Highlighting the difference between approach and avoidance motivation enhances the predictive validity of performance-avoidance goal reports
- 502 Downloads
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.
KeywordsApproach motivation Avoidance motivation Performance-approach Performance-avoidance Achievement goals
We would like to thank Allison Ryan for providing the adaptive help seeking and help avoidance measures used in study 2.
This work was supported by the National Science Foundation graduate research fellowship (NSF GRFP DGE 1419118) awarded to EJH.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
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.
- Elliot, A. J. (2005). A conceptual history of the achievement goal construct. Handbook of Competence and Motivation, 16, 52–72.Google Scholar
- 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Jackson, D. N. (1974). Personality research form manual. New York: Research Psychologists Press.Google Scholar
- 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.Google Scholar
- 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 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.Google Scholar
- 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.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Nicholls, J. G. (1989). The competitive ethos and democratic education. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar