Seff-Handicapping and Interpersonal Trade-Offs: The Effects of Claimed Self-Handicaps on Observers' Performance Evaluations and Feedback
Male subjects evaluated the performance of targets who, prior to and during the performance, offered no excuse, claimed intended low effort, claimed anxiety, or claimed drug impairment. Cross-cutting the excuse manipulation was the publicity of the feedback; half the subjects believed their evaluations were private, and half believed they would have to communicate their evaluations to the target. Subjects evaluated objectively equivalent performances more negatively if they came from an excuse-making target than a no-excuse target. Subjects provided less favorable feedback to targets claiming low effort or drug impairment than to those citing anxiety or no excuse. Depending on the handicap claimed, observers either discounted ability (claimed low effort) or inferred lower ability from perceived poorer performance (claimed anxiety or claimed drug impairment). Implications for the interpersonal consequences of self-handicapping and the self-perpetuating nature of such strategies are discussed.