Performance deficits following failure: Integrating motivational and functional aspects of learned helplessness

Abstract

This paper deals with the psychological processes that mediate between repeated, uncontrollable failure on one task and performance deficits on subsequent tasks. A model is presented that integrates Seligman's (1975) motivational and Kuhl's (1981) functional interpretation of performance deficits following failure. The central assumptions of this model were tested in a laboratory study with college students. In accordance with our model, repeated failure (1) increasingly led to task- and solution-irrelevant cognitive activities (state orientation, according to Kuhl) the more it was attributed to internal, stable, and global causes, and (2) led to an increment in effort the more it was attributed to unstable and specific causes. Furthermore, results indicated that the influence of failure on state orientation was partly mediated by the importance subjects attached to the failure, and that the performance on subsequent tasks was influenced by both the motivational (effort) and functional (state orientation) consequences of failure.     

Performance and motivational deficits of helplessness: the role of motivational orientations

The present study examined the hypothesis that the effect of failure feedback in producing learned helplessness would depend on the motivational orientation of a child. Extrinsically motivated children were predicted to exhibit performance decrement following a failure experience, whereas the opposite was predicted for intrinsically motivated children. In addition, success feedback was predicted to enhance subsequent performance only for the intrinsic group. Following success, failure, or no feedback on an activity reflecting spatial skills (an incomplete picture task), subjects' performance on an activity tapping different skills (i.e., anagrams) provided by a second experimenter served as the primary measure of helplessness. Subjects' intrinsic motivation in performing the incomplete picture task, a similar task (embedded figures) and a dissimilar task (dots-to-dots) was also examined. The results supported the predictions on both performance and intrinsic motivation measures. The results are discussed in terms of implications for learned helplessness as well as cognitive evaluation theories.     

The influence of stimulus intensity and motivational differences on learned helplessness deficits

Two experiments are reported which assess the moderating effects on learned helplessness deficits of individual differences in task-specific motivation and expectation of control. In Experiment 1 a neutral stimulus was used and in this case only high motivation subjects displayed helplessness deficits in response to noncontingency training. In addition, high motivation subjects demonstrated greater sensitivity to the noncontingency than did low motivation subjects. However, when an aversive stimulus was used in Experiment 2 the moderating effect of motivational differences was removed and this was accompanied by greater sensitivity to the noncontingency on the part of low motivation subjects. Indeed, the learned helplessness effect in Experiment 2 was more pronounced within the low motivation group. The theoretical significance of these findings is explored and directions for future research are suggested.     

Predicting emotional concomitants of learned helplessness: The role of motivational orientation

Previous theoretical and empirical analyses indicate that an extrinsic motivational orientation, i.e., performing activities to please others or concern with criticism, predicts the cognitive and behavioral deficits associated with learned helplessness. Conversely, intrinsically motivated students, who perform activities for the inherent pleasure of mastery over challenge, have been shown to be virtually resilient to successive failure experiences and even show a facilitation effect. However, research has not yet addressed the extent to which motivational orientation predicts the emotional deficits associated with helplessness—namely, depression and a maladaptive attributional style. Furthermore, no research has examined the relative predictability of these variables to investigate subjects' feelings after an experimental manipulation of failure. The present research found support for the proposition that an extrinsic motivational orientation predicts depression and the Expanded Attributional Style Questionnaire. More importantly, our findings demonstrated that an extrinsic motivational orientation was a more reliable predictor of subjects' feelings after a failure manipulation than either depression or a maladaptive attributional style. These findings are discussed in light of intervention strategies to attenuate the development of an extrinsic motivational orientation in students.     

On learned helplessness

“Learned helplessness” and its Pavlovian analog, learned irrelevance, are phenomena thought integral to understanding depression, PTSD, psychosomatic vulnerability, and a variety of diseases and immune disorders. The origin and development of research on learned helplessness is briefly overviewed with attention to the reasons for the controversy that surrounds the study of learned helplessness and derived physiological, psychological, and behavioral phenomena. The need to remedy past focus on American research and English language journals in this area is noted. The heuristic value as well as the wide ranging empirical value of the research domain is lauded. The meretricious emerging social and legal barriers to this research are noted to be unrealistic and unfortunate.     

Epistemic needs and learned helplessness

This study assesses the impact of non-specific epistemic needs—the need for structure and the fear of invalidity—on expectancy of control and performance following unsolvable problems. Subjects answered a questionnaire tapping their non-specific epistemic needs and were exposed to either no feedback or failure in unsolvable problems. Then their expectancies of control and performance were assessed. The results showed that a high need for structure was associated with a transfer of the expectancy of uncontrollability and worse performance following failure. The results are discussed in terms of Kruglanski's lay epistemic theory.     

Frustation and learned helplessness.

This article reports the transfer of learned helplessness from one aversive motivator, shock to another, frustration. In experiment 1, animals were trained to approach food in a runway and concomitantly exposed to either escapable, inescapable, or no shock in a different situation. Extinction was conducted in the runway, and subsequently the animals were tested for hurdle-jump escape from the frustrating goal box. Inescapably shocked rats failed to learn to hurdle-jump, whereas escapably or nonshocked animals learned the frustration escape response. Experiment 2 replicated the basic finidngs of Experiment 1 and showed transfer of learned helplessness from shock to frustration when no running response had been first acquired in the runway.     

Learned helplessness and judgments of control

One of the central hypotheses of learned helplessness theory is that exposure to noncontingency produces a reduced ability to perceive response-outcome relations (the postulated "cognitive deficit"). To test this hypothesis, subjects were exposed to a typical helplessness induction task and then asked to make judgments of the amount of control their responses exerted over a designated outcome (the onset of a light). Support for the postulated cognitive deficit would be found if subjects who experienced the induction underestimated the relation between their responses and outcomes. The results, however, demonstrated that induction subjects (n = 30) made higher and more accurate judgments of control than subjects in a no-treatment control group (n = 30). This finding clearly fails to support the postulated cognitive deficit and highlights the need for other direct tests of the basic hypotheses of helplessness theory.     

Learned helplessness and IQ differences

Two groups of adult Ss differing in verbal IQ were compared in a learned helplessness experiment involving cognitive tasks and non-contingent rewards. The mean IQs for the two groups were 131 and 117. As predicted, the higher IQ Ss performed better overall and showed greater awareness of the response-outcome contingency. Their test-task performance was also more affected by the contingency manipulation although this occured only with success feedback. Implications of the results for cognitive accounts of human helplessness are discussed.     

Learned helplessness in groups

Group learned helplessness is demonstrated in Experiment I. Groups of 2 tried to turn off noise by their joint action. In the solvable group (S), noise offset was contingent on their sequence of button pushing. In the yoked, unsolvable group (U), noise offset was independent of all sequences of button pushes they produced. In a practice group (O). subjects practiced coordinated sequences of button pushes with their partners, but heard no noise. Later, all 3 groups were tested in pairs in a shuttlebox which required coordinated joint responding to turn off noise. The unsolvable group escaped more poorly than the other 2 groups, paralleling helplessness effects with individuals. Experiment 2 and 3 found no transfer from individual helplessness training to group testing and no transfer from group helplessness training to individual testing. We suggest that the same mechanism, the expectation of response ineffectiveness, may mediate both individual and group learned helplessness.     

Learned helplessness and the schedule-shift hypotheses

The critique of learned helplessness research and theory and the alternative schedule-shift discrimination hypothesis offered by McReynolds (Journal of Research and Personality, 1980,14, 139–157) are considered. Each point made by McReynolds is discussed and a variety of recent experimental evidence is reviewed. It is concluded that McReynolds' critique is without substance and that the schedule-shift discrimination explanation of the learned helplessness effect is contradicted by existing data.     

The conceptualization of helplessness: II. Laboratory correlates of the phenomenological definition of helplessness

The present research was designed to investigate the correspondence between the phenomenological definition of helplessness and its laboratory analogue—the learned helplessness paradigm. In experiment 1, subjects were exposed to unsolvable, solvable, or no problems. It was found that exposure to unsolvable problems increased the report of helplessness feelings and impaired subsequent performance. In addition, experiment 1 demonstrated a negative and significant correlation between performance and the report of helplessness feelings. Experiment 2 isolated the cognitive component of helplessness by measuring the amount of expectancy changes following success and failure. The amount of expectancy changes was negatively correlated with the belief in an outcome's uncontrollability. Finally, experiment 3 showed that exposure to only one unsolvable problem was associated with the reports of coping and anger feelings, whereas exposure to four unsolvable problems was related to surrender feelings. These results demonstrated that laboratory-induced helpless situations elicit the same feelings as real-life helplessness situations.The study was conducted by the first author in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the M.A. degree at Bar Ilan University under the supervision of Prof. R. E. Lubow.     

Richard L. Solomon and learned helplessness

This article reviews the course of development of research on a currently popular explanatory approach to dysfunctional behavior, the learned helplessness analysis. The early history is prominent in this review as it reflects the inspirations of Richard L. Solomon, a scholar who fostered the resurgence of psychologists’ interests in Pavlovian conditioning in the 1950s and 1960s. Current research is characterized as having four separate themes: elaboration of “symptoms,” elucidating the role of fear, explicit modeling, and extensions involving attributional constructs.     

Attributional style and the generality of learned helplessness

According to the logic of the attribution reformulation of learned helplessness, the interaction of two factors influences whether helplessness experienced in one situation will transfer to a new situation. The model predicts that people who exhibit a style of attributing negative outcomes to global factors will show helplessness deficits in new situations that are either similar or dissimilar to the original situation in which they were helpless. In contrast, people who exhibit a style of attributing negative outcomes to only specific factors will show helplessness deficits in situations that are similar, but not dissimilar, to the original situation in which they were helpless. To test these predictions, we conducted two studies in which undergraduates with either a global or specific attributional style for negative outcomes were given one of three pretreatments in the typical helplessness triadic design: controllable bursts of noise, uncontrollable bursts of noise, or no noise. In Experiment 1, students were tested for helplessness deficits in a test situation similar to the pretreatment setting, whereas in Experiment 2, they were tested in a test situation dissimilar to the pretreatment setting. The findings were consistent with predictions of the reformulated helplessness theory.     

Sex differences in attributions and learned helplessness

This investigation assessed the hypothesis that girls are more likely to be learned helpless in math than boys. Students in grades 5 through 11 completed questionnaires assessing their causal attributions for success and failure in mathematics, their self-concepts of math ability, and their expectations for both current and future success in math. Results indicated that sex differences in attributions depended on the type of methodology used (open-ended or rank-ordered questions). The most consistent difference involved the differential use and ranking of ability, skills, and consistent effort. No sex differences were found in either students' perceptions of their own math ability or in their current achievement expectations. Girls, however, rated their future expectations slightly lower than did boys. Taken together, these results provide little support for the hypothesis that girls are generally more learned helpless in mathematics than are boys.