Coping with Broken Achievement-Related Expectations in Students from Elementary School: An Experimental Study

Abstract

The experiment analyzed reactions of 115 first-to fourth-graders after realizing that they performed worse than they expected in a computer game. Based on the VIOLEX model of expectation violation, we assessed immunization against achievement feedback, assimilation (striving to increase performance), and accommodation (willingness for expectation change). Students decreased their expectations for the next round of the game after getting feedback indicating that they performed worse than expected, and younger students decreased their expectation more than older students did. After giving them some time for thinking about their achievement (and for finding potential excuses for the lower-than-expected performance), younger students slightly increased their expectation, while older students showed a further drop in expectation. Analyses of verbal responses showed that immunizing against the discrepant feedback was followed by an increase in expectations, whereas assimilative and accommodative tendencies did not predict persistence and change in expectations. Conclusions are drawn for future research.

How Do Students React When Their Performance Is Worse or Better Than Expected?

“…The authors suggested that sex differences in socialization may make girls more sensitive to negative achievement-related feedback. However, a recent study found no sex differences for expectation change after a worse-thanexpected achievement (Pinquart & Block, 2020). Thus, boys' and girls' expectation changes in response to achievement-related feedback might have become more similar in recent years.…”

“…In the study by Pinquart and Block (2020), children's reported immunization against the negative discrepant feedback was followed by less frequent expectation change. In contrast, reported assimilative and accommodative tendencies did not predict expectation change.…”

“…For example, Stipek and Hoffman (1980b) showed that compared with high-achieving peers, lowachieving third graders adjusted their expectations for future achievement less often than low-achieving first graders did. In a study of first to fourth graders, Pinquart and Block (2020) found that immediately after the confrontation with a worse-than-expected achievement, younger students changed their expectations more than older students did. After giving some time to think about possible reasons for their unexpected achievement, younger students increased their expectations for their achievement in the next round, while older students showed a further drop in achievement expectation.…”

“…Until now, only one study assessed these coping processes among children. With the method of thinking aloud (i. e., verbalizing one's thoughts aloud), Pinquart and Block (2020) coded verbal responses after a worsethan-expected achievement with regard to whether they reflected immunization, assimilation, or accommodation. The responses did not vary by age or sex, but it should be noted that very few reports of assimilation and accommodation were identified, which reduced the chance of finding significant differences.…”

A revised framework for the investigation of expectation update versus maintenance in the context of expectation violations: the ViolEx 2.0 model

“…Often enough, however, they do not update their expectations when violated by disconfirming evidence Rief et al, 2015;Roese & Sherman, 2007). On the one hand, such expectation maintenance can be advantageous, for example, when disregarding probable noise (Hohwy, 2017), avoiding or attenuating negative affect after worse-than-expected experiences , or protecting expectations that are relevant for values, goals, and positive beliefs that individuals hold about themselves or about the world (Greve & Wentura, 2010;Pinquart & Block, 2020). On the other hand, the maintenance or even stabilization of expectations despite disconfirming evidence -in other words, not adjusting one's internal model of the world to reality -can have negative consequences for oneself (e.g., psychopathology; Craske et al, 2014;Kube et al, 2019Kube et al, , 2020 or others (e.g., stereotypes; Dort et al, 2020aDort et al, , 2020bKotzur & Wagner, 2021).…”