The objective of the current study was to investigate the relationship between training performance and self-efficacy using a longitudinal design (approximately 11 weeks) in the context of massed and distributed practice. Limited attention in the training performance and efficacy literature has been paid to the spacing of practice (massed and distributed). However, it is conceivable that both the spacing of practice as well as the time frames over which it operates could influence the performance and efficacy relationship. Based on the practice schedule (massed versus distributed) and longitudinal study design, it was posited that the nature of the performance and efficacy relationship is likely to be quite different during two phases of learning (acquisition and reacquisition). Data were obtained from 198 undergraduate students over an 11-week training protocol using a 2 (distributed versus massed acquisition) × 2 (distributed versus massed reacquisition) × 16 (session) mixed design. Contrary to the first set of hypotheses, results indicated that the performance and efficacy relationship did not vary as a function of practice protocols (massed versus distributed) during acquisition and reacquisition. Also, no support was found for the hypothesis that the performance and efficacy relationship will vary as a function of whether the practice condition during acquisition is the same or different from the practice condition during reacquisition such that the relationships will be stronger when the practice condition is the same as opposed to when it is different. However, support was found for the hypothesis that when past performance is controlled the unique contribution of self-efficacy to subsequent task performance will be attenuated. Implications of these findings for research on the performance and efficacy relationship and training practice are discussed.