Lochbaum Marc, Sisneros Cassandra, Kazak Zişan
Department of Kinesiology and Sport Management, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409, USA.
Education Academy, Vytautas Magnus University, 44248 Kaunas, Lithuania.
Eur J Investig Health Psychol Educ. 2023 Jun 21;13(7):1130-1157. doi: 10.3390/ejihpe13070085.
Achievement goal theory has been a dominant motivation framework since the 1980s. The 3 × 2 achievement goal framework emerged in the literature in 2011. We aimed to conduct a systematic review with meta-analysis following the PRISMA guidelines of the 3 × 2 achievement goal research in education, sport, and occupation settings. We retrieved articles from searching EBSCOhost and Google Scholar platforms. Eligible articles contained the 3 × 2 achievement goal in education, sport, or occupation, were published in a peer-reviewed journal, and provided mean data or correlate data. We tested hypotheses concerned with (1) the overall pattern of achievement goal endorsement, (2) achievement goal differences by domain (education, sport) and compulsory nature of the domains or sub-domains, and (3) achievement goal relationships with correlates (e.g., learning strategies, motivations, performance). After screening, 56 articles met all inclusion criteria, providing 58 samples across education ( = 44), sport ( = 10), and occupation ( = 4) settings with 35,031 unique participants from 15 countries. Participants endorsed the task- and self-approach goals more than the counterpart avoidance goals, other-avoidance goals more than other-approach goals, and the intercorrelations and reliability coefficients were acceptable. Minimal impact results from examining within and across study bias statistics. Of importance, the domain (i.e., education, sport) and the compulsory nature of the domain or sub-domains (i.e., primary-secondary education, sport) moderated goal endorsement (group mixed-effects < 0.05, values medium to very large). These groupings also moderated the other goal differences. Concerning our correlates analyses, most meta-analyzed correlations among the achievement goals and correlates were small in meaningfulness with the largest correlations (0.30-0.42) between the approach goals merged and the task- and self-approach goals and facilitative learning strategies and desired motivations. In conclusion, the 3 × 2 achievement goals literature is diverse. Furthering the study and application of this model requires overcoming inherent limitations (i.e., consistent response scale sets), teasing out differences between the task- and self-goals, measuring performance outcomes, and cross-cultural collaborations.
自20世纪80年代以来,成就目标理论一直是一个占主导地位的动机框架。2011年,文献中出现了3×2成就目标框架。我们旨在遵循PRISMA指南,对教育、体育和职业环境中的3×2成就目标研究进行系统综述和荟萃分析。我们通过搜索EBSCOhost和谷歌学术平台检索文章。符合条件的文章包含教育、体育或职业领域的3×2成就目标,发表在同行评审期刊上,并提供均值数据或相关数据。我们检验了与以下方面有关的假设:(1)成就目标认同的总体模式;(2)按领域(教育、体育)以及领域或子领域的强制性性质划分的成就目标差异;(3)成就目标与相关因素(如学习策略、动机、表现)之间的关系。筛选后,56篇文章符合所有纳入标准,提供了来自教育(n = 44)、体育(n = 10)和职业(n = 4)环境的58个样本,共有来自15个国家的35,031名独特参与者。参与者对任务和自我趋近目标的认同高于对应的回避目标,对他人回避目标的认同高于他人趋近目标,且相互关联和信度系数是可接受的。检验研究内和研究间偏差统计的结果影响极小。重要的是,领域(即教育、体育)以及领域或子领域的强制性性质(即中小学教育、体育)调节了目标认同(组混合效应p < 0.05,效应值为中等至非常大)。这些分组也调节了其他目标差异。关于我们的相关因素分析,成就目标与相关因素之间的大多数荟萃分析相关性在意义上较小,合并后的趋近目标与任务和自我趋近目标以及促进性学习策略和期望动机之间的最大相关性为0.30 - 0.42。总之,3×2成就目标的文献多种多样。进一步开展该模型的研究和应用需要克服内在局限性(即一致的反应量表集),梳理任务目标和自我目标之间的差异,测量绩效结果,以及开展跨文化合作。