Although longitudinal studies have consistently shown the positive impact of performance-approach goals (i.e., the desire to demonstrate one's abilities and outperform others) on academic success, they might allow some strategic behaviors such as cheating and surface studying, leaving open the question of the sheer impact of performance-approach goals on cognitive performance. We argued that the pressure to outperform others might generate outcome concerns and thus deplete working memory resources available for the activity, thereby hindering cognitive performance. Three studies carried out in a laboratory context confirmed this hypothesis. During a demanding cognitive task, performance-approach goal manipulation hampered performance (Experiment 1) by generating distractive concerns that drew on the limited verbal component of working memory (Experiment 2). Moreover, this interference was shown to be specifically due to the activation of performance-approach goal-related thoughts during the task solving (Experiment 3). Together, the present results highlight the distractive consequence of performance-approach goals on cognitive performance, suggesting that cognitive resource allocation is divided among the storage, processing, and retrieval of task-relevant information and the activation of normative goal-attainment concerns.

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected all domains of human life, including the economic and social fabric of societies. One of the central strategies for managing public health throughout the pandemic has been through persuasive messaging and collective behavior change. To help scholars better understand the social and moral psychology behind public health behavior, we present a dataset comprising of 51,404 individuals from 69 countries. This dataset was collected for the International Collaboration on Social Moral Psychology of COVID-19 project (ICSMP COVID-19). This social science survey invited participants around the world to complete a series of individual differences and public health attitudes about COVID-19 during an early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic (between April and June 2020). The survey included seven broad categories of questions: COVID-19 beliefs and compliance behaviours; identity and social attitudes; ideology; health and well-being; moral beliefs and motivation; personality traits; and demographic variables. We report both raw and cleaned data, along with all survey materials, data visualisations, and psychometric evaluations of key variables.

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected all domains of human life, including the economic and social fabric of societies. One of the central strategies for managing public health throughout the pandemic has been through persuasive messaging and collective behaviour change. To help scholars better understand the social and moral psychology behind public health behaviour, we present a dataset comprising of 51,404 individuals from 69 countries. This dataset was collected for the International Collaboration on Social & Moral Psychology of COVID-19 project (ICSMP COVID-19). This social science survey invited participants around the world to complete a series of moral and psychological measures and public health attitudes about COVID-19 during an early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic (between April and June 2020). The survey included seven broad categories of questions: COVID-19 beliefs and compliance behaviours; identity and social attitudes; ideology; health and well-being; moral beliefs and motivation; personality traits; and demographic variables. We report both raw and cleaned data, along with all survey materials, data visualisations, and psychometric evaluations of key variables.

Recent research has documented the academic disadvantage of low social class students, whose performance is impaired by competitive educational practices. Across 2 experiments, we examined whether the pursuit of performance-approach goals (aiming to outperform others) favors the emergence of this achievement gap. We first manipulated low versus high relative social class positions; participants then solved a reasoning test, for which they had been incited (or not) to outperform others. In Experiment 1, carried out among French students, participants primed with a low relative social class obtained a lower performance than those primed with a high relative social class—but only when performance-approach goals had been made salient. Results of Experiment 2 replicated this pattern among American participants. These findings reveal that the pursuit of performance-approach goals can fuel the social class achievement gap. We consider the advantages associated with the experimental manipulation of relative social class, and discuss how educational practices and policies may jeopardize—in an invisible way—the potential of lower social class students.

We tested whether the goal to attain normative superiority over other students, referred to as performance-approach goals, is particularly distractive for high-Working Memory Capacity (WMC) students—that is, those who are used to being high achievers. Indeed, WMC is positively related to high-order cognitive performance and academic success, a record of success that confers benefits on high-WMC as compared to low-WMC students. We tested whether such benefits may turn out to be a burden under performance-approach goal pursuit. Indeed, for high achievers, aiming to rise above others may represent an opportunity to reaffirm their positive status—a stake susceptible to trigger disruptive outcome concerns that interfere with task processing. Results revealed that with performance-approach goals—as compared to goals with no emphasis on social comparison—the higher the students’ WMC, the lower their performance at a complex arithmetic task (Experiment 1). Crucially, this pattern appeared to be driven by uncertainty regarding the chances to outclass others (Experiment 2). Moreover, an accessibility measure suggested the mediational role played by status-related concerns in the observed disruption of performance. We discuss why high-stake situations can paradoxically lead high-achievers to sub-optimally perform when high-order cognitive performance is at play.