Duration of failure,causal attributions for failure,and subsequent reactions

Subjects were given a preliminary problem solving task of either short or long duration, and were told that they could shorten the duration of aversive noise bursts by correctly solving the problems. They were then given false feedback that they had done either well or poorly on the problems. Two groups of failing subjects were given information designed to lead them to attribute failure to either lack of ability or a difficult task. Two additional groups received “success” or “failure” feedback without any attributional cues. Failure-induced stress was reported to be greater under short duration conditions than under long duration conditions, and increased to the extent that subjects were led to believe they were personally responsible for failure. Following the preliminary failure period, task performance in the same situation and task performance and persistence in a different situation were assessed. In each case, performance and persistence decreased (a) following short-duration failure when subjects were led to attribute failure to a difficult task, and (b) following long-duration failure when subjects were led to attribute failure to lack of ability. These results are discussed within a framework that emphasizes the role of casual attributions in mediating the effects of failure.     

The debilitating effect of exposure to noncontingent escape: A test of the learned helplessness model

Two studies were conducted to test the hypothesis that exposure to non-contingent escape leads to performance deficits similar to those observed when subjects are exposed to noncontingent aversive outcomes from which there is no escape, and that causal attributions mediate these deficits. Previous attempts to produce “appetitive helplessness” (deficits resulting from exposure to noncontingent positive events) have been plagued by subjects' tendency to believe that they are responsible for positive events. In Experiment 1, 40 subjects were exposed to contingent or noncontingent noise escape trials. As predicted by the learned helplessness model, subjects who received inescapable noise performed less well on a subsequent anagram task than subjects exposed to escapable noise. Similarly, subjects who escaped from the noise owing to the benevolence of a powerful other rather than because of their own efforts, showed performance deficits paralleling those of the inescapable noise subjects. In Experiment 2, subjects who escaped an aversive tone through no effort of their own showed subsequent performance deficits, but globality of their self-reported attributions did not predict subsequent anagram performance. The results of these studies provide support for the hypothesis that uncontrollability, independent of the valence of a particular outcome, is responsible for helplessness deficits, but do not support the mediational role of attributions, at least in the laboratory.     

The Relationship of Attributional Style to Learned Helplessness in an Interpersonal Context

The construct validity of the Attributionai Style Questionnaire (ASQ), developed from Seligrnan's reformulated model of learned helplessness and depression, was evaluated in an interpersonal context rather than in the typical research context of an impersonal academic task. Forty college women who had completed the ASQ 1 to 2 months earlier interacted with potential male dates. The subjects reported their causal attributions for dating outcomes as well as their outcome expectations and depressive affect before and after in-, teraction that resulted in their rejection. Several attributional indices on the ASQ did predict subjects' causal attributions for dating failure and expectations of outcomes with a different potential date. While expectations and affect were related, neither dispositional nor situational attributions predicted affective responses to rejection. Subjects, ages and physical attractiveness were also found to influence cognitive aspects of subjects' interpersonal experience. The results were discussed in terms of the utility of the ASQ and the reformulated learned helplessness model.     

Effects of knowledge that attributions will be observed by others

The current study was conducted to determine if attribution statements would be affected by subjects' knowledge that their attributions of success or failure would be observed by an opposite-sex peer. At the time subjects recorded their attributions, half of them anticipated that their attributions would soon be observed in their presence by an opposite-sex peer, while the other half recorded their attributions anonymously. Results indicated that attributions of success and failure were affected by the social context. Observed subjects evidenced less tendency to attribute their failure to low ability than did nonobserved subjects. Subjects who succeeded on an identity-relevant task reported higher ability attributions under observation conditions than under nonobservation conditions. Observed subjects evidenced significantly greater willingness to attribute failure to lack of effort than did nonobserved subjects. For a task intended to be of minimal relevance to subjects' identities, nonobserved subjects attributed failure to task difficulty to a significantly greater degree than did observed subjects. Results were discussed in relation to Bradley's contention that self-serving biases in attribution can usefully be conceptualized as strategic self-presentations.     

Temporal effects on attributions for one's own behavior: The role of task outcome

Previous investigations into how attributions for one's own behavior change over time have resulted in surprisingly inconsistent results. Two experiments were conducted to account for these discrepant findings. In Experiment 1 male undergraduates were given feedback indicating that they had done either well or poorly on a skill-assessment test. Half of the subjects believed they were being videotaped when performing the test, half did not. In addition, half of the subjects completed attribution questionnaires immediately after the feedback, whereas half completed the questionnaires 2 or 3 days later. It was found that subjects who felt they had succeeded on the task made attributions that were more dispositional over time and subjects who felt they had failed made attributions that were more situational over time. No effect for the videotape manipulation was found. Experiment 2 replicated the task outcome effect and provided evidence suggesting that the effect was caused by a selective forgetting of unflattering attributions.     

The relationship of probability of success and performance following unsolvable problems: Reactance and helplessness effects

The present study assessed the effects of amount of helplessness training and probability of success given prior to performance on motivational involvement and on subsequent task performance. Subjects were exposed to either high, low, or no helplessness training on a series of cognitive discrimination problems and were given instructions regarding the probability of success on those problems. In the low helplessness condition, subjects who received moderate probability of success exhibited higher motivation to perform, higher levels of frustration and hostility, and better performance than subjects in the no helplessness condition. In the high helplessness condition, subjects who received moderate or high probability of success exhibited higher motivational involvement and greater performance decrements in the subsequent task than did control subjects. The results are discussed within the context of Wortman and Brehm's theory of reactance and helplessness.     

Control motivation and attributions for performance

Two experiments examined the relationship between the desire for effective control over performance outcomes and attributions of causality for those outcomes. In Experiment 1, subjects were led to believe that they had either succeeded at or failed a test that was either unimportant or important. As predicted, failure of the important test was attributed more to lack of effort (a controllable cause) and less to lack of ability (an uncontrollable cause) than was failure of the unimportant test. In Experiment 2, all subjects were led to believe that they had failed a test. Once again, subjects were informed that the test was either important or unimportant. In addition, half the subjects were told that they would be undergoing more tests in a later testing session, while half were not informed of any future testing. As in Experiment 1, subjects failing the important test attributed their failure less to lack of ability than did subjects failing the unimportant test. The anticipation of future testing interacted with test importance in its effects on attributions to ability. Subjects performing the unimportant task attributed their failure more to lack of ability when anticipating future performance than when not. Attributions of subjects performing an important task were not affected by the anticipation of future performance. Results were discussed in terms of the need for control over performance outcomes.     

Learned helplessness: Not dependent upon cognitions, attributions, or other such phenomenal experiences

Subjects shot a light gun at a target with a photorecepter cell in the bull's-eye, with the only information regarding their accuracy being provided by reinforcing tone signals. Half the subjects received reinforcers contingent upon their hits. The others were yoked to the contingent subjects, receiving non-contingent reinforcers in the same patterns. Experiment 1 compared contingent or noncontingent positive or aversive reinforcers in their effect on subsequent anagrams performance. Phenomenal experiences, such as cognitive awareness, attributions, and moods, were assessed. Subjects exhibited a strong helplessness effect independent of their phenomenal experiences. In Experiment 2 the independent variables of contingent/noncontingent reinforcement and awareness of noncontingency were manipulated orthogonally by informing half the subjects that their reinforcement had been noncontingent in the target-shooting. Actual noncontingency produced a strong helplessness effect whereas “awareness of noncontingency” did not.     

Effects of learned helplessness training on instrumental heart rate control in humans

In Experiment 1, subjects who received feedback contingent on short interbeat intervals (relative to a baseline period) learned to accelerate their heart rates, but subjects who received noncontingent feedback did not. In Experiment 2, subjects who were exposed to noncontingent aversive noises later showed significant performance deficits on both an instrumental and a cognitive task. Attributional style predicted helplessness deficits on the cognitive but not the instrumental task. Experiment 3 demonstrated that experimentally induced helplessness interferes with biofeedback learning. Attributional style did not predict the occurrence of helplessness deficits in this context. Results are discussed in terms of the nature of biofeedback training and the range of behaviors that learned helplessness training affects.     

The elimination of learned helplessness deficits as a function of induced self-esteem

The efficiency of induced self-esteem in reducing various deficits caused by learned helplessness was tested in this study. Sixty undergraduate students were divided into three equal groups. The first group received uncontrollability treatment, the second received controllability treatment, and the third received no treatment. The subjects in the first two groups were asked to reduce the anxiety reaction of a confederate, as shown on an oscilloscope, by talking to him. The anxiety waves were shown on the oscilloscope and were preprogrammed so that subjects in the uncontrollability treatment group experienced lack of control over the results, while the ones in the controllability group were led to belive that they successfully controlled the changes of the confederate's anxiety. Then, half of the subjects in each of the three groups received positive feedback on their personality, while the other half received no feedback. In the last phase all subjects participated in a word recognition task using a tachistoscope operated by a combined push-button and microphone device. Response latency, number of correct identifications, and persistence in the task were recorded. In addition, the subjects completed a mood scale. The results indicate that subjects who received induced self-esteem treatment showed significantly more deficit reversal as reflected in response latency, persistence, feelings of potency, and sadness. The results are discussed in relation to (a) the assumption regarding the similarities between learned helplessness and depression, and (b) the usefulness of induced self-esteem as a form of treatment for helplessness depression.     

Causal attributions as a function of locus of control, initial confidence, and performance outcomes.

Causal attributions and body movements indicative of tension were recorded while subjects completed an anagrams task that was more extensive than most similar tasks used in attribution studies. Nine trials each containing 10 anagrams were presented such that most subjects succeeded on three sets of relatively simple anagrams, failed on three sets of difficult anagrams, and either succeeded or failed on three sets of intermediately difficult anagrams. Attributions and body movements were predicted by a combination of locus of control, initial confidence, and type of outcome. High-confident internals attributed responsibility for outcomes to themselves more than did low-confident externals, and this difference was most prominent when subjects failed. Tension-indicating body movements were also less common among the former than the latter subjects and were in greater evidence with failure than with success. The data indicate that there is consistency between locus of control and causal attributions obtained during performances. The data also correspond to the findings on helplessness in which aversive agents prove to be more deleterious when individuals perceive themselves as unable to alter their negative circumstances.     

Actors' and Observers' attributions,self-serving bias and positivity bias

An experiment was conducted to investigate the influence of evaluative factors upon preference for situational and dispositional attributions. Subjects listened to a tape recording of a group discussion on smoking, two actors presenting arguments in favour of smoking and two actors arguing against smoking. Subjects were then asked to explain in attributional terms the actors' behaviour and their own smoking behaviour, their evaluation of smoking being separately assessed. Results provided no support for a general self-other attributional difference; subjects did not explain their own behaviour in more situational terms while explaining the behaviour of others in more dispositional terms. Findings indicated that individuals generally attributed positively evaluated behaviour to dispositional factors and negatively evaluated behaviour to situational factors, regardless of attributor role (actor or observer). The results are interpreted as offering support for a positivity bias in attributional preference.     

Importance of attributions as a predictor of how people cope with failure

This study examined the extent to which causal attributions were predictive of depressed mood in college students who experienced a negative event. In a replication and extension of a study by Metalsky, Abramson, Seligman, Semmel, and Peterson (1982), we evaluated students' attributional style and their attributions for an examination performance in the college classroom. Additionally, an indirect probe was used to assess unsolicited attributions. Subjects were asked about their plans to prepare for the next examination in order to test for the motivational deficits predicted by the reformulated learned helplessness (RLH) model. Unlike Metalsky et al., attributional style did not predict depressed mood following a disappointing examination performance. Attributions for the particular examination performance were predictive of depressed mood for students who were disappointed in their examination performance. Few subjects, 31%, gave attributions in response to the indirect probe, and there was no support for the prediction that unexpected negative events would lead to subjects' making more attributions. Internal, stable, and global attributions for poor examination performance resulted in students making more plans to study for the next examination, a finding contrary to what is predicted by the RLH model.     

The effect of debriefing on laboratory induced helplessness: An attributional analysis1

Debriefing was assessed as means of reversing helplessness deficits through reattribution. Fifty-five subjects listened to escapable or inescapable tones. One inescapable group, prior to anagrams, was debriefed regarding noise uncontrollability. A second inescapable group was administered anagrams by a different experimenter. While exposure to inescapable noise led to performance deficits, switching experimenters obviated these deficits. Debriefing actually facilitated anagram performance. All inescapable subjects—debriefed or not—attributed their lack of control on the noise task to experimenter interference, casting some doubt on reattribution as an explanation of debriefing's effects. Results were discussed in terms of the reformulated learned helplessness model and the ethical implications of debriefing in learned helplessness research.     

Effects of amount of helplessness training and internal-external locus of control on mood and performance.

Based on Wortman and Brehm's integration of reactance theory with Seligman's model of learned helplessness, an investigation was conducted to examine the effects of amount of helplessness training and internal--external locus of control on subsequent task performance and on self-ratings of mood. Subjects were divided into "internal" and "external" groups and were then given either high, low, or no helplessness training on a series of concept-formation problems. After completing a mood checklist, all subjects worked on an anagram task presented as a second experiment by a second experimenter. The results revealed that internals exhibited greater performance decrements and reported greater depression under high helplessness than did externals. In the low helplessness conditions, internals tended to perform better than control subjects, while externals tended to perform worse than control subjects; low helplessness subjects also reported the highest levels of hostility. The results are discussed within the context of Wortman and Brehm's integration of reactance and learned helplessness theories.     

When experiences of failure promote expectations of success: The impact of attribution failure to ineffective strategies1

This experiment examined the effects of attributing initial failure to ineffective strategies on performance expectancies. Subjects were induced to attribute performance at a persuasion task to either their strategies (a controllable factor) or abilities (an uncontrollable factor). Subjects then failed at their initial persuasion attempt. Following failure, strategy subjects expected more successes in future attempts than did ability subjects. Strategy subjects also expected to improve with practice, while ability subjects did not. Comparisons to control subjects, who received no attribution manipulation prior to success or failure, clarify these results. Findings suggest that subjects attributing task outcomes to strategies monitored the effectiveness of their strategies and concluded that by modifying their strategies they would become more successful. In contrast, subjects attributing task outcome to abilities failed to attend to strategic features and concluded that they could not improve. Implications of this overlooked factor for attribution theory and learned helplessness are discussed.     

Outcome expectancy,locus of attribution for expectancy,and self-directed attention as determinants of evaluations and performance

Are internal versus external attributions of responsibility for prior outcomes important determinants of subsequent performances? or is their effect limited to influencing the affective and evaluative experiences that are associated with the task outcomes? Recent theoretical statements appear to differ on this issue. The present study examined the question, while at the same time testing the influence of self-directed attention on the process under investigation. Subjects attempted a series of mazes in collaboration with an ostensible cosubject (actually a confederate). The pair experienced either three consecutive sucesses or three consecutive failures. Subjects were led to perceive the responsibility for these outcomes as residing primarily with themselves or primarily with their partner. Self-focus was manipulated (by a mirror) prior to attempting a fourth maze and completing a set of rating scales. Success-condition subjects performed better on the fourth maze in the mirror's presence than in its absence, whereas failure-condition subjects tended to perform more poorly in the mirror's presence than in its absence. The manipulation of internal versus external attributions did not influence behavior, but did influence subjects' affective and evaluative reactions to themselves and their partner. Discussion centers on the relationship between these findings and other recent findings in the areas of attribution and achievement-related behavior.     

Cognitive effects of life stress and learned helplessness

Abstract Stressful life events and learned helplessness attributional styles have been shown to impact a variety of personal outcomes. This study examined how these factors influence two classes of cognitive behaviors: the occurrence of intrusive thoughts and performance in memory and verbal-spatial reasoning tasks. Negative life change and attributions for negative events predicted different types of cognitive responses. Individuals reporting higher levels of life stress were more likely to experience distracting thoughts that were unrelated to the current task, whereas individuals with learned helplessness attributional styles tended to have more worrisome thoughts about their task performance. In general, individuals reporting high levels of negative life stress tended to perform more poorly in tasks, whereas individuals with learned helplessness attributional styles tended to perform better than those who did not share this explanatory style. These results suggest that life stress and attributional style have important influecnes on cognitive processes, and that a learned helplessness attributional style can have beneficial effects on behavior in some situations.     

Perceived self-efficacy in coping with cognitive stressors and opioid activation

This experiment tested the hypothesis that perceived self-inefficacy in exercising control over cognitive stressors activates endogenous opioid systems. Subjects performed mathematical operations under conditions in which they could exercise full control over the cognitive task demands or in which the cognitive demands strained or exceeded their cognitive capabilities. Subjects with induced high perceived self-efficacy exhibited little stress, whereas those with induced low perceived self-efficacy experienced a high level of stress and autonomic arousal. Subjects were then administered either an inert saline solution or naloxone, an opiate antagonist that blocks the analgesic effects of endogenous opiates, whereupon their level of pain tolerance was measured. The self-efficacious nonstressed subjects gave no evidence of opioid activation. The self-inefficacious stressed subjects were able to withstand increasing amounts of pain stimulation under saline conditions. However, when endogenous opioid mechanisms that control pain were blocked by naloxone, the subjects were unable to bear much pain stimulation. This pattern of changes suggests that the stress-induced analgesia found under the saline condition was mediated by endogenous opioid mechanisms and counteracted by the opiate antagonist.     

Affect as a mediator of attributional egotism

A three-stage model of the relationships among achievement outcomes, outcome-related affect, attribution, and emotion is tested in two studies. It is suggested that success and failure elicit positive and negative affective states due to prior conditioning. These affective states then lead to an attribution process that serves to defend and enhance self-esteem. Next, emotional labels are chosen that are consistent with the affective states and the attributions. Two studies were designed to test the proposed relationships among achievement outcomes, affective states, and attributions. In the first study, subjects received information indicating that they were strongly or mildly aroused as a result of receiving outcome feedback on an achievement task. The results indicated that low arousal reduced egotistical attributions to internal factors. In the second study, subjects either succeeded or failed on an achievement task. Half of the subjects were provided with an opportunity to misattribute the arousal elicited by their outcomes to an irrelevant source. Subjects in the misattribution condition made less egotistical attributions to external factors than subjects who were given no opportunity to misattribute their arousal. The results of both studies suggest that outcome-related affect mediates the relationship between outcomes and attributions in achievement situations.