Abstract
An experiment was conducted to determine the effects of task difficulty on achievement when ability and two types of motivation, Hostile Press and need achievement, are varied. It was found that Ss of high Hostile Press generally achieved more than Ss of high need achievement and the latter more than Ss of low need achievement. Ss of both high Hostile Press and high need achievement tended to prefer the more difficult tasks.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Atkinson
J. W.
Motivational determinants of risk-taking behavior . Psychol. Rev. , 1957 , 64 , 368 –369 .
2.
Birney
R. C.
Burdick
H.
Teevan
R. C.
Fear of failure . Princeton : Van Nostrand , 1968 .
3.
Birney
R. C.
Teevan
R. C.
Burdick
H.
The hostile press scoring system . Paper read at meetings of the Eastern Psychological Association , New York , 1961 .
4.
Campbell
V. N.
Bypassing as a way of adapting self instruction programs to individual differences . J. educ. Psychol. , 1964 , 54 , 337 –345 .
5.
Campeau
L.
Level of anxiety and presence or absence of feedback in programmed instruction . Pittsburgh : Amer. Inst. Res. , 1965 . (AIR-D96-2/65-FR)
6.
Carroll
J. B.
Programmed instruction and student ability . J. programmed Instruc. , 1963 , 2 , 7 –13 .
7.
Coulson
J. E.
Silberman
H. F.
Effects of three variables in a teaching machine . J. educ. Psychol. , 1960 , 51 , 135 –143 .
8.
Doty
A.
Doty
L. A.
Programmed instructional effectiveness in relation to certain student characteristics . J. educ. Psychol. , 1964 , 55 , 334 –338 .
9.
Fusco
G. C.
Programmed self-instruction: possibilities and limitations . High Sch. J. , 1960 , 59 , 85 –90 .
10.
Gagne
R. M.
Dick
W.
Measures in a self-instructional program . Psychol. Rep. , 1962 , 10 , 131 –146 .
11.
Gagne
R. M.
Paradise
N. E.
Abilities and learning sets in knowledge acquisition . Psychol. Monogr. , 1961 , 75 , No. 11 (Whole No. 518).
12.
Goldbeck
R. A.
The effect of response mode and learning difficulty on automated instruction . Pittsburgh : Amer. Instit. Res. , 1960 . (Tech. Rep. No. 1)
13.
Goldbeck
R. A.
Briggs
L. J.
An analysis of response mode and feedback factors in automated instruction . Pittsburgh : Amer. Instit. Res. , 1960 . (Tech. Report No. 2)
14.
Hancock
J. G.
Teevan
R. C.
Fear of failure and risk-taking behavior . J. Pers. , 1964 , 32 , 200 –209 .
15.
Jacobs
P. I.
Some relationships between testing and autoinstructional programming . Audiovis. Commun. Rev. , 1962 , 10 , 317 –327 .
16.
Jensen
A. R.
Teaching machines and individual differences . Automated Teaching Bull. , 1960 , 1 , 12 –17 .
17.
Kendler
H. H.
Teaching machines and psychological theory . In
Galanter
E.
(Ed.), Automatic teaching: the state of the art . New York : Wiley , 1959 . Pp. 177 –187 .
18.
Lambert
P.
Miller
D. M.
Wiley
D. E.
Experimental folklore and experimentation: the study of programmed learning in the Wauwatosa Public Schools . J. educ. Res. , 1962 , 55 , 485 –494 .
19.
McClelland
D. C.
Atkinson
J. W.
Clark
R. A.
Lowell
E. L.
The achievement motive . New York : Appleton-Century-Crofts , 1953 .
20.
Pressey
S. L.
Some perspectives and major problems regarding teaching machines . In
Lumsdaine
A. A.
&
Glaser
R.
(Eds.), Teaching machines and programmed learning . Washington : Nat. Educ. Assn , 1960 . Pp. 497 –505 .
21.
Shay
C. B.
Relationship of intelligence to step size on a teaching machine program . J. educ. Psychol. , 1961 , 52 , 98 –103 .
22.
Skinner
B. F.
Teaching machines . Science , 1958 , 128 , 969 –977 .
23.
Smith
L. M.
Programmed learning in elementary school: an experimental study of relationship between mental abilities and performance . Urbana, Ill. : Univer. of Illinois, Training Res. Lab. , 1962 .