Effects of feedback sign and credibility on goal setting and task performance

• Published in: Organizational behavior and human decision processes Vol. 44; no. 1; pp. 45 - 67
• Main Authors: Podsakoff, Philip M, Farh, Jiing-Lih
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Amsterdam Elsevier Inc 01.08.1989; Elsevier; Elsevier Science Publishing Company, Inc
• Series: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes
• Subjects: Behavior. Attitude; Biological and medical sciences; Control theory; Correlation analysis; Credibility; Feedback; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology; Goal setting; Motivation; Organizational behavior; Psychological aspects; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry; Psychology. Psychophysiology; Social psychology; Studies; Human; Social behavior; Information credibility; Source credibility; Acquisition process; Feedback; Social structure; Self efficacy; Social learning; Social organization; Performance; Communication
• ISSN: 0749-5978; 1095-9920
• DOI: 10.1016/0749-5978(89)90034-4

Despite previous research on feedback sign and feedback accuracy, little is known about the main and interactive effects of these two feedback dimensions on specific types of cognitive and behavioral responses. The present laboratory study used 90 undergraduate students to examine the influence of feedback sign and feedback credibility on goal setting and task performance. Consistent with propositions derived from social learning theory and control theory, the results showed that feedback sign had a main effect on subjects' performance. Subjects who received negative feedback performed at higher levels than subjects who received positive feedback. In addition, feedback sign was found to interact with feedback credibility to influence subjects' self-set goals and performance. Subjects who received more credible negative feedback set higher goals and performed at higher levels than subjects who received less credible negative feedback, while subjects who received more credible positive feedback did not set higher goals or perform significantly better than subjects who received less credible positive feedback. The findings also suggest that feedback sign combines with both ability and self-efficacy to determine task performance.