Evaluation apprehension model

Last updated September 22, 2023

The evaluation apprehension theory was proposed by Nickolas B. Cottrell in 1972. He argued that we quickly learn that the social rewards and punishments (for example, in the form of approval and disapproval) that we receive from other people are based on their evaluations of us. On this basis, our arousal may be modulated. In other words, performance will be enhanced or impaired only in the presence of persons who can approve or disapprove of our actions.

Feelings of concern about evaluation nearly always occur when in the presence of others. However, in 1968, Cottrell tried to separate these variables in an experiment.^[1] He found that there was no social facilitation effect on three well-learned tasks performed by a participant when there were two other persons (part of the study) blindfolded and supposedly preparing for a perception study. The participants would perform the same as the participants who were to perform the three well-learned tasks alone. Dominant responses (sharper and quicker) were given mainly by participants who had to perform the three tasks in the presence of spectators who seemed interested and who were able to see the participant perform the tasks.^[1]

People may experience evaluation apprehension when they are part of a negatively stereotyped group and involved in a stereotype-linked activity. For example, women taking a math test may not perform to their full potential because of concerns regarding women's stereotyped difficulties with math. In this situation, evaluation apprehension is called stereotype threat. Stereotype threat can also occur in private, whereas evaluation apprehension cannot.

Evaluation apprehension can affect subjects' behavior in psychological experiments, and can lead to invalid causal inference. Rosenberg defined evaluation apprehension as "an active, anxiety-toned concern that he [the subject] win a positive evaluation from the experimenter, or at least that he provide no grounds for a negative one."^[2] As a result, subjects have conformed less in conformity studies and exhibited quicker conditioning in conditioning studies as part of a positive self-presentation.^[3]

Other research on evaluation apprehension has shown that, when they must make a choice, subjects are more concerned with presenting themselves in a favorable light (this has been called the apprehensive hypothesis, the "good subject role").^[4]

Concern with giving a positive self-presentation is also implicit in the social desirability bias. This bias is the tendency to give the "socially desired response" (e.g., a response that would typically be considered well-adjusted) in answering items on personality measures. This response set is important for personality researchers because it threatens valid interpretation of test results.

The manipulation of evaluation apprehension

To study the causal influence of evaluation apprehension in experimental designs, experimenters frequently have to try to manipulate this variable. By creating differing levels of evaluation apprehension, researchers can assess its effect on, and interaction with, other variables, such as self-esteem and manifest anxiety.^[5] To heighten participants' evaluation apprehension, experimenters create situations in which participants perceive themselves as being publicly judged. For example, Kim et al. (2010)'s tested the effect of apprehension on making positive self-evaluations.^[5] Specifically, they studied the effect of evaluation apprehension between two groups: people from collectivistic cultures and people from individualistic cultures. To manipulate evaluation apprehension, they raised and lowered the level of evaluation apprehension depending on if participants were alone or with a group of people when they were asked to make positive self-evaluations.^[5]

An indirect manipulation of evaluation apprehension is demonstrated in Leary et al. (1987)'s study of evaluation apprehension on social-esteem and self-esteem.^[6] One's social-esteem is how one is evaluated by others, or at least how one perceives that one is being perceived by others.^[6] Until recently, scholars hypothesized that the model of social-esteem directly contrasted the model of self-esteem, one's evaluation of oneself. There is some consensus that social-esteem is influenced by evaluation apprehension given that they are both related to a person's apprehension of being evaluated by others. However, recent research shows that evaluation apprehension can also influence general self-esteem.^[6] Leary et al. conducted an experiment in which participants were told that they would be taking a test that could threaten their ego and that either "only they, only another individual, both they and the other individual, or no one would see their test score".^[6] By varying the perceived audience, the researchers indirectly manipulated evaluation apprehension. Leary et al. thus hoped to create conditions that tested the effects of differing levels of evaluation apprehension on social-esteem and self-esteem. Before the test began, the participants were all assessed on their level of evaluation apprehension. The purpose of the study was then to determine how one's evaluation apprehension was affected by a threat to one's self-esteem, social-esteem, both, or neither.^[6]

The results of Leary et al. (1987)'s study showed a significant increase in evaluation apprehension for participants with both the self-viewing condition and the peer-viewing condition.^[6] Participants in the peer-viewing condition were told that they would be evaluated by others; participants in the self-viewing condition were told that they would be evaluated by themselves. This effect was similarly found for the self-viewing and social-viewing condition, but not for the condition in which no one would view the results. These results demonstrate that one may be able to alter evaluation apprehension by manipulating social-esteem and self-esteem.

Evaluation apprehension as a moderator

Recent research has shown that there is a negative correlation between social desirability and manifest anxiety.^[7] Studies have demonstrated that evaluation apprehension may moderate this relationship. When evaluation apprehension is lowered, a much smaller relationship between these two variables is found. Therefore, evaluation apprehension is positively correlated to the relationship between social desirability and manifest anxiety.^[7] This does not imply that evaluation apprehension is the reason why a person has more anxiety when they have more social desirability. However, this correlation does imply that someone with high desirability is more likely to have manifest anxiety when there is high evaluation apprehension rather than in cases of low evaluation apprehension.^[7]

Other studies have revealed that there is a relationship between collectivism and corruption.^[8] Recent research has shown that evaluation apprehension may moderate this association.^[8] Collectivistic values and one's willingness to act in a corrupted way positively correlate in some studies and negatively correlate in others. Researchers are unsure how to interpret these mixed results.^[8] However, Huang et al. (2015) believed that evaluation apprehension was the third variable that was moderating the relationship.^[8] They hypothesized that there would be a negative correlation between collectivism and corruption when evaluation apprehension was high because of the fear of being judged for being corrupt by the other people of one's culture. On the other hand, they hypothesized that there would be a positive correlation when evaluation apprehension was low because people would have low fear of judgment from others for being corrupt.^[8] Therefore, the researchers conducted an experiment that tested the relationship between collectivism and corruption with the independent variable being evaluation apprehension. All of the conditions in the experiment contained situations where collectivistic values and one's willingness to act corruptly were tested, the conditions only differed in the amount of evaluation apprehension they contained. Numerous experiments were completed by Huang et al. and the experiment based on bribery scenarios found corroborating results with the experiment based on a bribery game containing real money. Both experiments produced significant results which indicate that collectivism only facilitated corruption when there was low evaluation apprehension. Although this is only one study, the fact that high levels of evaluation apprehension inhibit collectivism facilitating corruption provides further supporting evidence that evaluation apprehension can sometimes act as a moderator.

The effects of evaluation apprehension on behavior

The presence of evaluation apprehension can cause some people to act abnormally.^[9] Their behavior may be altered from the norm by increasing evaluation apprehension even if the rest of the context remains unchanged. Evaluation apprehension can change behavior both beneficially and detrimentally in laboratory and work settings.^[9] Recent research has suggested that at times the true effects of a treatment being tested in an experiment can be influenced by evaluation apprehension. Sometimes, the participants' knowledge that they are in an experiment leads them to experience evaluation apprehension.^[9] Their apprehensive feelings of being evaluated results in them acting in a different manner than they would in normal life, thereby leading to false data.^[9]

Evaluation apprehension can affect the behavior of people differently depending on their culture and other factors.^[5] Research indicates that evaluation apprehension is a primary determinant of individual differences in the ability to make positive self-evaluations among Western and Eastern cultures.^[5] Western cultures tend to be more individualistic in nature and therefore the people of those cultures have an easier time making public, positive self-evaluations. The individualistic nature of those cultures encourages people who reside in them to make public, positive self-evaluations because of a lack of social/societal judgment when they do.^[5] Eastern cultures, on the other hand, tend to be more collectivistic in nature and therefore the people of those cultures are less likely to make public, positive self-evaluations than they are to make private self-evaluations.^[5] This may be due to evaluation apprehension. The collectivistic nature of those cultures discourages praising oneself, so such people are discouraged from public self-praise from fear of being evaluated negatively. Studies have revealed that when these people are in a more private setting where they do not have evaluation apprehension they are more likely to make positive self-evaluations.^[5]

Benefits and detriments of evaluation apprehension

Although it is commonly believed that evaluation apprehension is largely detrimental, research demonstrates that evaluation apprehension can have both positive and negative effects on social interactions.^[10] Evaluation apprehension can be useful at times in spite of its tendency to create anxiety. At high levels, evaluation apprehension can inform people that the situation is important and that they should focus attention on whatever stressor is causing the heightened levels of evaluation apprehension.^[10] Research indicates that a person is less easily distracted when they have a heightened level of evaluation apprehension and can therefore be more easily persuaded. Eliminating such distraction creates a higher level of understanding of the presented argument. At the same time, this heightened level of attention can create anxiety.^[1] Thus, evaluation apprehension leads to an amplified level of attention that is both beneficial and detrimental.^[10]

Related Research Articles

Shyness is the feeling of apprehension, lack of comfort, or awkwardness especially when a person is around other people. This commonly occurs in new situations or with unfamiliar people; a shy person may simply opt to avoid these situations. Although shyness can be a characteristic of people who have low self-esteem, the primary defining characteristic of shyness is a fear of what other people will think of a person's behavior. This fear of negative reactions such as being mocked, humiliated or patronized, criticized or rejected can cause a shy person to retreat. Stronger forms of shyness can be referred to as social anxiety or social phobia.

A self-serving bias is any cognitive or perceptual process that is distorted by the need to maintain and enhance self-esteem, or the tendency to perceive oneself in an overly favorable manner. It is the belief that individuals tend to ascribe success to their own abilities and efforts, but ascribe failure to external factors. When individuals reject the validity of negative feedback, focus on their strengths and achievements but overlook their faults and failures, or take more credit for their group's work than they give to other members, they are protecting their self-esteem from threat and injury. These cognitive and perceptual tendencies perpetuate illusions and error, but they also serve the self's need for esteem. For example, a student who attributes earning a good grade on an exam to their own intelligence and preparation but attributes earning a poor grade to the teacher's poor teaching ability or unfair test questions might be exhibiting a self-serving bias. Studies have shown that similar attributions are made in various situations, such as the workplace, interpersonal relationships, sports, and consumer decisions.

Stereotype threat is a situational predicament in which people are or feel themselves to be at risk of conforming to stereotypes about their social group. It is theorized to be a contributing factor to long-standing racial and gender gaps in academic performance. Since its introduction into the academic literature, stereotype threat has become one of the most widely studied topics in the field of social psychology.

Terror management theory (TMT) is both a social and evolutionary psychology theory originally proposed by Jeff Greenberg, Sheldon Solomon, and Tom Pyszczynski and codified in their book The Worm at the Core: On the Role of Death in Life (2015). It proposes that a basic psychological conflict results from having a self-preservation instinct while realizing that death is inevitable and to some extent unpredictable. This conflict produces terror, which is managed through a combination of escapism and cultural beliefs that act to counter biological reality with more significant and enduring forms of meaning and value.

Cultural psychology is the study of how cultures reflect and shape their members' psychological processes.

Social rejection occurs when an individual is deliberately excluded from a social relationship or social interaction. The topic includes interpersonal rejection, romantic rejection and familial estrangement. A person can be rejected or shunned by individuals or an entire group of people. Furthermore, rejection can be either active, by bullying, teasing, or ridiculing, or passive, by ignoring a person, or giving the "silent treatment". The experience of being rejected is subjective for the recipient, and it can be perceived when it is not actually present. The word "ostracism" is also commonly used to denote a process of social exclusion.

Social facilitation is a social phenomenon in which being in the presence of others improves individual task performance. That is, people do better on tasks when they are with other people rather than when they are doing the task alone. Situations that elicit social facilitation include coaction, performing for an audience, and appears to depend on task complexity.

Sociometer theory is a theory of self-esteem from an evolutionary psychological perspective which proposes that self-esteem is a gauge of interpersonal relationships.

In social psychology, the pratfall effect is the tendency for interpersonal appeal to change after an individual makes a mistake, depending on the individual's perceived competence. In particular, highly competent individuals tend to become more likeable after committing mistakes, while average-seeming individuals tend to become less likeable even if they commit the same mistake.

According to some theories, emotions are universal phenomena, albeit affected by culture. Emotions are "internal phenomena that can, but do not always, make themselves observable through expression and behavior". While some emotions are universal and are experienced in similar ways as a reaction to similar events across all cultures, other emotions show considerable cultural differences in their antecedent events, the way they are experienced, the reactions they provoke and the way they are perceived by the surrounding society. According to other theories, termed social constructionist, emotions are more deeply culturally influenced. The components of emotions are universal, but the patterns are social constructions. Some also theorize that culture is affected by emotions of the people.

Belongingness is the human emotional need to be an accepted member of a group. Whether it is family, friends, co-workers, a religion, or something else, some people tend to have an 'inherent' desire to belong and be an important part of something greater than themselves. This implies a relationship that is greater than simple acquaintance or familiarity.

Face-Negotiation Theory is a theory conceived by Stella Ting-Toomey in 1985, to understand how people from different cultures manage rapport and disagreements. The theory posited "face", or self-image when communicating with others, as a universal phenomenon that pervades across cultures. In conflicts, one's face is threatened; and thus the person tends to save or restore his or her face. This set of communicative behaviors, according to the theory, is called "facework". Since people frame the situated meaning of "face" and enact "facework" differently from one culture to the next, the theory poses a cultural-general framework to examine facework negotiation. It is important to note that the definition of face varies depending on the people and their culture and the same can be said for the proficiency of facework.

In the field of social psychology, illusory superiority is a condition of cognitive bias wherein a person overestimates their own qualities and abilities, in relation to the same qualities and abilities of other people. Illusory superiority is one of many positive illusions, relating to the self, that are evident in the study of intelligence, the effective performance of tasks and tests, and the possession of desirable personal characteristics and personality traits. Overestimation of abilities compared to an objective measure is known as the overconfidence effect.

Implicit self-esteem refers to a person's disposition to evaluate themselves in a spontaneous, automatic, or unconscious manner. It contrasts with explicit self-esteem, which entails more conscious and reflective self-evaluation. Both explicit and implicit self-esteem are constituents of self-esteem.

Self-esteem can be defined as how favorably individuals evaluate themselves. According to Leary, self-esteem is the relationship between one's real self and one's ideal self, feeding off of favorable behaviors. It refers to an individual's sense of their value or worth, or the extent to which a person values, approves of, appreciates, prizes, or likes themselves. Self-esteem is generally considered the evaluative component of the self-concept, a broader representation of the self that includes cognitive and behavioral aspects as well as evaluative or affective ones. There are several different proposals as to the functions of self-esteem. One proposal is that it satisfies the inherent need to feel good about oneself. Another is that it serves to minimize social rejection. Self-esteem is also known as a way for a person to remain dominant in relationships. Self-esteem is known to protect people from potential fear that arises from the prospect of death. Self-esteem helps motivate people to achieve their goals – high self-esteem leading to coping in situations and low self-esteem leading to avoidance.

Allocentrism is a collectivistic personality attribute whereby people center their attention and actions on other people rather than themselves. It is a psychological dimension which corresponds to the general cultural dimension of collectivism. In fact, allocentrics "believe, feel, and act very much like collectivists do around the world." Allocentric people tend to be interdependent, define themselves in terms of the group that they are part of, and behave according to that group's cultural norms. They tend to have a sense of duty and share beliefs with other allocentrics among their in-group. Allocentric people appear to see themselves as an extension of their in-group and allow their own goals to be subsumed by the in-group's goals. Additionally, allocentrism has been defined as giving priority to the collective self over the private self, particularly if these two selves happen to come into conflict.

Subjective well-being (SWB) is a self-reported measure of well-being, typically obtained by questionnaire.

Humor styles are a subject of research in the field of personality psychology that focuses on the ways in which individuals differ in their use of humor. People of all ages and cultures respond to humor, but their use of it can vary greatly. There are multiple factors, such as culture, age, and political orientation, that play a role in determining what people find humorous. Although humor styles can be somewhat variable depending on social context, they tend to be a relatively stable personality characteristic among individuals. Humor can play an instrumental role in the formation of social bonds, enabling people to relate to peers or to attract a mate, and can help to release tension during periods of stress. There is a lack of current, reliable research that explores the impact of humor usages on others because it is difficult to distinguish a healthy humor usage from one that is unhealthy. Justifications for harmful versus benign humor styles are subjective and lead to varying definitions of either usage.

Fear of negative evaluation (FNE) or fear of failure, also known as atychiphobia, is a psychological construct reflecting "apprehension about others' evaluations, distress over negative evaluations by others, and the expectation that others would evaluate one negatively". The construct and a psychological test to measure it were defined by David Watson and Ronald Friend in 1969. FNE is related to specific personality dimensions, such as anxiousness, submissiveness, and social avoidance. People who score high on the FNE scale are highly concerned with seeking social approval or avoiding disapproval by others and may tend to avoid situations where they have to undergo evaluations. High FNE subjects are also more responsive to situational factors. This has been associated with conformity, pro-social behavior, and social anxiety.

Albert Jan "Ap" Dijksterhuis is a Dutch Social Psychologist at Radboud University Nijmegen.

References

1 2 3 Cottrell, Nickolas B.; Wack, Dennis L.; Sekerak, Gary J.; Rittle, Robert H. (1968). "Social facilitation of dominant responses by presence of others". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology . 9 (3): 245–50. doi:10.1037/h0025902. PMID 5666972.
↑ Rosenberg, Milton J. (1965). "When dissonance fails: On eliminating evaluation apprehension from attitude measurement". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1 (1): 28–42. doi:10.1037/h0021647. PMID 14328700.
↑ Weber, Stephen J.; Cook, Thomas D. (1972). "Subject effects in laboratory research: An examination of subject roles, demand characteristics, and valid inference". Psychological Bulletin . 77 (4): 273–295. doi:10.1037/h0032351.
↑ Rosnow, Ralph L.; Goodstadt, Barry E.; Suls, Jerry M.; Gitter, A. George (1973). "More on the social psychology of the experiment: When compliance turns to self-defense". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 27 (3): 337–343. doi:10.1037/h0034943.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Kim, Y.; Chiu, C.; Peng, S.; Cai, H.; Tov, W. (2010). "Explaining East-West Differences in the Likelihood of Making Favorable Self-Evaluations: The Role of Evaluation Apprehension and Directness of Expression". Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 41 (1): 62–75. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.721.2080 . doi:10.1177/0022022109348921. S2CID 55659878.
1 2 3 4 5 6 Leary, M.; Barnes, B.; Griebel, C.; Mason, E.; McCormack, Jr. (1987). "The Impact of Conjoint Threats to Social- and Self-Esteem on Evaluation Apprehension". Social Psychology Quarterly. 50 (4): 304–311. doi:10.2307/2786815. JSTOR 2786815.
1 2 3 Thomas, C.; Hall, J.; Miller, F.; Dewhirst, J.; Fine, G.; Taylor, M.; Rosnow, R. (1979). "Evaluation Apprehension, Social Desirability, and the Interpretation of Test Correlations". Social Behavior and Personality. 7 (2): 193–197. doi:10.2224/sbp.1979.7.2.193.
1 2 3 4 5 Huang, Z.; Liu, L.; Zheng, W.; Tan, X. (2015). "Walking the Straight and Narrow: The Moderating Effect of Evaluation Apprehension on the Relationship between Collectivism and Corruption (K. Eriksson, Ed.)". PLOS ONE. 10 (3): 3. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0123859 . PMC 4376769 . PMID 25815819.
1 2 3 4 Simons, L.; Turner, C. (1976). "Evaluation apprehension, hypothesis awareness, and the weapons effect". Aggressive Behavior. 2 (1): 77–87. doi:10.1002/1098-2337(1976)2:1<77::aid-ab2480020108>3.0.co;2-a.
1 2 3 Silverman, I.; Regula, R. (1968). "Evaluation Apprehension, Demand Characteristics, and the Effects of Distraction on Persuasibility". The Journal of Social Psychology. 75 (2): 273–281. doi:10.1080/00224545.1968.9712504.

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.

[Cottrell1968-1] 1 2 3 Cottrell, Nickolas B.; Wack, Dennis L.; Sekerak, Gary J.; Rittle, Robert H. (1968). "Social facilitation of dominant responses by presence of others". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology . 9 (3): 245–50. doi:10.1037/h0025902. PMID 5666972.

[2] Rosenberg, Milton J. (1965). "When dissonance fails: On eliminating evaluation apprehension from attitude measurement". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1 (1): 28–42. doi:10.1037/h0021647. PMID 14328700.

[3] Weber, Stephen J.; Cook, Thomas D. (1972). "Subject effects in laboratory research: An examination of subject roles, demand characteristics, and valid inference". Psychological Bulletin . 77 (4): 273–295. doi:10.1037/h0032351.

[4] Rosnow, Ralph L.; Goodstadt, Barry E.; Suls, Jerry M.; Gitter, A. George (1973). "More on the social psychology of the experiment: When compliance turns to self-defense". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 27 (3): 337–343. doi:10.1037/h0034943.

[Kim2010-5] 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Kim, Y.; Chiu, C.; Peng, S.; Cai, H.; Tov, W. (2010). "Explaining East-West Differences in the Likelihood of Making Favorable Self-Evaluations: The Role of Evaluation Apprehension and Directness of Expression". Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 41 (1): 62–75. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.721.2080 . doi:10.1177/0022022109348921. S2CID 55659878.

[Leary1987-6] 1 2 3 4 5 6 Leary, M.; Barnes, B.; Griebel, C.; Mason, E.; McCormack, Jr. (1987). "The Impact of Conjoint Threats to Social- and Self-Esteem on Evaluation Apprehension". Social Psychology Quarterly. 50 (4): 304–311. doi:10.2307/2786815. JSTOR 2786815.

[Thomas1979-7] 1 2 3 Thomas, C.; Hall, J.; Miller, F.; Dewhirst, J.; Fine, G.; Taylor, M.; Rosnow, R. (1979). "Evaluation Apprehension, Social Desirability, and the Interpretation of Test Correlations". Social Behavior and Personality. 7 (2): 193–197. doi:10.2224/sbp.1979.7.2.193.

[Huang2015-8] 1 2 3 4 5 Huang, Z.; Liu, L.; Zheng, W.; Tan, X. (2015). "Walking the Straight and Narrow: The Moderating Effect of Evaluation Apprehension on the Relationship between Collectivism and Corruption (K. Eriksson, Ed.)". PLOS ONE. 10 (3): 3. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0123859 . PMC 4376769 . PMID 25815819.

[Simons1976-9] 1 2 3 4 Simons, L.; Turner, C. (1976). "Evaluation apprehension, hypothesis awareness, and the weapons effect". Aggressive Behavior. 2 (1): 77–87. doi:10.1002/1098-2337(1976)2:1<77::aid-ab2480020108>3.0.co;2-a.

[Silverman1968-10] 1 2 3 Silverman, I.; Regula, R. (1968). "Evaluation Apprehension, Demand Characteristics, and the Effects of Distraction on Persuasibility". The Journal of Social Psychology. 75 (2): 273–281. doi:10.1080/00224545.1968.9712504.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]