Abstract

Two motivational theories – the Achievement Goal Theory and Self-Determination Theory – have recently been combined to explain students’ motivation, making it possible to study the “what” and the “why” of learners’ achievement strivings. The present study built on this approach by (a) investigating whether the distinction between autonomous or volitional and controlling or pressuring reasons can be meaningfully applied to the adoption of mastery-avoidance goals, (b) investigating the concurrent and prospectiverelations between mastery-avoidance goals and their underlying reasons and learning strategies when mastery-approach goals and their underlying reasons were also considered, and by (c) incorporating psychological need experiences as an explanatory variable in the relation between achievement motives (i.e., the motive to succeed and motive to avoid failure) and both mastery goals and their underlying reasons. In two Turkish university students samples (N = 226, Mage = 22.36; N = 331, Mage = 19.5), autonomous and controlling reasons appeared applicable to mastery-avoidance goals and regression and path analysis further showed that mastery-avoidance goals and their underlying autonomous reasons fail to predicted learning strategies over and above the pursuit of mastery-approach goals and their underlying reasons. Finally, need experiences were established as mediators between achievement motives and both mastery goals and their underlying reasons.

Highlights

  • A follow-up analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Bonferroni correction showed that males scored lower than females in fear of failure, F(1, 176) = 7.89, p < .05, η2 = .00 (Mmale = 2.84, SD = 0.87 vs. Mfemale = 3.15, SD = 0.84), controlling reasons underlying masteryapproach goals (MAp) goals, F(1, 176) = 4.55, p < .05, η2 = .03 (Mmale = 3.02, SD = 0.95 vs. Mfemale = 3.32, SD = 0.84), as well as mastery-avoidance goals (MAv) goals, F(1, 176) = 4.11, p < .05, η2 = .02 (Mmale = 3.76, SD = 0.73 vs. Mfemale = 3.97, SD = 0.63)

  • The enriched hierarchical model of achievement motivation proposed by Willy Lens and his associates provides a framework to extend our knowledge on achievement motivation

  • In our study, based on this model, we found that the endorsement of MAv goals can be regulated by both autonomous and controlling reasons

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Background variables1. Age Antecedents2. Motive to suceed .04 –3. Motive to avoid –.04 .10 – failure4. Need satisfaction .00 .22** –.05 –5. Need frustration –.15* .05 .31** .10 – Motivational variables Background variablesAntecedents T12. Motive to suceed .08 –3. Motive to avoid failure4. Need satisfaction .06 .25** –.10 –5. Need frustration .14* .07 .36** .10 –Motivational variables T1.08 .21** .04 .18** –.12 –7. MAp autonomous .08 .20** .07 .16** .02 .32** –

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.