Are positive illusions about academic competence always adaptive, under all circumstances: New results and future directions

The papers in this special issue provide a comprehensive examination of the prevalence and implications of positive biases in perceived academic competence at different ages in different countries. Main results showed that marked positive biases were rare, were associated with performance goals, were more adaptive than negative biases, but were not necessarily less adaptive than realistic self-views. I discuss the papers within an analysis of theoretical shifts from early emphases on the benefits of veridical self-appraisal, through emphases on the benefits of positive illusions, to recent inquiry into the possibility that positive biases have both benefits and costs. I suggest how the functions and consequences of positive versus accurate self-appraisals might differ among high and low achievers, and in different learning contexts.

► I discuss the papers using a three-stage analysis of research on self-appraisal.
► Strong positive bias was rare; bias varied by measurement method and context.
► Overall, moderate positive bias had more costs than benefits.
► Accurate self-appraisal may be beneficial in contexts that emphasize mastery goals.
► Future research might focus on negative biases, which were quite prevalent.