1. Coping with Achievement-Related Failure: An Examination of Conversations Between Friends Ellen Rydell Altermatt, Elizabeth Broady, & Taryn Bellgard Hanover College Funded by National Science Foundation Grant BCS-0236678

2. Responses to Achievement-Related Failure Mastery-oriented approach (Dweck, 1986) Mastery-oriented approach (Dweck, 1986) Maintain high expectations for future success Maintain high expectations for future success Report positive affect Report positive affect Demonstrate persistence in the face of challenge Demonstrate persistence in the face of challenge Learned helpless approach (Dweck, 1986) Learned helpless approach (Dweck, 1986) Have diminished expectations for future success Have diminished expectations for future success Report negative affect Report negative affect Fail to persist in the face of challenge Fail to persist in the face of challenge

3. What Role Do Social Interactions Play? Hokoda and Fincham (1995) Hokoda and Fincham (1995) Mothers of mastery-oriented children were more likely to offer assistance when their children requested it. Mothers of mastery-oriented children were more likely to offer assistance when their children requested it. Mothers of mastery-oriented children were less likely to respond to self-critical statements (e.g., “I can’t do it.”) by suggesting that their children discontinue the activity. Mothers of mastery-oriented children were less likely to respond to self-critical statements (e.g., “I can’t do it.”) by suggesting that their children discontinue the activity.

4. Why Friends? Children spend a substantial amount of time with friends (e.g., Larson & Richards, 1991) Children spend a substantial amount of time with friends (e.g., Larson & Richards, 1991) Children seek the support and advice of friends during times of stress (e.g., Causey & Dubow, 1992) Children seek the support and advice of friends during times of stress (e.g., Causey & Dubow, 1992)

5. Research Questions What are the features of children’s conversations with friends following achievement-related failure? What are the features of children’s conversations with friends following achievement-related failure? Are the features of children’s conversations related to changes in their responses to failure over time? Are the features of children’s conversations related to changes in their responses to failure over time?

6. Participants Fourth, fifth, and sixth grade students Fourth, fifth, and sixth grade students 116 friendship dyads 116 friendship dyads 40 male dyads, 76 female dyads 40 male dyads, 76 female dyads 70% Caucasian, 14% African-American, 7% Latino 70% Caucasian, 14% African-American, 7% Latino

7. Procedure Ice-breaker activity Ice-breaker activity Children worked on puzzles in separate rooms Children worked on puzzles in separate rooms Focal child received unsolvable puzzles Focal child received unsolvable puzzles Friend received either solvable (success condition) or unsolvable puzzles (failure condition) Friend received either solvable (success condition) or unsolvable puzzles (failure condition) Children were reunited to discuss the task Children were reunited to discuss the task Children work on a final set of solvable problems Children work on a final set of solvable problems

8. Questionnaires Mastery-Orientated Beliefs Mastery-Orientated Beliefs Baseline, Post-Failure, Post-discussion Baseline, Post-Failure, Post-discussion Sample Items Sample Items “I want to do the puzzles.” “I want to do the puzzles.” “I am confident that I will do well on the puzzles.” “I am confident that I will do well on the puzzles.” Reliability: αs =.81 to.91 Reliability: αs =.81 to.91

9. Coding Children’s Conversations Overview Overview 17,000 statements (κs =.71 to.99) 17,000 statements (κs =.71 to.99) 8,441 focal child statements 8,441 focal child statements 8,559 friend statements 8,559 friend statements 75% of statements were on-task 75% of statements were on-task

10. Statement Types Performance Checks (e.g., How many [puzzles] did you solve?) Performance Checks (e.g., How many [puzzles] did you solve?) Positive Performance Statements (e.g., I got them all.) Positive Performance Statements (e.g., I got them all.) Negative Performance Statements (e.g., I didn’t get any of mine.) Negative Performance Statements (e.g., I didn’t get any of mine.) Positive Self-Evaluative Statements (e.g. I’m really good at puzzles.) Positive Self-Evaluative Statements (e.g. I’m really good at puzzles.) Negative Self-Evaluative Statements (e.g., I stink at puzzles.) Negative Self-Evaluative Statements (e.g., I stink at puzzles.) Discounting Statements (e.g., I’m used to doing puzzles that attach.) Discounting Statements (e.g., I’m used to doing puzzles that attach.) Help Seeking (e.g., How do you make the diamond?) Help Seeking (e.g., How do you make the diamond?) Help Giving (e.g., Okay. Well, you just need to look for a green one.) Help Giving (e.g., Okay. Well, you just need to look for a green one.)

11. Descriptive Analyses Mastery-oriented beliefs Mastery-oriented beliefs Features of conversations Features of conversations

12. Mastery-Orientated Beliefs

13. Descriptive Analyses Mastery-oriented beliefs Mastery-oriented beliefs Features of conversations Features of conversations

14. Gender Differences in Performance Checks

15. Predicting Mastery-Oriented Beliefs Hierarchical regression analyses Hierarchical regression analyses Dependent variable Dependent variable Mastery-oriented beliefs at post-discussion Mastery-oriented beliefs at post-discussion Control variable Control variable Mastery-oriented beliefs at post-failure Mastery-oriented beliefs at post-failure Predictor variables Predictor variables Statement type Statement type Gender (male, female) Gender (male, female) Condition (friend success, friend failure) Condition (friend success, friend failure)

16. Predicting Mastery-Oriented Beliefs Statement Type Main Effect Statement Type Main Effect Discounting statements (FC), β = -.15, p <.01 Discounting statements (FC), β = -.15, p <.01 Help-giving statements (Friend), β =.12, p <.01 Help-giving statements (Friend), β =.12, p <.01

17. Predicting Mastery Orientation Statement Type x Gender Interactions Statement Type x Gender Interactions Negative performance statements (FC), β= -.28, p <.001 Negative performance statements (FC), β= -.28, p <.001 Negative self-evaluative statements (FC), β= -.19, p <.01 Negative self-evaluative statements (FC), β= -.19, p <.01

18. Negative Performance Statements

19. Negative Self-Evaluative Statements

20. Why the gender difference? Sequential analyses Sequential analyses What happens immediately after each statement type? What happens immediately after each statement type? Are particular sequences of statements more likely to occur with boys than with girls? Are particular sequences of statements more likely to occur with boys than with girls?

21. Sequential Analyses Negative Performance Statements

22. Sequential Analyses Negative Self-Evaluative Statements

23. Sample Conversation Between Girls FC: I can’t put puzzles together. As a matter of fact I think that I may need to practice a little more. FC: I can’t put puzzles together. As a matter of fact I think that I may need to practice a little more. FR: I know… This was hard. FR: I know… This was hard. FC: [Laughs] …. I mean, I hated it. I was like, ok do this, do this, and then she was like, ‘I’m sorry, but your time is up.’ FC: [Laughs] …. I mean, I hated it. I was like, ok do this, do this, and then she was like, ‘I’m sorry, but your time is up.’ FR: I know, she was like, ‘It’s time for the next one.’ I was like, um. FR: I know, she was like, ‘It’s time for the next one.’ I was like, um. FC: [Laughs]. Shoot! FC: [Laughs]. Shoot! FR: And then …. it was time for the next one. FR: And then …. it was time for the next one. FC: …I’m still shaking from doing it. FC: …I’m still shaking from doing it.

24. Co-Rumination Rose (2002) Co-rumination is characterized by Co-rumination is characterized by repeated discussion of the same problem repeated discussion of the same problem mutual encouragement of discussing problem mutual encouragement of discussing problem Girls are more likely to co-ruminate than are boys Girls are more likely to co-ruminate than are boys Co-rumination has tradeoffs Co-rumination has tradeoffs