1. SELF-DOUBT EFFECTS DEPEND ON BELIEFS ABOUT ABILITY
EVA FRISHBERG1 and QIN ZHAO2
BARD COLLEGE1 and WESTERN KENTUCKY UNIVERSITY2
ABSTRACT
METHODS continued…
RESULTS continued…
The present research investigated whether beliefs about ability can be manipulated, and if so, whether those beliefs can subsequently moderate the effects of self-doubt on well-being and task performance. Consistent with our hypothesis, for participants who were exposed to entity beliefs, higher self-doubt was associated with lower task performance. However, those who were exposed to incremental beliefs experienced diminished negative effects of self-doubt on task performance. These findings suggest that self-doubt may have negative effects only when it is interpreted as signaling that ability is immutably low.
Task Effort:
Higher self-doubt was associated with lower task effort, B = .48 (SE = .20), p = .02.
Task effort was higher in the incremental condition (M = 11.51, SD = .96) than in the entity condition (M = 10.98, SD = 1.56), t(87) = -.199, p = .05.
Task Enjoyment: No effects were significant, p >.05
Measures of Well-Being
Positive affect: Higher self-doubt was associated with lower positive affect, B =
-3.39 (SE = 1.65), p = .04.
Negative affect: Higher self-doubt was associated with higher negative affect, B = 2.82 (SE = .88), p = .002.
Performance Self-Esteem: Higher self-doubt was associated with lower performance self-esteem, B = (SE = .56), p <.001.
Task anxiety: Higher self-doubt was associated with higher task anxiety, but only for the anagram task, B = .85(SE = .29), p <.01.
Anagram Task:
Listen: ___________
Answer: Silent
Verbal Reasoning Task:
A misconception frequently held by novice writers is that sentence structure mirrors thought; the more convoluted the structure, the more
_________ the ideas.
a. Complicated
b. Engaged
c. Essential
d. Fanciful
e. Inconsequential
f. Involved
INTRODUCTION
Self-doubt
Past research has typically shown negative self-doubt effects (e.g., Hermann, Leonardelli, & Arkin, 2002; Wichman & Hermann, 2010) and a link between self-doubt and maladaptive coping strategies such as self-handicapping and subjective over-achievement (e.g., Jones & Berglas, 1978; Oleson, Poehlmann, Yost, Lynch, & Arkin, 2000). We suggest that these self-doubt effects largely may be due to the underlying assumption that ability is innate and fixed.
Beliefs about Ability
Some believe that ability is malleable and develops incrementally through effort; whereas others believe that ability is a fixed and stable entity. Students with incremental beliefs are more willing to take on challenging tasks and persist on them. In contrast, an entity belief motivates individuals to maintain a positive self-view of ability. Students with entity beliefs tend to avoid challenges and to seek tasks that will prove that they are smart (e.g., Dweck, 1999; Dweck & Leggett, 1988; Hong, Chiu, Dweck, Lin, & Wan, 1999; Molden & Dweck, 2006).
Zhao and Wichman (2015) reported correlational evidence that incremental beliefs about ability ameliorated self-doubt effects, particularly for low-ability individuals.
Current Research
This study is a replication based on Zhao and Wichman (2015). We aim to provide experimental evidence that self-doubt effects depend on beliefs about ability.
DISCUSSION
We investigated whether incremental beliefs about about ability would lessen the negative effects of self-doubt.
We successfully manipulated beliefs about ability and found that ability beliefs did indeed interact with self-doubt to predict performance, but only on the anagram task.
This finding supports our hypothesis that self-doubt effects depend on beliefs about ability.
Limitations
Due to high percentage of missing ACT scores, we were unable to use ACT scores to control for academic ability or as a predictor, to examine:
whether our findings in the anagram task would be even stronger in low-ACT participants. We expected to see more significant self-doubt and belief effects among low ability participants; and
if there will be self-doubt and belief effects on verbal reasoning performance for low-ACT individuals.
Future Directions
Collect a larger sample size with more ACT scores. A previous correlational study has shown that ACT scores moderated the effects of self-doubt and incremental beliefs on performance and well-being (Zhao & Wichman, 2015).
Examine cross-cultural patterns of self-doubt and ability beliefs. Studies have shown that self-doubt has different effects on Confucian Asian versus European students academic performance (Lee, 2009; Wilkins, 2004).
In light of our findings, we would like to see how these interventions of exposure to incremental beliefs can be used in educational settings to improve academic performance and engagement.
This research was funded by National Science Foundation Award #
Figure 1. An example of one of the fictitious intelligence articles
RESULTS
ENTITY CONDITION
Higher self-doubt  Worse Performance
INCREMENTAL CONDITION
No significant association between self-doubt and performance
Task Performance
Anagram Performance
There was a 2 -way Self-Doubt x Manipulated Beliefs interaction, B = 1.08 (SE = .36), p = .025 such that there was a negative association between self-doubt and performance in the entity belief condition, but no significant association in the incremental belief condition.
Figure 2. Effects of self-doubt on anagram performance, as moderated by beliefs about ability.
Verbal Reasoning Performance
No effects were significant, p > .05.
Measures of Task Engagement
Task Involvement
Higher self-doubt was associated with lower task involvement, B = 1.16 (SE = .54), p = .035.
Task involvement was higher in the incremental condition (M = 30.06, SD = 3.61) than in the entity condition (M = 28.38, SD = 3.63), t(87) = -2.12, p = .03.
METHOD
Participants & Design
Eighty-nine MTurk participants; 37% female; ages ranged from 21 to 69 years (M = 32.94, SD = 9.72).
Randomly assigned to either incremental or entity beliefs condition.
IVs: self-doubt, beliefs about ability (incremental or entity)
Main DVs: positive & negative affect, task performance, task engagement.
Tasks: Anagram and GRE Verbal Reasoning Questions
Materials & Procedure
1. Informed consent
2. Self-doubt scale (Oleson et al., 2000)
ex: “As I begin an important task, I am usually confident in my abilities.”
3. Manipulation of beliefs about ability (Miele & Molden, 2010) – Figure 1
4. Personalized Measure of Theories of Intelligence (De Castella & Bryne, 2015)
ex: “I don’t think personally I can do much to increase my intelligence”
5. Measures of psychological well-being - e.g., Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS; Watson, Clark, & Tellegan, 1988)
6. Performance tasks
7. Measures of Task Involvement, Effort, and Enjoyment (Elliot & Harackiewicz, 1996)
8. Demographic information
9. Debriefing