Effects of overt self-talk on team partners’ other-efficacy and performance in a golf putting task
Options
Date of Publication
May 13, 2014
Publication Type
Conference Paper
Division/Institute
Language
English
Uncontrolled Keywords
Description
Introduction
According to Lent and Lopez’ (2002) tripartite view of efficacy beliefs, members of a team form beliefs about the efficacy of their team partners. This other-efficacy belief can influence individual performance as shown by Dunlop, Beatty, and Beauchamp (2011) in their experimental study using manipulated performance feedback to alter other-efficacy beliefs. Participants holding favorable other-efficacy beliefs outperformed those with lower other--‐efficacy beliefs. Antecedents of such other-efficacy beliefs are amongst others perceptions regarding motivation and psychological factors of the partner (Jackson, Knapp, & Beauchamp, 2008). Overt self-talk could be interpreted as the manifestation of such motivational or psychological factors. In line with this assumption, in an experimental study using dubbed videos of the same segment of a tennis match, Van Raalte, Brewer, Cornelius, and Petitpas (2006) found that players were perceived more favorably (e.g., more concentrated, and of higher ability levels) when shown with dubbed positive self-talk as compared to dubbed negative or no dubbed self--‐talk.
Objectives
The aim of the study was to examine the possible effects of a confederate’s overt self-talk on participants’ other-efficacy beliefs and performance in a team setting.
Method
In a laboratory experiment (between-subjects, pre-post-test design, matched by pretest performance) 89 undergraduate students (female = 35, M = 20.81 years, SD = 2.34) participated in a golf putting task together with a confederate (same gender groups). Depending on the experimental condition (positive, negative, or no self-talk), the confederate commented his or her putts according to a self-talk script. Bogus performance feedback assured that the performance of the confederate was held constant. Performance was measured as the distance to the center of the target, other-efficacy by a questionnaire.
Results
The data collection has just finished and the results of repeated measures analyses of variance will be presented and discussed at the congress. We expect to find higher other-efficacy beliefs and better individual performance in the positive self-talk condition.
References
Dunlop, W.L., Beatty, D.J., & Beauchamp, M.R. (2011). Examining the influence of other-efficacy and self-efficacy on personal performance. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 33, 586-593.
Jackson, B., Knapp, P., & Beauchamp, M.R. (2008). Origins and consequences of tripartite efficacy beliefs within elite athlete dyads. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 30, 512-540.
Lent, R.W., & Lopez, F.G. (2002). Cognitive ties that bind: A tripartite view of efficacy beliefs in growth--‐promoting relationships. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 21, 256-286.
Van Raalte, J.L., Brewer, B.W, Cornelius, A.E., & Petitpas, A.J. (2006). Self-presentational effects of self-talk on perceptions of tennis players. Hellenic Journal of Psychology, 3, 134-149.
According to Lent and Lopez’ (2002) tripartite view of efficacy beliefs, members of a team form beliefs about the efficacy of their team partners. This other-efficacy belief can influence individual performance as shown by Dunlop, Beatty, and Beauchamp (2011) in their experimental study using manipulated performance feedback to alter other-efficacy beliefs. Participants holding favorable other-efficacy beliefs outperformed those with lower other--‐efficacy beliefs. Antecedents of such other-efficacy beliefs are amongst others perceptions regarding motivation and psychological factors of the partner (Jackson, Knapp, & Beauchamp, 2008). Overt self-talk could be interpreted as the manifestation of such motivational or psychological factors. In line with this assumption, in an experimental study using dubbed videos of the same segment of a tennis match, Van Raalte, Brewer, Cornelius, and Petitpas (2006) found that players were perceived more favorably (e.g., more concentrated, and of higher ability levels) when shown with dubbed positive self-talk as compared to dubbed negative or no dubbed self--‐talk.
Objectives
The aim of the study was to examine the possible effects of a confederate’s overt self-talk on participants’ other-efficacy beliefs and performance in a team setting.
Method
In a laboratory experiment (between-subjects, pre-post-test design, matched by pretest performance) 89 undergraduate students (female = 35, M = 20.81 years, SD = 2.34) participated in a golf putting task together with a confederate (same gender groups). Depending on the experimental condition (positive, negative, or no self-talk), the confederate commented his or her putts according to a self-talk script. Bogus performance feedback assured that the performance of the confederate was held constant. Performance was measured as the distance to the center of the target, other-efficacy by a questionnaire.
Results
The data collection has just finished and the results of repeated measures analyses of variance will be presented and discussed at the congress. We expect to find higher other-efficacy beliefs and better individual performance in the positive self-talk condition.
References
Dunlop, W.L., Beatty, D.J., & Beauchamp, M.R. (2011). Examining the influence of other-efficacy and self-efficacy on personal performance. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 33, 586-593.
Jackson, B., Knapp, P., & Beauchamp, M.R. (2008). Origins and consequences of tripartite efficacy beliefs within elite athlete dyads. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 30, 512-540.
Lent, R.W., & Lopez, F.G. (2002). Cognitive ties that bind: A tripartite view of efficacy beliefs in growth--‐promoting relationships. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 21, 256-286.
Van Raalte, J.L., Brewer, B.W, Cornelius, A.E., & Petitpas, A.J. (2006). Self-presentational effects of self-talk on perceptions of tennis players. Hellenic Journal of Psychology, 3, 134-149.