Construct validity of multiple achievement goals: A multitrait‐multimethod approach

Abstract

Motivation-related issues have been one of the most popular topics in sport and exercise psychology research (Roberts, 2001). Over the past several decades, achievement goal frameworks have provided one of the main models laying the groundwork for the study of motivational processes in the physical domain. Differences in how people interpret and respond to their achievement-related activities have been found to be dependent on the achievement goal(s) emphasized. Nicholls (1984Nicholls ( , 1989, in particular, has argued that how individuals define success and construe their level of competence underpins distinctions in achievement goals. When perceptions of high competence and subjective sport success are tied to outperforming others, people's goals revolve around an ego/ performance emphasis. In contrast, a sense of competence and personal success gained by exhibiting high effort, task mastery, and learning are assumed to reflect a task mastery/goal focus. In general, research conducted in sport and other achievement contexts has revealed mastery (or task) goals to be associated with adaptive cognitive, affective,

Social comparison information, performance expectancy, and performance goal adoption.

“…However, far fewer studies have focused on these links with regard to other-based (as opposed to task- or self-based) expectancies (Senko & Hulleman, 2013) that are most comparable to the performance expectancy construct focused on in the present research, and these studies have yielded mixed results (especially those conducted in the physical education or sport domain domain). Specifically, these studies have found performance expectancy to positively predict performance-approach goals, but they have only occasionally found it to negatively predict performance-avoidance goals (Cury, Da Fonsèca, Rufo, & Sarrazin, 2002; Ommundsen, 2004) and more often found performance expectancy and performance-avoidance goals to be unrelated (Jaakkola, Ntoumanis, & Liukkonen, 2016; Morris & Kavussanu, 2008; Nien & Duda, 2009) or even positively related (Wang, Biddle, & Elliot, 2007; Warburton & Spray, 2008; Zourbanos, Papaioannou, Argyropoulou, & Hatzigeorgiadis, 2014).…”

An exploration of motives, constraints and future participation intention in sport and exercise events

“…Established, assimilated and inherent served as the greater independent types of motivation and were equated with a numerous positive impacts. For people who were more independent in adapting their comportment, it was more likely that they would endure task engagement instead of ego engagement (Ryan and Deci, 2000), inherent goals and purposes (Sheldon et al , 2004), accessing rather than preventing mentality (Nien and Duda, 2009) and also more enjoyment recurrence (Deci and Ryan, 2008).…”