Age differences in attributions to causality: Implications for intellectual assessment

Negative attributions and failure expectations held by elderly test-takers may be confounding ability-extraneous variables and thus may contribute to lowered intellectual performance. The present study, using the contextualistic model, examined these confounds through experimental manipulation of ca...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Experimental aging research 1984-01, Vol.10 (2), p.111-117
Hauptverfasser: Prohaska, Thomas R., Parham, Iris A., Teitelman, Jodi
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 117
container_issue 2
container_start_page 111
container_title Experimental aging research
container_volume 10
creator Prohaska, Thomas R.
Parham, Iris A.
Teitelman, Jodi
description Negative attributions and failure expectations held by elderly test-takers may be confounding ability-extraneous variables and thus may contribute to lowered intellectual performance. The present study, using the contextualistic model, examined these confounds through experimental manipulation of causal attributions to test outcome in younger and older individuals. Eighty females (40 elderly; 40 younger) were exposed to noncontingent failure (unsolvable test items) and received a verbal massage stating their failure and relating it to either their ability, effort, or no cause. A fourth group exposed to identical failure was not given feedback. Subjects in all four groups for both ages were then administered three solvable intelligence sub-tests: Reasoning, Hidden Patterns, and Paper Folding. Older subjects exhibited significantly lower success expectations and performed more poorly on all three tests. Also, older and younger subjects, in the absence of suggested causal ascription, showed differential performance in the Paper Folding Test. Younger subjects with no experimenter-given cause for failure exhibited facilitation of performance while older subjects' performances, under the same conditions, showed deficits. Results are discussed in reference to attributional style research and the contextualistic viewpoint.
doi_str_mv 10.1080/03610738408258553
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmed_primary_6499891</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>81338255</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c392t-981c1fe16ed687c6418d873443538832ca8749a509e161fd8111972e1238d4ba3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE1LAzEURYMotVZ_gAthVu5G8ybJTCJupPhRKLhRcRfSTCKRmUlNMkj_vSktbsTVW9xzL4-D0DngK8AcX2NSA24Ip5hXjDNGDtAUsKhLWrPmEE23eZmB92N0EuMnxpgRIBM0qakQXMAUvd19mKJ11ppgBm1i4YZCpRTcakzOD7FIvtBqjKpzaXNTLPp157TaRdaHjCfTdUanUXWFitHE2JshnaIjq7pozvZ3hl4f7l_mT-Xy-XExv1uWmogqlYKDBmugNm3NG11T4C1vCKWEEc5JpRVvqFAMi8yAbTkAiKYyUBHe0pUiM3S5210H_zWamGTvos4fqcH4MUoOhGQ1LIOwA3XwMQZj5Tq4XoWNBCy3LuUfl7lzsR8fV71pfxt7eTm_3eVuyCp69e1D18qkNp0PNqhBuyjJ__M_iIiBnw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>81338255</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Age differences in attributions to causality: Implications for intellectual assessment</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Taylor &amp; Francis Journals Complete</source><creator>Prohaska, Thomas R. ; Parham, Iris A. ; Teitelman, Jodi</creator><creatorcontrib>Prohaska, Thomas R. ; Parham, Iris A. ; Teitelman, Jodi</creatorcontrib><description>Negative attributions and failure expectations held by elderly test-takers may be confounding ability-extraneous variables and thus may contribute to lowered intellectual performance. The present study, using the contextualistic model, examined these confounds through experimental manipulation of causal attributions to test outcome in younger and older individuals. Eighty females (40 elderly; 40 younger) were exposed to noncontingent failure (unsolvable test items) and received a verbal massage stating their failure and relating it to either their ability, effort, or no cause. A fourth group exposed to identical failure was not given feedback. Subjects in all four groups for both ages were then administered three solvable intelligence sub-tests: Reasoning, Hidden Patterns, and Paper Folding. Older subjects exhibited significantly lower success expectations and performed more poorly on all three tests. Also, older and younger subjects, in the absence of suggested causal ascription, showed differential performance in the Paper Folding Test. Younger subjects with no experimenter-given cause for failure exhibited facilitation of performance while older subjects' performances, under the same conditions, showed deficits. Results are discussed in reference to attributional style research and the contextualistic viewpoint.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0361-073X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1096-4657</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/03610738408258553</identifier><identifier>PMID: 6499891</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Taylor &amp; Francis Group</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Aged - psychology ; Aging ; Female ; Humans ; Intelligence ; Intelligence Tests ; Middle Aged ; Self Concept</subject><ispartof>Experimental aging research, 1984-01, Vol.10 (2), p.111-117</ispartof><rights>Copyright Taylor &amp; Francis Group, LLC 1984</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c392t-981c1fe16ed687c6418d873443538832ca8749a509e161fd8111972e1238d4ba3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c392t-981c1fe16ed687c6418d873443538832ca8749a509e161fd8111972e1238d4ba3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/03610738408258553$$EPDF$$P50$$Ginformaworld$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03610738408258553$$EHTML$$P50$$Ginformaworld$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902,59620,60409</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6499891$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Prohaska, Thomas R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Parham, Iris A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Teitelman, Jodi</creatorcontrib><title>Age differences in attributions to causality: Implications for intellectual assessment</title><title>Experimental aging research</title><addtitle>Exp Aging Res</addtitle><description>Negative attributions and failure expectations held by elderly test-takers may be confounding ability-extraneous variables and thus may contribute to lowered intellectual performance. The present study, using the contextualistic model, examined these confounds through experimental manipulation of causal attributions to test outcome in younger and older individuals. Eighty females (40 elderly; 40 younger) were exposed to noncontingent failure (unsolvable test items) and received a verbal massage stating their failure and relating it to either their ability, effort, or no cause. A fourth group exposed to identical failure was not given feedback. Subjects in all four groups for both ages were then administered three solvable intelligence sub-tests: Reasoning, Hidden Patterns, and Paper Folding. Older subjects exhibited significantly lower success expectations and performed more poorly on all three tests. Also, older and younger subjects, in the absence of suggested causal ascription, showed differential performance in the Paper Folding Test. Younger subjects with no experimenter-given cause for failure exhibited facilitation of performance while older subjects' performances, under the same conditions, showed deficits. Results are discussed in reference to attributional style research and the contextualistic viewpoint.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged - psychology</subject><subject>Aging</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Intelligence</subject><subject>Intelligence Tests</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Self Concept</subject><issn>0361-073X</issn><issn>1096-4657</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1984</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kE1LAzEURYMotVZ_gAthVu5G8ybJTCJupPhRKLhRcRfSTCKRmUlNMkj_vSktbsTVW9xzL4-D0DngK8AcX2NSA24Ip5hXjDNGDtAUsKhLWrPmEE23eZmB92N0EuMnxpgRIBM0qakQXMAUvd19mKJ11ppgBm1i4YZCpRTcakzOD7FIvtBqjKpzaXNTLPp157TaRdaHjCfTdUanUXWFitHE2JshnaIjq7pozvZ3hl4f7l_mT-Xy-XExv1uWmogqlYKDBmugNm3NG11T4C1vCKWEEc5JpRVvqFAMi8yAbTkAiKYyUBHe0pUiM3S5210H_zWamGTvos4fqcH4MUoOhGQ1LIOwA3XwMQZj5Tq4XoWNBCy3LuUfl7lzsR8fV71pfxt7eTm_3eVuyCp69e1D18qkNp0PNqhBuyjJ__M_iIiBnw</recordid><startdate>19840101</startdate><enddate>19840101</enddate><creator>Prohaska, Thomas R.</creator><creator>Parham, Iris A.</creator><creator>Teitelman, Jodi</creator><general>Taylor &amp; Francis Group</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19840101</creationdate><title>Age differences in attributions to causality: Implications for intellectual assessment</title><author>Prohaska, Thomas R. ; Parham, Iris A. ; Teitelman, Jodi</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c392t-981c1fe16ed687c6418d873443538832ca8749a509e161fd8111972e1238d4ba3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1984</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged - psychology</topic><topic>Aging</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Intelligence</topic><topic>Intelligence Tests</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Self Concept</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Prohaska, Thomas R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Parham, Iris A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Teitelman, Jodi</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Experimental aging research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Prohaska, Thomas R.</au><au>Parham, Iris A.</au><au>Teitelman, Jodi</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Age differences in attributions to causality: Implications for intellectual assessment</atitle><jtitle>Experimental aging research</jtitle><addtitle>Exp Aging Res</addtitle><date>1984-01-01</date><risdate>1984</risdate><volume>10</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>111</spage><epage>117</epage><pages>111-117</pages><issn>0361-073X</issn><eissn>1096-4657</eissn><abstract>Negative attributions and failure expectations held by elderly test-takers may be confounding ability-extraneous variables and thus may contribute to lowered intellectual performance. The present study, using the contextualistic model, examined these confounds through experimental manipulation of causal attributions to test outcome in younger and older individuals. Eighty females (40 elderly; 40 younger) were exposed to noncontingent failure (unsolvable test items) and received a verbal massage stating their failure and relating it to either their ability, effort, or no cause. A fourth group exposed to identical failure was not given feedback. Subjects in all four groups for both ages were then administered three solvable intelligence sub-tests: Reasoning, Hidden Patterns, and Paper Folding. Older subjects exhibited significantly lower success expectations and performed more poorly on all three tests. Also, older and younger subjects, in the absence of suggested causal ascription, showed differential performance in the Paper Folding Test. Younger subjects with no experimenter-given cause for failure exhibited facilitation of performance while older subjects' performances, under the same conditions, showed deficits. Results are discussed in reference to attributional style research and the contextualistic viewpoint.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Taylor &amp; Francis Group</pub><pmid>6499891</pmid><doi>10.1080/03610738408258553</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0361-073X
ispartof Experimental aging research, 1984-01, Vol.10 (2), p.111-117
issn 0361-073X
1096-4657
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmed_primary_6499891
source MEDLINE; Taylor & Francis Journals Complete
subjects Adolescent
Adult
Aged - psychology
Aging
Female
Humans
Intelligence
Intelligence Tests
Middle Aged
Self Concept
title Age differences in attributions to causality: Implications for intellectual assessment
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-02T12%3A45%3A58IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Age%20differences%20in%20attributions%20to%20causality:%20Implications%20for%20intellectual%20assessment&rft.jtitle=Experimental%20aging%20research&rft.au=Prohaska,%20Thomas%20R.&rft.date=1984-01-01&rft.volume=10&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=111&rft.epage=117&rft.pages=111-117&rft.issn=0361-073X&rft.eissn=1096-4657&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/03610738408258553&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E81338255%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=81338255&rft_id=info:pmid/6499891&rfr_iscdi=true