預期一致性、結果價性與自我肯定對正、負向回饋的處理與回憶效果

Abstract

人們傾向會去處理或回憶正向或負向回饋？對於不同類型回饋的處理與回憶，是否會受到不同結果狀態所影響，像是好、壞結果，或者是結果與自己預期的一致性？如何讓人們願意去處理可能會對自尊帶來威脅的負向回饋？皆為本研究所關心的研究問題。本研究以四個實驗，來檢驗預期一致性（預期一致或預期違反）、結果價性（好結果或壞結果）與自我肯定（有或無自我肯定）因素，如何影響人們對於正、負向回饋訊息的處理與回憶。實驗一與實驗二分別以心理健康測量及理性思考作業為材料，透過給予參與者在練習階段與正式評定階段的假分數，來操弄預期變項與結果變項，以檢驗預期一致性與結果價性兩因素，是否會對回饋的處理造成影響。實驗三與實驗四，則使用與實驗二相同的實驗材料與操弄方式，但新增自我肯定變項，來檢驗自我肯定程序如何改變預期一致性與結果價性因素對回饋處理的影響（實驗三的自我肯定作業是在理性思考作業前進行；實驗四則是在理性思考作業之結果分數出現後、回饋呈現前進行）。整體結果顯示：（1）參與者對負向回饋有較多的觀看時間或較好的自由回憶（實驗一與實驗三有顯著效果，實驗四為臨界顯著）。（2）結果價性因素會對回饋的處理與回憶產生影響，而預期一致性因素則不會（實驗二、三、四皆獲致此結果）。此可能的解釋為，人們在好結果的情境下，會降低自我保護，對威脅到自我的負向回饋，有較高的處理與回憶效果；然而在壞結果的情境，則會啟動自我保護，降低對負向回饋的處理與回憶。另一方面，預期一致性因素則不會對回饋的處理產生影響。換句話說，人們會受到結果價性因素的影響，而盡可能避免去處理會對自尊帶來威脅的訊息；然而，個體卻不會受到預期一致性因素的影響，不會試圖去尋找結果發生的可能原因。（3）自我肯定因素，會讓獲得壞結果的個體，提升其處理具有威脅性質之負向回饋的意願，並對負向回饋有較好的回憶；不過此自我肯定程序，需在結果分數出現後再進行，才會有效果（實驗四有效果，實驗三則無）。最後，將研究結果與過去文獻進行比較，並探討此結果在教育情境與現實生活中的意涵。Do people prefer to process and recall positive or negative feedback? Would the processing and memory of different feedback be affected by the different outcome or expectancy situation? How to let people process the negative feedback which could threaten our self-esteem? All of above are the questions our research concerned. Four experiments were conducted to exame the influence of Expectancy Violation (Expectancy Confirmation VS Expectancy Violation), Outcome Valence (Good Outcome VS Bad Outcome) and Self-Affirmation (Self-Affirmation VS non-Self-Affirmation) factors on the processing and memory of Feedback (Positive Feedback VS Negative Feedback). The measurement of Mental Heath (MH) and Rational Thinking Task (RTT) were used as material in Experiment 1 and 2 sequentially, by giving bogus score in the Pratice Phase and Formal Rating Phase to manipulate the variables of Expectancy and Outcome. Experiment 3 and 4 were used the same materials and manipulation as Experiment 2, but adding the variable of Self-Affimation to exame whether it would change the influence of Expectancy Violation and Outcome Valence on Feedback (The Self-Affirmation Task was conducted before the RTT in Experiment 3, but after the outcome score in the RTT and before the presentation of feedback in Experiment 4). Overall, the results show that (1) People would view negative feedback longer and recall better than positive feedback. (2) The factor of Outcome Valence would influence the processing and recall of feedback, but the factor of Expectancy Violation wouldn’t (the result of Experment 2, 3, 4). Specificallly, in Good Outcome situation, people would lessen self-protection, and process or recall more of negative feedback which threatening ourselves. But in Bad Outcome situation, people would activate self-protection, and lower the process or recall of negative feedback. On the other hand, the factor of Expectancy Violation wouldn’t influence the process of feedback. In other words, people would avoid to processs the threatening feedback (which be activated by the factor of Outcome Valence), but would not make the effort to find the possible causes of the outcome (which be activated by the factor of Expectancy Violation). (3) The factor of Self-Affirmaion would enhance the participants of bad outcme situation to process and recall more of negative feedback. However, the effect of Self-Affirmation only existed after the appearance of outcome score (existed in Experiment 4, but not in Experiment 3). Implications of psychological theory and practice were discussed.