Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The combined effects of goal type and cognitive ability on performance

  • Original paper
  • Published:
Motivation and Emotion Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We tested the combined effects of goal type and cognitive ability on task performance using a moderately complex task. Business students (N = 105) worked on a 24 min class scheduling task. The results showed that participants with higher cognitive ability benefited more from the setting of a performance goal as opposed to a learning goal. The reverse pattern was true for participants with lower cognitive ability. Performance goals were more effective for participants with higher cognitive ability vis-à-vis those with lower cognitive ability. The correlation between goal commitment and performance was positive and significant as was the correlation between cognitive ability and performance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ackerman, P. L., Kanfer, R., & Goff, M. (1995). Cognitive and non-cognitive determinants and consequences of complex skill acquisition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 4, 270–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, T. C., & Latham, G. P. (2002). The effects of behavioural outcome goals, learning goals, and urging people to do their best on an individual’s teamwork behaviour in a group problem-solving task. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Sciences, 34, 276–285.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cervone, D., Jiwani, N., & Wood, R. (1991). Goal setting and the differential influence of self-regulatory processes on complex decision-making performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 257–266.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, G., Gully, S. M., Whiteman, J. A., & Kilcullen, R. N. (2000). Examination of relationships among trait-like individual differences, state-like individual differences, and learning performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 835–847.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, G., & Mathieu, J. E. (2008). Goal orientation dispositions and performance trajectories: The roles of supplementary and complementary situational inducements. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 106, 21–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeShon, R. P., Brown, K. G., & Greenis, J. L. (1996). Does self-regulation require cognitive resources? An evaluation of resource allocation models of goal setting. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 595–608.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • DeShon, R. P., & Gillespie, J. Z. (2005). A motivated action theory account of goal orientation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 1096–1127.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41, 1040–1048.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galbraith, J., & Cummings, L. L. (1967). An empirical investigation of the motivational determinants of task performance: Interactive effects between instrumentality-valence and motivation-ability. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 2, 237–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, J. E. (1986). Cognitive ability, cognitive aptitudes, job knowledge, and job performance. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 29, 340–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, J. E. (1989). The Wonderlic Personnel Test as a predictor of training success and job performance. Northfield, IL: E. F. Wonderlic Personnel Test, Inc.

  • Hunter, J. E., & Hunter, R. F. (1984). Validity and utility of alternative predictors of performance. Psychological Bulletin, 96, 72–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johns, G. (2001). In praise of context. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22, 31–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanfer, R., & Ackerman, P. L. (1989). Motivation and cognitive abilities: An integrative/aptitude-treatment interaction approach to skill acquisition. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 657–690.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, H. J., Wesson, M. J., Hollenbeck, J. R., Wright, P. M., & DeShon, R. P. (2001). The assessment of goal commitment: A measurement model meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 85, 32–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Bell, B. S. (2006). Disentangling achievement orientation and goal setting: Effects on self-regulatory processes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 900–916.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Latham, G. P. (2007). Work motivation: History, theories, research, and practice. Thousand Oakes, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latham, G. P., & Lee, T. W. (1986). Goal setting. In E. A. Locke (Ed.), Generalizing from laboratory to field settings. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latham, G. P., Seijts, G. H., & Crim, D. (2008). The effects of learning goal difficulty level and cognitive ability on strategy development and performance. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Sciences, 40, 220–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latham, G. P., & Yukl, G. (1975). Assigned versus participative goal setting with educated and uneducated wood workers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61, 166–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawler, E. E. (1966). Ability as a moderator of the relationship between job attitudes and job performance. Personnel Psychology, 19, 143–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). A theory of goal setting and task performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey. American Psychologist, 57, 705–717.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2006). New directions in goal setting theory. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15, 265–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miner, J. B. (2003). The rated importance, scientific validity, and practical usefulness of organizational behavior theories: A quantitative review. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 2, 250–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, K. R., & Davidshofer, C. O. (1998). Psychological testing. Princeton, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noel, T. W., & Latham, G. P. (2006). The importance of learning goals versus outcome goals for entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 7, 213–220.

    Google Scholar 

  • Page-Voth, V., & Graham, S. (1999). Effects of goal setting and strategy use on the writing performance and self-efficacy of students with writing and learning problems. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 230–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, J. M., & Gully, S. M. (1997). Role of goal orientation, ability, need for achievement, and locus of control in the self-efficacy and goal-setting process. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 792–802.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinder, C. C. (1984). Work motivation. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pringle, C. D., & DuBose, P. B. (1995). Ability and role clarity as enhancers of the expectancy theory model. Psychological Reports, 76, 522.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ree, M. J., & Earles, J. A. (1991). Predicting training success: Not much more than g. Personnel Psychology, 44, 321–332.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ree, M. J., Earles, J. A., & Teachout, M. S. (1994). Predicting job performance: Not much more than g. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 518–524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seijts, G. H., & Latham, G. P. (2001). The effect of distal learning, outcome, and proximal goals on a moderately complex task. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22, 291–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seijts, G. H., & Latham, G. P. (2005). Learning versus performance goals: When should each be used? Academy of Management Executive, 19, 124–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seijts, G. H., Latham, G. P., Tasa, K., & Latham, B. W. (2004). Goal setting and goal orientation: An integration of two different yet related literatures. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 227–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terborg, J. R. (1977). Validation and extension of an individual differences model of work performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 18, 188–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • VandeWalle, D., Cron, W. J., & Slocum, J. W. (2001). The role of goal orientation following performance feedback. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 629–640.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York, NY: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winters, D., & Latham, G. P. (1996). The effect of learning versus outcome goals on a simple versus a complex task. Group and Organization Management, 21, 235–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, R. E., Mento, A. J., & Locke, E. A. (1987). Task complexity as a moderator of goal effects: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 416–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yeo, G. B., & Neal, A. (2004). A multilevel analysis of effort, practice, and performance: Effects of ability, conscientiousness, and goal orientation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 231–247.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Richard Ivey School of Business, University of Western Ontario, 1151 Richmond Street North, London, ON, N6A 3K7, Canada

    Gerard Seijts & Dan Crim

Authors
  1. Gerard Seijts
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dan Crim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gerard Seijts.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Seijts, G., Crim, D. The combined effects of goal type and cognitive ability on performance. Motiv Emot 33, 343–352 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-009-9143-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-009-9143-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation