Perfectionist Quiz

How the Scales are Structured
Who Usually Takes This Test?
See How You Compare
Below is a preview of how scores are typically distributed across each scale.
Example Questions From the Test
- I leave it unless the meaning is unclear.
- I feel a small twinge of annoyance that passes quickly.
- I wonder for a while whether the recipient noticed or judged it.
- I keep returning to it and feel disproportionately embarrassed.
- The practical lesson, after which I usually move on.
- Some brief embarrassment along with a plan to correct it.
- Repeated thoughts about how I should have prevented it.
- A strong sense that the mistake says something negative about me.
- Comfortable; I can respond when the details emerge.
- I prefer earlier decisions, but uncertainty rarely occupies me.
- I feel distracted and push to settle most details soon.
- I feel distinctly tense until the plan is fully defined.
Perfectionist Quiz - Description and methodology of the test
People who want to understand whether high standards are helping or straining them can use this perfectionist quiz to examine recurring patterns rather than judge one success or mistake. It suits readers reflecting on work, study, hobbies, shared tasks, or everyday plans. This quiz asks whether you are a perfectionist by clarifying whether pressure is linked mainly to demanding goals, control, or harsh self-evaluation.
What This Assessment Explores
Perfectionism here is a pattern of standards, control, and self-evaluation, not competence. Situations include work, delegation, disrupted plans, criticism, mistakes, and improvement beyond requirements. A perfectionism quiz can show whether quality-seeking stays flexible or becomes tied to pressure.
Three result dimensions are:
- Order and Control (0-15) reflects preference for predictability and oversight: Adaptable structure (0-5) means comfort with variation; Preferred order (6-10) means plans matter but adjustment is possible; Strong control preference (11-15) signals tension around uncertainty.
- Personal Standards (0-15) reflects demanding self-defined aims, not talent or work ethic: Flexible aims (0-5) allow adjustment; Selective striving (6-10) focuses effort where it matters; Exacting standards (11-15) indicate pressure for exceptional results.
- Self-Critical Response (0-15) reflects how imperfections affect self-evaluation, not performance: Steady perspective (0-5) separates shortcomings from worth; Lingering evaluation (6-10) involves rumination; Intense inner pressure (11-15) gives mistakes personal meaning.
Methodology and Scientific Basis
Each item presents an everyday situation with four response options, moving from flexible reactions toward stronger striving, oversight, or self-criticism. Respondents choose the option that best matches their usual pattern, so the result summarizes tendencies across contexts. A perfectionist self-assessment is most useful when answers reflect recurring behavior rather than an idealized self-image.
The displayed result combines responses into three dimensions and shows a category for each; the profile is more informative than a single overall label.
Conceptually, the questionnaire is consistent with the Almost Perfect Scale-Revised (APS-R; Slaney et al., 2001), which distinguishes high standards from perceived discrepancy between aspirations and performance. It is not a direct administration or validated adaptation of the APS-R.
Vandiver and Worrell (2002) found reliability and validity evidence for APS-R scores in a specific academically talented middle-school sample, not a universal norm. Stoeber and Otto (2006) distinguish constructive striving from perfectionistic concerns, clarifying why ambitious standards may coexist with pressure.
The online self-report has no population norms, so its bands are descriptive rather than clinical cutoffs; current stress, self-awareness, and candor may shift results.
- Slaney, Robert B., Kenneth G. Rice, Michael Mobley, Joseph Trippi, and Jeffrey S. Ashby. “The Revised Almost Perfect Scale.” Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 34(3), 130-145, 2001. 10.1080/07481756.2002.12069030
- Vandiver, Beverly J., and Frank C. Worrell. “The Reliability and Validity of Scores on the Almost Perfect Scale-Revised With Academically Talented Middle School Students.” Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 13(3), 108-119, 2002. 10.4219/jsge-2002-372
- Stoeber, Joachim, and Kathleen Otto. “Positive Conceptions of Perfectionism: Approaches, Evidence, Challenges.” Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10(4), 295-319, 2006. 10.1207/s15327957pspr1004_2