THE ROLE OF EFFORT EXPENDITURE IN ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT

The present investigation, a study of academic underachievement and academic overachievement in high school students, consisted of two sessions with each subject and a questionnaire completed by parents. The first session was largely an attempt to replicate and expand upon a study conducted by Riggs (Note 7). In the second session, subjects completed a questionnaire and took part in a conversation with the experimenter. Although data from all three parts of the study are presented, the discussion focuses on data related to Riggs' experiment.;A portable computer presented digit-symbol problems to subjects in both Riggs' study and in the first session of the present study. A hand dynamometer was attached to the computer, and subjects were told that the more pressure they applied to the dynamometer, the longer some problems would stay on the screen. Measurements of both actual and estimated pressure were obtained.;Riggs unexpectedly found that underachievers in a control condition exerted more effort but reported exerting less effort than overachievers in a control condition and other subjects in the study. This finding, which was based on the responses of six subjects, was considered tentative. However, the finding was replicated in the present study: actual effort expenditure was significantly higher than estimated effort expenditure for underachievers and estimated effort expenditure was significantly higher than actual effort expenditure for overachievers. The possibility that these data reflect self-deception or unconscious behavior is mentioned.;In the present study, there is a significant effect of gender with overachievers tending to be female and underachievers tending to be male. That effect is not present in Riggs' data. In addition, a post-hoc analysis of Riggs' data support the notion that overachievers are primarily concerned with producing a high performance while underachievers are primarily concerned with the attributions made from a performance. An identical analysis of data from the present study supports the same conclusion.;In both Riggs' study and the present study, students were classified as either academic overachievers or academic underachievers on the basis of discrepancies between their actual GPAs and GPAs predicted by their PSAT scores. The terms "academic underachievement" and "academic overachievement" are purely operational terms. They are not theoretically derived psychological constructs; nor do they refer necessarily to students performing either above or below their "true" ability level.