Some research findings on achievement goal theoryA number of predictions from achievement goal theory have been tested by researchers.
First, children who hold task-oriented goals (e.g., wanting to learn new skills) should
show persistence in sport situations whereas more ego-motivated counterparts may drop
out of sport at an earlier stage. Some support for this prediction has been found (see
review by Weiss and Ferrer-Caja, 2002). Second, achievement goal theory predicts that
athletes with different goal orientations will have different beliefs about the causes of
their success. As in the previous case, this hypothesis has received some empirical
support. Thus task-oriented athletes tend to regard athletic success as being determined
significantly by the expenditure of effort. By contrast, athletes with an ego orientation
typically believe that success is achieved mainly by having high ability (Roberts, 2001).
Interestingly, the belief that effort rather than ability leads to success may help to explain
why task-oriented athletes tend to persist longer in sport than do ego-oriented
counterparts. A third trend in research findings in this field is that athletes’ goal
orientations are related to the way in which they cope with anxiety. For example,
Ntoumanis, Biddle and Haddock (1999) discovered that when exposed to stressful
situations, task-oriented student athletes tended to use problem-solving strategies (e.g.,
exerting more effort, seeking social support) whereas those with a predominant ego
orientation tended to rely on emotion-focused coping strategies (e.g., venting their
emotions). Furthermore, a task orientation was found to be negatively associated with
thoughts about wanting to escape from a losing situation in sport whereas an ego
orientation was positively associated with such thoughts (Hatzigeorgiadis, 2002).
So far, we have examined the predictions of achievement goal theory in sport as if no
moderating variables were involved. Unfortunately, the impact of situational factors in
this field needs to be considered carefully. Not surprisingly, therefore, researchers in this
field have postulated that an intervening variable called “motivational climate” regulates
the relationship between goal orientation and athletic performance. According to Ames
(1992), motivational climate refers to the perceived structure of the achievement
environment as mediated by the coach’s attitudes and behaviour. In general, two types of
climate may be identified. A “mastery” climate is perceived when the coach places the
emphasis on personal effort and skill development. In such an environment, mistakes are
regarded as sources of feedback and learning. By contrast, an “ego-oriented”
motivational climate is said to prevail when athletes are compared with, and pitted
against, each other and when their mistakes are criticised and punished (Duda and
Pensgaard, 2002). A scale has been developed by Walling, Duda and Chi (1993) to
measure the “Perceived Motivational Climate in Sport”.
Several trends are evident from research findings on motivational climates in sport. To
begin with, available evidence (over 14 studies based on about 4,500 participants)
suggests that a task-orientation or mastery climate is correlated significantly positively
with athletes’ satisfaction and intrinsic motivation (r of approximately 0.70). Next, an
ego-oriented climate is typically correlated negatively with similar motivational indices
(approximate r=0.3) (Harwood and Biddle, 2002). One possible reason for the perceived
advantage of the task-oriented climate over the ego-oriented one is that in the former, the
athlete is encouraged to focus on factors within his or her control whereas in the latter,
athletes tend to use social comparison processes when assessing their own competence
(Duda and Hall, 2001). Generally, most achievement goal theorists (e.g., Ames, 1992;
Motivation and goal-setting in sport 43