The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Age-related differences in achievement goal differentiation.
Abstract
Validity of the 2 X 2 achievement goal framework for school-aged children and adolescents was examined, using self-report responses from 1,196 Korean elementary and middle school students. Confirmatory factor analysis models hypothesizing 4 distinct achievement goal factors demonstrated the best fit in all age groups. Nevertheless, achievement goals of these young students were strongly correlated with each other, regardless of the goal definition or valence. The correlation became increasingly weaker with the increasing age of the respondents. Students in Grades 1-4 endorsed a mastery-approach goal most strongly, but those in Grades 5-9 endorsed a performance-approach goal. Performance-avoidance and mastery-avoidance goals received significantly lower average ratings than did the 2 approach goals in all age groups. Whereas both mastery-approach and performance-approach goals correlated positively with self-efficacy, strategy use, and performance in math, only the performance-approach goal correlated positively with anxiety. Anxiety also correlated positively with the 2 avoidance goals. A performance-avoidance goal further demonstrated positive correlation with help-seeking avoidance, whereas a mastery-avoidance goal did so with strategy use.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation.
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.98.2.224 · Cited by 21,995
A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality.
Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.95.2.256 · Cited by 9,745
Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance.
Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.33 · Cited by 8,332
Motivational processes affecting learning.
Dweck, C. S. (1986) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.41.10.1040 · Cited by 6,971
Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation.
Ames, C. (1992) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.84.3.261 · Cited by 6,468
Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice, and performance.
Nicholls, J. G. (1984) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.91.3.328 · Cited by 4,161
A 2 × 2 achievement goal framework.
Elliot, A. J., & McGregor, H. A. (2001) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.80.3.501 · Cited by 3,953
Approach and avoidance motivation and achievement goals
Elliot, A. J. (1999) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1207/s15326985ep3403_3 · Cited by 3,103
Academic Self-Concept and Self-Efficacy: How Different Are They Really?
Bong, M., & Skaalvik, E. M. (2003) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1023/a:1021302408382 · Cited by 1,994
Self-citationHarackiewicz, J. M., Barron, K. E., Tauer, J. M., Carter, S. M., & Elliot, A. J. (2000) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.92.2.316 · Cited by 892
Cited by
Development of Achievement Motivation and Engagement
Wigfield, A., Eccles, J. S., Fredricks, J. A., Simpkins, S., Roeser, R. W., & Schiefele, U. (2015) · Handbook of Child Psychology and Developmental Science · doi:10.1002/9781118963418.childpsy316 · Cited by 646
Achievement Goals and Achievement Emotions: A Meta-analysis
Huang, C. (2011) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-011-9155-x · Cited by 344
Separation of performance-approach and performance-avoidance achievement goals: A broader analysis.
Murayama, K., Elliot, A. J., & Yamagata, S. (2011) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0021948 · Cited by 166
Kim, D., Yoon, M., Jo, I.-H., & Branch, R. M. (2018) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2018.08.023 · Cited by 151
Enjoyment, Boredom, Anxiety in Elementary Schools in Two Domains: Relations With Achievement
Raccanello, D., Brondino, M., Moè, A., Stupnisky, R., & Lichtenfeld, S. (2019) · The Journal of Experimental Education · doi:10.1080/00220973.2018.1448747 · Cited by 116
Do students distinguish between different types of performance goals?
Bong, M., Woo, Y., & Shin, J. (2013) · The Journal of Experimental Education · doi:10.1080/00220973.2012.745464 · Cited by 57
Self-citationAcademic Achievement and Failure in University Studies: Motivational and Emotional Factors
Gilar-Corbi, R., Pozo-Rico, T., Castejón, J.-L., Sánchez, T., Sandoval-Palis, I., & Vidal, J. (2020) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su12239798 · Cited by 52
Achievement motivation and knowledge development during exploratory learning
DeCaro, D. A., DeCaro, M. S., & Rittle-Johnson, B. (2015) · Learning and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2014.10.015 · Cited by 20
Metadata
- Authors
- Bong, M.
- Venue
- Journal of Educational Psychology
- Published
- 2009-11
- Volume
- 101
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 879-896
- ISSN
- 0022-0663 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-2176
- OpenAlex
- W2170524340
- Cited by
- 280
- References
- 11
- FWCI
- 19.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
