The worker scale: Developing a measure to explain gender differences in behavioral self-handicapping

Abstract

Research has consistently found that men engage in more behavioral self-handicapping than do women. We first review evidence suggesting that these gender differences result from women placing more importance on displaying effort than do men. We then present the results of two studies seeking to develop measures of beliefs about effort that might explain these gender differences in behavioral self-handicapping. Women, across a wide range of measures, placed more importance on effort than did men. However, only a new measure of more personalized effort beliefs, dubbed the Worker scale, uniquely explained gender differences in dispositional tendency to behaviorally self-handicap. The Worker scale also predicted academic performance, consistent with the notion that these effort beliefs would predict engagement in actual behavioral selfhandicaps that undermine performance.

Self-handicapping strategies for learning of preservice teachers

“…Generally, the use of self-handicapping strategies is associated with low self-esteem, reports of psychological symptoms (such as stress and anxiety), poor academic performance and lack of organization and academic goals (Hendrix & Hirt, 2009;Martin et al, 2001;McCrea, 2008;Schwinger & Stiensmeier-Pelster, 2011). Regarding the differences between genders, the data indicate that women evaluate self-handicapping behaviors more negatively than men and use these strategies less often (Hirt et al, 2003;Hirt, McCrea, & Kimble, 2000;McCrea et al, 2008).…”

“…Self-handicapping strategies can be used in many contexts, such as management, sports and in academia. The frequent use of these strategies jeopardizes performance and interferes with success (Finez & Sherman, 2012;McCrea, Hirt, Hendrix, Milner, & Steele, 2008;Smith, Hardy, & Arkin, 2009). …”

“…The studies have investigated the relationship between the use of these strategies and motivation (Graham, Tisher, Ainley, & Kennedy, 2008;Hirt, McCrea, & Boris, 2003;McCrea, 2008), self-esteem (Seli, Dembo, & Crocker, 2009), performance (Martin et al, 2001;McCrea et al, 2008;Schraw et al, 2007;Smith et al, 2009) and emotions (Alter & Forgas, 2007;Coudevyle, Martin Ginis, Famose, & Gernigon, 2009;Hendrix & Hirt, 2009). Generally, the use of self-handicapping strategies is associated with low self-esteem, reports of psychological symptoms (such as stress and anxiety), poor academic performance and lack of organization and academic goals (Hendrix & Hirt, 2009;Martin et al, 2001;McCrea, 2008;Schwinger & Stiensmeier-Pelster, 2011).…”

Free Will Belief as a Predictor of Self-Handicapping

“…The purpose of Study 1 was to explicate the relationship between selfhandicapping (Jones & Rhodewalt, 1982) and free will beliefs (Rakos, Laurene, Skala, & Slane, 2008;Paulhus & Carey, 2011;Deery, Davis, & Carey, 2015), as well as related constructs such as beliefs about control (Levenson, 1973;Lefcourt, von Baeyer, Ware, & Cox, 1979), and effort (Schwarzer Bäßler, Kwiatek, Schröder, & Zhang, 1997;McCrea, Hirt, Hendrix, & Milner, 2008). We expected that there would be a positive relationship between free will beliefs, internal locus of control, self-efficacy, and belief in the value of effort, as well as a negative relationship between these constructs and scores on the selfhandicapping scale.…”

Socially Positive Behaviors as Self-Handicapping

“…McCrea, Hirt, Hendrix, Milner, and Steele (2008) developed The Worker Scale in an effort to explain gender differences in behavioral self-handicapping. Across a variety of effort based belief measures, McCrea et al found that women place a higher value than men on effort, perceive effort as normative, view effort rather than ability as more important in others, and enjoy putting forth more effort.…”