The concept of self-handicapping can be legitimately anchored in a vari-
ety of intellectual contexts, some old and some newer. As this volume
reminds us, Alfred Adler was perhaps the first to articulate the
signifi- cance of various self-defeating claims and gestures for
protecting the self- concept. Thus the apparent paradox of "defeat" in
the interests of "pro- tection. " More recently (but still more than 30
years ago), Heider's "naive psychology" added attributional rhetoric to
the description of self-defeat- ing strategies. While predominantly
cognitive in its thrust, the attribu- tional approach incorporated
several motivational influences-especially those involving egocentric
concerns. Heider hardly violated our common sense when he suggested that
people are inclined to attribute their performances in a self-serving
manner: the good things I caused; the bad things were forced upon me.
The notion of self-handicapping strategies, proposed by Berglas and
myself a little more than a decade ago, capitalized on these homely
truths while adding a particular proactive twist. We not only make ex-
cuses for our blunders; we plan our engagements and our situational
choices so that self-protective excuses are unnecessary. In doing so, we
use our attributional understanding to arrange things so that flawed and
failing performances will not be interpreted in ways that threaten our
self-esteem.