Abstract
Academic overachieving (n equals 12) and underachieving (n equals 10) tenth grade boys were randomly assigned, with their parents, to either a success or a failure treatment in a problem solving task to determine the effects of induced stress on problem solving flexibility. For the underachievers, Ss in the success treatment were the most flexible, while for the overachievers, Ss in the failure treatment were the most flexible. A curvilinear proposition, consistent with Hebb's cue-arousal postulate was proposed to explain the results and also to explain the apparent discrepancies in the literature as to whether situational stress increases or decreases flexibility in problem solving. An implication of the proposition is that for persons with feelings of personal inadequacy, increases in situation stress result in decreased problem solving flexibility, but for persons with feelings of personal adequacy such increases enhance their problem solving flexibility.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.