Self-Handicapping
'Self-handicapping' is described as an action or choice which prevents a person from being responsible for failure. [1] It was first theorized by Edward E. Jones and Steven Berglas [2], according to whom self-handicaps are obstacles created, or claimed, by the individual in anticipation of failing performance. [3] Self-handicapping behaviour allows individuals to externalise failures but internalise success; accepting credit for achievements, but allowing excuses for failings. Self-handicapping can be seen as a method of preserving self-esteem but it can also be used for self-enhancement. People may self-handicap to manage the impressions of others, or of themselves (though studies have been unable to test the latter)[ citation needed].
Example: An example of an individual self-handicapping is the student with an impending important exam who spends the night before at an all-night party rather than studying. The student fears failing their exam and appearing incapable. In partying the night before their exam the student has engaged in self-defeating behaviour and increased the likelihood of poor exam performance. However, in the event of failure, the student can offer fatigue and a hangover, rather than lack of ability, as plausible explanations. Furthermore, should the student receive positive feedback about their exam, their achievement is enhanced by the fact that they succeeded, despite the handicap.
Researchers on self-handicapping have distinguished between claimed self-handicaps, in which the individual merely states that an obstacle to performance exists, and behavioral handicaps, in which the individual actually creates obstacles to performance. [4] Examples of behavioural handicaps include alcohol consumption [5] the selection of unattainable goals [6] or lack of practice [7]. Examples of claimed self-handicaps include declarations that one is very anxious [8] or experiencing various physical and psychological symptoms [9] [8]
Functionality of Self-Handicapping
Previous research has established that self-handicapping is motivated by uncertainty about one's ability [2] or, more generally, anticipated threats to self-esteem. [10] Self-handicapping can be exacerbated by self-presentational concerns [1] but also occurs in situations where such concerns are at a minimum. [2] [11]
Jones and Berglas gave people positive feedback following a problem-solving test, regardless of actual performance. Half the participants had been given fairly easy problems, while the others were given difficult problems. Participants were then given the choice between a "performance-enhancing drug" and one which would inhibit it. Those participants who received the difficult problems were more likely to choose the impairing drug, and participants who faced easy problems were more likely to choose the enhancing drug. It is argued that the participants presented with hard problems, believing that their success had been due to chance, chose the impairing drug because they were looking for an external attribution (what might be called an "excuse") for expected poor performance in the future, as opposed to an internal attribution. [2]
More recent research has found that generally people are willing to use handicaps in order to protect their self-esteem (e.g. discounting failings) but are more reluctant to employ them for self-enhancement. (e.g. to further credit their success). Rhodewalt, Morf, Hazlett, and Fairfield (1991) [11] selected participants who scored high or low on the Self-Handicapping Scale (SHS) and who had high or low self-esteem. They presented participants with a handicap and then with success of failure feedback and asked participants to make attributions for their performance. The results showed that both self-protection and self-enhancement occurred, but only as a function of levels of self-esteem and the level of tendency to self-handicap. Participants who were high self-handicappers, regardless of their level of self-esteem, used the handicap as a means of self-protection but only those participants with high self-esteem used the handicap to self-enhance. In a further study, Rhodewalt (1991) [12] presented the handicap to only half of the participants and gave success and failure feedback. The results provided evidence for self-protection but not for self-enhancement. Participants in the failure feedback, handicap absent group, attributed their failures to their own lack of ability and reported lower self-esteem to the handicap-present, failure-feedback condition. Furthermore, the handicap-present failure group reported levels of self-esteem equal to that of the successful group. This evidence highlights the importance of self-handicaps in self-protectively although it offers no support for the handicap acting to self-enhance.
Individual Differences
People differ in the extent to which they self-handicap [13] Although a number of characteristics have been related to self-handicapping (e.g. hypochondriasis) [9] most research on individual differences has used the Self-Handicapping Scale (SHS). [14] The SHS was developed as a means of measuring individuals tendency to employ excuses or create handicaps as a means to protects ones self esteem and research to date shows that SHS has adequate construct validity [13] For example, individuals who score high on the SHS will put in less effort and practice less when concerned about their ability to perform well in a given task. [15] [11] They are also more likely that those rated low self-handicappers (LSH) to mention obstacles or external factors which may hinder their success, prior to performing. [16] [17]
Gender differences
Gender differences are one of the most consistent findings in self-handicapping literature. [13] [18] Research has repeatedly found that men appear to self-handicap to a greater degree than do women, yet the reason for this difference remains unknown. [19] [13] While many studies have found that claimed self-handicaps are used by men and women alike, [19] [13] the vast majority of research has found than generally only men behaviourally self-handicap. [2] [7] [15] [20]
Recent studies
Mood and Self-handicapping
Previous research has looked at the consequences of self-handicapping and have suggested that self-handicapping leads to a more positive mood (at least in the short term). [21] [22] However, based on past evidence that positive mood motivates self-protective attributions for success and failure [23] and increases the avoidance of negative feedback [24],recent research has focused on mood as an antecedent to self-handicapping; expecting positive mood to increase self-handicapping behaviour. [25] Results have shown that people who are in positive mood are more likely to engage in self-handicapping, even at the cost of jeopardizing future performance.
Self-handicapping in Sports
Previous research, [26] has suggested that because in Physical Education (PE) students are required to overtly display their physical abilities and incompetence could be readily observed by others, PE is an ideal setting to observe self-handicapping. [27] Because of its prevelence in the sporting world, self-handicapping behavioiur has become of interest to sports psychologists who are interested in increasing sports performance. Recent research has examined the relationship between behavioural and claimed self-handicaps and atheletic performance [28] as well as the effects self-handicapping has on anxiety and fear of failure before Athletic Performance. [27]
Longitudinal studies
Longitudinal studies of self-handicapping have shown that while self-handicapping may protect self-esteem in the short term, it could have long-term costs for the individual. Self-handicapping has been found to lead to lower intrinsic motivation, worse health and wellbeing, more frequent negative moods and higher use of various substances. [22]
See also
External links
New York Times: Some Protect the Ego by Working on their Excuses Early
References
- ^ a b Kolditz, T. A., & Arkin, R. M. (1982). An impression management interpretation of the self-handicapping strategy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 492-502.
- ^ a b c d e Jones, E. E., & Berglas, S. (1978). Control of attributions about the self through self-handicapping strategies: The appeal of alcohol and the role of underachievement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4, 200-206.
- ^ Feick, D.L., & Rhodewalt, F. (1997). The Double-Edged Sword of Self-Handicapping: Discounting, Augmentation, and the Protection and Enhancement of Self-Esteem. Motivation and Emotion, Vol. 21, No. 2.
- ^ Leary, M. R., & Shepperd, J. A. (1986). Behavioral self-handicaps versus self-reported handicaps: A conceptual note. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1265–1268.
- ^ Bordini, E.J., Tucker, J.A., Vuchinich, R.E., & Rudd, E.J. (1986). Alcohol consumption as a self-handicapping strategy in women. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 95, 346–349.
- ^ Greenberg, J. (1985). Unattainable goal choice as a self-handicapping strategy. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 15, 140–152.
- ^ a b Harris, R.N., & Snyder, C.R. (1986). The role of uncertain self-esteem in self-handicapping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 451–458.
- ^ a b Smith, T.W., Snyder, C.R., & Handelsman, M.M. (1982). On the self-serving function of an academic wooden leg: Test Anxiety as a self-handicapping strategy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 314–321.
- ^ a b Smith, T.W., Snyder, C.R., & Perkins, S.C. (1983). The self-serving function of hypochondriacal complaints: Physical symptoms as self-handicapping strategies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 787–797.
- ^ Snyder, C. R., & Smith, T. W. (1982). Symptoms as self-handicapping strategies: The virtues of old wine in a new bottle. In G. Weary & H. L. Mirels (Eds.), Integrations of clinical and social psychology (pp. 104-127). New York: Oxford University Press.
- ^ a b c Rhodewalt, F., & Fairfield M. (1991). Claimed self-handicaps and the self-handicapper: On the relation of reductions in intended effort to performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 25, 402-417.
- ^ Rhodewalt, F., Morf, C, Hazlett, S., & Fairfield, M. (1991). Self-handicapping: The role of discounting and augmentation in the preservation of self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 121-131
- ^ a b c d e Rhodewalt, F. (1990) Self-handicappers: Individual differences in the preference for anticipatory self-protective acts. In R. Higgins, C. R. Snyder, & S. Berglas. Self-handicapping: The paradox that isn't. New York: Plenum Press.
- ^ Jones, E. E., & Rhodewalt, F. (1982). The Self-Handicapping Scale. Unpublished manuscript.
- ^ a b Hirt, E. R., Deppe, R. K., & Gordon, L. J. (1991). Self-reported versus behavioral self-handicapping: Empirical evidence for a theoretical distinction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 981-991.
- ^ Strube, M. J. (1986). An analysis of the Self-Handicapping Scale. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 7, 211-224.
- ^ Rhodewalt, F., & Hill, S. K. (1995). Self-handicapping in the classroom: The effects of claimed self-handicaps on responses to academic failure. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 17, 397-416.
- ^ McCrea, S. M., Hirt, E. R., & Milner, B. J. (2008). She works hard for the money: Valuing effort underlies gender difference in behavioral self- handicapping. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 292– 311.
- ^ a b Arkin, R. M., & Oleson, K. C. (1998). Self-handicapping. In J. M. Darley & J. Cooper (Eds.), Attribution and social interaction: The legacy of Edward E. Jones (pp. 313–371). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
- ^ Rhodewalt, F., & Davison, J. (1986). Self-handicapping and subsequent performance: Role of outcome valence and attributional certainty. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 7, 307–322.
- ^ McCrea, S. M., & Hirt, E. R. (2001). The role of ability judgments in self-handicapping. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1378–1389.
- ^ a b Zuckerman, M., & Tsai, F. F. (2005). Costs of self-handicapping. Journal of Personality, 73(2), 411–442.
- ^ Forgas, J. P. (1994). Sad and guilty? AVective inXuences on explanations of conXict episodes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 56–68.
- ^ Trope, Y., Ferguson, M., & Ragunanthan, R. (2001). Mood as a resource in processing self-relevant information. In J. P. Forgas (Ed.), Handbook of aVect and social cognition. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
- ^ Alter, A. L., & Forgas, J. P. (2007). On being happy but fearing failure: The effects of mood on self-handicapping strategies. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 947-954.
- ^ Ommundsen, Y. (2001). Self-handicapping strategies in physical education classes:The influence of implicit theories of the nature of ability and achievement goal orientations. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 2(3), 139–156.
- ^ a b Chen, L. H., Chen, M. Y., Lin, M. S., Kee, Y. H., Kuo, C. F., & Shui, S. H. (2008). Implicit theory of athletic ability and self-handicapping in college students. Psychological Reports, 103, 476–484.
- ^ Coudevylle, G., Martin Ginis, K., & Famose, J-P. (in press).Determinants of self-handicapping strategies in sport and their effects on athletic performance. Social Behavior and Personality. International Journal (Toronto, Ont.)
Self-Handicapping
'Self-handicapping' is described as an action or choice which prevents a person from being responsible for failure. [1] It was first theorized by Edward E. Jones and Steven Berglas [2], according to whom self-handicaps are obstacles created, or claimed, by the individual in anticipation of failing performance. [3] Self-handicapping behaviour allows individuals to externalise failures but internalise success; accepting credit for achievements, but allowing excuses for failings. Self-handicapping can be seen as a method of preserving self-esteem but it can also be used for self-enhancement. People may self-handicap to manage the impressions of others, or of themselves (though studies have been unable to test the latter)[ citation needed].
Example: An example of an individual self-handicapping is the student with an impending important exam who spends the night before at an all-night party rather than studying. The student fears failing their exam and appearing incapable. In partying the night before their exam the student has engaged in self-defeating behaviour and increased the likelihood of poor exam performance. However, in the event of failure, the student can offer fatigue and a hangover, rather than lack of ability, as plausible explanations. Furthermore, should the student receive positive feedback about their exam, their achievement is enhanced by the fact that they succeeded, despite the handicap.
Researchers on self-handicapping have distinguished between claimed self-handicaps, in which the individual merely states that an obstacle to performance exists, and behavioral handicaps, in which the individual actually creates obstacles to performance. [4] Examples of behavioural handicaps include alcohol consumption [5] the selection of unattainable goals [6] or lack of practice [7]. Examples of claimed self-handicaps include declarations that one is very anxious [8] or experiencing various physical and psychological symptoms [9] [8]
Functionality of Self-Handicapping
Previous research has established that self-handicapping is motivated by uncertainty about one's ability [2] or, more generally, anticipated threats to self-esteem. [10] Self-handicapping can be exacerbated by self-presentational concerns [1] but also occurs in situations where such concerns are at a minimum. [2] [11]
Jones and Berglas gave people positive feedback following a problem-solving test, regardless of actual performance. Half the participants had been given fairly easy problems, while the others were given difficult problems. Participants were then given the choice between a "performance-enhancing drug" and one which would inhibit it. Those participants who received the difficult problems were more likely to choose the impairing drug, and participants who faced easy problems were more likely to choose the enhancing drug. It is argued that the participants presented with hard problems, believing that their success had been due to chance, chose the impairing drug because they were looking for an external attribution (what might be called an "excuse") for expected poor performance in the future, as opposed to an internal attribution. [2]
More recent research has found that generally people are willing to use handicaps in order to protect their self-esteem (e.g. discounting failings) but are more reluctant to employ them for self-enhancement. (e.g. to further credit their success). Rhodewalt, Morf, Hazlett, and Fairfield (1991) [11] selected participants who scored high or low on the Self-Handicapping Scale (SHS) and who had high or low self-esteem. They presented participants with a handicap and then with success of failure feedback and asked participants to make attributions for their performance. The results showed that both self-protection and self-enhancement occurred, but only as a function of levels of self-esteem and the level of tendency to self-handicap. Participants who were high self-handicappers, regardless of their level of self-esteem, used the handicap as a means of self-protection but only those participants with high self-esteem used the handicap to self-enhance. In a further study, Rhodewalt (1991) [12] presented the handicap to only half of the participants and gave success and failure feedback. The results provided evidence for self-protection but not for self-enhancement. Participants in the failure feedback, handicap absent group, attributed their failures to their own lack of ability and reported lower self-esteem to the handicap-present, failure-feedback condition. Furthermore, the handicap-present failure group reported levels of self-esteem equal to that of the successful group. This evidence highlights the importance of self-handicaps in self-protectively although it offers no support for the handicap acting to self-enhance.
Individual Differences
People differ in the extent to which they self-handicap [13] Although a number of characteristics have been related to self-handicapping (e.g. hypochondriasis) [9] most research on individual differences has used the Self-Handicapping Scale (SHS). [14] The SHS was developed as a means of measuring individuals tendency to employ excuses or create handicaps as a means to protects ones self esteem and research to date shows that SHS has adequate construct validity [13] For example, individuals who score high on the SHS will put in less effort and practice less when concerned about their ability to perform well in a given task. [15] [11] They are also more likely that those rated low self-handicappers (LSH) to mention obstacles or external factors which may hinder their success, prior to performing. [16] [17]
Gender differences
Gender differences are one of the most consistent findings in self-handicapping literature. [13] [18] Research has repeatedly found that men appear to self-handicap to a greater degree than do women, yet the reason for this difference remains unknown. [19] [13] While many studies have found that claimed self-handicaps are used by men and women alike, [19] [13] the vast majority of research has found than generally only men behaviourally self-handicap. [2] [7] [15] [20]
Recent studies
Mood and Self-handicapping
Previous research has looked at the consequences of self-handicapping and have suggested that self-handicapping leads to a more positive mood (at least in the short term). [21] [22] However, based on past evidence that positive mood motivates self-protective attributions for success and failure [23] and increases the avoidance of negative feedback [24],recent research has focused on mood as an antecedent to self-handicapping; expecting positive mood to increase self-handicapping behaviour. [25] Results have shown that people who are in positive mood are more likely to engage in self-handicapping, even at the cost of jeopardizing future performance.
Self-handicapping in Sports
Previous research, [26] has suggested that because in Physical Education (PE) students are required to overtly display their physical abilities and incompetence could be readily observed by others, PE is an ideal setting to observe self-handicapping. [27] Because of its prevelence in the sporting world, self-handicapping behavioiur has become of interest to sports psychologists who are interested in increasing sports performance. Recent research has examined the relationship between behavioural and claimed self-handicaps and atheletic performance [28] as well as the effects self-handicapping has on anxiety and fear of failure before Athletic Performance. [27]
Longitudinal studies
Longitudinal studies of self-handicapping have shown that while self-handicapping may protect self-esteem in the short term, it could have long-term costs for the individual. Self-handicapping has been found to lead to lower intrinsic motivation, worse health and wellbeing, more frequent negative moods and higher use of various substances. [22]
See also
External links
New York Times: Some Protect the Ego by Working on their Excuses Early
References
- ^ a b Kolditz, T. A., & Arkin, R. M. (1982). An impression management interpretation of the self-handicapping strategy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 492-502.
- ^ a b c d e Jones, E. E., & Berglas, S. (1978). Control of attributions about the self through self-handicapping strategies: The appeal of alcohol and the role of underachievement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4, 200-206.
- ^ Feick, D.L., & Rhodewalt, F. (1997). The Double-Edged Sword of Self-Handicapping: Discounting, Augmentation, and the Protection and Enhancement of Self-Esteem. Motivation and Emotion, Vol. 21, No. 2.
- ^ Leary, M. R., & Shepperd, J. A. (1986). Behavioral self-handicaps versus self-reported handicaps: A conceptual note. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1265–1268.
- ^ Bordini, E.J., Tucker, J.A., Vuchinich, R.E., & Rudd, E.J. (1986). Alcohol consumption as a self-handicapping strategy in women. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 95, 346–349.
- ^ Greenberg, J. (1985). Unattainable goal choice as a self-handicapping strategy. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 15, 140–152.
- ^ a b Harris, R.N., & Snyder, C.R. (1986). The role of uncertain self-esteem in self-handicapping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 451–458.
- ^ a b Smith, T.W., Snyder, C.R., & Handelsman, M.M. (1982). On the self-serving function of an academic wooden leg: Test Anxiety as a self-handicapping strategy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 314–321.
- ^ a b Smith, T.W., Snyder, C.R., & Perkins, S.C. (1983). The self-serving function of hypochondriacal complaints: Physical symptoms as self-handicapping strategies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 787–797.
- ^ Snyder, C. R., & Smith, T. W. (1982). Symptoms as self-handicapping strategies: The virtues of old wine in a new bottle. In G. Weary & H. L. Mirels (Eds.), Integrations of clinical and social psychology (pp. 104-127). New York: Oxford University Press.
- ^ a b c Rhodewalt, F., & Fairfield M. (1991). Claimed self-handicaps and the self-handicapper: On the relation of reductions in intended effort to performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 25, 402-417.
- ^ Rhodewalt, F., Morf, C, Hazlett, S., & Fairfield, M. (1991). Self-handicapping: The role of discounting and augmentation in the preservation of self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 121-131
- ^ a b c d e Rhodewalt, F. (1990) Self-handicappers: Individual differences in the preference for anticipatory self-protective acts. In R. Higgins, C. R. Snyder, & S. Berglas. Self-handicapping: The paradox that isn't. New York: Plenum Press.
- ^ Jones, E. E., & Rhodewalt, F. (1982). The Self-Handicapping Scale. Unpublished manuscript.
- ^ a b Hirt, E. R., Deppe, R. K., & Gordon, L. J. (1991). Self-reported versus behavioral self-handicapping: Empirical evidence for a theoretical distinction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 981-991.
- ^ Strube, M. J. (1986). An analysis of the Self-Handicapping Scale. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 7, 211-224.
- ^ Rhodewalt, F., & Hill, S. K. (1995). Self-handicapping in the classroom: The effects of claimed self-handicaps on responses to academic failure. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 17, 397-416.
- ^ McCrea, S. M., Hirt, E. R., & Milner, B. J. (2008). She works hard for the money: Valuing effort underlies gender difference in behavioral self- handicapping. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 292– 311.
- ^ a b Arkin, R. M., & Oleson, K. C. (1998). Self-handicapping. In J. M. Darley & J. Cooper (Eds.), Attribution and social interaction: The legacy of Edward E. Jones (pp. 313–371). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
- ^ Rhodewalt, F., & Davison, J. (1986). Self-handicapping and subsequent performance: Role of outcome valence and attributional certainty. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 7, 307–322.
- ^ McCrea, S. M., & Hirt, E. R. (2001). The role of ability judgments in self-handicapping. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1378–1389.
- ^ a b Zuckerman, M., & Tsai, F. F. (2005). Costs of self-handicapping. Journal of Personality, 73(2), 411–442.
- ^ Forgas, J. P. (1994). Sad and guilty? AVective inXuences on explanations of conXict episodes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 56–68.
- ^ Trope, Y., Ferguson, M., & Ragunanthan, R. (2001). Mood as a resource in processing self-relevant information. In J. P. Forgas (Ed.), Handbook of aVect and social cognition. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
- ^ Alter, A. L., & Forgas, J. P. (2007). On being happy but fearing failure: The effects of mood on self-handicapping strategies. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 947-954.
- ^ Ommundsen, Y. (2001). Self-handicapping strategies in physical education classes:The influence of implicit theories of the nature of ability and achievement goal orientations. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 2(3), 139–156.
- ^ a b Chen, L. H., Chen, M. Y., Lin, M. S., Kee, Y. H., Kuo, C. F., & Shui, S. H. (2008). Implicit theory of athletic ability and self-handicapping in college students. Psychological Reports, 103, 476–484.
- ^ Coudevylle, G., Martin Ginis, K., & Famose, J-P. (in press).Determinants of self-handicapping strategies in sport and their effects on athletic performance. Social Behavior and Personality. International Journal (Toronto, Ont.)