REACTIONS TO FEEDBACK ABOUT PERFORMANCE - A TEST OF 3 COMPETING MODELS

Reactions to an important college exam were used to test enhancement, consistency, and stability contingent theory. Before the exam, students completed a measure of level and stability of self‐esteem. After the exam, cognitive, affective, and behavioral responses to the feedback were taken. Enhancement theory predicts that persons low in self‐esteem have a strong need to think and feel better about themselves. Thus, they should indicate more acceptance of success and more rejection of failure than persons high in self‐esteem. Consistency theory asserts that people avoid inconsistency because it is psychologically uncomfortable. This model predicts that high self‐esteem persons should accept success more than lows, who in turn should be more accepting of failure than highs. Finally, the stability contingent theory highlights the importance of stability of self‐esteem as a moderator of self‐motives. This model predicts that enhancement effects should occur for persons with unstable self‐esteem, whereas consistency effects should occur for those with stable self‐esteem. Our data provide no support for the stability contingent theory. Support for the other two models depended upon the type of feedback that was assessed: Cognitive reactions to feedback supported consistency theory, whereas affective reactions supported enhancement theory. Copyright © 1990, Wiley Blackwell. All rights reserved