Testing the mere effort account of the evaluation-performance relationship.

McFall, Sametria R.; Jamieson, Jeremy P.; Harkins, Stephen G.

doi:10.1037/a0012878

Cited by 44 publications

(78 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consistent with these arguments, McFall, Jamieson, and Harkins (2009) found that experimenter evaluation only reduced Stroop interference when the response deadline was late enough (2 sec) for cognitive inhibition to operate (as in Huguet et al, 1999, where there was no deadline). Faced with a shorter deadline (750 msec or 1 sec), participants showed no difference in RT interference when subject to evaluation, but made more errors on incongruent trials.…”

Section: Mere Effortsupporting

confidence: 58%

“…According to this account, evaluation motivates the participant and potentiates the prepotent response, but this is corrected when the response deadline is long enough to make a correction (leading to facilitation in the Stroop task;McFall et al, 2009). Here there was no significant decrease in RT in the presence condition, which contradicts a motivational account.…”

Section: Rtscontrasting

confidence: 46%

“…This is an important question for experimental psychology in general, as there is always an experimenter present at some points in time during the experimental session. McFall et al's (2009) findings show that participants' performance can be affected by their beliefs as to how interested the experimenter is on individual performance. Another important question is whether the experimenter's physical presence can also make a difference: earlier social facilitation findings suggest it does (for a review, see Guerin, 1993).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Exploring the temporal dynamics of social facilitation in the Stroop task

Sharma

Booth

Brown

et al. 2010

Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The importance of social context in affecting attention has recently been highlighted by the finding that the presence of a passive, nonevaluative confederate can improve selective attention. The underlying mechanism, however, remains unclear. In this paper, we argue that social facilitation can be caused by distractor inhibition. Two distinct sources of evidence are provided from an experiment employing the Stroop task with and without social presence. First, analysis of the response time (RT) distribution indicates that interference is reduced at relatively long RTs. This is consistent with an inhibitory mechanism, whose effects build up slowly. Further support is provided by showing that social facilitation is prevented by using short response-to-stimulus intervals that are thought to reduce cognitive control processes.

show abstract

Section: Mere Effortsupporting

confidence: 58%

Section: Rtscontrasting

confidence: 46%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Exploring the temporal dynamics of social facilitation in the Stroop task

Sharma

Booth

Brown

et al. 2010

Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other social threats (i.e., evaluation threat and stereotype threat) have also produced this effect (Jamieson & Harkins, 2007;McFall et al, 2009). However, those threats also affected motivated behavior (volitional saccade latency and adjusted reaction time), but this was not the case in Experiment 1.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Need Threat Can Motivate Performance After Ostracism

Jamieson

Harkins

Williams

2010

Pers Soc Psychol Bull

Self Cite

156

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ostracism threatens fundamental needs of belonging, self-esteem, control, and meaningful existence, which should motivate participants to respond to this threat. However, research has yet to examine the role of need threat in producing motivation after ostracism. In the current work, participants completed a "cognitive ability" (antisaccade) task following Cyberball-induced ostracism or inclusion. In two experiments, it was found that when ostracized, participants do not see antisaccade performance as a means of responding to the concerns produced by need threat; they respond only to the social threat, leading to worse performance than included participants (Experiments 1 and 2). However, when participants see an avenue of response (the Cyberball players can compare antisaccade performances), ostracized participants outperform included participants (Experiment 2). Moreover, this effect was mediated by the need for belonging, suggesting that ostracized participants were motivated to elevate their inclusionary status by demonstrating their worth on the cognitive ability task.

show abstract

“…However, if the prepotent response is correct, or if participants are able to recognize that their prepotent tendencies are incorrect and are given the opportunity to correct, performance will be facilitated. Harkins and his colleagues have found support for these predictions on the Remote Associates Task (Harkins, 2006), anagrams (McFall, Jamieson & Harkins, 2009, Experiment 1), the Stroop task (McFall et al, 2009, Experiments 2 and 3) and the antisaccade task (McFall et al, 2009, Experiment 4).…”

Section: Mere Effort: a Motivational Accountmentioning

confidence: 94%

The effect of stereotype threat on performance of a rhythmic motor skill.

Huber¹,

Seitchik²,

Brown³

et al. 2015

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many studies using cognitive tasks have found that stereotype threat, or concern about confirming a negative stereotype about one's group, debilitates performance. The few studies that documented similar effects on sensorimotor performance have used only relatively coarse measures to quantify performance. Three experiments tested the effect of stereotype threat on a rhythmic ball bouncing task, both at the novice and skilled level. Previous analysis of the task dynamics afforded more detailed quantification of the effect of threat on motor control. In this task, novices hit the ball with positive racket acceleration, indicative of unstable performance. With practice, they learn to stabilize error by changing their ball-racket impact from positive to negative acceleration. Results showed that for novices, stereotype threat potentiated hitting the ball with positive racket acceleration, leading to poorer performance of stigmatized females. However, when the threat manipulation was delivered after having acquired some skill, reflected by negative racket acceleration, the stigmatized females performed better. These findings are consistent with the mere effort account that argues that stereotype threat potentiates the most likely response on the given task. The study also demonstrates the value of identifying the control mechanisms through which stereotype threat has its effects on outcome measures.

show abstract

Testing the mere effort account of the evaluation-performance relationship.

Cited by 44 publications

References 61 publications

Exploring the temporal dynamics of social facilitation in the Stroop task

Exploring the temporal dynamics of social facilitation in the Stroop task

Need Threat Can Motivate Performance After Ostracism

The effect of stereotype threat on performance of a rhythmic motor skill.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About