Comparing three models of achievement goals: Goal orientations, goal standards, and goal complexes.

Abstract

Achievement goal theory (Dweck, 1986) initially characterized mastery goals and performance goals as opposites in a good–bad dualism of student motivation. A later revision (Harackiewicz, Barron, & Elliot, 1998) contended that both goals can provide benefits and be pursued together. Perhaps both frameworks are correct: Their contrasting views may stem from differences in how they define performance goals. The traditional framework favors a goal orientation model in which performance goals entail demonstrating competence (“appearance goals”). The revised framework favors a goal standard model in which performance goals entail outperforming peers (“normative goals”). The present studies test whether the 2 performance goals function differently, each promoting educational outcomes that support its guiding framework’s view of performance goals. These studies also unify the earlier models through the emerging goal complex model, which assumes that the normative goal’s effects depend on students’ reasons for pursuing the goal. University students (Ns = 168 and 160) completed measures of their appearance, normative, and mastery goals; their reasons for pursuing normative goals; and several educational outcomes. When pursued for autonomous reasons (e.g., enjoyment or challenge seeking), normative goals predicted adaptive outcomes (self-efficacy and interest) and also proved more compatible with mastery goals (all ps < .05). However, when pursued for controlling reasons (e.g., rewards), normative goals behaved exactly like appearance goals, each predicting maladaptive outcomes (help avoidance and self-handicapping). These findings help resolve the long-standing debate about performance goals, showcase the goal complex model’s potential as a unifying framework, and unveil multiple new research directions.

Children’s and Mothers’ Achievement Goal Orientations and Self-Efficacy: Dyadic Contributions to Students’ Well-Being

“…This was also true for performance-avoidance goals, as verified by Bong who found no significant relationship between this type of goal and self-efficacy [43], whereas other studies found negative associations between the two [95,96,98]. Finally, although normative performance-approach goals were found to be associated with high self-efficacy, no significant relationship between appearance performance-approach goals and self-efficacy was found [36].…”

“…Self-efficacy and achievement goals. In previous studies, it was found that mastery goal orientations were positively associated with self-efficacy [36,43,[94][95][96][97], whereas performance-approach goals were shown to be either positively [43,95,98] or non-significantly associated with this concept [99]. This was also true for performance-avoidance goals, as verified by Bong who found no significant relationship between this type of goal and self-efficacy [43], whereas other studies found negative associations between the two [95,96,98].…”

“…Although there is a consensus on the negative impact of the performance-avoidance goals on the learning and achievement outcomes, there is still a debate in the literature about the consequences of performance-approach goals. Some theorists posit that performance-approach goals have a positive effect on learning and school outcome, whereas others consider this is detrimental [35,36]. Specifically, in some studies, performance-approach goals significantly and positively predicted academic performance [37][38][39][40][41], were related to greater self-esteem [42] and greater self-efficacy [30,42,43], and even positively predicted intrinsic motivation [31] and learning strategies [44].…”

Effects of achievement goals on perceptions of competence in conditions of unfavourable social comparisons: The mastery goal advantage effect

“…Additionally, the current study did not measure reasons for pursuing achievement goals (Senko & Tropiano, ). Viewing results of the current study in the light of goal complex models, it is possible the mastery goal advantage effect to be much stronger when performance‐approach goals are pursuit for extrinsic reasons rather than intrinsic reasons.…”

“…To date, research has shown that performance‐avoidance or mastery‐avoidance goals are maladaptive because they are correlated with undesirable educational outcomes such as low academic achievement and course interest, fear of failure, and anxiety (Elliot & McGregor, ; Harackiewicz, Durik, Barron, Linnenbrink‐Garcia, & Tauer, ; Senko, Hulleman, & Harackiewicz, ). There is also general agreement, among researchers who are involved in this area of research, that mastery‐approach goals are adaptive because they are correlated with positive educational outcomes (Harackiewicz, Barron, & Elliot, ; Senko & Tropiano, ). Performance‐approach goals, on the other hand, are more likely to instigate adaptive educational outcomes when (1) they are engaged with a tendency to outperform others rather than tendencies to demonstrate ability to others (Hulleman, Schrager, Bodmann, & Harackiewicz, ) and (2) they are pursuit for autonomous rather than controlling reasons (Gaudreau, ; Gillet, Lafrenière, Vallerand, Huart, & Fouquereau, ; Senko & Tropiano, ; Vansteenkiste, Lens, Elliot, Soenens, & Mouratidis, ; Vansteenkiste et al ., ).…”