Anticipatory Excuses in Relation to Expected versus Actual Task Performance

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
The relationship between task performance and frequency of posttask excuses was compared with that between performance level and frequency of anticipatory excuses made before performance was measured on a classroom exam. Study 1 used a checklist of 10 statements frequently used by students as excuses for poor performances on examinations and students indicated which statements applied to them. The relationships between excuse frequency, actual performance, and expected performance (relative to classmates) were measured either before or after the first midterm exam for two subgroups. There was a weak inverse correlation between excuse frequency and expected, but not with actual exam scores. Expected scores were uncorrelated with actual exam scores. Anticipatory excuses were less frequent than posttest excuses, whereas expectations about performance were higher before than immediately after the test. Study 2 was based on the second exam of the semester to enable students to have a better basis for their expectations. An open-ended format was used to allow students to express a wider variety of excuses. Accounts were obtained for higher (justification) as well as lower (excuse) expected scores. Expectations of poorer performance led to more anticipatory excuses whereas expected improved scores were correlated with more pretest justifications. Thus, even though students are poor predictors of actual performance, the relationship between frequency of anticipatory excuses and expected performance parallels that obtained for excuses made after task performance.