Content uploaded by Gunnar Bjørnebekk
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Gunnar Bjørnebekk on Mar 27, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
Mediators and Moderators of Approach-Performance and Avoidance-Performance Relationships in Children: Theoretical and Experimental Aspects
... Thus, a pupil may very well have a strong motive to approach success without being motivated for school work, i.e., without having his/ her motives aroused in the school situation. This is likely to be the case if the probability of success is very high or very low (Atkinson 1964), the psychological distance to goal in time is long (Bjørnebekk 2009a;Gjesme 1974), or the perceived instrumentality of the activity is low (Raynor 1974). Thus, it is important to distinguish between motive and motivation, the first referring to a personality characteristic which may or may not manifest itself in a particular situation, and the second to its manifestation in a specific situation. ...
... Several empirical studies have shown that achievement motives are of significance in relation to performance and satisfaction at school or during problemsolving. The motive to approach success is positively related to performance (Atkinson and Litwin 1960;Bjørnebekk 2009a) and satisfaction and approach motivation (T s ) during problem-solving (Bjørnebekk and Gjesme 2009;Gjesme 1983a). Conversely, the motive to avoid failure is negatively related to performance (Bjørnebekk 2009a;Cock and Halvari 2001) and task well-being (Bjørnebekk 2009a;Gjesme 1983a). ...
... The motive to approach success is positively related to performance (Atkinson and Litwin 1960;Bjørnebekk 2009a) and satisfaction and approach motivation (T s ) during problem-solving (Bjørnebekk and Gjesme 2009;Gjesme 1983a). Conversely, the motive to avoid failure is negatively related to performance (Bjørnebekk 2009a;Cock and Halvari 2001) and task well-being (Bjørnebekk 2009a;Gjesme 1983a). Achievement goal focus as predictor and moderator of the motivation-performance relation Teachers commonly use goals as a strategy to motivate their pupils in the classroom. ...
In two studies, the influence of key emotional and motivational factors on performance in different achievement goal-type situations is examined. In study 1, based on 314 sixth-graders, two types of goal situations were induced; performance and mastery. The goals were examined with respect to important antecedents (e.g., motive dispositions) and several consequences (e.g., performance, satisfaction, pleasant affect, worry, and emotionality). The results showed that the motive to achieve success (M
s) produced positive affects, satisfaction, and increased performance, whereas the motive to avoid failure (M
f) produced worries and performance reduction. In study 2, based on 331 sixth-graders, three types of goal situations were induced; performance–approach, performance–avoidance, and mastery goals. The findings revealed that the most important single factors positively related to performance were M
s and mastery–goal situation. In addition, high M
s pupils performed better under mastery condition than under performance condition. Finally, avoidance-goal situation accentuate the negative effects of high M
f on performance.
... However, pointing out the temporal distance to a goal may not only lead to approach motivation and enhanced performance, for some pupils it may also lead to avoidance motivation (Gjesme, 1974). Activated motivation is a key factor for predicting performance and well-being during problem solving (Bjørnebekk, 2008(Bjørnebekk, , 2009. Research on the effects of temporal distance to goals may therefore be particularly relevant to the connection between teachers' instructions and student outcomes in the classroom. ...
... Results confirming these postulates have been found for conflicts in space (Brown, 1948;Miller & Murray, 1952). More recently, Bjørnebekk (2009) found that present performance increased as a future event or performance goal approached in time. ...
... This conception, combined with the assumption that performance is a positive function of motivational strength, implies that there should be a positive relationship between strength of the motive to achieve success and performance and a negative relationship between strength of the motive to avoid failure and performance (Nygård, 1975, p. 62). Earlier studies have revealed that the motive to avoid failure (M f ) is positively related to avoidance motivation (T f ) and negatively related to approach motivation (T s ) (Gjesme, 1983a) and performance (Bjørnebekk, 2009). Conversely, the motive to approach success (M s ) is positively related to approach motivation (T s ) (Gjesme, 1983a) and performance (Halvari, 1997;Bjørnebekk, 2009) and negatively related to state anxiety (e.g., avoidance motivation; Halvari & Gjesme, 1995). ...
The implications of temporal distance on motivation-related concepts were examined. The results of an experiment, based on 585 Grade 6 students, indicated that both positive (approach) and negative (avoidance) motivation increased as the future goal or event approached in time. This increase in approach and avoidance motivation influenced the performance of the pupils differently. For pupils with success orientation, the performance increased. For pupils with failure orientation, the performance remained about the same.
... The connection between Atkinson's motivation theory and the concept of argumentativeness can be accepted as a link from goal orientations to argumentativeness. Bjørnebekk (2009) also indicated that the motive to avoid failure directly affects the tendency and performance of an individual's problem solving. In addition, goal orientations affect individuals' task preferences and how to behave in challenging situations (Butler & Shibaz, 2008). ...
This study was conducted to investigate the relationships among Turkish preservice science teachers’ argumentativeness, epistemological beliefs, and achievement goals, as well as the reasons for coherencies and incoherencies among these variables. A sequential explanatory research design was applied within the 2 following studies. In Study I, the data from 930 preservice science teachers were investigated with structural equation modeling analysis. This analysis presented evidence regarding the relationships among the variables of the study. For example, preservice science teachers’ scientific epistemological beliefs significantly predicted their argumentativeness and goal orientations. In Study II, 2 students were selected for each argument approach and argument avoidance cases. Data were collected through semistructured interviews and analyzed via a content analysis. The results of this study showed that participants’ self-construal impacted the relationships among their argumentativeness, goal orientations and scientific epistemological beliefs. An investigation of a more comprehensive belief system model including preservice science teachers’ self-construal is suggested considering the overall results.
... positive and negative affects, as well as end-of-study overall satisfaction with this experience (Bjørnebekk, 2009;Updegraff, Gable, & Taylor, 2004). Situational-and contextualbased experiences and judgments as related to recent positive and negative events (Suh, Diener, & Fujita, 1996) and social comparisons (Lyubomirsky & Ross, 1997) reflect more of a "bottom-up" influence on subjective well-being than a "topdown" influence (e.g., personality factors). ...
Two of the most important constructs in research on achievement motivation in educational contexts are achievement goals and achievement motives. Investigating the relationships between the two constructs is essential to providing constructive input to teachers regarding the creation of an optimal achievement climate.
Previous research assumes personality based approach-avoidance temperaments to be predictors of domain-specific achievement goals in a hierarchical model within a trichotomous achievement goal framework (Elliot & Thrash, 2002). The present study investigates the relations between temperaments and achievement goals in a sample of 661 elementary school students to test the validity of this model in an alternative sample by means of a more contemporary 2 X 2 achievement goal framework. A structural equation model supports previous findings that approach temperament serves as predictor of mastery-approach goals, performance approach goals and avoidance temperament of mastery-avoidance goals, performance avoidance goals. In addition, there is some evidence of avoidance temperament as predictor of approach goal and approach temperament as predictor of avoidance goal. These results provide further support to the validity of the model proposed by Elliot and Thrash (2002), and suggests additional relations that add to the knowledge of the relationship between temperament and achievement goals.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.