| The following study investigated individual differences in self-evaluative task choice. Four styles of self-evaluative task choice were identified: (a) self-assessment--choosing tasks diagnostic both of high and low ability, (b) self-enhancement--choosing tasks diagnostic of high ability but not low ability, (c) low-ability-confirmation--choosing tasks diagnostic of low but not high ability, and (d) information-avoidance--choosing tasks diagnostic neither of high nor low ability. The primary purpose of the study was to demonstrate that these four individual differences in self-evaluative task choice are related to differences in subjective probability of success, perception of task difficulty, and tendency to self-blame (i.e., attributional style). Subjects were told they were participating in a study of the relationship between personality and cognitive ability. Subjects completed three personality questionnaires: the Attributional Style Questionnaire, the Janis-Field Feelings of Inadequacy Scale, and the Self-Handicapping Scale. Subjects' style of self-evaluative task choice (e.g., self-enhancement) was determined by their choice of one of four forms of a cognitive abilities test that varied in type of performance feedback (e.g., the test form provided performance norms that could indicate high but not low ability). After subjects chose a form of the test, the study was complete. Results indicated (a) that the extent to which subjects sought accurate performance feedback was positively related to the extent to which they anticipated successful task performance, (b) that subjects who chose a test form that could diagnose low ability tended to perceive the test as less difficult than those who avoided diagnosticity of low ability, and (c) that subjects who chose the test form that accurately diagnosed low ability as well as high ability tended to attribute the causes of bad events (e.g., poor task performance) to factors other than themselves. Results are discussed in terms of a general tendency for individuals to protect themselves from ego-threatening ability-relevant information, either by avoiding such information, or by distancing themselves from it via anticipation of success, perceived low task difficulty, or externalization of blame for poor performance. |
