Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Willing or Able?Willing or Able?The meanings of self efficacyThe meanings of self efficacy
Shown P. Cahill, Laurie A Gallo, Stephen A Lisman, And Alison weinsten
Journal of Social And Clinical PsychologyJournal of Social And Clinical Psychology
Vol. 25, No. 2, 2006, PP: 196-209Vol. 25, No. 2, 2006, PP: 196-209
Introduction
OutcomeOutcome & & Self efficacySelf efficacy
expectanciesexpectancies
person’s estimate that a given behavior will lead to a person’s estimate that a given behavior will lead to a certain outcomecertain outcome
خاص رفتاری خاص انجام رفتاری نظر انجام مورد نتیجه نظر کسب مورد نتیجه کسب
The conviction that one can successfully execute the The conviction that one can successfully execute the behavior required to produce the outcome.behavior required to produce the outcome.
رفتارهای آمیز موفقیت انجام ازتوانایی رفتارهای اطمینان آمیز موفقیت انجام ازتوانایی اطمیناننیاز نیاز پیش پیش
Bandura (1977)Bandura (1977)
IntroductionIntroduction
Within the field of phobic disorders, self efficacy is highly predictive of behavioral performance (bandura & others)
IntroductionIntroduction
predictSelf efficacy Avoidance behavior
Anxiety Avoidance behavior
Self efficacy
predict
Anxiety
IntroductionIntroduction
Predictive validity of self efficacy has Predictive validity of self efficacy has demonstrateddemonstrated
what measures of self-efficacy assess, varies what measures of self-efficacy assess, varies across tasks?across tasks?
Question
Construct validity
IntroductionIntroduction
measures of self efficacy measures of self efficacy assess the theoretical assess the theoretical construct of self-efficacy construct of self-efficacy for for some taskssome tasks, but not other , but not other tasks. tasks. (Kirsch, 1982)(Kirsch, 1982)
IntroductionIntroduction
Example:Example: most people are able to walk most people are able to walk
toward a cage, place their hand on it, toward a cage, place their hand on it,
reach to the cage, etc. but highly phobic reach to the cage, etc. but highly phobic
individuals will report that they cannot individuals will report that they cannot
perform these activities when the cage perform these activities when the cage
contains a phobic object.contains a phobic object.
IntroductionIntroduction
For fearful individualFor fearful individual
Not able Not willing Not able Not willing
IntroductionIntroduction
People’s decisions
Outcome expectancy
Equating willingness with ability for such aversively motivated tasks is
a common linguistic habit
IntroductionIntroduction
In contrast In contrast
skill-based taskskill-based task
Weight lifting
Calculus
People who report that they cannot accomplish the target performance are providing
estimates of their ability levelAnd not simply their level of willingness
IntroductionIntroduction
Initial testInitial test
Target group: Target group: students who reported students who reported being afraid of snakesbeing afraid of snakes
Method:Method: rating their expected rating their expected performance on two different activitiesperformance on two different activities
1.1. Snake BATSnake BAT
2.2. Basket shooting taskBasket shooting task
IntroductionIntroduction
Participants were offered a range of Participants were offered a range of hypothetical incentives for reports of hypothetical incentives for reports of increased performance in each task.increased performance in each task.
Participants were far more likely to increase estimates of their BAT
performance
IntroductionIntroduction
Incentives
Ability Willingness
The pattern of results was consistent with Kirsch’s hypothesis
IntroductionIntroduction
Single dissociationSingle dissociation
One independent variable (incentive) One independent variable (incentive)
has a strong effect on one measure (self has a strong effect on one measure (self
efficacy for BAT), but little or no effect efficacy for BAT), but little or no effect
on a second measure (self efficacy for on a second measure (self efficacy for
BAT).BAT).
IntroductionIntroduction
HypothesesHypotheses
Disambiguating instruction
Basket shooting task
Little effect
Willing to try > able to do
strong effect
Snake BAT
able to do > Willing to try
Materials & Methods
MethodMethod
participantsparticipants
120 (97 females) undergraduate 120 (97 females) undergraduate
students enrolled in psychology students enrolled in psychology
courses at Binghamton university.courses at Binghamton university.
MethodMethod
MaterialsMaterials
1.1. Task DescriptionsTask Descriptions
- several photograph of different people - several photograph of different people handling a non-poisonous snake , four feet in handling a non-poisonous snake , four feet in length.length.
- Some basic facts about snakes( they are dry - Some basic facts about snakes( they are dry in comparison with the myth)in comparison with the myth)
MethodMethod
- BAT consisted of 18 graded steps:- BAT consisted of 18 graded steps:
Step1:Step1: looking at a snake in a glass looking at a snake in a glass cage from a distancecage from a distance
Step2-17:Step2-17: Touching, lifting, and then Touching, lifting, and then reaching in to the cage , first with a reaching in to the cage , first with a gloved hand and later with a bare gloved hand and later with a bare handhand
Step 18: Step 18: sitting in a chair and allowing sitting in a chair and allowing snake to be placed on his/her lapsnake to be placed on his/her lap
MethodMethod
- Basket shooting task consisted of:- Basket shooting task consisted of:
Step1:Step1: throwing a wadded piece of throwing a wadded piece of paper at a distance of two feet.paper at a distance of two feet.
Step2:Step2: increased to five feet increased to five feet
Step3-15:Step3-15: increased to 70 feet increased to 70 feet
Step 16-18: Step 16-18: increased to 100 feet.increased to 100 feet.
To help participants distances were To help participants distances were compared to basketball court. compared to basketball court.
MethodMethod
2.2. Anticipated performanceAnticipated performance- Separate measures of anticipated Separate measures of anticipated
performance were constructed for BAT & performance were constructed for BAT & basket-shooting modeled after Bandura’s basket-shooting modeled after Bandura’s self efficacy questionnaire.self efficacy questionnaire.
- participants were instructed to make two participants were instructed to make two judgments about their anticipated judgments about their anticipated performance for each of 18 steps in both performance for each of 18 steps in both tasks.tasks.
MethodMethod
- Half of participants indicated those steps they felt Half of participants indicated those steps they felt “able to do” “able to do” and then rate their confidence in and then rate their confidence in their ability to perform each steps (0-100 scale).their ability to perform each steps (0-100 scale).
- the remaining indicated the remaining indicated “willing to try” “willing to try” steps and steps and then rate them.then rate them.
Method
3.3. Disambiguating InstructionsDisambiguating Instructions
Vignette 1: lifting weightVignette 1: lifting weight
Vignette 2: experiencing loneliness Vignette 2: experiencing loneliness
Results
Discussion
discussiondiscussion
hypothesishypothesis
The meaning of measures of self efficacy differs across tasks.
discussiondiscussion
Skill-based Fear-motivated
ability willingness
Theoretical definition
ConclusionsConclusions
Strong evidence for the predictive validity of a measure Strong evidence for the predictive validity of a measure should not be confused with evidence of construct validity. should not be confused with evidence of construct validity.
• Drug/tobacco/ alcohol abstinenceDrug/tobacco/ alcohol abstinence• Condom useCondom use• Weight lossWeight loss• exerciseexercise
recommendation
Investigation of the construct validity Investigation of the construct validity of measures of self efficacy should be a of measures of self efficacy should be a research priority for self efficacy research priority for self efficacy theorists.theorists.
