Effects Of Success And Failure Feedback On Depressive Patients’ Self-esteem And Core Self-evaluations And Depressions:an Experimental Research

Objective:To explore the effects of success and failure feedback manipulation on depressive patients’self-esteem and core self-evaluations and depressions, and the effect’s difference between depressive patients and normal persons.Methods:65depressive patients and65normal people as subjects, using2(participant types:depression/normal) x2(feedback types: success feedback or failure feedback)two factors between subjects design and Raven reasoning test was used as a feedback tool for success or failure feedback manipulation to explore the effects of success and failure feedback manipulation on depressive patients’self-esteem and core self-evaluations and depressions, and the effect’s difference between depressive patients and normal persons,and two types of subjects’ difference in validity estimation of Raven reasoning test after receiving success or failure feedback.Participant types and feedback types are both between subjects variables.Results:(1) The self-esteem of depressive patients was significantly lower than normal persons (t=6.34, p<0.001) and the core self-evaluation of depressive patients was significantly lower than normal persons (t=9.12, p<0.001).(2) The depressive participants’self-esteem did not have significant changes after receiving success or failure feedback (p>0.05). Normal persons’self-esteem did have significant rise after receiving success feedback(t=5.56, p<0.001),and have significant decline after receiving failure feedback (t=3.92, p<0.001).Participant types and feedback types on main effect of the self-esteem’s change was not significant (p>0.05), but their interaction was significant (F (1,126)=10.44, p=0.002).(3) Both the depressive participants and the normal persons’core self-evaluation did not have significant changes after receiving success or failure feedback (p>0.05). Participant types and feedback types on main effect of the core self-evaluation’s change was not significant (p>0.05), but their interaction was significant (F (1,126)=4.13, p=0.044).(4) The depressive participants’depression did not have significant changes after receiving success or failure feedback (p>0.05). Normal persons’depression did not have significant change after receiving success feedback(t=2.01, p=0.053),but have significant rise after receiving failure feedback (t=-4.39, p<0.001);Participant types on main effect of the depression’s change was not significant (F (1,126)=1.27, p-0.261),feedback types on main effect of the depression’s change was significant (F(1,126)=5.38, p=0.022), and their interaction was significant (F (1,126)=19.57, p<0.001).(5) Participant types and feedback types on main effect of the estimation of the Raven reasoning test’s overall evaluation was not significant (p>0.05), but their interaction was significant (F (1,126)=5.52, p=0.02).Estimation of the Raven reasoning test’s overall evaluation of depressive participants who received success feedback was significant lower than those who received failure feedback (t=2.92, p=0.005),but normal persons’estimation of the Raven reasoning test’s overall evaluation did not have significant difference after receiving success or failure feedback (t=0.32, p=0.751);After receiving success feedback, the depressive participants and normal participants’estimation of the Raven reasoning test’s overall evaluation was significant different (t=3.04, p=3.04), and after receiving failure feedback, the depressive participants and normal participants’estimation of the Raven reasoning test’s overall evaluation was not significant different (t=0.33, p0.743).(6) Participant types and feedback types on main effect of the estimation of the Raven reasoning test’s self-assessment was not significant (p>0.05), but their interaction was significant (F (1,126)3.96, p=0.049). The depressive participants’estimation of the Raven reasoning test’s self-assessment did not have significant difference after receiving success or failure feedback (t=0.02, p=0.02), but estimation of the Raven reasoning test’s self-assessment of normal persons who received success feedback was significant higher than those who received failure feedback (t=-3.23, p=0.002). After receiving success feedback, the depressive participants and normal participants’estimation of the Raven reasoning test’s self-assessment was not significant different (t=1.95, p=0.055), and after receiving failure feedback, the depressive participants and normal participants’estimation of the Raven reasoning test’s self-assessment was not significant different too(t=0.85, p=0.401).Conclusion:(1) The depressive patient’s level of self-esteem, core self-evaluation and expectations are lower than normal persons.(2) Depressive patient’s low self-esteem is relatively stable, which is not affected by the influence of the outside success or failure feedback, but normal persons’self-esteem will change with the outside success or failure feedback. Considered the fact that normal persons’self-esteem had significant greater changes than depressive patients under the condition of two types of feedback,we think that normal people with more unstable self-esteem.(3) The depressive patients and normal persons’core self-evaluation are stable, not affected by the influence of the outside success or failure feedback. But the success or failure feedback’s effect on the normal persons’core self-evaluation were greater than on depressive patients,and the effects of success or failure feedback on normal persons’core self-evaluation is significant different.(4) The depressive participants’depression is relatively stable, not subject to be affected significantly by the success or failure feedback.But the influence of failure feedback to normal persons’depression is greater than the influence of the success feedback.(5) The normal persons’estimation of the Raven reasoning test’s overall evaluation after the success and failure feedback is relatively objective, not affected by the feedback types, while the depressive patients’estimation of the Raven reasoning test’s overall evaluation after the success and failure feedback is affected by feedback types, showing the opposite of self service preference tendency.That is to say depressive patients are inclined to underestimate the feedback tool’s objective validity after the success feedback,while overestimate the feedback tool’s objective validity after the failure feedback.(6) As for the estimation of the Raven reasoning test’s self-assessment related to one’s performance,normal persons showed obvious tendency of self service preferences, namely they considered that Raven reasoning test did measure their true abilities if they received success feedback and that Raven reasoning test did not measure their true abilities if they received failure feedback,while such tendencies did not appear in depressive patients.The full text contains0picture,20tables and89references.