El intérprete de guerra: ¿víctima o verdugo?

Related to schema theory and attentional bias, Carver and Scheier (1981) discuss the concept of self-focus within the larger model of self-regulation. Self-focus is defined as the “extent to which attention is predominantly directed toward the self as opposed to external events or internal thoughts unrelated to the self” (Matthews & Wells, 1996, p. 578) and concerns selective attention to information that is generated from within the self and concerns the self (Carver & Scheier, 1981). The hypothesised relationship between self-focus and coping behaviours is as follows (Matthews & Wells, 1996; Carver & Scheier, 1988): self-focus should increase problem-focused coping when discrepancy reduction is likely to be successful; when discrepancy reduction is considered unlikely, behavioural and mental disengagement (type of avoidance strategies commonly aligned with emotion-focused coping) should be seen along with a reduction in problem-focused coping strategies (indeed Scheier, Carver, & Gibbons, 1981, have found that highly self-focused individuals are more likely to engage in avoidance behaviours following a threat appraisal). Increased attention to internal states (as is the onus of

high self-focus) suggests increased emotion-focused coping (Matthews & Wells, 1996). Due to the general finding of a need for confidence among low literacy individuals when beginning an adult vocational course (Eberle & Robinson, 1980; Neubauer & Dusewicz, 1988; Ross, 1987; Tilley et al., 2006), a tendency toward a high self-focus combined with low confidence should show a dispositional pattern of avoidance and emotion-focused coping strategies in times of stress, even in situations where there are opportunities to undertake problem-focused approaches (Matthews & Wells, 1996). Interestingly, Strack, Blaney, Ganellen, and Coyne (1985) found, in a sample of depressed individuals, that task performance was enhanced by problem-focused strategies regardless of whether the individual expected their performance to be successful. This result suggests that there could be a difference between confidence in self and confidence in the approach taken; that is, a depressed individual may have negative expectations of their outcome on a task but still use appropriate strategies to perform the task successfully. However, their interpretation of their own influence on the performance of that task may be overtly negative when compared to another non-depressed individual. Matthews and Wells (1996) propose that the effect of self-focus on coping responses is moderated by attentional capacity and success expectancies (the latter of which may in the present author’s opinion be based on self-esteem or confidence in oneself as opposed to confidence in the approach). In a related view, Carver and Scheier’s (1981) theory of self-regulation holds that expectations of success with regard to a goal can allow individuals to maintain effort toward that goal even in the face of setbacks (as an example, Scheier, Weintraub, & Carver, 1986, found a positive correlation between optimism and problem-focused coping). However, if expectations of success are low, the result can be reduced effort and sometimes complete disengagement.

Kanfer and Stevenson (1985) found that self-focused individuals showed impaired learning performance and lower rates of persistence in completing tasks when compared to non-self- focused individuals. These authors claimed that the predominance of emotion-focused coping required through self-regulation processes influenced by high self-focus, impaired the ability to

engage in problem-focused coping strategies (Kanfer & Stevenson, 1985). Matthews and Wells (1996) also hypothesise that task-directed performance can be impaired by the amount of attentional capacity required to develop plans of action which, in the case of a complex task, could result in cognitive resource overload. If a person with high self-focus is more likely to give substantial attention to their emotional reaction, it is proposed that attention can be split between the emotional arousal and plans for problem-focused coping leaving little capacity for task-related coping plans (Matthews & Wells, 1996). Therefore, Matthews and Wells argue there should be a general negative association between self-focus and problem-focused coping. Indeed, Carver and Scheier (1981) argue that avoidance coping strategies may be used more often by those with high self-focus as the resource demands they place on the individual are perceived as lower than the demands that could be placed by problem-focused strategies.

Heppner, Witty, and Dixon (2004) showed that individuals with negative appraisals of their problem-solving capabilities tended to lack persistence in finding solutions to problems, were less motivated to problem-solve, avoided their problems, felt powerless in dealing with interpersonal stressors, and tended to act impulsively. However, there are always exceptions to general rules. Matthews and Wells (1996) point out that an individual with high self-focus may still implement a complex problem-focused strategy to perform a task of value. However, the attentional capacity of this individual is still theorised to be less than optimal (considering its hypothesised split between emotional regulation and task-focus) resulting in a higher likelihood that the problem-focused strategies will not be implemented as effectively as they might have been given a lower tendency for self-focus (Matthews & Wells, 1996).

Examples of self-focus research of particular relevance to the current study are offered by research into test anxiety (or academic evaluative anxiety). Wine (1980) argues that self-focus can cause individuals who are test anxious to fail to attend fully to their task performance, resulting in performance deficits. Carver and Scheier (1981) argue that a discrepancy between

an individual’s current state and a standard that cannot be reduced will result in negative affect (see Kashdan & Roberts, 2004), a narrow focus for attentional capacities, and an attempt to withdraw (either physically or mentally) from the environment.

Differing results have been found as to whether individuals of differing levels of test anxiety experience the same degree of emotional arousal. Holroyd and Appel (1980) found that emotional physiological arousal across low and high test-anxious participants was similar (although self-reported arousal was not) and therefore did not impact differentially on task performance, whereas Hembree (1988) in his review of test anxiety research, found that perceived-physiological emotionality was a significant influence on task performance (although this was often less important than the cognitive aspect of worry). The role of heightened psychological affect in performance deficits associated with self-focus and subsequent attentional factors seems to be important. Carver and Scheier (1981) hypothesise, however, that self-focus will enhance awareness of heightened affect.

Carver and Scheier (1981) suggest that it is the unfavourable expectancy judgment that leads to impairment of performance rather than heightened self-focus in test anxious individuals. Their argument is that test anxious individuals that do not withdraw eventually return to the task but perhaps do not attempt the task at the same level of effort or attend fully to the information needed to do so as they do not expect to do well (Carver & Scheier, 1981). However, it is unclear from this theory where the unfavourable expectancy has been sourced from. For example, it may be possible that an unfavourable expectancy has resulted from a heightened self-focus.

With regard to persistence in educational situations (another interest of the present study) Carver, Peterson, Follansbee, and Scheier (1983) found that highly test anxious participants under conditions of self-focus were less likely to persist in a task they were being evaluated for

and their performance was also adversely affected (in comparison to participants with low test anxiety levels).

Much of the research on self-focus has been conducted with clinical samples and has been experimental and laboratory-based. Matthews and Wells (1996) suggest that in non-clinical samples, high self-focus may not necessarily be detrimental or be found to be so generally negative in coping with everyday threats and stressors. Further, research that is experimental and laboratory-based has usually required hypothetical situations and the experimental manipulation of self-focus conditions generally through the use of mirrors or audiences. This introduces limitations to the transfer of findings to self-focus as it occurs in natural environments.