Self-Efficacy Theory

10 Key excerpts on "Self-Efficacy Theory"

• 

  eBook - ePub

  Motivation and Self-Regulated Learning

  Theory, Research, and Applications

  • Dale H. Schunk, Barry J. Zimmerman, Dale H. Schunk, Barry J. Zimmerman(Authors)
  • 2012(Publication Date)
  • Routledge

    (Publisher)

  self-efficacy beliefs provide the foundation for human motivation, well-being, and personal accomplishment. No matter what other factors may serve as motivators, Bandura (2004) contended, “they are rooted in the core belief that one has the power to effect changes by one’s actions” (p. 622). This is because unless people believe that their actions can produce the outcomes they desire, they have little incentive to act or to persevere in the face of difficulties.

  Self-efficacy beliefs touch virtually every aspect of people’s lives—whether they think productively or self-debilitatingly; how well they motivate themselves and persevere in the face of adversities; their vulnerability to stress and depression; and the life choices they make. People with a strong sense of efficacy approach difficult tasks as challenges to be mastered rather than as threats to be avoided. They have greater intrinsic interest and deep engrossment in activities, and they set themselves challenging goals and maintain strong commitment to them. High self-efficacy also helps create feelings of serenity in approaching difficult tasks and activities. As a consequence, self-efficacy beliefs powerfully influence the level of accomplishment that one ultimately achieves.

  It is at this juncture important to extend the caution that self-efficacy should not be confused with self-concept, which is a broader evaluation of one’s self, often accompanied by the judgments of worth or esteem that typically chaperone such self-views. When individuals tap into these two self-beliefs, they ask themselves quite different types of questions. Self-efficacy beliefs refer to matters related to one’s capability and revolve around questions of “can” (Can I drive a car? Can I solve this problem?), whereas self-concept beliefs refer to matters related to being

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  The Routledge International Encyclopedia of Sport and Exercise Psychology

  Volume 1: Theoretical and Methodological Concepts

  • Dieter Hackfort, Robert Schinke, Dieter Hackfort, Robert J. Schinke(Authors)
  • 2020(Publication Date)
  • Routledge

    (Publisher)

  42

  Self-efficacy

  Timothy J. H. Budden, Ben Jackson, and James A. Dimmock

  Introduction

  Grounded in social cognitive theory (SCT; Bandura, 1986), self-efficacy refers to one’s ‘beliefs in one’s capability to organize and execute the courses of action required to produce given attainments’ (Bandura, 1997, p. 3). The nature, causes, and consequences of self-efficacy perceptions have been widely studied within sport and exercise psychology; as such, the literature is replete with comprehensive reviews of both the construct and the broader theoretical framework within which it exists (Feltz, Short, & Sullivan, 2008). Accordingly, in this chapter, rather than providing another exhaustive overview of sport- and exercise-based self-efficacy research, we seek to (a) broadly consider the prevalence and significance of ‘agentic’ perceptions—such as self-efficacy—within motivation and behaviour change theories, (b) offer a relatively brief theoretical overview of the construct, and (c) highlight an important, broad issue that requires further research attention in this area.

  Theoretical Overview

  Defined broadly, perceptions of competence or agency (e.g., self-efficacy, perceived competence, perceived behavioural control) appear as important drivers of goal-directed action in several motivational and behavioural frameworks. In self-determination theory (Ryan & Deci, 2000), for example, it is outlined that high-quality (i.e., autonomous) motivation is supported, in part, by an individual’s perceptions of competence (i.e., a sense of capability with regards to a focal activity). Individuals who consider themselves to be highly capable in a given athletic endeavour, therefore, are theorized to be more likely to be autonomously motivated for that endeavour. Within the theory of planned behaviour (Ajzen, 1991), meanwhile, perceived behavioural control is posited as a predictor of both intentions and behavioural engagement. Specifically, individuals who believe they possess a high degree of control over a behaviour are said to be more likely to intend to (and actually) engage in that behaviour. Similarly, in expectancy-value theoretical models (see Wigfield & Eccles, 2000), expectancies of success and ability beliefs predict achievement choices and, in turn, performance, effort, and persistence. Finally, within the health promotion literature, self-efficacy beliefs are proposed to contribute to behaviour change, planning, and/or maintenance in the transtheoretical model (Prochaska & Velicer, 1997), the health belief model (Rosenstock, Strecher, & Becker, 1988), the health action process approach framework (Schwarzer & Luszczynska, 2008), and the extended parallel process model (Witte, 1992). As is evident from the array of frameworks that incorporate self-efficacy (or related) perceptions as drivers of motivation and/or behaviour, the salience of individuals’ competence beliefs is well recognized. It could be argued, however, that the most detailed account of these agentic perceptions is provided within Bandura’s (1977, 1997) Self-Efficacy Theory. In the following section, we provide a brief overview of the theoretical foundations of—and empirical support associated with—Self-Efficacy Theory.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  Social Cognitive Theory

  An Agentic Perspective on Human Nature

  • Albert Bandura, Daniel Cervone(Authors)
  • 2023(Publication Date)
  • Wiley

    (Publisher)

  1986 ). To equate for individual differences in physical performance, participants rated their self‐efficacy for 14 levels of performance attainment ranging from a 50% decline to and 80% increase in effortful performance compared to their baseline performance level. Their subsequent percent change in effortful performance was also measured relative to their baseline performance level. The higher the participants perceived self‐efficacy and the greater their discontent with just matching their past performance the higher their performance output.

  Social cognitive theory of career choice and development has sponsored wide‐ranging programs of research with special focus on the role played by beliefs of personal efficacy in occupational choice and preparation (Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 1994 : Betz & Hackett, 1997 ). These lines of research help to clarify the impact of self‐efficacy beliefs on decisional behavior. The findings of this substantial body of research show that the higher the perceived self‐efficacy to fulfill educational requirements and occupational roles the wider the career options people seriously consider pursuing, the greater the interest they have in them, the better they prepare themselves educationally for different occupational careers, and the greater their staying power in challenging career pursuits. Efficacy beliefs predict occupational choices and level of mastery of educational requirements for those careers, and persistence in technical/scientific pursuits when variations in actual ability, prior level of academic achievement, scholastic aptitude and vocational interests are controlled (Lent, Brown, & Larkin, 1989 ; Lent, Brown, & Larkin, 1984 , 1986 , 1987 ; Lent, Lopez, & Bieschke, 1993 ).

  Self‐development during formative years forecloses some types of occupational options and makes others realizable. A multifaceted longitudinal project examined by the path analytic method shows how sociostructural determinants operating in concert with different facets of perceived self‐efficacy at the beginning of junior high school predict the types of occupational pursuits students are seriously considering toward the end of junior high (Bandura, Barbaranelli, Caprara, Pastorelli, 2001

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  The Theory of Reasoned Action

  Its application to AIDS-Preventive Behaviour

  • Cynthia Gallois, Malcolm McCamish, Deborah J Terry(Authors)
  • 2015(Publication Date)
  • Routledge

    (Publisher)

  8 Self-Efficacy Expectancies and the Theory of Reasoned Action

  DEBORAH TERRY The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia

  According to Bandura's (1977 , 1986 ) social cognitive theory, people's actions are not only influenced by their beliefs concerning the likely consequences of an act, but also by their expectations of personal mastery. Such expectations are referred to by Bandura (1977 , 1986 ) as efficacy expectancies, and reflect people's beliefs concerning the likelihood that they will be able to perform a particular behaviour successfully. Self-efficacious thinking cannot be equated with the possession of the requisite skills to perform the behaviour. As noted by Bandura (1986 , 1989a ,b ), successful performance of a behaviour depends not only on the availability of skills, but also on the belief that one will be able to utilise the skills effectively in the appropriate situation. In the absence of the belief that they can successfully perform a behaviour, people will be unlikely to be motivated to perform the behaviour. Moreover, if they do attempt to perform the behaviour, people with low levels of self-efficacy are unlikely to persist in their behavioural efforts.

  There is considerable evidence linking levels of self-efficacy to health behaviour (Bandura, 1986 ; O'Leary, 1985 ; Strecher, deVillis, Becker, & Rosenstock, 1986 ). Subjects with high levels of self-efficacy are more likely to engage in health-promoting behaviours (e.g., quitting smoking; dieting) than their counterparts with low levels of self-efficacy (see

  Strecher et al., 1986

  for a review). Additional evidence reveals that people are more likely to comply with the recommendations of persuasive communications if they perceive that they can successfully execute the recommended behaviours (Beck & Lund, 1981 ; Maddux, Norton & Stolenberg, 1986). The evidence linking perceived self-efficacy to health behaviour is not restricted to correlational support (Taylor, 1991 ). There is evidence that experimental enhancement of personal efficacy expectations reflects in subsequent behaviour change (see

  Strecher et al

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  New Developments in Goal Setting and Task Performance

  • Edwin A. Locke, Gary P. Latham, Edwin A. Locke, Gary P. Latham(Authors)
  • 2013(Publication Date)
  • Routledge

    (Publisher)

  10 The Role of Self-Efficacy in Goal-Based Motivation

  Albert Bandura Stanford University DOI: 10.4324/9780203082744-10

  People’s beliefs in their capabilities regulate the quality of their functioning through four separable processes: cognitive, motivational, affective, and decisional (Bandura, 1997 ). In the cognitive mode, self-efficacy beliefs affect whether people think optimistically or pessimistically, in self-enhancing or self-debilitating ways. In the motivational mode, such beliefs influence the goal challenges people set for themselves, how much effort they invest in the endeavor, and their perseverance in the face of difficulties and setbacks. In the affective mode, people’s beliefs in their coping capabilities affect the quality of their emotional life and their vulnerability to stress and depression. In the decisional mode, based on beliefs in their capabilities, people set the slate of options they consider the decisions they make, and how well they implement them. The choices made at critical decision points shape the course lives take. The present chapter reviews the effect of self-efficacy on the goals people set for themselves and the strength of their commitment to them. However, before examining the empirical evidence, I will comment briefly on the forms that goals take and the scope of self-efficacy assessment. For linguistic brevity, perceived self-efficacy as a belief in one’s capabilities is represented throughout the chapter in a shorter form as self-efficacy.

  Scope of Self-Efficacy Beliefs and Goals

  Self-Efficacy Theory does not subscribe to a decontextualized all-purpose measure of self-efficacy. Given the conditional nature of human behavior, such measures sacrifice explanatory and predictive power (Bandura, 1997 , 2012 ). Assessment of self-efficacy relies on a sound conceptual analysis of the relevant domain of functioning. Knowledge of the activity domain specifies the types of self-efficacy that should be measured. Attainments are the products of multiple determinants. Multicausality requires multidimensional assessment of self-efficacy. Self-management of weight is a good case in point. Weight is determined by eating habits that govern calorie intake, level of exercise that burns calories, and by genetic factors that regulate metabolic processes. Multifactor assessment that includes perceived capability to regulate food purchases, eating habits, and physical exercise provides a more accurate estimate of the contribution of self-efficacy to self-management of weight than if the assessment is confined to eating habits, as is typically the case. In eating disorders, self-efficacy to regulate aversive affective states and to manage troublesome interpersonal relationships, both of which often trigger binge-eating, also come into play (Love, Ollendick, Johnson, & Schlezinger, 1985 ; Schneider, O’Leary, & Agras, 1987

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  Sustainable Business Practices for Rural Development

  The Role of Intellectual Capital

  • Hardeep Chahal, Vijay Pereira, Jeevan Jyoti, Hardeep Chahal, Vijay Pereira, Jeevan Jyoti(Authors)
  • 2020(Publication Date)
  • Palgrave Macmillan

    (Publisher)

  In other words, if one regulates himself/herself then they can manage, organise and control the business successfully. The person with high self-regulation becomes a successful entrepreneur. This phenomenon mediates between self-efficacy and entrepreneurial intentions (Pihie and Bagheri 2013). Individuals who are confident about their abilities and skills are able to control their behaviour more, which in turn motivates them to engage themselves in entrepreneurial activities or set up their own ventures. In order to start and run a business lucratively, there is need for individual’s adaptability to the situation, which can be possible only with the help of regulation. Self-efficacious individuals are able to manage difficult situations and learn from their mistakes, which in turn helps them to undertake entrepreneurship. They set their personal standards and follow them strictly, which in turn enhances their entrepreneurial intentions. Self-efficacious individuals have the capability to successfully complete the specific task (Paulsen and Gentry 1995 ; Schunk 1996 ; Onoda 2014), which in turn helps individual to regulate themselves thereby improving their entrepreneurial intentions. Self-efficacy fuels motivation (i.e., a drive to initiate their learning) and volition (i.e., willpower to help individuals to maintain their learning when they are faced with distracting factors), enabling individuals to persist when faced with difficulties (Onoda 2014) which further leads to higher entrepreneurial intentions

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  Exploring Language Teacher Efficacy in Japan

  • Gene Thompson(Author)
  • 2020(Publication Date)
  • Multilingual Matters

    (Publisher)

  Furthermore, both may also be influenced by context (e.g. working at a school with motivated students versus with students who have no desire or need to speak English). Thus, in the assessment of their efficacy beliefs, individuals are likely to weigh up the difficulty of carrying out the task (e.g. is it possible or valued?) and the expected outcome (i.e. will it be perceived to influence student learning and development?), alongside the skills they perceive available to use in achieving the task (see Figure 2.1). Figure 2.1 Conceptual framework of self-efficacy assessment Accordingly, self-efficacy beliefs are argued to influence agency, motivation and self-regulation, and to mediate states of anxiety. Agency is concerned with individuals’ capacity to control and coordinate their actions, beliefs and emotions to reach goals. Therefore, agency is the driver of intentional acts (as opposed to outcomes, which may be unintended). Bandura (2001: 10) claimed that ‘efficacy beliefs are the foundation of human agency’ and summarised their importance, stating ‘whatever other factors may operate as guides and motivators, they are rooted in the core belief that one has the power to produce effects by one’s actions’. As self-efficacy beliefs are perceptions of capability, these beliefs influence choice and effort towards goals, that is, individuals ‘regulate their level and distribution of effort in accordance with the effects they expect their actions to have’ (Bandura, 1986: 129). Efficacy beliefs have also been consistently shown to have a negative relationship with anxiety (Mills et al., 2006; Pajares & Kranzler, 1995; Swars et al., 2006). Such a relationship is not surprising, as people who perceive a negative emotional and threatening response towards a task (e.g. anxiety towards teaching via English) may also believe themselves less capable of bringing about actions to complete it

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  Technophobia

  The Psychological Impact of Information Technology

  • Mark J. Brosnan(Author)
  • 2002(Publication Date)
  • Routledge

    (Publisher)

  a decrease in anxiety about computers is expected to influence computer related behaviour by decreasing the likelihood of avoidance and increasing that of future use. Likewise, computer exposure should influence expectations of self efficacy, anxiety, attitudes and the likelihood of future computer use versus avoidance as well as computer related skills.

  (p. 176)

  Indeed, the role of expectation on performance has been highlighted in the previous two chapters (e.g. Glass and Knight, 1988; Lenney, 1977). Bandura (1977a, b) terms self perceptions of ability to perform a given behaviour ‘self efficacy’. When people are assured of their capabilities they get the most out of their talents whereas, when they are beset by self doubts, they tend to behave ineffectually despite well-developed skills (Bandura and Wood, 1988; Wood and Bandura, 1988). Bandura (1988) further clarifies:

  Neither self efficacy nor social environments are fixed entities. Operative efficacy is a generative capability in which multiple subskills must be continuously improvised to manage ever-changing circumstances often containing unpredictable and stressful elements. Individuals with the same subskills may, therefore, perform poorly, adequately or extraordinarily, depending on their self-beliefs of efficacy, which affect how well they use the capabilities they possess.

  (p. 88)

  Bandura (1986) develops SLT into social cognitive theory (SCT) and argues that there are obvious advantages to having accurate self perceptions of one’s capabilities as overestimation may result in risk-taking and underestimation in a lack of achievement.

  INTRODUCTION TO SCT

  To place self efficacy in context, social cognitive theory (SCT) explains human behaviour in terms of a three-way interaction (termed ‘triadic reciprocality’) between behaviour, cognitive and other personal factors, and environmental determinants. Bandura (1986) outlines five basic capabilities which humans possess (symbolizing, forethought, vicarious, self-regulatory and self reflective capabilities). A full discussion of SCT is beyond the remit of this book, but interested readers are referred to Bandura (1986). Rather, the focus of this chapter will be Bandura’s concept of self efficacy, which is an extension of the self-reflective capability of SCT and is particularly salient to understanding technophobia.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  Noncognitive psychological processes and academic achievement

  • Jihyun Lee, Lazar Stankov(Authors)
  • 2017(Publication Date)
  • Routledge

    (Publisher)

  Academic self-efficacy represents the conviction that one can successfully learn and perform given academic tasks at designated levels (Schunk, 1991), a judgment that is specifically tailored to given situations (Bandura, 1997). Students form and adjust their self-efficacy beliefs by carefully interpreting and weighing their mastery and vicarious experiences, verbal messages communicated by others and their own emotional states (Bandura, 1986; Usher, 2009). Strengths of students’ self-efficacy beliefs are also dependent on the characteristics of the target tasks, activities and domains (Bong, 2002).

  More pertinent to the present research, students’ self-efficacy beliefs towards the same academic tasks differ with the contexts in which they are encountered. Learning contexts that highlight progress and genuine effort and provide encouragement and support strengthen students’ self-efficacy. Contexts that highlight competition and relative standing, in contrast, often weaken students’ efficacy expectations (Ames, 1992; Greene, Miller, Crowson, Duke, & Akey, 2004; Roeser, Midgley, & Urdan, 1996). A year-long investigation by Bong (2005) clearly illustrates the fluctuating nature of academic self-efficacy in response to both mastery experience and perceptions of the learning environment. Specifically, Korean high school girls’ self-efficacy across multiple domains was found to uniformly drop before tests and rise after them. Further, the self-efficacy of these girls increased significantly as they perceived a stronger focus on effort and task mastery in their school and classrooms.

  When significant others express belief in students’ capabilities, students maintain or enhance their efficacy beliefs even when struggling with difficult tasks (Bandura, 1997; Bong, Hwang, & Song, 2010). Consequently, students with the same actual levels of competence can develop vastly different self-efficacy beliefs, depending on whether significant others in their learning environment emphasise the deficiencies or improvements in their performance and whether their performance is evaluated by normative or absolute standards (Bandura & Jourden, 1991). All of the available evidence thus points to the importance of perceived learning contexts for students’ academic self-efficacy beliefs.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  The Human Side of Virtual Work

  • Laurence M. Rose(Author)
  • 2015(Publication Date)
  • Business Expert Press

    (Publisher)

  In conclusion, the model shows how the overlap of the three perceptions is critical to ensure that the virtual worker and the organization need to have a common understanding to truly define a level of productivity that will result in success for both the individual and the organization. It is reasonable to expect that an individual left to work in an environment that lacks trust, creates a level of isolation, and produces a presence that is different from others will lead to a disconnect between the individual and the organization.

  I offer for future or additional reading related to self-efficacy that you look to the leading expert on self-efficacy, Albert Bandura (1997). In particular, his book titled “Self-efficacy: The exercise of control” is an excellent read concerning the different aspects of self-efficacy.

  People

  The people who are affected by this theory and model is everyone. This model even though focused more on the VWE relates to all working conditions. People need to feel a sense of trust in all they do. Whether it is in a family, friend, or work relationship, trust is needed for the connection to be healthy. People need to feel secure in their surroundings. People are social creatures and the level of trust one feels helps to define how socially secure people feel. As was discussed in the trust chapter, the level of connection one has helps determine the level of trust one feels. A secure social environment will allow people to focus on the task at hand and not worry about the insecurities that arise when the conditions lack trust. This aspect of feeling secure in their surrounding also can be seen in terms of isolation and presence. If a person feels isolated, they will have a feeling of being disconnected. If a person lacks presence with others, again they can also feel disconnected. Therefore, it is critical that all people are subject to this theory and model.

  Process

  The organization has to look for processes that make sure that all individuals are part of decisions. As we have discussed, the lack of being part of decisions can lead to a moving away from the organization. The concept of self-reliance through self-efficacy is what the theory and model addresses. We have all been in situations where we have a different level of confidence in the organization if we are asked to be part of the decision. Even when we don’t get our way if we have been asked to participate, we feel better about the situation. We have seen through the use of the model when trust, isolation, and presence are part of the solution for the individual, the individual is left standing on their own to determine the level of productivity and how they produce the task they are required to complete. The organizational process must ensure that the circles of trust, isolation, and presence stay overlapping with the point of self-efficacy to produce the most success in the work environment.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book