Journal of Applied Psychology 1995, Vol. 80, No. 2,226-238 Copyright 1995 by the American Psychological Association, Inc. 002I-9010/95/S3.00 Pretraining Context Effects: Training Assignment as Feedback Miguel A. Quinones Rice University This study examined the effects of framing training program assignments on training outcomes. A model was developed that suggests that the framing of training assignments can provide feedback regarding past performance and result in different attitudinal and motivational levels going into training. Participants were randomly assigned to 2 differ- ently framed training programs (remedial vs. advanced). Attributions regarding past performance were found to interact with training assignments to affect pretraining self- efficacy. Both perceptions of past performance and expected assignment were found to moderate the relationship between training assignment and fairness perceptions. Also, motivation to learn was a key variable linking pretraining characteristics and training outcomes. Implications for training effectiveness research and practice are discussed. Recent changes in the demographic characteristics of the U.S. workforce as well as escalating competition in the world market are increasing the need for effective training systems (Goldstein & Gilliam, 1990; Rosow & Zager, 1988). Despite these increased demands for highly educated employees, statistics suggest that the future workforce is likely to be lacking in the most basic reading, writing, and arithmetic skills (Goldstein & Gilliam, 1990; Offermann & Cowing, 1990; U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1983). In fact, organizations are already having to make up for the deficiencies created by a seemingly ineffective educational system by tailoring their training systems to include basic educational courses such as En- glish literacy (Rosow & Zager, 1988). This article is based on my doctoral dissertation, completed at Michigan State University. I would like to thank my commit- tee members J. Kevin Ford (committee chair, mentor, and friend), John Hollenbeck, and Mike Lindell for their wisdom and encouragement throughout the entire process. I would also like to thank Robert Dipboye for his comments on an earlier version of this article. Finally, this project could not have been made possible without the hard work of everyone at the Team Effectiveness Lab at Michigan State University. An earlier ver- sion of this article was presented at the Ninth Annual Confer- ence of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychol- ogy in Nashville, Tennessee, May 1994. Part of the research was supported by a grant from the Office of Naval Research (Grant N0014-90-J-1786). Although the ideas expressed herein are mine and are not necessarily en- dorsed by the agency, I acknowledge and greatly appreciate the support. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Miguel A. Quinones, Department of Psychology, Rice Uni- versity, P.O. Box 1892, Houston, Texas 77251. Electronic mail may be sent via Internet to mickey@rice.edu. Given the variability in skills that must be addressed with training, increased effectiveness can be obtained by targeting specific interventions to specific individuals (Ackerman, 1991). This approach is consistent with the concept of aptitude-treatment interactions (ATIs; Cron- bach & Snow, 1977). The basic premise behind ATIs is that no training approach is optimal for every trainee (Ackerman, 1991). Past research on ATIs has found that individuals with different aptitudes such as cognitive abil- ity and motivation show different gains as a result of the same training intervention (Kanfer & Ackerman, 1989; Snow, 1989). Although the idea of targeting training interventions to specific individuals is intuitively appealing, there is a potential downside. Training assignments are likely to become a form of feedback as individuals are assigned to training programs created for remedial as opposed to advancement purposes. Trainees are likely to approach training with different attitudes and motivational levels as a result of their training assignment and the feedback implicit in these assignments (Ilgen, Fisher, & Taylor, 1979). This feedback creates the context in which indi- viduals approach training (Martocchio, 1992). The purpose of this study is to expand knowledge of the effects of pretraining contextual factors on training effectiveness. The study examines the extent to which framing the purpose of attending a training program affects training outcomes. Specifically, this study exam- ines the effects of assigning individuals to training be- cause of poor performance (remedial training) or supe- rior performance (advanced training). The mechanisms by which the framing of training assignment can affect training outcomes are identified and used to develop a number of research hypotheses. Finally, I discuss im- plications for training research and practice. 226 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.