Achievement goals as predictors of achievement-relevant processes prior to task engagement.

By Holly Mcgregor, A. Elliot. 2002

475 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/489280fa1f4e36ca1c979b751785ca9e3e7599ab

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

The trichotomous achievement goal model and intrinsic motivation: a sequential mediational analysis (2002, background): “Mastery, but not necessarily performance–approach , goals may be optimal facilitators of perceived autonomy throughout task engagement (Elliot & McGregor, 2001; McGregor and Elliot, 2001) and perceived autonomy has been shown to support intrinsic motivation (Deci & Ryan, 1990).”
Performance-approach goals: good or bad forms of regulation? (2003, unknown): “…and Sakurai (2001); Q=Lee, Sheldon, Turban (2003); R=Lopez (2000); S=McGregor and Elliot (2002) (Study 1); T=McGregor and Elliot (2002) (Study 2); U=McGregor and Elliot (2002) (Study 3); V=Middleton and Midgley (1997); W=Middleton and Midgley (2002); X=Midgley and Urdan (2001); Y=Pajares (2001);…”
Seeing and mastering difficulty: The role of affective change in achievement flow (2010, background): “…positive affect (cf. Kuhl, 2000, 2001; Kazén & Kuhl, 2005), whereas a focus on mastery is associated with the ability to overcome instances of reduced positive affect and to get fully immersed in difficult tasks (Baldwin, 2001; Harackiewicz, Barron, Tauer, & Elliot, 2002; McGregor & Elliot, 2002).”
My intelligence may be more malleable than yours: the revised implicit theories of intelligence (self-theory) scale is a better predictor of achievement, motivation, and student disengagement (2015, unknown): “Research indicates that the scale is psychometrically sound, reliable and a replicable measure of achievement goal constructs (Church, Elliot & Gable, 2001; Donnellan, 2008; Fryer & Elliot, 2007; McGregor & Elliot, 2002).”
A 3 × 2 achievement goal model (2011, result): “For absorption during class, our predictions were identical to those for intrinsic motivation, for the same reasons articulated therein (see Cury, Elliot, Sarrazin, Da Fonseca, & Rufo, 2002; McGregor & Elliot, 2002).”
The Relationship between Future Goals and Achievement Goal Orientations: An Intrinsic-Extrinsic Motivation Perspective. (2010, unknown): “…goals have also been bifurcated into performance-approach and performance-avoidance goals (Elliot, 1999, 2005; Harackiewicz, Barron, Pintrich, Elliot, & Thrash, 2002a; McGregor & Elliot, 2002; Middleton & Midgley, 1997; Skaalvik, 1997; Smith, Duda, Allen, & Hall, 2002; Urdan, 1997; Wolters, 2004).”
Active learning: effects of core training design elements on self-regulatory processes, learning, and adaptability. (2008, unknown): “This path is consistent with work by Elliot and McGregor (2001) and McGregor and Elliot (2002), which has demonstrated a positive relationship between performance-avoid goals and state anxiety.”
Why Grades Engender Performance Avoidance Goals: The Mediating Role of Autonomous Motivation (2011, background): “These results, when taken in conjunction with those of McGregor and Elliot (2002), which show that pretask performance-avoidance goal adoption predicts increased test anxiety, desire to escape, reduced abilityrelated self-esteem, and competence expectancies, are consistent with those of Harter’s…”
The Relation of Self-Determination and Achievement Goals to Taiwanese Eighth Graders' Behavioral and Emotional Engagement in Schoolwork (2008, background): “…low absorption during task engagement, reluctance to seek help with schoolwork, test anxiety, superficial processing of information, and poor performance (Church, Elliot, & Gable, 2001; Elliot & McGregor, 2001; Elliot et al., 1999; McGregor & Elliot, 2002; Skaalvik, 1997; Wolters, 2004).”