Intrapersonal Achievement Goals and Underlying Reasons among Long Distance Runners: Their Relation with Race Experience, Self-Talk, and Running Time.

Jochen Delrue,Nathalie Aelterman,Athanasios Mouratidis,Gert-Jan De Muynck,Leen Haerens,Maarten Vansteenkiste

doi:10.5334/pb.280

Abstract

In a sample of long distance runners, we examined the role of type of intrapersonal achievement goals (i.e., approach versus avoidance) and type of underlying reasons (i.e., autonomous and controlled), assessed prior to the race, as predictors of both pre-race (e.g., race appraisals) and post-race (e.g., flow experience) outcomes. Of 221 (62.4% males) runners, 111 reported pursuing an intrapersonal-approach goal (i.e., doing better than before) as their dominant or preferred achievement goal for the race, while 86 prioritized intrapersonal-avoidance goals (i.e., avoiding to perform worse than before). Regression and path analyses showed that the type of achievement goals predicted none of the outcomes except for running time, with approach goals predicting better performance when compared to avoidance goals. Path analyses revealed that autonomous reasons underlying intrapersonal goal pursuit related positively to pre-race challenge appraisals, performance and, via need satisfaction, to flow experience. Interestingly, controlled reasons positively related to pre-race threat appraisals and positively predicted both positive and negative self-talk, with both yielding opposing relations with flow. These findings complement past research on the intersection between the Achievement Goal Approach and Self-Determination Theory and highlight the value of studying the reasons underlying intrapersonal achievement goals.

Highlights

Delrue et al: Intrapersonal Achievement Goals and Underlying Reasons relied on Self-determination Theory (SDT: Deci & Ryan, 2000) and the Achievement Goal Approach (AGA: Elliot, 2005) and sought to understand whether the motivational experiences of runners of a popular street race, the “20 km of Brussels”, would relate to their race-appraisals, race experiences, and their actual performance
We focused on runners’ intrapersonal achievement goals (Elliot, Murayama, & Pekrun, 2011), that is, the type of goals that athletes set for themselves in relation to their previous performance, because such goals are highly salient among long distance runners and remain understudied in the sports context
Present Research The present study aimed to extend the limited body of work on the “what” and “why” of achievement goals by (a) focusing on an underexamined achievement goal, (b) sampling athletes participating in an individual instead of a team sport, (c) adopting a prospective instead of cross-sectional research design in the prediction of outcomes that are highly appreciated in competitive sports such as flow and performance, (d) including an objective rather than a self-reported performance indicator, and (e) considering the role of both a more affective and a cognitive explanatory mechanism

Summary

Introduction

Delrue et al: Intrapersonal Achievement Goals and Underlying Reasons relied on Self-determination Theory (SDT: Deci & Ryan, 2000) and the Achievement Goal Approach (AGA: Elliot, 2005) and sought to understand whether the motivational experiences of runners of a popular street race, the “20 km of Brussels”, would relate to their race-appraisals, race experiences, and their actual performance. We examined whether runners’ race appraisals, flow and performance would vary as a function of the type of prerace intrapersonal goal runners set (i.e., approaching success versus avoiding failure) and the reasons for pursuing the goal (i.e., autonomous versus controlled). The satisfaction of the psychological needs for autonomy and competence is critical for full task absorption (Kowal & Fortier, 1999), which is conducive to a flow experience Apart from this more affective mechanism, we considered the role of self-talk, a more cognitive-oriented process, as it denotes “athletes’ verbalizations to themselves” (Hardy, Hall, & Hardy, 2005). Similar to task-approach goals, normative-approach goals have been found to relate positively to performance (Van Yperen et al, 2014), challenge (Adie et al, 2008), as well as threat appraisals (Adie et al, 2008) and negatively to self-handicapping (Chen et al, 2009). Contrary to their approach oriented counterparts, normative-avoidance goals are positively related to self-handicapping (e.g., Chen et al, 2009), cognitive anxiety (Morris & Kavussanu, 2009) and threat appraisals, but negatively to challenge appraisals (Adie et al, 2008)

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion