The Perception of Task Difficulty on Task Performance
Measured in Task Accuracy and Self-Efficacy
Ng, J. Y., Cheong, G. L., Choi, Y. W., Lee, W. W. K., Thelieandy, S. A., Wong, K. Y., Wee, A. K. J., & Gun, C. H
Introduction
2
1
Academic performance is not solely influenced by a student's cognitive
abilities but also by their confidence in completing the task successfully.
(Bandura, 1977; Hayat et al., 2020). Perception of task difficulty may have
an influence on student’s self-efficacy and task accuracy in academic
settings which also influences one’s motivation (Li et al., 2007).
Previous studies have demonstrated that higher self-efficacy is
associated with lower perceived task difficulty (Helm et al., 2026). Positive
verbal affirmations increase self-efficacy (Aljamal et al., 2019). However,
findings about objective performance have been inconsistent.
Most past studies were on mental arithmetic instead of mental rotation
tasks (Chen, 2003; Street et al., 2017). Evidence remains inconsistent
regarding how perceived task difficulty affects self-efficacy and task
accuracy even when the effort needed to complete remain constant.
3
2
Manipulation Check
Figure 1
Frequency distribution of
manipulation check settings
across the Easy and Difficult
conditions.
1 = Not difficult at all
6 = Very difficult
5
3
2
7
4
5
2
5
11
1
6
2
0
2
4
6
8
Objective
Hypotheses
H1: Participants who were told that the task is easy will display higher
perceived competence compared to participants who were told the
task is difficult.
H2: Participants who were told that the task is easy will demonstrate
higher task performance compared to participants told the task is
difficult.
10
Figure 2
Mean self-efficacy (PSI-PSSE)
scores for the Easy and Difficult
conditions.
Easy
Difficult
Discussion
Both hypotheses were not supported. The absence of a significant
difference in self-efficacy may suggest that brief verbal persuasion was
insufficient to alter participants’ efficacy beliefs which is consistent with
Bandura’s Self-Efficacy Theory (Bandura, 1977). Furthermore, the findings
differ from Aljamal et al. (2019) study, who reported higher self-efficacy
with positive pre-task notes. The findings from this study suggests that
mental rotation tasks may depend more on spatial ability than
expectations. Moreover, verbal manipulation may not be enough
although a brief visual manipulation was available.
There is no statistically significant difference (p = .073) between the
easy and difficult conditions in task accuracy although Participants in
the Difficult condition (M = 85.0%, SD = 17.32) obtained a higher mean
task accuracy score than those in the Easy condition (M = 72.3%, SD =
25.67). This finding suggests that even if a descriptive difference was
observed between the conditions, there is not enough evidence to
conclude that perceived task difficulty significantly influenced objective
task performance in the present study.
25
20
15
29
28.9
Easy
Difficult
10
5
Methodology
0
100
Design: A cross-sectional between-subject experimental design (Easy
vs DIfficult Condition)
80
Procedure: Participants were assigned to an Easy or Difficult
condition, completed a manipulation check and self-efficacy
questionnaire, performed the mental rotation task, and were
subsequently debriefed about the deception manipulation.
Analysis: 2 Independent-samples t-tests, reliability analysis and
descriptives were conducted using Jamovi (α = .05).
Task Accuracy
Participants: 40 tertiary students aged 18-25 years old were recruited
Measures: Manipulation Check (6-point Likert scale), Problem
Solving Inventory - Problem Solving Self-Efficacy (PSI-PSSE) scale, 20
Medium-Difficulty 2D Mental Rotation Task
60
40
85
72.3
Easy
Figure 3
Mean task accuracy scores for
the Easy and Difficult
conditions.
Easy
Difficult
20
0
2 Independent samples t-test were used to compare the mean
perceived self-efficacy scores and mean task accuracy for
participants in the easy and difficult task conditions.
Participants assigned to Easy conditions reported similar mean selfefficacy (M = 29.0, SD = 4.41), compared to Difficult condition (M =
28.9, SD = 4.45), the difference was not statistically significant,
t(38) = 0.07, p = .943, d = 0.02. (Figure 2)
Participants in the Difficult conditions reported higher mean task
accuracy (M = 85.0%, SD = 17.32) compared to Easy condition (M =
72.3%, SD = 25.67), however no statistical difference was
reached, t(38) = -1.84, p = .073, d = -0.58. (Figure 3)
12
30
Total PSI-PSSE
To address the gap in how perceived task difficulty influences self-efficacy
and task accuracy using mental rotation tasks.
Easy
Difficult
Results
Conclusion
Verbal manipulation of perceived task difficulty did not affect
participants self-efficacy and task accuracy in a mental rotation task.
These results suggest that verbal manipulation and expectations may
be insufficient to alter one’s performance when participants directly
experience the task and rely on their own cognitive abilities.
Difficult
References
Aljamal, Y., Prabhakar, N., Saleem, H., & Farley, D. R. (2019). Can the Perceived Difficulty of a Task Enhance Trainee Performance? Journal of Surgical Education, 76(6), e193–e198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2019.08.005
Bandura, A (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
Chen, P. P. (2003). Exploring the accuracy and predictability of the self-efficacy beliefs of seventh-grade mathematics students. Learning and Individual Differences, 14(1), 77–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2003.08.003
Hayat, A. A., Shateri, K., Amini, M., & Shokrpour, N. (2020). Relationships between academic self-efficacy, learning-related emotions, and metacognitive learning strategies with academic performance in medical students: a structural equation model. BMC Medical Education, 20(1), 76. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-01995-9
Helm, C., Mihalca, L., & Große, C. S. (2026). Impact of age and prior knowledge on performance and perceived task difficulty: The role of perceived competence and self-efficacy. International Journal of Educational Research, 137(1), 102951. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2026.102951
Li, W., Lee, A., & Solmon, M. (2007). The role of perceptions of task difficulty in relation to self-perceptions of ability, intrinsic value, attainment value, and performance. European Physical Education Review, 13(3), 301–318. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356336x07081797
Street, K. E. S., Malmberg, L.-E., & Stylianides, G. J. (2017). Level, strength, and facet-specific self-efficacy in mathematics test performance. ZDM, 49(3), 379–395. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-017-0833-0
The jamovi project. (2024). jamovi (Version 2.6) [Computer software]. https://www.jamovi.org