Planning to Fail: Mental Simulation and Self-handicapping
Final Report Abstract
In this project, we examined the role of mental simulation in the self-handicapping strategy. Specifically, we found evidence that 1) individuals are more likely to generate upward counterfactuals indicating how a failure could have been better when they have previously self-handicapped, that these thoughts serve to excuse poor performance, and that excusing failure comes at the cost of undermining future motivation to improve; 2) that individuals who tend to self-handicap therefore expect to feel less upset about a failure if they have undermined their performance than do those who tend not to self-handicap, and that these expectations predict the selection of non-diagnostic tasks and actual self-handicapping behavior; and 3) that individuals motivated to self-handicap are more likely to generate prefactual thoughts concerning ways to undermine their performance, and that these thoughts increase self-handicapping behavior. The results have important implications for understanding the strategic nature of self-handicapping behavior, and underscore the usefulness of the mental simulation model for understanding self-regulation more generally. Furthermore, we have identified potentially useful techniques (e.g., promoting upward prefactual thinking) for reducing self-handicapping behavior, which may be of use in educational, personnel management, and clinical contexts. Portions of the research in this project were discussed in a recent article in The New York Times: Carey, Benedict. (2009). “Some Protect the Ego by Working on Their Excuses Early,” The New York Times, URL: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/06/health/06mind.html
Publications
- (2008). Self-handicapping, excuse-making, and counterfactual thinking: Consequences for self-esteem and future motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 274-292
McCrea, S. M.
