Volume 16, Issue 1 (March 2018)                   IRJ 2018, 16(1): 69-76 | Back to browse issues page

XML Print

1- MA Department of Psychology, Faculty of Literature & Humanities, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran.
2- Department of Psychology, Faculty of Literature & Humanities, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran.
Abstract:   (397 Views)
Objectives: Considering the negative effect of self-handicapping on both mental and physical health and the positive effect of self-efficacy on success and efficacy of people, this research has been conducted with the aim of investigating the effect of meta-cognitive skills training on self-handicapping and self-efficacy of students. 
Methods: This research is an experimental study with pre/post-test, and 28 student participants were allocated to experimental and control groups randomly (14 persons per group). Jones and Rhodewalt Self-Handicapping Scale, Sherer and Maddux Self-Efficacy Scale, and Raven Standard Progressive Matrices Test had been utilized for data collecting. The meta-cognitive training program was provided to the experimental group within two months in six sessions while students of the control group did not receive any training.
Results: Covariance analysis proposes that meta-cognitive training has a significant effect on decreasing self-handicapping in experimental group; however, there are no significant differences in the results of self-efficacy post-test in both experimental and control groups.
Discussion: Findings of the present study suggest that meta-cognitive skills training- as an effective training program- could be used for decreasing students’ self-handicapping. But with regards to the effectiveness of meta-cognitive skills training on self-efficacy, it is revealed that more variables are involved, and it needs further investigation.
Full-Text [PDF 547 kb]   (108 Downloads) |   |   Full-Text (HTML)  (38 Views)  
Type of Study: Original Research Articles | Subject: Psychology
Received: 2017/08/16 | Accepted: 2017/12/5 | Published: 2018/03/1

1. Fernie BA, Bharucha Z, Nikčević AV, Marino C, Spada MM. A Metacognitive model of procrastination. Journal of Affective Disorders . 2017; 210:196–203. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2016.12.042 [DOI:10.1016/j.jad.2016.12.042]
2. Dragan M, Dragan W. Temperament and anxiety: The mediating role of metacognition. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment. 2013; 36(2):246–54. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10862-013-9392-z [DOI:10.1007/s10862-013-9392-z]
3. Double KS, Birney DP. The effects of personality and metacognitive beliefs on cognitive training adherence and performance. Personality and Individual Differences . 2016; 102:7–12. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.04.101 [DOI:10.1016/j.paid.2016.04.101]
4. Roelle J, Nowitzki C, Berthold K. Do cognitive and metacognitive processes set the stage for each other. Learning and Instruction . 2017; 50:54–64. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.11.009 [DOI:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.11.009]
5. Wells A. Metacognitive therapy: A practical guide. New York: Guilford; 2008.
6. Efklides A. Metacognition and affect: What can metacognitive experiences tell us about the learning process. Educational Research Review . 2006; 1(1):3–14. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2005.11.001 [DOI:10.1016/j.edurev.2005.11.001]
7. Yamada M, Goda Y, Matsuda T, Saito Y, Kato H, Miyagawa H. How does self-regulated learning relate to active procrastination and other learning behaviors. Journal of Computing in Higher Education. 2016; 28(3):326–43. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12528-016-9118-9 [DOI:10.1007/s12528-016-9118-9]
8. Bobo JL, Whitaker KC, Strunk KK. Personality and student self-handicapping: A cross-validated regression approach. Personality and Individual Differences . 2013; 55(5):619–21. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.04.010 [DOI:10.1016/j.paid.2013.04.010]
9. Schwinger M. Structure of academic self-handicapping — Global or domain-specific construct. Learning and Individual Differences . 2013; 27:134–43. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2013.07.009 [DOI:10.1016/j.lindif.2013.07.009]
10. Petersen LE. Self-compassion and self-protection strategies: The impact of self-compassion on the use of self-handicapping and sandbagging. Personality and Individual Differences. 2014; 56:133–8. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.08.036 [DOI:10.1016/j.paid.2013.08.036]
11. Ross SR, Canada KE, Rausch MK. Self-handicapping and the Five Factor Model of personality: Mediation between neuroticism and conscientiousness. Personality and Individual Differences . 2002; 32(7):1173–84. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0191-8869(01)00079-4 [DOI:10.1016/S0191-8869(01)00079-4]
12. Nosenko D, Arshava I, Nosenko E. Self-handicapping as a coping strategy: Approaches to conceptualization. Advances in Social Sciences Research. 2014; 1(3):157–66. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/assrj.13.205 [DOI:10.14738/assrj.13.205]
13. Clarke IE, MacCann C. Internal and external aspects of self-handicapping reflect the distinction between motivations and behaviours: Evidence from the Self-handicapping Scale. Personality and Individual Differences . 2016; 100:6–11. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.03.080 [DOI:10.1016/j.paid.2016.03.080]
14. Curtis RC. Reference module in neuroscience and biobehavioral psychology. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2017.
15. Berglas S, Jones EE. Drug choice as a self-handicapping strategy in response to noncontingent success. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1978; 36(4):405–17. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.36.4.405 [DOI:10.1037/0022-3514.36.4.405]
16. Cocoradă E. Academic self-handicapping and their correlates in adolescence. Bulletin of the Transilvania University of Braşov. 2011; 4(53):57-64.
17. Akça F. An investigation into the self-handicapping behaviors of undergraduates in terms of academic procrastination, the locus of control and academic success. Journal of Education and Learning. 2012; 1(2). Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/jel.v1n2p288 [DOI:10.5539/jel.v1n2p288]
18. Rickert NP, Meras IL, Witkow MR. Theories of intelligence and students' daily self-handicapping behaviors. Learning and Individual Differences. 2014; 36:1-8. Available from: [DOI:10.1016/j.lindif.2014.08.002]
19. Ganda DR, Boruchovitch E. Self-handicapping strategies for learning of preservice teachers. Estudos de Psicologia (Campinas). 2015; 32(3):417–25. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0103-166x2015000300007 [DOI:10.1590/0103-166X2015000300007]
20. Barzegar K, Khezri H. Predicting academic cheating among the fifth grade students: The role of self-efficacy and academic self-handicapping. Journal of Life Science and Biomedicine. 2012; 2(1):1-6.
21. Bandura A. Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. In: Pajares F, Urdan TC, editors. Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents. Charlotte: Information Age Pub; 2006. [PMCID]
22. Kim DH, Wang C, Ahn HS, Bong M. English language learners' self-efficacy profiles and relationship with self-regulated learning strategies. Learning and Individual Differences. 2015; 38:136-42. Available from: [DOI:10.1016/j.lindif.2015.01.016]
23. Schnell K, Ringeisen T, Raufelder D, Rohrmann S. The impact of adolescents' self-efficacy and self-regulated goal attainment processes on school performance—Do gender and test anxiety matter. Learning and Individual Differences. 2015; 38:90-8. Available from: [DOI:10.1016/j.lindif.2014.12.008]
24. Paciello M, Ghezzi V, Tramontano C, Barbaranelli C, Fida R. Self-efficacy configurations and wellbeing in the academic context: A person-centred approach. Personality and Individual Differences. 2016; 99:16–21. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.04.083 [DOI:10.1016/j.paid.2016.04.083]
25. Panadero E, Jonsson A, Botella J. Effects of self-assessment on self-regulated learning and self-efficacy: Four meta-analyses. Educational Research Review . 2017; 22:74–98. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.08.004 [DOI:10.1016/j.edurev.2017.08.004]
26. Jansen M, Scherer R, Schroeders U. Students' self-concept and self-efficacy in the sciences: Differential relations to antecedents and educational outcomes. Contemporary Educational Psychology. 2015; 41:13-24. Available from: [DOI:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2014.11.002]
27. Kuczka KK, Treasure DC. Self-handicapping in competitive sport: Influence of the motivational climate, self-efficacy, and perceived importance. Psychology of Sport and Exercise . 2005; 6(5):539–50. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2004.03.007 [DOI:10.1016/j.psychsport.2004.03.007]
28. Pulford BD, Johnson A, Awaida M. A cross-cultural study of predictors of self-handicapping in university students. Personality and Individual Differences . 2005; 39(4):727–37. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2005.02.008 [DOI:10.1016/j.paid.2005.02.008]
29. Moores TT, Chang JCJ, Smith DK. Clarifying the role of self-efficacy and metacognition as predictors of performance. ACM SIGMIS Database. 2006; 37(2-3):125. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1161345.1161360 [DOI:10.1145/1161345.1161360]
30. Lavasani MG, Mirhosseini FS, Hejazi E, Davoodi M. The effect of self-regulation learning strategies training on the academic motivation and self-efficacy. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences . 2011; 29:627–32. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.285 [DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.285]
31. Tavakolizadeh J, Ebrahimi-Qavam S. Effect of teaching of self-regulated learning strategies on self-efficacy in students. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2011; 29:1096–104. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.343 [DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.343]
32. Cazan AM. Self regulated learning strategies – predictors of academic adjustment. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences . 2012; 33:104–8. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.01.092 [DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.01.092]
33. Kleitman S, Gibson J. Metacognitive beliefs, self-confidence and primary learning environment of sixth grade students. Learning and Individual Differences. 2011; 21(6):728–35. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2011.08.003 [DOI:10.1016/j.lindif.2011.08.003]
34. Corkin DM, Yu SL, Lindt SF. Comparing active delay and procrastination from a self-regulated learning perspective. Learning and Individual Differences . 2011; 21(5):602–6. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2011.07.005 [DOI:10.1016/j.lindif.2011.07.005]
35. Schwinger M, Wirthwein L, Lemmer G, Steinmayr R. Academic self-handicapping and achievement: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology. 2014; 106(3):744–61. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0035832 [DOI:10.1037/a0035832]
36. Heidari M, Khodapanahi MK, Dehghani M. Psychometric examination of Self-Handicapping Scale (SHS). Journal of Research in Behavioural Sciences. 2009; 7(2):97-106.
37. Martin KA, Brawley LR. Is the self-handicapping scale reliable in non-academic achievement domains. Personality and Individual Differences. 1999; 27(5):901–11. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0191-8869(99)00039-2 [DOI:10.1016/S0191-8869(99)00039-2]
38. Niknam MA, Hosseinian SI, Zazdi SM. Relationship between perfectionism beliefs and self-handicapping behaviors in university students. International Journal of Behavioral Sciences. 2010; 4(2):103-8.
39. Seyed Salehi M, Delavar A. [Studding the psychometric properties of self-handicapping scale (Persian)]. Educational Measurement. 2015; 5(20):97-117. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.22054/jem.2015.1789
40. Asgharnezhad T, Ahmadi Deh Ghotboddini M, Farzad V, Khodapanahi MK. [Study of the psychometric properties of Sherer's General Self-Efficacy Scale (Persian)]. Journal of Psychology. 2006; 10(3):262-74.
41. Khosroshahi JB, Khanjani Z. Relationship of coping strategies and self-efficacy with substance abuse tendency among students. Knowledge & Research in Applied Psychology. 2013; 14:80-90.
42. Najafi M, Foladjang M. [The relationship between self- efficacy and mental health among high school students (Persian)]. Clinical Psychology & Personality. 2007; 1(22):69-83.
43. Heidari S, Maktabi G, Shahni Yeylagh M. Comparison of successful and unsuccessful female high school students in terms of attribution and self-management style with controlling intelligence quotient in Ahvaz city (Persian)]. Journal of Psychology Achievements. 2012; 19(1):43-62.
44. Narimani M, Eyni M, Dehghan H, Gholamzad H, Safarinia M. Comparison of the big five personality traits and self-efficacy of gifted and normal students. Journal Of School Psychology. 2013; 2(3):164-79.
45. Efklides A. The role of metacognitive experiences in the learning process. Psicothema. 2009; 21(1):76-82. PMID: 19178860 [PMID]
46. Efklides A. Metamemory and affect. In: Dunlosky J, Tauber SK, editors. The oxford handbook of metamemory. Oxford: Oxford University; 2016. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199336746.013.1
47. Hoskin PW. Affecting increased student achievement in geoscience education by instruction in metacognition: A small class case study [Internet]. 2000 [Updated 2000 February 23]. Available from: http://ascilite.org/archived-journals/e-jist/docs/Vol7_no2/CurrentPractice/Affect_student_ach.htm
48. Valle A, Nú-ez JC, Cabanach RG, González Pienda JA, Rodríguez S, Rosário P, et al. Academic goals and learning quality in higher education students. The Spanish Journal of Psychology. 2009; 12(1):96–105. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1138741600001517 [DOI:10.1017/S1138741600001517]