Cited by 380Education, Achievement, and GiftednessHigher Education Research StudiesGrit, Self-Efficacy, and Motivation

A Closer Look at College Students: Self-Efficacy and Goal Orientation

Hsieh, Peggy (Pei-Hsuan), Sullivan, Jeremy R., Guerra, Norma S.·2007·Journal of Advanced Academics

Abstract

Given that student retention is now one of the leading challenges faced by colleges and universities, research seeking to understand students’ reasons for attrition is of critical importance. Two factors influence students’ underachievement and subsequent dropping-out of college: self-efficacy and goal orientation. Self-efficacy refers to peoples’ judgments about their abilities to complete a task. Goal orientations refer to the motives that students have for completing tasks, which may include developing and improving ability (mastery goals), demonstrating ability (performance-approach goals), and hiding lack of ability (performance-avoidance goals). This study examined differences among goal orientations and self-efficacy using two distinct student groups: college students in good academic standing (GPA of 2.0 or higher) and college students on academic probation (GPA of less than 2.0). Results indicated that self-efficacy and mastery goals were positively related to academic standing whereas performance-avoidance goals were negatively related to academic standing. Students in good academic standing reported having higher self-efficacy and adopted significantly more mastery goals toward learning than students on academic probation. Among students who reported having high self-efficacy, those on academic probation reported adopting significantly more performance-avoidance goals than those in good academic standing. These findings suggest that teachers should identify those s…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4219/jaa-2007-500

Cites

6 of 6 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?

  • The main effect of subject GPA echoes findings that higher academic standing, as measured by general GPA, has a negative impact on generalized performance-avoidance goal adoption.

    “The main effect of subject GPA echoes findings that higher academic standing, as measured by general GPA, has a negative impact on generalized performanceavoidance goal adoption (Hsieh, Sullivan, & Guerra, 2007).”

    From Why grades engender performance-avoidance goals: The mediating role of autonomous motivation. (2011) · cites this paper as Hsieh, Sullivan, & Guerra, 2007

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hsieh, P. (.-H., Sullivan, J. R., & Guerra, N. S.
Affiliations
The University of Texas at San Antonio (US)
Venue
Journal of Advanced Academics
Published
2007-05
Volume
18
Issue
3
Pages
454-476
ISSN
  • 1077-4610 (ISSN-L)
  • 1932-202X
  • 2162-9536
OpenAlex
W2136861509
Cited by
380
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 38 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 32 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 31 · 2012: 26
FWCI
9.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Advanced Academics (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
  • Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Research Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Grit, Self-Efficacy, and Motivation
Keywords
self-efficacy, goal orientation, mastery goals, performance-avoidance goals, academic probation, student retention, university students, academic underachievement, student attrition, academic standing

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