Outcome Expectancy And Self-Efficacy Theory

Outcome expectancy and self-efficacy are two important concepts within the socio-cognitive learning theory. While both were devised by Albert Bandura, Williams decided to revisit the theories in order to examine the contradiction posed within these concepts (2010). According to the author, while Bandura stated that self-efficacy influence outcome expectancy without the reverse direction, several studies showed the opposite fact. Thus, it is important to analyze the self-efficacy theory regarding its relationship with outcome expectancy. The study first explained the definition of self-efficacy as the perception of a person on his or her capability on performing a behavior. The theory explicitly presented that self-efficacy is not concern with the real capability, but rather the capability the

person believes that he or she has. Outcome expectancy, on the other hand, is the expectation of a person that specific action will lead to certain outcome. The author pointed out that the self-efficacy theory determine that outcome expectancy does not influence self-efficacy. He then presented the critique that studies had shown otherwise. The research examined a considerable amount of studies suggested that outcome expectancy, in fact, had a causal relationship toward self-efficacy. Thus, Williams laid out Bandura’s rebuttal with two main ideas, including the emphasis on self-efficacy as more a more significant influence of behavior, and the validation of self-efficacy judgment. Bandura’s statement posed a contradiction to his own theory, which yield for the remodeling of the self-efficacy theory for reconciliation. The author proposed two solutions in addressing the problem concerning the altering of self-efficacy operational definition, to correspond with either the self-efficacy theory, or conducted studies.

The first solution depicted that the definition must be changed so that outcome expectancy would not influence self-efficacy rating, which integrate a phrase indicate a hypothetical expectation within the assessment to control the constancy of the expected outcome, with the use of the word “if”. A problem arose from this ways, as the outcome expectancy might not be held truly constant. The other solution required the theory to accept the influence of outcome expectancy on self-efficacy. However, in measuring self-efficacy through questionnaire, respondent answers may vary depends on the person’s definition to incorporate outcome expectancy in self-efficacy. Nevertheless, the author concluded that the presented solutions must be considered carefully and may be used in accordance to the purpose and view oneself. In conclusion, two important concepts from the socio-cognitive learning theory is reviewed and clarified, in order to figure out a practical implication in assessing

people.