Advertisement

Motivation and Emotion

, Volume 36, Issue 2, pp 130–142 | Cite as

When avoiding failure improves performance: Stereotype threat and the impact of performance goals

  • Aïna ChalabaevEmail author
  • Brenda Major
  • Philippe Sarrazin
  • François Cury
Original Paper

Abstract

We examined the impact of inducing performance-avoidance and approach goals (versus no goal) on women’s math performance in stereotype threatening versus nonthreatening situations. Two experiments showed that inducing either stereotype threat (versus no-threat) or a performance-avoidance goal (versus no goal) alone led to decreased math performance. However, inducing both stereotype threat and a performance-avoidance goal increased women’s performance and challenge appraisals. These findings are consistent with the theory of regulatory fit. Performance and challenge appraisals increased when there was a fit between the motivation associated with stereotype threat (avoid failure) and the induced goal (avoid performing worse than others). Implications for stereotype threat, achievement goals and regulatory focus theories are discussed.

Keywords

Stereotype threat Achievement goals Regulatory fit Avoidance Approach 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by a Marie Curie fellowship from the European Commission. We wish to express our gratitude to Heidi Nyberg, Kathryn Chaimov, and Stacy Springmeyer for their help in collecting data.

References

  1. Alter, A. L., Aronson, J., Darley, J. M., Rodriguez, C., & Ruble, D. N. (2010). Rising to the threat: Reducing stereotype threat by reframing the threat as a challenge. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 166–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aronson, J., Fried, C. B., & Good, C. (2002). Reducing the effects of stereotype threat on African American college students by shaping theories of intelligence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 113–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barron, K. E., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2002). Achievement goals and optimal motivation: Testing multiple goal models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 706–722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blascovich, J., Seery, M. D., Mugridge, C. A., Norris, R. K., & Weisbuch, M. (2004). Predicting athletic performance from cardiovascular indexes of challenge and threat. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 683–688.Google Scholar
  5. Bouffard, T., Boisvert, J., Vezeau, C., & Larouche, C. (1995). The impact of goal orientation on self-regulation and performance among college students. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 65, 317–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brodish, A. B., & Devine, P. G. (2009). The role of performance-avoidance goals and worry in mediating the relationship between stereotype threat and performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 180–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brown, R. P., & Josephs, R. A. (1999). A burden of proof: Stereotype relevance and gender differences in math performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 246–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Camacho, C. J., Higgins, E. T., & Luger, L. (2003). Moral value transfer from regulatory fit: What feels right is right and what feels wrong is wrong. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 498–510.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chalabaev, A., Major, B., Cury, F., & Sarrazin, P. (2009). Physiological markers of challenge and threat mediate the effects of performance-based goals on performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 991–994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chalabaev, A., Sarrazin, P., Stone, J., & Cury, F. (2008). Do achievement goals mediate stereotype threat? An investigation on females’ soccer performance. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 30, 143–158.Google Scholar
  11. Crowe, E., & Higgins, E. T. (1997). Regulatory focus and strategic inclinations: Promotion and prevention in decision-making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 69, 117–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cury, F., Elliot, A., 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.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cury, F., Elliot, A., Sarrazin, P., Da Fonseca, D., & Rufo, M. (2002). The trichotomous achievement goal model and intrinsic motivation: A sequential mediational analysis. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 473–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Darnon, C., Dompnier, B., Delmas, F., Pulfrey, C., & Butera, F. (2009). Achievement goal promotion at university: Social desirability and social utility of mastery and performance goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 119–134.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Darnon, C., Harackiewicz, J. M., Butera, F., Mugny, G., & Quiamzade, A. (2007). Performance-approach and performance-avoidance goals: When uncertainty makes a difference. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 813–827.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Elliot, A. J. (2005). A conceptual history of the achievement goal construct. In A. Elliot & C. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 52–72). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  17. Elliot, A. J., & Church, M. A. (1997). A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 218–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Elliot, A. J., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (1996). Approach and avoidance achievement goals and intrinsic motivation: A mediational analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 461–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Elliot, A. J., & McGregor, H. A. (1999). Test anxiety and the hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 628–644.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Elliot, A. J., McGregor, H. A., & Gable, S. (1999). Achievement goals, study strategies, and exam performance: A mediational analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 549–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Elliot, A. J., Shell, M. M., Bouas, H. K., & Maier, M. A. (2005). Achievement goals, performance contingencies, and performance attainment: An experimental test. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 630–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1985). If it changes it must be a process: Study of emotion and coping during three stages of a college examination. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 150–170.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Forbes, C. E., & Schmader, T. (2010). Retraining attitudes and stereotypes to affect motivation and cognitive capacity under stereotype threat. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99, 740–754.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Freitas, A. L., & Higgins, E. T. (2002). Enjoying goal-directed action: The role of regulatory fit. Psychological Science, 13, 1–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Friedman, R. S., & Förster, J. (2001). The effects of promotion and prevention cues on creativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 1001–1013.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Goff, P. A., Steele, C. M., & Davies, P. G. (2008). The space between us. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 91–107.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Grant, H., & Dweck, C. S. (2003). Clarifying achievement goals and their impact. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 541–553.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Grimm, L. R., Markman, A. B., Maddox, W. T., & Baldwin, G. C. (2009). Stereotype threat reinterpreted as a regulatory mismatch. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 288–304.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 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, 638–645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52, 1280–1300.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Higgins, E. T. (1998). Promotion and prevention: Regulatory focus as a motivational principle. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 1–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Higgins, E. T. (2000). Making a good decision: Value from fit. American Psychologist, 55, 1217–1230.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Higgins, E. T. (2005). Value from regulatory fit. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 209–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Higgins, E. T., Roney, C. J. R., Crowe, E., & Hymes, C. (1994). Ideal versus ought predilections for approach and avoidance distinct self-regulatory systems. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 276–286.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Inzlicht, M., & Ben Zeev, T. (2000). A threatening intellectual environment: Why females are susceptible to experiencing problem-solving deficits in the presence of males. Psychological Science, 11, 365–371.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Johns, M., Schmader, T., & Martens, A. (2005). Knowing is half the battle. Teaching stereotype threat as a means of improving women’s math performance. Psychological Science, 16, 175–179.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Keller, J., & Bless, H. (2006). Regulatory fit and cognitive performance: The interactive effect of chronic and situational self-regulatory mechanisms on cognitive test performance. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36, 393–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lawrence, J. S., Marks, B. T., & Jackson, J. S. (2010). Domain identification predicts black students’ underperformance on moderately-difficult tests. Motivation and Emotion, 34, 105–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Coping and adaptation. In W. D. Gentry (Ed.), The handbook of behavioral medicine (pp. 282–325). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  40. Linnenbrink, E., Ryan, A., & Pintrich, P. R. (1999). The role of goals and affect in working memory functioning. Learning and Individual Differences, 11, 213–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lockwood, P., Jordan, C. H., & Kunda, Z. (2002). Motivation by positive or negative role models: Regulatory focus determines who will best inspire us. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 854–864.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Martens, A., Johns, M., Greenberg, J., & Schimel, J. (2006). Combating stereotype threat: The effect of self-affirmation on women’s intellectual performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 236–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Marx, D. M., Ko, S. J., & Friedman, R. A. (2009). The “Obama Effect”: How a salient role model reduces race-based performance differences. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 953–956.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Marx, D. M., Stapel, D. A., & Muller, D. (2005). We can do it: The interplay of construal orientation and social comparisons under threat. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 432–446.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. McIntyre, R. B., Paulson, R. M., & Lord, C. G. (2002). Alleviating women’s mathematics stereotype threat through salience of group achievements. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 83–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Muller, D., Judd, C., & Yzerbyt, V. (2005). When moderation is mediated and mediation is moderated. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 852–863.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Murayama, K., & Elliot, A. J. (2009). The joint influence of personal achievement goals and classroom goal structures on achievement-relevant outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 432–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Schmader, T. (2002). Gender identification moderates stereotype threat effects on women’s math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 194–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Schmader, T., Johns, M., & Forbes, C. (2008). An integrated process model of stereotype threat effects on performance. Psychological Review, 115, 336–356.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Seibt, B., & Förster, J. (2004). Stereotype threat and performance: How self-stereotypes influence processing by inducing regulatory foci. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 38–56.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Senko, C. M., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2005). Achievement goals, performance and task interest: Why perceived difficulty matters. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 1739–1753.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Shah, J., Higgins, E. T., & Friedman, R. S. (1998). Performance incentives and means: How regulatory focus influences goal attainment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 285–293.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Shih, M., Pittinsky, T. L., & Ambady, N. (1999). Stereotype susceptibility: Identity salience and shifts in quantitative performance. Psychological Science, 10, 80–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Smith, J. L., Sansone, C., & White, P. H. (2007). The stereotyped task engagement process: The role of interest and achievement motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 99–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Spencer, S. J., Steele, C. M., & Quinn, D. M. (1999). Stereotype threat and women’s math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 4–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Steele, C. M. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. American Psychologist, 52, 613–629.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Steele, C. M., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 797–811.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Urdan, T. C. (2004). Predictors of self-handicapping and achievement: Examining achievement goals, classroom structures, and culture. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 251–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Van Yperen, N. W. (2003). Task interest and actual performance: The moderating effects of assigned and adopted purpose goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 1006–1015.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aïna Chalabaev
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    Email author
  • Brenda Major
    • 1
  • Philippe Sarrazin
    • 2
  • François Cury
    • 4
  1. 1.University of CaliforniaSanta BarbaraUSA
  2. 2.University of GrenobleGrenobleFrance
  3. 3.Paris West University Nanterre La DéfenseNanterre cedexFrance
  4. 4.ISM CNRS Aix Marseille University and Toulon Var South UniversityGrenobleFrance

Personalised recommendations