Comparing two- and three-factor models of goal orientation: A meta-analysis

Day, Eric R.; Yeo, Sheauyuen; Radosevich, David J.

doi:10.1037/e518712013-265

Cited by 11 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The association between performance avoidance goals and high-stakes scores decreases across the achievement distribution, so that performance avoidance goals appear to be more detrimental for lower achieving students than their higher achieving peers. This finding is in line with prior research that has found negative associations between performance avoidance goals and performance (Day, Yeo, & Radosevich, 2003; Elliot, 1994; Payne, Youngcourt, & Matthew, 2007; Rawsthorne & Elliot, 1999). In addition, this finding is consistent with the established link between performance avoidance goals and test anxiety.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Raising the stakes: How students' motivation for mathematics associates with high- and low-stakes test achievement

Simzar

Martinez

Rutherford

et al. 2015

Learning and Individual Differences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study uses data from an urban school district to examine the relation between students’ motivational beliefs about mathematics and high- versus low-stakes math test performance. We use ordinary least squares and quantile regression analyses and find that the association between students’ motivation and test performance differs based on the stakes of the exam. Students’ math self-efficacy and performance avoidance goal orientation were the strongest predictors for both exams; however, students’ math self-efficacy was more strongly related to achievement on the low-stakes exam. Students’ motivational beliefs had a stronger association at the low-stakes exam proficiency cutoff than they did at the high-stakes passing cutoff. Lastly, the negative association between performance avoidance goals and high-stakes performance showed a decreasing trend across the achievement distribution, suggesting that performance avoidance goals are more detrimental for lower achieving students. These findings help parse out the ways motivation influences achievement under different stakes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Raising the stakes: How students' motivation for mathematics associates with high- and low-stakes test achievement

Simzar

Martinez

Rutherford

et al. 2015

Learning and Individual Differences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A performance orientation with a focus on avoiding negative judgments or appearing incompetent is termed an avoiding goal orientation (VandeWalle, 1997) or a performance-avoidance orientation (Elliot & Church, 1997). In a meta-analysis, Day, Yeo, and Radosevich (2003) demonstrated that the three-factor model of goal orientation is superior to the two-factor model. A performance-approach orientation focuses on demonstrating the adequacy of one's ability and hence is not necessarily dysfunctional (Day et al, 2003;Wang & Takeuchi, 2007).…”

Section: A Goal Orientation-based Feedback-seeking Typologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a meta-analysis, Day, Yeo, and Radosevich (2003) demonstrated that the three-factor model of goal orientation is superior to the two-factor model. A performance-approach orientation focuses on demonstrating the adequacy of one's ability and hence is not necessarily dysfunctional (Day et al, 2003;Wang & Takeuchi, 2007). A performance-avoidance orientation tends to be dysfunctional because it is related to anxiety, distraction, withdrawal, and low self-efficacy (Day et al, 2003).…”

Section: A Goal Orientation-based Feedback-seeking Typologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Toward a Goal Orientation–Based Feedback-Seeking Typology

Gong

Wang

Huang

et al. 2016

Journal of Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, we conceptualized four types of feedback seeking about self and others (i.e., self-positive, self-negative, other-positive, and other-negative) based on their foci (i.e., self or peers) and nature (i.e., positive or negative), as derived from goal orientation theory. In a series of field studies, we found that these four types of feedback seeking were distinct from each other. A learning orientation was positively related to self-negative, self-positive, and other-positive feedback seeking. A performance-approach orientation was positively related to self-positive and other-negative feedback seeking. On further examining the performance impacts of the four types of feedback-seeking, we found that self-negative feedback seeking was positively related to job performance, role clarity, and social integration. Self-positive feedback seeking was negatively related, whereas other-positive feedback seeking was positively related to job performance.

show abstract

“…One individual characteristic thought to influence self‐regulatory processes over time is goal orientation (Button, Mathieu, & Zajac, 1996). Goal orientations refer to individual preferences for different types of goals in achievement contexts (Dweck, 1986; Dweck & Leggett, 1988) and are typically operationalized in three forms (Day, Yeo, & Radosevich, 2003; VandeWalle & Cummings, 1997): learning goal orientation (LGO), prove performance goal orientation (PPGO), and, avoid performance goal orientation (APGO). Although situations may be constructed to induce performance or learning goals, goal orientation can also be conceptualized as a relatively stable disposition (Attenweiler & Moore, 2006; Button et al, 1996).…”

Section: Goal Orientation and Self‐regulation In Team Trainingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Members Matter in Team Training: Multilevel and Longitudinal Relationships Between Goal Orientation, Self‐Regulation, and Team Outcomes

Dierdorff

Ellington

2012

Personnel Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Longitudinal data from 338 individuals across 64 teams in a simulationbased team-training context were used to examine the effects of dispositional goal orientation on self-regulated learning (self-efficacy and metacognition). Team goal orientation compositions, as reflected by average goal orientations of team members, were examined for moderating effects on these individual-level relationships. Finally, individual-level self-regulation was investigated for its influence on multiple team-level outcomes across time. Results showed generally positive effects of learning goal orientation and negative effects of avoid performance and prove performance goal orientations on rates of self-regulation during team training. However, several of these individual-level relationships were moderated by team goal orientation composition. The importance of self-regulation in teams was displayed by results showing the average level of self-regulation among a team's members over time was positively associated with team efficacy, team cooperation quality, and team decision making.

show abstract

Comparing two- and three-factor models of goal orientation: A meta-analysis

Cited by 11 publications

References 0 publications

Raising the stakes: How students' motivation for mathematics associates with high- and low-stakes test achievement

Raising the stakes: How students' motivation for mathematics associates with high- and low-stakes test achievement

Toward a Goal Orientation–Based Feedback-Seeking Typology

Members Matter in Team Training: Multilevel and Longitudinal Relationships Between Goal Orientation, Self‐Regulation, and Team Outcomes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About