掌握方法目标:对前因和后果的大规模跨文化分析。

IF 6.4 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Journal of personality and social psychology Pub Date : 2023-08-01 DOI:10.1037/pspp0000436
Jiesi Guo, Xiang Hu, Andrew J Elliot, Herbert W Marsh, Kou Murayama, Geetanjali Basarkod, Philip D Parker, Theresa Dicke
{"title":"掌握方法目标:对前因和后果的大规模跨文化分析。","authors":"Jiesi Guo,&nbsp;Xiang Hu,&nbsp;Andrew J Elliot,&nbsp;Herbert W Marsh,&nbsp;Kou Murayama,&nbsp;Geetanjali Basarkod,&nbsp;Philip D Parker,&nbsp;Theresa Dicke","doi":"10.1037/pspp0000436","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Mastery-approach (MAP) goals, focusing on developing competence and acquiring task mastery, are posited to be the most optimal, beneficial type of achievement goal for academic and life outcomes. Although there is meta-analytic evidence supporting this finding, such evidence does not allow us to conclude that the extant MAP goal findings generalize across cultures. Meta-analyses have often suffered from overrepresentation of Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic (WEIRD) samples; reliance on bivariate correlations; and lack the ability to directly control individual-level background variables. To address these limitations, this study used nationally representative data from 77 countries/regions (<i>N</i> = 595,444 adolescents) to examine the relations of MAP goals to four antecedents (workmastery, competitiveness, fear of failure, fixed mindset) and 16 consequences (task-specific motivational, achievement-related, and well-being outcomes), and tested the cross-cultural generalizability of these relations. Results showed that MAP goals were: (a) grounded primarily in positive but not negative achievement motives/beliefs; (b) most strongly predictive of well-being outcomes, followed by adaptive motivation; (c) positively but consistently weakly associated with achievement-related outcomes, particularly for academic performance (β = .069); (d) negatively and weakly associated with maladaptive outcomes; and (e) uniquely predictive of various consequences, controlling for the antecedents and covariates. Further, the MAP goal predictions were generalizable across countries/regions for 13 of 16 consequences. While directions of effect sizes were slightly mixed for academic performance, perceived reading, and PISA test difficulty, the effect sizes were consistently small for most countries/regions. This generalizability points to quite strong cross-cultural support for the observed patterns. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":16691,"journal":{"name":"Journal of personality and social psychology","volume":"125 2","pages":"397-420"},"PeriodicalIF":6.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mastery-approach goals: A large-scale cross-cultural analysis of antecedents and consequences.\",\"authors\":\"Jiesi Guo,&nbsp;Xiang Hu,&nbsp;Andrew J Elliot,&nbsp;Herbert W Marsh,&nbsp;Kou Murayama,&nbsp;Geetanjali Basarkod,&nbsp;Philip D Parker,&nbsp;Theresa Dicke\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/pspp0000436\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Mastery-approach (MAP) goals, focusing on developing competence and acquiring task mastery, are posited to be the most optimal, beneficial type of achievement goal for academic and life outcomes. Although there is meta-analytic evidence supporting this finding, such evidence does not allow us to conclude that the extant MAP goal findings generalize across cultures. Meta-analyses have often suffered from overrepresentation of Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic (WEIRD) samples; reliance on bivariate correlations; and lack the ability to directly control individual-level background variables. To address these limitations, this study used nationally representative data from 77 countries/regions (<i>N</i> = 595,444 adolescents) to examine the relations of MAP goals to four antecedents (workmastery, competitiveness, fear of failure, fixed mindset) and 16 consequences (task-specific motivational, achievement-related, and well-being outcomes), and tested the cross-cultural generalizability of these relations. Results showed that MAP goals were: (a) grounded primarily in positive but not negative achievement motives/beliefs; (b) most strongly predictive of well-being outcomes, followed by adaptive motivation; (c) positively but consistently weakly associated with achievement-related outcomes, particularly for academic performance (β = .069); (d) negatively and weakly associated with maladaptive outcomes; and (e) uniquely predictive of various consequences, controlling for the antecedents and covariates. Further, the MAP goal predictions were generalizable across countries/regions for 13 of 16 consequences. While directions of effect sizes were slightly mixed for academic performance, perceived reading, and PISA test difficulty, the effect sizes were consistently small for most countries/regions. This generalizability points to quite strong cross-cultural support for the observed patterns. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16691,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of personality and social psychology\",\"volume\":\"125 2\",\"pages\":\"397-420\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of personality and social psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000436\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of personality and social psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000436","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

摘要

掌握方法(MAP)目标侧重于发展能力和获得任务掌握,被认为是学业和生活成果中最理想、最有益的成就目标。虽然有元分析证据支持这一发现,但这些证据并不能让我们得出结论,即现有的MAP目标发现可以在不同文化中推广。荟萃分析经常受到西方、受过教育、工业化、富裕和民主(WEIRD)样本的过度代表性的影响;对双变量相关性的依赖;缺乏直接控制个体水平背景变量的能力。为了解决这些局限性,本研究使用了来自77个国家/地区(N = 595,444名青少年)的具有全国代表性的数据,研究了MAP目标与四个前因(工作精通、竞争力、失败恐惧、固定心态)和16个后果(任务特定动机、成就相关和福祉结果)的关系,并测试了这些关系的跨文化普遍性。结果表明:MAP目标主要基于积极而非消极的成就动机/信念;(b)最能预测幸福结果,其次是适应性动机;(c)与成就相关的结果呈正相关,但始终呈弱相关,尤其是学业成绩(β = 0.069);(d)与适应不良结果呈弱负相关;(e)在控制前因和协变量的情况下,对各种结果具有独特的预测性。此外,MAP的目标预测对16个后果中的13个可推广到各个国家/地区。虽然学业成绩、感知阅读和PISA测试难度的效应量方向略有不同,但大多数国家/地区的效应量始终很小。这种概括性表明对观察到的模式有很强的跨文化支持。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c) 2023 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Mastery-approach goals: A large-scale cross-cultural analysis of antecedents and consequences.

Mastery-approach (MAP) goals, focusing on developing competence and acquiring task mastery, are posited to be the most optimal, beneficial type of achievement goal for academic and life outcomes. Although there is meta-analytic evidence supporting this finding, such evidence does not allow us to conclude that the extant MAP goal findings generalize across cultures. Meta-analyses have often suffered from overrepresentation of Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic (WEIRD) samples; reliance on bivariate correlations; and lack the ability to directly control individual-level background variables. To address these limitations, this study used nationally representative data from 77 countries/regions (N = 595,444 adolescents) to examine the relations of MAP goals to four antecedents (workmastery, competitiveness, fear of failure, fixed mindset) and 16 consequences (task-specific motivational, achievement-related, and well-being outcomes), and tested the cross-cultural generalizability of these relations. Results showed that MAP goals were: (a) grounded primarily in positive but not negative achievement motives/beliefs; (b) most strongly predictive of well-being outcomes, followed by adaptive motivation; (c) positively but consistently weakly associated with achievement-related outcomes, particularly for academic performance (β = .069); (d) negatively and weakly associated with maladaptive outcomes; and (e) uniquely predictive of various consequences, controlling for the antecedents and covariates. Further, the MAP goal predictions were generalizable across countries/regions for 13 of 16 consequences. While directions of effect sizes were slightly mixed for academic performance, perceived reading, and PISA test difficulty, the effect sizes were consistently small for most countries/regions. This generalizability points to quite strong cross-cultural support for the observed patterns. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
12.70
自引率
3.90%
发文量
250
期刊介绍: Journal of personality and social psychology publishes original papers in all areas of personality and social psychology and emphasizes empirical reports, but may include specialized theoretical, methodological, and review papers.Journal of personality and social psychology is divided into three independently edited sections. Attitudes and Social Cognition addresses all aspects of psychology (e.g., attitudes, cognition, emotion, motivation) that take place in significant micro- and macrolevel social contexts.
期刊最新文献
Compassionate love and beneficence in the family. How people (fail to) control the influence of affective stimuli on attitudes. A contest study to reduce attractiveness-based discrimination in social judgment. Group information enhances recognition of both learned and unlearned face appearances. Moderators of test-retest reliability in implicit and explicit attitudes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1