The Role of College Students' Perceptions of Effort Source on Self-Evaluations of Academic Ability

In the present studies I investigated whether college students’ perceptions of effort source influenced their perceptions of the relation between levels of their own effort and ability in mathematics. In Study 1 (N = 210), I found using hypothetical vignettes that perceptions of task-elicited effort (i.e., effort that arises due to the subjective difficulty or ease of the task) led to perceptions of an inverse relation between one’s effort and ability, and perceptions of self-initiated effort (i.e., effort that arises due to one’s own motivation or lack of motivation) led to perceptions of a positive relation between one’s effort and ability, consistent with my hypotheses and prior research. In Study 2 (N = 160), participants completed an academic task and I used open-ended questions to manipulate their perceptions of effort source. I found that participants in the task-elicited condition endorsed no overall relation between effort and ability, and participants in the self-initiated condition endorsed an overall inverse relation, which is inconsistent with my hypotheses and prior research. Possible explanations for the findings, as well as broader theoretical and educational implications are discussed.

THE INFLUENCE OF MOTIVATION ON EMOTION REGULATION AND MOTOR PERFORMANCE: EXAMINATION OF A NEURO-AFFECTIVE MODEL

Mental stress is known to disrupt the execution of motor performance and can lead to decrements in the quality of performance, however, individuals have shown significant differences regarding how fast and well they can perform a skilled task according to how well they can manage stress and emotion. The purpose of this study was to advance our understanding of how the brain modulates emotional reactivity under different motivational states to achieve differential performance in a target shooting task that requires precision visuomotor coordination. In order to study the interactions in emotion regulatory brain areas (i.e. the ventral striatum, amygdala, prefrontal cortex) and the autonomic nervous system, reward and punishment interventions were employed and the resulting behavioral and physiological responses contrasted to observe the changes in shooting performance (i.e. shooting accuracy and stability of aim) and neuro-cognitive processes (i.e. cognitive load and reserve) during the shooting task. Thirty-five participants, aged 18 to 38 years, from the Reserve Officers’ Training Corp (ROTC) at the University of Maryland were recruited to take 30 shots at a bullseye target in three different experimental conditions. In the reward condition, $1 was added to their total balance for every 10-point shot. In the punishment condition, $1 was deducted from their total balance if they did not hit the 10-point area. In the neutral condition, no money was added or deducted from their total balance. When in the reward condition, which was reportedly most enjoyable and least stressful of the conditions, heart rate variability was found to be positively related to shooting scores, inversely related to variability in shooting performance and positively related to alpha power (i.e. less activation) in the left temporal region. In the punishment (and most stressful) condition, an increase in sympathetic response (i.e. increased LF/HF ratio) was positively related to jerking movements as well as variability of placement (on the target) in the shots taken. This, coupled with error monitoring activity in the anterior cingulate cortex, suggests evaluation of self-efficacy might be driving arousal regulation, thus affecting shooting performance. Better performers showed variable, increasing high-alpha power in the temporal region during the aiming period towards taking the shot which could indicate an adaptive strategy of engagement. They also showed lower coherence during hit shots than missed shots which was coupled with reduced jerking movements and better precision and accuracy. Frontal asymmetry measures revealed possible influence of the prefrontal lobe in driving this effect in reward and neutral conditions. The possible interactions, reasons behind these findings and implications are discussed.