Are mastery-avoidance achievement goals always detrimental? An adult development perspective
- 721 Downloads
Achievement goal research consistently reveals that mastery-avoidance goals (i.e., striving to avoid losses) are maladaptive, especially in comparison to mastery-approach goals (i.e., striving for gains). Nearly all of it has been done with children or young adults, however. Lifespan theories of motivation posit that people in late adulthood are more likely than young adults to strive toward maintenance and loss-prevention rather than gains, and also that they sometimes profit from pursuing those goals. Integrating the two approaches, this experiment compared young and older adults’ experience and performance on a laboratory task when pursuing either mastery-approach or mastery-avoidance goals. Results show that young adults perceived the mastery-approach goal to be more attainable and therefore felt less pressure, enjoyed the task more, and performed better with it, whereas older adults showed this pattern with the mastery-avoidance goal. This matching effect replicates recent research on adult development and has broader implications for achievement goal theory and avoidance motivation in general.
KeywordsAchievement goals Mastery-avoidance Gains Losses Adult age-differences
We thank Monika Bieri and Juerg Graf for assistance in putting together the experimental materials. Financial support for this research was provided by a grant to Corwin Senko, while a Post-Doctoral researcher at the University of Zürich, from the Suzanne and Hans Biäsch Foundation for Applied Psychology.
- Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Baltes, P. B., Lindenberger, U., & Staudinger, U. M. (2006). Life-span theory in developmental psychology. In R. M. Lerner (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology. Vol. 1: Theoretical models of human development (6th ed.). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (2000). Autonomy and self-regulation. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 284–291.Google Scholar
- Hamamura, T., & Heine, S. J. (2008). Approach and avoidance motivation across cultures. In A. J. Elliot (Ed.), Handbook of approach and avoidance motivation (pp. 557–570). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
- Harackiewicz, J. M., Canning, E. A., Tibbetts, Y., Giffen, C. J., Blair, S. S., Rouse, D. I., & Hyde, J. S. (2014). Closing the social class achievement gap for first-generation students in undergraduate biology. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106, 375–389.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hayes, A. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling [White paper]. Retrieved from http://www.afhayes.com/public/process2012.pdf
- Hulleman, C. S., & Senko, C. (2010). Up around the bend: Forecasts for achievement goal theory and research in 2020. In T. C. Urdan & S. A. Karabenick (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (Vol. 16). UK: Emerald Group Publishing.Google Scholar
- Jarvis, B. (2004). MediaLab (Version 2004). New York: Empirisoft Corp.Google Scholar
- Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Midgley, C., Maehr, M. L., Hruda, L. Z., Anderman, E., Anderman, L., Freeman, K. E., et al. (2000). Manual for the Patterns of Adaptive Learning Scales (PALS). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan.Google Scholar
- Vansteenkiste, M., Lens, M., Elliot, A. J., Soenens, B., & Mouratidis, A. (2014). Moving the achievement goal approach one step forward: Towards a systematic examination of the autonomous and controlled reasons underlying achievement goals. Educational Psychologist, 49, 153–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar