Self-handicapping and intrinsic motivation: Buffering intrinsic motivation from the threat of failure.

Abstract

High and low self-handicappers (as measured by E. E. Jones & F. Rhodewalt's [1982] Self-Handicapping Scale) were asked to play a game of pinball (in a competitive or noncompetitive setting) after they had practiced as much as they wanted on a related task (thus, not practicing could have served as a self-handicap). High self-handicappers who did not practice much became more involved in the game and subsequently reported enjoying the game more than high self-handicappers who practiced a lot. Furthermore, the effects on enjoyment were mediated by task involvement, suggesting that the protection afforded by self-handicapping affects intrinsic motivation by allowing the individual to become absorbed in the activity instead of focusing on performance concerns. Individuals who self-handicap may be providing themselves with the "breathing room" they need to become absorbed in an activity and to experience the activity as enjoyable.

Do Athletes Claim Handicaps in Low Ego-Threatening Conditions? Re-Examining the Effect of Ego-Threat on Claimed Self-Handicapping

“…Our results are consistent with the findings of previous research in which high self-handicappers students engaged in self-handicapping in a situations with low evaluative components (Rhodewalt & Fairfield, 1991, studies 1 and 2) or in a noncompetitive task (Deppe & Harackiewicz, 1996). Our findings, however, differ from these studies on three points.…”

“…Rather, they suggest that high self-handicappers may engage in behavioral selfhandicapping even in low ego-threatening situations. Further, in an other study that was designed to investigate the consequences of self-handicapping on performance, Deppe and Harackiewicz (1996) observed that high self-handicappers engaged in more behavioral self-handicapping compared with low self-handicappers before participating in a pinball game both in a competitive condition (that included a high evaluative component) and in a noncompetitive condition (that lacked an evaluative component).…”

“…Although the experiments of Rhodewalt and Fairfield (1991) and Deppe and Harackiewicz (1996) were not designed to test the emergence of self-handicapping in low ego-threatening conditions, they suggest that high self-handicappers may engage in this strategy even when they are faced with low evaluative situations-and which should be, by nature, low ego-threatening. Surprisingly, these findings were not highlighted and have received little attention in the literature even though they are inconsistent with the initial (Jones & Berglas, 1978) and most defended position (see e.g., Self, 1990) that self-handicapping emerges to shape the implication of performance feedback.…”

“…The CSHS-S was used rather than the Self-Handicapping Scale (SHS, Jones & Rhodewalt, 1982) which is generally used to assess self-handicapping tendency (e.g., Deppe & Harackiewicz, 1996;Rhodewalt & Fairfield, 1991;Thompson & Richardson, 2001) because it specifically measures claimed self-handicapping. Further, unlike the CSHS-S, the SHS assesses both self-protective and selfenhancing motives of self-handicapping, which is essential to measure all aspects of self-handicapping, not simply its self-protective motives (Tice, 1991).…”

Motivation and Performance in Context: The Influence of Goal Orientations and Instructional Setting on Situational Appraisals and Task Performance

“…Some studies show negative effects (Rhodewalt, Morf, Hazlett, & Fairfield, 1991) and some show no effects at all (Greenberg, Paisley, & Pyszczynski, 1984). Some studies even suggest that self-handicapping may act as a buffer against anxiety and ability attributions thus leading to performance benefits (Deppe & Harackiewicz, 1996). Most studies focusing on habitual self-handicapping (i.e., selfreported preference for self-handicapping behavior) have found evidence linking selfhandicapping with maladaptive outcomes.…”