Achievement Goal Theory and Affect: An Asymmetrical Bidirectional Model
Top Cited Papers
- 1 January 2002
- journal article
- Published by Taylor & Francis Ltd in Educational Psychologist
- Vol. 37 (2), 69-78
- https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3702_2
Abstract
This article discusses the research on the relations between achievement goals and develops a conceptual model based on a review of extant literature. The model distinguishes between moods and emotions and the relative roles of perceived classroom goal structures and personal goals. In this article, it is suggested that the relation between achievement goals and affect is asymmetrical and bidirectional. However, given differences in the conceptualization and measurement of affect, the empirical findings are somewhat inconsistent and difficult to interpret in some studies. Thus, there is a clear need for more research on the dynamics of achievement goals and affect in classroom settings.Keywords
This publication has 39 references indexed in Scilit:
- Achievement goals and optimal motivation: Testing multiple goal models.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2001
- Approach and avoidance motivation and achievement goalsEducational Psychologist, 1999
- Goal striving, need satisfaction, and longitudinal well-being: The self-concordance model.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1999
- On the Self-Regulation of BehaviorPublished by Cambridge University Press (CUP) ,1998
- Approach and avoidance achievement goals and intrinsic motivation: A mediational analysis.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1996
- Classroom learning and motivation: Clarifying and expanding goal theory.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1992
- Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1992
- Origins and functions of positive and negative affect: A control-process view.Psychological Review, 1990
- A social^cognitive approach to motivation and personality.Psychological Review, 1988
- Motivational determinants of risk-taking behavior.Psychological Review, 1957