Attributional style,attributional retraining,and inoculation against motivational deficits

College students periodically experience many challenges in pursuit of their educational goals. Such experiences can have deleterious effects on subsequent motivation and performance when they are perceived as negative. Research shows that some students who experience negative events are buffered against motivational deficits, whereas others are motivationally at-risk. Several individual difference variables have been proposed to account for such diverse reactions. A longitudinal field study that involved three phases was conducted to extend this research. Phase I examined the motivational buffering effects of academic attributional style on students' performance, motivation, and emotions. Results indicated that attributional style related to students' performance, motivation, and emotions. Specifically, students who routinely made unstable and controllable attributions for negative academic events exhibited the greatest performance and motivation compared to students who typically made stable and uncontrollable attributions. Phases II and III were designed to examine the remedial benefits of attributional retraining for different attributional styles. Findings indicated that attributional retraining influenced motivation, emotions, and course grade. These results were qualified by the interaction between attributional style, attributional retraining, and time. Findings are discussed within Weiner's (1985, 1986) attribution theory. This research was based, in part, on the first author's dissertation submitted to the Department of Psychology and the Faculty of Graduate Studies of The University of Manitoba in partial fulfillment for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy. This research was supported by a Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRCC) doctoral fellowship, a University of Manitoba doctoral fellowship, and a SSHRCC postdoctoral fellowship to the first author. In addition, the research was also supported by a SSHRCC research grant (#410911296) to the second author. The authors gratefully acknowledge the helpful comments of Bernard Weiner, Harvey Keselman, John Adair, Rodney Clifton, and Robert Altemeyer. Also appreciated was the assistance of Verena Menec and the Higher Education Research group.