Hunsu Nathaniel, Oje Adurangba V, Jackson Andrew, Olaogun Olanrewaju Paul
College of Engineering, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, United States.
College of Education, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, United States.
Front Psychol. 2021 Sep 9;12:628004. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.628004. eCollection 2021.
Development of the 3 × 2 achievement goal questionnaire (AGQ) advanced approach and avoidance goals in three goal types within the achievement goal framework: task-, self-, and other-based. The purpose of the present study was to examine empirical support for the construct validity, reliability, and measurement invariance of factors on the questionnaire and compare model fit of the 3 × 2 configuration to other alternatives. In addition to validating some of the findings reported in earlier studies, especially the inclusion of task-based goal orientations, the study highlights a limitation and potential boundary of the 3 × 2 AGQ. While the 3 × 2 model was found to be structurally valid, we found multiple validity supports for a definition-based model of the AGQ scale, which does not differentiate between goal approach or avoidance. The study provides some indications that approach and avoidance goals can be indistinguishable to some respondents. Nonetheless, the scale was invariant across multiple groups making group comparison possible.
3×2成就目标问卷(AGQ)的开发提出了成就目标框架内三种目标类型(基于任务、自我和他人)的进步和回避目标。本研究的目的是检验问卷各因素的结构效度、信度和测量不变性的实证支持,并将3×2结构的模型拟合与其他备选方案进行比较。除了验证早期研究报告的一些结果,特别是基于任务的目标导向的纳入外,该研究还突出了3×2 AGQ的一个局限性和潜在边界。虽然发现3×2模型在结构上是有效的,但我们发现了基于AGQ量表定义模型的多重效度支持,该模型没有区分目标追求或回避。该研究提供了一些迹象表明,对于一些受访者来说,追求和回避目标可能难以区分。尽管如此,该量表在多个群体中是不变的,使得群体比较成为可能。