Self-efficacy

Self-efficacy is a term used in psychology, roughly corresponding to a person's belief in their own competence.

It has been defined as the belief that one is capable of performing in a certain manner to attain a certain set of goals.[1] It is believed that our personalized ideas of self-efficacy affect our social interactions in almost every way. Understanding how to foster the development of self-efficacy is a vitally important goal for positive psychology because it can lead to living a more productive and happy life.

Contents

Theoretical approaches

Social cognitive theory

Psychologist Albert Bandura has defined self-efficacy as one's belief in one's ability to succeed in specific situations. One's sense of self-efficacy can play a major role in how one approaches goals, tasks, and challenges.[2] The concept of self-efficacy lies at the center of Bandura’s social cognitive theory, which emphasizes the role of observational learning and social experience in the development of personality. The main concept in social cognitive theory is that an individual’s actions and reaction in almost every situation is influenced by the actions which that individual has observed in others. People observe others acting within an environment whether natural or social. These observations are remembered by an individual and help shape social behaviors and cognitive processes. This theoretical approach proposes the idea that by changing how an individual learns their behaviors in the early stages of mental development could have a large impact on their mental processes in later stages of development. Since Self-efficacy is developed from external experiences and self-perception and is influential in determining the outcome of many events, it is an important aspect of social cognitive theory. Self-efficacy represents the personal perception of external social factors.[3][4][5][6] According to Bandura's theory, people with high self-efficacy—that is, those who believe they can perform well—are more likely to view difficult tasks as something to be mastered rather than something to be avoided.

Social learning theory

This psychological theory describes the acquisition of socially valuable skills that are developed exclusively or primarily in a social group. Social learning depends on group dynamics and how individuals either succeed or fail at dynamic interactions. Social learning promotes the development of individual emotional and practical skills as well as the perception of oneself and the acceptance of others with their individual competencies and limitations. It considers that people learn from one another, including such concepts as observational learning, imitation, and modeling. Self-efficacy levels reflect a persons’ understanding of what skills they can offer in a group setting.[7]

Self-concept theory

Seeks to explain how people interpret and perceive their own existence from cues they receive from external sources. Unlike Social learning and Social Cognitive Theory, self-concept theory focuses on how these perceptions are organized and how they are dynamically active throughout life. Many of the successes and failures that people experience in many areas of life are closely related to the ways that they have learned to view themselves and their relationships with others. It is also becoming clear that self-concept has at least three major qualities of interest to behavioral therapist: (1) it is learned, (2) it is organized, and (3) it is dynamic. Self-concept is learned and, from what we can tell, no one is born with a self-concept. Self-concept organization refers to the way we apply experiences to our selves; we often develop ideas based on multiple experiences. Self-concept dynamics refers to the idea that our perception changes at all times and is not fixed at a certain age.[8]

Attribution theory

Attribution theory focuses on how people attribute the cause of an event and how those beliefs interact with internal perception of themselves. Attribution Theory defines three major elements of cause: Locus, Stability, and Control ability.

1. Locus - determining the location of the cause—internal (dispositional) or external (situational) to the person • Influential to feelings of self-esteem and self-efficacy • If success or failure is attributed to internal factors, success will lead to pride and increased self-efficacy, whereas failure will diminish self-esteem and negatively affect self-efficacy

2. Stability - whether the cause is static or dynamic over time • Closely related to expectations and goals in the future • If students attribute their failure to stable factors such as the difficulty of the subject, they will expect to fail in that subject in the future

3. Controllability - whether the person is actively in control of the cause • Related to emotions such as anger, pity, gratitude, or shame • Conflict can arise if we feel we have not done our best; guilt • If we attribute our own abilities to success we will increase self-efficacy • Failing at a task we cannot control can lead to shame or anger[9]

How self-efficacy affects human function

Choices regarding behavior
People will be more inclined to take on a task if they believe they can succeed. People generally avoid tasks where their self-efficacy is low, but will engage in tasks where their self-efficacy is high. People with a self-efficacy significantly beyond their actual ability often overestimate their ability to complete tasks, which can lead to difficulties. On the other hand, people with a self-efficacy significantly lower than their ability are unlikely to grow and expand their skills. Research shows that the ‘optimum’ level of self-efficacy is a little above ability, which encourages people to tackle challenging tasks and gain valuable experience.[10]
Motivation
People with high self-efficacy in a task are more likely to make more of an effort, and persist longer, than those with low efficacy.[11] The stronger the self-efficacy or mastery expectations, the more active the efforts.[12] On the other hand, low self-efficacy provides an incentive to learn more about the subject. As a result, someone with a high self-efficacy may not prepare sufficiently for a task.
Thought patterns & responses
Low self-efficacy can lead people to believe tasks are harder than they actually are.[13] This often results in poor task planning, as well as increased stress. Observational evidence shows that people become erratic and unpredictable when engaging in a task in which they have low self-efficacy. On the other hand, people with high self-efficacy often take a wider overview of a task in order to take the best route of action. People with high self-efficacy are shown to be encouraged by obstacles to make a greater effort. Self-efficacy also affects how people respond to failure. A person with a high self-efficacy will attribute the failure to external factors, where a person with low self-efficacy will attribute failure to low ability. For example; a person with high self-efficacy in regards to mathematics may attribute a poor result to a harder than usual test, feeling sick, lack of effort or insufficient preparation. A person with a low self-efficacy will attribute the result to poor ability in mathematics. See Attribution Theory.
Health Behaviors
Health behaviors such as non-smoking, physical exercise, dieting, condom use, dental hygiene, seat belt use, or breast self-examination are, among others, dependent on one’s level of perceived self-efficacy (Conner & Norman, 2005). Self-efficacy beliefs are cognitions that determine whether health behavior change will be initiated, how much effort will be expended, and how long it will be sustained in the face of obstacles and failures. Self-efficacy influences the effort one puts forth to change risk behavior and the persistence to continue striving despite barriers and setbacks that may undermine motivation. Self-efficacy is directly related to health behavior, but it also affects health behaviors indirectly through its impact on goals. Self-efficacy influences the challenges that people take on as well as how high they set their goals (e.g., "I intend to reduce my smoking," or "I intend to quit smoking altogether"). A number of studies on the adoption of health practices have measured self-efficacy to assess its potential influences in initiating behavior change (Luszczynska, & Schwarzer, 2005). Often single-item measures or very brief scales (e.g., 4 items) have been used. It is actually not necessary to use larger scales if a specific behavior is to be predicted. More important is rigorous theory-based item wording. A rule of thumb is to use the following semantic structure: "I am certain that I can do xx, even if yy (barrier)" (Schwarzer, 2008). If the target behavior is less specific, one can either use more items that jointly cover the area of interest, or develop a few specific sub-scales. Whereas general self-efficacy measures refer to the ability to deal with a variety of stressful situations, measures of self-efficacy for health behaviors refer to beliefs about the ability to perform certain health behaviors. These behaviors may be defined broadly (i.e., healthy food consumption) or in a narrow way (i.e., consumption of high-fibre food).[14]
Academic Productivity

Research done by Sharon Andrew and Wilma Vialle also show the connection between personalized self-efficacy and productivity. They studied the academic achievements of students involved in science classes in Australia and found that students with high levels of self-efficacy show a boost in academic performance compared to those who reported low self-efficacy. The researchers found that confident individuals typically took control over their own learning experience and were more likely to participate in class and preferred hands-on learning experiences. Those individuals reporting low self-efficacy typically shied away from academic interactions and isolated themselves in their studies.[15]

The Destiny Idea
Further information: Locus of control

Bandura showed that people of differing self-efficacy perceive the world in fundamentally different ways.[16][17] People with a high self-efficacy are generally of the opinion that they are in control of their own lives; that their own actions and decisions shape their lives. On the other hand, people with low self-efficacy may see their lives as somewhat out of their hands.

Factors affecting self-efficacy

Bandura points to four sources affecting self-efficacy;

1. Experience - a.k.a. Enactive Attainment
"Mastery experience" is the most important factor deciding a person's self-efficacy. Simply put, success raises self-efficacy, failure lowers it.

"Children cannot be fooled by empty praise and condescending encouragement. They may have to accept artificial bolstering of their self-esteem in lieu of something better, but what I call their accruing ego identity gains real strength only from wholehearted and consistent recognition of real accomplishment, that is, achievement that has meaning in their culture." (Erik Erikson)

2. Modeling - a.k.a. "Vicarious Experience"
“If they can do it, I can do it as well.” This is a process of comparison between oneself and someone else. When people see someone succeeding at something, their self-efficacy will increase; and where they see people failing, their self-efficacy will decrease. This process is more effectual when a person sees him- or herself as similar to his or her own model. If a peer who is perceived as having similar ability succeeds, this will usually increase an observer's self-efficacy. Although not as influential as experience, modeling is a powerful influence when a person is particularly unsure of him- or herself.
3. Social Persuasions
Social persuasions relate to encouragements/discouragements. These can have a strong influence – most people remember times where something said to them significantly altered their confidence. While positive persuasions increase self-efficacy, negative persuasions decrease it. It is generally easier to decrease someone's self-efficacy than it is to increase it.
4. Physiological Factors
In unusual, stressful situations, people commonly exhibit signs of distress; shakes, aches and pains, fatigue, fear, nausea, etc. A person's perceptions of these responses can markedly alter a person's self-efficacy. If a person gets 'butterflies in the stomach' before public speaking, those with low self-efficacy may take this as a sign of their own inability, thus decreasing their self-efficacy further, while those with high self-efficacy are likely to interpret such physiological signs as normal and unrelated to his or her actual ability. Thus, it is the person's belief in the implications of their physiological response that alters their self-efficacy, rather than the sheer power of the response.

Theoretical models of behavior

A theoretical model of the effect of self-efficacy on transgressive behavior was developed and verified in research with school children.[18]

Prosociality and moral disengagement

Examples of prosocial behavior are helping others, sharing, being kind and cooperative. Feelings of self-efficacy (with respect to academic work, social interactions, and self-regulation) influence prosocial behavior. Self-regulatory self-efficacy and academic self-efficacy have a negative correlation with moral disengagement (making excuses for bad behavior, avoiding responsibility for consequences, blaming the victim).[19] Social Self-Efficacy has a positive correlation with prosocial behavior. On the other hand, moral disengagement and prosocial behavior have a negative relationship.[20] The three types of self-efficacy are positively correlated.

Over-efficaciousness in learning

Research on learning has indicated that in certain circumstances, having less self-efficacy for a subject may be helpful, as negative attitudes towards how quickly/well one will learn can actually prove of benefit. One study[21] used the foreign language classroom to examine students' beliefs about learning, perceptions of goal attainment, and motivation to continue language study. Survey and interview results indicated students’ attributions for success and failure and their expectations for certain subjects’ learning ability played a role in the relationship between goal attainment and volition. It appears that over-efficaciousness negatively affected student motivation. For other students who felt they were "bad at languages," their negative beliefs increased their motivation to study.

Health behavior change

Social-cognitive models of health behavior change include the construct of perceived self-efficacy either as predictors, mediators, or moderators. Self-efficacy is supposed to facilitate the forming of behavioral intentions, the development of action plans, and the initiation of action. Moreover, self-efficacy can assist relapse prevention.[22] As a moderator, self-efficacy can support the translation of intentions into action.[23] See Health Action Process Approach.

Possible applications

The applications of self-efficacy in modern society are enormous. We are searching for ways to make our children learn more effectively and be more productive, but we are also learning that adults are affected by perceived self-efficacy as well. By understanding how to help influence one to develop a positive mental assessment of their abilities, it is possible for us to design learning and work environments that provide the necessary feedback and support for individuals. This will allow more people to develop high levels of self-efficacy that will translate into increased productivity in their environments. Also, the stress of life can be at times intolerable, but those with high self-efficacy seem to be more able to live stress-free lives that are rewarding and happy.

Furthermore, self-efficacy has been included as one of the four dimensions that comprise core self-evaluations, one's fundamental appraisal of oneself, along with locus of control, neuroticism, and self-esteem. [24] The concept of core self-evaluations was first examined by Judge, Locke, and Durham (1997), [24] and since has proven to have the ability to predict several work outcomes, specifically, job satisfaction and job performance.[25][26][24][27][28]

Generalizations/specializations of the concept

General Self-Efficacy. Self-efficacy is commonly understood as domain-specific; that is, one can have more or less firm self-beliefs in different domains or particular situations of functioning. But some researchers have also conceptualized a general sense of self-efficacy. It refers to the global confidence in one’s coping ability across a wide range of demanding or novel situations. This broader construct is most frequently assessed with the General Self-Efficacy Scale.[29]

Social Self-efficacy. Social self-efficacy is “an individual’s confidence in her/his ability to engage in the social interactional tasks necessary to initiate and maintain interpersonal relationships.”[30] As a construct social self-efficacy has been variably defined, described, and measured in the scientific literature as researchers began to generalize Bandura’s theory for specific applications. For example, Smith and Betz measured social self-efficacy using an instrument they developed and tested called the Scale of Perceived Social Self-Efficacy (PSSE), which they described as a measure of self-efficacy expectations with respect to a range of social behaviors. They argued that extant attempts to measure the construct (e.g., Scherer et al., 1982; Fitchen et al., 1997) were either “psychometrically inadequate or somewhat narrow in definition and scope”, particularly when applied to various target populations, and thus they created the PSSE scale. Their instrument measured six domains: (1) making friends, (2) pursuing romantic relationships, (3) social assertiveness, (4) performance in public situations, (5) groups or parties, and (6) giving or receiving help. Additionally, Matsushima and Shiomi modified an instrument used in a different study in such a way that they felt it captured and measured the construct of social self-efficacy. Some of the item domains for this instrument included Self-confidence about Social Skill in Personal Relationship, Trust in Friends, and Trust by Friends.[31] Both sets of authors suggest that social self-efficacy is strongly correlated to the constructs of shyness and social anxiety, the measure of self-efficacy having a heavy impact upon that of the others. Moreover, when people lack social support they may be able to compensate for it by self-efficacy or vice versa.[32]

Academic Self-efficacy. Academic self-efficacy refers to a student’s belief that he or she can successfully engage in and complete course-specific academic tasks, such as accomplishing course outcomes, demonstrating competency skills used in the course, satisfactorily completing assignments, passing the course, and meeting the requirements to continue on in his or her major.[33] Various empirical inquiries have also been conducted attempting to measure academic self-efficacy.[34][35][36]

Teacher Self-Efficacy. Teacher self-efficacy pertains to one's perceived competence to deal with all demands and challenges that are implied in teachers' professional life.[37]

Clarifications and distinctions

Self-efficacy versus self-efficacy beliefs, assessments, or expectations. Self-efficacy as a theoretically derived construct can be considered to be any or a combination of the above definitions, but is generally the notion of one’s complete concept of his or her ability to perform a type of task related to a particular context and domain. Self-efficacy beliefs or expectations, however, are the item-specific tasks and measurements of one’s beliefs that such tasks can be performed. Self-efficacy beliefs or expectations combine together to form one’s overall concept of self-efficacy.

Self-efficacy versus efficacy. Unlike efficacy, which is the power to produce an effect—in essence, competence—self-efficacy is the belief (whether or not accurate) that one has the power to produce that effect by completing a given task or activity related to that competency. For example, a person with high self-efficacy may engage in a more health-related activity when an illness occurs, whereas a person with low self-efficacy would harbor feelings of hopelessness.[38]

Self-efficacy versus self-esteem. There is a distinction between self-esteem and self-efficacy. Self-efficacy relates to a person’s perception of their ability to reach a goal, whereas self-esteem relates to a person’s sense of self-worth. For example, a person who is a terrible rock climber would probably have poor self-efficacy with regard to rock climbing, but this need not affect that person's self-esteem since most people don’t invest much of their self-esteem in this activity.[39] On the other hand, one might have enormous skill at rock climbing, yet set such a high standard for oneself that self-esteem is low.[40] At the same time, a person who has high self-efficacy in general but is poor at rock climbing might think that he/she is good at rock climbing, or might still believe that he/she could quickly learn.

Self-efficacy versus confidence. Albert Bandura argues, “the construct of self-efficacy differs from the colloquial term "confidence." Confidence is a nonspecific term that refers to strength of belief but does not necessarily specify what the certainty is about. I can be supremely confident that I will fail at an endeavor. Perceived self-efficacy refers to belief in one's agentive capabilities, that one can produce given levels of attainment. A self-efficacy belief, therefore, includes both an affirmation of a capability level and the strength of that belief. Confidence is a catchword rather than a construct embedded in a theoretical system."[41] A helpful clarifying example is that a person’s confidence statement may be that they are good at math; that same person’s self-efficacy beliefs may be about the upcoming algebra exam and its particular questions.[33]

Self-efficacy versus self-concept. Self-efficacy is concerned with beliefs of personal capability, they are judgments of one's capabilities to perform given actions. Self-concept, however, is measured at a more general level of specificity and includes the evaluation of such competence and the feelings of self-worth associated with the behaviors in question.[42]

Controversy

While the general concept that self-efficacy is a positive aspect of the human cognition is mostly accepted , the advantages of high versus low levels in certain social situations is not universally agreed upon as salient . Some research shows that while self-efficacy can be accurately reported by an individual, it isn’t able to predict actual social interactions in many situations. Tasks that are specifically socially oriented, such as public speaking, were more difficult to individuals with low self-efficacy, but those individuals showed no correlating social responses in a casual social setting. The controversy exists regarding how important self-efficacy is to complex social situations, and currently more research is needed to determine if one can make any predictive claims based on perceived self-efficacy.[43]

See also

References

Citations
  1. ^ Ormrod, J. E. (2006),
  2. ^ Luszczynska, A., & Schwarzer, R. (2005). Social cognitive theory. In M. Conner & P. Norman (Eds.), Predicting health behaviour (2nd ed. rev., pp. 127-169). Buckingham, England: Open University Press.
  3. ^ name="Bandura, A. 1977">Bandura, A. , Self-efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behavioral Change, Psychological Review 1977, Vol. 84, No. 2, 191-215
  4. ^ Miller, N. E., & Dollard, J. (1941). Social Learning and Imitation. New Haven: Yale University Press
  5. ^ Bandura, A. (1988). Organizational Application of Social Cognitive Theory. Australian Journal of Management, 13(2), 275-302
  6. ^ Mischel, W. & Shoda, Y. (1995). A cognitive-affective system theory of personality: Reconceptualizing situations, dispositions, dynamics, and invariance in personality structure. Psychological Review, 102, 246-268
  7. ^ Ormrod, J.E. (1999). Human learning (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall
  8. ^ McAdam, E. K. (1986). Cognitive behavior therapy and its application with adolescents
  9. ^ Heider, Fritz. (1958). The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York: John Wiley & Sons
  10. ^ Csikszentmihalyi, M., Finding Flow, 1997
  11. ^ Goal Setting and Self-Efficacy During Self-Regulated Learning.
  12. ^ Bandura, Albert (1977), Social Learning Theory, Alexandria, VA: Prentice Hall, p. 247, ISBN 0138167443, http://books.google.com/?id=19I7AAAACAAJ 
  13. ^ Self-efficacy defined
  14. ^ Schwarzer, R., Richert, J., Kreausukon, P., Remme, L., Wiedemann, A. U., & Reuter, T. (2010). Translating intentions into nutrition behaviors via planning requires self-efficacy: Evidence from Thailand and Germany. International Journal of Psychology, 45, 260-268. doi: 10.1080/00207591003674479
  15. ^ Vialle Wilma. Graduate School of Education, University of Wollongong, Australia, http://www.aare.edu.au/98pap/and98319.htm
  16. ^ Karyn Ainsworth, Fall Quarter Seminar Paper: What is Teaching? / What is Learning?
  17. ^ Diffusion of the Internet within a Graduate School of Education, 2. Conceptual Framework 2.3.3.2 Bandura: Efficacy x Value
  18. ^ Albert Bandura, Gian Vittorio Caprara, Claudio Barbaranelli, and Concetta Pastorelli, "Sociocognitive Self-Regulatory Mechanisms Governing Transgressive Behavior" [PDF]
  19. ^ Albert Bandura, Gian Vittorio Caprara, Claudio Barbaranelli3, Maria Gerbino, and ConcettaPastorelli, "Role of Affective Self-Regulatory Efficacy in Diverse Spheres of Psychosocial Functioning"
  20. ^ Kwak, K., & Bandura, A. (1998). Role of perceived self-efficacy and moral disengagement in antisocial conduct. Manuscript, Osan College, Seoul, Korea.
  21. ^ Christine Galbreath Jernigan, What do Students Expect to Learn? The Role of Learner Expectancies, Beliefs, and Attributions for Success and Failure in Student Motivation.
  22. ^ Schwarzer, R. (2008). Modeling health behavior change: How to predict and modify the adoption and maintenance of health behaviors. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 57(1), 1-29.
  23. ^ Gutiérrez-Doña, B., Lippke, S., Renner, B., Kwon, S., & Schwarzer, R. (2009). How self-efficacy and planning predict dietary behaviors in Costa Rican and South Korean women: A moderated mediation analysis. Applied Psychology: Health & Well-Being, 1, 91–104. doi: 10.1111/j.1758-0854.2008.01001.x
  24. ^ a b c Judge, T. A., Locke, E. A., & Durham, C. C. (1997). The dispositional causes of job satisfaction: A core evaluations approach. Research in Organizational Behavior, 19, 151–188.
  25. ^ Bono, J. E., & Judge, T. A. (2003). Core self-evaluations: A review of the trait and its role in job satisfaction and job performance. European Journal of Personality, 17(Suppl1), S5-S18. doi:10.1002/per.48
  26. ^ Dormann, C., Fay, D., Zapf, D., & Frese, M. (2006). A state-trait analysis of job satisfaction: On the effect of core self-evaluations. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 55(1), 27-51.
  27. ^ Judge, T. A., Locke, E. A., Durham, C. C., & Kluger, A. N. (1998). Dispositional effects on job and life satisfaction: The role of core evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(1), 17-34.
  28. ^ Judge, T. A., & Bono, J. E. (2001). Relationship of core self-evaluations traits—self-esteem, generalized self-efficacy, locus of control, and emotional stability—with job satisfaction and job performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 80-92.
  29. ^ Schwarzer, R., & Jerusalem, M. (1995). Generalized Self-Efficacy scale. In J. Weinman, S. Wright, & M. Johnston, Measures in health psychology: A user’s portfolio. Causal and control beliefs (pp. 35-37). Windsor, UK: NFER-NELSON.
  30. ^ Smith, H. M. & Betz, N. E. (2000). Development and validation of a scale of perceived social self-efficacy. Journal of Career Assessment, 8(3), p. 286.
  31. ^ Matsushima, R., & Shiomi, K., (2003). Social self-efficacy and interpersonal stress in adolescence. Social Behavior and Personality.
  32. ^ Schwarzer, R., & Knoll, N. (2007). Functional roles of social support within the stress and coping process: A theoretical and empirical overview. International Journal of Psychology, 42, 243-252.
  33. ^ a b Jimenez Soffa, S. (2006). Inspiring academic confidence in the classroom: An investigation of features of the classroom experience that contribute to the academic self-efficacy of undergraduate women enrolled in gateway courses. Dissertation completed at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
  34. ^ Bong, M. (1997). Congruence of measurement specificity on relations between academic self-efficacy, effort, and achievement indexes. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (Chicago, IL, March 24–28, 1997).
  35. ^ Rushi, P. J. (2007). Questioning the utility of self-efficacy measurements for Indians. The entity from which ERIC acquires the content, including journal, organization, and conference names, or by means of online submission from the author. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 30(2), 193-206.
  36. ^ Academic self-concept: models, measurement, influences and enhancements.
  37. ^ Schwarzer, R., & Hallum, S. (2008). Perceived teacher self-efficacy as a predictor of job stress and burnout: Mediation analyses. Applied Psychology: An International Review. Special Issue: Health and Well-Being, 57, 152-171.
  38. ^ David Sue, Derald Wing Sue, Stanley Sue, 8th edition Understanding Abnormal Behavior, pg 214
  39. ^ Self-efficacy Lecture - Pajares
  40. ^ Prof. Albert Bandura quoted in The Wall Street Journal 29 April 2008: D1
  41. ^ Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control (see article). New York: Worth Publishers.
  42. ^ Parajes, F. Self-efficacy beliefs in academic contexts: An outline. Retrieved from http://www.des.emory.edu/mfp/efftalk.html on November 12, 2009.
  43. ^ Thomas L. Rodebaugh. Behaviour Research and Therapy Volume 44, Issue 12, December 2006, Pages 1831-1838
General

External articles and further reading