What is self-sabotage and why some people choose to fail in advance

"It's a very common phenomenon," said Yang Xiang, a graduate student in psychology at Harvard University. - There are decades of research describing this behaviour."

In the past, self-sabotage has more often been linked to personality traits - like a tendency to avoid failure. A new Harvard paper offers a different view: in certain circumstances, it may be a rational social strategy. The study is published in the journal Cognition.

A mathematical model of self-sabotage

Xiang and her colleagues developed a formal, mathematical model - the "signalling theory of self-handicapping". It describes

• when it 's advantageous for a person to self-sabotage,

• how it affectshow others judge their competence.

In essence, self-sabotage is an attempt to "play" on how others draw conclusions about our ability:

• if a person is successful despite the handicap, he looks even more competent ("look how well he did, even though he hindered himself so much");

• if he fails, responsibility can be shifted to external factors ("I would have done better if I hadn't...").

"We say that regardless of personality type, it can be quite rational," explains Xiang. - We can predict when a person will choose this strategy and when they won't."

How the experiments are structured

The researchers conducted two online experiments stylised as a TV quiz:

1. Round 1.

   • 200 participants watched "players" who were given 20 questions each.

   • To "pass," they had to answer at least 8.

   • Some were judged on all 20 questions, others were judged on only a random 10.

2. Round 2.

   • The participants themselves became players.

   • They were offered to choose in advance:

     • whether to evaluate them on all answers or

     • only on a random half (i.e., to deliberately "worsen" the informativeness of the evaluation - this is model self-handicapping).

3. Round 3.

   • Participants were again shown the players from the first round.

   • Now they knew whether the player had self-sabotaged (chosen an incomplete score) and whether they had passed the threshold.

   • Exact scores were not reported - only the fact of pass/fail and the presence of self-handicapping.

What we found

The model and experiments showed:

• Self-handicapping is most often chosen by people who have either a very high or very low chance of success.

  • An observer seeing self-handicapping tends to think:

    • the person is either very competent

    • or very weak.

  • If someone is not self-handicapping, however, they are probably "average".

• Self-handicappers who passed the threshold received the highest competence scores.

• If a participant failed a task but also self-sabotaged, observers rated them more leniently than someone who failed without an "excuse."

However, when people tried the self-sabotage strategy themselves as players, they judged more harshly others who similarly "set themselves up" and ended up failing.

"People who have used self-handicapping themselves are more likely to notice the same techniques in others and perceive them as intentional," Xiang notes.

The danger to learning - and possible solutions

Previously, numerous studies have linked self-handicapping to:

• lower motivation,

• lower self-esteem,

• poorer academic performance over time.

The new work adds an important detail:

• In one experiment, participants were told to maximise the impression of their competence - self-handicapping was used frequently.

• In another - maximise success - self-handicapping became less common, but still more common in those whose competence was very high or very low.

Conclusion: a focus on "success" alone is not enough to remove self-sabotage.

Researchers suggest:

• emphasise learning and progress rather than comparisons and ratings;

• tailor assignments to the student's level so that the tasks are manageable, but not too easy - then the motivation to "make excuses" is reduced;

• in the educational environment, shift the focus from "failure" and "evaluation" to the process of development.

"By formalising the cognitive mechanisms of this behaviour, we hope to suggest how to reduce harmful academic self-handicapping," Xiang concludes.