Towards Contextualising Implicit Theories and Achievement Goals: Rethinking About the Dichotomies

Neha Arora*
Department of Psychology, Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar College, University of Delhi, India.
Periodicity:May - July'2020
DOI : https://doi.org/10.26634/jpsy.14.1.16852

Abstract

The literature on implicit theory and achievement goals posit that individuals can think only in dichotomies i.e. entity or incremental and thus can pursue performance or mastery goals. However, there are contexts in which individuals may endorse both entity and incremental theory simultaneously or adopt both mastery and performance goals together. The present study highlights important limitations in the implicit theory and achievement goal framework which has been generalized across cultures. Therefore, it becomes important to contextualise implicit theories and achievement goals in a framework which is more realistic. 253 students participated in the present study. Achievement goal questionnaire was administered to the participants pre and post administering implicit theory questionnaire with forced choice between performance and mastery goals in the first administration and adding a third alternative 'both the goals' along with performance and mastery goals in the post administration. Results were analyzed using Chi-Square and Descriptive Statistics. Findings reveal that students indicated their preference for the third alternative, i.e., opting for 'both the goals' performance and mastery together highlighting the importance of examination context. The study provides some useful insights for the future research in the domain of academic achievement.

Keywords

Implicit Theories, Achievement Goals, Academic Achievement.

How to Cite this Article?

Arora, N. (2020). Towards Contextualising Implicit Theories and Achievement Goals: Rethinking About the Dichotomies. i-manager's Journal on Educational Psychology, 14(1), 24-34. https://doi.org/10.26634/jpsy.14.1.16852

References

[1]. Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 261-271.
[2]. Ames, C., & Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Students' learning strategies and motivational processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 260- 267.
[3]. Arora, N. (2013). Is entity theory of intelligence always maladaptive? Academic self-concept, well-being and psychological disengagement in relation to entity theory among senior secondary school students. (Unpublished M. Phil. Dissertation). Jawaharlal Nehru University, India.
[4]. Blumenfeld, P. C. (1992). Classroom learning and motivation: Clarifying and expanding goal theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 272-281.
[5]. Boekaerts, M., de Koning, E., & Vedder, P. (2006). Goaldirected behavior and contextual factors in the classroom: An innovative approach to the study of multiple goals. Educational Psychologist, 41(1), 33-51. https://doi.org/10. 1207/s15326985ep4101_5
[6]. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The Ecology of Human Development. Harvard University Press.
[7]. Dhar, R., & Simonson, I. (2003). The effect of forced choice on choice, Journal of Marketing Research, 40, 146- 160.
[8]. Duda, J. L., & Nicholls, J. G. (1992). Dimensions of achievement motivation in schoolwork and sport. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 290-299. https://doi.org/ 10.1037/0022-0663.84.3.290
[9]. Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 40, 1040-1048.
[10]. Dweck, C. S. (2000). Self-theories: Their role in Motivation, Personality, and Development. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
[11]. Eccles, J. S., Wigfield, A., & Schiefele, U. (1998). Motivation to succeed. In Teoksessa W. Damon (series ed.) & N. Eisenberg (vol. ed.) Handbook of child psychology (Vol. 3, s. 1017-109).
[12]. Elliot, A. J. (1999). Approach and avoidance motivation and achievement goals. Educational Psychologist, 34(3), 169-189.
[13]. Elliot, A. J., & Murayama, K. (2008). On the measurement of achievement goals: Critique, illustration, and application. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(3), 613-628. https://doi:10.1037/0022-0663.100.3.613
[14]. Hannula, M. S. (2006). Motivation in mathematics: Goals reflected in emotions. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 63, 165-178.
[15]. Harris, A., Yuill, N., & Luckin, R. (2007). Examining the consistency of mastery and performance goals across group and perceived-ability contexts. Cognitive Studies Research Paper. University of Sussex.
[16]. Haste, H. (1994). The Sexual Metaphor. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
[17]. Janoff-Bulman, R., & Brickman, P. (1981). Expectations and what people learn from failure. In N. Faether (Ed.), Expectations and Actions. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
[18]. Krosnick, J. A., & Presser, S. (2010). Questionnaire design In JD Wright and PV Marsden. Handbook of Survey Research, 263-313.
[19]. Krosnick, J. A., & Fabrigar, L. R. (2013). Designing Great Questionnaires: Insights from Psychology. New York: Oxford Press.
[20]. Larkins, A. G., & Shaver, J. P. (1967). Matched-pair scoring technique used on a first grade yes-no type economics achievement test. Utah Academy of Science, Art and Letters: Proceedings, 44, 229-242.
[21]. Luce, M. F. (1998). Choosing to avoid: Coping with negatively emotion-laden consumer decisions. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(4), 409-433.
[22]. Meece, J. L., Blumenfeld, P. C, & Hoyle, R. H. (1988). Students' goal orientations and cognitive engagement in classroom activities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 514-523
[23]. MHRD, (2014). Education for all towards Quality with Equity. National University of Educational Planning and Administration, New Delhi.
[24]. Murphy, P. K., & Alexander, P. A. (2000). A motivated exploration of motivation terminology. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 3-53.
[25]. Nicholls, J. G. (1984). Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice, and performance. Psychological Review, 91(3), 328–346. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.91.3.328
[26]. O'Keefe, P. A. (2009). The situational adaptiveness of implicit theories of intelligence and achievement goal orientations (Doctoral dissertation), Duke University, NC, USA.
[27]. Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in selfregulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner, (Eds.), Handbook of Self-Regulation: Theory, Research, and Applications (pp. 451–502). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
[28]. Pintrich, P. R. (2003). Motivation and classroom learning. In W. M. Reynolds & G. E. Miller (Eds.), Handbook of Psychology: Educational Psychology (103-122). Hoboken, NJ, US: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
[29]. Quihuis, G., Bempechat, J., Jimenez, N. V., & Boulay, B. A. (2002). Implicit theories of intelligence across academic domains: A study of meaning making in adolescents of Mexican descent. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 96, 87-100.
[30]. Roeser, R. W. (2004). Competing schools of thought in achievement goal theory. Advances in Motivation and Achievement, 13, 265-299.
[31]. Rothenberg, B. B. (1969). Conservation of number aong four- and five-year-old children: Some methodological considerations. Child Development, 40, 383-406.
[32]. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
[33]. Watson, D. R., & Crawford, C. C. (1930). Four types of tests. The High School Teacher, 6, 282-283.
If you have access to this article please login to view the article or kindly login to purchase the article

Purchase Instant Access

Single Article

North Americas,UK,
Middle East,Europe
India Rest of world
USD EUR INR USD-ROW
Pdf 35 35 200 20
Online 35 35 200 15
Pdf & Online 35 35 400 25

Options for accessing this content:
  • If you would like institutional access to this content, please recommend the title to your librarian.
    Library Recommendation Form
  • If you already have i-manager's user account: Login above and proceed to purchase the article.
  • New Users: Please register, then proceed to purchase the article.