Two paths of defense: Specific versus compensatory reactions to self-threat

Eisenstadt, Donna; Hicks, J.; McIntyre, Kevin P.; Rivers, Jennifer A.; Cahill, Michael J.

doi:10.1080/15298860500348079

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Unfortunately, unfavorable feedback is not easily accepted. People have been shown to cope with negative feedback by disputing it, lowering their goals, reducing commitment, misremembering or reinterpreting the feedback to be more positive, and engaging in self-esteem repair, none of which are likely to motivate efforts to do a better job next time [8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16].…”

Section: Performance Feedback In the Workplacementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The self-serving tendency in attributions is magnified under conditions of self-threat, that is, when information is conveyed that questions, contradicts, or challenges a person's favorable view of the self [33]. People mentally argue against threatening feedback, rejecting what they find refutable [11,34]. In Studies 2 and 3, we explored the effects of live feedback discussions on attributions, feedback acceptance, and motivation to improve.…”

Section: Diagnosing the Pastmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The future of feedback: Motivating performance improvement through future-focused feedback

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Managerial feedback discussions often fail to produce the desired performance improvements. Three studies shed light on why performance feedback fails and how it can be made more effective. In Study 1, managers described recent performance feedback experiences in their work settings. In Studies 2 and 3, pairs of managers role-played a performance review meeting. In all studies, recipients of mixed and negative feedback doubted the accuracy of the feedback and the providers' qualifications to give it. Disagreement regarding past performance was greater following the feedback discussion than before, due to feedback recipients' increased self-protective and self-enhancing attributions. Managers were motivated to improve to the extent they perceived the feedback conversation to be focused on future actions rather than on past performance. Our findings have implications for the theory and practice of performance management.

show abstract

Section: Performance Feedback In the Workplacementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Diagnosing the Pastmentioning

confidence: 99%

The future of feedback: Motivating performance improvement through future-focused feedback

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, the frequency and intensity of each of these emotional experiences is affected by the magnitude of self-discrepancies (Higgins et al, 1985(Higgins et al, , 1986, such that when individuals 138 K. P. McIntyre & D. Eisenstadt perceive a discrepancy between the actual and ideal or ought selves to be relatively large, they experience more intense dejection-related or agitation-related emotions, and do so more frequently, than when the magnitude of discrepancy is relatively small. Building upon Higgins' (1987) self-discrepancy theory, several researchers have articulated the presence of a third self-guide that serves as a strictly undesired selfregulatory standard (Carver et al, 1999;Eisenstadt & Leippe, 1994;Eisenstadt, Hicks, McIntyre, Rivers, & Cahill, 2006;Ogilvie, 1987). For example, Markus and Nurius (1986), in their discussion of possible selves, described the role of the feared self, which they define as the collection of self-attributes that a person does not want, but fears attaining.…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%