Wen-Bin Chiou

Achievement, Attributions, Self-Efficacy, and Goal Setting by Accounting Undergraduates

Correlations were examined between two measures of accounting self-efficacy, achievement goal setting, attributions, and scores on the Accounting Practice Achievement Test, obtained 1 yr. apart for 124 freshmen in junior college. Analysis indicated favorable attribution contributed to a higher mean score on accounting self-efficacy. Students with higher perceived self-efficacy performed better on the proficiency tests. Those with higher self-efficacy also set higher goals for subsequent achievement tests. Moreover, students who set higher achievement goals performed better. Goal setting mediated the relation of initial self-efficacy with subsequent test performance. However, the amount of variance accounted for by self-efficacy was small. An effective method for enhancing performance on an accounting achievement test might be to increase beneficial attributions, self-efficacy in accounting, and to encourage setting reasonable achievement goals.

FRAMING EFFECTS IN GROUP INVESTMENT DECISION MAKING : ROLE OF GROUP POLARIZATION

Prospect theory proposes that framing effects result in a preference for risk-averse choices in gain situations and risk-seeking choices in loss situations. However, in group polarization situations, groups show a pronounced tendency to shift toward more extreme positions than those they initially held. Whether framing effects in group decision making are more prominent as a result of the group-polarization effect was examined. Purposive sampling of 120 college students (57 men, 63 women; M age = 20.1 yr., SD = 0.9) allowed assessment of relative preference between cautious and risky choices in individual and group decisions. Findings indicated that both group polarization and framing effects occur in investment decisions. More importantly, group decisions in a gain situation appear to be more cautious, i.e., risk averse, than individual decisions, whereas group decisions in the loss situation appear to be more risky than individual decisions. Thus, group decision making may expand framing effects when it comes to investment choices through group polarization.

Dialectical thinking and creativity among young adults: a postformal operations perspective.

This study used a post-Piagetian perspective to investigate the relation of dialectical thinking and creative performance in early adulthood. The modified version of the Social Paradigm Belief Scale was employed to measure the development of formal and dialectical thinking among 454 young adults, ages 23 to 40 years (M = 32.1, SD = 4.8). The Divergent Thinking Test estimated their creative performance. Scores on dialectical thinking were positively correlated and scores on formal thinking were negatively correlated with Divergent Thinking Test scores. Planned contrasts indicated that participants in the dialectical thinking group scored higher than did those in the formal thinking group on the six dimensions of the Divergent Thinking Test, i.e., Fluency, Openness, Flexibility, Originality, Elaboration, and Naming. Multiple discriminant analysis with a cross-validation examination showed the linear combination of scores on the six dimensions of creativity included in the Divergent Thinking Test discriminated between formal and dialectical thinking groups; this supported predictions about the relation between postformal thinking and creativity among young adults.

Rejection or selection: influence of framing in investment decisions.

According to prospect theory, reflection effects result in preferences for risk-averse choices in gain situations and risk-seeking choices in loss situations. However, relevant literature in regard to decision making has suggested that positive information receives more weight in a selection task, whereas negative information receives more weight in a rejection task. The present study examined whether the nature of a decision task (selection vs rejection) would moderate the reflection effects. Undergraduates (47 men, 49 women; M age = 20.5 yr., SD = 1.1), selected according to specific screening criteria, participated in an experimental study. Typical reflection effects were observed in both selection and rejection task conditions. More importantly, negative information (i.e., the information about probable loss in risky choice of gain situations and the information about certain loss in cautious choice of loss situations) provided in the context of a rejection task received more weight and resulted in more frequent endorsements of the cautious choice in gain situations and of the risky choice in loss situations. Hence, the findings suggest that a decision context characterized by rejection may expand the reflection effects and thereby provide important information about situations in which investment decisions occur in a context characterized by rejection.