Goal Setting

The Moderating Effect of Performance Feedback and the Mediating Effect of Self-Set Goals on the Primed Goal-Performance Relationship

Abstract

The effect of feedback and a self-set goal on the relationship between a goal primed in the subconscious and performance were examined in three laboratory experiments and one field experiment (n = 241, 465, 201, 74 respectively), using normative (bogus) and absolute feedback manipulations, and different performance tasks that were coded for both performance quality (i.e. creativity) and quantity. The hypothesis that providing feedback, a moderator in goal-setting theory, amplifies the causal effect of a primed goal on performance was supported. Specifically, in experiment 1, participants were randomly assigned to a 2 (prime of effective vs. ineffective performance) × 3 (positive, negative, no feedback) factorial design. The primed goal for effective performance led to higher performance than the negative primed goal. In addition, feedback, regardless of its sign, increased both task and creative performance when a primed goal for effective performance was presented but did not do so when the goal primed ineffective performance. This effect was replicated in two subsequent laboratory experiments which employed three primed goal conditions (effective/neutral/ineffective). In experiments 2 and 3, a consciously set goal, with no prompting by an experimenter, mediated the relationship between a primed goal and performance when feedback was provided. Experiment 4 provided a conceptual replication in a work setting, involving employees in a customer service department of a large communication company. Finally, a meta-analysis of these four experiments indicated an average effect size of d = 0.36, 95 percent CI [0.23, 0.49] with no evidence of heterogeneity across the four experiments. These findings suggest that not only are subconscious goals a foundation for the difficulty level of consciously set goals but in addition, subconscious goals and conscious goals work together in affecting performance.
F. K. Tia Moin, Guy Itzchakov, and Netta Weinstein
|
Listening
Abstract High-quality listening is a multifaceted social behavior, and theories and research concerning listening and how to train people to listen are mixed in terms of listening definitions and recommendations. The current study canvassed lay practitioners’ understanding of optimal listening qualities and training, drawing on a wide range of listening training materials (N = 207) sourced from the World Wide Web. Thematic analysis results were critically examined to systematically position praxis against our current understanding of listening theories. Findings are presented as a “dialectical listening theory,” which posits that at its core, listeners’ behaviors often exist in direct tension with their mindset or intuition. Furthermore, we posit that this tension is amplified when individuals are faced with conversations that conflict with their perspectives or values, making learning to listen challenging in practice. We conclude that high-quality listening requires direct recognition and strategic management of these tensions throughout the listening process and make recommendations based on listening and cognitive theories to inform best practice in listening training. Keywords: listening; listening training; active listening; dual-processing
Keep reading
Guy Itzchakov, Avraham N. (Avi) Kluger
|
Listening
Giving performance feedback is one of the most common ways managers help their subordinates learn and improve. Yet, research revealed that feedback could actually hurt performance: More than 20 years ago, one of us (Kluger) analyzed 607 experiments on feedback effectiveness and found that feedback caused performance to decline in 38% of cases. This happened with both positive and negative feedback, mostly when the feedback threatened how people saw themselves.
Keep reading