Achievement Goals as Predictors of Expectancy-Value Motivation, Effort, and Intention

Xiaoxia Su1, Ron E. McBride1, Ping Xiang1,

Jaeyoung Yang1, Fatma Sacli2, Robert Speer1

Glenn Schroeder1

(1) Texas A&M University

(2) Hacettepe University 1

Introduction

The prevalence of childhood obesity in U.S.

The discrepancy on obesity rate among at-risk children (Caucasian, 14.0%; African-American, 24.3%; Hispanic-American, 21.2%; Ogden,

Carroll, Kit, & Flegal, 2012 ).

Summer sports camp can provide valuable opportunities for children to be physically active during the summer months (Jago & Baranowski, 2004).

2

Introduction

Motivation is the driving force of physical activity

participation (Pintrich & Schunk, 1996)

Achievement goal theory (Nicholls, 1989) and

expectancy-value theory (Eccles et al., 1983; Wigfield & Eccles, 2000) are

two well-established theories that explain students’

motivation.

3

The 2×2 Achievement Goals

Mastery-approach goal (MAp) Aims to learn or improve one’s skill

Mastery-avoidance goal (MAv) Striving to avoid learning failures or skill decline

Performance-approach goal (PAp) Aims to outperform others

Performance-avoidance goal (PAv) Striving to avoid doing worse than others

4(Elliot & McGregor, 2001)

Expectancy-Value Motivation

Expectancy beliefs: children’s perceptions about how

well they will perform the activity

Task values: perceptions about the value of the activity

Usefulness

Importance

Interest

5

The Purpose of Study

To examine how 2×2 achievement goals

predict expectancy-value motivation, effort,

and intention for future leisure-time physical

activity.

6

MethodsSetting

A summer sports camp in the southern U.S. Two 3-week sessions

Participants 97 boys attending this summer camp

Ages:10- 13 (M=11.56, SD=1.95)

Ethnicity: Hispanic (48.5%), Caucasian American (27.8%), African American (18.6%), Asian American (1.0%), and other (4.1%).

Prior to the study, permission was obtained from the university institutional review board (IRB) and all participants.

7

Methods

2× 2 achievement goals: a 12-item scale adapted from the Achievement Goal Questionnaire–Physical Education (Guan, McBride, & Xiang, 2007)

Expectancy-value motivation: a 11-item scale adapted from Xiang, McBride, and Bruene (2006)

Effort – a 4-item scale adapted from Guan, Xiang, and McBride(2006)

Intention - a 3-item scale adapted from Shen, McCaughtry, and Martin (2007)

Instrumentation

8

MethodsProcedure

Participants completed questionnaires on the third day of camp.

Data Analysis

Cronbach’s coefficient alphas

Descriptive statistics

Pearson product-moment correlations

Multiple regressions

9

Results

  Mean SD Cronbach's α MAp 4.16 0.64 .80MAv 3.19 0.99 .69PAp 3.30 1.03 .81PAv 3.61 0.91 .66Expectancy belief 3.75 0.58 .74Usefulness 3.79 0.71 .75Importance 3.87 0.70 .78Interest 4.17 0.72 .78Effort 3.61 0.78 .72Intention 3.16 1.04 .81

10

ResultsTable 2. Inter-correlations among Study Variables

**p<.01, *p<.05

  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1. MAp 1

2. MAv .10 1

3. PAp .18 .17 1

4. PAv .18 .35** .30** 1

5. Expectancy belief .46** -.15 .33** -.01 1

6. Usefulness .37** -.12 .23* .18 .40** 1

7. Importance .29** .03 .44** .15 .46** .31** 1

8. Interest .46** -.21* .14 .08 .49** .44** .30** 1

9. Effort .49** -.05 .14 .12 .42** .43** .14 .30** 1

10. Intention .36** -.06 .41** .19 .51** .38** .25* .37** .32** 1

11

ResultsMultiple Regressions

Expectancy beliefs, F (4,83) = 10.68, p < .001, R2 = .34

Interest, F (4,83) = 8.14, p < .001, R2 = .28

Importance, F (4,83) = 6.334, p < .001, R2 = .23

Effort, F (4,84) = 5.86, p < .001, R2 = .22

Intention, F (4,84) = 9.31, p < .001, R2 = .31

12

Results

• MAp positively predicted boys' expectancy beliefs (β = .423,

t = 4.58, p < .001), interest (β = .389, t = 4.04, p < .001), importance (β

= .442, t = 4.25, p < .001), effort (β = .404, t = 4.04, p < .001), and

intention (β = .332, t = 3.53, p < .001).

• MAv negatively predicted expectancy beliefs (β = -.208, t = -

2.17, p < .05), interest (β = -.323, t = -3.22, p < .01), and intention (β =

-.221, t = -2.27, p < .05).

13

Results

• PAp positively predicted expectancy beliefs (β = .326, t =

3.39, p < .01), and intention (β = .330, t = 3.35, p < .001).

• PAv was not a predictor of any of the dependent

variables.

14

Discussion/Conclusion

• Supported the view that MAp goals are positively

associated with expectancy-value motivation, effort, and

intention (Agbuga, Xiang, & McBride, 2010; Shen, Chen, & Guan, 2007; Gao et al., 2012)

• Extended the view that MAp goal is motivationally

adaptive to a summer sports camp setting.

15

Discussion/Conclusion

Supported previous studies that PAp was associated

with positive student learning outcomes (Gao et al., 2012; Chen et al.,

2009) .

Based on the study results, we suggest that camp

designers promote MAp and PAp to optimize student

engagement and learning in summer sports camps.

16

Directions for Future Research Include female participants and examine gender

differences

Use longitudinal study to examine the changes on the predictive utility of the 2×2 achievement goals in expectancy-value motivation, effort, and intention

Include qualitative data (e.g., interviews, journals, observations)

Replicate this study in other settings such as physical education classes.

17

References (Selected)1. Jago, R., & Baranowski, T. (2004). Non‐curricular approaches for

increasing physical activity in youth: A review. Preventive Medicine, 39(1), 157‐163.

2. Ogden, C. L., Carroll, M., Kit, B. K., & Flegal, K. M. (2012). Prevalence of obesity and trends in body mass index among US children and Adolescents, 1999-2010. Journal of American Medical Association, 307, 483-491.

3. Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy–value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary educational psychology, 25(1), 68-81.

4. Xiang, P., McBride, R. E., & Bruene, A. (2006). Fourth-grade students’ motivational changes in an elementary physical education running program. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 77, 195-207.

18

Thank you…

19