The Relationship between the Instructors ’ Perfectionism and Social Emotional Loneliness Levels

Isini en iyi sekilde yerine getirmek icin caba sarf eden ogretim elemanlari, bu mukemmeliyetci kisilik ozelliginden kaynakli yalnizlik yasayabilirler. Bu nedenle bu arastirmada, ogretim elemanlarinin mukemmeliyetcilikleri ile yalnizlik duzeyleri arasindaki iliskiyi ortaya cikarmak amaclanmistir. Iliskisel tarama modeline gore desenlenen arastirmaya tesadufi ornekleme yontemi ile secilen gonullu 123 ogretim elemani katilmistir. Arastirmada betimsel ve kanitlamasal istatistik teknikleri kullanilmistir. Arastirma sonucunda ogretim elemanlarinin genel mukemmeliyetcilikleri gorece ortalamanin uzerinde bulunmustur. Ogretim elemanlarinin kendi odakli mukemmeliyetcilikleri en yuksek duzeydedir. Ogretim elemanlarinin sosyal duygusal yalnizlik duzeyleri gorece ortalamanin altindadir. Ogretim elemanlarinin mukemmeliyetcilik ve yalnizlik duzeyleri demografik degiskenlere gore farklilik gostermemektedir. Ogretim elemanlarinin mukemmeliyetcilikleri arasinda pozitif yonde, orta ve yuksek duzeyde iliskiler tespit edilmistir. Ogretim elemanlarinin sosyal odakli mukemmeliyetciligi disindaki mukemmeliyetcilikleri ile sosyal duygusal yalnizlik duzeyleri arasinda negatif yonde, dusuk duzeyde iliskiler bulunmustur. Ogretim elemanlarinin baskasi odakli mukemmeliyetcilik duzeyinin, yalnizligi anlamli sekilde yordadigi tespit edilmistir. Ortaya cikan bu bulgulari destekleyecek calismalar farkli universitelerde yapilabilir.


Introduction
Universities are the institutions that are at the top level of educational institutions and they are of great importance as they take the role of shaping the students from the professional aspect.It is important for educational institutions that will fulfil the task of shaping the students to know the individual and psychological conditions of the instructors, who offer the required education for the students, in order for the education to be achieve its goals.In addition to educating their students, scientific productivity of the instructors is an undeniable fact.The academic staff at universities are expected to offer a high level of training on the one hand and to conduct academic studies on the other.Naturally, this leads to different situations both in the psychological and social sense of the instructors, and they may have to exhibit different personality traits.An instructor who strives to do his job in the best way may come across with various problems arising from this perfectionist personality trait.One of the most important of these problems is probably experiencing social and emotional loneliness by becoming distant from academic and social environment in which the person is.Perfectionism and loneliness, as important personality traits, can be important variables that affect the lives of people, especially the instructors.However, the fact that the instructors devote all of their efforts to make the best of each task, the expectations of others in terms of doing the best, or the expectations of the instructors from others in terms of best products or services may isolate themselves.While people's perceptions of perfectionism are considered as good to a certain extent, they can become the obstacles to academic development by causing problems at a certain point and becoming an inextricable situation.
Although perfectionism was first studied by researchers such as Freud (1957), Adler (1956) and Ellis (1962), it was in fact put forth by researchers such as Frost, Marten, Lahart and Rosenblate (1990) and Hewitt and Flett (1991).Many different definitions of perfectionism have been revealed by different researchers (Adler, 1956;Burns;1980;Ellis, 1962;Freud, 1957;Horney, 1970;Missildine, 1963).When these perfectionism definitions are analyzed, it can be concluded that previous studies (Ellis, 1962;Freud, 1957;Missildine, 1963) addressed perfectionism in the negative and one-dimensional structure, but subsequent studies (Frost et al., 1990;Hamachek, 1978;Hewitt & Flett, 1991;Kottman & Ashby, 2000) suggested that besides the negative side, perfectionism may also have positive sides, and they regard perfectionism as a multi-dimensional structure.While perfectionism was especially regarded as one-dimensional and as having a negative structure from the mid-1950s until the end of 1970s, such researchers as Hamachek (1978) to begin with, and later on Frost et al., 1990, Hewitt andFlett (1991), Slaney and Johnson (1992), and Slade and Owens (1998) began to study perfectionism extensively as a multi-dimensional structure (Kıral, 2012).Positive perfectionism allows one to achieve his aims, whereas negative perfectionism can create an exactly opposite situation and lead to various problems in the individual (Stoeber & Becker, 2008).Besides, perfectionism can affect the lives of the individuals as an important personality trait that holds both positive and negative situations inside with a multidimensional perspective.While high performance, reaching high standards, superiority and effectiveness point to positive and desired perfectionism, seeking the perfect and extreme effort and ambition to reach it, an understanding of not accepting the outcomes other than the perfect point to negative perfectionism.For this reason, perfectionism, at a certain point, reflects healthy, desired and positive perfectionism that is at the optimal level, whereas it, after a certain point, reflects undesired, negative, neurotic and unhealthy perfectionism.
In general, perfectionism can be seen as an effort by the individual to achieve high performance standards that the individual creates for himself and others, and that others create for the individual.Achieving or not achieving high performance standards set by the individual or others can lead to positive or negative situations in the individual.Positive situations contribute the individuals to achieve the goals by influencing the performance of the individual; negative situations can lead to various problems both in the individual and in the people around him (Kıral, 2012).Furthermore, the perspective of perfectionism put forth by Hewitt and Flett (1991) clearly reflects this situation.These researchers handled perfectionism as; (1) self-oriented, (2) other-oriented, and (3) socially prescribed perfectionism.Self-oriented perfectionism is the practice of putting extremely high standards and assessing oneself according to these standards.The challenge of putting specific targets and struggling to achieve them is positive and desirable, whereas not being able to achieve them can lead to such psychopathological situations as anxiety, stress, etc. (Flett, Panico & Hewitt, 2011;Kıral, 2012).Otheroriented perfectionism is the practice of setting high standards for others and expecting them to adapt to these standards.In other-oriented perfectionism, the individual expects others to achieve the high standards set by the individual himself (Kıral, 2012).Therefore, the individual closely follows their performances.While other-oriented perfectionism can lead to such positive situations as leading and motivating people, it can also conduce towards the loneliness of the individual and family problems by accusing those who do not meet the standards, not trusting them, bearing hostility towards them (Burns, 1980).Socially prescribed perfectionism is the belief of the individual that the society has set high standards for him and that he struggles to achieve these high standards.Believing that the individual fulfils these high standards set for him and the approval of them by others motivating him, the belief that these high standards will not be achieved can lead him to get furious, criticize himself and feel depressed (Hewitt & Flett, 1991).
As can be seen, there is a belief and attitude of the individual in self-oriented perfectionism that individual's expectation of perfectionism is directed towards himself, in other-oriented perfectionism that individual's expectation of perfectionism is directed towards others, and in socially prescribed perfectionism that others' expectation of perfectionism is directed towards the individual (Kıral, 2012).Naturally, extreme perfectionism expectations, beliefs and attitudes can lead to problems in the individual himself and the people around them.As a matter of fact, analysing the studies in which perfectionism is handled with different variables, it can be determined that perfectionism was studied with various variables such as test anxiety (Uyanik, 2007), favourableness of child self-conception and acceptance-rejection perception (Özçiçek, 2014), burnout (Comerchero, 2008), family attitude (Cook, 2012;Ogurlu, Yalin & Birben, 2015), student behaviours (Diteljan, 2012), rejection sensitivity and subjective well-being (Erbaş, 2012), life satisfaction (Albano, 2011), academic procrastination (Boysan & Kıral, 2016a;Sarıoğlu, 2011), academic achievement (Polifroni, 2011) and locus of control (Boysan & Kıral, 2016a;Boysan & Kıral 2016b;Kıral, 2012), but there are no studies encountered analysing the instructors' loneliness and perfectionism together.One's extreme perfectionism can move him away from people and the individual can distance himself from others.Naturally, this can lead someone to be separated from other people and become isolated.When a person struggles to achieve the perfect, he may experience the concern, anxiety and stress of not being able to achieve it.Being stressful may generally lead the individual to loneliness, too.One can sometimes cope with stressful elements and sometimes experience such feelings as defeat, frustration, loneliness and burnout against stressful situations (Kıral, 2016).
Loneliness is defined as a state of discomfort, feeling that something is missing, feeling that one is separated from others, being alone and not being able to communicate with others, and feeling senseless (Kirova-Petrova, 1996).However, loneliness can also be considered as a condition of human life, as an experience to be able to sustain, expand and deepen his life (Moustakas, 1961, as cited in Yeh, 2002).As mentioned, loneliness is not fully expressed because there are many aspects of it.In fact, loneliness is full of positive and negative associations.However, when loneliness is considered as a creative, productive and maturing agent, it is accepted as positive; and when it is considered as physical, affective, social alienation or as moving away from self and others, it is accepted as negative (Kaplan, 2011;Luanaigh & Lawlor, 2008;Octane, 2014;Uyanık, 2007;Van Baarsen, Snijders, Smit & van Duijn, 2001 ).
In general, the feeling of loneliness can show itself more in negative loneliness because loneliness is considered to be a sign of affective, psychological and social isolation (Johnson, Lavoie, Spenceri & Mahoney-Wernli, 2001;Karnick, 2005).Loneliness can be described as the perceptions of the individual like values, beliefs, desires, concerns, anxieties, etc., and psycho-social and affective state with respect to these.Together with the fact that loneliness is handled differently as mentioned, it can be dealt in two dimensions generally as social and emotional loneliness.In the previous studies on loneliness (Clinton & Anderson, 1999;Olenik-Shemesh, Heiman & Eden, 2012;Salimi, 2011;Salimi & Bozorgpour, 2012;Şişman & Turan, 2004;Tan, 2000;Van Baarsen et al., 2001), these two dimensions were analysed.
Social loneliness expresses the problem of not being able to become a member of a group that shares common interests and actions (Weiss, 1993).There is no group in which the individual interacts.Such a situation can be caused either by the individual or by the group he wants to be in.Therefore, situations such as not feeling belonged to the place where the individual is, not being able to integrate with people, not being appreciated, and having no reliable relationships can be a source of social loneliness (Asher & Paquette, 2003;Clinton & Anderson, 1999;Weiss, 1993).Emotional loneliness is the feeling of emptiness that the situation of not being able to set up intimate and sincere relationships with the people around (Tan, 2000).Emotional loneliness can stem from such undesirable incidences as divorce, abandonment, etc. (Clinton & Anderson, 1999;Gierveld and Van Tilburg, 2006;Weiss, 1973Weiss, , 1989)).
Researchers are prompted to conduct such a study by the fact that the loneliness and perfectionism levels, and the relationship between the loneliness and perfectionism levels of the instructors who undertake the task of professional formation of the students at university, which is at the top of the education system, has not been analysed before.The research is important in terms of analysing the two significant variables as perfectionism and loneliness and thus, revealing the current situation.They both affect interpersonal relationships and the individual himself as well as the instructors that are one of the most important elements of higher education.It is hoped that this research will also contribute to future research.

The Purpose of the Research
The aim of this research is to analyse the relationship between the instructors' perfectionism and their loneliness levels.So as to achieve this aim, the answers to the questions below are sought for: 1. What is the perfectionism and loneliness levels that the instructors' perceive?2. Does the perfectionism and loneliness levels that the instructors' perceive differ according to demographic variables?
3. Is there a significant relationship between the perfectionism and loneliness levels that the instructors' perceive?
4. Does the perfectionism of the instructors predict their loneliness levels?

Research Model
This research, which aims to reveal the relationship between the instructors' perfectionism and their loneliness levels, was designed according to relational screening model (Balcı, 2009;Tabachnick & Fidell, 2015).In the research, the existence of covariance among dependent variables was analysed and how the instructors' perfectionism levels predicted their loneliness levels was identified.

Study Group
The study group of the research was composed of 121 voluntary instructors who worked in a state university selected by the researchers because of economic constraints and time lag via random sampling method.Of the participants, 58 of the instructors participating in the research were male and 63 were female.The age of the participants ranged from 22 to 56 (̅ =35.46) .69 of the instructors were married, 52 were single; 54 of them had an undergraduate degree, 35 of them had a master's degree and 32 of them had a PhD degree.

Data Collection Tools
In order to collect data, "Multi-dimensional Perfectionism Scale" by Hewitt and Flett (1991) and "Social Emotional Loneliness Scale" by Russell et al. (1984) were used as well as the personal information form created by the researchers that included the independent variables considered to be related with the dependent variables of the research.

Multi-dimensional Perfectionism Scale (MPS):
The scale which was developed by Hewitt and Flett (1991) and whose Turkish short form was developed by Kıral (2012) is a seven point Likert scale [I totally disagree (1) -I totally agree (7)].The scale is composed of a total of 24 items with three dimensions as self-oriented, other-oriented, and socially prescribed perfectionism.In the scale, two items are reverse coded.The statement of "I intend to be perfect in every task I do.","I cannot stand seeing people around making mistakes."and "People expect more than I can do."can be shown as examples to these dimensions, respectively.In Kıral's (2012) study on school administrators, it was revealed that the short form of the scale was a valid and reliable measurement tool.However, since the sample group of this study is different, the reliability and validity analyses were conducted again.As a result of the analysis using Satorra-Bentler adjustment and modification suggestions, Chi-square value with 247 degree of freedom in a participation group of 121 people was found 449.05.This value, obtained as 2/degree of freedom =449.05/247=1.81, meets the excellent fit value (≤ 2) put forth by Tabachnick and Fidell (2015).Root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) value was .083;comparative fit index (CFI) value was .91 and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) value was found .095.When the results are compared with the fact that the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) is below .080and comparative fit index (CFI) is over .90means that there is good fit according to what Hu and Bentler (1999) suggested, it can be concluded that there is good fit; when compared with the fact that the value of standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) is .10or below means that there is moderate fit (Kline, 2005), it can be concluded that there is moderate fit.In the reliability analysis, Cronbach Alpha reliability values were found to vary between .70 and .88 for general perfectionism and the three dimensions of perfectionism.According to these results, it can be said that the short form of MPS is a valid and reliable measurement tool for the sample of instructors.
Loneliness Scale:The scale which was developed by Russell et al. (1984) and whose Turkish short form was developed by Şişman and Turan (2004) is a five point Likert scale [I totally disagree (1) -I totally agree (5] consisting of a total of 10 items.In the scale, 5 items are reverse coded.The statement "I have close friends at university." can be given as an example.In the study conducted by Şişman and Turan (2004) on a sample group of educational administrators, it was found that Cronbach Alpha values of the scale were .75 and that the scale was a reliable measurement tool.Since the sample group is different in this study and no confirmatory factor analysis has been conducted before, Chi-square value with a 33 degree of freedom in a study group of 121 people was found 68.29.This value, obtained as 2/degree of freedom =68.29/33 =2.06, meets the excellent fit value (≤ 2.5) put forth by Kline (2015).Root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) value was .094;comparative fit index (CFI) value was .95 and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) value was found .079.When the results are compared with the fact that comparative fit index (CFI) is over .95 and the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) is below .080means that there is good fit according to what Hu and Bentler (1999) suggested.It can be concluded that there is good fit; but when compared with the fact the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) is .10or below (Tabachnick & Fidell 2015), it means that there is weak fit but still there is a fit.In the reliability analysis performed for this research, Cronbach Alpha reliability values were found to be .84.According to these results, it can be said that social emotional loneliness scale is a valid and reliable measurement tool for the sample of instructors.

Data Collection and Data Analysis
The data of the study was collected from the academic staff of a state university in 2015-2016 academic year.The measurement tools were applied by the researchers to the instructors, who voluntarily participated in the research.123 volunteer instructors participated in the research.The analysis of the data was performed via SPSS 21 package programme.By looking at Box Plot and Mahalanobis distances at first, two data collection tools with extreme values were excluded from the analysis.Thus, the research was carried out through the data collection tools filled in by 121 participants.Measures of central tendency (mean, median and mode) were analysed so as to determine whether the normality of the data was provided and it was seen that the measures were close to each other.In addition, kurtosis and skewness coefficients of the data the normality of which was to be tested were analysed, and it was found that they were between +1 and -1 (Can, 2015).Descriptive statistics were used to determine the perfectionism and loneliness of the instructors.Whether the instructors' perfectionism and loneliness levels differed according to demographic variables (gender, age, marital status, education), which were thought to be related with the instructors perfectionism and loneliness levels, was tested with MANOVA.In order to determine the relationship between the instructors' perfectionism and loneliness levels, the Pearson correlation coefficient was examined.In the evaluation, coefficient between .00 and .29 was interpreted as low; between .30and .69 was interpreted as moderate; and between .70 and 1.00 was interpreted as high (Büyüköztürk, 2007).Whether the instructors' perfectionism predicted their loneliness levels was tested with Multiple Linear Regression Analysis (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2015).

Findings Findings Related to the First Sub-problem
The mean scores and standard deviations of the responses that the participants gave so as to determine the instructors' perfectionism and loneliness levels were calculated, and the results obtained are given in Table 1.

Table 1.
Perfectionism and Loneliness Levels of the Instructors.

Findings Related to the Second Sub-problem
In order to analyse whether the instructors' perfectionism and loneliness levels differed according to each demographic variable (gender, age, marital status, education), MANOVA analysis was performed.It was detected as a result of the analysis performed for gender variable that the findings met the variance-covariance homogeneity necessary for multiple variance analysis (Box's M=3.30,F=1.08,p>.05)and the error variance equality for the scores of perfectionism (p=.90, p> .05)and loneliness (p=.09 p> .05) in Levene test.As a result of MANOVA, it was found that perfectionism (̅̅ female =4.97, ss=.77; 𝒙̅̅ male =4.86, ss=.78) and social emotional loneliness (̅̅ female =2.14, ss=.60; ̅̅ male =2.36, ss=.50) scores of male and female instructors together did not show any significant difference (Wilks' λ=.96,F (2,118) =2.30, p> .05, η2=.04).
It was found as a result of the analysis performed for education variable that the findings met the variance-covariance homogeneity necessary for multiple variance analysis (Box's M=3.04, F=.49, p> .05)and the error variance equality for the scores of perfectionism (p=.69, p> .05)and loneliness (p=.17, p>.05) in Levene test.As a result of MANOVA, it was found that perfectionism (̅̅ undergraduate =4.95; ss=.78 =2.44, ss=.65) perceptions of the instructors with an undergraduate, postgraduate and PhD degree together did not show any significant difference (Wilks' λ=.95,F (3,117) =1.39, p> .05; η2=.02).

Findings Related to the Third Sub-problem
Correlation test results in terms of the relationship between the instructors' perfectionism and loneliness levels were given in Table 2.As can be seen in Table 2, it was found that self-oriented perfectionism of the instructors had a positive moderate significant relationship with other-oriented perfectionism (r=.66) and socially prescribed perfectionism (r=.33); a positive high level of significant relationship with general perfectionism (r=.93); and a negative low level of significant relationship with social emotional loneliness (r=-.26).It was detected that other-oriented perfectionism had a positive moderate significant relationship with socially prescribed perfectionism (r=.32); positive high level of significant relationship with general perfectionism (r=.81); and a negative low level of significant relationship with social emotional loneliness (r=-.29).It was also found that socially prescribed perfectionism had a positive moderate significant relationship with general perfectionism (r=.60); and general perfectionism had a negative low level of significant relationship with social emotional loneliness (r=-.24).

Findings Related to the Fourth Sub-problem
In order to determine whether the sub-dimensions of perfectionism predicted the instructors' social emotional loneliness, multiple regression analysis was performed and the results of this analysis are given in Table 3.As can be seen in Table 3, it was found that the dimensions of perfectionism significantly predicted social emotional loneliness (R=.33;R 2 =.11) [F (3-117) =4.87, p< .01].The sub-dimensions of perfectionism explained 11.00% of the instructors' social emotional loneliness.Besides, when t value was examined, it was seen that only other-oriented perfectionism (β=-.25;t (120) =2.09; p< .05)was the significant predictor of social emotional loneliness.According to the results of regression analysis, the regression equation in terms of the prediction of social emotional loneliness is as follows:

SEL=(3.05) + (-.15 x OOP)
In accordance with the model mentioned above, a unit of increase in other-oriented perfectionism brings about .15 unit of decrease in social emotional loneliness.Therefore, it can be stated that as other-oriented perfectionism increases, the level of social emotional loneliness decreases.

Discussion, Conclusion & Suggestions
The research was conducted in order to reveal the relationship between the instructors' perfectionism and social emotional loneliness levels.The perfectionism levels of the instructors participating in the research in general and in terms of the dimensions of perfectionism were relatively above average.The instructors had self-oriented perfectionism at the highest level.The social emotional loneliness of the instructors was relatively below average.It can be said that as the perfectionism of the instructors was relatively higher than the average, such a level of perfectionism is not a problem for the instructors.Hence, extremely high perfectionism can cause such undesired situations as concern, anxiety, loneliness, etc.; perfectionism that can be controlled can lead to desired situations like achieving personal goals, self-efficacy, etc. (Shafran, Cooper & Fairburn, 2002;Stoeber & Otto, 2006; Terry-Short, Owens, Slade & Dewey, 1995).The fact that the instructors' self-oriented perfectionism was relatively above average can be an important indicator that they set high standards for themselves and strive to achieve these standards.Indeed, the fact that the instructors perform their tasks in the best way or that they strive for such a goal can provide advantages not only for themselves but also for the university they work for.On account of the fact that the instructors determine high standards, do their best to reach these standards within the bounds of possibility, and confine themselves with what they have got, they can easily achieve the goals of both their own and the university.According to Hamachek (1978), it is a healthy desired condition that perfectionism does not put pressure on the individual.The fact that the instructor's self-oriented perfectionism was relatively above average can be expressed as an important indicator of the desired healthy perfectionism.
While perfectionism expectations of the instructors from the individuals around them and letting them feel it may motivate the others at a certain point; exaggeration of this perfectionism expectation, surveillance and looking for defects in every task to be performed may lead to various problems (such as lack of effort, frustration, departure, etc.) in them (Klibert, Langhinrichsen-Rohling & Saito, 2005;Stoeber & Otto, 2006).An instructor with an excessively high perception of other-oriented perfectionism may experience frustration or anger when this expectation is not met or is met moderately.The instructor who thinks that the perfectionism expectation of others from him, that is, the socially prescribed perfectionism expectation is extremely high, will either make too much effort to fulfil this expectation or do nothing for fear of making mistakes and failing (Klibert, Langhinrichsen-Rohling & Saito, 2005).There are also studies, albeit in different fields, that are similar to the conclusions of the present study (Alden, Bieling & Wallace, 1994;Bardone-Cone, 2007;Hewitt, Flett & Ediger, 1995;Kıral, 2012;Üstün & Akdağ, 2015).In the study conducted by Kıral (2012) with the sample of school administrators, it was determined that perfectionism perceptions of school administrators were above average and that their self-oriented perfectionism was relatively higher than other dimensions of perfectionism.
That social emotional loneliness levels of the instructors was low is a positive situation.This positive situation may be a significant indicator that the instructors do not feel lonely, that they interact with the people in their surroundings, and that they live in peace with themselves.There are also studies, albeit with different participation groups, that are similar to the conclusions of the present study (Kaymaz et al., 2014;Softa et al., 2015;Şişman & Turan, 2004;Uyanık, 2007).Uyanık (2007) found that the loneliness levels of gifted children; Softa et al. (2015) found that the loneliness levels of university students were relatively low.
It was found that the perfectionism and social emotional loneliness levels of the instructors participating in the research did not differ significantly according to gender, age, marital status and education variables.Similarly, in the studies of Polifroni (2011), Leana-Taşcılar, Özyaprak, Güçyeter, Kanlı and Camci-Erdoğan (2014), Acuner, Camadan and Turkan (2014), Oğurlu et al. (2015) and Dişbudak (2016), it was revealed that the participant's perfectionism; in the studies of Selçukoğlu (2001), Yılmaz and Aslan (2013), Oruç (2013), Sezen (2014) and Ekinci et al. (2015), the participants' loneliness levels did not differ according to the gender variable.It was also revealed that in the studies of Selçukoğlu(2001), Oruç (2013), Sezen (2014) and Softa et al. (2015), the participants' loneliness levels; in the studies of Benk (2006), Stoeber and Stoeber (2009) and Kıral (2012), the participants perfectionism levels did not show any significant difference according to age variable.It was found that in the studies of Sezen (2014) and Tanrıseven (2014), the teachers' loneliness levels; in the study of Dişbudak (2016), the perfectionism of the instructors in the dimensions of organization, family expectations and criticism; and in the study of Aluç (2013), the participants' self-oriented and other-oriented perfectionism did not differ according to marital status variable.It was also found that in the studies of Kıral (2012), Karaduman (2013) and Aluç (2013), the participants' perfectionism levels; and in the study of Tanrıseven (2014), the participants' loneliness levels did not show any significant difference according to education variable.
Another finding obtained from the research is that there was a significant positive relationship between general perfectionism and the dimensions of perfectionism, which are self-oriented, otheroriented and socially prescribed perfectionism.These results can be regarded as a sign that the perfectionism of the instructors positively affects each other.Similarly, in the studies of Kıral (2012), Uçar (2012) and Stoeber and Stoeber (2009), it was found that there were significant positive relationships between the dimensions of perfectionism.It was found that other dimensions of perfectionism and general perfectionism, except for social emotional loneliness and socially prescribed perfectionism dimension, showed negative low level of relationships.Similar findings were found in the study of Karayel (2011) conducted on the sample of adolescents and of Uçar (2012) conducted on the sample of university students.
These results indicate that the perceived pressure of perfectionism does not have any relationship with the social emotional loneliness of the instructors but that the self-oriented and other-oriented perfectionism of the instructors is healthy, desired and positive (Stoeber & Otto, 2006).Moreover, this positive perfectionism naturally shows a negative relationship with the social emotional loneliness of the instructors.In the opposite case, that is to say, when the individual cannot reach the extremely high standards expected from himself, and when such undesired situations as frustration, disappointment, resentment, procrastination, abandonment and alienation (Jadidi, Mohammadkhani & Tajrishi, 2011;Klibert, et al., 2005;Saddler & Sacks, 1993) are revealed by the unrealistic perfectionism expectation of the others from the individual underestimating their competences can lead to an increase in the social emotional loneliness of both in the person himself and in the people around.
The last finding of the research is that the perfectionism of the instructors predicted their socialemotional loneliness levels.However, it was detected that only other-oriented perfectionism, which is one of the sub-dimensions of perfectionism, was a meaningful predictor of social emotional loneliness.Accordingly, when other-oriented perfectionism increases, the social emotional loneliness level decreases.It can be said that the perfectionism expectation of the instructors from the people around them motivate these people in the positive way and that other-oriented perfectionism perception is desired and healthy.However, the fact that the expectation of perfectionism is healthy and that their interaction with others is good have led to a decrease in the social emotional loneliness levels of the instructors (Chang, Sanna, Chang & Bodem, 2008;Wang, Yuen & Slaney, 2009).Naturally, this can cause them to feel lonely if the instructors feel responsible, expect others to be perfect as well and strive to achieve this.When the relevant literature was reviewed, it was found that, together with the fact that there are no studies revealing the relationship between the instructors' perfectionism and loneliness, perfectionism and loneliness were studied with adolescents (Karayel, 2011) and with different concepts separately (Akkaya, 2007;Bardone-Cone, 2007;Clinton & Anderson, 1999;Comerchero, 2008;Hart, Frank, Gilner, Handal & Gfeller, 1998;Kaplan, 2011;Karaduman, 2013;Kıral, 2012;Stoeber, Feast & Hayward, 2009;Wang, Fink & Cai, 2008).Similar with the present study, Karayel (2011) revealed in his research that perfectionism predicted loneliness at the low level.
In conclusion, the perfectionism of the instructors was relatively above average and the loneliness of the instructors was relatively below average.The instructors do not feel themselves lonely in the social emotional respect.This is a desirable, healthy and positive situation.The increase in the instructors' other-oriented perfectionism levels causes a decrease in their social emotional loneliness.Catch-up work can be performed for the instructors about other-oriented perfectionism.In order to increase the perfectionism of the instructors expected from others in the desired, healthy and positive way, they can be told what level of perfectionism they should expect from others by taking their competencies into account.As the reasons underlying the perfectionism of the instructors are not deeply explained, this can be studied in depth through qualitative research.The studies that can support the findings of the present study can be conducted at different universities.

Table 2 .
Pearson Product-Moment Correlation Coefficient Results in Terms of The Relationship between the Instructors' Perfectionism and Loneliness Levels.

Table 3 .
The Results of Multiple Regression Analysis in Terms of Whether the Instructors' Perfectionism Predicts Social Emotional Loneliness.