Approach and avoidance achievement goals and intrinsic motivation: A mediational analysis.

Abstract

Most contemporary achievement goal conceptualizations consist of a performance goal versus mastery goal dichotomy. The present research offers an alternative framework by partitioning the performance goal orientation into independent approach and avoidance motivational orientations. Two experiments investigated the predictive utility of the proposed approach-avoidance achievement goal conceptualization in the intrinsic motivation domain. Results from both experiments supported the proposed framework; only performance goals grounded in the avoidance of failure undermined intrinsic motivation. Task involvement was validated as a mediator of the observed effects on intrinsic motivation. Ramifications for the achievement goal approach to achievement motivation and future research avenues are discussed. Achievement motivation theorists focus their research attention on a particular class of behaviors, those involving competence. Individuals may aspire to attain competence or may strive to avoid incompetence, and this approach-avoidance distinction was explicitly incorporated into the earliest achievement motivation conceptualizations. Two independent motivational orientations, the desire for success and the desire to avoid failure, were identified by Lewin and colleagues as critical determinants of aspiration behavior (Hoppe, cited in Lewin, Dembo, Festinger, & Sears, 1944). In his nascent achievement motivation theory, McClelland (1951) proposed that "there are at least two kinds of achievement motivation, one of which appears to be oriented around avoiding failure and the other around the more positive goal of attaining success" (p. 202).

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

“…In contrast, when assigned either mastery or performance-approach goals, Barron and Harackiewicz replicated the pattern found previously by Harackiewicz and Elliot. Although previous research provides some suggestions for how achievement motivation may moderate the impact of performanceapproach and mastery goals on interest, much less research has been done examining performance-avoidance goals and interest. Elliot and Harackiewicz (1996) found that assigned performanceavoidance goals were associated with lower interest as compared with assigned performance-approach, mastery, or performanceneutral goals, but these authors did not assess individual differences in achievement motivation. One possibility, therefore, is that when assigned performance-avoidance goals under conditions of stereotype threat, both individuals higher and lower in achievement motivation will experience lower interest, with the key difference being that individuals higher in achievement motivation would be more likely to spontaneously adopt performanceavoidance goals in those situations.…”

“…Performance-avoidance goals are defined as wanting to avoid demonstrating incompetence (e.g., Elliot & Church, 1997;Wolters, 2004;e.g., I want to avoid failing the computer science task) and often have negative effects on learning and motivation (e.g., Elliot & Harackiewicz, 1996;Elliot et al, 2005). In contrast, effects of performance-approach goals on performance and motivation appear to depend both on the context and on individual differences.…”

Understanding the Emergence of State Goal Orientation in Organizational Work Groups: The Role of Leadership and Multilevel Climate Perceptions.

“…In contexts where a psychological MS# 2003 climate for performance emerges, ongoing assessments of performance are designed to motivate group members to outperform one another, whereas in contexts in which individuals view avoiding failure as valued, performance is consistently monitored to detect errors and minimize their consequences. Experimental research shows that these subtle nuances in perception effectively cue the expected form of state performance orientation (Elliot & Harackiewicz, 1996;Harackiewicz & Elliot, 1993).…”

Goals Gone Wild: The Systematic Side Effects of Over-Prescribing Goal Setting

“…This is true of rewards in general (Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 1999), but several studies demonstrate that this is particularly true for goals themselves (Elliot & Harackiewicz, 1996;Rawsthorne & Elliot, 1999). …”