Past work has documented and described major patterns of adaptive and maladaptive behavior: the mastery-oriented and the helpless patterns. In this article, we present a research-based model that accounts for these patterns in terms of underlying psychological processes. The model specifies how individuals' implicit theories orient them toward particular goals and how these goals set up the different patterns. Indeed, we show how each feature (cognitive, affective, and behavioral) of the adaptive and maladaptive patterns can be seen to follow directly from different goals. We then examine the generality of the model and use it to illuminate phenomena in a wide variety of domains. Finally, we place the model in its broadest context and examine its implications for our understanding of motivational and personality processes. The task for investigators of motivation and personality is to identify major patterns of behavior and link them to underlying psychological processes. In this article we (a) describe a research-based model that accounts for major patterns of behavior, (b) examine the generality of this model—its utility for understanding domains beyond the ones in which it was originally developed, and (c) explore the broader implications of the model for motivational and personality processes.

/pdf/a-social-cognitive-approach-to-motivation-and-personality-4r18vjg2jg.pdf

A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality

Many prominent theorists have argued that accurate perceptions of the self, the world, and the future are essential for mental health. Yet considerable research evidence suggests that overly positive selfevaluations, exaggerated perceptions of control or mastery, and unrealistic optimism are characteristic of normal human thought. Moreover, these illusions appear to promote other criteria of mental health, including the ability to care about others, the ability to be happy or contented, and the ability to engage in productive and creative work. These strategies may succeed, in large part, because both the social world and cognitive-processing mechanisms impose niters on incoming information that distort it in a positive direction; negative information may be isolated and represented in as unthreatening a manner as possible. These positive illusions may be especially useful when an individual receives negative feedback or is otherwise threatened and may be especially adaptive under these circumstances. Decades of psychological wisdom have established contact with reality as a hallmark of mental health. In this view, the well-adjusted person is thought to engage in accurate reality testing, whereas the individual whose vision is clouded by illusion is regarded as vulnerable to, if not already a victim of, mental illness. Despite its plausibility, this viewpoint is increasingly difficult to maintain (cf. Lazarus, 1983). A substantial amount of research testifies to the prevalence of illusion in normal human cognition (see Fiske& Taylor, 1984;Greenwald, 1980; Nisbett & Ross, 1980; Sackeim, 1983; Taylor, 1983). Moreover, these illusions often involve central aspects of the self and the environment and, therefore, cannot be dismissed as inconsequential. In this article, we review research suggesting that certain illusions may be adaptive for mental health and well-being. In particular, we examine evidence that a set of interrelated positive illusions—namely, unrealistically positive self-evaluations, exaggerated perceptions of control or mastery, and unrealistic optimism—can serve a wide variety of cognitive, affective, and social functions. We also attempt to resolve the following para

/pdf/illusion-and-well-being-a-social-psychological-perspective-5acx7rw6hx.pdf

Illusion and well-being: a social psychological perspective on mental health

Motivational processes influence a child's acquisition, transfer, and use of knowledge and skills, yet educationally relevant conceptions of motivation have been elusive. Using recent research within the social-cognitive framework, Dweck describes adaptive and maladaptive motivational patterns and presents a research-based model of motivational processes. This model shows how the particular goals children pursue on cognitive tasks shape their reactions to success and failure and influence the quality of their cognitive performance. Dweck argues that this approach has important implications for practice and the design of interventions to change maladaptive motivational processes. She presents a compelling proposal for explaining motivational influences on gender differences in mathematics achievement and observes that empirically based interventions may prevent current achievement discrepancies.--The Editors Most research on effective learning and performance of cognitive tasks analyzes the particular cognitive skills required to succeed at those tasks. In contrast, the focus here is on motivational processes that affect success on cognitive tasks. That is, the focus is on psychological factors, other than ability, that determine how effectively the individual acquires and uses skills. It has long been known that factors other than ability influence whether children seek or avoid challenges, whether they persist or withdraw in the face of difficulty, and whether they use and develop their skills effectively. However, the components and bases of adaptive motivational patterns have been poorly understood. As a resuit, commonsense analyses have been limited and have not provided a basis for effective practices. Indeed, many \"commonsense\" beliefs have been called into question or seriously qualified by recent research--for example, the belief that large amounts of praise and success will establish, maintain, or reinstate adaptive patterns, or that \"brighter\" children have more adaptive patterns and thus are more likely to choose personally challenging tasks or to persist in the face of difficulty. In the past 10 to 15 years a dramatic change has taken place in the study of motivation. This change has resulted in a coherent, replicable, and educationally relevant body of findings--and in a clearer understanding of motivational phenomena. During this time, the emphasis has shifted to a social-cognitive approachwaway from external contingencies, on the one hand, and global, internal states on the other. It has shifted to an emphasis on cognitive mediators, that is, to how children construe the situation, interpret events in the situation, and process information about the situation. Although external contingencies and internal affective states are by no means ignored, they are seen as part of a process whose workings are best penetrated by focusing on organizing cognitive variables. Specifically, the social-cognitive approach has allowed us to (a) characterize adaptive and maladaptive patterns, (b) explain them in terms of specific underlying processes, and thus (c) begin to provide a rigorous conceptual and empirical basis for intervention and practice. Adaptive and Maladaptive Motivational Patterns The study of motivation deals with the causes of goaloriented activity (Atkinson, 1964; Beck, 1983; Dollard & Miller, 1950; Hull, 1943; Veroff, 1969). Achievement motivation involves a particular class of goals--those involving competence--and these goals appear to fall into two classes: (a) learning goals, in which individuals seek to increase their competence, to understand or master something new, and (b) performance goals, in which individuals seek to gain favorable judgments of their competence or avoid negative judgments of their competence (Dweck & Elliott, 1983; NichoUs, 1984; Nicholls & Dweck, 1979). l Adaptive motivational patterns are those that promote the establishment, maintenance, and attainment of personally challenging and personally valued achievement goals. Maladaptive patterns, then, are associated with a failure to establish reasonable, valued goals, to maintain effective striving toward those goals, or, ultimately, to attain valued goals that are potentially within one's reach. Research has clearly documented adaptive and maladaptive patterns of achievement behavior. The adaptive (\"mastery-oriented\") pattern is characterized by challenge seeking and high, effective persistence in the face of obstacles. Children displaying this pattern appear to enjoy exerting effort in the pursuit of task mastery. In contrast, the maladaptive (\"helpless\") pattern is characterized by challenge avoidance and low persistence in the face of difficulty. Children displaying this pattern tend to evidence negative affect (such as anxiety) and negative self-cogniCorrespondence concerning this article should be addressed to Carol S. Dweck, Department of Psychology, University of Illinois, 603 E. Daniel, Champaign, IL 61820. l The word performance will be used in several ways, not only in connection with performance goals. It will also be used to refer to the child's task activity (performance of a task) and to the product of that activity (level of performance). The meaning should be clear from the context. 1040 October 1986 9 American Psychologist Copyrisht 1986 by the American Psychological Association, Inc. 0003-066X/86/$00.75 Vol. 41, No. 10, 1040-1048 Table 1 Achievement Goals and Achievement Behavior Confidence in Theory of intelligence Goal orientation present ability Behavior pattern Entity theory (Intelligence is fixed) Incremental theory (Intelligence is malleable) > Performance goal (Goal is to gain positive judgments/avoid negative judgments of competence) > Learning goal (Goal is to increase competence) If high ---> Mastery-oriented Seek challenge but High persistence If low ~ Helpless Avoid challenge Low persistence If high > Mastery-oriented ioOr ~ ' Seek challenge (that fosters learning) High persistence tions when they confront obstacles (e.g., Ames, 1984; C. Diener & Dweck, 1978, 1980; Dweck & Reppucci, 1973; Nicholls, 1975). Although children displaying the different patterns do not differ in intellectual ability, these patterns can have profound effects on cognitive performance. In experiments conducted in both laboratory and classroom settings, it has been shown that children with the maladaptive pattern are seriously hampered in the acquisition and display of cognitive skills when they meet obstacles. Children with the adaptive pattern, by contrast, seem undaunted or even seem to have their performance facilitated by the increased challenge. If not ability, then what are the bases of these patterns? Most recently, research has suggested that children's goals in achievement situations differentially foster the two patterns. That is, achievement situations afford a choice of goals, and the one the child preferentially adopts predicts the achievement pattern that child will display. Table 1 summarizes the conceptualization that is emerging from the research. BasieaUy, children's theories of intelligence appear to orient them toward different goals: Children who believe intelligence is a fixed trait tend to orient toward gaining favorable judgments of that trait (performance goals), whereas children who believe intelligence is a malleable quality tend to orient toward developing that quality (learning goals). The goals then appear to set up the different behavior patterns. 2 Learning and Performance Goals Contrasted How and why do the different goals foster the different patterns? How do they shape task choice and task pursuit to facilitate or impede cognitive performance? The research reviewed below indicates that with performance goals, the entire task choice and pursuit process is built around children's concerns about their ability level. In contrast, with learning goals the choice and pursuit processes involve a focus on progress and mastery through 2 See M. Bandura and Dweck (1985), Dweck and Elliott (1983), and Leggett (1985) for a more extensive treatment of children's theories of intelligence. The present article will focus on achievement goals and their allied behavior patterns. effort. Further, this research shows how a focus on ability judgments can result in a tendency to avoid and withdraw from challenge, whereas a focus on progress through effort creates a tendency to seek and be energized by challenge. Although relatively few studies as yet have explicitly induced and compared (or measured and compared) learning versus performance goals (see M. Bandura & Dweck, 1985; Elliott & Dweck, 1985; FarreU & Dweck, 1985; Leggett, 1985, 1986), many have manipulated the salience and value of performance goals, and hence the relative value of the two types of goals. This has been done, for example, by instituting a competitive versus individual reward structure (e.g., Ames, 1984; Ames, Ames, & Felker, 1977), by varying the alleged diagnosticity of the task vis vis important abilities (e.g., Nicholls, 1975), by introducing an audience or evaluator versus allowing the individual to perform privately or focusing his or her attention on the task (e.g., Brockner & Hulton, 1978; Carver & Scheier, 1981; E. Diener & SruU, 1979), and by presenting the task with \"test\" instructions versus \"game\" or neutral instructions (e.g., Entin & Raynor, 1973; Lekarczyk & Hill, 1969; McCoy, 1965; Sarason, 1972). Taken together, the results suggest that highlighting performance goals relative to learning goals can have the following effects on achievement behavior. Goals and Task Choice Appropriately challenging tasks are often the ones that are best for utilizing and increasing one's abilities. Recent research has shown that performance goals work against the pursuit of challenge by requiring that children's perceptions of their ability be high (and remain high) before the children will desire a challenging task (M. Bandura & D

Motivational processes affecting learning.

Achievement behavior is denned as behavior directed at developing or demonstrating high rather than low ability. It is shown that ability can be conceived in two ways. First, ability can be judged high or low with reference to the individual's own past performance or knowledge. In this context, gains in mastery indicate competence. Second, ability can be judged as capacity relative to that of others. In this context, a gain in mastery alone does not indicate high ability. To demonstrate high capacity, one must achieve more with equal effort or use less effort than do others for an equal performance. The conditions under which these different conceptions of ability function as individuals' goals and the nature of subjective experience in each case are specified. Different predictions of task choice and performance are derived and tested for each case. In this article, predictions of task choice, performance, and subjective experience in experimental achievement settings are derived, and relevant evidence is examined. An intentional view of behavior (Dennett, 1978) is adopted. In this, action is construed as a rational attempt to attain goals or incentives. In commonsense terms, individuals' actions serve to achieve purposes efficiently or economically. In the terms of games theory, action maximizes

/pdf/achievement-motivation-conceptions-of-ability-subjective-1pzqng26ay.pdf

Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice, and performance.

I propose that the ways people respond to their own symptoms of depression influence the duration of these symptoms. People who engage in ruminative responses to depression, focusing on their symptoms and the possible causes and consequences of their symptoms, will show longer depressions than people who take action to distract themselves from their symptoms. Ruminative responses prolong depression because they allow the depressed mood to negatively bias thinking and interfere with instrumental behavior and problem-solving. Laboratory and field studies directly testing this theory have supported its predictions. I discuss how response styles can explain the greater likelihood of depression in women than men. Then I intergrate this response styles theory with studies of coping with discrete events. The response styles theory is compared to other theories of the duration of depression. Finally, I suggest what may help a depressed person to stop engaging in ruminative responses and how response styles for depression may develop.

Arthur Frankel

Papers

Poor performance following unsolvable problems: Learned helplessness or egotism?

A comparison of egotism, negativity, and learned helplessness as explanations for poor performance after unsolvable problems.

Observer bias: A stringent test of behavior engulfing the field.

Testifying in one's own defense: The ingratiator's dilemma.