T A S K I, ver. ENG
1. I have chosen:
Szmajke A. (1998). Self-handicapping as a tactic of impression management; is it effective?, Polish Psychological Bulletin, 29 (3), 165-179.
2. Formal overview
2.1. Specific style traits:
- formal expressions
- no colloquial expressions
- complete verb forms (for example: "I am" instead of: "I'm")
2.2. The way in which the author appeals to other scientists
Science is authorized. Therefore in each case when the author refers to a scientist (even himself) or some kind of research that a particular scientist has made, he puts his surname along with the year (when his words were published) in brackets, at the end of the sentence. Moreover, more details about this reference a reader can find in "References" - the last part of the article. The article's author can agree or disagree with the scientist he is referring to but he always have to remember about this specific way of authorization.
2.3. The structure of the articles' narration
At first glance it is clear that the article's structure is highly organized and specific. Just under the topic we find a short summary of the whole article's content. Other parts of the article go as follows: "Problem", "Method", "Results", "Discussion" and "References". Additionally, this kind of structure is very characteristic for a scientific article as well as the fact that the author is using third person narration.
3. Content
3.1. Understand the introduction
a)Vocabulary:
-Anxiety - A pervasive and unpleasant feeling of tension, dread, apprehension, and impending disaster. Whereas fear is a response to a clear and present danger, anxiety often is a response to an undefined or unknown threat which may stem from internal conflicts, feelings of insecurity, or forbidden impulses. In both, fear and anxiety, the body mobilizes itself to meet the threat, and muscles become tense breathing is faster, and the heart beats more rapidly.
-ASO scale - 25-item instrument (modelled after the Jones and Rhodewalt Self-Handicapping Scale (SHS), constructed by Szmajke and Świątnicki, Cronbach alpha=0.73) which is aimed to measure the individual's tendency to self-handicapping.
-Attributions - Assignment of responsibility by the process of inferring underlying conditions and causes regarding behavior of others or self.
-Depression - An emotional state of persistent dejection flanging from relatively mild discouragement feelings of extreme despondency and despair. These feelings are usually accompanied by loss of initiative, listlessness, insomnia, loss of appetite, and difficulty in concentrating and making decisions.
-Deprivation - An involuntary lack of something desired, as of food or human associates.
-Impression - A vague or unanalyzed cognition, judgment or reaction.
-Impression management - Behavior designed to elicit particular responses or reactions from another, such as stratagems to portray the self in a positive manner.
-Personality - The pattern of collective character, behavioral, temperamental, emotional, and mental traits of a person.
-Questionnaire - A set of questions for submission to a group of persons for the purpose of bringing out their resemblance's and differences in the matter considered. The questionnaire method is a recognized form of psychological investigation.
-Self-esteem - An attitude of self-acceptance, self-approval, and self-respect.
-Self-handicapping - An behavior or choice in performance - setting that enhances personal opportunity excuse failure and accept credit for success.
b)Few of the researches to which the author refers to:
1.Rhodewalt F., Morf C., Hazlett S., & Fairfield M. (1991), Self-handicapping: The role of discounting and augmentation in the preservation of self-esteem, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 397-416.
Two studies examined the effects of self-handicapping on ability attributions and self-esteem.
2. Shepperd J. A. & Arkin R.M. (1991). Behavioral other-enhancement: Strategically obscuring the link between performance and evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 79-88.
A strategy related to self-handicapping in which individuals supply a comparison other with a performance advantage rather than handicap their own performance was investigated in two experiments.
3. Luginbuhl J., & Palmer R. (1991). Impression management aspects of self-handicapping: Positive and negative effects, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 655-662.
Experiment conducted by Szmajke was based on the experimental pattern from this study. In this experiment the information influence (about self-handicapping) on abilities perception and future results predictions etc. in the circumstances of “forced” instruction comparison was compared with the perceptions and predictions formulated without “forced” instruction comparison.
3.2. Terms that sill are not clear
ASO scale - how does it look like?
3.3. Answers to the control questions
Main hypothesis
a) Persons asked to predict the self-handicapping actor's future results -not being forced by instruction to make comparisons between those results and hypothetical ones achieved without self-handicapping - will not expect better results, as compared with participants evaluating the actor without self-handicapping.
b) Persons who make such predictions under for which force them to compare a self-handicapper actor's achievements and his (hypothetical) results obtained without using this tactic will formulate more favorable predictions than persons relating only to the actor's future results without using self-handicapping.
The reason why author put such a hypothesis
To put such a hypothesis author was led by other scientists and their experimental results concerning familiar topics. The most important was of course the Luginbuhl & Palmer's research. Additionally, author was basing also on the results from his own individual researches from 1996 and 1997. Those information planted in prof. Szmajke a seed of curiosity, which (as I suppose) was the direct cause of putting such a hypothesis. Alternatively, Szmajke wanted to find out if the stronger impact of self-handicapping on opinion the actor noted in Luginbuhl and Palmer's was caused by the fact that the experiment was performed in a scheme with within-subject variable, not by the fact that the information about the event was provided more directly and thus, possibly, involving the observer more.
Questions which answers are aimed to the verification of the hypothesis
Is self-handicapping an effective tactic for impression management?
What factors have an important influence on this effectiveness?
What and what we may assume about if the hypothesis will/will not confirm
The author tries to find out in what circumstances the self-handicapping is an effective tactic of impression management and when it is not? Therefore we could assume that the main hypothesis is: Self-handicapping is an effective tactic of impression management. In this case if the main hypothesis will confirm it could mean that self-handicapping is an efficient tool of impression management. If it will not confirm then we could assume that self-handicapping is not important for impression management. Anyway we will know something more about human - is he able to manage with other impressions by self-handicapping or not?
But if we concentrate only on the introduction (what I was suppose to do) we will see that there are two very concrete hypothesis (which I mentioned in “main hypothesis” point). If they will/will not confirm we could only assume that the instruction concerning comparisons does/does not have any influence on the observers predictions.
A question on which the experiment may help to answer
Is self-handicapping beneficial for self-handicappers in a social view?
A general question which this experiment is part of
Are we being better evaluated by others when we make damage to ourselves?
A global question which this experiment is part of
Is it possible to change what other think about us by acting only on ourselves in a specific way?
A universal question which this experiment is part of
Is a man able to manage anybody else impression?
3.4. The title
The title includes information about the main article's topic. It also suggests a general question, which the article is aimed to answer: "Is self-handicapping an effective tactic of impression management?". At first I supposed that this topic is like a thought, which could be a cornerstone of the whole undertaking. On the second thought if we look closer to the article's content (especially to what concrete hypothesis author put and why) we could assume that this topic is rather a good advertisement.
I think that this topic could not be an article's summary, because it refers neither to the method, nor to: procedure, results or discussion.
I would like to propose a slight modification of the title:
"Important factors of the self-handicapping influence on impression management"
or:
"When self-handicapping is an effective tactic of impression management?"
I think that these propositions, which are parallel: not longer and more concrete than the original topic, would also give more information about the article's content to the reader and drove his attention to it. But those are only my opinions - a first-year student who is trying to get his task done.
Written by:
Stanley Just
....................