Revision of achievement goal theory: Necessary and illuminating.

Harackiewicz, Judith M.; Barron, Kenneth E.; Pintrich, Paul R.; Elliot, Andrew J.; Thrash, Todd M.

doi:10.1037/0022-0663.94.3.638

Cited by 956 publications

(913 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

745

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Individuals higher in achievement motivation are more likely than those lower in achievement motivation to endorse all achievement goals: mastery, performance-approach, and performance-avoidance goals (Elliot & McGregor, 2001). Thus, if the presence of competence-related stereotypes leads to the adoption primarily of performanceavoidance goals at the expense of other achievement goals, then the functions that the other kinds of goals typically serve for individuals higher in achievement motivation will not be served (e.g., Harackiewicz et al, 2002;Linnenbrink, 2005;Pintrich, 2000;Wolters, 2004).…”

Section: Role Of Achievement Motivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In contrast, effects of performance-approach goals on performance and motivation appear to depend both on the context and on individual differences. A performance-approach goal is defined as wanting to demonstrate competence in comparison to others (e.g., Elliot & Church, 1997;e.g., I want to do the best on the computer science task) and often is associated with positive effects on learning in the college classroom (e.g., Harackiewicz et al, 2002). These goals have also been associated with positive, null, or negative effects on interest, depending on other individual or contextual factors (e.g., Elliot & McGregor, 2001;Harackiewicz & Elliot, 1993;Wolters, 2004;cf.…”

Section: The Step Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The model uses the tripartite goal framework described by Elliot and colleagues (e.g., Cury, Elliot, Sarrazin, Fonseca, & Rufo, 2002;Elliot & Church, 1997;Elliot, Shell, Henry, & Maier, 2005;Harackiewicz, Barron, Pintrich, Elliot, & Thrash, 2002; see also Skaalvik, 1997). Before detailing how these goals may be elicited and their effects when working on a stereotyped task, we briefly define the three kinds of achievement goals proposed by this framework.…”

Section: The Step Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The stereotyped task engagement process: The role of interest and achievement motivation.

Smith¹,

Sansone²,

White³

2007

Journal of Educational Psychology

137

126

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Competence-based stereotypes can negatively affect women's performance in math and science (referred to as stereotype threat), presumably leading to lower motivation. The authors examined the effects of stereotype threat on interest, a motivational path not necessarily mediated by performance. They predicted that working on a computer science task in the context of math-gender stereotypes would negatively affect undergraduate women's task interest, particularly for those higher in achievement motivation who were hypothesized to hold performance-avoidance goals in response to the threat. Compared with when the stereotype was nullified, while under stereotype threat an assigned performance-avoidance (vs. -approach) goal was associated with lower interest for women higher in achievement motivation (Study 1), and women higher (vs. lower) in achievement motivation were more likely to spontaneously adopt performance-avoidance goals (Study 2). The motivational influence of performance-avoidance goals under stereotype threat was primarily mediated by task absorption (Study 3). Implications for the stereotyped task engagement process (Smith, 2004) are discussed.Keywords: achievement motivation, achievement goals, motivation, stereotype threat, gender Women continue to be less likely to select and persist in science, mathematics, and related fields despite gains in preparation and increased requirements for both girls and boys prior to college. A number of hypotheses have been proposed as to why these gender differences occur, including both biological limitations and socialization pressures (e.g., Eccles, Adler, & Meece, 1984). The focus of our research is on the role competence-based stereotypes may play. Whether or not there are real intrinsic ability differences between men and women in math and science (e.g., Benbow & Stanley, 1980;Mullis et al., 1998;Spelke, 2005), stereotypes about these differences exist and are frequently made salient (e.g., comments by Summers, as cited in the Harvard Crimson, 2005). 1 The stereotype threat literature is centered on the finding that awareness of a competence-related stereotype can, in and of itself, lead to poorer task performance (e.g., Smith & White, 2002;Spencer, Steele, & Quinn, 1999;C. M. Steele & Aronson, 1995;Yopyk & Prentice, 2005; see also Wicherts, Dolan, & Hessen, 2005). Members of stereotyped groups feel threatened because their performance may confirm to themselves, other people, or both the negative performance expectations about the group. The resulting negative effects on performance can occur even when women report that they do not believe the stereotypes are true (cf. Schmader, Johns, & Barquissau, 2004).As illustrated on the left side of Figure 1, the stereotype-performance path suggests negative competence-based stereotypes associated with women in math and science lead directly to an impairment of their performance (e.g., Shih, Pittinsky, & Ambady, 1999;Smith & White, 2002;Spencer et al., 1999), which, in turn, negatively affect their likelihood of selecti...

show abstract

Section: Role Of Achievement Motivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Step Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Step Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The stereotyped task engagement process: The role of interest and achievement motivation.

Smith¹,

Sansone²,

White³

2007

Journal of Educational Psychology

137

126

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The additive goal pattern suggests that both mastery and performance-approach goals have independent positive main effects on a given outcome (e.g., exam grade). In the specialized pattern, mastery and performance-approach goals affect different outcomes (for instance, interest and performance, respectively; for a review, see Harackiewicz, Barron, Pintrich, Elliot, & Thrash, 2002). In the selective goal pattern, individuals could actually switch from one type of goals to the other depending on the situation requirement.…”

Section: The Multiple-goal Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

The interplay of mastery and performance goals in social comparison: A multiple-goal perspective.

Darnon¹,

Dompnier²,

Gillieron³

et al. 2010

Journal of Educational Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Régner, Escribe, and Dupeyrat (2007) recently demonstrated that not only performance-approach and performance-avoidance goals (respectively, the desire to outperform others and not to be outperformed by others) but also mastery goals (the desire to acquire knowledge) were related to social comparison orientation (SCO, the tendency to search for social comparison information). In the present article, the possibility of a link between mastery goals and social comparison that depends on the level of performance-approach goals-a possibility supported by a multiple-goal perspective-was tested by examining the interaction effect between mastery and performance-approach goals. This is an important endeavor, as educational settings are rarely free from performance-approach goals, even when mastery goals are promoted. In Study 1, we tested self-set achievement goals (mastery, performance-approach, and performance-avoidance goals) as predictors of SCO; the interaction between mastery goals and performance-approach goals indicated that the higher the performance-approach goal endorsement, the stronger the link between mastery goals and SCO. In Study 2, we manipulated goal conditions; mastery goals predicted interest in social comparison in the performance-approach goal condition only. Results are discussed in terms of the importance of multiple-goal pursuit in academic settings.

show abstract

“…To date, evidence has shown that avoidance goals (masteryavoidance or performance-avoidance goals) are associated with maladaptive outcomes such as anxiety, disorganised study habits, fear of failure, self-handicapping, and low achievement or task interest (Elliot & McGregor, 2001;Senko, Hulleman, & Harackiewicz, 2011;Senko & Miles, 2007). In contrast, approach goals are associated with adaptive outcomes such as intrinsic motivation, interest, and use of deep learning strategies (Harackiewicz et al, 2002;Harackiewicz et al, 2008). Moreover, there is evidence that the two approach goals predict different outcomes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clarifying the link between mastery goals and social comparisons in classroom settings

Chatzisarantis

Ada

et al. 2016

Contemporary Educational Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Revision of achievement goal theory: Necessary and illuminating.

Cited by 956 publications

References 48 publications

The stereotyped task engagement process: The role of interest and achievement motivation.

The stereotyped task engagement process: The role of interest and achievement motivation.

The interplay of mastery and performance goals in social comparison: A multiple-goal perspective.

Clarifying the link between mastery goals and social comparisons in classroom settings

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About