Abstract A more stringent test was made of Martens and Landers' (1972) conclusion that direct evaluation of performance and outcomes leads to greater performance impairment than indirect evaluation of outcomes only. Expert and nonexpert audiences viewed Subjects performing a motor task with visual information and knowledge of outcomes (direct evaluation), with no visual information but knowledge of outcomes (indirect evaluation), and the absence of both visual information and knowledge of outcomes (no evaluation). Contrary to Martens and Landers, with an expert audience, both direct and indirect evaluation impaired performance equally. Results indicated that at least two factors in social facilitation research, audience characteristics and form of evaluation, can be considered interactive determinants of evaluation potential. These results directly support Cottrell's (1968) notion that the potential for evaluation characterizing a social situation is the chief source of audience and coaction effects in humans.
[1]
N. B. Cottrell,et al.
Social facilitation of dominant responses by the presence of an audicence and the mere presence of others.
,
1968,
Journal of personality and social psychology.
[2]
Rainer Martens,et al.
Evaluation potential as a determinant of coaction effects
,
1972
.
[3]
Paul B. Paulus,et al.
Anticipated evaluation and audience presence in the enhancement of dominant responses
,
1971
.
[4]
E. Klinger,et al.
Feedback effects and social facilitation of vigilance performance: Mere coaction versus potential evaluation
,
1969
.
[5]
B. J. Winer.
Statistical Principles in Experimental Design
,
1992
.
[6]
D. C. Glass,et al.
Evaluation apprehension and the social facilitation of dominant and subordinate responses.
,
1968,
Journal of personality and social psychology.