Ronald W. Rogers

The Self-Efficacy Scale: Construction and Validation

Self-efficacy theory asserts that personal mastery expectations are the primary determinants of behavioral change. Further, it is suggested that individual differences in past experiences and attribution of success to skill or chance result in different levels of generalized self-efficacy expectations. To measure these generalized expectancies, a Self-efficacy Scale was developed. A factor analysis yielded two subscales: a General Self-efficacy subscale (17 items) and a Social Self-efficacy subscale (6 items). Confirmation of several predicted conceptual relationships between the Self-efficacy subscales and other personality measures (i.e., Locus of Control, Personal Control, Social Desirability, Ego Strength, Interpersonal Competence, and Self-esteem) provided evidence of construct validity. Positive relationships between the Self-efficacy Scale and vocational, educational, and military success established criterion validity. Future research and clinical uses of the scale were discussed.

Protection Motivation and Self-Efficacy: A Revised Theory of Fear Appeals and Attitude Change

The effects of fear appeals on persuasion were investigated in a factorial experiment that was designed to test a combined model of protection motivation theory and self-efficacy theory. As predicted, the probability of a threats occurrence and the effectiveness of a coping response both had positive main effects on intentions to adopt a recommended preventive health behavior. More importantly, the findings provided support for self-efficacy expectancy as a fourth component of protection motivation theory: Self-efficacy had a direct influence on intentions and interacted with two other variables of protection motivation theory. The interaction effect was interpreted in terms of two new decision-making strategies that people use when confronted with a fear appeal: a precaution strategy and a hyperdefensiveness strategy. In addition, the results replicated previous findings on the relationship between self-efficacy expectancy and outcome expectancy. A model incorporating protection motivation theory and self-efficacy theory is presented as a possible general model of attitude change.

Effects of components of protection-motivation theory on adaptive and maladaptive coping with a health threat

How do people cope with a threat when they do not plan to adopt an adaptive, protective response? We explored this question by examining the effects of information about a health threat and two aspects of coping ability, self-efficacy and response efficacy, on two adaptive and five maladaptive coping strategies (e.g., avoidance, wishful thinking). The results disclosed that the high-threat condition energized all forms of coping; it did not differentially cue specific coping strategies. The critical factor in determining the specific strategies used was the coping information. The high-response-efficacy and high-self-efficacy conditions strengthened adaptive coping and did not foster any maladaptive coping. A supplementary path analysis revealed an intriguing pattern of relations, including the finding that the most maladaptive strategy was avoidant thinking, which simultaneously reduced fear of the threat and weakened intentions to adopt the adaptive response.

Fear appeals and attitude change: effects of a threat's noxiousness, probability of occurrence, and the efficacy of coping responses

Three factorial experiments examined the persuasive effects of the noxiousness of threatened event, its probability of occurrence, and the efficacy of recommended protective measures. A total of 176 students participated in separate studies on the topics of cigarette smoking, driving safety, and venereal disease. The results disclosed that increments in the efficacy variable increased intentions to adopt the efficacy variable increased intentions to adopt the recommended practices. Interaction effects revealed that when the preventive practices were effective, increments in the noxiousness and probability variables facilitated attitude change; however, when the coping responses were the preventive practices were effective, increments in the noxiousness and probability either had no effect or a deleterious effect, respectively. These interaction effects were discussed in terms of a defensive avoidance hypothesis, the crucial component of which was an inability to ward off the danger. Furthermore, the effect of the emotion of fear upon intentions was found to be mediated by the cognitive appraisal of severity of the threat. Finally, similarities with and extensions of previous studies were reviewed. Language: en

ATTITUDE CHANGE AND INFORMATION INTEGRATION IN FEAR APPEALS

A 2 × 2 × 2 factorial experiment investigated the combinatorial rule individuals use to integrate information about the components of a fear appeal. Individuals were presented information about a hypothetical danger, and their intentions to adopt the recommended coping response were measured. The potential danger was varied on the dimensions of noxiousness, probability of occurrence, and efficacy of the coping response. Each independent variable had a significant main effect. A multiplicative combinatorial rule was rejected. Although individuals do not respond completely rationally when confronting real dangers, individuals respond in a highly logical fashion when contemplating how they would respond to an hypothetical danger.

Effects of threatening and reassuring components of fear appeals on physiological and verbal measures of emotion and attitudes

Abstract Physiological processes are integral components of (a) many conceptualizations of emotion, (b) the emotion of fear, and (c) the fear-as-acquired-drive model of attitude change. Nevertheless, few studies of fear and persuasion have simultaneously measured self-reports of fear and autonomic activity. The present factorial experiment manipulated high versus low fear and high versus low reassurance and monitored self-reports and cardiovascular and electrodermal activity. The results disclosed that heart rate (HR) and skin conductance (SC) were highly correlated (r = .70). Although the multiple correlation among HR, SC, and a self-report measure of fear was a modest .44 (p

Self-Efficacy Expectancy and Outcome Expectancy: Their Relationship and Their Effects on Behavioral Intentions.

Self-efficacy theory maintains that self-efficacy expectancy, a belief about ones ability to successfully perform a behavior, is independent of outcome expectancy, a belief about the likelihood of the behavior leading to a specific outcome. This experiment tested the hypothesis that self-efficacy and outcome expectancy are independent and have independent effects on behavior change. Subjects read communications that differed in descriptions of the difficulty of learning and performing a behavior (self-efficacy expectancy) and the effectiveness of the behavior in producing a desired outcome (outcome expectancy). Results disclosed that increments in outcome expectancy increased intentions to perform the behavior. Increments in self-efficacy expectancy yielded nonsignificant increases in intentions. Also, the outcome expectancy manipulation influenced expectations of self-efficacy. When the behavior was presented as relatively difficult to perform, subjects who believed that the behavior was more likely to result in a favorable outcome expressed greater confidence in their ability to perform the behavior than those who perceived a relatively weak relationship between the behavior and its outcome. It was suggested that the degree of risk involved in attempting yet failing to perform correctly a behavior may determine the extent to which self-efficacy expectancy affects decisions about behavior.

Effects of fear appeals and physiological arousal upon emotion, attitudes, and cigarette smoking.

Two experiments are reported that attempted to replicate conceptually Schachters theory of the determinants of emotion and to test the feasibility of extending the theory to attitudes and behavior that may be mediated by the emotion of fear. A total of 279 cigarette smokers were administered either epinephrine or a placebo and then exposed to situational cues suggestive of disparate emotional states (Experiment 1) or different intensities of the same emotion (Experiment 2). Contrary to preictions based upon Schachters theory, manipulated physiological arousal was not necessary for emotional labeling and under some conditions elicited fear. The situational cues affected emotion and attitudes. Higher levels of fear appeals strengthened intentions to quit smoking, and reassurance of the efficacy of stopping smoking reduced cigarette consumption.

Effects of deindividuating situational cues and aggressive models on subjective deindividuation and aggression

This experiment demonstrated that a subjective state of deindividuation mediates the effect of deindividuating situational cues on aggression displayed by small groups (n = 4) of coacting aggressors. The deindividuated state was composed of two factors, Self-Awareness and Altered Experiencing, both of which had a causal influence on aggressive behavior. These data are interpreted in terms of deindividuation theories which assume that certain input variables reduce self-awareness and concern about social evaluation and thereby weaken the restraints against expressing antisocial behavior. Also as predicted, compared with a no-model control condition, a high-aggressive model disinhibited overt displays of aggression, whereas a low-aggressive model inhibited aggression among both individuated and deindividuated group members.

Power and Personality: Effects of Machiavellianism, Need for Approval, and Motivation on Use of Influence Tactics

Abstract An organizational simulation explored the selection and use of influence tactics as a function of characteristics of the influencer, the target, and the situation. The choice of influence tactics differed dramatically according to whether a person was high or low in the power-relevant personality traits of Machiavellianism and need for approval. Also, as people became more motivated to influence another person successfully, they became more assertive and less manipulative. Resistance from the target changed peoples influence strategy: Promises and threats were replaced by reason-based tactics. Some implications for selection procedures, training programs, and organizational design are discussed.