Universidad de Oviedo (Spain).
Span J Psychol. 2014;17:E36. doi: 10.1017/sjp.2014.37.
The main goal was to compare idiographic profiles of achievement goal dominance (AGD) and motivational profiles based on 2x2 achievement goals to improve our understanding of how the four achievement goals work in conjunction with one another, and to discern which profiles are most adaptive in the Physical Education context. A total of 351 students (203 males; 148 females) (M = 14.26 ± 1.37 years) from 3 different secondary schools agreed to participate. 86.6% (N = 303) showed AGD, mostly mastery-approach dominance (62.9%).We examined the four AGD groups' idiographic profiles and how they relate to certain positive (autonomous motivation and positive affect) and negative variables (controlled motivation and amotivation). The results supported the hypotheses of AGD theory (MANOVA one-way, Wilks' lambda = .609, F(24, 298) = 7.96, p < .001, η2 = .15). Subsequently, k-means cluster analysis was performed, yielding 4 distinct achievement goal profiles. The most adaptive was named "mastery goals", while "high achievement goals" were the second most adaptive. AGD participants'distribution across the different motivational clusters was also ascertained (MANOVA one-way, Wilks' lambda = .678, F(12, 910) = 12.01, p < .001, η2 = .12).
主要目的是比较特定的成就目标优势（AGD）和基于 2x2 成就目标的动机特征，以增进我们对四个成就目标如何相互配合的理解，并辨别在体育教育背景下哪些特征最具适应性。共有 351 名学生（203 名男生；148 名女生）（M=14.26±1.37 岁）来自 3 所不同的中学，同意参与研究。86.6%（N=303）表现出 AGD，主要是掌握趋近优势（62.9%）。我们考察了四个 AGD 群体的特定特征，以及它们与某些积极（自主动机和积极情绪）和消极变量（控制动机和无动机）的关系。结果支持了 AGD 理论的假设（MANOVA 单向，Wilks' lambda=.609，F(24, 298)=7.96，p<.001，η2=.15）。随后，进行了 k-均值聚类分析，得出了 4 个不同的成就目标特征。最具适应性的被命名为“掌握目标”，而“高成就目标”是第二具适应性的。还确定了 AGD 参与者在不同动机群体中的分布情况（MANOVA 单向，Wilks' lambda=.678，F(12, 910)=12.01，p<.001，η2=.12）。
