Cited by 79Education, Achievement, and GiftednessMotivation and Self-Concept in SportsStudent Assessment and Feedback

Are mastery and ability goals both adaptive? Evaluation, initial goal construction and the quality of task engagement

Butler, Ruth·2006·British Journal of Educational Psychology

Abstract

Aims The aims of this research were to examine the predictions that (a) the kind of evaluation pupils anticipate will influence their initial achievement goals and, as a result, the quality and consequences of task engagement; and (b) initial mastery goals will promote new learning and intrinsic motivation and initial ability goals will promote entity beliefs that ability is fixed. Sample Participants were 312 secondary school pupils at ages 13-15. Methods Pupils expected to receive normative evaluation, temporal evaluation (scores over time) or no evaluation. Mastery and ability goals were measured before pupils worked on challenging problems; intrinsic motivation and entity beliefs were measured after task completion. Results Anticipation of temporal evaluation enhanced initial mastery goals, anticipation of normative evaluation enhanced ability goals and the no-evaluation condition undermined both. Anticipation of temporal evaluation enhanced new learning (strategy acquisition and performance gains) and intrinsic motivation both directly and by enhancing initial mastery goals; anticipation of normative evaluation enhanced entity beliefs by enhancing ability goals. Conclusions Results confirmed that evaluation conveys potent cues as to the goals of activity. They also challenged claims that both mastery and ability goals can be adaptive by demonstrating that these were differentially associated with positive versus negative processes and outcomes. Results have theoretical a…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1348/000709905x52319

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Butler, R.
Affiliations
Hebrew University of Jerusalem (IL)
Corresponding author
Butler, Ruth
Venue
British Journal of Educational Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2006-09
Volume
76
Issue
3
Pages
595-611
ISSN
  • 0007-0998 (ISSN-L)
  • 2044-8279
OpenAlex
W2016297636
Cited by
79
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 10
FWCI
5.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • British Journal of Educational Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Motivation and Self-Concept in Sports
  • Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
Keywords
mastery goals, achievement goals, normative evaluation, temporal analysis, intrinsic motivation, entity beliefs, task engagement, new learning, strategy acquisition, student motivation, high school students
MeSH terms
Achievement, Adaptation, Psychological, Adolescent, Aptitude, Culture, Female, Goals, Humans, Male, Professional Competence, Surveys and Questionnaires, Time Factors

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