Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Illusory control as a function of the motivation to avoid randomly determined aversive outcomes

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Motivation and Emotion Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Previous research has provided evidence that the need to attain appetitive outcomes positively affects the certainty of winning that outcome in purely chance-based games. Three experiments were conducted to test the notion that the need to avoid an aversive outcome affects winning confidence in the same fashion. In Experiment 1, participants were given the opportunity to avoid having to give an introductory remark (low need) or an impromptu speech (high need) to a group of peers by winning a chance-based card-drawing game. As predicted, confidence-in-winning ratings were found to be a positive function of outcome need. In Experiment 2, participants faced a similar card-drawing procedure but this time could avoid ostensibly having their arms submersed in either room temperature water (low need) or cold water (high need) need. Again as expected, results showed that participants in the high need condition not only displayed greater winning confidence but also believed more skill was involved in playing the purely chance-based game. In Experiment 3, the methodology of Experiment 1 was replicated incorporating a skill measure. The results of this experiment mirrored those of Experiment 2. Results of these investigations are discussed in terms of control theory.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The notion that need may influence illusory perceptions can be traced back to the classic work of Bruner and Goodman (1947) which showed that financially poorer children, relative to their wealthier counterparts, generally overestimated the size of various coins.

  2. Pretesting indicated that males were generally insensitive to the manipulation to be used in this experiment. That is, early data showed that male ratings of outcome unpleasantness tended to be both low and uniform regardless of the level of the independent variable. Female ratings of unpleasantness, however, showed excellent variability across conditions. Given this, only females were used in the study.

  3. Also in line with prior studies on illusory control, this scale was identified as measuring “skill.” It should be noted, however, that this label is quite arbitrary considering the bipolar nature of the measure. That is, the scale could just as easily have been labeled a measure of “luck.”

References

  • Alloy, L. B., & Abramson, L. Y. (1979). Judgments of contingency in depressed and nondepressed students: Sadder but wiser? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 108, 441–485. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.108.4.441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Biner, P. M., Angle, S. T., Park, J. H., Mellinger, A. E., & Barber, B. C. (1995). Need state and the illusion of control. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21(9), 899–907. doi:10.1177/0146167295219004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biner, P. M., & Hua, D. M. (1995). Determinants of the magnitude of goal valence: The interactive effects of need, instrumentality, and the difficulty of goal attainment. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 16, 53–74. doi:10.1207/s15324834basp1601&2_4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biner, P. M., Huffman, M. L., Curran, M. A., & Long, K. R. (1998). Illusory control as a function of motivation for a specific outcome in a chance-based situation. Motivation and Emotion, 22, 277–291. doi:10.1023/A:1021300306318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bouts, P., & Van Avermaet, E. (1992). Drawing familiar or unfamiliar cards: Stimulus familiarity, chance orientation, and the illusion of control. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 331–335. doi:10.1177/0146167292183009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brehm, J. W., & Self, E. (1989). The intensity of motivation. In M. R. Rozenweig & L. W. Porter (Eds.), Annual review of psychology (Vol. 40, pp. 109–131). Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruner, J. S., & Goodman, C. C. (1947). Value and need as organizing factors in perception. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 42, 33–44. doi:10.1037/h0058484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burger, J. M. (1985). Desire for control and achievement-related behaviors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 1520–1533. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.48.6.1520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burger, J. M. (1986). Desire for control and the illusion of control: The effects of familiarity and sequence of outcomes. Journal of Research in Personality, 20, 66–76. doi:10.1016/0092-6566(86)90110-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burger, J. M., & Schnerring, D. A. (1982). The effects of desire for control and extrinsic rewards on the illusion of control and gambling. Motivation and Emotion, 6, 329–335. doi:10.1007/BF00998189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, D., Sundahl, I., & Lesbo, M. (2000). Illusory control as a determinant of bet size and type of casino craps games. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30(6), 1224–1242. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2000.tb02518.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunn, D. S., & Wilson, T. D. (1990). When the stakes are high: A limit to the illusion-of-control effect. Social Cognition, 8, 305–323.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dykstra, S. P., & Dollinger, S. J. (1990). Model competence, depression, and the illusion of control. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 28, 235–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1984). Social cognition. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleming, J. H., & Darley, J. M. (1990). The purposeful-action sequence and the illusion of control: The effects of foreknowledge and target involvement on observers’ judgments of others’ control over random events. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 16, 346–357. doi:10.1177/0146167290162014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedland, N., Keinan, G., & Regev, Y. (1992). Controlling the uncontrollable: Effects of stress on illusory perceptions of controllability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(6), 923–931. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.63.6.923.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gollwitzer, P. M., & Kinney, R. F. (1989). Effects of deliberative and implemental mind-sets on the illusion of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 531–542. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.56.4.531.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths, M. D. (1990). The cognitive psychology of gambling. Journal of Gambling Behavior, 6, 31–42. doi:10.1007/BF01015747.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Judd, C. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1981). Process analysis: Estimating mediation in evaluation research. Evaluation Research, 5, 602–619. doi:10.1177/0193841X8100500502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langer, E. J. (1975). The illusion of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 311–328. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.32.2.311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langer, E. J., & Roth, J. (1975). Heads I win, tails it’s chance: The illusion of control as a function of the sequence of outcomes in a purely chance task. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 951–955. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.32.6.951.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawler, E. E. (1973). Motivation in work organizations. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKinnon, D. P., Warsi, G., & Dwyer, J. H. (1995). A simulation study of mediated effect measures. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 30(1), 41–62. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr3001_3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nisbett, R. E., & Ross, L. (1980). Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinder, C. C. (1991). Valence-instrumentality-expectancy theory. In R. M. Steers & L. W. Porter (Eds.), Motivation and work behavior (pp. 144–164). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, L. W., & Lawler, E. E. (1968). Managerial attitudes and performance. Homewood, IL: Dorsey. The sourcebook of zip code demographics. (1990). Fairfax, VA: CICA Marketing Systems.

  • Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic intervals for indirect effects in structural equations models. In S. Leinhart (Ed.), Sociological Methodology 1982 (pp. 290–312). San Francisco: Josey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, S. E., & Brown, J. D. (1988). Illusion and well-being: A social psychological perspective on mental health. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 193–210. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.103.2.193.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, S. C., Armstrong, W. A., & Thomas, C. T. (1998). Illusions of control, underestimations, and accuracy: A control heuristic explanation. Psychological Bulletin, 123(2), 143–161. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.123.2.143.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, S. C., Kyle, D., Osgood, A., Quist, R. M., Phillips, D. J., & McClure, M. (2004). Illusory control and motives for control: The role of connection and intentionality. Motivation and Emotion, 28(4), 315–330. doi:10.1007/s11031-004-2386-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wohl, M. J., & Enzle, M. E. (2002). The deployment of personal luck: Sympathetic magic and illusory control in games of pure chance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(10), 1388–1397. doi:10.1177/014616702236870.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, R. A., & Brehm, J. W. (1989). Energization and goal attractiveness. In L. A. Pervin (Ed.), Goal concepts in personality and social psychology (pp. 169–210). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Benjamin Vold and Elizabeth Goforth in ably conducting Experiment 2.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychological Science, Ball State University, Muncie, IN, 47306, USA

    Paul M. Biner, Bradley C. Johnston, Amanda D. Summers & Elyse N. Chudzynski

Authors
  1. Paul M. Biner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bradley C. Johnston
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Amanda D. Summers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Elyse N. Chudzynski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paul M. Biner.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Biner, P.M., Johnston, B.C., Summers, A.D. et al. Illusory control as a function of the motivation to avoid randomly determined aversive outcomes. Motiv Emot 33, 32–41 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-008-9111-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-008-9111-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation