Trait Perfectionism, L2 Anxiety, and Willingness to Communicate Among Adolescents: Evaluating the Roles of Worrying About Mistakes and Mistake Rumination
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current study investigated the associations among trait perfectionism, worry about mistakes, mistake rumination, L2 anxiety, and willingness to communicate in adolescents. A key element was examining the psychometric properties of a new measure of worry about mistakes as well as the Mistake Rumination Scale and the short Child-Adolescent Perfectionism Scale and its two dimensions (i.e., self-oriented and socially prescribed perfectionism). Our participants were 954 Iranian adolescent English learners. Psychometric tests supported the psychometric properties and use of the mistakes and perfectionism measures. Correlation analyses indicated that both trait perfectionism dimensions were associated with mistake rumination and worry about mistakes, and socially prescribed perfectionism was associated with L2 anxiety. However, self-oriented perfectionism was associated with greater willingness to communicate. Further analyses showed that worry about mistakes and mistake rumination mediated the association that socially prescribed perfectionism had with L2 anxiety. The vulnerabilities of adolescent perfectionists are discussed in terms of the approach-avoidance conflict as it relates to worry about mistakes and pressures to be perfect. It is evident that adolescents who are vulnerable must learn cognitive and emotional regulation techniques to effectively manage mistakes and the pressure to be perfect.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".