IPIP-HEXACO
Perfectionism
A public-domain personality facet scoring engine
Instructions: For each statement, select the response that best describes how accurately it reflects your typical behavior and attitudes. There are no right or wrong answers. Respond as honestly as possible for the most informative academic baseline.
Scale: 1 = Very Inaccurate · 2 = Moderately Inaccurate · 3 = Neither · 4 = Moderately Accurate · 5 = Very Accurate
Your Perfectionism Profile
IPIP-HEXACO · Ashton, Lee & Goldberg (2007) · Public Domain
Facet Interpretation
—
—
—
—
Academic Citation
Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., & Goldberg, L. R. (2007). The IPIP–HEXACO scales: An alternative, public-domain measure of the personality constructs in the HEXACO model. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 1515–1526. doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2007.02.003
About the IPIP-HEXACO Perfectionism Scale (C-Perf)
The IPIP-HEXACO Perfectionism scale (C:Perf) is a public-domain personality instrument from the International Personality Item Pool by Ashton, Lee, and Goldberg (2007). Perfectionism is the third facet of the Conscientiousness dimension and measures the degree to which individuals attend to detail, detect mistakes, demand quality, and continue working until everything meets their precision standards. Unlike maladaptive perfectionism constructs, this facet captures only the adaptive accuracy-seeking and standards-setting components.
The IPIP-HEXACO Perfectionism scale is notable for having eight items in the positive (perfectionism) direction and only two reverse-keyed items, reflecting the strong positive valence of the construct in the IPIP item pool. The alpha of .80 indicates solid reliability. Research demonstrates that Perfectionism shows specific predictive validity for output quality ratings, error frequency in structured tasks, and occupational performance in precision-requiring roles, with effects independent of Diligence, Organization, and Prudence — supporting the four-facet structure of Conscientiousness.
Perfectionism vs. Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (MPS): Key Differences
| Feature | IPIP-HEXACO Perfectionism (C-Perf) | Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (MPS) |
|---|---|---|
| Core Construct | Adaptive precision & quality standards | Adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism |
| Item Count | 10 items (IPIP-HEXACO) | 45 items (MPS) |
| Access | Public domain — free any use | Academic research use |
| Alpha Reliability | .80 (Ashton et al., 2007) | ~.82–.88 (Frost et al., 1990) |
Facet Position Within the HEXACO Model
The Perfectionism facet (C-Perf) is one of four facets within the Conscientiousness (C) dimension of the six-factor HEXACO personality model developed by Michael Ashton and Kibeom Lee. Unlike the Big Five framework, HEXACO adds a sixth dimension — Honesty-Humility — capturing variance in sincere, fair, modest, and non-materialistic behavior that the five-factor model distributes across Agreeableness and Conscientiousness. The IPIP representation of this facet, developed in collaboration with Lewis Goldberg and the International Personality Item Pool project, provides researchers with an openly licensed operationalization that achieves internal consistency (alpha = .80) comparable to the proprietary HEXACO-PI-R while remaining entirely free for academic, organizational, and educational deployment.
Research and Applied Utility
Researchers and students in personality psychology, organizational behavior, and educational research regularly use the IPIP-HEXACO facet scales as targeted instruments for hypothesis testing, survey battery supplementation, and educational self-reflection activities. Because the IPIP scales are public domain, they may be embedded in any survey platform, online tool, or research system without licensing restrictions. The Perfectionism (C-Perf) scale specifically provides a standardized academic baseline for the perfectionism construct within the Conscientiousness domain, enabling comparison with published normative data from the Ashton, Lee, and Goldberg (2007) validation study. The scale has been applied in cross-cultural research across more than 35 countries, providing researchers with substantial normative reference material.
Frequently Asked Questions — Perfectionism Scale (C-Perf)
Is perfectionism always rooted in fear of failure, or can it come from somewhere healthier?
Research on perfectionism models consistently distinguishes between perfectionism grounded in love of quality versus perfectionism grounded in fear of inadequacy — and these two roots produce dramatically different outcomes. Quality-driven perfectionism predicts high output standards, careful attention to detail, and persistence, with relatively modest wellbeing costs. Fear-based perfectionism predicts procrastination, self-criticism, and performance anxiety that can ultimately undermine the quality it is trying to protect.
Does high perfectionism make people better surgeons, engineers, or other precision-dependent professionals?
Research on occupational performance in precision-requiring roles shows that above-average perfectionism does independently predict fewer errors, higher quality outputs, and stronger standards maintenance in roles where accuracy genuinely matters — medical, engineering, and quality assurance contexts among them. The caveat is that extreme perfectionism can also predict decision paralysis, excessive time investment in low-stakes details, and difficulty delegating. The sweet spot tends to be high perfectionism paired with strong prioritisation skill.
Can perfectionism cause people to never finish things or feel like their work is never ready?
This is one of perfectionism's most documented functional costs. Research on creative productivity shows a reliable curvilinear relationship: moderate perfectionism predicts higher creative output quality, while extreme perfectionism predicts lower total output volume because finishing requires accepting imperfection. The intervention research shows that explicitly time-boxing completion and separating 'done' standards from 'perfect' standards is more effective than trying to lower the quality bar.
Is there a connection between high perfectionism and anxiety?
The relationship is real but conditional. High perfectionism correlates with anxiety particularly when it is combined with harsh self-judgment of errors — when falling short of the standard is experienced as a failure of the self rather than a feature of a difficult task. Perfectionism without the self-critical component shows much lower anxiety correlations. Self-compassion practices show specific effectiveness for reducing the anxiety associated with perfectionism without reducing the quality standards.
Does this perfectionism profile replace a formal psychological or occupational evaluation?
No. The IPIP-HEXACO Perfectionism scoring engine is a self-reflection worksheet for educational and academic baseline purposes only. It does not assess performance capacity, psychological health, or occupational functioning, and produces no formal conclusions about individual perfectionism in any applied context. Formal evaluation of perfectionism and its implications for wellbeing or performance requires a qualified professional and appropriate validated instruments.