Transcript 48x36 poster template - Laboratory for Research in

The Effect of Remembering Success or Failure Memories on Self-Efficacy:
The Role of Memory Perspective
Ezgi Aytürk & Sami Gülgöz, 2013
Koç University
İstanbul, Turkey
ABSTRACT
SAMPLE AND DESIGN
RESULTS
The main goal of this research was to test
whether memory perspective moderates the
effect of remembering failure- or successrelated autobiographical memories on
perceived self efficacy. One hundred six
undergraduate students were asked to
remember either a success or a failure
memory. Participants in each group were
instructed to visualize their memories either
from the first person-actor perspective, or
from the third person-observer perspective.
Subjects’ perceived self efficacy was assessed
before and after the experimental
manipulation by both self-report and implicit
measures. Results revealed that, when
remembering a failure memory, taking the
first person perspective decreased, and the
third person perspective increased subjects’
self-efficacy when assessed with a self-report
questionnaire. However, this effect was not
observed when self-efficacy was measured
implicitly.
Participants: One hundred six (66 females)
undergraduate students participated (Mage:
21.44, SD=1.353).
A 3(memory type) x 2(memory perspective)
between-subjects design was used.
 A significant interaction effect of valence
and memory perspective on self-efficacy
was found after controlling baseline selfefficacy (F(2,98)=3.265, p<.05). Taking
the first person perspective increased and
the first person perspective decreased the
self-efficacy of participants in the failurememory condition.
 There was no main effect of valence
(F(2,98)= 0.121, p>.05) or memory
perspective (F(1,98)= 1.181, p>.05) on
self-efficacy.
BACKGROUND
McIsaac and Eich (2004), and Sanitioso
(2008) suggested that memory perspective
functions to promote individuals’ well being
by defining the connection between the
pictured and the present self. They suggested
that the third person perspective serves a
distancing function between the present and
pictured selves whereas the first person
perspective connects the pictured self to the
present self by incorporating the internal
information (e.g. sensory details) of the
pictured self to the event representation.
On the other hand, Libby and Eibach (2011)
suggested that memory perspective is a
representational tool which determines the
information individuals incorporate into their
event representation. They claimed that
rather than merely distancing or connecting
the pictured and present selves, memory
perspective influences the way individuals
define the meaning of the event. In this
model, the first person perspective is
conceptualized to promote bottom-up
processing of event representation in which
concrete details, sensory, and internal
information are incorporated as if the
rememberer relives the past event. On the
other hand, the third person perspective is
conceptualized to promote top-down
processing of the event representation by
focusing on the meaning of the event in a
broader context of one’s life or self concept.
Contact info:
[email protected]
1st person
3rd person
Total
Success
20
24
44
Failure
19
13
32
Control
16
14
30
Total
55
51
106
Table 1. Sample sizes by experimental conditions
MATERIALS
General Self-efficacy Scale (Magaletta, &
Oliver, 1999). Consisting of 17 item 5-point
Likert Scale, General Self-Efficacy Scale is a
self-report questionnaire to measure
individuals’ belief in their ability to start,
continue, and complete actions to achieve their
goals.
Self Liking/ Self Competence Scale
(Tafarodi & Swan, 2001). Consisting of 16
item 5-point Likert scale, Self Liking/ Self
Competence Scale has two subscales named
“self liking” and “self competence’’. Self
liking subscale measures whether individuals
are pleased with themselves, whereas selfcompetence subscale measures individuals’
perceptions about themselves in terms of being
competent, skillful, and successful in
achieving their goals.
Implicit Association Test - Self-esteem
(Greenwald, McGhee, Schwartz, 1998) is a
computerized measure to tap individuals’
automatic associations between mental
representations of concepts. In this study,
subjects’ implicit associations between self
and “pleasantness” was measured.
Figure 1. Illustration of sample Implicit Association Test trials.
PROCEDURE
The whole experimental session took place in
a laboratory room with three computers.
After arriving to the laboratory and signing
the consent form, participants were asked to
complete a computerized survey to measure
the baseline level of their self efficacy. Then
they were instructed to remember a personal
memory either about a past success of past
failure on a domain that is important to them.
Next, participants were given a general
description of the memory perspective, and
instructed to take either the first or the third
person perspective when visualizing their
memories. They were also asked to write a
summary of their memories from the given
perspective. Perspective manipulation phase
was followed by presenting participants with
the post-test measures of self-efficacy.
Figure 2. Interaction effect of memory perspective and
memory type on self-efficacy.
 No significant effect of memory
perspective (F(1,90)=.724, p>.05) or
memory type (F(2,90)=.530, p>.05) was
found with the Implicit Association Test.
DISCUSSION
To date, numerous research has reported the
moderating role of memory perspective on the
effect of memory remembering and
individuals’ self concepts. In this study, one
might speculate that, taking the first person
perspective when remembering a past failure
made individuals to relive the event, and
negatively influenced their on-line judgments
about their self-efficacy as a consequence.
On the other hand, taking the third person
perspective distanced them from their
remembered failed-self and helped them to
reevaluate or reframe their failures from a
different perspective, and reverse its influence
on their self-concepts.
Nevertheless, the absence of these effects on
an implicit measure should warn us to be
cautious about an expectancy effect in any
further research on the subject.
REFERENCES
Greenwald, A.G., McGhee, D.E., Schwartz, J.L.K. (1998). Measuring
individual differences in implicit cognition: the implicit association test.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74,1464–80.
Libby, L.K., & Eibach, R.P. (2011b). Visual perspective in mental
imagery: A representational tool that functions in judgment, emotion, and
self-insight. In M.P. Zanna and J.M. Olson (Eds.), Advances in
Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 44, pp. 185 – 245). San Diego:
Academic Press.
Magaletta, P.R., Oliver, J.M. (1999). The hope construct, will, and ways:
their relations with self-efficacy, optimism, and general well-being.
Journal of Clinical Psychoogy, 55, 539-551.
McIssac, H. K., & Eich, E. (2004). Vantage point in traumatic memory.
Psychological Science, 15, 248–253.
Sanitioso, R. B. (2008). Motivated self and recall: Visual perspectives in
remembering past behaviors. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38,
566–575.
Tafarodi, R. W., & Swan, W. B. (2001). Two-dimensional self-esteem:
Theory and measurement. Personality and Individual Differences, 31,
653- 673.