Hypothesis:Hypothesis:

Students would benefit from both self-Students would benefit from both self-esteem and internal control interventions. esteem and internal control interventions. One intervention may prove more helpful One intervention may prove more helpful

than the other.than the other.

Level 1: No message (control group) Level 2: Internal control message (You will be

responsible for your own performance in this course.)

Level 3: Self-esteem bolstering message (stressed the importance of maintaining high self-esteem)

Independent Variable

The main dependent variable was the grade

that each student received on the final exam. This would show whether or not each level of the independent variable worked.

Dependent Variable

86 students who received Cs, Ds, and Fs

during their academic careers. Recruited by the experimenter by asking them

to take part in a study concerning the use of e-mail.

Participants

Conducted over e-mail The participants were randomly assigned to

one of the three aforementioned groups. They would receive a message, or not receive

a message, depending on which group they were in.

Duration: 6 weeks

Procedure

Self-esteem bolstering group: Great drop in

grades between the midterm and final exam. Internal control group: No significant change in

grades. No message (control) group: No significant

change in grades.

Results

Boosting self-esteem may lead to a person

adopting an arrogant attitude. Perhaps the participants thought very well of

themselves, regardless of their low grades. Internal control: neglected going to lecture

because they felt they had full control over their performance.

Self-esteem should not be bolstered independent of academic success.

Internal control over academic success should be accessed in light of actual performance.

What does this mean?

Hypothesis:Hypothesis:

The participants would report better The participants would report better study habits and less test anxiety.study habits and less test anxiety.

Level 1: Teaching group- Find a friend,

roommate, or sibling who would be their pupil in study skills.

Level 2: Nonteaching group- Did not teach anyone about the study skills program.

Independent Variable

The dependent variables are the scores the

participants received when completing the Study Skills Inventory, Survey of Study Habits and Attitudes, and the Suinn Test Anxiety Scale.

Dependent Variable

30 university students who responded to a

letter, posters, or radio announcements describing the study skills program.

Average age: 22.67 years 19 male, 11 female 22 of the 30 were freshmen

Participants

Prior to the Study Skills program, the

participants were asked to complete the previously mentioned surveys.

Participants were randomly assigned into the two groups and attended the study skills program.

After the program, each participant completed the same three surveys again.

Duration: 4 weeks, each group met twice per week.

Procedure

Study Skills Inventory and Study Habits

Survey: Increased scores after the program. Participants in the teaching group showed a higher gain.

Suinn Test Anxiety Scale: Less test anxiety following the program.

Only 6 times was it reported that those in the teaching group failed to teach their pupils some of the information from the sessions.

Results

Increase on the scores of the Study Habits

Survey and Study Skills Inventory: Came from the study skills program. The teaching group had a higher gain than the nonteaching group. They felt more responsible for learning the skills because they had to teach another.

Decrease on the Suinn Test Anxiety Scale: The program focused on behaviors that could alleviate this anxiety (setting goals to facilitate on-task behavior, concentration, effective test-taking practices, etc.

What does this mean?