Motivation for Sport: A Comparison Between Perfectionism and Excellencism in Self-Determination Theory

Abstract Perfectionism creates motivational conflicts. However, researchers have repeatedly found positive associations between perfectionistic standards and autonomous motivation. This may be because researchers have not distinguished between perfectionistic standards and the pursuit of excellence. Based on the Model of Excellencism and Perfectionism (MEP), we recruited 328 sport participants to investigate the unique associations of perfectionistic standards and excellencism with sport motivations. We hypothesized that perfectionistic standards should primarily be associated with controlled types of motivation and amotivation, while excellencism would only predict autonomous types of motivation. As expected, results of structural equation modeling showed that excellencism was a positive and significant predictor of intrinsic, integrated, and identified motivation. Mean scores of introjected motivation, external motivation, and amotivation were very low in this sample, thus we carried out zero-inflated negative binomial structural equation modeling. The probability of reporting zero introjected motivation, external motivation, and amotivation was positively associated with excellencism. The probability of reporting zero external motivation was negatively associated with perfectionistic standards. We concluded that pursuing excellencism should be encouraged, as it is associated with autonomous motivation in sport. Examining motivation through the MEP revealed that pursuing high standards – rather than perfectionistic standards – is responsible for the desirable associations with autonomous motivation. Our results suggest that findings from past studies should be interpreted with caution as they did not distinguish excellencism from perfectionistic standards.Keywords: Perfectionism, Excellencism, Motivation, Sport