A Meta‐Analytic Investigation of the Within‐Person Self‐Efficacy Domain: Is Self‐Efficacy a Product of Past Performance or a Driver of Future Performance?
verifiedmedium profile · Personnel Psychology · 2013
Sitzmann, Traci; Yeo, Gillian
How this was studied
A meta-analytic synthesis — it pools many primary studies rather than running a single design, so there is no single-study diagram.
What this article reports
The findings we extracted from this work, normalized into Principia’s relationship form (X → Y). Each feeds the synthesized models below.
Models this article informs
The meta-analytic priors this article contributes evidence to — its place in the broader synthesis.
In the authors’ words
The article’s own abstract.
We conducted a meta‐analysis to determine whether the within‐person self‐efficacy/performance relationship is positive, negative, or null and to compare the strength of the self‐efficacy/performance and past performance/self‐efficacy within‐person relationships. The self‐efficacy/performance within‐person corrected correlation was .23 but was weak and nonsignificant (ρ = .06) when controlling for the linear trajectory, revealing that the main effect was spurious. The past performance/self‐efficacy within‐person corrected correlation was .40 and remained positive and significant (ρ = .30) when controlling for the linear trajectory. The moderator results revealed that at the within‐person level of analysis: (a) self‐efficacy had at best a moderate, positive effect on performance and a null effect under other moderating conditions (ρ ranged from –.02 to .33); (b) the main effect of past performance on self‐efficacy was stronger than the effect of self‐efficacy on performance, even in the moderating conditions that produced the strongest self‐efficacy/performance relationship; (c) the effect of past performance on self‐efficacy ranged from moderate to strong across moderating conditions and was statistically significant across performance tasks, contextual factors, and methodological moderators (ρ ranged from .18 to .52). Overall, this suggests that self‐efficacy is primarily a product of past performance rather than the driving force affecting future performance.
What the literature says about it
Attributed, open-access quotes from other works that cite this article, plus the citation-graph verdict tally. Corroborations and disputes, in one place — the honest-broker view.
supports “Previous performance strongly relates to self-efficacy [72] , granting a sense of successful life support execution.”
disputes “Indeed, a meta-analysis of the subject concludes that self-efficacy is a product of past performance rather than a static determinant of future performance (Sitzmann & Yeo, 2013).”
disputes “Furthermore, a meta-analysis found that task-specific self-efficacy is more likely to be predicted by past performance, opposing the view that future performance is predicted by task-specific self-efficacy (Sitzmann & Yeo, 2013).”
disputes “Moreover, although self-efficacy for learning is mainly an indicator of past performance and does not alone predict future performance (Sitzmann & Yeo, 2013), it is one’s belief in their capabilities to handle new challenges and is the main reason for procrastination with homework (Katz et al.,…”
Ancillary research
Neighbouring works in the citation graph around this article.
- 10.53964/jmnpr.2024006
- 10.1080/1360144x.2022.2082435
- 10.1007/s11409-025-09421-5
- 10.1007/s10734-023-01162-1
Assembled from Principia’s registry — bibliographic record, extracted effect sizes, the models they inform, and open-access citing literature.