Thinking about self-efficacy.
Split self-efficacy into strategy belief and goal belief—mood widens the space between them.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Kraijer (2000) wrote a theory paper about self-efficacy. The author asked how mood, goals, and strategies fit together. No new data were collected; ideas were reviewed and linked.
What they found
Self-efficacy splits into two parts: belief you can do the strategy and belief you can reach the goal. Bad mood raises the goal bar more than it lowers strategy belief. The gap between the two grows when people feel down.
How this fits with other research
Hastings et al. (2002) tested the idea with special-ed staff. Staff who felt less capable reported more upset when problem behavior hit. The survey backs D’s claim that low efficacy widens the strategy-goal gap.
Higgins et al. (2021) moved the idea into parent telehealth. They showed child-fit, parent-fit, setting, and child response all shape parent confidence. The study extends D by naming real-world levers you can adjust.
McLennan et al. (2008) seems to clash at first. After a smoking lapse, people prone to depression kept the same efficacy scores as peers yet felt worse and wanted to quit less. The result fits D once you see mood hit motivation, not efficacy itself.
Why it matters
Check both strategy belief and goal belief in your clients. If mood is low, the goal may feel farther away even when skills stay the same. Add supports that shrink the gap: break goals, boost strategy practice, or lighten mood first. Ask parents or staff about fit and setting; small tweaks there raise confidence fast.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Rate your client’s belief in the steps (strategy) and in the end point (goal); if the second is much lower, shrink the goal or add mood support before teaching more steps.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
People's perceptions of their capabilities for performance, or self-efficacy perceptions, are a cognitive mechanism underlying behavioral change. This article addresses three questions in the study of perceived self-efficacy: Do self-efficacy perceptions generalize across situations? Do affective states influence perceived self-efficacy? Do people have a singular level of perceived self-efficacy in any domain, or are there multiple aspects to self-efficacy perception? These questions are answered by analyzing the cognitive processes through which people appraise their efficacy for performance. The research reviewed indicates that (a) self-efficacy perceptions generalize across idiosyncratic sets of situations relating to schematic personal attributes; (b) induced negative mood does not reliably influence perceived self-efficacy but does raise performance standards, creating efficacy-standards discrepancies; (c) distinct aspects of self-efficacy appraisal can be organized by distinguishing between perceived self-efficacy for executing strategies and for attaining goals.
Behavior modification, 2000 · doi:10.1177/0145445500241002