The thesis contains five chapters (including three empirical chapters), which attempt to further our knowledge of the reciprocal relationship between self-efficacy and performance. The thesis attempts to answer questions related to the possible negative effects that self-efficacy can have on subsequent performance by considering the limitations of previous research (e.g., Bandura & Lock, 2003; Vancouver, Thompson, Tischner, & Putka, 2002; Vancouver, Thompson, & Williams, 2001). Chapter 1 provides a general conceptual overview of the self-confidence and selfefficacy literature, the majority of which has typically supported the positive relationship between efficacy beliefs and performance in a range of settings. The chapter then provides a detailed review of how and when self-efficacy may be negatively related to subsequent performance. Finally, the limitations and future directions that are offered form the basis of the ensuing three empirical chapters. Chapter 2 addresses the limitation that previous tests of the reciprocal relationship between self-efficacy and performance tend to be of short duration (i.e., approx. 8–10 trials). This short duration may limit the mastery experiences that are an important source of selfefficacy beliefs. This chapter explores the reciprocal relationship between self-efficacy and performance in a longitudinal golf putting study where participants complete 40 trials of 20 putts each (800 putts in total). The results supported the positive effects of self-efficacy on performance in only one of the four putting sessions, where self-efficacy had a significant albeit weak positive reciprocal relationship with putting performance. Chapter 3 explores the criticism that mundane tasks (or tasks that remain static throughout testing) generally do not vary or intrude on attentional focus (Bandura & Locke, 2003). Two studies were conducted to examine the reciprocal relationship between selfefficacy and performance using a complex task (car racing simulation). Participants were required to learn to race on a difficult computer racing track across trials where performance was assessed in relation to improvement on the preceding lap time (Study 1) and in relation to a baseline time (Study 2). The results supported the positive reciprocal effects of self-efficacy on performance over time (Bandura, 1997). Chapter 4 reports a golf putting study which examined the effects of feedback on the reciprocal relationship between self-efficacy and performance. Previous tests of the reciprocal relationship between self-efficacy and performance tend to ignore previous performances in the measurement of self-efficacy. Consequently, important information regarding previous performances may be ignored. The current test provides a performance diary where participants have access to all previous performance results, upon which they can base their subsequent self-efficacy beliefs. Again, support was shown for the positive reciprocal effects of self-efficacy on performance (Bandura, 1997). Chapter 5 provides a summary and integrated discussion of these findings. Furthermore, methodological and conceptual limitations, implications, and future research directions for the study of the reciprocal relationship between self-efficacy and performance are discussed.