This article was downloaded by: [University of New Hampshire] On: 13 February 2015, At: 22:17 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjrl20
Success, Failure, and Self-Other Orientations P. S. Fry
a
a
The University of Calgary Published online: 02 Jul 2010.
To cite this article: P. S. Fry (1976) Success, Failure, and Self-Other Orientations, The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 93:1, 43-49, DOI: 10.1080/00223980.1976.9921372 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1976.9921372
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire] at 22:17 13 February 2015
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Published as a separate and in The Journal o f Psychology, 1976, 93, 43-49
SUCCESS, FAILURE, AND SELF-OTHER ORIENTATIONS*
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire] at 22:17 13 February 2015
The University of Calgary
The experiment investigated the effects of success and failure experiences on Ss' subsequent ratings in a symbols task measure designed to examine perceptions of self-other orientations. Sixty male and female adolescents were assigned to success, failure, or control experiences on three achievement tasks ostensibly testing intellectual ability. Posttest minus pretest changes were assessed on variables of self-esteem, social interest, egocentricity, power, and individuation as measured in the symbols tasks, and analyses of variance results were examined for differences among Ss in the success, failure, and control conditions. As hypothesized, Ss in the success condition made significantly more positive changes in self-perceptions of esteem, social interest, and power relative to failure and control Ss. Implications of the findings were discussed for social psychologists and clinicians interested in personality assessment and social functioning.
Mischel, Ebbesen, and Zeiss ( 1 4 ) developed a paradigm to investigate the influence of success and failure experiences on subsequent selective attention to information about the self. College students were assigned to success, failure, or control experiences on an achievement task and subsequently required to attend to their assets or limitations. Successful Ss attended more to their personality assets and less to their liabilities than did Ss who failed or had a control experience. Evidence reviewed by Mischel (13) points to the likelihood that the influence of situational factors is important for the change in many behaviors and self-perceptions which have hitherto been regarded as constant dispositions in individuals. Mischel et al. ( 1 4 ) observed that selective attention to information about the self was significantly influenced by prior success-failure experiences. The questions of intimate social space and the adolescent's perceptions of
* Received in the Editorial Office on February 9, 1976, and published immediately at Provincetown, Massachusetts. Copyright by The Journal Press. 1 Requests for reprints should be sent to the author at the address shown at the end of this article.
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire] at 22:17 13 February 2015
44
JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY
self-other orientations are concepts believed to be fundamental aspects of personality serving both as mediators in the assimilation of esperience and as important aids in accomniodation to the environment ( 3 . 1 2 , 15). As suggested by Argyle ( 1 ) and Hallowell ( 4 ) . the adolescents' social schemata and their interpretation of experience within this framework are heavily influenced by patterns of social relations and common perceptions about them in the environment. Thus. social expectancies related to success, failure, power, antl esteem are believed to be assimilated by the adolescent into his self -concept. Traditionally, the psychological literature reporting changes in self-other perceptions is derived from studies examining developmental changes in selfconcept (e. g., 1 1 ) , changes evolving from family experiences (e. g., 1 7 ) , and transcultural experiences (e. g., 5 ) . However, an understanding of the situational variables, such as success and failure, which may influence selfperceptions has been an especially pervasive but thus far neglected feature of investigations. Thus, the specific purpose in the present study was to assess by means of a nonverbal method the immediate influence of success and failure experiences in tasks of intellectual ability on the adolescent's perceptions of self-other relationships. The study is based upon two assumptions: ( a ) Success and failure experiences have affective components that create contrasting \ocial experiences and correspondingly modify some personal-social dispositional traits commonly held to be constant and stable ( 2 , 6, 1 4 ) . ( 6 ) Self-social concepts are derived largely from the individual's perceptions of dimensions such as power, value, and status, antl evaluative feedback regarding intellectual ability will produce corresponding changes in perceptions of power, value, and status ( 1, 4 ) . Consistent with recent theorizing and research (e. g., 1 4 ) , it was hypothesized that Ss who experienced success in tasks of intellectual ability would make more positive gains in self-scores of esteem, social interest, egocentricity, power, and individuation. Conversely, it was hypothesized that Ss who experienced failure in tasks of intellectual ability would show significant decrease in self-scores of esteem, social interest, egocentricity, power, and individuation.
1.
Subjects
Ss were 60 high school seniors ( 3 0 males and 30 females) between the 1 16.1 ) who were planning to enter the university the ages of 16 and 17 following year. Ss were selected from volunteers from two community asso-
(x
P.
S. FRY
45
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire] at 22:17 13 February 2015
ciations which were selected partly on practical grounds but were thought to be typical of middle class suburbia. They were randomly assigned in equal numbers to each of the three conditions. Ss did not know the precise nature of the experiment a t the time they volunteered, but were informed generally that the study had two independent parts: ( a ) a Ph.D. student was developing a symbols test for his thesis, and ( 6 ) an E wanted to test Ss on some tasks of intellectual and psychomotor ability. Ss were informed that E's test was quite unrelated to that of the graduate student. 2 . Procedure a. Self-Social Symbols Tasks. A graduate student confederate ( C ) administered the Self-Social Symbols Tasks ( 9 , 10) to all Ss and used standard manual instructions designed to elicit natural responses. The Self-Social Synlbol Tasks measure is a nonverbal test of self-other relationships in which the S selects, arranges, or produces the syn~bolsto represent the self usually in relation to symbols representing others. From these arrangements, certain aspects of the person's conception of himself in regard to others are inferred. I t is assumed that the patterns seen in the symbolic arrangements represent relations with the person's life space. I n the present study attention was focused on five out of the possible 11 dimensions of the self described in the test. The five components were selected as most desirable in a preliminary study conducted on a sample of 30 adolescents similar in background to the experimental Ss. Each S read over extensive descriptions of the 11 dimensions represented in the Self-social Symbols Tasks and was instructed to select the component that was most significant to him or her. The component selected was then removed from the list, and S was instructed to choose from the remaining 10 the dimension that was most significant. This procedure was repeated until all 11 components had been ranked. The five components that received the highest median preference ranks in the group were as follows: ( a ) Esteem, relative to selected groups of other persons. Self-esteem is defined as the value or importance attributed to the self in comparison with others. ( 6 ) Social interest, relative to a group of others, such as "parents," "teachers," and "friends," is defined as the degree to which a person conceives of himself as a part of a group of others as opposed to a concept of self as separated from the group. ( c ) Power of self in relation to authority figures is seen to be a conception of self a5 superior, inferior, or equal to such other authority persons as father, principal. ( d ) Egocentricity relative to a friend, for example, is seen to reflect the focusing of attention on the self, as opposed to the other,
46
JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire] at 22:17 13 February 2015
that is an inward rather than an outward orientation. ( e ) Individuation is defined as the degree to which the individual differentiates himself from his peers. The extremes of this dimension are considered to be "like" and "different" from others. While a more extended presentation of the theoretical and operational rationale regarding these components and evidence supporting reliability and validity are presented elsewhere ( 5 , 8, 9, 10, l l ) , it is important to note that obtained scores have been found to be independent of ZQ and largely independent of one another.
6. Success-failure experiences. Three experimental sessions providing success-failure experiences were conducted 10 minutes apart. A similar success-failure paradigm was used previously ( 2 , 6, 14) to study the relationship between success and failure and certain behaviors viewed to be constant dispositions. However, the competency based success and failure experiences had not been used previously in the particular combination employed in the present study. Paralleling procedures used in recent research (e. g., 6 ) , E told Ss that the purpose of the experimental activity was to examine the relationship between adolescents' personality orientations and their abilities and skills in certain intellectual and psychomotor tasks. They were told that Ss who scored very high or very low on the first task would be asked to return for the second and third task to see whether they could improve their scores on each subsequent task: ( a ) I n the first experimental task, a perceptual motor skill test adapted from Isen ( 6 ) was used. This task was a face-valid measure of perceptual motor skill, such as setting the right and left sides of a horizontal line of a Muller-Lyer Illusion figure equal and keeping on target on a pursuit rotor. ( 6 ) The second experimental task required the S to take the Stroop Color and Word Test ( 7 ) which has been frequently used to test ability to select and screen stimuli. This test requires the S to make some complex color and word discriminations. ( c ) I n the third task, a recall-recognition test of attention was used. S was required to recall a series of analogies (related to the humanities and sciences) which were projected on a screen for one minute. At the beginning of the experimental tasks, Ss in the success, failure, and control groups received instructions about the tasks. Ss in the control group heard E's standard instructions but were later told they would not be asked to solve any tasks. Instead, control Ss were urged to stay around, inspect the materials, ask questions, if they had any, and make written comments about the usefulness of the materials. After each task S received feedback with regard to his/her performance, and E generated a success or failure ex-
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire] at 22:17 13 February 2015
P. S. FRY
47
perience corresponding to the experimental condition to which S was assigned. In the success condition, E said: "Well, I'm happy to tell you that you did extremely well on this task, way above the average; and you're even in the range where I would like you to return for a second task in which you may be able to prove yourself again. 1'11 return in a few minutes and set up a time for the next task." In the failure condition, E said: "I'm afraid you did quite poorly on the test and your score is much below the average. However, I'd like you to return for another task in which you may be able to prove yourself again. I'll return in a few minutes and set up a time for the next task." Unknown to Ss, individuals in the success condition were given relatively easier aspects of the experimental tasks than those in the failure condition. This procedure ensured that subjective feelings of performance on the test would not be discrepant with the manipulated feedback. c . Posttesting. After the three tasks were completed and the success or failure inducing feedback was given to the S, the graduate student C set the stage for the posttesting on the Self-Social Symbols Tasks. C approached the S and said: "You've been very helpful in my dissertation work by taking the symbols test I'm developing. I would appreciate it very much if you would take the test once again while you are waiting for Dr. -- to return. Unfortunately, I had to discard the results of the test you took this morning because I forgot to time you. Do you mind taking it again for me? T am extremely sorry to ask you this at the end of a long day." d . Debriefing. After the posttest administration of the Self-Social Symbols Task measure, E invited Ss individually to express their feelings toward the experiment in general and toward E on a four-point scale from 1 = liked a lot to 4 = disliked a lot. Ss were also asked to specify what they thought was the purpose of the study. E debriefed Ss and explained in detail the experimental manipulation and real purpose of the experiment. Care was taken to ensure that Ss understood that they had not actually failed or done poorly. e. Analysis of the data. The data of main interest consisted of the effects of success, failure, and control conditions on each of the five selected variables of the self-social orientation test. Means and standard deviations for the pretest and posttest measures were examined for the following variables of the Self-Social Symbols measure: esteem, social interest, egocentricity, power, and individuation. A summary
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire] at 22:17 13 February 2015
48
JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY
of the results is provided in Table 1 and shows significant effects for all five variables. A 3 X 2 X 2 analyses of variance was done on each dependent variabje, with the three factors being treatment conditions, pre-post ratings, and sex. .4 significant main effect of success treatment on esteem, egocentricity, and individuation [ F ( 3 , 5 7 ) = 6.23, p < .01: F ( 3 , 5 7 ) = 4.32, p < .05; and F ( 3 , 5 7 ) = 5.61, P < .05, respectively ] was obtained, indicating that success treatment affected change scores significantly. A contrast to test this conlparison was also examined for the effect of failure treatment. A significant main effect [ F ( 3 , 5 7 ) = 6.14, p < .O1] was obtained for the failure condition and resulted from the fact that failure Ss showed a significant decline in self-perceptions of esteem ( p < . 0 1 ) . power ( p < . 0 1 ) , and social interest ( p < .05) relative to success and control Ss. T h e analysis of variance results showed no significant interactions hetween evaluative feedback conditions and ses on any of the variables. The results supported the hypothesis regarding the change in self-other orientation scores following success and failure experiences. A nonorthogonal comparison guided by theoretical considerations ( 1 6 ) indicated that Ss exposed to failure esperiences tended to dislike the esperiment, as a whole, si:cnificantly more than Ss exposed to success experiences 11.'(1, 5 8 ) = 4.82, P < . 0 5 ] . Only two out of 60 -5's suspected the real purpose of the study, showing that the experimental manipulation had been quite successful. The general issue of how information regarding one's performance is attended to, processed, and incorporated into self-perception is clearly a significant one for psychologist> and personality theorists. The findings suggeht that success experiences heightened self-perceptions of esteem and individuation, and failure experiences lowered self-perceptions of power and social interest. The reduction in perception of power and social interest in failure TABLE 1 h1E.i~SEI.F-SOI.I.\L SCORES I S SUCCESS, FAII.VRE A S D C ~ S T R OCI I. ) N ~ I T I ~ I V S --
-
~
Variables
----
Estcxem Social interest Egocentricity Power Individuation
Success I'retcst Posttest -. .
-- -
16..3 .\.I ? .4 16.7 4.2 ~
50tr: S
= 20
in each group.
.
21.4
.
Failure Prrlest Posttest
-
-
-
- .
~
Control Pretest Posttest
p -
J.9
16.1 34
5.6 17.6 8.4
17.1 4.6
2.8
10.4 1.2 2.6 11.1 2.1
15.0 .1.?
2.1 16.6 4.5
15.4 3.5 2.7 17.1 4.9
P . S . FRY
49
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire] at 22:17 13 February 2015
Ss may partly explain why they disliked the experiment as a whole more than did success Ss. The simplest explanation assumes that the success or failure experience led to a kind of feeling "good" or "bad" that was translated into positive or negative perceptions of the self in relation to others. The finding that even fleeting success and failure experiences can alter the individual's perception of self and others suggests to psychologists that personality scales, tests, and projective techniques asessing self-other orientation styles are highly sensitive to even minor situational and affective factors, and results should be interpreted always as being tentative and flexible.
REFERENCES ARGYLE, M. Psychology of Interpersonal Behavior. Baltimore, Md.: Penguin, 1967. B E R K O W ~ TL., Z , & CONNOR, W. H. Success, failure and social responsibility. J . Personal. 6 Soc. Psychol., 1966, 4, 664--669. FLAVELL, J . H. The Developmental Psychology of Jean Piaget. Princeton, N.J.: Van Nostrand, 1963. HALLOWELL, A. I. Culture and Experience. Philadelphia: Univ. Pennsylvania Press, 1954. HENDERSON, E. H.: LONG,B. H., & GANTCHEFF, H. Self-other orientations of French and English Canadian adolescents. C a n . J. Psychol., 1970, 24, 142-152. ISEN, A. M. Success, failure, attention and reaction t o others: The warm glow of success. I . Personal. B Soc. Psychol., 1970, 14, 294-301. JENSEN,.4. R., & ROHWER,W. D. The Stroop color and word test: A review. Acta Psychol., 1966, 25, 36-93. LONG,B. H., & HENDERSON, E. G. Measuring esteem across cultures. Proc. 79th Ann. Conven. Amer. Psychol. Assoc., 1971, 6, 255-256 (Summary). LONG,B. H., HENDERSON, E. G., & PLATT,L. Self-other orientations of Israeli adolescents reared in Kibbutzim and Moshavim. Devel. Psychol., 1973, 8, 300-308. I,ONG,B. H., HENDERSON, E. G., & ZILLER,R. C. Manual for the Self-Social Symbols Tasks. Towson, Md.: Goucher Coll., 1970. LONG,B. H., ZILLER,R. C., & BANKES,J . Self-other orientations of institutionalized behavior-problem adolescents. J. Consult. 6 Clin. P ~ y c h o l . ,1970, 34, 43-47. LUIJPEN, W. Existential Phenomenology. Pittsburgh, Pa.: Duquesne Univ. Press, 1960. MISCHEL,W. Personality and Assessment. New York: Wiley, 1968. MISCHEL,U'.,EBBESEN,E. B., & ZEISS, A. R. Selective attention to the self: Situational and dispositional determinants. J. Personal. G Soc. Psychol., 1973, 27, 129142. VAN KAAM,A. Counseling from the viewpoint of existential psychology. Harvard Educ. R e v . , 1962, 32, 403-415. WINER,B. J. Statistical Principles in Experimental Design. New York: McGrawHill, 1962. ZILLER,R. C., LONG,B. H., RAMANA, K. V., & REDDY,V . E. Self-other orientations of Indian and American adolescents. J. Personal., 1968, 36, ,315-.U0.
Department of Educational Psychology The University of Calgary Calgary, Alberta', Canada T2N I N 4
The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjrl20
Success, Failure, and Self-Other Orientations P. S. Fry
a
a
The University of Calgary Published online: 02 Jul 2010.
To cite this article: P. S. Fry (1976) Success, Failure, and Self-Other Orientations, The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 93:1, 43-49, DOI: 10.1080/00223980.1976.9921372 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1976.9921372
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire] at 22:17 13 February 2015
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Published as a separate and in The Journal o f Psychology, 1976, 93, 43-49
SUCCESS, FAILURE, AND SELF-OTHER ORIENTATIONS*
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire] at 22:17 13 February 2015
The University of Calgary
The experiment investigated the effects of success and failure experiences on Ss' subsequent ratings in a symbols task measure designed to examine perceptions of self-other orientations. Sixty male and female adolescents were assigned to success, failure, or control experiences on three achievement tasks ostensibly testing intellectual ability. Posttest minus pretest changes were assessed on variables of self-esteem, social interest, egocentricity, power, and individuation as measured in the symbols tasks, and analyses of variance results were examined for differences among Ss in the success, failure, and control conditions. As hypothesized, Ss in the success condition made significantly more positive changes in self-perceptions of esteem, social interest, and power relative to failure and control Ss. Implications of the findings were discussed for social psychologists and clinicians interested in personality assessment and social functioning.
Mischel, Ebbesen, and Zeiss ( 1 4 ) developed a paradigm to investigate the influence of success and failure experiences on subsequent selective attention to information about the self. College students were assigned to success, failure, or control experiences on an achievement task and subsequently required to attend to their assets or limitations. Successful Ss attended more to their personality assets and less to their liabilities than did Ss who failed or had a control experience. Evidence reviewed by Mischel (13) points to the likelihood that the influence of situational factors is important for the change in many behaviors and self-perceptions which have hitherto been regarded as constant dispositions in individuals. Mischel et al. ( 1 4 ) observed that selective attention to information about the self was significantly influenced by prior success-failure experiences. The questions of intimate social space and the adolescent's perceptions of
* Received in the Editorial Office on February 9, 1976, and published immediately at Provincetown, Massachusetts. Copyright by The Journal Press. 1 Requests for reprints should be sent to the author at the address shown at the end of this article.
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire] at 22:17 13 February 2015
44
JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY
self-other orientations are concepts believed to be fundamental aspects of personality serving both as mediators in the assimilation of esperience and as important aids in accomniodation to the environment ( 3 . 1 2 , 15). As suggested by Argyle ( 1 ) and Hallowell ( 4 ) . the adolescents' social schemata and their interpretation of experience within this framework are heavily influenced by patterns of social relations and common perceptions about them in the environment. Thus. social expectancies related to success, failure, power, antl esteem are believed to be assimilated by the adolescent into his self -concept. Traditionally, the psychological literature reporting changes in self-other perceptions is derived from studies examining developmental changes in selfconcept (e. g., 1 1 ) , changes evolving from family experiences (e. g., 1 7 ) , and transcultural experiences (e. g., 5 ) . However, an understanding of the situational variables, such as success and failure, which may influence selfperceptions has been an especially pervasive but thus far neglected feature of investigations. Thus, the specific purpose in the present study was to assess by means of a nonverbal method the immediate influence of success and failure experiences in tasks of intellectual ability on the adolescent's perceptions of self-other relationships. The study is based upon two assumptions: ( a ) Success and failure experiences have affective components that create contrasting \ocial experiences and correspondingly modify some personal-social dispositional traits commonly held to be constant and stable ( 2 , 6, 1 4 ) . ( 6 ) Self-social concepts are derived largely from the individual's perceptions of dimensions such as power, value, and status, antl evaluative feedback regarding intellectual ability will produce corresponding changes in perceptions of power, value, and status ( 1, 4 ) . Consistent with recent theorizing and research (e. g., 1 4 ) , it was hypothesized that Ss who experienced success in tasks of intellectual ability would make more positive gains in self-scores of esteem, social interest, egocentricity, power, and individuation. Conversely, it was hypothesized that Ss who experienced failure in tasks of intellectual ability would show significant decrease in self-scores of esteem, social interest, egocentricity, power, and individuation.
1.
Subjects
Ss were 60 high school seniors ( 3 0 males and 30 females) between the 1 16.1 ) who were planning to enter the university the ages of 16 and 17 following year. Ss were selected from volunteers from two community asso-
(x
P.
S. FRY
45
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire] at 22:17 13 February 2015
ciations which were selected partly on practical grounds but were thought to be typical of middle class suburbia. They were randomly assigned in equal numbers to each of the three conditions. Ss did not know the precise nature of the experiment a t the time they volunteered, but were informed generally that the study had two independent parts: ( a ) a Ph.D. student was developing a symbols test for his thesis, and ( 6 ) an E wanted to test Ss on some tasks of intellectual and psychomotor ability. Ss were informed that E's test was quite unrelated to that of the graduate student. 2 . Procedure a. Self-Social Symbols Tasks. A graduate student confederate ( C ) administered the Self-Social Symbols Tasks ( 9 , 10) to all Ss and used standard manual instructions designed to elicit natural responses. The Self-Social Synlbol Tasks measure is a nonverbal test of self-other relationships in which the S selects, arranges, or produces the syn~bolsto represent the self usually in relation to symbols representing others. From these arrangements, certain aspects of the person's conception of himself in regard to others are inferred. I t is assumed that the patterns seen in the symbolic arrangements represent relations with the person's life space. I n the present study attention was focused on five out of the possible 11 dimensions of the self described in the test. The five components were selected as most desirable in a preliminary study conducted on a sample of 30 adolescents similar in background to the experimental Ss. Each S read over extensive descriptions of the 11 dimensions represented in the Self-social Symbols Tasks and was instructed to select the component that was most significant to him or her. The component selected was then removed from the list, and S was instructed to choose from the remaining 10 the dimension that was most significant. This procedure was repeated until all 11 components had been ranked. The five components that received the highest median preference ranks in the group were as follows: ( a ) Esteem, relative to selected groups of other persons. Self-esteem is defined as the value or importance attributed to the self in comparison with others. ( 6 ) Social interest, relative to a group of others, such as "parents," "teachers," and "friends," is defined as the degree to which a person conceives of himself as a part of a group of others as opposed to a concept of self as separated from the group. ( c ) Power of self in relation to authority figures is seen to be a conception of self a5 superior, inferior, or equal to such other authority persons as father, principal. ( d ) Egocentricity relative to a friend, for example, is seen to reflect the focusing of attention on the self, as opposed to the other,
46
JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire] at 22:17 13 February 2015
that is an inward rather than an outward orientation. ( e ) Individuation is defined as the degree to which the individual differentiates himself from his peers. The extremes of this dimension are considered to be "like" and "different" from others. While a more extended presentation of the theoretical and operational rationale regarding these components and evidence supporting reliability and validity are presented elsewhere ( 5 , 8, 9, 10, l l ) , it is important to note that obtained scores have been found to be independent of ZQ and largely independent of one another.
6. Success-failure experiences. Three experimental sessions providing success-failure experiences were conducted 10 minutes apart. A similar success-failure paradigm was used previously ( 2 , 6, 14) to study the relationship between success and failure and certain behaviors viewed to be constant dispositions. However, the competency based success and failure experiences had not been used previously in the particular combination employed in the present study. Paralleling procedures used in recent research (e. g., 6 ) , E told Ss that the purpose of the experimental activity was to examine the relationship between adolescents' personality orientations and their abilities and skills in certain intellectual and psychomotor tasks. They were told that Ss who scored very high or very low on the first task would be asked to return for the second and third task to see whether they could improve their scores on each subsequent task: ( a ) I n the first experimental task, a perceptual motor skill test adapted from Isen ( 6 ) was used. This task was a face-valid measure of perceptual motor skill, such as setting the right and left sides of a horizontal line of a Muller-Lyer Illusion figure equal and keeping on target on a pursuit rotor. ( 6 ) The second experimental task required the S to take the Stroop Color and Word Test ( 7 ) which has been frequently used to test ability to select and screen stimuli. This test requires the S to make some complex color and word discriminations. ( c ) I n the third task, a recall-recognition test of attention was used. S was required to recall a series of analogies (related to the humanities and sciences) which were projected on a screen for one minute. At the beginning of the experimental tasks, Ss in the success, failure, and control groups received instructions about the tasks. Ss in the control group heard E's standard instructions but were later told they would not be asked to solve any tasks. Instead, control Ss were urged to stay around, inspect the materials, ask questions, if they had any, and make written comments about the usefulness of the materials. After each task S received feedback with regard to his/her performance, and E generated a success or failure ex-
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire] at 22:17 13 February 2015
P. S. FRY
47
perience corresponding to the experimental condition to which S was assigned. In the success condition, E said: "Well, I'm happy to tell you that you did extremely well on this task, way above the average; and you're even in the range where I would like you to return for a second task in which you may be able to prove yourself again. 1'11 return in a few minutes and set up a time for the next task." In the failure condition, E said: "I'm afraid you did quite poorly on the test and your score is much below the average. However, I'd like you to return for another task in which you may be able to prove yourself again. I'll return in a few minutes and set up a time for the next task." Unknown to Ss, individuals in the success condition were given relatively easier aspects of the experimental tasks than those in the failure condition. This procedure ensured that subjective feelings of performance on the test would not be discrepant with the manipulated feedback. c . Posttesting. After the three tasks were completed and the success or failure inducing feedback was given to the S, the graduate student C set the stage for the posttesting on the Self-Social Symbols Tasks. C approached the S and said: "You've been very helpful in my dissertation work by taking the symbols test I'm developing. I would appreciate it very much if you would take the test once again while you are waiting for Dr. -- to return. Unfortunately, I had to discard the results of the test you took this morning because I forgot to time you. Do you mind taking it again for me? T am extremely sorry to ask you this at the end of a long day." d . Debriefing. After the posttest administration of the Self-Social Symbols Task measure, E invited Ss individually to express their feelings toward the experiment in general and toward E on a four-point scale from 1 = liked a lot to 4 = disliked a lot. Ss were also asked to specify what they thought was the purpose of the study. E debriefed Ss and explained in detail the experimental manipulation and real purpose of the experiment. Care was taken to ensure that Ss understood that they had not actually failed or done poorly. e. Analysis of the data. The data of main interest consisted of the effects of success, failure, and control conditions on each of the five selected variables of the self-social orientation test. Means and standard deviations for the pretest and posttest measures were examined for the following variables of the Self-Social Symbols measure: esteem, social interest, egocentricity, power, and individuation. A summary
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire] at 22:17 13 February 2015
48
JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY
of the results is provided in Table 1 and shows significant effects for all five variables. A 3 X 2 X 2 analyses of variance was done on each dependent variabje, with the three factors being treatment conditions, pre-post ratings, and sex. .4 significant main effect of success treatment on esteem, egocentricity, and individuation [ F ( 3 , 5 7 ) = 6.23, p < .01: F ( 3 , 5 7 ) = 4.32, p < .05; and F ( 3 , 5 7 ) = 5.61, P < .05, respectively ] was obtained, indicating that success treatment affected change scores significantly. A contrast to test this conlparison was also examined for the effect of failure treatment. A significant main effect [ F ( 3 , 5 7 ) = 6.14, p < .O1] was obtained for the failure condition and resulted from the fact that failure Ss showed a significant decline in self-perceptions of esteem ( p < . 0 1 ) . power ( p < . 0 1 ) , and social interest ( p < .05) relative to success and control Ss. T h e analysis of variance results showed no significant interactions hetween evaluative feedback conditions and ses on any of the variables. The results supported the hypothesis regarding the change in self-other orientation scores following success and failure experiences. A nonorthogonal comparison guided by theoretical considerations ( 1 6 ) indicated that Ss exposed to failure esperiences tended to dislike the esperiment, as a whole, si:cnificantly more than Ss exposed to success experiences 11.'(1, 5 8 ) = 4.82, P < . 0 5 ] . Only two out of 60 -5's suspected the real purpose of the study, showing that the experimental manipulation had been quite successful. The general issue of how information regarding one's performance is attended to, processed, and incorporated into self-perception is clearly a significant one for psychologist> and personality theorists. The findings suggeht that success experiences heightened self-perceptions of esteem and individuation, and failure experiences lowered self-perceptions of power and social interest. The reduction in perception of power and social interest in failure TABLE 1 h1E.i~SEI.F-SOI.I.\L SCORES I S SUCCESS, FAII.VRE A S D C ~ S T R OCI I. ) N ~ I T I ~ I V S --
-
~
Variables
----
Estcxem Social interest Egocentricity Power Individuation
Success I'retcst Posttest -. .
-- -
16..3 .\.I ? .4 16.7 4.2 ~
50tr: S
= 20
in each group.
.
21.4
.
Failure Prrlest Posttest
-
-
-
- .
~
Control Pretest Posttest
p -
J.9
16.1 34
5.6 17.6 8.4
17.1 4.6
2.8
10.4 1.2 2.6 11.1 2.1
15.0 .1.?
2.1 16.6 4.5
15.4 3.5 2.7 17.1 4.9
P . S . FRY
49
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire] at 22:17 13 February 2015
Ss may partly explain why they disliked the experiment as a whole more than did success Ss. The simplest explanation assumes that the success or failure experience led to a kind of feeling "good" or "bad" that was translated into positive or negative perceptions of the self in relation to others. The finding that even fleeting success and failure experiences can alter the individual's perception of self and others suggests to psychologists that personality scales, tests, and projective techniques asessing self-other orientation styles are highly sensitive to even minor situational and affective factors, and results should be interpreted always as being tentative and flexible.
REFERENCES ARGYLE, M. Psychology of Interpersonal Behavior. Baltimore, Md.: Penguin, 1967. B E R K O W ~ TL., Z , & CONNOR, W. H. Success, failure and social responsibility. J . Personal. 6 Soc. Psychol., 1966, 4, 664--669. FLAVELL, J . H. The Developmental Psychology of Jean Piaget. Princeton, N.J.: Van Nostrand, 1963. HALLOWELL, A. I. Culture and Experience. Philadelphia: Univ. Pennsylvania Press, 1954. HENDERSON, E. H.: LONG,B. H., & GANTCHEFF, H. Self-other orientations of French and English Canadian adolescents. C a n . J. Psychol., 1970, 24, 142-152. ISEN, A. M. Success, failure, attention and reaction t o others: The warm glow of success. I . Personal. B Soc. Psychol., 1970, 14, 294-301. JENSEN,.4. R., & ROHWER,W. D. The Stroop color and word test: A review. Acta Psychol., 1966, 25, 36-93. LONG,B. H., & HENDERSON, E. G. Measuring esteem across cultures. Proc. 79th Ann. Conven. Amer. Psychol. Assoc., 1971, 6, 255-256 (Summary). LONG,B. H., HENDERSON, E. G., & PLATT,L. Self-other orientations of Israeli adolescents reared in Kibbutzim and Moshavim. Devel. Psychol., 1973, 8, 300-308. I,ONG,B. H., HENDERSON, E. G., & ZILLER,R. C. Manual for the Self-Social Symbols Tasks. Towson, Md.: Goucher Coll., 1970. LONG,B. H., ZILLER,R. C., & BANKES,J . Self-other orientations of institutionalized behavior-problem adolescents. J. Consult. 6 Clin. P ~ y c h o l . ,1970, 34, 43-47. LUIJPEN, W. Existential Phenomenology. Pittsburgh, Pa.: Duquesne Univ. Press, 1960. MISCHEL,W. Personality and Assessment. New York: Wiley, 1968. MISCHEL,U'.,EBBESEN,E. B., & ZEISS, A. R. Selective attention to the self: Situational and dispositional determinants. J. Personal. G Soc. Psychol., 1973, 27, 129142. VAN KAAM,A. Counseling from the viewpoint of existential psychology. Harvard Educ. R e v . , 1962, 32, 403-415. WINER,B. J. Statistical Principles in Experimental Design. New York: McGrawHill, 1962. ZILLER,R. C., LONG,B. H., RAMANA, K. V., & REDDY,V . E. Self-other orientations of Indian and American adolescents. J. Personal., 1968, 36, ,315-.U0.
Department of Educational Psychology The University of Calgary Calgary, Alberta', Canada T2N I N 4
