The present study was designed to test two theories which conceptualize performance deficits and negative mood associated with depression. Reformulated learned helplessness theory suggests that the expectation of uncontrollable outcomes is sufficient to result in performance deficits and depressed mood. On the other hand, self-efficacy theory proposes that while the expectation of uncontrollability is important, the individual's perception of self-efficacy determines when performance deficits and depressed mood will occur. In the present study, both self-response (efficacy) and response-outcome expectancies were manipulated and performance, mood, and self-esteem were measured. Ninety undergraduates were randomly assigned to one of four experimental groups or a no-treatment comparison group. Group 1: Low self-response/high response-outcome expectancy Group 2: Low self-response/low response-outcome expectancy Group 3: High self-response/high response-outcome expectancy Group 4: High self-response/low response-outcome expectancy Group 5: No-Treatment Comparison Hard or easy math problems manipulated self-response expectancy. Graphs and cards indicating high or low percentages of peer solution of math problems manipulated response-outcome expectancy. While the data suggested that the manipulations were effective, performance was enhanced, not diminished. Further, no subjects scored in the depressed range. Finally, there were no significant differences in self-esteem between groups. Failure to find the expected differences are discussed in terms of the facilitation effects found. In conclusion, support was found for Roth's (1980) reconceptualization of learned helplessness theory which relates facilitation effects to the amount of exposure to helplessness training. Implications of the results are discussed in terms of practical application and future research. / Master of Science