The empirical base of Trope's position on achievement-task choice: A critique

The empirical base of Trope's position on achievement-task choice is critiqued here. Attention is focused on Trope's earliest studies (Trope, 1975; Trope & Brickman, 1975) because they provide this position's most critical tests. Support for the following three propositions of the position is assessed: (1) diagnosticity information, rather than task difficulty information, is the basis of task selection; (2) desire for information about one's ability, not the wish for certain affective consequences, is what motivates achievement-task choice; and (3) the success of the Atkinson model is owed to the adventitious confounding existing between task diagnosticity and task difficulty, and the resulting confounding between ability-informational and affective consequences. The major findings are that (1) the tests of all propositions have such serious logical flaws that they cannot answer the questions they seek to answer, (2) the task choice situation containing the diagnosticity manipulation employed by Trope is so different from real-life task choice situations as to call into question the relevance of Trope's findings for the latter situations, (3) Trope's diagnosticity manipulation is a meaningless one as it gives rise to situations that are logical impossibilities (e.g., skill tasks that are performed equally well by high- and low-skilled people), and (4) the tests of Atkinson's position are invalidated by a serious misinterpretation of that position by Trope.