Advertisement

Springer Nature is making Coronavirus research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

The role of competence-related attentional bias and resilience in restoring thwarted feelings of competence

Abstract

The key goal of the present study was to examine how people deal with feelings of failure stemming from negative feedback. Specifically, we investigated whether individuals, and in particular those high in resilience, would display an attentional bias for competence-related cues after receiving competence-thwarting (i.e., negative) feedback. First, we validated a dot probe task tapping into competence-related attentional bias in a pilot study with 80 participants (Mage = 19.06, SDage = 3.91; 84% female). Subsequently, in the main study, another group of 60 participants (Mage = 21.95, SDage = 3.00; 68% female) were randomly provided with either positive or negative feedback after participating in a puzzle task. Subsequently, participants’ puzzle-task competence and their attentional bias were assessed, while their behavioral persistence during a free-choice period was recorded. First, results showed that participants in the negative, relative to the positive, feedback condition experienced higher levels of puzzle-task related competence frustration and displayed a stronger attentional bias for competence-related words. Next, regression analyses revealed that only individuals high in resilience displayed an attentional bias towards competence-related words in response to negative feedback. Finally, we found that such attentional bias was functional for a recovery in feelings of competence over time among those who received negative feedback. The discussion focuses on the role of attentional bias as a potential need-restoring coping mechanism.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Notes

  1. 1.

    At the end of the lab session in the preliminary study, we checked whether participants of the preliminary study understood and interpreted the presented words in the dot probe task in accordance with the set categories. While all ‘competence-related’ and ‘incompetence-related’ words were correctly classified into their respective categories, 21 neutral words were not correctly interpreted. These words were replaced in preparation of the main experiment (see Appendix).

  2. 2.

    In addition to the operationalized negative and positive feedback conditions, 30 participants (60% female; Mage = 22.01, SDage = 4.45; range 18–37) received no feedback after solving a combination of difficult and easy puzzles. A MANOVA contrasting the negative with the no feedback condition produced similar results as those obtained for the comparison of the positive and negative feedback condition (Wilks’ Lambda = .80, F(5, 53) = 2.66, p = .03). Participants who did not receive feedback reported significantly lower competence frustration [F(1, 57) = 4.47, p = .04], higher intrinsic motivation [F(1, 57) = 4.48, p = .04], a lower competence bias [F(1, 57) = 4.86, p = .03] compared to those in the no feedback condition. Additionally, there were no differences in terms of the duration of persistent behavior [F(1, 57) = .63, p = .43] and feelings of competence frustration after the free-choice period [F(1, 57) = .02, p = .90].

  3. 3.

    One of the reviewers raised the question to what extent the concepts resilience and competence satisfaction are similar measurements. To explore this issue, we performed additional analyses. Specifically, we performed two confirmatory factor analyses with the first analysis modeling two separate factors (i.e., items relating to resilience and competence satisfaction were modeled as two factors) [CFI = .89, AIC = 1678.75, χ2(76) = 121.97, p = .001] and the second analysis modeling a single-factor [CFI = .82, AIC = 1703.48, χ2(77) = 148.70, p = .000]. A Chi square comparison test between both models revealed that the first model, including two factors, had a significant better fit with respect to the data (\(\chi_{diff}^{2} (1)\)  = 26.73, p < .001).

  4. 4.

    In addition to feelings of competence frustration, we also measured feelings of competence satisfaction. Participants in the negative, relative to those in the positive, feedback condition reported less competence satisfaction after the puzzle task (but not after the free-choice period). In addition, the restorative movement over time was also found for competence satisfaction such that participants, who received negative feedback, reported significantly improved competence satisfaction in case they had a strong attentional bias for competence-related words.

  5. 5.

    In the main study, participants’ level of intrinsic motivation with regard to the puzzle task was assessed using the subscale ‘pleasure and interest’ of the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (McAuley et al. 1989; 4 items; αmain = .90). Self-reported intrinsic motivation correlated negatively with feelings of competence frustration (r = − .46, p < .01) and participants who received positive feedback reported higher intrinsic motivation (M = 5.28, SD = 1.13) compared to participants who received negative feedback [M = 4.23, SD = 1.37; t(87) = 3.27, p < .01], a finding documented in earlier research (e.g., Vansteenkiste and Deci 2003).

References

  1. Aarts, H., Dijksterhuis, A., & De Vries, P. (2001). On the psychology of drinking: Being thirsty and perceptually ready. British Journal of Psychology,92, 631–642.

  2. Abramson, L., Seligman, M. E. P., & Teasdale, J. (1978). Learned helplessness in humans: Critique and reformulation. Journal of Abnormal Psychology,84, 49–94.

  3. Anderson, S., & Rodin, J. (1989). Is bad news always bad? Cue and feedback effects on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology,19, 449–467.

  4. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy and health behaviour. In A. Baum, S. Newman, J. Weinman, R. West, & C. McManus (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of psychology, health and medicine (pp. 160–162). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

  5. Baron, R. A. (2008). The role of affect in the entrepreneurial process. Academy of Management Review,33(2), 328–340.

  6. Bartholomew, K. J., Ntoumanis, N., Ryan, R. M., Bosch, J. A., & Thøgersen-Ntoumani, C. (2011). Self-Determination Theory and diminished functioning: The role of interpersonal control and psychological need thwarting. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,37, 1459–1473.

  7. Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. R package version 1.1-10. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lme4.

  8. Belsky, J. (1997). Variation in susceptibility to rearing influences: An evolutionary argument. Psychological Inquiry,8, 182–186.

  9. Black, A. E., & Deci, E. L. (2000). ‘The effects of instructors’ autonomy support and students’ autonomous motivation on learning organic chemistry: A self-determination theory perspective. Science Education,84, 740–756.

  10. Borrell-Carrio, F., Suchman, A. L., & Epstein, R. M. (2004). The biopsychosocial model 25 years later: Principles, practice, and scientific inquiry. Annals of Family Medicine,2, 576–582.

  11. Burgers, C. F., Eden, A. L., van Engelenburg, M. D., & Buningh, S. (2015). How feedback boosts motivation and play in a brain-training game. Computers in Human Behavior,48, 94–103.

  12. Campbell-Sills, L., & Stein, M. B. (2007). Psychometric analysis and refinement of the Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC): Validation of a 10-item measure of resilience. Journal of Traumatic Stress,20, 1019–1028.

  13. Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1982). Outcome expectancy, locus of attribution for expectancy, and self-directed attention as determinants of evaluations and performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,18, 184–200.

  14. Cassidy, S. (2015). Resilience building in students: The role of academic self-efficacy. Frontiers in Psychology,6, 1781.

  15. Chen, B., Vansteenkiste, M., Beyers, W., Boone, L., Deci, E. L., Deeder, J., et al. (2015). Basic psychological need satisfaction, need frustration, and need strength across four cultures. Motivation and Emotion,39, 216–236.

  16. Deci, E. L. (1971). Effects of externally mediated rewards on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,18, 105–115.

  17. Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999). A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin,125, 627–668.

  18. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum Press.

  19. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (Eds.). (2002). Handbook of self-determination research. New York: University of Rochester Press.

  20. Earl, S. R., Taylor, I. M., Meijen, C., & Passfield, L. (2017). Autonomy and competence frustration in young adolescent classrooms: Different associations with active and passive disengagement. Learning and Instruction,49, 32–40.

  21. Fang, H., He, B., Fu, H., & Meng, L. (2017). Being eager to prove oneself: U-shaped relationship between competence frustration and intrinsic motivation in another activity. Frontiers in Psychology,8, 2123.

  22. Fang, H., He, B., Fu, H., Zhang, H., Mo, Z., & Meng, L. (2018). A surprising source of self-motivation: Prior competence frustration strengthens one’s motivation to win in another competence-supportive activity. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience,12, 314.

  23. Fletcher, D., & Sarkar, M. (2012). A grounded theory of psychological resilience in Olympic champions. Psychology of Sport and Exercise,13, 669–678.

  24. Fong, C. J., Patall, E., Vasquez, A., & Strautberg, S. (2018). A meta-analysis of negative feedback on intrinsic motivation. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-018-9446-6.

  25. Fransen, K., Boen, F., Vansteenkiste, M., Mertens, N., & Vande Broek, G. (2017). The power of competence support: The impact of coaches and athlete leaders on intrinsic motivation and performance. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports,28, 725–745.

  26. Gross, J. J. (1998). The emerging field of emotion regulation: An integrative review. Review of General Psychology,2(3), 271–299.

  27. Grouzet, F. M., Vallerand, R. J., Thill, E., & Provencher, P. (2004). From environmental factors to outcomes: A test of an integrated motivational sequence. Motivation and Emotion,28, 331–346.

  28. Hagger, M., Koch, S., & Chatzisarantis, N. (2015). The effect of causality orientations and positive competence-enhancing feedback on intrinsic motivation: A test of additive and interactive effects. Personality and Individual Differences,72, 107–111.

  29. Hosseini, S. A., & Besharat, M. A. (2010). Relation of resilience with sport achievement and mental health in sample of athletes. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences,5, 633–638.

  30. Jang, H., Reeve, J., & Halusic, M. (2016). A new autonomy-supportive way of teaching that increases conceptual learning: Teaching in students’ preferred ways. The Journal of Experimental Education,84(4), 686–701.

  31. Johnson, D. R. (2009). Emotional attention set-shifting and its relationship to anxiety and emotion regulation. Emotion,9(5), 681–690.

  32. Kasser, T., & Ryan, R. M. (1996). Further examining the American dream: Well-being correlates of intrinsic and extrinsic goals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,22, 281–288.

  33. Koster, E. H., Crombez, G., Verschuere, B., & De Houwer, J. (2004). Selective attention to threat in the dot probe paradigm: Differentiating vigilance and difficulty to disengage. Behavioral Research Therapy,42, 1183–1192.

  34. Lee, H. J., & Telch, M. J. (2008). Attentional biases in social anxiety: An investigation using the inattentional blindness paradigm. Behavioral Research and Therapy,46(7), 819–835.

  35. Legault, L., & Inzlicht, M. (2013). Self-determination, self-regulation, and the brain: Autonomy improves performance by enhancing neuroaffective responsiveness to self-regulation failure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,105, 123–138.

  36. Luecken, L. J., Tartaro, J., & Appelhans, B. (2004). Strategic coping responses and attentional biases. Cognitive Therapy and Research,28(1), 23–37.

  37. Luthar, S., Cicchetti, D., & Becker, B. (2000). The construct of resilience: A critical evaluation and guidelines for future work. Child Development,71, 543–562.

  38. Luther, S. S., Sawyer, J. A., & Brown, P. J. (2006). Conceptual issues in studies of resilience: Past, present, and future research. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences,1094, 105–115.

  39. Mabbe, E., Soenens, B., De Muynck, G.-J., & Vansteenkiste, M. (2018). The impact of feedback valence and communication style on intrinsic motivation in middle childhood: Experimental evidence and generalization across individual differences. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,170, 134–160.

  40. MacLeod, C., Mathews, A. M., & Tate, P. (1986). Attentional bias in emotional disorders. Journal of Abnormal Psychology,95, 15–20.

  41. MacLeod, C., Rutherford, E., Campbell, L., Ebsworthy, G., & Holker, L. (2002). Selective attention and emotional vulnerability: Assessing the causal basis of their association through the experimental manipulation of attentional bias. Journal of Abnormal Psychology,111(1), 107–123.

  42. Martin, A. V. S., Distelberg, B., Palmer, B. W., & Jeste, D. V. (2015). Development of a new multidimensional individual and interpersonal resilience measure for older adults. Aging and Mental Health,19(1), 32–45.

  43. Masten, A. S. (2001). Ordinary magic: Resilience processes in development. American Psychologist,56, 227–238.

  44. Masten, A. S., Burt, K. B., & Coatsworth, J. D. (2006). Competence and psychopathology in development. In D. Cicchetti & D. J. Cohen (Eds.), Developmental psychopathology (Vol. 3, 2nd ed., pp. 696–738). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

  45. Masten, A. S., & Tellegen, A. (2012). Resilience in developmental psychopathology: Contributions of the Project Competence Longitudinal Study. Development and Psychopathology,24, 345–361.

  46. Mogg, K., Bradley, B. P., Hyare, H., & Lee, S. (2016). Selective attention to food-related stimuli in hunger: Are attentional biases specific to emotional and psychopathological states, or are they also found in normal drive states? Behaviour Research and Therapy,36, 227–237.

  47. Mogg, K., Millar, N., & Bradley, B. P. (2000). Biases in eye movements to threatening facial expressions in generalized anxiety disorder and depressive disorder. Journal of Abnormal Psychology,109, 695–704.

  48. Montalan, B., Boitout, A., Veujoz, M., Leleu, A., Germain, R., Personnaz, B., et al. (2011). Social identity-based motivation modulates attention bias toward negative information: An event-related brain potential study. Socioaffective Neuroscience Psychology,1, 5892.

  49. Moors, A., De Houwer, J., Hermans, D., Wanmaker, S., van Schie, K., Van Harmelen, A. L., et al. (2013). Norms of valence, arousal, dominance, and age of acquisition for 4,300 Dutch words. Behavior Research Methods,45, 169–177.

  50. Mouratidis, M., Vansteenkiste, M., Lens, W., & Sideridis, G. (2008). The motivating role of positive feedback in sport and physical education: Evidence for a motivational model. Journal of Sport Exercise Psychology,30(2), 240–268.

  51. Nichols, W. C. (2013). Roads to understanding family resilience: 1920 s To the twenty-first century. In D. Becvar (Ed.), Handbook of family resilience (pp. 3–16). New York: Springer.

  52. Niemann, J., Wisse, B., Rus, D., Van Yperen, N. W., & Sassenberg, K. (2014). Anger and attitudinal reactions to negative feedback: The effects of emotional instability and power. Motivation and Emotion,38, 687–699.

  53. Notario-Pacheco, B., Solera, M., Serrano, M. D., Bartolomé, R., García-Campayo, J., & Martínez-Vizcaíno, V. (2011). Reliability and validity of the Spanish version of the 10 item Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale (10 item CDRISC) in young adults. Health Quality Life Outcomes,9, 63–68.

  54. Parsons, S., Kruijt, A. W., & Fox, E. (2016). A cognitive model of psychological resilience. Journal of Experimental Psychopathology,7(3), 296–310.

  55. Patall, E. A., Cooper, H., & Robinson, J. C. (2008). The effects of choice on intrinsic motivation and related outcomes: A meta-analysis of research findings. Psychological Bulletin,134, 270–300.

  56. Pfabigan, D. M., & Tran, U. S. (2015). Editorial: Behavioral and physiological bases of attentional biases: Paradigms, participants, and stimuli. Frontiers in Psychology,6, 686.

  57. Posner, M. I. (1980). Orienting of attention. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,32(1), 3–25.

  58. R Development Core Team. (2011). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. http://www.R-project.org.

  59. Radel, R., Pelletier, L. G., Sarrazin, P., & Milyavskaya, M. (2011). Restoration process of the need for autonomy: The early alarm stage. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,101, 919–934.

  60. Radel, R., Sarrazin, P., Jehu, M., & Pelletier, L. G. (2013). Priming motivation through unattended speech. British Journal of Social Psychology,52, 763–772.

  61. Richardson, G. E. (2002). The metatheory of resilience and resiliency. Journal of Clinical Psychology,58, 307–321.

  62. Rutter, M. (1987). Psychosocial resilience and protective mechanisms. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry,57, 316–331.

  63. Ryan, R. M. (1982). Control and information in the intrapersonal sphere: An extension of cognitive evaluation theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,43, 450–461.

  64. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. New York: Guilford Publishing.

  65. Sarkar, M., & Fletcher, D. (2015). Psychological resilience in sport performers: A review of stressors and protective factors. Journal of Sports Sciences,32, 1419–1434.

  66. Schielhetz, H. (2010). Simple means to improve the interpretability of regression coefficients. Methods in Ecology and Evolution,1, 103–113.

  67. Seligman, M. E. P. (1975). Helplessness: On depression, development, and death. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman.

  68. Sheldon, K. M., & Gunz, A. (2009). Psychological needs as basic motives, not just experiential requirements. Journal of Personality,77, 1467–1492.

  69. Skinner, E. A., Edge, K., Altman, J., & Sherwood, H. (2003). Searching for the structure of coping: Are view and critique of category systems for classifying ways of coping. Psychological Bulletin,129, 216–269.

  70. Skinner, E. A., & Zimmer-Gembeck, M. J. (2007). The development of coping. Annual Review of Psychology,58, 119–144.

  71. Stone, E. F., & Stone, D. L. (1984). The effects of multiple sources of performance feedback and feedback favorability of self-perceived task competence and perceived feedback accuracy. Journal of Management,10, 371–378.

  72. Strack, F., & Deutsch, R. (2004). Reflective and impulsive determinants of social behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review,8(3), 220–247.

  73. Stroop, J. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reaction. Journal of Experimental Psychology,18, 643–662.

  74. Thoern, H. A., Grueschow, M., Ehlert, U., Ruff, C. C., & Kleim, B. (2016). Attentional bias towards positive emotion predicts stress resilience. PLoS ONE,11, e0148368.

  75. Thorpe, S. J., & Salkovskis, P. M. (1997). The effect of one-session treatment for spider phobia on attentional bias and beliefs. British Journal of Clinical Psychology,36, 225–241.

  76. Treisman, A. M., & Gelade, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology,12, 97–136.

  77. Tugade, M. M., & Fredrickson, B. L. (2004). Resilient individuals use positive emotions to bounce back from negative emotional experiences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(2), 320–333.

  78. Turk, D. C., & Monarch, E. S. (2002). Biopsychosocial perspective on chronic pain. In D. C. Turk & R. J. Gatchel (Eds.), Psychological approaches to pain management: A practitioner’s handbook (pp. 3–29). New York: Guilford Press.

  79. Vallerand, R. J., & Reid, G. (1984). On the causal effects of perceived competence on intrinsic motivation: A test of cognitive evaluation theory. Journal of Sport Psychology,6, 94–102.

  80. van der Kaap-Deeder, J., Vansteenkiste, M., Van Petegem, S., Raes, F., & Soenens, B. (2016). On the integration of need-related autobiographical memories among late adolescents and late adults: The role of depressive symptoms and self-congruence. European Journal of Personality,30, 580–593.

  81. Van Elk, M. (2015). Perceptual biases in relation to paranormal and conspiracy beliefs. Public Library of Science One,10(6), e0130422.

  82. Vansteenkiste, M., & Deci, E. L. (2003). Competitively contingent rewards and intrinsic motivation: Can losers remain motivated? Motivation and Emotion,27, 273–299.

  83. Vansteenkiste, M., & Ryan, R. M. (2013). On psychological growth and vulnerability: Basic psychological need satisfaction and need frustration as a unifying principle. Journal of Psychotherapy Integration,23, 263–280.

  84. Wadlinger, H. A., & Isaacowitz, D. M. (2008). Looking happy: The experimental manipulation of a positive visual attention bias. Emotion,8, 121–126.

  85. Walsh, F. (2012). Family resilience: Strengths forged through adversity. In F. Walsh (Ed.), Normal family processes (4th ed., pp. 399–427). New York: Guilford Press.

  86. Wang, L., Shi, Z., Zhang, Y., & Zhang, Z. (2010). Psychometric properties of the 10-item Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale in Chinese earthquake victims. Psychiatry Clinical Neuroscience,64(5), 499–504.

  87. White, R. W. (1959). Motivation reconsidered: The concept of competence. Psychological Review,66, 297–333.

  88. Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy—Value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68–81.

  89. Windle, G., Bennett, K. M., & Noyes, J. (2011). A methodological review of resilience measurement scales. Health Quality Life Outcomes, 9, 8.

Download references

Funding

Joachim Waterschoot and Maarten Vansteenkiste received no funding. For Jolene van der Kaap-Deeder, the preparation of this paper was supported by Grant 12X5818 N of the Research Foundation: Flanders.

Author information

Correspondence to Joachim Waterschoot.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the Ethical Standards of the Institutional and/or National Research Committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

List of stimuli as a function of trial types with number of letters (N) and average valence

  Word (English) N Valence Word (English) N Valence
Incompetence versus neutral trials
 (1) Inefficiënt (inefficient) 11 2.12 Hoogachtend ( sincerely )
Bijenhoning (honeybee)
11 4.15
4.37
 (2) Floppen (flop) 7 2.49 Pleiten ( argue )
Brengen (bring)
7 4.04
4.48
 (3) Falen (fail) 5 1.64 Tafel (table) 5 4.04
 (4) Onbekwaam (inept) 9 2.10 Gemiddeld ( average )
Afrikanen (Africans)
9 3.74
3.86
 (5) Afgang (embarrassment) 6 1.76 Kikker (frog) 6 4.19
 (6) Blunder (blunder) 7 2.31 Gordijn (curtain) 7 4.08
 (7) Gefaald (failed) 7 1.71 Hagedis (lizard) 7 4.01
 (8) Misser (miss) 6 2.13 Paneel (panel) 6 4.11
 (9) Incompetent (incompetent) 11 2.02 Binnenschip (barge) 11 4.22
 (10) Mislukkeling (failure) 12 1.71 Sentimenteel ( sentimental )
Zwaarbewolkt (cloudy)
12 4.13
3.70
 (11) Buizen (flunk) 6 2.08 Ladder (ladder) 6 4.02
 (12) Incapabel (incapable) 9 2.14 Scharnier (hinge) 9 3.89
Competence versus neutral trials
 (1) Vertrouwen (confide) 10 5.99 Verrichten ( conduct )
Aanbrengen (affixing)
10 4.31
4.03
 (2) Slim (smart) 4 5.97 Knop (button) 4 3.97
 (3) Talent (talent) 6 5.86 Orgaan ( organ )
Bouten (bults)
6 4.35
4.28
 (4) Capabel (capable) 7 5.58 Stempel (stamp) 7 4.15
 (5) Expert (expert) 6 5.53 Karton (cardboard) 6 3.86
 (6) Bedreven (skilled) 8 5.61 Vermogen (power) 8 4.16
 (7) Bekwaam (capable) 7 5.55 Scooter (scooter) 7 4.16
 (8) Behendig (agile) 8 5.54 Overgave ( submission )
Klassiek (classic)
8 3.78
4.10
 (9) Kennis (knowledge) 6 5.5 Knopen (knots) 6 3.95
 (10) Succes (success) 6 5.96 Sessie ( session )
Figuur (figure)
6 3.96
4.18
 (11) Capaciteit (capacity) 10 5.63 Maarschalk (marshal) 10 3.74
 (12) Competent (competent) 9 5.56 Medeweten ( consent )
Kandelaar (candle)
9 4.01
3.96
Neutral versus neutral trials
 (1) Vierkant (square) 8 4.15 Verbaasd ( surprised )
Overname (takeover)
8 4.12
3.78
 (2) Trechter (funnel) 8 3.89 Onbekend ( unknown )
Stelling (claim)
8 3.50
3.72
 (3) Grijnzen ( grin )
Spreiden (spread)
8 3.71
3.93
Delicaat (delicate)
Voortuin (front yard)
8 3.90
4.05
 (4) Impulsief (impulsive)
Nationaal (national)
9 3.67
3.63
Gewichtig ( momentous )
Televisie (television)
9 3.61
3.72
 (5) Vragend ( asking )
Browser (browser)
7 4.06
4.26
Terrein (area) 7 3.98
 (6) Tellend ( counting )
Anoniem (anonymous)
7 4.06
3.82
Staande ( standing )
Fontein (fontain)
7 4.09
4.15
 (7) Spoelen (flush) 7 3.93 Snellen ( rush )
Bestaan (exist)
7 3.97
4.11
 (8) Serieus ( serious )
Vroeger (past)
7 3.84
3.69
Schroef (propeller) 7 3.84
 (9) Schalen (bowls) 7 3.79 Rooster (schedule) 7 3.75
 (10) Ploeger (plow) 7 3.83 Plafond (ceiling) 7 3.94
 (11) Pamflet (pamphlet) 7 3.87 Makreel (mackerel) 7 3.77
 (12) Loodsen (guide) 7 3.58 Knippen ( cut )
Vliegen (fly)
7 3.91
4.45
Incompetence versus competence trials
 (1) Inefficiënt (inefficient) 11 2.12 Vertrouwen (confide) 10 5.99
 (2) Floppen (flop) 7 2.49 Capabel (capable) 7 5.58
 (3) Falen (fail) 5 1.64 Slim (smart) 4 5.97
 (4) Onbekwaam (inept) 9 2.10 Competent (competent) 9 5.56
 (5) Afgang (embarrassment) 6 1.76 Expert (expert) 6 5.53
 (6) Blunder (blunder) 7 2.31 Bekwaam (capable) 7 5.55
 (7) Gefaald (failed) 7 1.71 Talent (talent) 6 5.86
 (8) Misser (miss) 6 2.13 Succes (success) 6 5.96
 (9) Incompetent (incompetent) 11 2.02 Bedreven (skilled) 8 5.61
 (10) Mislukkeling (failure) 12 1.71 Capaciteit (capacity) 10 5.63
 (11) Buizen (flunk) 6 2.08 Kennis (knowledge) 6 5.51
 (12) Incapabel (incapable) 9 2.14 Behendig (agile) 8 5.54
  1. Note. Numbers of letters are based on words translated in Dutch. Underlined words and averages scores refer to the replaced words (see preliminary study, word selection). For contrast-related trials, numbers of letters do not match exactly

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Waterschoot, J., van der Kaap-Deeder, J. & Vansteenkiste, M. The role of competence-related attentional bias and resilience in restoring thwarted feelings of competence. Motiv Emot 44, 82–98 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-019-09776-8

Download citation

Keywords

  • Resilience
  • Attentional bias
  • Need frustration
  • Negative feedback
  • Self-determination theory