| Abstract: | Fifty-six pairs of male college students competed in games of electronic table tennis. The participants were led to expect a bias in the game equipment, such that one player would have an advantage and the other a disadvantage. All participants recorded levels of aspiration both before and after being informed of the alleged bias. Upon completion of the game, the subjects made ratings of causal attribution to five factors: ability, task difficulty, effort, luck, and equipment bias. The results showed that the students with the putative disadvantage set significantly lower aspiration levels and performed at a significantly lower level than those students with the supposed advantage. Thus the putative bias became a real bias, although a psychological rather than a physical one. It is suggested that the source of the bias and the performance differences was a self-fulfilling prophecy. In contrast to the results of earlier studies, there were no meaningful differences in ratings of causal attribution. |
