The goals of this article are to (a) describe differences between moderator and mediator effects; (b) provide nontechnical descriptions of how to examine each type of effect, including study design, analysis, and interpretation of results; (c) demonstrate how to analyze each type of effect; and (d) provide suggestions for further reading. The authors focus on the use of multiple regression because it is an accessible data-analytic technique contained in major statistical packages. When appropriate, they also note limitations of using regression to detect moderator and mediator effects and describe alternative procedures, particularly structural equation modeling. Finally, to illustrate areas of confusion in counseling psychology research, they review research testing moderation and mediation that was published in the Journal of Counseling Psychology during 2001.

C. Midgley et al. (2001) raised important questions about the effects of performance-approach goals. The present authors disagree with their characterization of the research findings and implications for theory. They discuss 3 reasons to revise goal theory: (a) the importance of separating approach from avoidance strivings, (b) the positive potential of performance-approach goals, and (c) identification of the ways performance-approach goals can combine with mastery goals to promote optimal motivation. The authors review theory and research to substantiate their claim that goal theory is in need of revision, and they endorse a multiple goal perspective. The revision of goal theory is underway and offers a more complex, but necessary, perspective on important issues of motivation, learning, and achievement. We thank Amanda Durik and Corwin Senko for helpful comments on earlier drafts of this article.

Currently, there is a debate about which types of achievement goals promote optimal motivation. A number of theorists argue for a mastery goal perspective focusing on the adaptive consequences of mastery goals and the maladaptive consequences of performance goals. Others endorse a multiple goal perspective in which both mastery and performance goals can be beneficial. The purpose of the present investigation was to review why this debate has emerged and to offer a critical test of the mastery versus multiple goal perspectives. In Study 1, a correlational approach was used to identify the optimal goals for college participants to adopt for a learning activity. In Study 2, an experimental approach was used to identify the optimal goals to assign for the same activity. Each study revealed benefits of both mastery and performance goals, providing support for the multiple goal perspective.

Why do some students excel in their college classes and develop interest in an academic discipline? The authors examined both the short-term and long-term consequences of students' achievement goals in an introductory psychology course. Mastery goals positively predicted subsequent interest in the course, but not course grades. Performance goals positively predicted grades, but not interest. Three semesters later, the authors obtained measures of continued interest in the discipline and long-term performance. Mastery goals predicted subsequent enrollment in psychology courses, whereas performance goals predicted long-term academic performance. These positive and complementary effects of mastery and performance goals on different measures of academic success are consistent with a multiple-goals perspective in which both goals can have beneficial consequences in college education. College students often pursue multiple goals in their classes. Some goals may be fairly general and concern students' reasons for taking a class, whereas other goals are more specific to what students hope to accomplish in the course-to learn as much as they can about the subject or to obtain a high grade. These latter types of goals have been labeled achievement goals (Ames, 1992; Dweck, 1986; Nicholls, 1989), and they can influence how students approach, experience, and perform in their classes. A great deal of research has investigated the relationship between achievement goals and a wide range of educationally relevant measures such as learning strategies, attributions for success, and academic performance (see Ames, 1992, for a review). However, there has been relatively little research attention given to motivational variables such as interest and intrinsic motivation (see Harackiewicz, Barron, & Elliot, 1998, for review), and even less attention to the long-term consequences of achievement goals. We believe that educational research needs to consider not only how well students perform in their courses, but also whether students develop interest in the topics taught in those courses (

The authors investigated personality predictors of achievement goals in an introductory psychology class, as well as the consequences of these goals for the motivation and performance of 311 undergraduates. Two dimensions of achievement motivation (workmastery and competitive orientations; J. T. Spence & R. L. Helmreich, 1983) predicted the goals endorsed. Individuals high in workmastery were more likely to adopt mastery goals and less likely to adopt work avoidance goals, whereas competitive individuals were more likely to endorse performance and work avoidance goals. Students adopting mastery goals were more interested in the class, but students adopting performance goals achieved higher levels of performance. These results suggest that both mastery and performance goals can lead to important positive outcomes in college classes.