., Fo len, R.; Earles, J., & Gedney, J. J. (2000). The coming age of telecommunications in ps ychological resear ch and practice. American Psychologist, 55, 407-421.

PAGE 120

120 Jonhson, D. P. & Slaney, R. B. (1996). Perf ectionism: Scale development and a study of perfectionists in counseling. Journal of College Student Development, 37 29-41. Joiner Jr., T.E., Heatherton, T.F., Rudd, M.D., & Schmidt, N.B. (1997). Perfectionism, perceived weight status, and bulimic symptoms: two studies testing a diat hesis stress model. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 106 145-153. Kawamura, K. Y., Hunt, S. L., Frost, R. O., & DiBartolo, P. M. (2001) Perfectionism, anxiety, and depression: Are the re lationships independent? Cognitive Therapy and Research, 25, 291-301. Keltner, D., Locke, K. D., & Audrain, P. C. (1993). The influence of attributions on the relevance of negative feeli ngs to personal satisfaction. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 19 21. Kinicki, A. J., Prussia, G. E., Wu, B., & Mc Kee-Ryan, F. M. (2004). A Covariance Structure Analysis of Employees' Response to Performa nce Feedback. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 1057-1069. King, S. A. (1996a). Commentary on re sponses to the proposed guidelines. Information Society, 12, 199-201. King, S. A. (1996b). Researching Internet comm unities: Proposed ethical guidelines for the reporting of results. Information Society, 12, 119-127. Klein, K. & Boals, A. (2001). Expressive wr iting can increase working memory capacity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130 520-533. Klein, B. & Richards, J. C. (2001). A brief internet-based treatment for panic disorder. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 29 131. Klopfer, W. G. (1954). Principles of report writing. In B. Kl opfer, M.D. Ainsworth, W. G. Klopfer, & R. R. Holt (Eds.), Developments in the Rorschach technique: Vol. 1. Technique and Theory New York: Collins. Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effect s of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, an d a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 254-284. Kottman, T. & Ashby, J. (1999). Social inte rest and multidimensional perfectionism. Journal of Individual Psychology, 55 176-185. Lambert, M. J., Burlingame, G. M., Umphress, V ., Hansen, N. B., Vermeersch, D. A., Clouse, G. C., & Yanchar, S. C. (1996). The reliability and validity of the Outcome Questionnaire. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 3, 249.

PAGE 121

121 Lange, A., Van de Ven, J-P., Schrieken, B., Bredeweg, B., & Emmelkamp, P. M. G. (2000). Internet-mediated, protocol-drive n treatment of psychological dysfunction. Journal of Telemedi cine and Telecare, 6, 15-21. Lange, A., Rietdijk, D., Hudcovicova, M., Van de Ven, J. P., Schrieken, B., & Emmelkamp, P. M. (2003). Interapy: A controlled randomized trial of the standard ized treatment of posttraumatic stress th rough the Internet. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 71 901-909. Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal and coping. New York: Springer-Verlag. Lewak, R. W., Marks, P. A., & Nelson, G. E. (1990). Therapist guide to the MMPI & MMPI-2. Muncie, IN: Accelerated Development. Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). A theory of goal setting and task performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Lundh, L-G. (2004). Perfectionism and acceptance. Journal of Rational-Emotive and Cognitive Behavior Therapy. 22, 255-269. MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J. & Fr its, M. S. (2007). Mediation analysis. Annual Review in Psychology, 58, 593-614. MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G., & Sheets, V. (2002). A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods 7 83-104. Maheu, M. (1997). Will online services for consumer self-help improve behavioral healthcare? Behavioral Healthcare Tomorrow Journal, 6, 32-36, 53. Maheu, M. M., & Gordon, B. L. (2000). Counseling and therapy on the Internet. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 31, 484-489. Manzer, C. W. (1935). The effect of knowledge of output on muscular work. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 8, 80-90. Marks, I. (2000). Forty years of psychosocial treatment. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 28, 323-334. Martin, T. R., Flett, G. L. Hewitt, P. L., Kram es, L., & Szanto, G. (1996). Personality correlates of depression and health symptoms: A test of a self-regulation model. Journal of Research in Personality, Vol 30, 264-277. McCrae, R. R. & Costa, P. T. (1991). The NEO Personality Inventory: Using the five-factor model in counseling. Journal of Counseling and Development, 69 367-372.

PAGE 122

122 McConnaughy, E. A., DiClemente, C. C., Prochaska, J. O., & Velicer, W. F. (1989). Stages of change in ps ychotherapy: A follow-up report. Psychotherapy, 26, 494-503. McConnaughy, E. A., Prochaska, J. O., & Velic er, W. F. (1983). Stages of change in psychotherapy: Measurement and sample profiles. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice, 20, 368-375. Mikulincer, M. (1994). Human learned helplessness: A coping perspective. New York: Plenum Press. Miller, W. R. (1995). Increasing motivation for cha nge. In R. K. Hester & W. R. Miller (Eds.), Handbook of alcoholism treatment approaches: E ffective alternatives (pp. 89-104). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Miller, W. R., Benefield, R. G., & Tonigan, J. S. (1993). Enhancing motivation for change in problem drinking: A controlled co mparison of two therapist styles. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 61, 455-461. Miller, E. T., Neal, D. J., Roberts, L. J., Baer, J. S., Cressler, S. O., Metrik, J., & Marlatt, G. A. (2002). Test-retest reliability of alcohol measures : Is there a difference between Internetbased assessment and traditional methods? Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 16 56-63. Murdoch J. W. & Connor Greene, P. A. (2000). Enhancing th erapeutic impact and therapeutic alliance through electronic mail homework assignments. Journal of Psychotherapy Practice and Research, 9 232-237. Naglieri, J. A., Drasgow, R., Schmit, M., Handler L., Prifitera, A., Margolis, A., & Velasquez, R. (2004). Psychological testing on the Internet: New problems, old issues. American Psychologist, 59 150-162. Nass, C. & Moon, Y. (2000). Machines and mindl essness social responses to computers. Journal of Social Issues, 56 81. Neighbors, C., Larimer, M. E., & Lewis, M. A. (2004). Targeting Misperceptions of Descriptive Drinking Norms: Efficacy of a Computer-De livered Personalized Normative Feedback Intervention. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 72 434-447. Newman, M. L. & Greenway, P. (1997). Therapeutic effects of providing MMPI-2 test feedback to clients at a university counseling service: a colla borative approach. Psychological Assessment, 9 122-131. Nickelson, D. W. (1998). Telehealth and the ev olving health care system : Strategic opportunities for professional psychology. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 29, 527-535. OConnor, R. C. & OConnor, D. B. (2003). Pred icting hopelessness and psychological distress: The role of perfectionism and coping. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 50, 362-372.

PAGE 123

123 Orlinsky D. E., Grawe, K. & Parks, B. K. (1994). Process and outcome in psychotherapy: Noch einmal. In A. G. Bergin & l. E. Sol (Eds.) Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change (pp. 270-3764). Oxford, England: John Wiley & Sons. Pacht, A. R. (1984) Reflections on perfectionism. American Psychologist, 39 386-390. Pantalon, M. V., Nich, C., Frankforter, T., & Ca rroll, K. M. (2002). The URICA as a measure of motivation to change among treatment-seeking individuals with concurrent alcohol and cocaine problems. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 16, 299-307. Parker, W. D. (1997). An empirical typology of pe rfectionism in academically talented children. A merican Educational Research Journal, 34 545-562. Paul, L. (1967). Insight versus desensitization in psychothera py two years after termination. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 31 333-348. Paulhus, D. L. (1991). Measurement and control of response bias. In J. B. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, & L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measure of personality and social psychological attitudes (pp. 17). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Pauls, C. A. & Stemmler, G. (2003). Repressive and defensive coping dur ing fear and anger. Emotion, 3 284-302. Pennebaker, J. W. (1997). Writing about emoti onal experiences as a therapeutic process. Psychological Science, 8, 162-166. Pennebaker, J. W. (2004). Theories, Therapies, and Taxpayers: On the Complexities of the Expressive Writing Paradigm. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 11 138-142. Pennebaker, J. W., Kiecolt-Glaser, J., & Glaser, R. (1988). Disclosure of traumas and immune function: Health implications for psychotherapy. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 56 239. Phillips, J. R. (1984). Influences on personal grow th as viewed by former psychotherapy clients. Dissertation Abstracts International, 44, 441A. Podsakoff, P. M., & Farh, J. H. (1989). Effects of feedback sign and cr edibility on goal setting and task performance. Organizational Behavior and Hu man Decision Processes, 44, 45-67. Pope, K. S.(1992). Responsibilities in providi ng psychological test f eedback to clients. Psychological Assessment, 4, 268-271. Pope, K. S., Tabachnick, B., & Keith-Spiegel, P. C.(1987). Ethics of practice: Beliefs and behaviors of psychologists as therapists. American Psychologist, 42 993-1006.

PAGE 124

124 Pope, K. S., Tabachnick, B.,& Keith-Spiegel P. C.(1988). Good and Poor Practices in Psychotherapy: National Survey of Beliefs of Psychologists. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 19 547-552. Preusser, K. J., Rice, K. G., Ashby, J. S. (1994) The role of self-est eem in mediating the perfectionism-depression connection. Journal of College Student Development, 35 88-93. Prochaska, J. O., & DiClemente, C. C. (1983). St ages and processes of self-change of smoking: Toward an integrative model of change. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 51, 390-395. Prochaska, J. O., & DiClemente, C. C. (1992). St ages of change in the modification of problem behaviors. Progress in Behavior Modification, 28, 183-218. Prochaska, J. O., DiClemente, C. C., & Norcross, J. C. (1992). In search of how people change: Applications to addictive behaviors. American Psychologist, 47, 1102-1114. Prochaska, J. O. & Norcross, J. C. (2001). Stages of change. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 38 443-448. Project MATCH Research Group (1997). Matc hing alcoholism treatments to client heterogeneity: Project MATCH post-treatment drinking outcomes. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 58, 7-29. Quirk, M. P., Strosahl, K., Kreilkamp, T., & Erdberg, C. M. (1995). Personality feedback consultation to families in managed mental health care practice. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 26, 27-32. Reeves, B. & Nass, C. (1996). The Media Equa tion How People Treat Computers, Television, and New Media Like Real People and Places, Cambridge University Press, New York. Reynolds, W. M. (1982). Development of reliable and valid short forms of the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology 38 119-125. Rhaume, J., Freeston, M.H., Dugas, M.J., Letart e, H., & Ladouceur, R. (1995). Perfectionism, responsibility and obsessive compulsive symptoms. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 33 785-794. Richards, J. C., & Alvarenga, M. E. (2002). Exte nsion and replication of an internet-based treatment for panic disorder. Scandinavian Journal of Behaviour Therapy, 30 1-7. Rice, K.G. & Aldea, M. A. ( 2006). State Dependence and Trait Stability of Perfectionism: A Short-Term Longitudinal Study. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53, 205-213 Rice, K. G. & Ashby, J. S. ( 2007). An efficient method for classifying perfectionists. Journal of Counseling Psychology.

PAGE 125

125 Rice, K. G., Ashby, J. S., & Slaney, R. B. (1998). Self-esteem as a mediator between perfectionism and depression: A structural equations analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 45 304-314. Rice, K.G., Bair, C., Castro, J., Cohen, B. & Hood, C. (2003). Meanings of perfectionism: A quantitative and qualitative analysis. Journal of Cognitive Pssychology, 17 39-58. Rice, K. G., & Dellwo, J. P. (2002). Perfectio nism and self-development: Implications for college adjustment. Journal of Counseling and Development, 80 188-196. Rice, K. G., & Lapsely, D. K. (2001). Perf ectionism, coping, and emotional adjustment. Journal of College Student Development, 42 157-168. Rice K. G., Leever B. A., Christopher, J., & Porter, J. D. (2006). Perfectionism, Stress, and Social (Dis)Connection: A Short-Term Study of Hopelessness, Depression, and Academic Adjustment Among Honors Students. Journal of Counseling Psychology 53 524-534. Rice, K. G., Lopez, F. G., & Vergara, D. (2005) Parental/social influences on perfectionism and adult attachment orientations. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 24, 580-605. Rice, K. G., & Mirzadeh, S. A. (2000). Pe rfectionism, attachment, and adjustment. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47, 238-250. Rosenzweig, S. (1936). Some implicit common f actors in diverse methods of psychotherapy. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 6 412-415. Santor, D. A., Bagby, R. M., & Joffe, R. T. (1997). Evaluating stability and change in personality and depression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1354-1362. Sampson, J., Kolodinsky, R., & Greeno, B. ( 1997). Counseling on the information highway: Future possibilities and potential problems. Journal of Counseling and Development, 75, 203-212. Sedikides, C., Rudich, E. A., Gregg, A. P., Kumashiro, M., & Rusbult, C. (2004). Are normal narcissists psychologically h ealthy?: Self-esteem matters. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87 400-416. Seggar, L. B., Lambert, M. J., & Hansen, N. B. (2002). Assessing clinical significance: Application to the Beck Depression Inventory. Behavior Therapy, 33, 253-269. Shafran, R., Cooper, Z., & Fairburn, C. G. (2002) Clinical perfectionism: a cognitive-behavioral analysis Behavior Research and Therapy, 40 773-791. Shafran, R., Lee, M., Payne, E., & Fairburn, C. G. (2006). The impact of manipulating personal standards on eating at titudes and behavior. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 44, 897-906.

PAGE 126

126 Shapiro, D. E., & Schulman, C. E. (1996). Ethi cal and legal issues in e-mail therapy. Ethics & Behavior, 6, 107-125. Shrout, P. E. & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and none xperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7, 422-445. Slaney, R. B., & Ashby, J. S. (1996). Pe rfectionists: Study of a criterion group. Journal of Counseling & Development,74, 393-398. Slaney, R. B., Ashby, J. S., & Trippi, J. (1995) Perfectionism: its measurement and career relevance. Journal of Career Assessment, 3 279-297. Slaney, R. B., Chadha, N., Mobley, M., & Kenne dy, S. (2000). Perfectionism in Asian Indians: Exploring the meaning of the construct in India. Counseling Psychologist, 28, 10-31. Slaney, R. B., Mobley, M., Trippi, J., & Ashby, J. S., & Johnson, D. G. (1996). The Almost Perfect Scale-Revised. Unpublished manuscript, Penns ylvania State University. Slaney, R. B. & Johnson, D. G. (2002). The Almost Perfect Scale Unpublished manuscript, Pennsylvania State Univ ersity, State College. Slaney, R. B., Rice, K. G., & Ashby, J. S. (2002). A programmatic approach to measuring perfectionism: The Almost Perfect Scales. In G. L. Flett & P. L. Hewitt (Eds.), Perfectionism: Theory, re search, and treatment (pp. 63-88). Slaney, R. B., Rice, K. G., Mobley, M., Trippi, J., & Ashby, J. S. (2001). The Almost Perfect Scale-Revised. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 34 130-145. Sloan, D. M., & Marx, B. P. (2004b). A closer exam ination of the structured written disclosure procedure. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 72, 165-175. Smyth, J. M. (1998). Written emotional expression: Effect sizes, outcome types, and moderating variables. Journal of Consulting an d Clinical Psychology, 66 174-184. Smyth, J., Stone, A. A., Hurewitz, A., & Kaell, A. (1999). Effects of writing about stresstul experiences on symptom reduction in patients with asthma or rheumatoid arthritis: a randomized trial. Journal of the American Medical Association, 1304-1309. Snyder, C. R., Ingram, R. E., Handelsman, M. M., Wells, D. S., & Huwi eler, R.(1982). Desire for personal feedback: Who wants it and what does it mean for psychotherapy? Journal of Personality, 50, 316-330. Sorotzkin, B. (1998). Understanding and Treatin g Perfectionism in Religious Adolescents. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 35 87-95.

PAGE 127

127 Srinivasagam, N. M., Kaye, W. H., & Plotnic ov, K. H. (1995). Pers istent perfectionism, symmetry, and exactness after long-term recovery from anorexia nervosa. American Journal of Psychiatry, 152, 1630-1634. Stamm, B.(1998). Clinical applications of telehealth in mental health care. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 29, 536. Stein, D. J. (1997). Psychiatry on the In ternet: Survey of an OCD mailing list. Psychiatric Bulletin, 21, 95-98. Stone, D. L. & Stone, E. F. (1985). The eff ects of feedback consistency and feedback favorability on self-perceived task comp etence and perceived feedback accuracy. Organizational Behavior and Huma n Decision Processes, 36, 167-185. Suddarth, B.H., & Slaney, R.B. (2001). An investig ation of the dimensions of perfectionism in college students. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 34, 157-165. Thorndike, E. L. (1913). Educational psychology. Volume I: The original nature of man. New York: Columbia University, Teachers College. Thorndike, E. L. (1927). The law of effect. American Journal of Psychology, 39, 212-222. Tomohiro, S. (2005). Relationship Between Tw o Aspects of Perfectionism and ObsessiveCompulsive Symptoms. Psychological Reports, 96, 299-305. Troster, A., Paolo, A., Glatt, S., Hubble, J., & Koller, W. (1995). Interactive video conferencing in the provision of neuropsychologi cal services to rural areas. Journal of Community Psychology, 23, 85-88. Umphress, V. J., Lambert, M. J., Smart, D. W., Barlow, S. H., Clouse, G. C., & Hansen,N. B. (1997). Concurrent and construct valid ity of the Outcome Questionnaire. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 15, 40-55. Valesquez, M. M., Carbonari, J. P., & DiClem ente, C. C. (1999). Psychiatric severity and behavior change in alcoholism: The relation of the trans-theoretical model variables to psychiatric distress in du ally diagnosed patients. Addictive Behaviors, 24, 481-496. Yager, J. (2001). E-mail as a therapeutic adjunct in the outpatient treatmen t of anorexia nervosa: Illustrative case material a nd discussion of the issues. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 29, 125-138. Wampold B. E. (2001). The great psychotherapy debate: Models, methods, and findings. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

PAGE 128

128 Winters, K. C., Latimer, W. W., Stinchfield, R. D. & Egan, E. (2004). Measuring sdolescent drug abuse and psychosocial factors in four ethnic groups of drug-abusing boys. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 12, 227-236. Worthington, E. L., MCCulough, M. E., Shotz, J. L., Mindes, E. J., Sandage, S. J., & Chartrand, J. M. (1995). Can couples assessment and fee dback improve relationships? Assessment as a brief relationship enrichment procedure. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 42, 466-475. Zuroff, D. C., Blatt, S. J., Sotsky, S. M., Krupni ck, J. L., Martin, D. J., Sanislow, C. A., & Simmens, S. (2000). Relation of therapeutic allia nce and perfectionism to outcome in brief outpatient treatment of depression. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68, 114-124.

PAGE 129

129 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Mirela Aldea was born on May 29, 1973 in Iasi Romania. An only child, she grew up mostly in Iasi, a city in the eastern part of Romania where she earned a degree in psychology and one in law from Al. I. Cuza University. She worked for three years as a vis iting faculty at a small private university in Iasi and as a consultant for non-governmental organi zations providing social services. In august 2000 she came to the United St ates where she earned a masters degree in clinical psychology from Appalachian State Univ ersity. Upon completion of her Ph.D., Mirela will complete a postdoctoral program in the Psychiatry Department at the University of Florida where she will be involved in research and clinic al work primarily with clients with obsessivecompulsive disorder.


xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID E20101113_AAAAOQ INGEST_TIME 2010-11-13T20:14:51Z PACKAGE UFE0021110_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES
FILE SIZE 7169 DFID F20101113_AADEGD ORIGIN DEPOSITOR PATH aldea_m_Page_114thm.jpg GLOBAL false PRESERVATION BIT MESSAGE_DIGEST ALGORITHM MD5
442cf9c9ef9c95730a0391de5b613046
SHA-1
cf64bc7d914ac6b9e0e9d8eaf545424fa1c584bf
6872 F20101113_AADEFO aldea_m_Page_086thm.jpg
cf65bcf35e5e6d99c8b9f6d66c1e2a58
9ee2d85db051e5a7baed5d9bf0c46df055a49d7a
124240 F20101113_AADDBY aldea_m_Page_093.jp2
544e8611f31c17490da2d2f144d73475
59857d79496c7eae44576d1acd7e019dfc75e3a8
116679 F20101113_AADDZU aldea_m_Page_095.jp2
4bdac6698243e919a87289af56790c06
b84a3ccc69d81c92d0adbb02dfc41d25b8190077
60289 F20101113_AADDDB aldea_m_Page_127.pro
828d38da9cd1c6ac0e92fdfd688abda2
83546767f30a462f00224b0cf598462e8b194f93
7060 F20101113_AADDCM aldea_m_Page_020thm.jpg
6309df84483b00f8ec21313c83dcdf2b
f45f4f37bc1fd10435b9e1f7975123cee7adaeb0
25094 F20101113_AADEGE aldea_m_Page_116.QC.jpg
58de7910fdbb9de1cdbb0329d2f88abd
69da74140dbd8c9da075818c3c97daff61e453a4
25883 F20101113_AADEFP aldea_m_Page_087.QC.jpg
d47e957b3e2eef7f227330f1a539b967
a60fa4fc114174b417df9182b909b28d9c41961f
26419 F20101113_AADDBZ aldea_m_Page_037.QC.jpg
a5ed07e39833152624a5c9958e68b5bb
d6bb7016476b9fd2d49dcb200053ac019bae5659
106103 F20101113_AADDZV aldea_m_Page_100.jp2
ca90a4e1c410ffaa5d03a8d80c086318
911bd4052d0f3d7dbdcb15a9b03c9afbe810c4cc
23892 F20101113_AADDDC aldea_m_Page_009.QC.jpg
82c9d5e30fa45df51871a6bcccdb41d1
69a811c15b99c7fe1f72d7e361a2bbfa52ae3c91
56484 F20101113_AADDCN aldea_m_Page_040.pro
a4b6f752f5807d112503da2866aa8723
46b66256b235367e712e1bb4863987feb48c139d
6943 F20101113_AADEGF aldea_m_Page_118thm.jpg
5dd865572785088aff0cc1d103df275f
73d6b68c0bd4d811ce6bad0b487c719b224b4526
26730 F20101113_AADEFQ aldea_m_Page_089.QC.jpg
38e1eaf7eeccc5873ab1dce72d9a8cad
2764555b6bf02bb7f889e2f4c431900986d1f93a
162442 F20101113_AADDZW aldea_m_Page_105.jp2
34036981486cdec3a94a54efd5f4fcf6
0fc944cd44fe2e51132eba9282cce2213dfed4de
125622 F20101113_AADDDD aldea_m_Page_080.jp2
91472db0501cb31df6ca74efdd7a6a73
cc7cf76e7ce9f2b52470241a912b9f6d6672cef6
89905 F20101113_AADDCO aldea_m_Page_114.jpg
a9fbab4bcf697257ee54375a9b77b9ca
efc50d82cfb18b4e5b75f0622ca50e7bdd0e1866
25261 F20101113_AADEGG aldea_m_Page_119.QC.jpg
5ac5c26ea183e78398536f331148ce10
dd81507dd70d975a0e409d5173a5aec452dc31ce
6942 F20101113_AADEFR aldea_m_Page_090thm.jpg
49a712ac9ba2d3ec6b5c27314a733099
5ae6ca495b904f04f78e25161684bc114af1b4ca
96354 F20101113_AADDZX aldea_m_Page_106.jp2
9280eb57ee74b38ccb05df3720fcdd74
7d08b0d132142f62fe7beabe44f1555f01135fd2
1053954 F20101113_AADDDE aldea_m_Page_064.tif
223099717938146d0cf088f98eb51996
15a431ca96d36e2ae8a93d49fb91bb42aa2b2060
6444 F20101113_AADDCP aldea_m_Page_030thm.jpg
31531326b4ab04545e3c47a7492a0692
e4905abbe01ba81c9846249af0773431a14ad45a
2875 F20101113_AADEGH aldea_m_Page_128thm.jpg
bf69f573ece5da146aa4719e3532e650
8e8f5d1bc2bb7baad054c5a9391ed16fbf2d15f5
7114 F20101113_AADEFS aldea_m_Page_091thm.jpg
35be391a18a91b38b3a7ac05fb98dd53
29ba49de657a951afceec5dfcb290b45f15095a0
130906 F20101113_AADDZY aldea_m_Page_116.jp2
41db8a782a9021327589513b388a85ac
512f0552bdc5b0c87b6f3bfedc38f2b7598d841c
2142 F20101113_AADDDF aldea_m_Page_096.txt
7d124d88f3fb3bafc73060d04c879237
d92bf41e3802e05d8beb7c2e054da249d89b7fa2
2220 F20101113_AADDCQ aldea_m_Page_094.txt
a524338265da53fd1d9cde3b0c89d731
38a5122881d195b73cfe978f1cd68e69cec64019
11681 F20101113_AADEGI aldea_m_Page_129.QC.jpg
64b10f5feb8648f8f50c2f25d23f9289
e82cf354c75b758c7f11a0836806b9c3a7e33bfe
26441 F20101113_AADEFT aldea_m_Page_093.QC.jpg
651e39ee97224233bfd4d8541bcb8235
311c14936e6b0dbf015878ede65448d0a287afcb
131731 F20101113_AADDZZ aldea_m_Page_119.jp2
32fa0bda2d9ab1d334ea7896928cd0e6
f7bfb66c7a03fbde16fd2e6f9cee9d8271faf3cb
80831 F20101113_AADDDG aldea_m_Page_050.jpg
4899660fec7ab0646ff5778d64ebe2f4
955b28d3d80ad9e1517ae87627c243d857c814de
7048 F20101113_AADDCR aldea_m_Page_119thm.jpg
16996cf90a0c9680765a763b603212d3
2287a8c2feefd2a210f718f2c0862aaa8b04bb7c
148388 F20101113_AADEGJ UFE0021110_00001.mets FULL
6d4d3b1f0125151689a3ed9b8b9a9a8b
3d19e0c331d895e18fe5b35d36978d936fe69aa3
4325 F20101113_AADEFU aldea_m_Page_097thm.jpg
34cc11c6c1aae2a0f47349f201c4b8a1
f451497b8566d18a899d2f2cde208c13b6b8232d
7004 F20101113_AADCXM aldea_m_Page_037thm.jpg
699cf13952002b3d647a3bfbdaf3d68b
dc37e33cfac11d40ccfab1227430bebb2f96df52
3376 F20101113_AADDDH aldea_m_Page_074thm.jpg
d0b2dc7e2127c5b4e5fd3decd4d62322
2ed2b0787d0b1a3ac6e4fac00a793fdf5a8b1404
122942 F20101113_AADCYA aldea_m_Page_023.jp2
566566b6223c781b5a699d3e3527dd78
b4603b7e9b49d6c838a1251ceb99ecdd80659dfa
83806 F20101113_AADDCS aldea_m_Page_110.jp2
8c0ec30d401e0a72fe061bf6a694af29
f57820774dedecbbc6e4a5b95894a8f1178cb95d
22227 F20101113_AADEFV aldea_m_Page_099.QC.jpg
fb1e0717b7b92bed095ec6b7b4ab4adb
b0d6f3e10229e191ea6322a25510020543788aa3
77019 F20101113_AADCXN aldea_m_Page_096.jpg
b3abbca00b947b40df9ed4a7e7b74e1e
43d77a2e098486f93644199e6f58a7286496fe5e
2059 F20101113_AADDDI aldea_m_Page_062.txt
096a858e8391b4a8a08db795dad2374c
c35bc3a7144d07a782a14c58e41923ae391e071a
2060 F20101113_AADCYB aldea_m_Page_044.txt
b548d0a89cb9ddc125a153321056eb1b
edc2ee7530152437e6d79d92189080f57a83787e
408 F20101113_AADDCT aldea_m_Page_077.txt
d2a99246b24830eea5c991e166bea878
1b68883b3d0823c3b973fe994e1cfc44bc8c01e2
21795 F20101113_AADEFW aldea_m_Page_100.QC.jpg
42d2aacb0a01e816995a888604b2386d
10c6d71ab2f24a4622039a8698dfd86f9ece3de8
2222 F20101113_AADCXO aldea_m_Page_047.txt
a940d6bafe1283941abdd8fd12b11587
515a409e80f31105a2158e8b6d608f306e78688e
7380 F20101113_AADCYC aldea_m_Page_022thm.jpg
4429952f6f32f29ba2117aa7cd86e8f0
01b5e8dd3fc2b0abc8d466187d31574c0c140487
88134 F20101113_AADDCU aldea_m_Page_113.jpg
f1fa168c9ba784ff8c4540ef3cefefe6
fc1e1e016390312b4d65cb3d5b404f430cf2a2cf
6067 F20101113_AADEFX aldea_m_Page_103.QC.jpg
fed53931234d0ed0454b515af86ffd67
a5804c90990c924c4b5e88a05e8e9ce080fc5291
7036 F20101113_AADCXP aldea_m_Page_094thm.jpg
460100f5b1c5e8e7937707b0bbd8333f
9ff5842d0c4d135bd1a3536ee3f5f2212b9a8b1b
50188 F20101113_AADDDJ aldea_m_Page_049.pro
d83220bfba307db2c2dbc9c06740e0c6
0672b7be49412d7481534bfd0b58792249ab2ffb
26689 F20101113_AADCYD aldea_m_Page_083.QC.jpg
2e3beb47ad0563923664e07de569730d
c2866ab05f2bd20fb91fd9ff13a1674954bf82df
914 F20101113_AADDCV aldea_m_Page_069.txt
c091f6258869a50196e431776d013e12
4dbd3c1a19eff20280cead29532ee7c9983f8699
1967 F20101113_AADEFY aldea_m_Page_103thm.jpg
2a8ef0ce7fd2f173a9231a7880a31405
511d7044f4eba6340646c8c85ad29b16d906da03
F20101113_AADCXQ aldea_m_Page_041.tif
d2374de20e8d7c92fa9f4f5cc5693e4c
3c832194feaf6479eb3908d83112eabc2196a769
79410 F20101113_AADDDK aldea_m_Page_065.jpg
89674e92899d7e02b95265ef44293bf8
46f4a9d485af99d541d5bce70381e5998f45a64f
6752 F20101113_AADCYE aldea_m_Page_032thm.jpg
581cea9e4ae4d01e08b8a256da478afb
018c63c4dcc88f2f2b6e9ad70dcfff4f03989d53
321 F20101113_AADDCW aldea_m_Page_073.txt
698335cb0b7069e3015aef480142f380
03bafab62f9a8a3d9222e7763f52b70b5f75209a
21860 F20101113_AADEFZ aldea_m_Page_107.QC.jpg
c7c31090dcb9c85120e5c2b28abb525f
3ea54b43d83023e3f9de3bec8aa91334549e7dc3
F20101113_AADCXR aldea_m_Page_071.tif
a732c09441b52ce8b7ddafb361d12b74
c75e8e1fdfcdb9be9c3247a321814f53a3f8db48
33449 F20101113_AADDEA aldea_m_Page_109.pro
481eb32502c1447991db28d236a9960e
f9462bdac8d3674053cdf70e19b9e3817c57058c
76395 F20101113_AADDDL aldea_m_Page_053.jpg
4ac1596569f133024eb3e0d729685b0f
aad013fb97c2727322ef782f0e939e1c038cdcd6
81217 F20101113_AADCYF aldea_m_Page_105.pro
f2ad0c3e2b9f22896a5d29713f0b556a
dc7fdb89d7ff392c4f351fcb450b8c71043a7e41
117760 F20101113_AADDCX aldea_m_Page_031.jp2
38ee2fbf8c148e815dbf8ea2e86d85a9
5c4c29be7c1546b1444abc576cf2d60e63dde293
52473 F20101113_AADCXS aldea_m_Page_044.pro
f706a9e464a4c0cd79a6ce738a8135e3
7b919ff3e4ac25c46bee8755555067f3b05191f0
119821 F20101113_AADDEB aldea_m_Page_038.jp2
3847473bcb033bbef8eec5c038b9b535
9360663476b98959a3c5af47a2dfd24d801bb7ef
2865 F20101113_AADDDM aldea_m_Page_073thm.jpg
e9bdfb2969a8bc490b999559771297a3
1d0f865f74866dfb5099e474e112e436cd705b3a
3723 F20101113_AADCYG aldea_m_Page_007thm.jpg
c0cb896363d23ae93cbd27d44e7ec102
f0be4e9afa65b5d7e1535b74b4d77e14bab0cbbb
119681 F20101113_AADDCY aldea_m_Page_084.jp2
a2204aa7ae1a3741c47bccb355a1f7df
4626937f89d8646ed51ff5a5ba8d150e19e80518
6781 F20101113_AADCXT aldea_m_Page_058thm.jpg
f99229c07d5a633661bcdb9158c151fc
6444743013b33ea28def445929c0d2edbcadb2e8
20252 F20101113_AADDEC aldea_m_Page_069.jpg
41a8111b77674cfc47e7eacb68791a16
5526cf0277a62ca82d1550052900be9c885a1341
56012 F20101113_AADDDN aldea_m_Page_081.pro
77492cb80ddb421fa753e94af19c218e
17643cd9ec9d0e94b80de1c377cc5b3f14476534
7105 F20101113_AADCYH aldea_m_Page_088thm.jpg
d0daa659c182296dda383226a8c6244d
55bc919eaef68eb258ad441197d1f487b3b61d00
2247 F20101113_AADDCZ aldea_m_Page_021.txt
123e0280ca050fe1473bea94b459cb69
c5da23870028380a18535d404712fe1d7523ec9d
58660 F20101113_AADCXU aldea_m_Page_080.pro
ad4c2258bc29bb04ae9a219d0adb2343
0ab7d03a6357ebdfb147f0b68c1dc63ad404c423
11928 F20101113_AADDED aldea_m_Page_057.QC.jpg
d30e2b3c5cdc53842a733809a6fef1bc
e738038f8346edd9a823d0c9f4f3fa81bf5df9c2
113599 F20101113_AADDDO aldea_m_Page_014.jp2
e39469ab4b02bd2dde732b94e2b1b606
c7e7c0221497f7e903f54d0b244f996ecd081575
76382 F20101113_AADCYI aldea_m_Page_045.jpg
70e947bb79f9bf9bce1ce4be6e9f36eb
ef264f17426ed5b93f448dd31bd669e4576c6781
8344 F20101113_AADCXV aldea_m_Page_073.QC.jpg
ca6ac88f699d222cf50a2c32c647e16a
933ad90b4dfe8e9c0c130790a4b9a35a04d314ea
32529 F20101113_AADDEE aldea_m_Page_074.jpg
3a9836dd1f04138abff5a57d1a9f1bb8
51664da974da3f5526e4c000da11467ac86e2627
29135 F20101113_AADDDP aldea_m_Page_104.jp2
cfaf468927907d02919260594f006a76
27379c3815859056ae3fbf9a99d3ea68a6d56e4b
2240 F20101113_AADCYJ aldea_m_Page_083.txt
01b66d3ae8a4baee5e76aae320215074
0ab6eece2c95f46ecb5c743a569c547bae64d2b3
6857 F20101113_AADCXW aldea_m_Page_081thm.jpg
c6ee3f55d23827e2803f6f24a89a6656
bb31748c823e4609b8bed5452d8191727c13672c
6960 F20101113_AADDEF aldea_m_Page_046thm.jpg
45c4ec3cd0ca4e26a9425509e3f33f16
dc8ab1ac6f8a3d736e54900c31ed02c0896a5c88
78773 F20101113_AADDDQ aldea_m_Page_082.jpg
1659cd3ac1b767b782afd87fbcb0d5b4
46e08607aa4f43591d9f06686bf3107c135ae98d
36871 F20101113_AADCYK aldea_m_Page_069.jp2
fb98fbee677a03bec71f498abe552774
5957dd5b234d1d18e16edbcb2cd96433c5182b95
2285 F20101113_AADCXX aldea_m_Page_089.txt
6674ffa0492a06bebf6da411f3376578
3b4a2fb351f7a5559b2007967423201678b926d7
36362 F20101113_AADDEG aldea_m_Page_129.jpg
a856db953c3e4c763e0639197d86249c
218e100730fb7be5e4734a2c863e42fee60919c8
2007 F20101113_AADDDR aldea_m_Page_051.txt
cdd355c4d18bae9c54db03652b28d66d
b5b328eb60c1482810396a5d2267de9db152d7d3
124368 F20101113_AADCYL aldea_m_Page_011.jp2
a4dadd8d2ea2fc958df597ba97eabdf7
049eda84aa1377e3209bb86b837173a410d099c1
41515 F20101113_AADCXY aldea_m_Page_072.jpg
16757690200c12158bd346c95cb3dd63
d00ed0fee83cc01ce9a420a42fb33d8658cfed86
1988 F20101113_AADDEH aldea_m_Page_005.txt
522adf76788b4dd63dc4735495b90e3a
06d33351e2377d36e3e2923e4eff7207389e595a
F20101113_AADCZA aldea_m_Page_027.tif
635a03f3e936416720f5e8e55b2a97a4
0630e3ab657fa1b8553ff786a514595bcf27152c
2094 F20101113_AADDDS aldea_m_Page_071.txt
7a481b2fc4440a8dd7914288f5a1de8f
2d505b92cd3de1fe0acae4aafff23f9393ad36d2
80237 F20101113_AADCYM aldea_m_Page_029.jpg
b3a5b4f00527093dc45c50ca59ca1a90
2324fbce3a34a9fe139fb50d03b35bb93a0f20ed
79198 F20101113_AADCXZ aldea_m_Page_059.jpg
3ac5c833619ac79147d356fb56c88576
0b3b6aa3113872b7aacf16b973610417a1972c66
55969 F20101113_AADDEI aldea_m_Page_050.pro
2c45f035a17dcd5d6bce8d6e055205fc
e294546c88c14d0b6a096eee103c8903720042f5
F20101113_AADCZB aldea_m_Page_095.tif
e0a7e59e7d2880f36068b4d07077ee07
1e3f5ed319aaf04ab7e7ee2b2435f5ed7697089e
25739 F20101113_AADDDT aldea_m_Page_023.QC.jpg
3b99373a1ff98f1ffaebfca0391b3488
94587ffff0f63e5f3c223665f035005a42b6f10e
57032 F20101113_AADCYN aldea_m_Page_020.pro
30a846cd351c0881d418e16d5ba57052
dd12848e7bac5eb0d4eaa120b79b7ae17870253a
80747 F20101113_AADDEJ aldea_m_Page_083.jpg
f20abf7f8c162b95765c89fb9af26715
44c55c3a0b6cbe31446030862a9f50809c520053
101068 F20101113_AADCZC aldea_m_Page_008.jp2
2d0507f8b58e4780f1cb83ae6316ec1a
baa8fb96a89290147c41f2d76faa5e83b8d7ea65
80734 F20101113_AADDDU aldea_m_Page_037.jpg
a1b60168f4ecb73d3c00705fd7a13c3e
82018b22f15b24314c1f0c01d2326dd16f32e29f
57290 F20101113_AADCYO aldea_m_Page_100.pro
9044c33fdd0c217a3818c2453098ddbb
332e23beb4c76bb62d91d8da38a8e048a38c1e61
88025 F20101113_AADCZD aldea_m_Page_116.jpg
388b93516c2f774d4b4a29e085860ca2
4cfdc53150a54ea67bedd78737c13d195ca0af08
F20101113_AADDDV aldea_m_Page_109.tif
388d39d1001d14d31dde0a9463a661f1
de97e51a04eb5af83d145982bfeeeedbc793b499
2182 F20101113_AADCYP aldea_m_Page_101thm.jpg
7f08feef25990734de57de2fed9110f9
06c249953e34f3fe2c9f61df84d92cf1c0d07a45
31721 F20101113_AADDEK aldea_m_Page_078.jpg
9e575234536017d7e1829605fb48cdb3
459fe99c483cdb5b031a98f84b8f2d41b00ceb0e
F20101113_AADCZE aldea_m_Page_110.tif
8331827fccc5c22b53030807107166a4
6b96ae9b41d2554e87e3dd9c639293a2148562cd
2537 F20101113_AADDDW aldea_m_Page_126.txt
4efb0cbfe2a2f26acfdd9e54f4c4a50d
b2cceb952a3a9d553542cd2cb29155e5dffe04f0
78578 F20101113_AADCYQ aldea_m_Page_032.jpg
b3f535026a8e4e253659bbb51607ae4f
f6921ab7e8eaaaad770d4ed8fd0e37c09ed7cbf8
3465 F20101113_AADDEL aldea_m_Page_077thm.jpg
02c245f10deb5052c14e6b1ed942bdaf
04e66fd27162d889a4513f7f7945ae2a0f6fb631
26203 F20101113_AADCZF aldea_m_Page_029.QC.jpg
e218d45b263a3af8174df39a944f26d1
0d3a76695e4de9ea8439181206d26c4720ca35b5
F20101113_AADDDX aldea_m_Page_100.tif
105a27bb6586af451f2c64f8ad14369a
afaf83f281ee7e64c5f91b6988516ae606272992
7098 F20101113_AADCYR aldea_m_Page_080thm.jpg
7e34faa6691f5d658b375412769cd34d
73576e649eb2d377800a956c76e97d143a9328af
1051985 F20101113_AADDFA aldea_m_Page_048.jp2
dcf1798006d1f0078be3365f8fec9865
21a146d9337091b76a4aa2004cadc54c9b3d50cb
7022 F20101113_AADDEM aldea_m_Page_065thm.jpg
670559d542ee831ae010c6386cdbe137
26e1d60c3a9359099a8fce2b564ff2f3ab2292eb
64438 F20101113_AADCZG aldea_m_Page_113.pro
a97b06b1525bcdb4be6d90cd9e1c9995
126bd2342f6209b3c781baafbed617c8d74aebed
120125 F20101113_AADDDY aldea_m_Page_036.jp2
4a69f3e5ac85a0dc21968b7344e1ec70
f79c3a08bd5dde9f71e8afc115a105edf1e60517
123638 F20101113_AADCYS aldea_m_Page_083.jp2
5ccac7a68f42f937bb10dd1c41e9e957
2f0392e4df25ed07f74b9270acda985575e9d4eb
56956 F20101113_AADDFB aldea_m_Page_046.pro
431942f165005aa4b3395e69ce7cc566
897b9312284419820271c3593ccd0821df04b0a2
10320 F20101113_AADDEN aldea_m_Page_128.QC.jpg
92f76280e4436dcff1246c7fb2e65569
11fff9304f1d0966a4316addbb95ca3f5286f484
2562 F20101113_AADCZH aldea_m_Page_113.txt
a850a25a07f071406ec0a03065036da4
0ff161422d99223a20704bfd2bf5960b88cdb95e
2306 F20101113_AADDDZ aldea_m_Page_104thm.jpg
94ab740a58e17d8cb690e819be4b78be
707634796a68b585e6caecd7967f12856e140b83
2201 F20101113_AADCYT aldea_m_Page_081.txt
92244f107d343f58664d917d0e04823a
03afbdda9b474977b6102f6e3a19fb2b5ef7bf34
407 F20101113_AADDFC aldea_m_Page_103.txt
6ec7eedc9b984896deb4b1175b73f18c
5de05c3fd71dec07a7eb623f5198d18fb9de7bf9
61868 F20101113_AADDEO aldea_m_Page_120.pro
c75c5b72ff951a22dfa4e31c87c5f981
ab7db91b9bc99881ec7a7af117f2f4586008d886
65702 F20101113_AADCZI aldea_m_Page_117.pro
28a48e2821f9e72a276f51e652bf3dcd
56d39c29aafbda40c7c4d1dc4b9238fba3ed8ebf
94045 F20101113_AADCYU aldea_m_Page_122.jpg
e6255d2ca4a10d4ccf3c36862a0ea621
957d6510d5cfe947dc6db0aad8d5d9e8d53fd39e
F20101113_AADDFD aldea_m_Page_021.tif
89953ea1ee9598c5bdb3825b87d6a188
669f6e4a815a86f1d36d3e90faf9f34f74c3ee1a
7193 F20101113_AADDEP aldea_m_Page_105thm.jpg
a28884b84f7c101a907e053736c04dc7
1d2191e8095f8fb9308306ce323d67bff8de46a1
2231 F20101113_AADCZJ aldea_m_Page_020.txt
c54fd99d4d4af01be3f88bcf99389c4e
93c7990566ed6ace9ca036bca21e5be444bc8abc
26872 F20101113_AADCYV aldea_m_Page_059.QC.jpg
d566b06d4a356a18c3bf77457154757b
3a6abc9997f41c6b87c6c804a07622fe36b2e90f
F20101113_AADDFE aldea_m_Page_088.tif
9f48ae850c5e4bb1dbdf1e94fbd31848
498f55cae3e29fbb58c156d94b635e7f67bf1eec
18674 F20101113_AADDEQ aldea_m_Page_004.QC.jpg
726066730297aff203c22bea62083e84
7049e2ed9746d773bbec3012abd3b167e40222c3
F20101113_AADCZK aldea_m_Page_125.tif
c97983680a9eb6680ecd8f4656be1a33
9fdd203e6e8f6865d61443820a13130ab3cb007a
26154 F20101113_AADCYW aldea_m_Page_027.QC.jpg
c9c5788c9e2c539d3f0042279ff526fc
efc7d424b9ccec667465a6d12bfebaf3a44a296a
2131 F20101113_AADDFF aldea_m_Page_026.txt
d77ce7bfa795fa4ea9e780f23adc98c3
f65645773a6be3612f41bec6f83ec9e5f35811f3
7375 F20101113_AADDER aldea_m_Page_064thm.jpg
88367012081ae05a3eda0b066625fdef
c2fa39ada468332600e9ce80c9f1ef4aa8c4778e
7107 F20101113_AADCZL aldea_m_Page_024thm.jpg
2c04b4a2c5fbed2badb25c145610f84d
7ca548fbf711ff5d9b6f0554b6db3189bdf61d72
35024 F20101113_AADCYX aldea_m_Page_057.jpg
1a3a50c4bbbca5a9e12b6b0c3503fba9
e1608c8a3fd99d5e733971702ce037cbfd56c525
10930 F20101113_AADDFG aldea_m_Page_074.QC.jpg
b37a2805d4bc1bd411d4dc471dc76a50
40c9e3c3690bc8fbe86f1a9146b98bd75a6a58db
121342 F20101113_AADDES aldea_m_Page_027.jp2
7f582ee77373c72ad4090bbbf5b4b2ca
3a6633047a58e2df2735788b664d36df462d8dd7
40656 F20101113_AADCZM aldea_m_Page_070.pro
aaca2c75241ee6db9d33866b54455477
5f9f2b5c97a0878c4fed166ff8c3383fccfbc04e
6867 F20101113_AADCYY aldea_m_Page_095thm.jpg
3468f4f06fcbbd53043e22c41bcf2b16
5f5d51c0b8b3d7e5f78b8bda9a26f670b1bb18db
F20101113_AADDFH aldea_m_Page_122.tif
ef017dfca0e95817c7aac6bfe00c6b99
c06157bc79489162dc5d450aa5819643e72d79e3
26405 F20101113_AADDET aldea_m_Page_073.jpg
9cf74ae213ce568463f09a277596e648
6459dffc817f9fb82bd25006e04bb5ab21ab6fcb
F20101113_AADCZN aldea_m_Page_082.tif
a484d2097654b54679b9cb204870e44f
cc7839a105de90a539686b7e996854a540ba6768
78211 F20101113_AADCYZ aldea_m_Page_028.jpg
1167f1f6458b7be04335fc158ce1f2b8
c3f8485d32a5ade299551d1f1ecd5f310e5a3c5e
79474 F20101113_AADDFI aldea_m_Page_023.jpg
255ae497c848db9c71ba12699bfda803
98ad9d23ca04abe7629acd6242248b19e7255f23
7272 F20101113_AADDEU aldea_m_Page_093thm.jpg
8cd5069673e06aaafdcd1d83e165755a
3cb730232f0caf8132b510827522a154d7aed775
F20101113_AADCZO aldea_m_Page_032.tif
7c8abb1324bcceea8a0b4c6032c68886
83b198fffb42d8ff93bf20d2ab57d4240458cf99
59359 F20101113_AADDFJ aldea_m_Page_108.jpg
3b3284e0039e1ca3cf967d83e949d3e7
fc1c2dafc441f08053ca6b27873ca06ff330c54b
2163 F20101113_AADDEV aldea_m_Page_095.txt
d82ddbe2943bef5bc8b130da85e1a812
c304850453451cbfe96688429412d34631bc77db
2214 F20101113_AADCZP aldea_m_Page_100.txt
1984b30a4bdd655043113afc60bcd871
8a4aacedfe48066352ef7cc1600f29a1cb4a5fc8
4391 F20101113_AADDFK aldea_m_Page_005thm.jpg
4b8b50c1163eef611ed9367406e82233
d43b785a608e8a5ce822a90f466593015e62eccd
F20101113_AADDEW aldea_m_Page_066.tif
c54b9853c1f952e2560c4ce2601d67c0
3fa25a1e56b8d73b022a12d49ad32682206c5e2d
2076 F20101113_AADCZQ aldea_m_Page_012.txt
6e61d8fe1d5a0afb85dd69c439fabb85
14253a316530688f4c389e46563ded900af278c5
25271604 F20101113_AADDEX aldea_m_Page_004.tif
64fd2eac4ef3bc8c19d70633242df2b0
33f77f08777816c615cc530d8971c7b91f3d37fb
24721 F20101113_AADCZR aldea_m_Page_127.QC.jpg
683413b54d21bff95097f1ddf078ab39
e589c222495f24864ae3a1761a5814ead1486d84
115477 F20101113_AADDGA aldea_m_Page_012.jp2
79f056a4db2ad7d8278002b3fa74ff86
84f1e002dc89a7a75554299d73f7ed804ab77f6c
2207 F20101113_AADDFL aldea_m_Page_086.txt
a08d4a7883e0e0e2c832588a05da874b
f092220764664d2e126fcbfaac5631b44ccf570e
76613 F20101113_AADDEY aldea_m_Page_015.jpg
ab1d11861386636440b8694b768c3777
6e2730bce987d889f002df23ce10c687c9a25a15
F20101113_AADCZS aldea_m_Page_034.tif
33b5e99c0dea64979ff796da1d2c4e9d
a245683cee7fb1feed8bdeeb8aba76f4d23701e8
6896 F20101113_AADDGB aldea_m_Page_084thm.jpg
20ae0024f025cf1e526cfc67db2ee847
8bd2a7f5742c30e337423530a73a9945a916b80e
55429 F20101113_AADDFM aldea_m_Page_059.pro
7ed4dd3ee771c811ab8ddf7da2dcc159
978fdb914d971c8763388e1340640000c7185298
F20101113_AADDEZ aldea_m_Page_038.tif
f40ab04df840a2e308f11d5bdf1e47b7
8a0549929c28f8b6b32ed198d8447a592e8e6456
5717 F20101113_AADCZT aldea_m_Page_100thm.jpg
69755f1f34a33064e50fff8195563407
7423a05dd0e73c4aabf20c04d00259a33de515b7
8423998 F20101113_AADDGC aldea_m_Page_075.tif
1d6ea282d837816b3eb652c9b4ba1e53
5e8af86970b27439d473e474c82c0d0d17cfccdf
76266 F20101113_AADDFN aldea_m_Page_026.jpg
ab981e0c8e17c782cbdbd091cd3fe2e5
b1d31291ab7d6038fa921eb31620c9a4fdcc47cb
6992 F20101113_AADCZU aldea_m_Page_063thm.jpg
52b68b99a56ea28e66a4a7d858529d38
c766430d877bb3bf68c15cbcaeb2f71c178c406d
53893 F20101113_AADDGD aldea_m_Page_063.pro
a43964876edac6cdaac31b9bbf2e1602
93cdb74a625ae2fb92456cc9ed6ba508a00a9ffc
78824 F20101113_AADDFO aldea_m_Page_061.jpg
9def8ce91e307beab305685667622c48
247e21c3ab376df3d27516617980ec9071310190
F20101113_AADCZV aldea_m_Page_073.tif
2eec2e38a49c178d61467267fe5632a4
9ebfb2da4befc8801d4aad27ad7a67b43c9c5eda
1051952 F20101113_AADDGE aldea_m_Page_121.jp2
22390f6a48d55b2f607e5cc560ff080c
0160bd5aa606ad6d4d8a55a8a5c0669ad2575b28
67883 F20101113_AADDFP aldea_m_Page_008.jpg
03b5d5219388f4d19c2a002f7a7464d5
f44e724e471b4bb0bdcdce00ff87e1b1a3608b0d
26763 F20101113_AADCZW aldea_m_Page_039.QC.jpg
9389801fde606150d0b04574f5055be0
b843b635dd3735543d97879ed0523cabbf1fb237
65588 F20101113_AADDGF aldea_m_Page_118.pro
61642866711676b86e647dfe1e3b8aef
5004bf9196783ce18500d97c945d1bf2a5fc82fd
2416 F20101113_AADDFQ aldea_m_Page_116.txt
92a8217b9676097d538af8a3459006c0
a2a74f1479b54814fcdefc632368876c214a480a
F20101113_AADCZX aldea_m_Page_055.tif
a1a57dcb332f8a90cf9c1aedffad8568
5b24e59cfea669f3292f74518b35417c116a3ff8
F20101113_AADDGG aldea_m_Page_074.tif
95ab844891875e0df17ba84719c8adc0
13ec780b32e86efbb1c2f16e0ab921ec374c9308
78048 F20101113_AADDFR aldea_m_Page_035.jpg
14c9cccf05b983921e30abde158b2695
cf04d04ca78d4aaa78597c22b916bc184a0322bb
69530 F20101113_AADCZY aldea_m_Page_107.jpg
50dd84ef4280257f7483563b30043ba5
2d32a804c8ab565fe30f0005c6ced9d2490f1d11
18278 F20101113_AADDGH aldea_m_Page_006.pro
f85f5807553b2de058961a9dceefb131
7f6d8f35fc34d9f41cfd1d7b4a7232565fa256d7
75492 F20101113_AADDFS aldea_m_Page_058.jpg
889b60c3172337047741ed4348bb81af
d7ab3a842c7358b9d1d93da2f05332f25b0fc895
22609 F20101113_AADCZZ aldea_m_Page_106.QC.jpg
4c878350f7a8a4ae1245c0bab463934a
2851b3030458d9b0467bc58d33b6008392e58a1a
F20101113_AADDGI aldea_m_Page_126.tif
d556ff1254403936a729934283955ec4
bc9259a20ccca2b11ca809034cd43ce06c70f5aa
6702 F20101113_AADDFT aldea_m_Page_015thm.jpg
c82ea878c5cf8deaff16b441909a80d5
58e7c8d6740c42b05df7452ccbdeff8e323a9feb
609 F20101113_AADDGJ aldea_m_Page_078.txt
eab3f21a17c30e9aad9b5935fe1a76df
ca92eb1904a989f972b6379bfb1b789d72c405a5
3489 F20101113_AADDFU aldea_m_Page_129thm.jpg
da872b19ec5f29dd2426cbbc5c6756c6
0588a23ce79dde70b94289db25e1c89557f154e8
122927 F20101113_AADDGK aldea_m_Page_010.jp2
76531034ce229a6c81c3995dc7ef40c5
cea91c14fcb3c024fa22206cec91f85124c0ce92
26169 F20101113_AADDFV aldea_m_Page_016.QC.jpg
34cb7c1c158f05ef454668140b228f2e
d1116d8cf4695bfccaf6bb8501452e1482ffd3c1
121618 F20101113_AADDGL aldea_m_Page_087.jp2
eb80cf061296656d77a617806ae07de1
12fcf224e38970409b749c778f4e32773fbb2831
1051974 F20101113_AADDFW aldea_m_Page_039.jp2
23fa5cff068cd5be4c8db585f567e8a8
d43cd653fc7c70648d31d19c4b0db312f7747e79
2185 F20101113_AADDHA aldea_m_Page_032.txt
420f552d8a8630ee3c5fdfba97b5fa00
93a45e9a9ea64b3dc2b07021980dfb0f57f488d1
25623 F20101113_AADDFX aldea_m_Page_079.QC.jpg
51ee3def28bd893eb3eb1dd9e6eba971
5165e877f2c9f5900d51930187de2f09c7271e7a
25956 F20101113_AADDHB aldea_m_Page_082.QC.jpg
e054466561c3033e8d8b7894e4d20172
baad8a654b78932f3ee7ce438153cd596df4e7e1
52974 F20101113_AADDGM aldea_m_Page_019.pro
dcddeaa27ba3d0c9ae308be5d2936230
23450e9598c0c40f568799c7db2a2c58b0b7b5a4
2283 F20101113_AADDFY aldea_m_Page_106.txt
a1769b7654ed0adde4134c10c8af5c5c
b53aa0d5d39c5b171df0b9048f3e61bf0bc2e7b7
2236 F20101113_AADDHC aldea_m_Page_037.txt
3873f5c0104c360a3cdcb0f11cf992e7
98d39f634de869b6ba0aa5b0e1426c3fac1a74ed
F20101113_AADDGN aldea_m_Page_057.tif
c2ff6f1a3120572c67e5c0d82cf46f8a
b44b773fa6311c583c1457a53bcb8e3c0b5ba4c9
27181 F20101113_AADDFZ aldea_m_Page_125.QC.jpg
a95983363ef569c4cc4147c46d253429
ce14ac5b40167244acfa10f99f5c358465d3cfa9
86850 F20101113_AADDHD aldea_m_Page_126.jpg
d1e584446efcb3b5040b1d1eeceae08d
438a9cf1fc095a36774ed4f3b765d5bb8bed0645
3126 F20101113_AADDGO aldea_m_Page_070thm.jpg
41cd7f24f336d456f176bdb89d09bb65
81af8f21847ff13cd82a43a5f818c7f70e308c7c
125155 F20101113_AADDHE aldea_m_Page_088.jp2
acb888e3e84e42d8e1a8f4a82d9b4548
c0ad64abf0e0358f1b4bd210f1820b75a12dfaf9
78034 F20101113_AADDGP aldea_m_Page_097.jp2
2903245766d7f25caae96daa19079ef7
9dbef74abcf4be41eb21d628081e63b33fc22e53
75061 F20101113_AADDGQ aldea_m_Page_062.jpg
6921118961005168b98834b6e283d448
f761a80e8be17ce208f8f97ca81785f19bc06555
7027 F20101113_AADDHF aldea_m_Page_042thm.jpg
3ea0a7058505ab9453c0aa1a0174a6a5
e48879398d119df08bd7fb9c5bfa84a1d8c506d5
2108 F20101113_AADDGR aldea_m_Page_060.txt
02a2f886109f72680dc610b2748cd86b
0f38eb9a9efe087c926c11fdd15dff7062b1cb0c
78892 F20101113_AADDHG aldea_m_Page_054.jpg
b88e7f930385d0eb8eeb43a043c0399f
c62b1914b4a7b14020a4239b1042382bf798fe13
21951 F20101113_AADDGS aldea_m_Page_008.QC.jpg
d7a935b49c3c14f9bfc669cd84704e0d
e9e4733d075c49d10067e980ce59e07b7bced816
73004 F20101113_AADDHH aldea_m_Page_070.jp2
cbfbd2c7d5f0696226d2880affc917e7
6d3ca732f6ac77f79c64529cb97708aa5864b423
3542 F20101113_AADDGT aldea_m_Page_076thm.jpg
22d2dfe114976409742c813916ac42dd
c01fcf82804fdcf38d3cb63d22f4d4c0d5b5ab31
10754 F20101113_AADDHI aldea_m_Page_070.QC.jpg
be19e8854d5e49a0fd7cfa1b72dfdfc7
7f9aff15c7de5adeeed4b6e6758f05955bf58dcd
26308 F20101113_AADDGU aldea_m_Page_041.QC.jpg
54416ad904135dbf6af00964ec66ea55
ff83f4ef0867ba9c7544e2a3e7198f5a10c87b41
27191 F20101113_AADDHJ aldea_m_Page_088.QC.jpg
911766594d45d0b1981203c52a36d17d
1d4b51f6fca920234b30e04ca462d393bf43272e
F20101113_AADDGV aldea_m_Page_067.tif
9e82e2538170cb5ea01775f5238a1f57
da5ad86e850bca2b6141b403404d702e3b1b66b7
6958 F20101113_AADDHK aldea_m_Page_041thm.jpg
8af6ef8ec7c56ce22f6be5ac0b1bb99a
ca09419ae1188700b13588375b9d5fabeb9d4cb0
6945 F20101113_AADDGW aldea_m_Page_036thm.jpg
5e74b480089116c2d59e7a74640a86c8
c23f1a9807a36bb0899520f5c81830d5e2ce8990
50400 F20101113_AADDHL aldea_m_Page_005.pro
1907e0684123df1d7378d76222a9eb58
f6477178d6a56d4e2812dcdb822b6401b9f938ad
27454 F20101113_AADDGX aldea_m_Page_098.QC.jpg
60f33d5a514f7c51e1cc7fe47588b3ce
f1048ab8b5e5dc61bfd37f464c234b7c4d0f8dbe
F20101113_AADDIA aldea_m_Page_093.tif
4919f250b724d69ea9fb45f5081c8db3
a11e88721fd77374d6ab9c86634aedd37485e893
2232 F20101113_AADDHM aldea_m_Page_108.txt
c618158f9b46582dc5ecdf5b6d319c5c
7b90731942e3ea8e7bf8bd547b7f8f2f5370c3e2
56905 F20101113_AADDGY aldea_m_Page_023.pro
22eddf789f53d0a66c6b53cbfcf1075e
b8a18ee6a3195cf124fc029169278f9b5253f180
75078 F20101113_AADDIB aldea_m_Page_060.jpg
63ec247d92a2cafcd4bbc8d8bd678a7a
2956b434d94e131bb6178b767dd73eb14fe6c794
3026 F20101113_AADDGZ aldea_m_Page_048.txt
cf251798481a9a778e72bdcb11128a0a
06d56ebf81ff839b277c313cb5459182a7206ccd
75840 F20101113_AADDIC aldea_m_Page_095.jpg
7cd07e499d402f1db6c22a20b16c181f
4a1d5e9799644c96b612c0600562a7a219abc44d
F20101113_AADDHN aldea_m_Page_129.tif
d328a4337809dfdd584339efeaa19ad5
fd98b04dd757c6686691b3b325f03fcf996647e0
2125 F20101113_AADDID aldea_m_Page_031.txt
330647b2104a739496c03aa09aa03539
6bac384a916068bfb475a77570e4dfd9661034fd
84418 F20101113_AADDHO aldea_m_Page_127.jpg
47bc682262e964137c15ac3a84697fdb
dc91c62db43ea8a1be28325fe6a4ef5022c67a11
2213 F20101113_AADDIE aldea_m_Page_087.txt
ed9a1716fb7b084c676d562c262b38bb
5991424af2cc5cfea9b8cda609d3c16a5a732a5c
7033 F20101113_AADDHP aldea_m_Page_089thm.jpg
9c21dc405cb03e66ba1567d3ac76fe40
22c1075a1478918fe3cad23efcc4f9f69eb98910
6982 F20101113_AADDIF aldea_m_Page_017thm.jpg
3f4d3f23a2ee002e2ae4ec852425c471
7b9f7719ed54b334622a66a30476693323e179b5
F20101113_AADDHQ aldea_m_Page_124.tif
6c907284552b3a2fa0d7556eef8fa735
7858140d4f81502cf2595400a7443ed0be45e71c
70933 F20101113_AADDIG aldea_m_Page_098.pro
a5129d710d936b2be73dc8bb3a0e43e7
72471b7e7656e7f3e80765aeb265ab5f77b10f77
F20101113_AADDHR aldea_m_Page_061.tif
830529c08dc8c1783a1432ed08a54d60
a8f8e1a9d6fc607dcff23f690879a72de6c2e7f2
F20101113_AADDIH aldea_m_Page_023.tif
9834e43638a475e0825f81038d15745e
4d69edf7b0889c7fa28570afaae509dd258af81e
7034 F20101113_AADDHS aldea_m_Page_050thm.jpg
09eb1d3c31b39601a807675cdd4cedd2
3881dbdf6e0fba7b49e05041ab4e76f5d91f06b0
53610 F20101113_AADDII aldea_m_Page_060.pro
1f8e26b4b773c53a71befd1eaec2f4a6
6e91c4b71e2412b97935953a80f5a96d94e48bcb
F20101113_AADDHT aldea_m_Page_046.tif
994a984422534c04f6c51138a5d45007
91538b28ea7a2236dec21613adba93d643d8f7a1
2197 F20101113_AADDIJ aldea_m_Page_059.txt
34651dd3fcbf24f6c339f3d44b91d66d
ee4df1de146df531d9f036f5f7a718baa29f6a96
7183 F20101113_AADDHU aldea_m_Page_124thm.jpg
6ededf87d7325c67638d38b44986151e
209b24983dc6ba3f8543ec60655eb6e654e91f4f
55775 F20101113_AADDIK aldea_m_Page_042.pro
027608b1165e18262e6c5a14fa83bc0f
f5ad79e9ec864e6848dd1b394775505fce7fabc5
25597 F20101113_AADDHV aldea_m_Page_032.QC.jpg
f443e68c140af28f8f6862eff335ed85
a06fd638d279c66a6181e03a3983f627376534e8
6818 F20101113_AADDIL aldea_m_Page_053thm.jpg
2ef9c7ad2a99ce7da8e3da19a5666dad
8756c92b65aaa278d6f47cb3a1979681059c968c
123836 F20101113_AADDHW aldea_m_Page_089.jp2
4e5c67ddea2c446e23f2f6d6246482d0
5fa8a70b741048c2ca7b95c5be241577a53964c6
78955 F20101113_AADDJA aldea_m_Page_038.jpg
eae9280abc348dffa7700ae86a8cf1fd
f547d9eb7c97d45c56f0797f6429433bb034386d
80106 F20101113_AADDIM aldea_m_Page_085.jpg
951ebbaf9cf61aaf8e04921ca36e2cb6
1214b082a165f11363d9b08d1312e9285d3d1f87
52339 F20101113_AADDHX aldea_m_Page_107.pro
f96ff9789a0b56130f3c51a7bf7ff0d6
964687c2beb8e1bdd68e503cf36fe111f05b0b55
79606 F20101113_AADDJB aldea_m_Page_016.jpg
62dd5ef768557e80e77041e8c9e56eb7
c4ba7aca42654e3c608fe24269404289f98ead32
57009 F20101113_AADDIN aldea_m_Page_097.jpg
082bba0d2cb9ae15f94ee6db6d68d21a
935c24ce9406131d93dc4ec7fb1a90dda4d61a42
45529 F20101113_AADDHY aldea_m_Page_007.jpg
6aba57042c01d2062c0388712eeb4c26
c8891c27ca9149dc2ad57453594fed220594b021
F20101113_AADDJC aldea_m_Page_011thm.jpg
9fddd6c5c7e363b235af83682fdfd6fa
eab6ea5a6d871e36e387a73a717b0527969a7c59
2096 F20101113_AADDHZ aldea_m_Page_049.txt
027d0fc0dac8851bcf8ecb349332d40f
ac792264183728605f3c14173fb965788286db8b
551 F20101113_AADDJD aldea_m_Page_111.txt
dc7867f6c9e33acac1c96f8f959e8468
609ac8fa8a16ffe1dab7feaa7811bb9156cc07e2
F20101113_AADDIO aldea_m_Page_037.tif
3102a5f9a13e428c5b6d9c6fe1f1f701
2c59367acd2c7ae3ff9371fc6ef0a7eb8512dc7f
F20101113_AADDJE aldea_m_Page_010.QC.jpg
f1933cc5af8da0d8b2c45f43d4605750
56345838f94aa6d5fc1f9c3c4877122eeb2c641e
56965 F20101113_AADDIP aldea_m_Page_011.pro
65ba0c2d00ef20df63c0c17d2a93652f
dfbf33300db50f5d574caa33e9bd312c4a220324
24915 F20101113_AADDJF aldea_m_Page_019.QC.jpg
cb4102b5d25d4ef0e10bb8da3bf3d834
fa521292c8e465f8b1fdb0ccbe862630c3078ad7
F20101113_AADDIQ aldea_m_Page_044.tif
2a4898e903fd8aa248913e96dafa2e85
3b96d2b30532c75d701d314133e35f76e3606811
56611 F20101113_AADDJG aldea_m_Page_094.pro
eceb9b560b2a27377fbe333ae7fab8ba
0b4e019bee7deb7153809a141cd83ea79305b132
26499 F20101113_AADDIR aldea_m_Page_113.QC.jpg
8845aaf53f106f4fb0d12df921df067c
b13c8811d2fa295383af333d7421afbaf2c84b7f
921711 F20101113_AADDJH aldea_m_Page_107.jp2
7621d32724776f2863666ea5d8cd2a00
00f5d26485aaf3dd35650e25b1daf188211fed2f
F20101113_AADDIS aldea_m_Page_060.tif
83701e365f6fb28f761e0e4461f138e2
56c1cfce43ef6e7eb2725fd1d3e515b2a73ba34b
2049 F20101113_AADDJI aldea_m_Page_066.txt
659ca94746e597180c506f6055aa69f8
63867ac7fff8f9525be22a76ca0626f60c38d776
67116 F20101113_AADDIT aldea_m_Page_122.pro
c5827a94fde9b5dbeb107dc234f24586
a3faf6039a0fb8a5811704d8171776fc2d53a106
86624 F20101113_AADDJJ aldea_m_Page_123.jpg
bc37e20fc09b7f642169a26688ee6937
c4ede8ca4b808220605339c5a4e65418a989c005
19938 F20101113_AADDIU aldea_m_Page_101.jp2
393dfaa28d26969360cf4f28d586b01d
91f273e4669668296aa1d4a5e0319b27b7a9b895
F20101113_AADDJK aldea_m_Page_117.jp2
bf2181ab130e75234707a88ff08c8142
c1914634da3384893dbdd5bffc8f3873b1f857f6
53990 F20101113_AADDIV aldea_m_Page_031.pro
d1a23f2333e2cea7777c2288b368564f
24c6ed3ac45dde34f2f8713923928494f5cb49e0
62430 F20101113_AADDJL aldea_m_Page_119.pro
d70d20c0a735e463f1b0bb1d73c26086
152368609c37e4200a5adab3d66429227cd44edb
2227 F20101113_AADDIW aldea_m_Page_011.txt
1e864d464d242aeab9cf70d9e5a994af
29e91c2afe43085281a2d64f2c683e7edf3d1c95
996 F20101113_AADDJM aldea_m_Page_057.txt
6636a967bcbdf54c839618bcc780d135
98cbf57c65ef9215edc5aecd14cf5187cd3dacb1
89460 F20101113_AADDIX aldea_m_Page_118.jpg
cead3888c1cb79f79c24fdac315e9c05
d602182dd3af249f1e9b925b47c8ecb18a05f023
25193 F20101113_AADDKA aldea_m_Page_120.QC.jpg
c0be1f3ecdf52d52a580794bdc4ff382
e9ea9b1ff3dd2ea98c033c6de1c764b81009df12
F20101113_AADDJN aldea_m_Page_029.txt
b08573d8b39567b660387dbffbf8ffd7
1fd75bbccc3dfb73eac8fe52195dceaff3b4e442
F20101113_AADDIY aldea_m_Page_059.tif
f7304aab9ac043d8e2a829294d55d3ed
5089b496b209e7c798fec0d90dc3c5d35ccf3d6b
25484 F20101113_AADDKB aldea_m_Page_115.QC.jpg
126eeca3c56ede7f71bd1658de523352
f2efaa9d4a7155a338cdc6277d808b96772f1ec8
18864 F20101113_AADDJO aldea_m_Page_057.pro
83c6a2b0707c07f98dda241e1bc7aaa0
28de14f47d475b5358fd469603eff95ea938594c
5564 F20101113_AADDIZ aldea_m_Page_106thm.jpg
419cadef46600963c2f9411bba6507c8
132caaf8fcf3d22acf617484a2fe90f1dbcecd75
135118 F20101113_AADDKC aldea_m_Page_123.jp2
12696e4a805a188def2e61dc336a447d
05f7542ab73424d94f29273814580cb26c930371
24049 F20101113_AADDKD aldea_m_Page_030.QC.jpg
a3f627acb50ef261d3347b8663acbeaa
06fba8a483dc0e4dfa51aa35dc2b25e87e36e475
12570 F20101113_AADDJP aldea_m_Page_104.pro
80a223edcdae0fa076b056cd928954b2
ec9a0dd52e2237cbb9e78e5c6a6a3cca619cd9b3
F20101113_AADDKE aldea_m_Page_049.tif
d94d60349a852925e53667da380433c5
27002290b0d5a953326a61a8cda22ba73eac36f2
259257 F20101113_AADDJQ aldea_m_Page_073.jp2
d1eb8d5b337f5e7567e426bd3e3fb4cb
7ccdaf04483e46f0370e2ef0c34dc097390fe929
8906 F20101113_AADDKF aldea_m_Page_006.QC.jpg
0eda99fc70ce3c32b92da97a6aea2792
9e174fcde9ea652561c129d3b8c298bcf328a946
338349 F20101113_AADDJR aldea_m_Page_078.jp2
70f002f40d78d3e595a5737a8cf030e4
94cbadf669d52347f3f853e147a0949af8aef337
F20101113_AADDKG aldea_m_Page_089.tif
7db7e93e970ffedb6c10bcf903301833
425601fddbf4bab92bec677cfccb464933b807ac
2303 F20101113_AADDJS aldea_m_Page_093.txt
590db08f576279ee0ac6e8682d16136a
c04e8b9853423884d2d4f891fb5b1d7926bdb17c
25560 F20101113_AADDKH aldea_m_Page_067.QC.jpg
f8a67c50d6a001a1f8609558c1c1e97e
b0d6439e5f388fc3c4c24cd1d6e2d241001ef203
89405 F20101113_AADDJT aldea_m_Page_124.jpg
b95e56b3688e6b56baf4ba96b37af538
ffca2960ef480b198a564ce656003a094bd30b8c
F20101113_AADDKI aldea_m_Page_012.tif
bf3d9a75c17cbe0493596a1de2eff025
1a83867473a60dbebcc1f323c26b68160ebf54d0
18756 F20101113_AADDJU aldea_m_Page_069.pro
e45d6ada46b9aaf709a8082c056e68ca
0f85b2eaa4ec4e1dc88b3f928a58d6831e02688f
F20101113_AADDKJ aldea_m_Page_052.tif
1ffe9b21576ad10cc5d9d0526a64880b
05c1e2ce96bbd4b860f974393ecee8e531be2ff0
F20101113_AADDJV aldea_m_Page_072.tif
257ad352b012f60e74b99a09e8deef96
9eeb06427a4b6e7ecae5025968df8e634fbb098c
F20101113_AADDKK aldea_m_Page_047.tif
9eb57f724a9d75f0a3feb700299cc510
13909e49e5ca37ba9f6f7f202fb699fbf9db8094
2287 F20101113_AADDJW aldea_m_Page_080.txt
e279156a5647412c35bef980f6cfd566
8a9ddce0359298ad70fdd008c3407d1e9eb8efe5
53321 F20101113_AADDKL aldea_m_Page_014.pro
70725620299b8011afe944699fe9abac
c18880514ee33df51b5b0ac10a48e40319366d36
F20101113_AADDJX aldea_m_Page_051.tif
3b873260dd9eec5a17a4866ac2814b90
36f5722335466baaafd7bff9809c73c6146ce158
18161 F20101113_AADDLA aldea_m_Page_110.QC.jpg
973660b6e1c39759fd824106f5e2a0de
0faa5b1e2917a783e62123bc77dc7f12f406f831
76124 F20101113_AADDKM aldea_m_Page_034.jpg
77b3d9dac6c35d295f0836ee02630dc1
14bb0a512cc4d22767527a077b70324ae3ab3a8b
F20101113_AADDJY aldea_m_Page_103.tif
734ebe914f99062265992e25e989f615
3f7a6fe140066e0cc6522ac95cd6477277e426bc
7057 F20101113_AADDLB aldea_m_Page_087thm.jpg
46dda599431bbc37ec697c4efdfab761
a0c68390b162bba11126c36a8b340ef62269391f
6811 F20101113_AADDKN aldea_m_Page_044thm.jpg
c3d87350eb3caaae5bb91943d0401ceb
f5dba453d978aeae31ac22e5e63221d0633b6089
9764 F20101113_AADDJZ aldea_m_Page_002.jpg
88492a92b39d9e39cc7b12e0e6762ccc
c62852fb4f44da1e99820554ae56b94cc84566f2
25579 F20101113_AADDLC aldea_m_Page_042.QC.jpg
5e0c59db43f272c516f781b67e10e1da
34719cebd3695f8c482edbd181d5ed73277268c5
F20101113_AADDKO aldea_m_Page_001.tif
45b2787eb5df0407cc3b451f09379e86
820adfa835fd2f0ff164eaec24b4aefee59c59ec
6955 F20101113_AADDLD aldea_m_Page_123thm.jpg
dc208a7d56c2b6c3bde71788a02e478c
9e3c0e11fe8e0a423576447fc2b65532a33334af
118682 F20101113_AADDKP aldea_m_Page_035.jp2
164f4f88ac183d626aff35d9a514e543
7d44fe41028f8d7d4093c840558c3c0335ce7855
F20101113_AADDLE aldea_m_Page_128.tif
6827d8001ae6365775ef78443494b6c5
61b855edd7fbd7a444c92f1468dfa3b839011b3e
F20101113_AADDLF aldea_m_Page_030.tif
963f0e286e48acf1f699aa0a6de37fa5
b3e452343ea32d1a15ac828dfe81af99dc4ce2ea
56580 F20101113_AADDKQ aldea_m_Page_036.pro
20c6c083f8188c82a7649380f4b9cb76
3b6349d06ab5904c6de01bd549ce83ecbe64a7de
114266 F20101113_AADDLG aldea_m_Page_063.jp2
a6a310269cdaffa9ce9145df94b56321
ecc2bd1b0d7803a3afe1a59c5530a54b0d47bc94
58102 F20101113_AADDKR aldea_m_Page_064.pro
a13ad3481e008166fec8296eca94cca2
e79ac1032714c78893d1dd70c1c217e4bebbdc5a
52728 F20101113_AADDLH aldea_m_Page_012.pro
d443d68ce4d9661a7edd8b3c85cde6fc
80c27be17fd79dcfe8012d5455dfa5bc9b9a0214
2816 F20101113_AADDKS aldea_m_Page_098.txt
5fd8611d9aaf62a42256fbbb25a91b1d
ce0615e4ac80b33288a7bd5b693aad4782aa760b
F20101113_AADDLI aldea_m_Page_120.tif
9fb5261f5013447b24537868650a2172
507f861ef966ab5a3d1d406af2150f527d2ac9b2
7085 F20101113_AADDKT aldea_m_Page_047thm.jpg
fb4161d79cce66b0d5ecbdb3e4688ba5
c6cbf33399aa78419911c0acbca68cb4d9e10ac7
35934 F20101113_AADDLJ aldea_m_Page_007.pro
6855e7b1bf2d963021e8a4ae5fa35aca
bd9e32e30a26e712c9aa7a4f0fe838d3edcf1656
52617 F20101113_AADDKU aldea_m_Page_109.jpg
618fb70e63f6f25adf3d99442d4c1b5c
93de3ebbc54d911a0bf101d23e6d88ca53286955
55394 F20101113_AADDLK aldea_m_Page_061.pro
77630edf8e50c82ea47b1055513269e4
79ba7fea300ef4a7db44641f4b990a3e0793963f
26658 F20101113_AADDKV aldea_m_Page_065.QC.jpg
6ec50a027ea321c9ae95666037f96b4f
6edd07fe028f15b7133c367ff838d0a23007d421
24735 F20101113_AADDLL aldea_m_Page_062.QC.jpg
5c084af370d7a6b590a363d1ab28e8dc
0328f55f67a1d7968e7cc7524f23625bf8d2ed0b
24078 F20101113_AADDKW aldea_m_Page_112.QC.jpg
9472a083065279a24ba9adaf2a8eefb4
acb8234fa4c19666baf560c1b6893820cd787e06
F20101113_AADDMA aldea_m_Page_063.tif
cfd00514c47cb689755ce93f95a194eb
043040d51910ec8252cf24519f1348ce26bcf258
F20101113_AADDLM aldea_m_Page_080.tif
624c6b6f199665b18b35e75670b6e27e
f016e50aebe5152b4abb66b3cfae76b9476589b1
119444 F20101113_AADDKX aldea_m_Page_032.jp2
295dfca3f561786df86df9e3449f1c1a
b9d139aa05e48163e09e9f96952520078a1f66b6
6351 F20101113_AADDMB aldea_m_Page_069.QC.jpg
1bf3f183aeb8f84379fb14d86e074c01
33ecf809d0c95d21b280e54d1dc09cf97d1c3ad4
121174 F20101113_AADDLN aldea_m_Page_081.jp2
d8706d4c940d46c92a807e91dc4ab801
4747b76eb1bda194149b32ba21ef7442d8fa8594
F20101113_AADDKY aldea_m_Page_029.tif
9ecdb3f8df528608cf129ae075c77c2b
e5e81ae4fbf4530f151a77c77f6444a8e244d2f9
F20101113_AADDLO aldea_m_Page_098.tif
f1f303224d6e656bd2b9ad4040ce7615
4bba868755c052b025242fb7ce619d98760427ac
112816 F20101113_AADDKZ aldea_m_Page_052.jp2
e1a0f49f953cdcd9ba7bfb13fd321cd7
75821dd99c1a4cf1fca091ad61094e9eda4e4fff
75392 F20101113_AADDMC aldea_m_Page_092.jpg
0257b3aaeb31bf5dea9521b444b8fb28
4f6d5fab7a5908f31618ea86f22c0fd1eef19ad0
86833 F20101113_AADDLP aldea_m_Page_022.jpg
7b0bb47cd299e4e65e1d98667c96d993
ea404ef0c4020ab0420f0980b6c84b89d50b220c
10382 F20101113_AADDMD aldea_m_Page_103.pro
9e4d83b3a256b4fb20e989a988ebfc85
91fc1f7eeb066eb71ee85cdb61439302ec11a8be
7143 F20101113_AADDLQ aldea_m_Page_059thm.jpg
59f143fc2592e5c2f144e126a5fc6d82
dfd98c8b40de0b2e64343ca8808f51323a027b8d
1333 F20101113_AADDME aldea_m_Page_002thm.jpg
58f307dd38486defbc3e341f56f30189
9871e103a1db054cbdb537d45b2cd807767b8721
3197 F20101113_AADDMF aldea_m_Page_105.txt
1d161ebbbf8a73ae636e115dd51a84ee
10136bf2d4dc0f0bf05795350073e65e67c99689
120295 F20101113_AADDLR aldea_m_Page_067.jp2
548114f5998fb43e6db62d38f96b8da9
5b4d96e048f64ece63cc740f35c0d4de9c3d84a2
22558 F20101113_AADDMG aldea_m_Page_056.QC.jpg
f9cb788c1b4aab001a84443243c07fc8
04359db902c2cfe14c2aaf2d70ab2aa20e4482de
75949 F20101113_AADDLS aldea_m_Page_014.jpg
1275fd38c2e8fbce9d694c2b08c5880c
19c5ff97a1578548e6195a641b49744efb71ccd6
2198 F20101113_AADDMH aldea_m_Page_082.txt
f3e0803c02d938c47be5555ceb35a9c7
317b4fad164b0555ff4f5f46667aa9436ed957fa
55290 F20101113_AADDLT aldea_m_Page_028.pro
4434dbf9fc94974cb0923981340d76fe
f45134ecf09c55a738b9be996abb6977a4257a4c
F20101113_AADDMI aldea_m_Page_018.txt
0d1fee694719c107be6d7b7f0d574f19
58fa0f03e6253f45f6a77758743ad74681407472
2171 F20101113_AADDLU aldea_m_Page_041.txt
f88c62e5faa59c4e270feda4c1326bbe
5e02a7154e48266c32bedba88ddfc53c9ce8d2aa
78651 F20101113_AADDMJ aldea_m_Page_036.jpg
a4027b1918e3e75a6339a6ee82fc2bb5
0d5bca365a40933e90cc47e8c60f335b5f8ca978
121077 F20101113_AADDLV aldea_m_Page_046.jp2
9521581ebb9e6328192db319982bfb7e
4e907dc5091f20efb4a19c26661886bc222bf695
6740 F20101113_AADDMK aldea_m_Page_049thm.jpg
0cb7f1cfba11985146109c6e99e8a83a
cfcd18f2ac3b1004a1dad766bc6b5c8a600a8c76
108624 F20101113_AADDLW aldea_m_Page_105.jpg
ff54fa09280a7eb0043e03f3420de9c4
be7f71f1758a4c6617e3586073998c9f91837d5e
563 F20101113_AADDML aldea_m_Page_104.txt
cdd133d2b82b0969b95e9ac9f63d105c
7f399430a8772e6f0809e875a52f33d8925ef86a
17013 F20101113_AADDLX aldea_m_Page_068.jp2
e4269e6536cd63237a2079a316e01cd9
edf083547730ae938d9b9ef03c705b0a10f18b33
122279 F20101113_AADDNA aldea_m_Page_059.jp2
cbf71b90da43adc9a223ca0cb1097013
ffa3e17f0dc65b413bca1e6fc895174371262cd4
36396 F20101113_AADDMM aldea_m_Page_097.pro
cd2b18c153be08022ec8dd331e472170
f5180d49c73d8e5b032def54d7b570b0d41dbcf3
81771 F20101113_AADDLY aldea_m_Page_064.jpg
bb6f62e58421ccb5eaeb15a0dbe06100
73bd1a2d7df4a53845281a1a5cd07b512d16e1ca
254 F20101113_AADDNB aldea_m_Page_068.txt
8bf771bfccad89fde333f72cd72a6e51
f4bebda47d9e5375f80f503a59995f3526f35182
F20101113_AADDMN aldea_m_Page_022.tif
e9d480501ae6142a8ec0b60173464941
43cbebbdb86884ae4d61385ed10f7e3d5008e383
7648 F20101113_AADDLZ aldea_m_Page_102thm.jpg
0399eaec4ab87e3de72caa42d82de5c9
244d7a367044201702f4d7a60b96227fca33a1ee
26037 F20101113_AADDNC aldea_m_Page_126.QC.jpg
64a87fbf0c5f51a4c79ae2df4f3251c1
0e5a277c77a8de6e099949d18031cb9fccfe9431
2716 F20101113_AADDMO aldea_m_Page_006thm.jpg
23459133443acae253ba28a761f97085
f774c984563e2f6d3f0250e82eac30fc49805a9a
81715 F20101113_AADDND aldea_m_Page_080.jpg
28c4caddba5a0f88c9a70944e3e88e94
51ee2a663af66b1d8c41526d038a0fdbcfba9fd5
F20101113_AADDMP aldea_m_Page_042.txt
46c19912280f6c37f3d1afbb08798e29
213f31cc1e076834e8a37db7337f41445d50a26b
28426 F20101113_AADDNE aldea_m_Page_117.QC.jpg
6c0791591b3402d1bbc20619d35289d3
6efa1b16bccc5f368f8d303f7567c4d7d161195e
57309 F20101113_AADDMQ aldea_m_Page_025.pro
07c000e0a16cc797b0c461ed5702a3d7
95c3e5efac74fcc1cc59bc4e85228d9c60a99154
76695 F20101113_AADDNF aldea_m_Page_099.jpg
5e4e1f1316cc856636c5518a363ab8a5
7410ab0f011ea822f944b94dc934372dd37b108e
306 F20101113_AADDMR aldea_m_Page_074.txt
4394b7da1b0f55c28f30485a72bffac1
dcb6bc961f406eb6e53d02e93c9d3220933f8602
7329 F20101113_AADDNG aldea_m_Page_001.pro
e4f801ea2cdbe9ab37f53f722ba61199
de2154b133ff37dc8f5a0135903179f8f128b827
F20101113_AADDNH aldea_m_Page_097.tif
c150a3cfd775629ee8c85b8cf2abf495
cff7a158ccfc98b8e885a495f1db93d53d22ed81
25746 F20101113_AADDMS aldea_m_Page_084.QC.jpg
e69e947b347aeb841749b93e34000e6b
4a71fe7398c0a7144e34450172a04a799dd3a07a
81150 F20101113_AADDNI aldea_m_Page_017.jpg
b3fca1f2ca4532e1f4821f071930678e
b9e4b964f41b81a97c2d8b58a8a3e5d2af1fdedc
653124 F20101113_AADDMT aldea_m_Page_006.jp2
e4086be6e48b9ae00023d22858fb3d93
d308e3343b165080f2dc000e886210a6694c8762
25748 F20101113_AADDNJ aldea_m_Page_063.QC.jpg
17ee483dca9d0fe2088b5f8ddb8071e7
fbf839ab312889ce934ed5814ce9f72592a8793a
20806 F20101113_AADDMU aldea_m_Page_128.pro
4afe7be5e883f02570f14dec48dfedff
ff4fd959d3bcc288fae76d05a7565d97e17c524e
61522 F20101113_AADDNK aldea_m_Page_123.pro
0d2df8011445e68afbc8de4246ef829b
90f7291d80660e479b7c0da5865f5ff1956a5244
6873 F20101113_AADDMV aldea_m_Page_055thm.jpg
ca757f8e66f39d5207e1da16beb39465
15af686a6e9c1939751e260fc3d96a06a06f9377
304964 F20101113_AADDNL aldea_m_Page_075.jp2
ac5f6be055f16339ecd862944c9dc7ed
e3ffa1f7fc52e29f439ab43c98eb51ac95abd0e4
F20101113_AADDMW aldea_m_Page_099.tif
f414e86ac11a7ee827000b439ff3497f
50d71fd819dc442f987d83f4fd86109f29a9ac1a
26845 F20101113_AADDOA aldea_m_Page_011.QC.jpg
9cd59e695b3691ae03b62abe2c2911f6
2be0372bb970d6b5a857c2b116a4134879d175a8
6976 F20101113_AADDNM aldea_m_Page_029thm.jpg
4598fe9cf42224f2b91713f0279a91d7
49fd9b5f394a14aca39686b13a927537185f4905
53697 F20101113_AADDMX aldea_m_Page_099.pro
d8ee4a8a62ee7ff09d439ac67c8da3ba
49f3432edb30269100d1d79d3f888bb421ebb8d9
25483 F20101113_AADDOB aldea_m_Page_028.QC.jpg
b80b7f9723ef2864566743cb3988f0b6
98a777bb160324c320748fe6610964b36b12a2aa
19722 F20101113_AADDNN aldea_m_Page_108.QC.jpg
100814ce2c178cbe4923a1b1726cb05a
69d2edbb303b91b96254a0c620da77318f37911c
24544 F20101113_AADDMY aldea_m_Page_051.QC.jpg
874bf0d5bd41178c21fa4231c5a62c1f
9c71f2169e67e57229b6f6e8435d935e23ee764d
33209 F20101113_AADDOC aldea_m_Page_102.QC.jpg
ac4188b04b0bd28f1c7af62b1262f994
cb2dc380f791300cddb12f24d94e6356a1729247
54301 F20101113_AADDNO aldea_m_Page_038.pro
cbb32188d934e1b14e5007ae2208e679
dbcc921cff4eef87f278302027bdbcecfe5caf11
134595 F20101113_AADDMZ aldea_m_Page_115.jp2
40c5dfb89970188fdaafa4baae8cec2b
7f8abf2b56c41e4d4374cfe19e3d5ac730a23969
25158 F20101113_AADDOD aldea_m_Page_031.QC.jpg
55dc70a83579b685a97ec672ce51521c
d7c1fba8172e3c0d3da13dfc2dd1b9e29493cdc6
F20101113_AADDNP aldea_m_Page_108.tif
30649c3f8569d06742fdb215c9cd36fe
1e50934cee69e2d86f054a63e7dcc760577fb090
4988 F20101113_AADDOE aldea_m_Page_002.jp2
c25f09b0da6b11ee6938d0e51a37a608
371c2035d16c44f8c1457f51ca0beb3ba7e798a9
23565 F20101113_AADDNQ aldea_m_Page_049.QC.jpg
7e3dbfd36786d9d3060303feb1935cab
90d1842545d8bfe687f2572f555e698feec3a25e
110731 F20101113_AADDOF aldea_m_Page_030.jp2
a661473574d74d6cc9c6da08709c6016
d508965065e4506b3338ed007c633b57b3976589
4990 F20101113_AADDNR aldea_m_Page_004thm.jpg
726c939a4742b8c9c504d0484232ab06
9952c9cd33a1655f65253378df636c6624db57a1
31818 F20101113_AADDOG aldea_m_Page_077.jpg
d667136bd42aa3e485ecb9d748c0b491
0171ec6f733f2e2bf70bc29a41cbc6243ddb057b
5758 F20101113_AADDNS aldea_m_Page_068.QC.jpg
548dee0f28e686376a175cc65c58ba63
f753063818d0b3f3ea4ab2815dd586e9b86cc23a
79561 F20101113_AADDOH aldea_m_Page_027.jpg
343d3db8e70d011445f45243014bdb97
5c879973c7fc4a93b522b88cce0df0f3ee30d693
F20101113_AADDOI aldea_m_Page_077.tif
78da1d33a0dc74d74a7836ae5a7e0746
48497f98cb82ce70367f1911e6d08500c8e1839a
2005 F20101113_AADDNT aldea_m_Page_008.txt
8c4014a1b71c90b908c7a3b0de785d2f
d162eff4c3fa6af876ae66ee3c44d7d47464d8cd
2192 F20101113_AADDOJ aldea_m_Page_014.txt
2f618901f247fe7c11d9f83f7f22925d
1dc56a7d6c695ce4a93b4d6362032bb4fb7673ef
24670 F20101113_AADDNU aldea_m_Page_058.QC.jpg
620de9eda411ec6053d65b5b598036b5
31faa61e0ef6d22361a6ce7a6caf85b8e5966366
6560 F20101113_AADDOK aldea_m_Page_051thm.jpg
82bf1c96f08abdac387363b29d4413a0
3450300266833ab63ae40b65a508b33409016d17
101193 F20101113_AADDNV aldea_m_Page_117.jpg
6c33223c804554014f40a26f631f492e
55911217132318fca3a8364a2a1b67bf944f1c52
25854 F20101113_AADDOL aldea_m_Page_123.QC.jpg
b2fd3aa9df07bf59240374d9d22bd64e
5bfd6c89d4c63825b0e3c2557e03b85f882b385f
52678 F20101113_AADDNW aldea_m_Page_071.jpg
d98be46f5ce837fe46dbfbb32702cd3b
ef1f6e640cc85e2e8b74b1e1af38f949f649bff7
2310 F20101113_AADDOM aldea_m_Page_121.txt
1e8e4a1df33959aa82b1a39461c834ae
b28cef389c861a6fcf2e7d9b74d1a9951d3a021e
F20101113_AADDNX aldea_m_Page_014.tif
ba6d5779601822c74b648984c9d51a74
043a831865400c9f2cd4837cef1028e1119b8ac8
57407 F20101113_AADDPA aldea_m_Page_085.pro
c65c9460fec6cb22ac28362d68c91a90
820cab6d5ad13a9f033df9a7f16d55aa8d2ca040
53299 F20101113_AADDON aldea_m_Page_054.pro
28f9658e356899891fee8fe56b40995d
8260b161d01516bf7db40f3455c2fef09c0a5e38
6679 F20101113_AADDNY aldea_m_Page_092thm.jpg
ef28e15f2c95e7c18429782ad56937e4
21f3d8a4424532380623d602253e8f25bc6af213
2221 F20101113_AADDPB aldea_m_Page_090.txt
1304905dc498506a8e0f546014ab96af
6742050f0dd817bf550d5596e86781a7ef2e3b98
6185 F20101113_AADDOO aldea_m_Page_056thm.jpg
e636cb9b630aca256a8693807fe07500
35274a888dccdc5681deaac786160629151117d1
32551 F20101113_AADDNZ aldea_m_Page_076.jpg
4a1833c49c6e998daf7470354970d837
d6bad286b6580a375fb400ef8e28e3792f0c8eef
26474 F20101113_AADDPC aldea_m_Page_091.QC.jpg
aecc6ed9d291afa10131ae11189e0e4e
98a40bfb602bf6781c9575aea36c0bc337d882f5
55930 F20101113_AADDOP aldea_m_Page_084.pro
c8e27925e39710dda903c2acef4f9f17
521d0edb22bba26f1593adc4e3effabd13950b06
2180 F20101113_AADDPD aldea_m_Page_058.txt
ff513e4d1dcb10df9c232db4f65936dc
12a9df547b71bcf83b7f3f56b4984cf8256eebca
124708 F20101113_AADDOQ aldea_m_Page_112.jp2
ddf6280020804e291186d96ead7af3a9
f7acc7c7745659c483c02e4892e71bde68929519
7020 F20101113_AADDPE aldea_m_Page_120thm.jpg
a25245a330723662add740ae7b30d159
10b863c959d0d47e8a519b7d5c2538e7f13a694e
2251 F20101113_AADDOR aldea_m_Page_091.txt
ac70a4fa95b7a7e78ec0307a25ac158e
1aec6899c08d8bcc6c0877f1db04b153f448591e
F20101113_AADDPF aldea_m_Page_065.tif
69a4c63374af1ace11dd4c6706d226b0
612e61da57218f87cf478868189b4bb3f61b2fdf
F20101113_AADDOS aldea_m_Page_054.tif
456c7a3780684c3f76e6477166a91cd1
2359c1fd4f2ccc28fb230cf60b95330b9f263168
F20101113_AADDPG aldea_m_Page_017.tif
b2a71c0da8e4a9cb526901625f7f94bc
677c66b78358dc8f89a112f3ee67d474c7f4836e
6322 F20101113_AADDOT aldea_m_Page_068.pro
86fdb69a4a385e4cd6f432cc94c621b1
c0adae8a3b97e84e85e7a668d3b28f4acc8a8e65
120032 F20101113_AADDPH aldea_m_Page_065.jp2
d38400c8c369d41af1983d89dbeb00ef
b6028b1b5e1fc87fa0eedc8e111376a1c0b5e468
7015 F20101113_AADDPI aldea_m_Page_113thm.jpg
faa9c06476624b4addd164df3d932592
0c8fa079db78a88c5ca5c809d32fc35e134cabee
125330 F20101113_AADDOU aldea_m_Page_020.jp2
2b82d17fcb259cf34138a8bfdcd9aa4b
c170a47013202560bbb2b7b1fe602a1ce8e69bc2
24764 F20101113_AADDPJ aldea_m_Page_103.jp2
29de31c137470f843d1207043589b324
8d78347623236527672f8a03ffa9f801d398af90
2103 F20101113_AADDOV aldea_m_Page_035.txt
171b93605c5b65ce41a4ebb166eae59c
efb01851e07099e447aa537d977147eb09045b15
2457 F20101113_AADDPK aldea_m_Page_123.txt
3d2a937360e414b2d62269e8436eda7e
94057350d044daafffda7f152ee6404dc737e898
140216 F20101113_AADDOW aldea_m_Page_124.jp2
05ea6f82d2b9104094180ba1b5b04139
1998ccbe6b9aad8417affb527de659a930957f01
116444 F20101113_AADDPL aldea_m_Page_045.jp2
a00d9f1f0d519d3483dbbb790c0804d8
73c046fcdcd0ca68d92e75da0c1493fe26062158
F20101113_AADDOX aldea_m_Page_086.tif
ae0146e192c378cb36e8c57ace1178c1
30ef32e8d399790ee11f2a8c8cb18027ecb9c8f2
7175 F20101113_AADDQA aldea_m_Page_104.QC.jpg
7ae559ff85992c2c6ab5ea2c7bd97d23
3167eea9e3c1333ee979079208ba8daf56cf2793
2268 F20101113_AADDPM aldea_m_Page_043.txt
34053931b9ffe58fdcc8fa644c2f2dcd
60f86f9fcfc75cac645960386647df6173e2e0a9
7055 F20101113_AADDOY aldea_m_Page_083thm.jpg
a4092b50174a6656eb009577f0b0933d
b34a1258d9c9c1ca8f0641143e868b814b5d6402
80182 F20101113_AADDQB aldea_m_Page_043.jpg
4a7d1254fb554a596788fd46441f852c
a709e5b1d5156dbdf4ec8f7029e94f7e7d7d4cfb
F20101113_AADDPN aldea_m_Page_009.tif
0984e3423414b69164c1508b6bcb0975
44183fc79d67b7063476ba9d9dd4985447eafcc5
57125 F20101113_AADDOZ aldea_m_Page_037.pro
102382bf6d069c60ff6124d7ff707815
0f8a42ebfeebbb060e56d18c55b930c27caa9b63
114158 F20101113_AADDQC aldea_m_Page_044.jp2
754db62b1cd79f8be19a649d78835ef2
e957cd840f4f909195e95790874bc4f7c85dbea2
F20101113_AADDPO aldea_m_Page_050.tif
a4f2d8e47b4e99dc51014f65fb5bd42e
9aadd4aac2c4af563fe2166f719033620c8495a7
81197 F20101113_AADDQD aldea_m_Page_020.jpg
367a68b36223cd1f6e00f7209545a8b3
ef893bf198a971b728af8e0490661b9295476a69
80209 F20101113_AADDPP aldea_m_Page_040.jpg
fa30e3bfcd4adb1b39e3bf6b634d8d6f
1889a5d3ed8bdbbb604fceae49927308ae485dc9
431 F20101113_AADDQE aldea_m_Page_001.txt
1720d487fa8ff00409cfe364aa792737
7ec10a7473b395211dad88fcf5979f145c6eb07f
2245 F20101113_AADDPQ aldea_m_Page_085.txt
d51fe3a1fcc63f1b5f2ac001a84481f4
a508849a6c2f6c483e06488a6b65082aecea1418
F20101113_AADDQF aldea_m_Page_002.tif
9ae156c3048b31b511038767628547f1
978fab0a6b1630cfad170cc121d59bbf5085ad91
6909 F20101113_AADDPR aldea_m_Page_016thm.jpg
568532fb705950950f8b68632db4c7e8
26047382358f802e466b772223c3f56f52f4de54
118232 F20101113_AADDQG aldea_m_Page_096.jp2
822f90eadc26f02f620b22a424d164fd
c89697af45d19a6fc6c3039ee0eee91ade784501
79961 F20101113_AADDPS aldea_m_Page_018.jpg
6a112cf90b6d6dd9e7f01171ebb139eb
1b2f6345a0bb4aea5542e4f7be41255fe0b9a455
25922 F20101113_AADDQH aldea_m_Page_081.QC.jpg
27770fb6cdddb7538e504f90e6fe4c6d
2fa08134412f437aa445b8e15c47334436579c49
7014 F20101113_AADDPT aldea_m_Page_073.pro
6673d982829e0943f1e97dabe81eaed1
fdc63dc4826bcd95fb7802274008eb6a5bc36e68
118436 F20101113_AADDQI aldea_m_Page_054.jp2
6744bfb26c56fcc4e56b840a74054cef
0341c437a06ec64605fcc801d00a0c26d6a1ce78
7265 F20101113_AADDPU aldea_m_Page_122thm.jpg
9403c6b9d4a70b80e018e2aeb299042b
cf01e5bf808dfc473619c17a7bd7d0db2d58b675
2114 F20101113_AADDQJ aldea_m_Page_019.txt
9b41ca226c267dec4efa8f8a899c4704
ea20b504dd911715d95185e2fbd754c3d717a6cd
46542 F20101113_AADDQK aldea_m_Page_128.jp2
b6da633c19b3cde18f7ebe6f1d8ad860
629568a7977a3a12a1134ecbfd5db9922ac7b89c
136410 F20101113_AADDPV aldea_m_Page_113.jp2
66f929da334e2f3ad6c77f5a4b1f3237
57c6b4ccec43a42be8c1c2b4d4e24fd3e55831dd
F20101113_AADDQL aldea_m_Page_112.tif
42f531416380f152b5ec2f9013566413
c37687178a2d9dd7454538cb4c50ce314950f804
F20101113_AADDPW aldea_m_Page_105.tif
2e858efbb4ef6ccd9c08698280a54a24
e5a9c3dd2e0a49ad06bc7fc5e9e658d98f399866
53514 F20101113_AADDQM aldea_m_Page_092.pro
78870e4021ba3d592ab9ff98bbb02254
b93a2e68bf79e627620da5723142a481df03c7e5
20609 F20101113_AADDPX aldea_m_Page_101.jpg
38084f4f7bd219182f67c22f40232388
669af1d0ccc94cdf87ce3e95cb23b3b7da4de9b0
8555 F20101113_AADDRA aldea_m_Page_003.QC.jpg
7eb76561fd000a8a01e4772cb5b590a8
aa77ec1ec84999d320b469dd4d270485473f4fc7
121810 F20101113_AADDQN aldea_m_Page_016.jp2
2179f84890f2d2a266b7451b15cca55b
7bf160e2beec9f3ce090e75f4ecefa8fb13d62bf
2188 F20101113_AADDPY aldea_m_Page_084.txt
8db67ba6f5a2549608731fdb1293445f
7fb13ab926bc5b4e1e2a64aeaca686a2386bf902
25009 F20101113_AADDRB aldea_m_Page_014.QC.jpg
675d5bf7e2b3f2338bdb2424281cfdbf
b1758cd6cc86d865b092918356f27d8f9b513652
65474 F20101113_AADDQO aldea_m_Page_125.pro
7a06564f6a2953a6adb85bfb71289f25
86fb145e679640598118d35fc575900b08547a95
F20101113_AADDPZ aldea_m_Page_024.tif
dd30871bdc0a6701c8274daa03b97a86
c80ace80cb6174b66151c16ebc315c86e55b764d
112651 F20101113_AADDRC aldea_m_Page_009.jp2
e850282106e549920a8ca1f1f403bbeb
0c12738543c0ca73a08d67ff48f61c60c9f0b73c
16619 F20101113_AADDQP aldea_m_Page_071.QC.jpg
6b4074a7375544e1147c2c43890486f9
97a6614a63b379e21c63bbba107df9989f014373
F20101113_AADDRD aldea_m_Page_127.tif
67c86078ed0ce15a81f681398774fa39
0707ae1bbc1fff416a7ca694b5a6241279ab5880
6731 F20101113_AADDQQ aldea_m_Page_019thm.jpg
c76e56d869f4f2c63f2c82e8d2a59807
28a669b01d6fdfc38a7d1f4d5f3a3eea2a80a781
2133 F20101113_AADDRE aldea_m_Page_038.txt
42f7e216665975913667247c19dc576f
9f2770cb581662a8d79d1edf9f2799bc21d76b5b
5571 F20101113_AADDQR aldea_m_Page_108thm.jpg
e5488d8f796ee356a8312ac8347a3115
064e9eecb463c8ed4fe6e66de200e90e7d47aed4
6777 F20101113_AADDRF aldea_m_Page_012thm.jpg
6c2dbd19ed27beee46b33aae8e34b3a8
7fd400ce17ba7fa8c9ea6a67dc02fb2ba921eee9
F20101113_AADDQS aldea_m_Page_053.tif
3016c1f06d7e900898b17738a772cfb3
54546d624270b0cd99a14e8786450e940eb5e7b5
7069 F20101113_AADDRG aldea_m_Page_126thm.jpg
f4bcf334c8231e8689bc930abc474b30
578595658af70d30bf1b756ea1128fd861ccd7da
55835 F20101113_AADDQT aldea_m_Page_018.pro
77c1a7b1cc11ccd910160d0f73452655
caf6797ae53ced7e90b9eb8bc495d09f2ccda785
80992 F20101113_AADDRH aldea_m_Page_091.jpg
cda9155458ffd9bf900e7ac9c2b2b189
928d41c37490cce16822ae43d534e630dfd5ded0
74297 F20101113_AADDQU aldea_m_Page_009.jpg
ba22290cd1fc981a62691eebffbeb53e
ff169a66f268f88ae13e4fefde8c8a22dca677ca
121757 F20101113_AADDRI aldea_m_Page_043.jp2
8c7781034e24c67e30de025436f7da2d
4955b2e139db2e96e2c8b3d1e9f8eb190390626b
124917 F20101113_AADDQV aldea_m_Page_091.jp2
5e7019be13bff09fe271f5aae4996947
1be2a652e091e03ff3494f3afac73ab554ab6c34
2117 F20101113_AADDRJ aldea_m_Page_045.txt
aeace86808cdfa44fbaa92951d27cb89
2f8b8ffa3e2a877cfe02194f1dbab3174003557f
111863 F20101113_AADDRK aldea_m_Page_060.jp2
0bbbb8306a255fba7daef6bb1eb8ab86
98e2eb97731873804508dcaa3dc5847dd401a17a
123615 F20101113_AADDQW aldea_m_Page_025.jp2
24b50fc3e64e645b994a6947dfa55f46
d60f798f059f7bfcb67a1e0b219ec2fd7216bfa6
52767 F20101113_AADDRL aldea_m_Page_058.pro
caed18036f760cb1d1b678066c9383f6
0867c9eeec18d87ee4d30d217369eba6191ac165
3070 F20101113_AADDQX aldea_m_Page_002.QC.jpg
4019820dc353512ae49641207a5a3684
f90037d9361d022ca19b7054361e8d098e183a19
120764 F20101113_AADDSA aldea_m_Page_055.jp2
58efa8a3ef36d09732f987d17fbbdd3b
55e69ceeabe6ed49f02e29f5c912fa12ba8f9774
54207 F20101113_AADDRM aldea_m_Page_015.pro
3f47021acbf55d17eff31e43d309bc6e
f30f402dc8448a712700682e32e5ec5921f7b063
F20101113_AADDQY aldea_m_Page_033.tif
56899d8c2fed1b339dc3cca7c8bde351
87646a4425dfca74be4155534b0ee18c5f1bbd5c
26390 F20101113_AADDSB aldea_m_Page_050.QC.jpg
129d5fd547ed62592b3095a8800ef5e8
a35375330b8e151951526b20d2620b552e3785f2
16039 F20101113_AADDRN aldea_m_Page_097.QC.jpg
e5be9c55d30a07780ed87e5ae0840936
418bc7381a0014f1c7b90d054f90dc4008a85c6e
6927 F20101113_AADDQZ aldea_m_Page_018thm.jpg
0b55fa6aaf832b17ee0c3ef149719cca
cf62b26c73c13c53d944df8b303b560a2a9206f7
26329 F20101113_AADDSC aldea_m_Page_021.QC.jpg
6b2e946980467a21347359dbae0ac528
a121fe5dd5ff10696bcc12dec2bfae42ee9e0907
1970 F20101113_AADDRO aldea_m_Page_070.txt
c52912b15dc6110005a778eb2d0fdfe9
a05aa0561dac61f6caa6a368295b530679bcdb69
847 F20101113_AADDSD aldea_m_Page_128.txt
56695643fe862c3676f6d98db74e307a
8a80a7efe8aa3605ae7052b172e1b64d2c2d5de9
24749 F20101113_AADDRP aldea_m_Page_045.QC.jpg
02946358d81162b205c6cbc3c1745209
4bcb6eba0f42ea0fe864d5b352d0a0ddc3001839
F20101113_AADDSE aldea_m_Page_045.tif
b6983a216c18f9e38701dae7f368df62
7b9afbad0ffe88fd8f3c94b52293ebd96ee3768e
25037 F20101113_AADDRQ aldea_m_Page_026.QC.jpg
03d7cd90df28785c37ce264e76c32e54
0161bdd5c705ac7390723b2ae6fba14cb72355d5
123833 F20101113_AADDSF aldea_m_Page_040.jp2
559bad883aefa37d7c1f9ff4658a63ae
296fa91a0e0e08db054641bf5d7b3e3190b8dc7e
55672 F20101113_AADDRR aldea_m_Page_032.pro
451a051b1086aa07681fc2a1e4d7ca8e
acc7174ceb71a2733d9257c852daf3693d01f9ae
F20101113_AADDSG aldea_m_Page_019.tif
ecc06044789c5c08a62e27605a2a9d8b
64901d6f4aee309bd567f9ba12f40d1f04c52149
12136 F20101113_AADDRS aldea_m_Page_072.QC.jpg
bf8cb10d32a11801e84094e8de595d40
55488308c7eda83d669e31a5596a11529dbf6607
9323 F20101113_AADDSH aldea_m_Page_078.pro
05c3a534b045248ee5376f67aede638e
2614085bc8b451666305fe3cb30a01d1a1f2324c
100057 F20101113_AADDRT aldea_m_Page_098.jpg
6291cd039fb449ef87208476198011ab
36275508314cacbaf3b1b8980ec82f07b30db029
25355 F20101113_AADDSI aldea_m_Page_096.QC.jpg
3c23b86a2779a2cecc9e62dac2e59da5
e94025518f99c973a8366a0c3e7c7c680a987403
63486 F20101113_AADDRU aldea_m_Page_126.pro
90a831c3cfb2eabbad5a55ebbfb0a1d8
4472cefe49fc03d62d15cca9018c3cabfd8d9ede
7315 F20101113_AADDSJ aldea_m_Page_117thm.jpg
bbf43752341260678ffdcf2c8f038115
625100d6d748fe64938cba3187f772f00f1edf95
25761 F20101113_AADDRV aldea_m_Page_054.QC.jpg
8c290b2ba0f4ad40adfcf710c1de093a
b520e32361c50a2e3176f31a230b5c0b5247cc72
6180 F20101113_AADDSK aldea_m_Page_013thm.jpg
352b5cb08b196ade8e517f592745cf23
d7a424fbf5d864a226f5546732053f59e1d20144
26934 F20101113_AADDRW aldea_m_Page_118.QC.jpg
b055ea461b8765d4ec4706fd52a96b06
ee56e3ae39c93ff9c4a90e943d16898dd489be87
35820 F20101113_AADDSL aldea_m_Page_128.jpg
609582d39773ba3a8b73981ac2238aa0
3b085508f6e937a45b1d7afecd908533356814a1
24799 F20101113_AADDTA aldea_m_Page_012.QC.jpg
97869cf1da14e2ee4e6634ef1b715927
a3dd9df1263fd35f8f1264ba4c0f129582408405
F20101113_AADDSM aldea_m_Page_087.tif
ef32e41266d17bc8f329f75480be4f28
5755d7e2a05f6e6f425589f6fb14d16ac53bc404
58356 F20101113_AADDRX aldea_m_Page_088.pro
cdb748cf066031367cc4e8f5d1af9ac2
dd08307b9983051b3ebc34210087e0f20f4c7e7e
56960 F20101113_AADDTB aldea_m_Page_043.pro
e88b0e26e71bb5f3518a3022371eee7f
45222e8522be88e81222c7a24c1e8d1b48d603bf
F20101113_AADDSN aldea_m_Page_113.tif
e35e9fe6d27f06559c679da247a717bb
d5897e7822dccfaec2e48b0113afb39caba6fd09
F20101113_AADDRY aldea_m_Page_035.tif
6f143405b17d6bf80dd9ed8232bb95a2
5f79efc551465bcaaa787b2f0e07a8a880d1877e
89 F20101113_AADDTC aldea_m_Page_002.txt
2437f4d5b7234f6986c2e23df7aebd14
70e61331e36d97afdc3a844a59ceee720206b1d6
1512 F20101113_AADDSO aldea_m_Page_072.txt
b5e557fcc7e0b49ca5344d5b49fa3e6d
e9204c01ae1fc6eff19edb1062a3cf033dab929a
78529 F20101113_AADDRZ aldea_m_Page_033.jpg
424027c47a6641944da90e7b7773d74b
4997d37f38eb1e527026a3dc37d80b7ee0d31815
104977 F20101113_AADDTD aldea_m_Page_013.jp2
af97d156a8406f203e62b70554853e49
1e14095966964d717f0e1b2917b942c2c903e102
F20101113_AADDSP aldea_m_Page_096.tif
58b2d2d37a81dbaa50fa597f11dc6d88
f9ec919e99c71400bafb4861238ad91e2aee0f5e
2021 F20101113_AADDTE aldea_m_Page_030.txt
0d2e855ac9893d6ec54f963800d5b95b
b49de902eb388cc31adcdeb6e4c05f85af49125d
7532 F20101113_AADDSQ aldea_m_Page_111.QC.jpg
8aea6b54b39ecef79266c26fec461ddd
5d47fddff8ac3eb38552257ca2fa3be008753eb6
6658 F20101113_AADDTF aldea_m_Page_062thm.jpg
63d14c2a8d79deda596fc437ef907919
28958ffebdf8aa8fb420ab6147a1cb2aef122c0f
6435 F20101113_AADDSR aldea_m_Page_066thm.jpg
ac6ad351b6960d83e01ccaccadf481c7
cf9467ce0db55b3a8d03cf5aee9c87291cd8170b
25402 F20101113_AADDTG aldea_m_Page_095.QC.jpg
a4aca5376acca568369ff486d8d8bedb
46bf6b289c04a58f04b6d01db4c608c8c641c7e6
2681 F20101113_AADDSS aldea_m_Page_122.txt
2f6a40087d6bccf8fe63ed50fcfa1296
f25714cbed04382bc51b8aa0af2288f8d1f52a59
52125 F20101113_AADDTH aldea_m_Page_066.pro
019e47de3497f04a460e88426f3121d6
18eaa121e629e7e97fa6728457e7bbc7993a9a9e
F20101113_AADDST aldea_m_Page_083.tif
dd8947f3144e19354a04bca183b60880
7c33cb427d23d4b86e18ec046540499ad713e711
F20101113_AADDTI aldea_m_Page_118.tif
c13e348828252c0f388b2d8b00ba5245
64196fb41042bd5b627297e3b05b5966e7f31534
54975 F20101113_AADDSU aldea_m_Page_079.pro
e3f2fca18fbc47b5209829acadd93b5a
9ce80f1d5abc52edb4c627f5251da8b3cbf5e0be
48967 F20101113_AADDTJ aldea_m_Page_129.jp2
5040f05b89190b1ff079d98c3ba815c1
4cc95dc7f357cb05bb966745675e46cd434bd3cb
24391 F20101113_AADDSV aldea_m_Page_044.QC.jpg
987e02de61c1eb755f2b28dda968ef02
388e4bc0f2baadf68ef03a1f3869a123e92fa738
6876 F20101113_AADDTK aldea_m_Page_014thm.jpg
07731097d45e95be93f21c4062f5cdf5
c1ac96f260287acda6ab09d487b9ac3e874ac29b
58140 F20101113_AADDSW aldea_m_Page_121.pro
ed93dea0824d829ff767fe4c3f2ce459
d053530ffef62e2dc6601c6f734e1dd01d6b9657
6959 F20101113_AADDTL aldea_m_Page_096thm.jpg
359ad0804626fe3d209780fa4aac5cff
778bfa69d2b7dee952a17445774ab8d56f9f7fe1
332362 F20101113_AADDSX aldea_m_Page_077.jp2
1feb0e234155436aa65cf705d89f035b
effc2dfe4c3a188962744cc925104967997da1a3
7241 F20101113_AADDTM aldea_m_Page_039thm.jpg
12c9414f95764f2d5c0be4a992faba83
6c8937580796a8174dd4a19ca919d175217c4943
91030 F20101113_AADDUA aldea_m_Page_125.jpg
d76b321cceaf723a675a04b425c89fe7
5fdc86486a7bd1247906a9efb14c5b3bcaa62e30
53779 F20101113_AADDTN aldea_m_Page_034.pro
8edfb8b5e6ee62e1c143a25fe3df38d2
f8a310a7a84be46c49dc07e20bf297a4b2776a90
F20101113_AADDSY aldea_m_Page_026.tif
c869b3b671db4b476bd2fc345609be00
8d8394271bd46e721c4f9ce06c73ce0c71f2f11b
50940 F20101113_AADDUB aldea_m_Page_051.pro
40fd2832957b0119b670ff49899afc59
680e066987b30c3b42e8a4268600e6c45f19ce96
144285 F20101113_AADDTO aldea_m_Page_122.jp2
bbd2f02fc7d6656744c2889ee0db5a22
da42623f33d38582b97f627f8dab363aad9aa395
75048 F20101113_AADDSZ aldea_m_Page_052.jpg
5ee7b2885ffd100b71116da76aa198b3
bdc1d39ddd567a0e6186432a529e46e0bade0068
7028 F20101113_AADDUC aldea_m_Page_043thm.jpg
c690839ecd41c829b5d801bd76182b1c
e402b25ba3c645ab6a20595039e1e6b64c4ededa
7084 F20101113_AADDTP aldea_m_Page_125thm.jpg
3c0d92a4efb331eff2e5433af3ff6a45
0dae9e698bb04f550913343e46a80b470e9e519a
38942 F20101113_AADDUD aldea_m_Page_071.pro
6db502eb72be79cd0bb2a5008c9cf487
f028d85f1a8c16e5dfb1965445d27a13a530194c
99265 F20101113_AADDTQ aldea_m_Page_099.jp2
5fef6def78de862ea9504580fc2f50fb
43552bf00acb5741adb7fcec2a94a74333d2c824
2600 F20101113_AADDUE aldea_m_Page_125.txt
97b727b9d09e76aa39f78066e698f9f4
c3377fafc20578a350986be002d9d37c4dcaee33
F20101113_AADDTR aldea_m_Page_052.txt
5275911f2fbd9598a9d0c3cc90429f3c
c88334f2b76cd9b5beeaccef5e0743ede5b4301d
132271 F20101113_AADEAA aldea_m_Page_120.jp2
5b41683cba69fd003c2d1452045ae32b
5ee1de592d361b43f4ee2908baf422996f7e6247
116761 F20101113_AADDUF aldea_m_Page_019.jp2
41925862dec9c5ef43edf763a9efa33e
e68683dcc8ad3ca2f711235f6af19f8a7f0ff0f5
5906 F20101113_AADDTS aldea_m_Page_008thm.jpg
54e2dd3ae512f0ecade312c2d0ad6853
c1c5ed3614cd28cbed318e9e1d33e37ef7e1ce91
131354 F20101113_AADEAB aldea_m_Page_127.jp2
cb1ba42ed07e802163870eda4b7fbcc2
574024e40e0f01480e25043e946c9fba7e83b5d1
7088 F20101113_AADDUG aldea_m_Page_025thm.jpg
7b26f88ca0e20930fd365a595c1278db
d6e94c68d59849cf8e88530499847b1774b3bc02
1850 F20101113_AADDTT aldea_m_Page_056.txt
cbf29a3896adad8a64692fd15b87bfcf
2480d76429ad2695935d9091a46649dc90000c73
F20101113_AADEAC aldea_m_Page_003.tif
5b59e0a502be7b44497cbc6d554ca825
803a94877aa9b253c5092c664bb1a4f4deed8ed1
1490 F20101113_AADDUH aldea_m_Page_097.txt
b9a7ef680eac748f187c86d6659eec4c
e525f519fc08abc2f97a2a8f27c4e21587a0af96
120891 F20101113_AADDTU aldea_m_Page_047.jp2
69ec8378eab20d828183dd306d269934
eef82469475c1b0be1d2cc415558233af6c9a2de
F20101113_AADEAD aldea_m_Page_005.tif
1d177f7ae5950ec2add9d64dd98d8b21
cf3ee0079eb1c96efdb843320357f5c2923a01b7
25872 F20101113_AADDUI aldea_m_Page_094.QC.jpg
22bc13d0f8cb15ded5e15c1b5ea9560b
3af5cbcf3c0119b3218e8c3d9f792612e0e040c2
117991 F20101113_AADDTV aldea_m_Page_034.jp2
ac2b0172e1225072cb4255d2ddec5f98
42476ad65e9a9b2f2251ba7852e9e09636429af6
F20101113_AADEAE aldea_m_Page_008.tif
552e42c9c01dfe010686963fd7f974b1
7bff3ad4347a476e0d4890358076335250541a6e
F20101113_AADDUJ aldea_m_Page_018.tif
9c606f5e2bf550b36b2b77ecb430b010
d6031184fb145a3fa6b4a9d6fca85a3534dfbc8d
81657 F20101113_AADDTW aldea_m_Page_089.jpg
e99ab083f70c9aee13009dd8bf60b0a5
cb08f43c8f6496a282160697f384febb4c94ab73
77997 F20101113_AADDUK aldea_m_Page_084.jpg
e4678cb36d803cb3c5f3c386bed7b7e3
9d08e0d3ae0a45230edc3e371e1dc4484376c1c8
4467 F20101113_AADDTX aldea_m_Page_109thm.jpg
63d78fd415ccc34c7cd9ecfc42e1102d
cdee316ed27a27052abf224f5c9f326004061d18
F20101113_AADEAF aldea_m_Page_010.tif
fc14457a0d3d0670bad5f6b8da897cc0
489215b29afd1f91347279d4e9bf9ada8fa84182
85159 F20101113_AADDUL aldea_m_Page_115.jpg
daa58a2e8183f8d6a476c9adc042fd63
4579cc39a4e6ba9f802113d08b46de41280f5a46
F20101113_AADEAG aldea_m_Page_013.tif
6fad118b8dab92f2dac4b3b69af2f392
ed3d8ba5eb2a054651278ef5f315cf1c277cad11
27367 F20101113_AADDVA aldea_m_Page_121.QC.jpg
6a2013cf65bcc7e268f9c09d7c0d8928
38818f35bbba9b72c3e674fe498a07dad0993a27
79962 F20101113_AADDUM aldea_m_Page_010.jpg
d12670559213b53105b658027c54e2c1
9c1b4acf0b703fdf2d75f1159690679c8793d1b5
51863 F20101113_AADDTY aldea_m_Page_009.pro
0c9a024d40a412f76410ced0c1f04f79
ab0e3bd0a1d7b8138375c1bb48d0710184dd508f
F20101113_AADEAH aldea_m_Page_015.tif
afc180f7fb01397545e12c8304089c96
d8035d61fdf1dd1acf6b726779b6f62dd41cb88f
79655 F20101113_AADDVB aldea_m_Page_024.jpg
3ef57cd1cd5e233b4d7a9623dc852a70
21949c23ebbb831375788cab0466ff28a27dd8e1
28810 F20101113_AADDUN aldea_m_Page_072.pro
a6b946751d9de404639a9f73c6a8e995
f462ad3e51f62bb1cba57318e411fbb9cd21327a
F20101113_AADEAI aldea_m_Page_025.tif
b87baa78da62bc041c823aac68e11d39
f1c31d27f3f1c9af8066a35f64979000cee12935
78686 F20101113_AADDVC aldea_m_Page_081.jpg
4b99c505f25dd4d32af3aca30c6cc860
44ce0f00e82fd1145da8abb31dd84f3972b9f9aa
1921 F20101113_AADDUO aldea_m_Page_013.txt
5c1bdcfa4d45e729b72d5e394a3ada48
3734672248f656eb5b93b5d8b07654ede9bb1f54
1486 F20101113_AADDTZ aldea_m_Page_007.txt
52a264f5d932be47bd6fc39ff70501dc
f3d5918173176be81efe3932657d663081bd3115
F20101113_AADEAJ aldea_m_Page_028.tif
58a6407339e557a4dada2256eb96b776
d36df8164bdd74359f57a20b8ffda35f8dd5726f
67828 F20101113_AADDVD aldea_m_Page_056.jpg
2578716580cabe9ef6fe62063ba3cf17
aeb0e54b7b8f57038988cb8468ec660902ff9c02
138005 F20101113_AADDUP aldea_m_Page_114.jp2
af985bef501e927d85cbed168cb2e35a
bbca50f3f07a54d543b0404d0295509e16b866d2
F20101113_AADEAK aldea_m_Page_036.tif
8c9b42a94a6ffde891479f786f1902ee
656263e646bdfd7ea3bd5b7c34780db60964ea70
77839 F20101113_AADDVE aldea_m_Page_031.jpg
37d7d0b7faadf3e8dfb733b1c43f5d7e
352dda95f739b4ed03e554e2063a3d0852ecf29d
6941 F20101113_AADDUQ aldea_m_Page_116thm.jpg
5297433dc641bc5bfc4d9b8f721429ca
9cefcd01c1a8531f1c2ba1c5942e0ebafd212d5b
F20101113_AADEAL aldea_m_Page_039.tif
d9a494bf37ee4f2b104b5476f5eb0889
9672ec2301f060e1fef5cb968571a438d5f243b4
F20101113_AADDVF aldea_m_Page_007.tif
802e7e12aae274e46322e09fca67eee2
c3bd277ac5bd37a61de2818857efbe5724a566e9
186928 F20101113_AADDUR aldea_m_Page_102.jp2
0c146ac144686eca43e01719f18cf979
abb286a69881af17a0a6da7bfbf0aab4cc16a072
F20101113_AADEBA aldea_m_Page_115.tif
6b214cba196967bde6a98a36f040bf2d
1fcbf41ab4898e83d512abb3407ba96b7f5bd9f1
F20101113_AADEAM aldea_m_Page_040.tif
8e67c81f721cdb58a6382e50adcac8c1
1ae9f6bd76d0fb9826e0af7348f72fda6f15261c
26703 F20101113_AADDVG aldea_m_Page_124.QC.jpg
b5adc2a0d89adc91661fa0eb976729fb
b0c437a83c4d3e827979cb531bc2252b3b5ac2d6
2177 F20101113_AADDUS aldea_m_Page_055.txt
19110c6475c45f0782f2a0b72a3edd6d
608938be9201d5d257308eade006cc1a05e39a11
F20101113_AADEBB aldea_m_Page_116.tif
939198ba2af7770c470ce48ff35173b5
19783eb3ad2c2a66c4bf2f0de3953b60a87e7307
F20101113_AADEAN aldea_m_Page_042.tif
1cecd4bf61193fcfb5f3fe6c0784410b
2b28e27c7d09f46043eb83c37996978a9c765717
6285 F20101113_AADDVH aldea_m_Page_107thm.jpg
d5ec70ae3c7713b337e057bb20623934
a47836063bcf0673c46dd99794301e4ef166a710
76816 F20101113_AADDUT aldea_m_Page_019.jpg
a1b38d740c2663d14d8aec6f45a5ac99
0b4def4d5513e998783b1f92818edf83867ea0fa
F20101113_AADEBC aldea_m_Page_117.tif
3105264bbe2253280b034b6365b41b8d
cab83c364c032295b4130d252ecf13df343deab9
F20101113_AADEAO aldea_m_Page_043.tif
dbbc3209b49bed4464fda678f935dc54
0c22ce76a49b1420e41d359f97a585a3f4da3459
F20101113_AADDVI aldea_m_Page_076.tif
ccc2774008573478a165e896a3ee327f
bdb974c040fdb50e185efa0c5b421d78626fd19c
787227 F20101113_AADDUU aldea_m_Page_108.jp2
2c321fb2bfbffc2534a3448c3b4aa298
c88a2287fe1cdcc75fbe8424c6e6063a6ec0b716
F20101113_AADEBD aldea_m_Page_119.tif
f0d7d3f3655ee9287ad99e57f46b35ba
02e824286a0b4f6a005f749ecc0bdc72f61e1bf8
F20101113_AADEAP aldea_m_Page_048.tif
377572d9e73ee648ddd45d7f144f9a59
5096ca3c12c18595f00f0a22e4b3bca0c3c82297
71099 F20101113_AADDVJ aldea_m_Page_109.jp2
efd4d5f120e07a136fe44af0464ba455
d3de4fa4c811c613a98695aa439d4df68758a33a
4914 F20101113_AADDUV aldea_m_Page_071thm.jpg
c079e1522fc12b3e50dcc9dd312b9190
31a67442922e4c8607bfef6f157fe689d466666d
F20101113_AADEBE aldea_m_Page_123.tif
64616d2657288bd3fd86b388eb67491d
d28e6201536023c661d7ebb4951e0776fe5cd87c
F20101113_AADEAQ aldea_m_Page_058.tif
591561b7f89fca92ed13d2157390acfb
064b08fe1e6870e2085136153abad142e4111345
123851 F20101113_AADDVK aldea_m_Page_017.jp2
c0b0cd58ae75f89f47c599a1c9acb4cd
ac1a570e3e22d7c54d5f16b8c81a408c981475d9
75855 F20101113_AADDUW aldea_m_Page_012.jpg
5d2348400ba455fca45c37241b7155cc
9a728d9505e763d5597f9dc791727eff6f6700bc
860 F20101113_AADEBF aldea_m_Page_002.pro
e6435b3c2db4207ec98764a3435068c0
c9f4d99bf62e6177e75905df3a727049712ea237
F20101113_AADEAR aldea_m_Page_062.tif
ddbccded19f9e6d65fb7b5730ac3d03b
63480cd61174a84200c9f3715a4a7e32b6f3f992
F20101113_AADDVL aldea_m_Page_069thm.jpg
18bc839e5d65e35f4f5b0e67d43e631e
ffcde898aa75b37bc88390558cede3b32852bd75
6968 F20101113_AADDUX aldea_m_Page_115thm.jpg
2b86f5fc99db83613215210b9ed9e8c1
e01064d58a6e1b94aaf66fda94a30307ff358b6c
F20101113_AADEAS aldea_m_Page_078.tif
43c3626e9dcfe721270e3da40fef4d71
b3dd4a17188054bec617f74df1aa8f8932ea0f3b
7204 F20101113_AADDVM aldea_m_Page_067thm.jpg
813dcac771540ba8c10afc6af233be63
233b17809e661ff3c665696f99d7e494c8df3030
F20101113_AADDUY aldea_m_Page_107.tif
8dc2fefeae6d5b01f6d0b72ed7fd8524
99b6c06f683e4e0f2821741bda580789b4ffa430
13454 F20101113_AADEBG aldea_m_Page_003.pro
f2c4e550531cd1bb59b9dfce49fa4831
09945e5071f859741f5afaaf7e0c6cfc62bea94c
2626 F20101113_AADDWA aldea_m_Page_118.txt
07d721c81eeea1d6401169148334e11e
e8c0ff6c7ca18ad84a5a3a3f62fc1d38112d6087
F20101113_AADEAT aldea_m_Page_079.tif
52b51dde78f5aa3b0cfd9530f2ad2884
f31e0a3068c7f3e2cb1fd32cd4f28e11f3915246
2209 F20101113_AADDVN aldea_m_Page_040.txt
567b3b75566b8721c1d85dbbdb6d939b
c6df06e5d09e35c6b71a1c996b15be33dd7871fc
80969 F20101113_AADDUZ aldea_m_Page_093.jpg
f10393752252055a5fea9a900c806179
c5d7681d69deeb43b506e4e07390325076502eb5
87081 F20101113_AADEBH aldea_m_Page_004.pro
09fa2c3200d965f8b46fc9c5ce77f2a1
d91c8ef01f5ff8f5cd5d83d8d61cb6e2a9ad3d57
24460 F20101113_AADDWB aldea_m_Page_052.QC.jpg
5fe39f6e09c19f992c1a7b3af3ed9ec8
c8bb638223800737ad15bf2ae70e0b7d881226c9
F20101113_AADEAU aldea_m_Page_092.tif
c5305c7bf7d77ec105d2cbf43cd74f1c
b8198e205d4ea47e011df2d408f02d40cb61f638
7609 F20101113_AADDVO aldea_m_Page_048thm.jpg
399ea0d3dce662575761eff3923d605b
20f061f769ae870ae8d4f83723bc923adfedb5f2
48446 F20101113_AADEBI aldea_m_Page_013.pro
5015b8b4dee7caa1c4c19b19a02508dc
d40e4990636f8b8f6650f17f66f52318fa97f20c
25820 F20101113_AADDWC aldea_m_Page_090.QC.jpg
91620c415314039b5123bffc6f4c2cd6
4b076b9ae88d07a9b88812d0f334aedaab6f9080
79277 F20101113_AADDVP aldea_m_Page_094.jpg
76401a850d7607284239ec9514a9669f
95b34ae88444e96e7aed184de8459552d6b3125c
56488 F20101113_AADEBJ aldea_m_Page_016.pro
fdd3fd003bae1df12c1ffdfe97a340f1
d34ca6bf214a9b5dc149d0c00ed81c98d67d40ba
3331 F20101113_AADDWD aldea_m_Page_072thm.jpg
16d5338ad15e5bc9eab07e8a6cf52b31
ea5e5d153c9357f812f70d6b6f2c9fa6cd480261
F20101113_AADEAV aldea_m_Page_101.tif
2a9856beda5567b284f6fee6e95b29b7
b785e167abb40dccc1382f9f43b3ba532ebe37ac
F20101113_AADDVQ aldea_m_Page_084.tif
53e9366a6179a8bf1785225d18bd0120
6209e9722ed409bbd1342168546cf02317147e9c
57263 F20101113_AADEBK aldea_m_Page_017.pro
43617388f10c6e303a899f3282529c31
82c74755d5d0f4cc90021694d8a4e90401359b83
6788 F20101113_AADDWE aldea_m_Page_098thm.jpg
033d74e2fec497d803f62022a6880650
9ea950f8c339f4ca45e4b4bfcc1e59d1b46b6e62
F20101113_AADEAW aldea_m_Page_102.tif
a8b498d0ab8ca3342f8793afb819b00b
5093f9cb96f5777f594fafdc1f60e2eaa307a398
8249 F20101113_AADECA aldea_m_Page_077.pro
e132abe0b01eb9f6a679fab4a7f4d0da
6e4940f1b04d215bc3094bcb64977af426135ace
2120 F20101113_AADDVR aldea_m_Page_009.txt
1f775f5dfbd10194bb6ced259c2a5cc4
bf78d51571a792b681eb7e74fc4413c5150a8aab
57466 F20101113_AADEBL aldea_m_Page_021.pro
a2e0e85540dda38a5e5717ba0136fdc1
9e0970e5bdf55b91f5f37c52d6ac29422c7f2a26
55995 F20101113_AADDWF aldea_m_Page_065.pro
f68ad385389338f596c951b755e2037d
cd82861d2712abcb0fed9856e9122d378ab2cd5a
F20101113_AADEAX aldea_m_Page_106.tif
9ac0b64f96dc8fbd3d2a44c48f89370b
49d7931cc1e4e673d5d493cb90abd3b0cd799d25
56171 F20101113_AADECB aldea_m_Page_082.pro
b7ac55b5099c86e677669ad865603abf
8e462060d2dfb93a521b16ccb8c0655dbbfc8d4e
2449 F20101113_AADDVS aldea_m_Page_115.txt
22323764aafcd90cf1b7397101fe4e49
ae542ff7e79c5b51e97e622575761e6a5822042c
55647 F20101113_AADEBM aldea_m_Page_024.pro
b1d5151e08b5be94195d7a2a670f4cb2
21e2679480769f1f31893cd918eb0b680738b3a3
54182 F20101113_AADDWG aldea_m_Page_095.pro
200b47b4e85bdab9aa58c918df3463b1
9d1a931e7911adf344fa5a6220a211e5b4d8078f
F20101113_AADEAY aldea_m_Page_111.tif
fef693134b81fcb1db6956afb5413271
ba23be6c025b3143e9d79d705e111642e6b559a3
57448 F20101113_AADECC aldea_m_Page_083.pro
d5f80e6f14713febcc8340db4ee89700
aed8ba7716aa77c80157d739d2fb4cc1cc4edc7b
2406 F20101113_AADDVT aldea_m_Page_127.txt
17c001df74af875629e1ee81922278d8
21fa17f7834915d1241ddcb75ff8c6f810d62602
57623 F20101113_AADEBN aldea_m_Page_027.pro
55d34a1bbcaf312dc1335507182db472
2a9abd5303090e9caeb44edfd425cb5f472dbf0a
79206 F20101113_AADDWH aldea_m_Page_086.jpg
5ca7eb1a79e5c0b3d2cb1e8f96c47ed9
80dafe861ca3e018478c397d6f10324804dcae2e
F20101113_AADEAZ aldea_m_Page_114.tif
e0f79aa0ce3bdb354181a5dcc4c7b258
1350b33bfa5e888045e1bd40b312fbe8ac8ff68c
56328 F20101113_AADECD aldea_m_Page_086.pro
ed501b549e70368310ed38e1d82f293a
5c564907bfd786c331128541ddc92abec67e72f2
3870 F20101113_AADDVU aldea_m_Page_057thm.jpg
45d28ce2b7271c563c07351f416e7fba
6636b24124b8d4edfdaacbda8089e35a35597634
51323 F20101113_AADEBO aldea_m_Page_030.pro
5799d3993d21b20b6b8693b70b49d72a
c67be30b848c5d2754a26f3644ce20100af12aee
F20101113_AADDWI aldea_m_Page_127thm.jpg
83c4746af9da42a65427d72d62194e76
e6da9b4eb1367350ceb28e8cde4d5f5fd9872831
56567 F20101113_AADECE aldea_m_Page_087.pro
67cffe3b87d9f90835b409bc524a80d0
6cf2fabdcf73bb8cfd1cf3fac527002fe778cd94
64272 F20101113_AADDVV aldea_m_Page_124.pro
dd49db0f0790a5981f7993914a61a44e
2f80c027a448bfea0a7e4c89469f81a89e9bd6e8
55567 F20101113_AADEBP aldea_m_Page_033.pro
090664fe07307c0c906b9af2b9b6d6be
e6d7812dc7d33a3afe96fa7746c00259148910f5
114184 F20101113_AADDWJ aldea_m_Page_058.jp2
6214bb3256c57a36fa103fa70144e51d
00a15571665d7184bdd38babfb6b3edc9d8e8458
58470 F20101113_AADECF aldea_m_Page_089.pro
925310dabf973b501afda50b6ae50fe2
58867d3ea3811c0bd59e23f3c7c3f575176574da
145272 F20101113_AADDVW aldea_m_Page_098.jp2
0fd5e07e5ffe7422a37f9ef767a67072
02a1cbc09404a0503b23953a2c46918696bc5ba4
53783 F20101113_AADEBQ aldea_m_Page_045.pro
0030a622a48c5956ead86f1238a645a2
c7ef72eac7b39b439f27b4e15698824930863252
78747 F20101113_AADDWK aldea_m_Page_047.jpg
b9a57e40d9a2920681331c249aef86d3
0f90ac4728a6b313f3f506b52564d2e506b15c66
56636 F20101113_AADECG aldea_m_Page_090.pro
05bb60b9a6ea160b8cace0390c7052fe
70f65b94e935d9ff5d2f057caed6f4285ed4bd8c
6950 F20101113_AADDVX aldea_m_Page_023thm.jpg
c3f212a880eba85e4d7830f34f5ae25a
8abe351ba1065c5a4183f94a5e1cd95d47fd3697
55965 F20101113_AADEBR aldea_m_Page_047.pro
a4d3d97d9ee4974310d1b27b66467217
0fc4d1b3ac2628f723d075493cc3cfef9495d414
2159 F20101113_AADDWL aldea_m_Page_001thm.jpg
722bf18e4fc75af6bb5c4916059f20bd
dec2219c9dbbf9d0535bb65ff93c0328f143866f
51049 F20101113_AADEBS aldea_m_Page_052.pro
6706cd52afd334a4b6f239860f0f1649
dc60824adccac22238e0525e6b7ffa8b047a3101
87290 F20101113_AADDVY aldea_m_Page_119.jpg
ea9d8398b8d0cbfb97a6cedd9e91002e
00db3a8ad068eb42deb92272d825b54d6b0c0e4a
6901 F20101113_AADDXA aldea_m_Page_028thm.jpg
8ed0ab3405a7d5982ebbb495532c1766
c00caafd38dd06d6a00dfa09f0fa2282dfcb7037
54661 F20101113_AADDWM aldea_m_Page_096.pro
bc42b8835e7dded8a6eaac4e6e20227e
854f01f2249831b43d97df1f86ca07d29cbe1c91
57562 F20101113_AADECH aldea_m_Page_091.pro
5985718fd0d35dd298c5f36c59a1dd2a
487e91855ed54dab823d7b59cf60e15d194d562b
55481 F20101113_AADEBT aldea_m_Page_055.pro
71ea5bbb13de8a9ba10763b59c40871a
386bb818745cf4717564d2871e154265dfea0960
3636 F20101113_AADDVZ aldea_m_Page_004.txt
8d96695a460f6d88f06da7a44e601bcd
175423703c2d5cb76802e6b58a82c230c7fbf4fe
83828 F20101113_AADDXB aldea_m_Page_039.jpg
7f53c742205e1fcc413cdb8a0f073506
a91e4b66f4e8f4f9742ec9fde1d1c60f714c6d2f
F20101113_AADDWN aldea_m_Page_010thm.jpg
5064310d7e2700f2a212cfff8696664c
0122e3e7e023ad387d948e78e66a7cf24385a570
58267 F20101113_AADECI aldea_m_Page_093.pro
d762c7d3eaaff0166afd562eb68160ce
dd9f596998e9813c516184af88e06c67b8c11ee6
46635 F20101113_AADEBU aldea_m_Page_056.pro
eb198eb4d4a4315575ac9a2f5c8d1f3e
70a0c89e3ff133fc63aa6174b16e83756acc11f7
120451 F20101113_AADDXC aldea_m_Page_090.jp2
d19edf4aa9b825c1d1def89301b9cec2
cc4e09bf5399a8f4634f2c4b17883e5b6aee1899
81071 F20101113_AADDWO aldea_m_Page_011.jpg
a2e23620c83fe1b7ca71da71401192bb
e98f8399b629d7d7062eaf84bee32178bf4462c3
8292 F20101113_AADECJ aldea_m_Page_101.pro
f3d6533cd4e81a3450c678169db2268d
6ad8c49f00aed18a111694152017605d9f2fa21e
51570 F20101113_AADEBV aldea_m_Page_062.pro
87b177447ad280f5b864bfae773aa134
e295e827848c5695184fec3d786fd770e171d6a6
24797 F20101113_AADDXD aldea_m_Page_060.QC.jpg
ce27a7c417f1b572a9900036bd450b0c
4ad952da3db909fad3806c4252f9777dc7a65eb1
F20101113_AADDWP aldea_m_Page_085.tif
fa2adc539d894655c465deaf61c58bab
2caab242462168ad383545d3acb555c17c293755
52064 F20101113_AADECK aldea_m_Page_106.pro
0aa92effa2fe21e006c3cb2c355e6df8
1d7ba44cfd7134d7d198bb1efe35da015c5532a8
56102 F20101113_AADEBW aldea_m_Page_067.pro
7be39d3b8bd2c4226e956e12cbf9cc75
88c3dbb07ecc86405aa9cd1a6e258b785a77f79c
1976 F20101113_AADDXE aldea_m_Page_068thm.jpg
93f5aa59444287636a80c277b864083c
54a0d54a2f8b9776bc5a2c8adba1bc4c9efec6f5
2200 F20101113_AADDWQ aldea_m_Page_067.txt
480371e6104400dc3cc70e4f85b4ea90
d20c0332e426edeb1191f28132c81c5936e55e16
2242 F20101113_AADEDA aldea_m_Page_025.txt
38e6ff6d4da8b85cf0250f341ff65973
e4ec1cbc8fb4d00f2c000700c867967e15628562
50026 F20101113_AADECL aldea_m_Page_108.pro
af3accfacc89080470cf81289d57f42e
165db4ff2a2b4c4a4a93520b34cce15bb3b0b7f7
7308 F20101113_AADEBX aldea_m_Page_074.pro
a18115fb7e523834cad1df0898adc372
9a70938d6750332e1a4d53f2f2aca9266b41a263
1054428 F20101113_AADDXF aldea_m_Page_069.tif
3f335d2573781d464abc86cfb73236ff
c295423b7c0416ff946136acacd963c0c3e6c7c4
22707 F20101113_AADDWR aldea_m_Page_001.jp2
100df168b29658be8eddae5cdc0dc4c4
c968bbc4eb0d0ce199edb36027bbb6c5447a45e9
2254 F20101113_AADEDB aldea_m_Page_027.txt
24ece909a1cb5f9fe944697bbf9176fb
cb5dfd2065e21822a623e15a50ff0dc2f7706e02
42359 F20101113_AADECM aldea_m_Page_110.pro
da3b8bced52b141b3296064a2ae7f04a
7df0d8e09e6a89c44d059eb7dcc02c544c8bc413
7386 F20101113_AADEBY aldea_m_Page_075.pro
a6111f06a99d98c3860ba12ad13033df
0d0cc5b1016354db4412e64e95eabe5ad1ce161a
2618 F20101113_AADDXG aldea_m_Page_114.txt
159f92bfef4f7747776f955493c161c0
1fa12708bdd9a3dd57ff794e61a255fb4ce4f116
876 F20101113_AADDWS aldea_m_Page_129.txt
72d6f2f1c1567a831d276b80a3680205
e2436ac971946b6c47ba40f5b1b848a3977e0a47
2174 F20101113_AADEDC aldea_m_Page_033.txt
a3414de49382261f88b0a94f941cac0a
8f1e89b6bcd91aad32c75f537c8a2dd19f1ff773
14061 F20101113_AADECN aldea_m_Page_111.pro
554d06ad42213dad7d76f899a3bb3bcd
7e247e0d3618ee68338c01546bb59aadde6160fb
7999 F20101113_AADEBZ aldea_m_Page_076.pro
8af33b50f5addf7f266518a64997fa8c
e78b598a5d0f3077d2b5422b76eb2d00e581f140
108837 F20101113_AADDXH aldea_m_Page_051.jp2
8229e70460df05447260e53ea278a02d
1a9e3b6e856df70d06c5729527bdd669d07efe69
F20101113_AADDWT aldea_m_Page_085thm.jpg
f5507103a8bc368394db307273a770ac
2d0738892908d977af0da384f0fba581a45724ec
30447 F20101113_AADDAA aldea_m_Page_111.jp2
e78c2a679fee68d2cbbfa4eb5a362000
6f94c82a8b0cfd96c815320c7c5c34835aaeaa92
F20101113_AADEDD aldea_m_Page_039.txt
a0559fcf3005ac3964b41fc9b85f5fd2
8d1f5d331ba5ed71b894e5edac88a7bab22bcbd5
56755 F20101113_AADECO aldea_m_Page_112.pro
4c4074cd6d6924535512e81c2581fa4f
2d581042107cb63fcf7b62feeaab61ec0d41d71a
2101 F20101113_AADDXI aldea_m_Page_092.txt
05f9def8eef70cfe350fb274288f8f61
946f6b0c4fdedbc58320ef27a396f52cdbe68535
26697 F20101113_AADDWU aldea_m_Page_043.QC.jpg
0c2c544fa87b80e81d3c5df15dd9ff9c
a3997cf3cfac37e68273ec5dff91635f184fb9db
54265 F20101113_AADDAB aldea_m_Page_026.pro
de4198d7e8265429e60c8bf4d5c9856a
6aa4a44e35fc81530d843bf3a8d3959fd4a63c5a
F20101113_AADEDE aldea_m_Page_046.txt
0a4f253d78a12b203edbb82f885cdd90
b75031c44c69d33e4917beea0b47f2dc18a63d95
65366 F20101113_AADECP aldea_m_Page_114.pro
7283da7253300d1ae5dd27028a0107c0
18f274aa5d4aafda827b0fbca43c8bda7a220e36
24684 F20101113_AADDXJ aldea_m_Page_053.QC.jpg
9e48d56a118793866c0cabcc335b0d5d
0c9b9eae0e01eca85e02f4d56c01a634da0763f6
2113 F20101113_AADDWV aldea_m_Page_099.txt
69f9a57d6c8e7d91f7e2cfbf1493c519
8005bd67ce34ed3141f7a506a32b1c59429c5222
2122 F20101113_AADDAC aldea_m_Page_063.txt
dea1f337d387ff27b7040119634ac712
8af31454ba1355bb2094e1e2bcd7c1ec5963e99c
2196 F20101113_AADEDF aldea_m_Page_050.txt
136392ea23b7a0cbb9aa32788d638456
db34671b6782f4aa382789b1271a196698cdd471
61426 F20101113_AADECQ aldea_m_Page_115.pro
d19b7aecb437070d46cdea985fed1dd2
61d3150ab23adbce20226cef75594a952b1a2a89
192293 F20101113_AADDXK UFE0021110_00001.xml
213ff224649a0904704ea695f34125fa
a79904a7bd93c44bccf9998343a79dfc2b737581
6875 F20101113_AADDWW aldea_m_Page_045thm.jpg
4626a4871bbb629d19f48feb453a6112
0739cfa70ff4c48d74706cf8a4763b814090de13
7195 F20101113_AADDAD aldea_m_Page_121thm.jpg
9139f748fa2a81fced09ac72f4ec2d41
b3fc0de86680ffe635d93fadc98c5ab9a0d35905
F20101113_AADEDG aldea_m_Page_053.txt
a4f1d4ad95de8e9228f70702ff9d56f8
efb497fa93bceea77e9f108811fa0477348ed53c
60629 F20101113_AADECR aldea_m_Page_116.pro
515844e804c232436414aaf916b32fc6
23ca75fba5592a280b81b7ee67f6a2495228ab01
79447 F20101113_AADDWX aldea_m_Page_041.jpg
bc1d694b12003bfd6704a59c9bd984c1
f7a400adea49be97f32bb21877af0f64d339a20c
6733 F20101113_AADDAE aldea_m_Page_026thm.jpg
5b319eef1bdf6d8cdd80d042223dc338
b8172d85c46805f02b11fbf6410959e1f8f27254
2091 F20101113_AADEDH aldea_m_Page_054.txt
895203871c55da5f1d8fbbd231468d13
6b640fef9d3fb3932d0dadc8db558c1ea6a137df
589 F20101113_AADECS aldea_m_Page_003.txt
f57e643038e7825cbb72bb5cdd690014
bfced9d7004fcef509b054751ec497f2d6f76ee9
72711 F20101113_AADDYA aldea_m_Page_066.jpg
0ad3eb94a2d1f2cd2fceb3e8118f0c16
38c345c3572e517690652ae15ffe10d5341cff6e
F20101113_AADDWY aldea_m_Page_091.tif
db8402d3c132baae9b3fd772218a0b85
d9e7b3d3703fee50b737802e2d254f83eaa2882d
F20101113_AADDAF aldea_m_Page_104.tif
ea9e3fae2b9feb1deef44b59b157ad8a
564bfa071d2bed083a40ae8f9513126659018d01
2216 F20101113_AADECT aldea_m_Page_010.txt
eab72bac49fcff3b6d9ef6b439b73e33
56e736fd5b2e326116e194126c4dd057e57ac4ae
78274 F20101113_AADDYB aldea_m_Page_067.jpg
e10a680f7e08495a23e0c1bf32af39ac
3ccd304ba37dc8008a510b1296bfedacfbfc0312
20992 F20101113_AADDXN aldea_m_Page_001.jpg
fa2e72b47b43a63c081a8f62d9685b91
7d0a9bfa96f01d50b04445b5affe4e8c278ed463
76209 F20101113_AADDWZ aldea_m_Page_048.pro
ba97f900bd799a55212e40042e7b8618
c4b6e66bac07a1699cd0e8da05adfe3f78e96066
F20101113_AADEDI aldea_m_Page_061.txt
6336520053e6ed89aab47ccccd0c071a
ad04ff95c95a65822e026d2c45a198e67d880155
2129 F20101113_AADECU aldea_m_Page_015.txt
24cd9ef4f2468a202f3c7094497ec553
df0902f75c91a2d7cd27bbceffeb84976d18f8f0
16631 F20101113_AADDYC aldea_m_Page_068.jpg
8018597c69b735fb460f07c3d66023e3
29dbfa30829d2f60449d5477c5b3b49ee210a998
26985 F20101113_AADDXO aldea_m_Page_003.jpg
481ce0e043fbee8fd43d53aa2c1925d9
fa5347b2323286eb5d76ade61995b8eb461b5195
55030 F20101113_AADDAG aldea_m_Page_072.jp2
2c6c8b8c350f12bef0401956b26ce8ba
1bfd510ab7269535e99cfb435f4d43b31114d6e5
2265 F20101113_AADEDJ aldea_m_Page_064.txt
2918eab8a869149dce4d8a2e84616b17
3f30fbc51bee78f9f724d598e94f5cdb334befbc
2211 F20101113_AADECV aldea_m_Page_016.txt
a2f850fb4ba61bced0c234bea03e033b
3ea0866a6c71965edea55522e659ef172a341a49
34704 F20101113_AADDYD aldea_m_Page_070.jpg
858809fd572b55cef9a6910fb4465079
c22e22af4524fba2fbd2d0c9c93acda018829390
73267 F20101113_AADDXP aldea_m_Page_004.jpg
98a7f870229caad8df3df2d590a81c9f
1d54e84fa0393c1a9aa2a2c91f31ab56c5327318
141409 F20101113_AADDAH aldea_m_Page_125.jp2
4699610c156ec32b702a3ccce1ae1534
0e4b7d02337cd7c809ad951eda99f68ead482ae6
471 F20101113_AADEDK aldea_m_Page_075.txt
65debe90c686350d3ab5beb32f50ed0d
c853ecbe43794fc6ab578bce47ae3d5cf25b1cb1
F20101113_AADECW aldea_m_Page_017.txt
e671cc630005ce09fefef008c22cd3b9
46d69daf6b98cfed11998cf1069057611d8693cf
29047 F20101113_AADDYE aldea_m_Page_075.jpg
ff337bb3a9fc9afe1ba5a1e00538440e
0883f538be99a8143ccfa613192d76575dd9fd96
30039 F20101113_AADDXQ aldea_m_Page_006.jpg
5f271562700e3c2d506f2581e9a7f72b
085f357afe95eda731c4706d6dea42f036aef3ee
26638 F20101113_AADDAI aldea_m_Page_020.QC.jpg
17664e9e742c655132b23d55515eabc8
833758c2c5651c5f074ce61af7e66f931849d518
13104 F20101113_AADEEA aldea_m_Page_007.QC.jpg
b3154b710746a98ec30ca05acff4b7a1
de9a044fb4a20eaf3a471c8a6e3ae1f0ab4dc200
347 F20101113_AADEDL aldea_m_Page_076.txt
6bb2a00e2faa91e8153a04a46fcdccae
edbddf568261cf4aa79c2f05450688164354330a
2156 F20101113_AADECX aldea_m_Page_022.txt
b59b9f96d3dddc7c4547fb9a66b44324
cf81283954f9c9fb614a420414732a97a51d1e12
78580 F20101113_AADDYF aldea_m_Page_079.jpg
dd27e139d0009d3ae8c8560deb09386e
841d7d9c184bdcfb481622836ecb165f36259862
69667 F20101113_AADDXR aldea_m_Page_013.jpg
0eb3fb12e6da18a80d01ff7afc83c0ca
6e2dee17481ab490a5061541b392157373d4dd78
26975 F20101113_AADDAJ aldea_m_Page_114.QC.jpg
74c142fc220062662e4081f9e0d72ddc
63497c3aabd4e248bb47bccf3826580d96289b2e
6694 F20101113_AADEEB aldea_m_Page_009thm.jpg
81710f329f34a1de297d915471a113c0
19f25395bcc5fc28d537e62c8eb5b716fed0a60c
2237 F20101113_AADEDM aldea_m_Page_079.txt
1ada014283e582d1f2e1f9896b987aaf
c2e696df24a3d687077cae17617f8fc1bd42b0c3
2225 F20101113_AADECY aldea_m_Page_023.txt
375ec00743437034a4816d3b85508070
4e65dc9715de7b8a0de91fdc4e7ba925aea90c7c
78960 F20101113_AADDYG aldea_m_Page_087.jpg
07b1e73320b6868e60e40f8c51575348
3fb16f36307ed3eb63a781e782ab44f364d4d95c
80450 F20101113_AADDXS aldea_m_Page_025.jpg
d8445d23d76d75ac6d8b6c5e3f4279ca
25232e5e67578851e1f6f012a804314436f64ea4
72196 F20101113_AADDAK aldea_m_Page_049.jpg
1b91d2b6289a4c00eefbc8ca03c39c55
6f8dbcf715f9f7cf7f52b6da079eb7ad4b107899
22750 F20101113_AADEEC aldea_m_Page_013.QC.jpg
78bef64497b2ba81f07d868231c3132e
4f2dd8d0f7a6eba4a7021bd9cc21ab835665f976
2317 F20101113_AADEDN aldea_m_Page_088.txt
2691654a1bb1208dc2f70a86f20d8fa5
fa92d56248535bed64475713d742b7c5f6d2c1ec
F20101113_AADECZ aldea_m_Page_024.txt
484df2e0df9466f0fc6044fb11c0d047
24fe47131e4052e73a3c943390a02811882fdcbc
81607 F20101113_AADDYH aldea_m_Page_088.jpg
2a3128d780971c2d11c16fbbf3f03d86
9ec5b2e40579ee6b38faca4cb9f9598449eced64
73842 F20101113_AADDXT aldea_m_Page_030.jpg
14631dee9c562601b3dbe7fa4f2bdb39
dc304c2602b3b599bbe1a00b4084839694ea5029
1051946 F20101113_AADDBA aldea_m_Page_022.jp2
0b929ab38461ef035f3a8d9f47863e65
ad432f22f3d9a37c38a2a32d9ad74f71242f4cd7
136161 F20101113_AADDAL aldea_m_Page_126.jp2
4276f10867c8c0186ff1d1c32a921f3c
f14a77386b43e555f51a4100cbcd3a121693bcdd
25228 F20101113_AADEED aldea_m_Page_015.QC.jpg
ffcecc1bf14965e16628ea5edbe890cd
eacd11d0b6bcc736346f11d31ffe38a88f91eee7
332 F20101113_AADEDO aldea_m_Page_101.txt
cbf2ce6f93b72688f30913dcb7d4279d
50ac38f04bfeb3613682f9534b5e1efbdbb8bc03
78398 F20101113_AADDYI aldea_m_Page_090.jpg
75354bd7f92f56c41e01771f9b00ebd6
4927aaf1f07612f7d0f24dfb88db1ab29cfc005a
75308 F20101113_AADDXU aldea_m_Page_044.jpg
e08fcad9d1cbdfb065263cba4e56e27b
7d89f68f7f31dc49e3a8946918df4cbcddb680ed
6885 F20101113_AADDBB aldea_m_Page_035thm.jpg
1937d53785631869980fbb5d7c720f19
529b3853320cc4df0f64231aa1eb1de6fe036d71
114363 F20101113_AADDAM aldea_m_Page_062.jp2
e6c7e198d41680e66709654248c90328
f9a71a79b2b1aab2dd220d9c90330a87363f30ef
26653 F20101113_AADEEE aldea_m_Page_017.QC.jpg
14950642ab5a5bbd012804f684eb7c99
4230e140ca0531e2ae4a54fa160e01e5b4044656
2379 F20101113_AADEDP aldea_m_Page_107.txt
3d468cc2d9a4348d04d991ec0655a73b
356c611f90ead9491c3094faa6f16fa85c7613bb
80280 F20101113_AADDYJ aldea_m_Page_100.jpg
e3d8b1c04ded1d72c02c96aa64012a43
6b7cfe3f0bc0d027553cfe0479a649f920cd936a
80041 F20101113_AADDXV aldea_m_Page_046.jpg
aa5e9b474a58774bf13868a0ee6df92f
a6e909a9eecdcf20241a011351d83089d52786a0
6948 F20101113_AADDBC aldea_m_Page_027thm.jpg
a1a572f613b57f7ed21fdbc69ae58e24
e27281ec895e495b017eea6ac45337295825ff11
F20101113_AADDAN aldea_m_Page_090.tif
cbdda03c1e1066abf40b158315e1b4f1
fbbf781ed4f74c2a081ea7cd28b5682a92b16833
26147 F20101113_AADEEF aldea_m_Page_018.QC.jpg
7268eb5c5016675086b51143fabb4d52
6ca355b83795be2f76b2efad126d3bad50d5da3a
1368 F20101113_AADEDQ aldea_m_Page_109.txt
cd0626aedde12e9796923a1cfbd2b802
675a48bc7e7e513320ec79a5f44389cfe984f288
122687 F20101113_AADDYK aldea_m_Page_102.jpg
5e234b3e3bd40127c8d4fb10b2c83425
b6b20b088dddb0e3fb586659c1b64b73a3522f11
112536 F20101113_AADDXW aldea_m_Page_048.jpg
9f5383212837c54abc54cb86e23828f1
c5d591dcf5d9f01033c783b440c1f6c7d8534b8d
26815 F20101113_AADDBD aldea_m_Page_122.QC.jpg
a15980b22c320400791170578382442b
359a50f5b38b6dc970cff1b4988d814b1a8fc2f6
2147 F20101113_AADDAO aldea_m_Page_034.txt
2cad5f81e64b0d8ba0d4c670daab9670
c29ccd97e57ed9a9ec0231e2c41c2e2b911af824
6936 F20101113_AADEEG aldea_m_Page_021thm.jpg
776221ba0d2acd276a4f8229e2ae1999
78f90a9c91c7c30915cb3e5329a6d7e05e697cdd
1801 F20101113_AADEDR aldea_m_Page_110.txt
0609fab9059545a93aa7f5ebf3998b48
51d33bfd803a27a13d8e29ef907f49a4cba70d70
24878 F20101113_AADDYL aldea_m_Page_104.jpg
a0e465be9ae0ac98526f0f889f609ee1
ba7f41abc48c43b3b583304a4313ebade78de52e
73538 F20101113_AADDXX aldea_m_Page_051.jpg
10093f28634e4de1f49d1b80e3ac45e2
3d22bda8747eb90516c5431b9f8e807f2917be5d
56500 F20101113_AADDBE aldea_m_Page_010.pro
72ad20a5686bf49f4f04d84f20671c53
81c375a9f495032c25ae64b16a6025e7cdd7f687
53600 F20101113_AADDAP aldea_m_Page_035.pro
0b4808fe6793f6f84250b7f0197a81c1
6396bd98f634ed36de2bf67e80cfdcb83068fbf3
25707 F20101113_AADEEH aldea_m_Page_024.QC.jpg
fe833d58a86b9a6acd6d0a70ff666b3e
cf18a10f635d28dac6f948ef92b4d6a91783daec
2264 F20101113_AADEDS aldea_m_Page_112.txt
a6f9662079b97801df2179d7fc3bd7ea
0765bca02b9dad8250e5119ab334c516ae020567
71280 F20101113_AADDYM aldea_m_Page_106.jpg
4705bcaa0df7ad4002974af649ebf2ea
f9686728562955d533d082941c1c76cccbc90f42
79225 F20101113_AADDXY aldea_m_Page_055.jpg
5046c134d08c5e03f23adfdd8a2e469a
25af4413309dcf56adb127911dc55df4b5a8b73a
F20101113_AADDBF aldea_m_Page_121.tif
e434df669117f0f70df0d0a13a361c7b
7a5d8535c3e1fdd81535275b72a47d37f9155b07
F20101113_AADDAQ aldea_m_Page_031.tif
7156ddf609e74ad8b00fc8852e05557c
5fc30e346fd6feb664dd8177bdd3a4e1c813db93
117511 F20101113_AADDZA aldea_m_Page_028.jp2
096bd94015a4786b7bd29dc4b2b6d93e
26e8b1bc73a4b409a87f3005f9ea8bb6e5d53add
26369 F20101113_AADEEI aldea_m_Page_025.QC.jpg
c5f0ed79ac9b7e1735ffbe4b0317822d
56d693a00e556b1fd2620373c005277a6ff28fe0
2627 F20101113_AADEDT aldea_m_Page_117.txt
0710c6a16ef244f3dc91c8c39110a4d6
bd2fbbd48610dd6d2d4df695a5110b01c4a25a4d
60725 F20101113_AADDYN aldea_m_Page_110.jpg
13297106d0e7e06abdd60ce070c94895
45fd0085724700772ad6716060861602b28f417b
77050 F20101113_AADDXZ aldea_m_Page_063.jpg
ffa40a9d483b646a01f7733af9d1a4ef
7f1b34737a17ec933bce6b0a47a413c092826553
21372 F20101113_AADDBG aldea_m_Page_103.jpg
3f5d78d2df26a6bae6ee8b3558f6f25e
769ebf9c33f4288c59d937a0feaa6d0f33eab784
10254 F20101113_AADDAR aldea_m_Page_075.QC.jpg
486cbd3291a940db69d1fde5dc9173e9
64f8b3eff4715bc5adf9e45da3309ec6523c5f4c
122352 F20101113_AADDZB aldea_m_Page_029.jp2
8b25648be212a36aaaf1f93ab4187357
1167e883d2131d381b34a72e63ed1967d2b5486c
2465 F20101113_AADEDU aldea_m_Page_120.txt
e99662fa47dce971a6dc33f88389aae4
7885975de7053d1776a2c52325dbf5ea1e72044e
24930 F20101113_AADDYO aldea_m_Page_111.jpg
4273035a5d8c4118998765d68d2e64b5
846d8b6ebb2669f52d2ecfa657b46f1c01c6d392
F20101113_AADDAS aldea_m_Page_094.tif
3eb2fafae9d03a10b94111b8aeb2e16e
3072933de13314fbe06e49472b004dd0134a3a21
119580 F20101113_AADDZC aldea_m_Page_033.jp2
68f6f507a66fc13241fe1e8b86db919d
83ed15171846551ffc8d888b2d26fe8e9fd8bc06
6871 F20101113_AADEEJ aldea_m_Page_031thm.jpg
d0718b5e856203c2c426c0e883ca6496
7b0c921294c872880736210bbf9ae0fe4a62c236
2559 F20101113_AADEDV aldea_m_Page_124.txt
b3a7a358a0d0e9f48d73290c36218d69
129ef09c4bb46e6e64f5562dae5bde5ab03fd3c1
81220 F20101113_AADDYP aldea_m_Page_112.jpg
2ee59874343ecf405e1e63cf44b4b603
2389ba56535b3cb37aa625f0d261cfc1cdcb1c37
54925 F20101113_AADDBH aldea_m_Page_022.pro
f8631224cc249dd8febdb957cb6e3dbb
6323075e34262baf4f7b6cf67d04caac8731d70b
6247 F20101113_AADDAT aldea_m_Page_101.QC.jpg
086a7e6d952ab8bc7184842bb3a952c2
3fed9bff1d3271a32ce48cf1d71a7ecf75560a31
122670 F20101113_AADDZD aldea_m_Page_037.jp2
47c1b13697979c186d624a4d0ddae006
3d0eda6e102db90ff5b4a392cdeca80f4fa83488
25445 F20101113_AADEEK aldea_m_Page_033.QC.jpg
24e1d343fd5b367e42a9d5d3e3c5fc62
724261765ec922a61fbf3f259964b14185cba619
820013 F20101113_AADEDW aldea_m.pdf
dd2f34caa09c62c382cd610bf3e99f5e
8c93e359f3c2ad9a3e4462066f7d11f8f82d68f1
84726 F20101113_AADDYQ aldea_m_Page_120.jpg
924271ae8121bff567e6cfcac41e3ae9
d10d402c5c4ec7b712f72d296912fc83c0a2735a
F20101113_AADDBI aldea_m_Page_056.tif
cf8db4aa73ec85050b6b3bf9b32abc79
2aaaac8ca802a5a518f79834a15416f75b598644
6021 F20101113_AADDAU aldea_m_Page_099thm.jpg
48f6c624a644669f29f1785513a89906
7d2f1bf3a2fadc289eeadd32763bbf0f0b847b4d
121246 F20101113_AADDZE aldea_m_Page_041.jp2
45495cbed5003c1b9f9900963ec10c43
caabb2547ef09567235a2f41e5c3a4099c935c42
25592 F20101113_AADEFA aldea_m_Page_061.QC.jpg
11b9a5548916bf288923e00fb1ec0809
efc2aa9203033faa5ab1fbaf2d6127e31649c5a6
6918 F20101113_AADEEL aldea_m_Page_033thm.jpg
a2bfd456a8c7c91dac3982c361481c1a
9c93e616a71ecd375d17d28f3be8f8e77c3c14cb
6648 F20101113_AADEDX aldea_m_Page_001.QC.jpg
91fa0ece5c558f2fe2c418dccaca3f6d
7d96b528b791a474d31ea90833aba751183018eb
92199 F20101113_AADDYR aldea_m_Page_121.jpg
183c30538f02f7c745ef40f25786d543
3a01d7cb8efd208d5c0695ee8cd48d1b3130c1f5
771 F20101113_AADDBJ aldea_m_Page_006.txt
6cfedca545d778f40e8895d48a185350
99e7c681a79f02ed0bf067cdcf7c5cec7dac0d38
122832 F20101113_AADDAV aldea_m_Page_050.jp2
8f08c5aacd1cf141218937f9076968df
83839910a7770b8e9c0d890a0c7246a3f3446e50
109964 F20101113_AADDZF aldea_m_Page_049.jp2
c995f4cd8e697e6d71efb82ec755e24e
dfa463bb81727d6ff229b8704ef0b64f72249eca
7095 F20101113_AADEFB aldea_m_Page_061thm.jpg
3c75717551a24c7a0b71794e3cfdf04e
3ed05f534b3dfb9ece54d630d6b19ca51bf18c07
25253 F20101113_AADEEM aldea_m_Page_034.QC.jpg
2bc144641b1405ff8966c84e8a5a6b2b
a94ee9b8ec34eea796612ca4d2f0f81ae2f22fe1
2778 F20101113_AADEDY aldea_m_Page_003thm.jpg
8b57a6a6433a70512d0b027f02e2e04e
d8445cd851c9d137c56d02dff2e11089708f094f
33534 F20101113_AADDYS aldea_m_Page_003.jp2
322d15e8d1a963b4a63fbcd0a0e8a074
1ad564779447e689a0b792604c954f9e6144a190
F20101113_AADDBK aldea_m_Page_068.tif
d007e7943d00954c9e385c34dcc45688
edfb2eeafd4b9d6df33bc28f23c2bd3b6234a920
2502 F20101113_AADDAW aldea_m_Page_119.txt
68c50fb247fa01e45cdb03b869153968
f4d06a93a1b1959e14235ae243a508a72a86a96a
117645 F20101113_AADDZG aldea_m_Page_053.jp2
73fa993ef2cb272530f8c5118bd1adb8
075d5a8b4f9a016809cf2efb6c5fb856552abee0
27212 F20101113_AADEFC aldea_m_Page_064.QC.jpg
e58dc1ed54233ff53627d7750758554a
bf049474c26b91a611f254033577f3a158af5000
6966 F20101113_AADEEN aldea_m_Page_034thm.jpg
35dec2c9ab2ec84b297756e01a59db82
a9376112edcc74bdd3380f03d9b3c1cec2274e82
15951 F20101113_AADEDZ aldea_m_Page_005.QC.jpg
b388d122e88563bb716adf3d298e4bbf
9a5830f46f87c8135f56636280dca76e23f7b0d0
1051933 F20101113_AADDYT aldea_m_Page_004.jp2
a26f5aec037d451a80d6d4f7e021ac03
5c2f9e31a254629756441b0e0180680db8f6c7d6
F20101113_AADDCA aldea_m_Page_081.tif
ed7a1fb567bddb9a65e833c3415a35ad
e2b30d7f32ee9995a7a4e248f1d571fbcda6b568
139867 F20101113_AADDBL aldea_m_Page_118.jp2
8dcc2529ad808260252a1b85006d4544
ad447730a55df68d09ee7e470f06faaf7f491da1
992414 F20101113_AADDAX aldea_m_Page_070.tif
b275feedb27aabb9868136e7ecf14f4d
7fa42372fffb091054b248bdb5de41c5ca890c1b
102600 F20101113_AADDZH aldea_m_Page_056.jp2
bb3a3cfe7437a24c24c7e8df21437226
4d9ee64decc264dcb6ec1c003de66a6dc226a0b4
24077 F20101113_AADEFD aldea_m_Page_066.QC.jpg
b9b9e08b3bae282e9f33b0fcbebcea69
eb8077eb896e875bb0a04cbac4d1b7f4ded61fe5
25097 F20101113_AADEEO aldea_m_Page_035.QC.jpg
8675e74cbacdf298e703dbed986f399d
3f8128f3479cec608ff6e550b15fcceb919c5d2b
1051925 F20101113_AADDYU aldea_m_Page_005.jp2
4af5de4351a04be971b50f63daeaecb4
f95b1ef19a9c337cf6e355feec95c3592d8b8add
54589 F20101113_AADDCB aldea_m_Page_005.jpg
3e71f925e597439d7cdabe7a57d9e391
68ba9f9c079af7c016d60aa6587c83e174a36424
27623 F20101113_AADDBM aldea_m_Page_022.QC.jpg
023bb6168d8d33e6ac04db4cb71302b2
8c0ecc7069768b237e05f1c3c22bc5a395d22542
120508 F20101113_AADDAY aldea_m_Page_042.jp2
0f16042d076cc2190ff97b93d0196427
83bfe2970e78ad0614c6934487b656ec810960c2
118892 F20101113_AADDZI aldea_m_Page_061.jp2
be22c69823e51ef94c3b54ea71cb0923
953a67e41d316fa0abd49f870a6be8e98083a5d3
3095 F20101113_AADEFE aldea_m_Page_075thm.jpg
0296fe05a7e2c2d7c4d8d1b7011b0909
d040bdbe9a42ca3688d376cdefb54f71b85c8d78
25738 F20101113_AADEEP aldea_m_Page_036.QC.jpg
c491322c612d935ea0c070fb70254254
bb7cef5c02ce2846306823db5b5a3c29b651d8a7
24763 F20101113_AADDCC aldea_m_Page_092.QC.jpg
4669a3ce87301c1d6ba55f68fd8cae55
396c28b6c7fa336703c231ed2c6e3e7b9a9c5446
F20101113_AADDBN aldea_m_Page_011.tif
ed4596e28ab61e905a3dd232ff58bd81
35e86bd94a872f9d7f5d6c9f3642bf321ec32ce7
21118 F20101113_AADDAZ aldea_m_Page_129.pro
505dab129892742b7d4fb68c4f4db8c5
240f092e03b394da452cc77e8314a91444b425a7
124026 F20101113_AADDZJ aldea_m_Page_064.jp2
197b2ec30990def3880a35809cb382fb
e410329de29bbf054809150578e939141b89bd7f
1051926 F20101113_AADDYV aldea_m_Page_007.jp2
f622511a4decf1e37953ce63922e2fda
5217fb1656260f588e6116853717037cdb5b1edc
10882 F20101113_AADEFF aldea_m_Page_076.QC.jpg
78bdef2c0456eb3750d519a6d2c06c74
47b8e6bdd02af5c22f7de1eec46dcbf311065086
25750 F20101113_AADEEQ aldea_m_Page_038.QC.jpg
dffd5af59061b079cb738d24ea40c75c
59f446e04b0b6b999c49acf30c2285f7cd0f967e
2164 F20101113_AADDCD aldea_m_Page_028.txt
2bd19d75d52a5d795bbb9fe7fed7cc81
549b0d7a2e1344c4675e485aec6476e19e3ad048
80768 F20101113_AADDBO aldea_m_Page_021.jpg
a69913a26185df1632408c7ca010c110
7b44bc456ece94fb209dfcf95ba520252b4bd5a3
112872 F20101113_AADDZK aldea_m_Page_066.jp2
84a680010cf9592e5adce776b4faee5e
052999be71391053d964d1b732666fa99b88c939
122273 F20101113_AADDYW aldea_m_Page_018.jp2
0a40b733af9c25b31a87604e5f0e5eb1
a5ded897d426a7a70c572514540ca029beb14bbf
10580 F20101113_AADEFG aldea_m_Page_077.QC.jpg
6541586e86ecde2e964b89d5721f6cf4
4721603bf281494afc782ddbff971204fa16b898
6854 F20101113_AADEER aldea_m_Page_038thm.jpg
c92836129bef3ac5a0f4db1bb9155c8f
5ed83c4b398a1c508682dcbe962c147ac66f941d
78657 F20101113_AADDCE aldea_m_Page_042.jpg
88be64ba9d1933da01d5afcb13d98774
93b92be89199e8a938fab266de5d4cacf1a2754f
53327 F20101113_AADDBP aldea_m_Page_053.pro
1c9ee869206314616856f97d0281d38e
4ca521b5979077b18748f5d6770cad5db522ef35
72724 F20101113_AADDZL aldea_m_Page_071.jp2
624e10dee9fa3eda2648ddce4f500434
f64a47f8f8b2935f620dfddd52aabb770446bc84
123440 F20101113_AADDYX aldea_m_Page_021.jp2
37344628afc2b51471ce405e62742e6d
da08a52c963eb7474d564684aea2e60f1789aad7
10665 F20101113_AADEFH aldea_m_Page_078.QC.jpg
7547de86f190d1c6b3d6efd962fcc281
32ea242b5e2593ed346879ab87bfd0f6c84b29ab
7148 F20101113_AADEES aldea_m_Page_040thm.jpg
1240be91879c27989eea4e3550331187
bc77c058c850e49da381ff9391fed926c2ba3196
46016 F20101113_AADDCF aldea_m_Page_008.pro
99d1a58fbcf31eb4ea2ba74dc64b0397
119a69ab08f6f2385102b41e2c1283ee207cbae8
2219 F20101113_AADDBQ aldea_m_Page_036.txt
81215291529af23f75a1dbad17b7cde8
e2b9b33d51c26cd467ae844f2b143c7db2e21c55
321950 F20101113_AADDZM aldea_m_Page_074.jp2
710934628ff3c65f1ec465ca4fa4af88
f3c91513ad5cb7e39737ed6b82366806e20d8278
121123 F20101113_AADDYY aldea_m_Page_024.jp2
ac282c0d3c2b4dd76dfb548e54bc6e0c
347a6f74b8e6c0595d995b2d0c05c6bd681eff8a
3633 F20101113_AADEFI aldea_m_Page_078thm.jpg
1207e195cbcdfafef1af452e2a291263
7b4eb5bf2def2e62543bb5066fd4ca9c2e906d27
26055 F20101113_AADEET aldea_m_Page_046.QC.jpg
74e99f8b1c613934999964ac1678175c
33b1c7d2dc54c56a4f291fab2a99d5a75097e517
52147 F20101113_AADDCG aldea_m_Page_039.pro
80b9e26604823ac8d76fde7e401edf45
9e864a604feb8daf22495fb0cddc89097cdd8b79
55448 F20101113_AADDBR aldea_m_Page_041.pro
77b04ad6c70447cea29b5ab9da4dec19
649be79447498a84d99499bde0d7d79e96a7915c
346453 F20101113_AADDZN aldea_m_Page_076.jp2
16bb274335c3c8ca3c548573161399b1
114e8f83b23df94cbe6a5be752abd9bd3b9e050e
116709 F20101113_AADDYZ aldea_m_Page_026.jp2
2a75b49d4a121d085383452a7a5b970f
ef890e0ea881b7f78ccdd42452bff6f4799b2dea
6862 F20101113_AADEFJ aldea_m_Page_079thm.jpg
cfb3718ec4fe074f4361ad997c6ebde6
a2c0661a01002dce998268bb4e5a7a5aa93eb27e
25960 F20101113_AADEEU aldea_m_Page_047.QC.jpg
67bde68c3d86e416256841db0895c761
31e11438b4e68101e3e23806eb4cb851344113b2
57086 F20101113_AADDCH aldea_m_Page_029.pro
3b5f2e4b7878c0913a78f4049c266025
3851540b79e4e2b571dbf7f600a6723fac823263
45124 F20101113_AADDBS aldea_m_Page_057.jp2
e72cd622d1b00e80b11a7d1ee5ea3d26
e66d63722440d0c47805c17530204074f6b3e6a9
119802 F20101113_AADDZO aldea_m_Page_079.jp2
fa7ae8905acccec94dcef58ef02d6ca0
f41a7f47f238c37c5c7d92f1c2d7fa3353cafbaf
30419 F20101113_AADEEV aldea_m_Page_048.QC.jpg
8ae45c94e86163ae07197620f1cc0814
74e44908783e38cc7d68d8846f93598e2caf5cb0
3650 F20101113_AADDBT aldea_m_Page_102.txt
5c990efce23de028b0f57ce6090a6816
a7025625363367f255e6f9d290fde07f9b666b01
119783 F20101113_AADDZP aldea_m_Page_082.jp2
4a0fc6ebf6700b041006e9fc8028530a
e55206a2056308b0f9f177fc5b5726a7849427d6
26942 F20101113_AADEFK aldea_m_Page_080.QC.jpg
e17d539ca0dcf2251fb1eb570765fcc7
b71869c284e518aae6bf3aa4beae496a95df1e73
6606 F20101113_AADEEW aldea_m_Page_052thm.jpg
58b810da2980cb49481921ecbe72f5c1
e90df3b10c6342bf785c269532bb281771d00ae3
16879 F20101113_AADDBU aldea_m_Page_109.QC.jpg
c551a0af226ec966669c0f854dd9655a
84cb570b9cabb08c0e2e7408c680c727cabf3153
123254 F20101113_AADDZQ aldea_m_Page_085.jp2
7ac8aaf243e1542a0cc32a929e7ff7bb
88d8c053d2186c2673cda7ff713f12bf670c4f66
F20101113_AADDCI aldea_m_Page_016.tif
ead8c5829afcf0169863d791eeac66ea
007683f0f6810e98ce58f512d2ec88662ab55890
5143 F20101113_AADEGA aldea_m_Page_110thm.jpg
b3c343f0f509ec5cd8c076eb768059ba
606f2dae977738080437b232ddebd5933ce6dc09
7040 F20101113_AADEFL aldea_m_Page_082thm.jpg
275da6ffe09c2d29a908fe1e200d6d32
b75cb00ae89993c2d84ea3cff6e8f398f92c13a2
7035 F20101113_AADEEX aldea_m_Page_054thm.jpg
9c1a013e94cdf7277b3ac63eab009286
73aff8da6f49a140fbb6626f49f2ab4d8c7da241
93770 F20101113_AADDBV aldea_m_Page_102.pro
a60bc9f93726fde5874c7f0454c8a443
7b6eb5dc964abeea12065f9d92a4c9eb10acd3f0
121751 F20101113_AADDZR aldea_m_Page_086.jp2
db598d900bb3da63875db26679245141
d1e0d2b4d5be8ae39310f0cd03be5701d6a0037a
26546 F20101113_AADDCJ aldea_m_Page_040.QC.jpg
a18f10fb47cead0950ea8165541e9972
294d8593da7962528668ebd1fe9b22cc921ba377
F20101113_AADEGB aldea_m_Page_111thm.jpg
464c4837d2cf0f818b240d86901d876e
fa4771c7d5c0597ad82d289a4d3bc20092d99135
26217 F20101113_AADEFM aldea_m_Page_085.QC.jpg
3be333e7f08b8408a0ff08ed1190d549
9060be4ff7ba31873fa81f6c98128cedee64d73b
25991 F20101113_AADEEY aldea_m_Page_055.QC.jpg
bb17a642ae718811ccc5a5be129d07fa
d07a257820da0537e990693dc469b6d9c7fd63cf
F20101113_AADDBW aldea_m_Page_020.tif
c8cf5c3c0c7cd9dfc83af0e945d7e6ed
6ac58a7dc6d7d3296e84b7e66459d4e89228be6a
115056 F20101113_AADDZS aldea_m_Page_092.jp2
f784abdb41a2dd7c5882f273948dc468
28b77bdea48888f86e4a8eb02b4b34410aa357ee
29315 F20101113_AADDCK aldea_m_Page_105.QC.jpg
0f06b7c932149ca106085fe6a9d8ac16
edb9b41e0e3b646f5f84bd63b6fd8682d132b286
6742 F20101113_AADEGC aldea_m_Page_112thm.jpg
88462067fe4326c9f479b20dbee30927
7a7927ce0510bc0ad5be301a64b47e351805496c
26186 F20101113_AADEFN aldea_m_Page_086.QC.jpg
1ad57bd246409d90cd89f245cca2b83e
560c2271d009bbf705ed26637e6b9c861a46b772
6829 F20101113_AADEEZ aldea_m_Page_060thm.jpg
a5e989f81830f47952324ae33d459ef9
1db7ebd593093fc9da98de3c64f4da7b55ab2cfe
117535 F20101113_AADDBX aldea_m_Page_015.jp2
e12ced9b596ec737288c07e9745823d2
efdc1256f3351c5996193167257e66d9925076ed
122291 F20101113_AADDZT aldea_m_Page_094.jp2
f3b7af517643b5506cad8ca55533f5e4
cfcce57e4121197b60a91ec606168fb510f1e242
2199 F20101113_AADDDA aldea_m_Page_065.txt
f22de036a20e64c24a346e532e2dca66
a1f7433ac68db917b92f699671602eece94be587
F20101113_AADDCL aldea_m_Page_006.tif
91f37336df258d339e1617cc5526dca6
17acda59f8fe3f95a0bdf80032281d58f2e96c61