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.     

Recognition failure and integration

If a recognition test is followed by a cued recall test then the probability of recognition given recall generally follows the Tulving-Wiseman function. Despite this regularity two types of exceptions have been discovered. Both poor integration and cue overlap causes an observed value of recognition given recall that is higher than predicted. The present study explores the first type of exception by proposing and testing an analytical tool, which emanates from confidence ratings given to recall responses, for relating poor integration directly to variations in the degree of deviation from the function. It is demonstrated that very poor integration produces a deviation above the function, whereas a very good integration produces a deviation below the function. The effect of integration (and cue overlap) is explained by means of a conceptualization cue dependency. Support is also given to the notion that an enhanced variability of goodness of encoding contributes to an enhanced dependence between recall and recognition.     

Psychic functions of failure

While we can explain significant differences in social mobility between different occupational categories in terms of the economic and social resources made available to them, in order to understand those who deviate from the statistical mode we need to look at the unconscious meaning of "success" and "failure." Beatrice, Dave, and Sally are all children of professional families and yet have great difficulty being successful at work. Their difficulties with work are multi-determined and there are oedipal and preoedipal issues involved. However, in the case of Beatrice the issues are predominantly oedipal, while in the other cases the issues are primarily preoedipal. It seems that while the common oedipal themes inhibiting productive work and work satisfaction have been discussed in psychoanalytic literature under the rubric "work inhibition," albeit to a small extent, the preoedipal themes have been given less attention. This is because the traditional concept of "inhibition" has taken such a central place in the psychoanalytic perspective on work. The concept of "work inhibition" has paralyzed the development of a broader psychoanalytic framework for the analysis of work problems. As long as we limit our discussions of problems with work to the term "inhibition," they will focus on the oedipal problems of neurotic patients and a large gap will remain between theory and clinical experience because a large number of our patients have difficulties with work that are rooted in preoedipal issues. Unless we can stop being "inhibited" by the very concept, our theoretical understanding of problems with work will continue to lag behind our clinical understanding. "Work inhibition" is not the only type of major problem with work patients can have--they can be the result of a variety of dynamics on either oedipal or preoedipal levels.     

A failure to differentiate

The K. J. Rust and T. S. Kendler paper (1987, Developmental Review, 7, 326–362) makes two claims to publication: (1) it claims to show (and implicitly, to show for the first time) that a nonselective learning model such as Spence's can fit the basic phenomenon of independent subproblem learning, and (2) it claims two experimental tests of the nonselective theory versus the differentiation theory interpretations of independent subproblem learning. Neither claim is valid and both claims reflect a failure to differentiate the literature. Moreover, Kendler's basic assumption of a developmental difference in the nature of learning is questionable.     

The shame of failure: examining the link between fear of failure and shame

The present research was designed to examine hypotheses derived from the proposition that shame is the core of fear of failure. Study 1 was conducted in a naturalistic setting and demonstrated that individuals high in fear of failure reported greater shame upon a perceived failure experience than those low in fear of failure. These findings were obtained controlling for other negative emotions. Study 2 was conducted in a controlled laboratory setting and demonstrated that high fear of failure individuals reported greater shame, overgeneralization, and closeness to their mother (controlling for baseline levels of these variables) than those low in fear of failure. Those high in fear of failure also reported that they would be less likely to tell their mother and father about their failure experience and would be more likely to tell their mother and father about their success experience. The implications of these findings for acquiring a deeper understanding of fear of failure are discussed.     

Recognition failure of categorized words

Previous research has demonstrated that the phenomenon of recognition failure of recallable words does not hold for categorized word pairs (e.g.,flower-ROSE). We tested the hypothesis that such an exceptional finding is attributable to the use of homogeneous lists that create a situation in which the functional recall cues do not contain any information not already contained in the recognition cues. In three experiments in which categorized word pairs were used, but whose design ruled out the invariant informational overlap between recognition and recall cues, recognition failure was found to the extent expected by Tulving and Wiseman’s (1975) function. These results add to the evidence that the relation between recognition and cued recall in recognition-failure experiments is largely invariant over many otherwise relevant variables that affect recognition and recall.     

Cognitive neuroscience of self-regulation failure

Self-regulatory failure is a core feature of many social and mental health problems. Self-regulation can be undermined by failures to transcend overwhelming temptations, negative moods and resource depletion, and when minor lapses in self-control snowball into self-regulatory collapse. Cognitive neuroscience research suggests that successful self-regulation is dependent on top-down control from the prefrontal cortex over subcortical regions involved in reward and emotion. We highlight recent neuroimaging research on self-regulatory failure, the findings of which support a balance model of self-regulation whereby self-regulatory failure occurs whenever the balance is tipped in favor of subcortical areas, either due to particularly strong impulses or when prefrontal function itself is impaired. Such a model is consistent with recent findings in the cognitive neuroscience of addictive behavior, emotion regulation and decision-making.     

The failure of endogenous growth

Fifteen years have passed since Paul Romer published his seminal paper that launched the field of endogenous growth. Today seems like an appropriate time to reflect back on this field and assess its contribution. My own assessment is that this line of research has not proven useful for understanding the most important question faced by economists today, namely, why isn’t the whole world rich? Exogenous growth theory, in contrast, is. Endogenous growth may prove useful for understanding growth in world knowledge over time, but it is not useful for understanding why some countries are so poor relative to the United States today.