Abstract
This research investigated whether highlighting the difference between norm-based approach and avoidance motivation impacts performance goal reporting accuracy. Participants were randomly assigned to receive no instructions, or reading materials indicating that norm-based approach and avoidance motivation are the same (Same condition) or different (Different condition). In Study 1 (N = 978), experimental condition was tested as a moderator of the relation between antecedent variables and performance goal reports. In Study 2 (N = 957), experimental condition was tested as a moderator of the predictive utility of performance goal reports. Both studies showed that while relations with performance-approach goals remained unaffected, experimental condition moderated the relation between performance-avoidance goal reports and their antecedent variables (Study 1), and their process and outcome variables (Study 2). The strongest associations (the most accurate goal reports) came from the different condition. Highlighting the difference between approach and avoidance enhanced the predictive validity of performance-avoidance goal reports. Implications for understanding and measuring achievement goals are discussed.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Some conceptualizations of performance goals also include a demonstration or appearance component, whereby performance-approach goals include trying to demonstrate that one is competent and performance-avoidance goals include trying to demonstrate that one is not incompetent (Elliot 2005; Urdan and Mestas 2006).
We also tested whether there were conditions effects of the experimental materials on all measured motivation outcomes (i.e. pride, anxiety, etc.). No significant differences between conditions emerged for any of the processes and outcomes associated with performance-approach goals: for pride F(2, 954) = 1.07, p = .34, engagement F(2, 954) = 1.86, p = .16, nor help seeking F(2, 954) = 0.20, p = .82. Nor did any significant differences between conditions emerge for any of the processes and outcomes associated with performance-avoidance goals: anxiety F(2, 954) = 0.26, p = .77, help avoidance F(2, 954) = 0.25, p = .78, nor interest F(2, 954) = 0.40, p = .67.
References
Ames, C., & Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Students’ learning strategies and motivation processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(3), 260–267.
Cellar, D. F., Stuhlmacher, A. F., Young, S. K., Fisher, D. M., Adair, C. K., Haynes, S., et al. (2011). Trait goal orientation, self-regulation, and performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Business and Psychology, 26, 467–483.
Chen, G., Gully, S. M., & Eden, D. (2001). Validation of a new general self-efficacy scale. Organizational Research Methods, 4(1), 62–83.
Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity for psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 281–302.
Cury, F., Elliot, A. J., Da Fonseca, D., & Moller, A. (2006). The social-cognitive model of achievement motivation and the 2 × 2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 666–679.
Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41, 1040–1048.
Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95(2), 256.
Elliot, A. J. (2005). A conceptual history of the achievement goal construct. Handbook of Competence and Motivation, 16, 52–72.
Elliot, A. J. (2006). The hierarchical model of approach-avoidance motivation. Motivation and Emotion, 30, 111–116.
Elliot, A. J., & Church, M. A. (1997). A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(1), 218–232.
Elliot, A. J., & McGregor, H. A. (2001). A 2 × 2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 501–519.
Elliot, A. J., & Murayama, K. (2008). On the measurement of achievement goals: Critique, illustration, and application. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(3), 613–628.
Elliot, A. J., & Thrash, T. M. (2001). Achievement goals and the hierarchical model of achievement motivation. Educational Psychology Review, 13(2), 139–156.
Elliot, A. J., & Thrash, T. M. (2010). Approach and avoidance temperament as basic dimensions of personality. Journal of Personality, 78(3), 865–906.
Fryer, J. W., & Elliot, A. J. (2007). Stability and change in achievement goals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(4), 700–714.
Hangen, E. J., Elliot, A. J., & Jamieson, J. P. (2018). Lay conceptions of norm-based approach and avoidance motivation: Implications for the performance-approach and performance-avoidance goal relation. Journal of Personality. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12429.
Harackiewicz, J. M., Barron, K. E., Pintrich, P. R., Elliot, A. J., & Thrash, T. M. (2002). Revision of achievement goal theory: Necessary and illuminating. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(3), 638–645.
Harackiewicz, J. M., Durik, A. M., Barron, K. E., Linnenbrink-Garcia, L., & Tauer, J. M. (2008). The role of achievement goals in the development of interest: Reciprocal relations between achievement goals, interest, and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(1), 105–122.
Huang, C. (2011). Achievement goals and achievement emotions: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 23, 359–388.
Huang, C. (2012). Discriminant and criterion-related validity of achievement goals in predicting academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 48–73.
Hulleman, C. S., Schrager, S. M., Bodmann, S. M., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2010). A meta-analytic review of achievement goal measures: different labels for the same constructs or different constructs with similar labels? Psychological Bulletin, 136(3), 422–449.
Jackson, D. N. (1974). Personality research form manual. New York: Research Psychologists Press.
Jamieson, J. P., Hangen, E. J., Lee, H. Y., & Yeager, D. S. (2017). Capitalizing on appraisal processes to improve affective responses to social stress. Emotion Review, 10, 30–39.
Karabenick, S. A., & Knapp, J. R. (1991). Relationship of academic help seeking to the use of learning strategies and other instrumental achievement behavior in college students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(2), 221–230.
Karabenick, S. A., Wooley, M. E., Friedel, J. M., Ammon, B. V., Blazevski, J., & Kelly, K. L. (2007). Cognitive processing of self-report items in educational research: Do they think what we mean? Educational Psychologist, 42, 139–151.
Korn, R. M., & Elliot, A. J. (2016). The 2 × 2 standpoints model of achievement goals. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1–12.
Law, W., Elliot, A. J., & Murayama, K. (2012). Perceived competence moderates the relation between performance-approach and performance-avoidance goals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(3), 806–819.
Liem, A. D., Lau, S., & Nie, Y. (2008). The role of self-efficacy, task value, and achievement goals in predicting learning strategies, task disengagement, peer relationship, and achievement outcome. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(4), 486–512.
Linnenbrink-Garcia, L., Middleton, M. J., Ciani, K. D., Easter, M. A., O’Keefe, P. A., & Zusho, A. (2012). The strength of the relation between performance-approach and performance-avoidance goal orientations: Theoretical, methodological, and instructional implications. Educational Psychologist, 47, 281–301.
Linnenbrink-Garcia, L., Tyson, D. F., & Patall, E. A. (2008). When are achievement goal orientations beneficial for academic achievement? A closer look at main effects and moderating factors. Revue internationale de psychologie sociale, 21(1), 19–70.
Litman, L., Robinson, J., & Abberbock, T. (2017). TurkPrime.com: A versatile crowdsourcing data acquisition platform for the behavioral sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 49(2), 433–442.
Lochbaum, M., & Gottardy, J. (2015). A meta-analytic review of the approach-avoidance achievement goals and performance relationships in the sport psychology literature. Journal of Sport and Health Science, 4, 164–173.
Lochbaum, M., Jean-Noel, J., Pinar, C., & Gilson, T. (2017). A meta-analytic review of Elliot’s (1999) Hierarchical Model of Avoidance and approach Motivation in the sport, physical activity, and physical education literature. Journal of Sport and Health Science, 6, 68–80.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). Work motivation and satisfaction: Light at the end of the tunnel. Psychological Science, 1(4), 240–246.
Maniaci, M. R., & Rogge, R. D. (2014). Caring about carelessness: Participant inattention and its effects on research. Journal of Research in Personality, 48(1), 61–83.
Middleton, M. J., & Midgley, C. (1997). Avoiding the demonstration of lack of ability: An underexplored aspect of goal theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 710–718.
Neff, K. D., Hsieh, Y. P., & Dejitterat, K. (2005). Self-compassion, achievement goals, and coping with academic failure. Self and Identity, 4(3), 263–287.
Nicholls, J. G. (1984). Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice, and performance. Psychological Review, 91, 328–346.
Nicholls, J. G. (1989). The competitive ethos and democratic education. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Pekrun, R., Elliot, A. J., & Maier, M. A. (2009). Achievement goals and achievement emotions: Testing a model of their joint relations with academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(1), 115.
Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Titz, W., & Perry, R. P. (2002). Academic emotions in students’ self-regulated learning and achievement: A program of quantitative and qualitative research. Educational Psychologist, 37, 91–106.
Rawsthorne, L. J., & Elliot, A. J. (1999). Achievement goals and intrinsic motivation: A meta-analytic review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(4), 326–344.
Rich, B. L., Lepine, J. A., & Crawford, E. R. (2010). Job engagement: Antecedents and effects on job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 617–635.
Richardson, M., Abraham, C., & Bond, R. (2012). Psychological correlates of university students’ academic performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 138, 353–387.
Ryan, A. M., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). “Should I ask for help?” The role of motivation and attitudes in adolescents’ help seeking in math class. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(2), 329–341.
Ryan, R. M. (1982). Control and information in the intrapersonal sphere: An extension of cognitive evaluation theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 450–461.
Senko, C., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2005). Regulation of achievement goals: The role of competence feedback. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(3), 320–336.
Tanaka, A., Murakami, Y., & Okuno, T. (2002). Achievement goals, attitudes toward help seeking, and help-seeking behavior in the classroom. Learning and Individual Differences, 13, 23–35.
Thrash, T. M., & Elliot, A. J. (2003). Inspiration as a psychological construct. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(4), 871–889.
Urdan, T. (2004). Predictors of academic self-handicapping and achievement: Examining achievement goals, classroom goal structures, and culture. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 251–264.
Urdan, T., & Mestas, M. (2006). The goals behind performance goals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(2), 354–365.
Van Yperen, N. W., Blaga, M., & Postmes, T. (2014). A meta-analysis of self-reported achievement goals and nonself-report performance across three achievement domains (work, sports, and education). PLoS ONE, 9, e93594.
Zusho, A., Pintrich, P. R., & Cortina, K. S. (2005). Motives, goals, and adaptive patterns of performance in Asian American and Anglo American students. Learning and Individual differences, 15(2), 141–158.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Allison Ryan for providing the adaptive help seeking and help avoidance measures used in study 2.
Funding
This work was supported by the National Science Foundation graduate research fellowship (NSF GRFP DGE 1419118) awarded to EJH.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical approval
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hangen, E.J., Elliot, A.J. & Jamieson, J.P. Highlighting the difference between approach and avoidance motivation enhances the predictive validity of performance-avoidance goal reports. Motiv Emot 43, 387–399 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-018-9744-9
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-018-9744-9