Motivational Dynamics Underlying Competition: The Opposing Processes Model of Competition and Performance

Abstract

The chapter delineates motivational mechanisms underlying how competition affects performance. The authors propose an opposing processes model of competition and performance in which competition positively influences performance via the adoption of performance-approach goals (i.e., trying to do better than others), whereas competition impairs performance via the adoption of performance-avoidance goals (i.e., trying to avoid doing worse than others). In competitions, these positive and negative goal processes often cancel each other out, producing a seemingly weak or non-existent relationship between competition and performance. The authors review empirical evidence for the proposed model, discuss the implications of the model in relation to other theoretical perspectives on competition, and speculate on the possibility that competition can play an instrumental role in sustainable engagement in a task.

Economic inequality and student outcomes: What we know and where to go from here.

“…On the other hand, competition can lead individuals to strive to approach normative competence (e.g., being among the best students in their class), resulting in a challenge-based response characterized by eagerness and persistence, thereby enhancing performance. Importantly, the meta-analysis did not reveal differences across age groups (i.e., 18 years old or younger vs. older than 18 years) or the type of performance domain (i.e., sports vs. work vs. school; for additional evidence, see Elliot et al, 2018; for reviews, see Elliot, 2020; Murayama et al, 2021). Therefore, it is plausible that income inequality contributes to both aversive and appetitive competitive motivations in school, each with opposing effects on achievement.…”

“…On the other hand, competition can lead individuals to strive to approach normative competence (e.g., being among the best students in their class), resulting in a challenge-based response characterized by eagerness and persistence, thereby enhancing performance. Importantly, the meta-analysis did not reveal differences across age groups (i.e., 18 years old or younger vs. older than 18 years) or the type of performance domain (i.e., sports vs. work vs. school; for additional evidence, see Elliot et al, 2018; for reviews, see Elliot, 2020;Murayama et al, 2021). Therefore, it is plausible that income Summary • More research is needed on the link between economic inequality and school belonging • There is cross-sectional evidence linking economic inequality to antisocial behaviors commonly associated with competition, such as cheating, bullying, and violence in schools • But there is more to the story, as inequality may predict both antisocial (e.g., cheating) and prosocial (e.g., tactical cooperation) behaviors, provided they help in outperforming others ECONOMIC INEQUALITY IN SCHOOLS 7 inequality contributes to both aversive and appetitive competitive motivations in school, each with opposing effects on achievement.…”