Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The social utility of performance-approach goals in a selective educational environment

  • Published:
Social Psychology of Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

According to the recent research, the educational system fulfills both an educational function (i.e., teaching and training students) and a selection function (i.e., determining students’ future position in the social hierarchy), particularly in higher education. It has been argued that in the university system the selection function provides a social utility value to performance-approach goals (i.e., the goal to demonstrate one’s own competences relative to others), which in turn increases the extent to which students endorse these goals. Two experiments investigated the influence of the salience of the selection function on performance-approach goals’ social value and endorsement. The results showed that the salience of the selection function increased both performance-approach goal endorsement (experiment 1 and 2) and performance-approach goals’ social utility (experiment 2). These goals’ social utility contributes to explaining the effect of the salience of the selection function on performance-approach goal endorsement. Limitations of the present experiments and practical implications are discussed.

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
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Recent conceptualization of achievement goals (Elliot and McGregor 2001; see also Elliot et al. 2011) also includes mastery-avoidance goals. Nevertheless, as Elliot (2005) noted, these goals are presumed to be less prevalent compared to others, specifically in achievement contexts typically studied in the achievement goal literature. Moreover, they were not directly relevant to the question addressed in the present research. Therefore, these goals were not included in the present research.

  2. Participants reported various types of answers (e.g., “Continuous assessment seems to be the best solution because it requires daily work”; “internships should be favored to help students developing their skills”). Two independent judges with the instruction of identifying if participants properly answer the manipulation check question rated each answer. Those not related to the question were considered as unsatisfactory. Agreement between the two judges was moderate (k = .56). Judges both agreed that five participants did not answer the question properly. These participants were removed from the final sample.

  3. It should be noted that a fourth condition (n = 35) was initially included in this experiment. This condition promoted a mixed discourse about the selection and the educational functions. As this condition was ambiguous, for clarity reasons, it was not presented here. Nevertheless, it should be noted that testing a contrast between the selection condition (coded 3) and the three others conditions (coded −1 each) produced the same results: The selection condition elicited higher performance-approach goal endorsement compared to the three other conditions, B = .18, SE = .06, t(139) = 2.98, p = .003, \( \upeta_{p}^{2} \) = .06, 95 % CIs [.06, .30], as well as higher social utility associated to these goals, B = 0.15, SE = 0.08, t(139) = 2.00, p = .047, \( \upeta_{p}^{2} \) = .02, 95 % CIs [.00, .30], and did not reduce the social undesirability associated with these goals, B = 0.05, SE = 0.08, t(139) = 0.65, p = .52, \( \upeta_{p}^{2} \) = .00, 95 % CIs [−.10, .20]. Entering social utility in the regression model with the contrast produced a significant reduction in the coefficient of the contrast effect, which remained significant, B = 0.14, SE = 0.06, t(138) = 2.45, p = .015, \( \upeta_{p}^{2} \) = .04, 95 % CIs [.03, .26]. This indirect effect was 0.03, 95 % CIs [.00, .08], a small effect, ab cs  = 04, 95 % CIs [.00, .10]. No results were significant for mastery approach-goals and performance-avoidance goals. Full results are available on request.

References

  • Alon, S. (2009). The evolution of class inequality in higher education: Competition, exclusion, and adaptation. American Sociological Review, 74(5), 731–755. doi:10.1177/000312240907400503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 261–271. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.84.3.261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berger, N., & Archer, J. (2016). School socio-economic status and student socio-academic achievement goals in upper secondary contexts. Social Psychology of Education, 19(1), 175–194. doi:10.1007/s11218-015-9324-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blumenfeld, P. C. (1992). Classroom learning and motivation: Clarifying and expanding goal theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 272–281. doi:10.1037//0022-0663.84.3.272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P., Passeron, J.-C., & Nice, R. (1990). Reproduction in education, society and culture (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brophy, J. (2005). Goal theorists should move on from performance goals. Educational Psychologist, 40(3), 167–176. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4003_3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, R., & Neuman, O. (1995). Effects of task and ego achievement goals on help-seeking behaviors and attitudes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(2), 261–271. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.87.2.261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C. (2015). Incremental validity of achievement goals in predicting subjective well-being among university students. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 14(1), 38–62. doi:10.1891/1945-8959.14.1.38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corker, K. S., Donnellan, M. B., & Bowles, R. P. (2013). The development of achievement goals throughout college: Modeling stability and change. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39(11), 1404–1417. doi:10.1177/0146167213494243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crouzevialle, M., & Butera, F. (2013). Performance-approach goals deplete working memory and impair cognitive performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 142(3), 666–678. doi:10.1037/a0029632.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cury, F., Elliot, A. J., Da Fonseca, D., & Moller, A. C. (2006). The social-cognitive model of achievement motivation and the 2 × 2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(4), 666–679. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.90.4.666.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darnon, C., & Butera, F. (2005). Buts d’accomplissement, stratégies d’étude, et motivation intrinsèque : présentation d’un domaine de recherche et validation française de l’échelle d’Elliot et McGregor (2001) [Achievement goals, study strategies, and intrinsic motivation: Presenting a domain of research and the French validation of Elliot and McGregor’s (2001) scale]. L’année Psychologique, 105(1), 105–131. doi:10.3406/psy.2005.3821.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darnon, C., Butera, F., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2007a). Achievement goals in social interactions: Learning with mastery vs. performance goals. Motivation and Emotion, 31(1), 61–70. doi:10.1007/s11031-006-9049-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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(1), 119–134. doi:10.1037/a0012824.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darnon, C., Dompnier, B., & Poortvliet, M. (2012). Achievement goals in educational contexts: A social psychology perspective. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 6(10), 760–771. doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2012.00457.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darnon, C., Harackiewicz, J. M., Butera, F., Mugny, G., & Quiamzade, A. (2007b). Performance-approach and performance avoidance goals: When uncertainty makes a difference. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33(6), 813–827. doi:10.1177/0146167207301022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dompnier, B., Darnon, C., & Butera, F. (2009). Faking the desire to learn: A clarification of the link between mastery goals and academic achievement. Psychological Science, 20(8), 939–943. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02384.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dompnier, B., Darnon, C., & Butera, F. (2013). When performance-approach goals predict academic achievement and when they do not: A social value approach. British Journal of Social Psychology, 52(3), 587–596. doi:10.1111/bjso.12025.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dompnier, B., Darnon, C., Delmas, F., & Butera, F. (2008). Achievement goals and social judgment: The performance-approach goals paradox. Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale, 21(1), 247–271.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dornbusch, S. M., Glasgow, K. L., & Lin, I.-C. (1996). The social structure of schooling. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 401–429. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.47.1.401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dubet, F., & Duru-Bellat, M. (2004). Qu’est-ce qu’une école juste ? [What is a fair school?]. Revue Française de Pédagogie, 146(1), 105–114. doi:10.3406/rfp.2004.3099.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dubois, N., & Beauvois, J.-L. (2005). Normativeness and individualism. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 123–146. doi:10.1002/ejsp.236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duru-Bellat, M. (1996). Social inequalities in French secondary schools: From figures to theories. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 17(3), 341–350. doi:10.1080/0142569960170307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elliot, A. J. (2005). A conceptual history of the achievement goal construct. In A. J. Elliot & C. S. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 52–72). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elliot, A. J., & McGregor, H. A. (2001). A 2 × 2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(3), 501–519. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.80.3.501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elliot, A. J., Murayama, K., & Pekrun, R. (2011). A 3 × 2 achievement goal model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(3), 632–648. doi:10.1037/a0023952.

  • Gneezy, U., Leonard, K. L., & List, J. A. (2009). Gender differences in competition: Evidence from a matrilineal and a patriarchal society. Econometrica, 77(5), 1637–1664.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant, H., & Dweck, C. S. (2003). Clarifying achievement goals and their impact. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(3), 541–553. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.3.541.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harackiewicz, J., Barron, K., & Elliot, A. (1998). Rethinking achievement goals: When are they adaptive for college students and why? Educational Psychologist, 33(1), 1–21. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep3301_1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.94.3.638.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harackiewicz, J. M., Barron, K. E., Tauer, J. M., Carter, S. M., & Elliot, A. J. (2000). Short-term and long-term consequences of achievement goals: Predicting interest and performance over time. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(2), 316–330. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.92.2.316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jury, M., Smeding, A., & Darnon, C. (2015). First-generation students’ underperformance at university: The impact of the function of selection. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 710. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, A., & Maehr, M. L. (1999). Achievement goals and student well-being. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24(4), 330–358. doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.0993.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, A., & Middleton, M. J. (2002). Should childhood be a journey or a race? Response to Harackiewicz et al. (2002). Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(3), 646–648. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.94.3.646.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levy, I., Kaplan, A., & Patrick, H. (2004). Early adolescents’ achievement goals, social status, and attitudes towards cooperation with peers. Social Psychology of Education, 7(2), 127–159. doi:10.1023/B:SPOE.0000018547.08294.b6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lieberman, D. A., & Remedios, R. (2007). Do undergraduates’ motives for studying change as they progress through their degrees? British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(2), 379–395. doi:10.1348/000709906X157772.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maehr, M., & Midgley, C. (1991). Enhancing student motivation: A schoolwide approach. Educational Psychologist, 26(3), 399–427. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep2603&4_9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meece, J. L., Anderman, E. M., & Anderman, L. H. (2006). Classroom goal structure, student motivation, and academic achievement. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 487–503. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moller, A. C., & Elliot, A. J. (2006). The 2 × 2 achievement goal framework: An overview of empirical research. In A. V. Mittel (Ed.), Focus on educational psychology (pp. 307–326). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murayama, K., & Elliot, A. J. (2012). The competition–performance relation: A meta-analytic review and test of the opposing processes model of competition and performance. Psychological Bulletin, 138(6), 1035–1070. doi:10.1037/a0028324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicholls, J. G. (1989). The competitive ethos and democratic education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nichols, W. D., Jones, J. P., & Hancock, D. R. (2003). Teachers’ influence on goal orientation: Exploring the relationship between eighth graders’ goal orientation, their emotional development, their perceptions of learning, and their teachers’ instructional strategies. Reading Psychology, 24(1), 57–85. doi:10.1080/02702710308236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niederle, M., & Vesterlund, L. (2008). Gender differences in competition. Negotiation Journal, 24(4), 447–463. doi:10.1111/j.1571-9979.2008.00197.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pekrun, R., Cusack, A., Murayama, K., Elliot, A. J., & Thomas, K. (2014). The power of anticipated feedback: Effects on students’ achievement goals and achievement emotions. Learning and Instruction, 29, 115–124. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.09.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poortvliet, P. M., & Darnon, C. (2014). Understanding positive attitudes toward helping peers: The role of mastery goals and academic self-efficacy. Self and Identity, 13(3), 345–363. doi:10.1080/15298868.2013.832363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poortvliet, M., Janssen, O., Van Yperen, N. W., & Van de Vliert, E. (2007). Achievement goals and interpersonal behavior: How mastery and performance goals shape information exchange. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33(10), 1435–1447. doi:10.1177/0146167207305536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pope, D. C. (2001). Doing school: How we are creating a generation of stressed out, materialistic, and miseducated students. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Contemporary approaches to assessing mediation in communication research. In A. F. Hayes, M. D. Slater, & L. B. Snyder (Eds.), The Sage sourcebook of advanced data analysis methods for communication research (pp. 13–54). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Prentice, D. A., & Carranza, E. (2002). What women and men should be, shouldn’t be, are allowed to be, and don’t have to be: The contents of prescriptive gender stereotypes. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26(4), 269–281. doi:10.1111/1471-6402.t01-1-00066.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Senko, C., Hulleman, C. S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2011). Achievement goal theory at the crossroads: Old controversies, current challenges, and new directions. Educational Psychologist, 46(1), 26–47. doi:10.1080/00461520.2011.538646.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skaalvik, E. M., & Federici, R. A. (2016). Relations between classroom goal structures and students’ goal orientations in mathematics classes: When is a mastery goal structure adaptive? Social Psychology of Education, 19(1), 135–150. doi:10.1007/s11218-015-9323-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2013). School goal structure: Associations with students’ perceptions of their teachers as emotionally supportive, academic self-concept, intrinsic motivation, effort, and help seeking behavior. International Journal of Educational Research, 61, 5–14. doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2013.03.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smeding, A., Darnon, C., Souchal, C., Toczek-Capelle, M.-C., & Butera, F. (2013). Reducing the socio-economic status achievement gap at University by promoting mastery-oriented assessment. PLoS One, 8(8), e71678. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0071678.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sommet, N., Darnon, C., Mugny, G., Quiamzade, A., Pulfrey, C., Dompnier, B., et al. (2014). Performance goals in conflictual social interactions: Towards the distinction between two modes of relational conflict regulation. British Journal of Social Psychology, 53(1), 134–153. doi:10.1111/bjso.12015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, M., Stott, T., & Nuttall, A.-M. (2015). Study goals and procrastination tendencies at different stages of the undergraduate degree. Studies in Higher Education,. doi:10.1080/03075079.2015.1005590.

    Google Scholar 

  • Urdan, T., & Schoenfelder, E. (2006). Classroom effects on student motivation: Goal structures, social relationships, and competence beliefs. Journal of School Psychology, 44(5), 331–349. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2006.04.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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(4), e93594. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0093594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Yperen, N. W., & Leander, N. P. (2014). The overpowering effect of social comparison information: On the misalignment between mastery-based goals and self-evaluation criteria. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40(5), 676–688. doi:10.1177/0146167214523475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, M.-T., & Degol, J. L. (2015). School climate: A review of the construct, measurement, and impact on student outcomes. Educational Psychology Review,. doi:10.1007/s10648-015-9319-1.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the French Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR 11 INEG 002 02), the Swiss National Science Foundation (SINERGIA), and the Région Auvergne.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratoire de Psychologie Sociale et Cognitive, Université Clermont Auvergne, 34 Avenue Carnot, 63037, Clermont-Ferrand, Cedex, France

    Mickaël Jury & Céline Darnon

  2. University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland

    Benoit Dompnier & Fabrizio Butera

Authors
  1. Mickaël Jury
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Céline Darnon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Benoit Dompnier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Fabrizio Butera
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mickaël Jury.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jury, M., Darnon, C., Dompnier, B. et al. The social utility of performance-approach goals in a selective educational environment. Soc Psychol Educ 20, 215–235 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-016-9354-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-016-9354-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation