Durability and generalization of attribution-based feedback following failure: Effects on expectations and behavioral persistence

Objective: This experiment investigated, following perceived failure, the immediate, long-term (i.e., durability), and cross-situational (i.e., generalization) effects of attribution-based feedback on expectations and behavioral persistence. Design: We used a 3×2 (Group×Time) experimental design over seven weeks with attributions, expectations of success, and persistence as dependent measures. Method: 49 novice participants were randomly assigned to one of three treatment (attributional feedback) groups: (a) functional (i.e., controllable and unstable); (b) dysfunctional (i.e., uncontrollable and stable); or (c) no feedback. Testing involved three sessions, in which participants completed a total of five trials across two performance tasks (golf-putting and dart-throwing). In order to track whether the attributional manipulation conducted within the context of the golf-putting task in Session 2 would generalize to a new situation, participants performed a dart-throwing task in Session 3, and their scores were compared with those recorded at baseline (in Session 1). Results: Analysis of pre- and post-intervention measures of attributions, expectations, and persistence revealed that the functional attributional feedback led to more personally controllable attributions following failure in a golf-putting task, together with increases in success expectations and persistence. In contrast, dysfunctional attributional feedback led to more personally uncontrollable and stable attributions following failure, together with lower success expectations and reduced persistence. These effects extended beyond the intervention period, were present up to four weeks post intervention, and were maintained even when participants performed a different (i.e., dart-throwing) task. Conclusions: The findings demonstrate that attributional feedback effects are durable over time and generalize across situations

Being one of us: Translating expertise into performance benefits following perceived failure

Is feedback delivered by an expert sufficient to improve performance? In two studies, we tested, following failure, the influence of group membership (ingroup/outgroup) and source expertise (high/low) on the effectiveness of attributional feedback on performance. Results revealed a significant interactive effect, showing an increase of performance only when the source was an expert ingroup member (Study 1). This interaction was replicated on performance and success expectations in Study 2, which were significantly higher for high compared to low expertise ingroup sources. These data suggest that sharing a common identity with those you lead may help convert expert performance advice into real performance benefits

The Origin, Early Evolution and Predictability of Solar Eruptions

Coronal mass ejections (CMEs) were discovered in the early 1970s when space-borne coronagraphs revealed that eruptions of plasma are ejected from the Sun. Today, it is known that the Sun produces eruptive flares, filament eruptions, coronal mass ejections and failed eruptions; all thought to be due to a release of energy stored in the coronal magnetic field during its drastic reconfiguration. This review discusses the observations and physical mechanisms behind this eruptive activity, with a view to making an assessment of the current capability of forecasting these events for space weather risk and impact mitigation. Whilst a wealth of observations exist, and detailed models have been developed, there still exists a need to draw these approaches together. In particular more realistic models are encouraged in order to asses the full range of complexity of the solar atmosphere and the criteria for which an eruption is formed. From the observational side, a more detailed understanding of the role of photospheric flows and reconnection is needed in order to identify the evolutionary path that ultimately means a magnetic structure will erupt

An Individual Differences Measure of Attributions That Affect Achievement Behavior: Factor Structure and Predictive Validity of the Academic Attributional Style Questionnaire

SAGE Open, October-December, pp. 1–15Attributing a negative achievement outcome (e.g., failing a test) to causes that are personally uncontrollable and stable elicits a low expectancy of future success, feelings of hopelessness in that domain, and reduced behavioral efforts to succeed. Thus, a tendency to make such attributions (i.e., dysfunctional academic attributional style) is an individual differences variable that puts people at risk. Two studies examine the factor structure and predictive validity of the Academic Attributional Style Questionnaire (AASQ). Study 1 (using two independent samples) found that the AASQ is a factorially valid measure of functional and dysfunctional attributional styles. In Study 2, during repeated failure in an academic task, the success expectancies, hopefulness, and behavioral persistence of students with a dysfunctional attributional style were lower than those of students with a functional attributional style. These findings modify the attributional theory of achievement motivation (Weiner, 1985) by positing an individual differences moderator variable (i.e., attributional style) and extend attributional research on at-risk students