Journal of Educational Psychology 2006, Vol. 98, No.

3, 583597

Copyright 2006 by the American Psychological Association 0022-0663/06/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/0022-0663.98.3.583

Achievement Goals and Discrete Achievement Emotions: A Theoretical Model and Prospective Test
Reinhard Pekrun
University of Munich

Andrew J. Elliot
University of Rochester

Markus A. Maier
University of Munich
A theoretical model linking achievement goals to discrete achievement emotions is proposed. The model posits relations between the goals of the trichotomous achievement goal framework and 8 commonly experienced achievement emotions organized in a 2 (activity/outcome focus) 2 (positive/negative valence) taxonomy. Two prospective studies tested the model in German and American college classrooms. The results were largely in line with the hypotheses. Mastery goals were positive predictors of enjoyment of learning, hope, and pride and were negative predictors of boredom and anger. Performanceapproach goals were positive predictors of pride, whereas performance-avoidance goals were positive predictors of anxiety, hopelessness, and shame. The results were consistent across studies and robust when controlled for gender, GPA, social desirability, temperament, and competence expectancy. The research is discussed with regard to the underdeveloped literature on achievement emotions and with regard to the motivation and emotion research domains more broadly. Keywords: achievement goals and emotions, anxiety, boredom, enjoyment, hope

Traditionally, emotions have been neglected by educational research (Pekrun & Frese, 1992; Schutz & Lanehart, 2002). Despite the ubiquity of emotions in the classroom, research on emotions in achievement contexts has been slow to emerge, with just a few notable exceptions (studies on test anxiety, Zeidner, 1998; attributional research on emotions following success and failure, Weiner, 1985). There has been an increase in the number of studies on students achievement emotions during the past 10 years (Schutz & Pekrun, in press), but compared with cognitive and motivational constructs, students emotions continue to be underresearched. Basic research in psychology and the neurosciences, however, has shown that emotions are of fundamental importance for learning and memory, motivation, development, psychological health, and neuroimmunological functioning (Lewis & Haviland-Jones, 2000). Emotions are important across age groups, genders, and cultures (Shweder & Haidt, 2004), and the impact of emotions in educational contexts is pervasive. For example, emotions can impact on students academic learning and performance by changing brain dopamine levels affecting long-term memory (Ashby, Isen, & Turken, 1999), by directing attentional processes and the

Reinhard Pekrun and Markus A. Maier, Department of Psychology, University of Munich, Munich, Germany; Andrew J. Elliot, Department of Clinical and Social Psychology, University of Rochester. This research was supported by a grant from the Bavarian State Ministry of Sciences, Research and the Arts to Reinhard Pekrun and by a Friedrich Wilhelm Bessels award from the Humboldt foundation to Andrew J. Elliot. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Reinhard Pekrun, Department of Psychology, University of Munich, Leopoldstrasse 13, 80802, Munich, Germany. E-mail: pekrun@edupsy.uni-muenchen.de 583

use of cognitive resources (Meinhardt & Pekrun, 2003), by inducing and sustaining student interest in learning material (Ainley, Corrigan, & Richardson, 2005; Krapp, 2005), by triggering different modes of information processing and problem solving (Isen, 1999), and by facilitating or impeding students self-regulation of learning and performance (Pekrun, Goetz, Titz, & Perry, 2002). Emotions significantly add to the prediction of learning and achievement, over and above the predictive value of cognitive and motivational constructs (see research on anxiety [Zeidner, 1998], shame [Turner & Schallert, 2001], and boredom [Pekrun et al., 2002]; see also work on the effects of emotions on brain functioning [Parrott & Spackman, 2004; Phillips, Bull, Adams, & Fraser 2002]. Given the relevance of emotions for student learning and achievement, it is important to acquire information on the antecedents of students emotions so that recommendations can be derived for how teacher instruction and classroom environments can be shaped in emotionally sound (Astleitner, 2000) ways. Students achievement goals are certainly one promising set of antecedents, as goals are thought to exert a broad influence on students affect, cognition, and behavior in achievement settings (Dweck, 1986; Elliot, 1997; Nicholls, 1984). More specifically, goals can be assumed to regulate the achievement-related thoughts and actions that shape students emotions. Recent research on students achievement goals has begun to analyze the relationships between students goals and emotions (Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2002). However, most of the studies that have been conducted to date have used a dichotomous model of achievement goals that only distinguishes between mastery and

584

PEKRUN, ELLIOT, AND MAIER

performance goals.1 Similarly, with the exception of investigations focused on test anxiety, most of these studies have used general, two-dimensional conceptions of emotion (i.e., positive vs. negative affect). The dichotomous model of achievement goals does not incorporate the approach versus avoidance nature of goals, which is of fundamental importance for students motivation (Elliot, 1997). Similarly, two-dimensional models of emotion account for global differences in the experience of emotion but do not take important qualitative differences between emotions into account (Frijda, 1986; Izard & Ackerman, 2004; Pekrun, 1988). Accordingly, as detailed below, the available empirical evidence on the relationship between achievement goals and emotions seems to lack consistency, with a few exceptions. We believe that this lack of consistency is due to the use of dichotomous conceptions in much of the extant research. By implication, we assume that progress in research on achievement goals and emotions depends on the use of more differentiated concepts of both goals and emotions. The present research aims to advance our knowledge of goal-emotion relations by using such concepts. More specifically, the previous contribution of this research is to propose a theoretical framework linking the trichotomous model of achievement goals conceptualized by Elliot and colleagues (mastery, performance-approach, and performance-avoidance goals; Elliot & Church, 1997; Elliot & Harackiewicz, 1996) to a number of discrete achievement emotions commonly experienced by students in the classroom and addressed by Pekruns (Pekrun et al., 2002) 2 2 (Object Focus Valence) taxonomy of achievement emotions (i.e., enjoyment, hope, pride, boredom, anger, anxiety, hopelessness, and shame). Hypotheses regarding the influence of these goals on these emotions were tested in two predictive studies. Whereas most of the extant research has used student populations in the United States, the present research examined goal-emotion links across two different cultural contexts: university settings in Germany and the United States.

Prior Research on Achievement Goals and Emotions

Research on achievement goals and emotions has used emotion constructs derived from general approaches to positive versus negative affect (e.g., Tellegen, Watson, & Clark, 1999) or from research on test anxiety (Zeidner, 1998). We review this research in the following section (see also Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2002, for a more detailed overview of this and related work).

school). In these studies, mastery goals have been consistently positively related to upper elementary, middle, and high school students positive affect toward mathematics (Linnenbrink, 2005), science (Meece, Blumenfeld, & Hoyle, 1988; Nolen & Haladyna, 1990), or school learning in general (Kaplan & Maehr, 1999; Nicholls, Patashnick, & Nolen, 1985; Roeser, Midgley, & Urdan, 1996; Seifert, 1995). In a prospective investigation by Pintrich (2000), junior high school students with different multiple goal combinations (high high, highlow, low high, and lowlow mastery vs. performance goals) were compared. Students characterized by both high-mastery goals and high-performance goals had the highest level of positive affect in their math classrooms at the end of the study. Results for mastery goals and negative affect have been less consistent. Mastery goals have been negatively related to upper elementary and undergraduate students negative affect in some studies (Linnenbrink, 2005; Linnenbrink, Ryan, & Pintrich, 1999; Seifert, 1995), but null results have emerged in others (Meyer, Turner, & Spencer, 1997; Turner, Thorpe, & Meyer, 1998). In the Pintrich (2000) study, no significant difference in negative affect was observed among the various mastery/performance goal combinations. Findings for the relations between performance goals and affect have also been inconsistent across studies. In some studies, performance goals have been linked to negative affect (Elliott & Dweck, 1988; Meyer et al., 1997; Turner et al., 1998), but in other studies null results have been obtained (Linnenbrink, 2005; Seifert, 1995). Likewise, performance goals have sometimes been linked to positive affect, but other times null relations have been observed (Meece et al., 1988; Nicholls et al., 1985; Nolen & Haladyna, 1990; Roeser et al., 1996). Finally, recent research by Sideridis (2003, 2005) on the relations between performance-approach versus performance-avoidance goals and affect in fifth- and sixth-grade students has also produced a mixed pattern of results. Performance-approach goals were found to be unrelated to both positive and negative affect in mathematics class. Performance-avoidance goals were linked to negative affect in one study (Sideridis, 2003), but in another study in which performance-approach and performance-avoidance goals were contrasted, no difference in negative affect was observed (Sideridis, 2005, Study 3).

Achievement Goals and Test Anxiety

The one discrete emotion that has received empirical attention in the achievement goal literature is test anxiety. Three of the extant studies used the dichotomous model of goals. In studies by Linnenbrink (2005) and Wolters, Yu, and Pintrich (1996), neither mastery nor performance goals were significantly related to students test anxiety. In the aforementioned study by Pintrich (2000), the test anxiety scores of students with various combinations of mastery and performance goals did not differ from each other. A different picture has emerged, however, in studies on achievement goals and test anxiety when performance-approach and perOther terms, such as learning versus performance goals and task versus ego goals have also been used in the dichotomous model. In the present work, we use the terms mastery versus performance goals because they are the modal designations used in the literature.
1

Achievement Goals and Positive Versus Negative Academic Affect

Most studies on achievement goals and general affect have used the dichotomous model of goals and worked under the assumption that mastery goals are beneficial to, and performance goals detrimental for, students affective experience. Typically, affect has been operationalized by assessing different emotions and combining them into summary measures of positive and negative affect (e.g., Pintrich [2000] assessed positive affect with four items asking students how often they felt happy, had fun, felt proud about themselves, and were in a good mood during school, and negative affect was assessed with four items asking students how often they felt angry, ashamed, embarrassed, or frustrated in

GOALS AND EMOTIONS

585

formance-avoidance goals have been distinguished. In most of these studies, mastery goals have been found to be unrelated to test anxiety in samples across various age groups (from elementary school to college), and the relations for performance-approach goals have been either weakly positive or nonsignificant (Elliot & Church, 1997; Middleton & Midgley, 1997; Pajares & Cheong, 2004; Sideridis, 2005; Skaalvik, 1997; Zusho, Pintrich, & Cortina, 2005). In contrast, and without exception, performance-avoidance goals have been shown to be positively related to test anxiety, including undergraduates trait and state test anxiety (Elliot & McGregor, 1999; McGregor & Elliot, 2002), and elementary and middle school students test anxiety in mathematics class, language class, and sports (Cury, Elliot, Sarrazin, Da Fonseca, & Rufo, 2002; Middleton & Midgley, 1997; Pajares & Cheong, 2004; Sideridis, 2005; Skaalvik, 1997; Zusho et al., 2005). For example, in a developmentally focused study by Pajares and Cheong (2004), performance-avoidance goals were consistently positively related to writing apprehension in students at Grades 4 to 5, 6 to 8, and 9 to 11 (rs ranged from .39 to .45, p .001). In summary, it seems that two consistent findings have emerged from the research conducted on achievement goals and emotions to date. First, mastery goals are positively related to students positive affect. Second, performance-avoidance goals are positively related to students test anxiety. Findings for these relations appear to be consistent across age groups from elementary school to college, and across academic domains. Beyond these two consistently observed links, however, the empirical patterns are not clear, and it seems that the inconsistent findings observed in the literature cannot be explained by developmental changes or differences between academic domains. Given that neither age nor domain differences appear to be viable explanations, how can the consistencies and inconsistencies of the extant research be interpreted? In the two lines of research that have produced consistent results, relatively specific goal and emotion constructs were used. In research on mastery goals and positive affect, the goal construct was a pure mastery-approach goal, and the affect construct was rather concretely focused on enjoyment or on related constructs (like satisfaction, or being in a good mood). Similarly, in research on performance-avoidance goals and test anxiety, the goal construct was a pure performanceavoidance goal and the affect construct was, explicitly, a discrete emotion. In contrast, in research yielding less consistent results, either the goal construct was an omnibus goal, or the affect construct was quite diffuse in nature. Accordingly, we believe that a key to obtaining greater consistency in this literature, and to acquiring a clearer portrait of the goal-emotion link, is to attend to the approach-avoidance distinction with regard to the goal construct and to examine discrete, rather than general, emotional experience.

2005), and are themselves facilitators of a variety of motivationrelevant processes. More specifically, goals are presumed to facilitate different kinds of appraisals pertaining to desired and undesired outcomes, and these appraisals contribute to the activation of different kinds of emotions. As such, we assume that specific links may be identified between achievement goals and discrete achievement emotions. However, before addressing these specific links, a conceptual analysis of discrete achievement emotions and their associated appraisals needs to be articulated.

A 2 2 Taxonomy of Achievement Emotions

Discrete emotions can be classified on a number of dimensions (e.g., object focus, valence, activation, duration, intensity). As proposed by Pekrun (1992b; Pekrun et al., 2002), two such dimensions of particular importance for achievement emotions are object focus and valence. Concerning object focus, activity-related emotions can be distinguished from outcome-related emotions. Activity-related emotions include, for example, enjoyment of learning, boredom experienced during learning, and anger about learning assignments or task demands. Outcome-related emotions include both retrospective outcome emotions (e.g., pride and shame following success and failure) and prospective, anticipatory outcome emotions (e.g., hope, anxiety, and hopelessness relating to upcoming success or failure). Concerning valence, positive versus negative achievement emotions can be differentiated. This yields a 2 2 taxonomy of achievement emotions (or 2 3 taxonomy when differentiating retrospective from prospective outcome emotions; see Table 1). Emotions that are known to be important in achievement contexts can be grouped into cells of this taxonomy. In Table 1, achievement emotions are listed that have been found to be experienced frequently by middle school, high school, and university students (Pekrun, 1992c; Pekrun et al., 2002; Zeidner, 1998). These emotions are grouped according to the typical object focus and valence reported by students.

Appraisals and Achievement Emotions

Appraisals are assumed to be important proximal determinants of human emotions, including achievement emotions (Scherer, Schorr, & Johnstone, 2001). Among the many categories of appraisals relevant for emotion (Roseman, 2001), two may be of primary relevance in achievement contexts, as argued in Pekruns (2000; Pekrun et al., 2002) control-value theory of achievement emotions: (a) the perceived controllability of achievement activities and outcomes (as indicated by competence perceptions and

Table 1 A 2 2 Taxonomy of Achievement Emotions

Valence Object focus Activity Outcome Prospective Retrospective Positive Enjoyment Hope Pride Negative Boredom Anger Anxiety Hopelessness Shame

Toward a Theoretical Model Linking Achievement Goals and Discrete Achievement Emotions
We propose a model of the influence of achievement goals on discrete achievement emotions. In this model, we define goals as cognitive representations of future objects or outcomes that individuals are committed to approach or to avoid (see Elliot & Fryer, in press). These representations can be influenced by dispositional motives, self-perceptions, or environmental affordances (Elliot,

586

PEKRUN, ELLIOT, AND MAIER

achievement-related causal cognitions; Pekrun, 1992a; Turner & Schallert, 2001) and (b) the subjective value of achievement activities and outcomes. The control-value theory of achievement emotions posits that perceived controllability and the positive subjective value of achievement activities produce positive activity emotions like enjoyment of learning and reduce negative activity emotions like boredom and anger. Controllability of achievement outcomes and the positive subjective value of these outcomes are assumed to foster positive outcome emotions like hope and pride. Lack of controllability and the negative subjective value of outcomes are expected to produce negative outcome emotions like anxiety, hopelessness, or shame. For example, failure-related anxiety is assumed to be triggered if failures are expected that would be important to avoid but are perceived as not being sufficiently controllable (Pekrun, 1992a).

Performance-avoidance goals are assumed to focus prospective attention on the possibility of failure, ones lack of or doubts about controllability, and the negative value of failure; retrospective attention should be focused on the negative value of the outcomes acquired. Therefore, performance-avoidance goals are expected to impel emotions focusing, prospectively or retrospectively, on negative achievement outcomes. More precisely, these goals are expected to be a positive predictor of anxiety, hopelessness, and shame.

Corollaries and Caveats

The model that we have overviewed links different emotions to different goals. However, to avoid misunderstandings, two implications of the present analysis are important to note. First, it is groups of emotions that are posited to be linked to goals, rather than single emotions. That is, achievement goals are not assumed to give rise to one achievement emotion only (for a similar view, see Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2002). Goals frame cognitive perspectives on situations, activities, and outcomes, but they do not define the more subtle and specific appraisals differentiating single emotions. For example, goals per se do not define whether anxiety or hopelessness is experienced when the focus is on outcomes and the possibility of failure. Such differentiations depend on additional factors that underlie appraisals, including situational circumstances and appraisal-related beliefs (e.g., selfconcept of ability). Second, our theoretical analysis is guided by the assumption that emotions are shaped by appraisal processes. It should be noted, however, that appraisals need not be conscious for an emotion to be induced. Rather, appraisal processes can become routinized over time and with repeated experience. That is, for everyday achievement activities, appraisal processes can become automatic, such that goals trigger emotions in procedural, schematic fashion (Clore & Ketelaar, 1997; Pekrun, 1988; Reisenzein, 2001).

Linking Achievement Goals and Achievement Emotions

Achievement goals direct the attentional focus of individuals such that situational appraisals and self-related cognitions are framed by the perspective implied by the goal (Dweck & Leggett, 1988; Elliot & Harackiewicz, 1996; Nicholls, 1989). Accordingly, we propose that achievement goals facilitate the control and value appraisals underlying achievement emotions, thereby influencing these emotions. Specifically, we posit that mastery goals focus attention on ongoing mastery of the activity, controllability and available competencies, and the positive value of the activity itself. Therefore, mastery goals are expected to foster positive emotions linked to achievement activities and to reduce negative activity emotions. More precisely, these goals are expected to be a positive predictor of the enjoyment of learning and a negative predictor of boredom and anger (for a summary of these proposals, see Table 2). In contrast, performance-based goals are thought to focus attention on normative achievement outcomes in either prospective or retrospective ways. Performance-approach goals are posited to focus prospective attention on the possibility of attaining positive outcomes, the controllability of these outcomes, and the positive value of these outcomes; retrospective attention should be focused on the positive value of the outcomes attained. Therefore, performance-approach goals are expected to be beneficial for emotions focusing, prospectively or retrospectively, on positive achievement outcomes. More precisely, these goals are expected to be a positive predictor of hope and pride.

Summary of Aims and Hypotheses

In two studies, we tested the proposed goal emotion links in samples of German (Study 1) and American (Study 2) undergraduates enrolled in introductory-level psychology courses. In each of the two studies, we assessed students course-related achievement goals early in the semester and their subsequent achievement emotions near the end of the semester. More specifically, in Study 1, students learning-related emotions experienced while studying

Table 2 The Proposed Influence of Achievement Goals on Discrete Achievement Emotions

Goal Mastery Focus on activity, controllability, positive value of activity Performance-approach Focus on outcome, controllability, positive outcome value Performance-avoidance Focus on outcome, lack of controllability, negative outcome value 3 3 3 Emotion Activity Enjoyment (), Boredom (), Anger () Positive outcome Hope (), Pride () Negative outcome Anxiety (), Hopelessness (), Shame ()

GOALS AND EMOTIONS

587

for the course were assessed. In Study 2, students class-related emotions experienced in relation to their classes in general were assessed. In order to ensure that any observed relations were not spurious, we controlled for gender and prior level of achievement in Study 1 and for gender, social desirability, positive and negative temperament, and competence expectancy in Study 2. In controlling for social desirability and temperament in Study 2, we sought to document that the observed relations were not due to valencebased response sets or students general physiologically based dispositions. Finally, we also examined whether multiple goals or the interaction between goals and competence expectancies predicted emotions. By using both German and American student samples, we sought to test the generalizability of goal emotion links across two different cultural contexts. Traditionally, the German and the American university systems differ in a number of aspects that are important for students motivation. Specifically, most study programs and courses are less structured in the German than in the American system, implying that more self-regulation is expected from students in the German system. Second, achievement demands and assessments are organized differently. There is less frequent high-stakes testing in the German system to date, and course exams are typically less frequent. Both of these differences were true for the German and American samples in the present research. Succinctly stated, the primary hypotheses we examined in our research are as follows (see Table 2): Hypothesis 1. Mastery goals positively predict enjoyment of learning and negatively predict boredom and anger. Hypothesis 2. Performance-approach goals positively predict hope and pride. Hypothesis 3. Performance-avoidance goals positively predict anxiety, hopelessness, and shame.

Goals Questionnaire (AGQ). Participants goals for their introductory psychology class during the semester were assessed. Each goal was assessed with three items. The standard items for mastery goals (e.g., I want to learn as much as possible from this class) and performance-approach goals (e.g., It is important for me to do well compared to others in this class) were used. The performance-avoidance goal items were revised to address concerns raised by Elliot and Thrash (2001). Specifically, the items were made to explicitly emphasize a normative referent, and the item that contained motive (i.e., fear of failure) content (My fear of performing poorly in this class is often what motivates me) was changed altogether. As such, the three items of the revised performance-avoidance goal measure were as follows: My goal is to not perform poorly relative to my classmates, I just want to avoid doing poorly in this class compared with others, My goal in this class is to avoid performing poorly compared to the rest of the class. Participants responded on a 1 (not at all true of me) to 5 (very true of me) scale, and scores were summed to create the three goal indexes (mastery goal: .77; performance-approach goal: .94, performance-avoidance goal .73).2 Achievement emotions. The learning-related emotion scales of Pekrun et al.s (2002) Achievement Emotions Questionnaire (AEQ) were used to assess the emotions participants experienced when studying for their course. The instructions for the measure asked respondents to describe how they felt, typically, when studying for their course. The scales assess eight different emotions: enjoyment of learning (10 items; e.g., I enjoy dealing with the course material), hope (6 items; e.g., I feel confident when studying), pride (6 items; e.g., Im proud of myself), boredom (11 items; e.g., Studying for my course bores me), anger (9 items; e.g., I get angry when I have to study), anxiety (11 items; e.g., I get tense and nervous when studying), hopelessness (11 items; e.g., I feel hopeless when I think about studying), and shame (11 items; e.g., I feel ashamed). Participants responded on a 1 (not at all) to 5 (very much) scale, and the scores were summed to form the emotion indexes (enjoyment: .91, hope: .89, pride: .89, boredom: .94, anger: .92, anxiety: .93, hopelessness: .95, shame: .90). High school grade point average (GPA). High school GPA was used to assess prior achievement level. German final high school grades range from 1 to 4, with 1 indicating high achievement and 4 indicating low achievement. Scores were reversed such that low values indicate low achievement and high values indicate high achievement.

Study 1 Method Participants and Procedure

One hundred and eighty-seven (115 female and 72 male) undergraduates in introductory psychology courses (focusing on statistics) in Germany participated in the study in return for extra course credit (age: M 22.39, SD 4.66 years). Participants completed the measures in two different sessions. They completed the achievement goals measure in a take-home packet in the 3rd week of the semester, at a point in time when students have undoubtedly formed goals for the course. The achievement emotions measure was administered in a take-home packet later in the semester, approximately 12 weeks after completion of the goals measure, when students were studying for their course. The study design thus provided a clear temporal separation of the assessment of goals and emotions. One hundred and two (66 female and 36 male) students completed the measures at both the first and the second assessment. Attrition analyses revealed no differences between those who completed and did not complete both sets of measures.

Results Preliminary Analysis, Descriptive Statistics, and Intercorrelations

Prior to the primary analyses, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to document that the revised AGQ retained the same structural properties as the original scale (i.e., three factors: mastery goals, performance-approach goals, and performance-avoidance goals). The analysis was conducted using AMOS 4; covariance matrices served as input and solutions were generated on the basis of maximum-likelihood estimation. Following Hoyle and Panters (1995) recommendation, we used both absolute and incremental fit indexes to evaluate model fit. The results confirmed that the hypothesized three-factor solution had a good fit to the data, 2(24, N 187) 46.21, p .01; 2/df ratio 1.92; Comparative Fit Index (CFI) .98; TuckerLewis Index (TLI) .96; root-mean-square error of approximation (RMSEA) .070. All factor loadings were significant, and the
In both Study 1 and Study 2, reliability coefficients for all measures pertain to the present samples.
2

Measures
Achievement goals. The goals of the trichotomous achievement goal model were assessed with Elliot and McGregors (2001) Achievement

588

PEKRUN, ELLIOT, AND MAIER

Table 3 Descriptive Statistics for the Study Variables (Study 1)

Variable Mastery goals Performance-approach goals Performance-avoidance goals Enjoyment Hope Pride Boredom Anger Anxiety Hopelessness Shame GPA M 12.31 6.37 7.33 27.31 15.19 22.03 20.60 24.97 25.90 19.44 26.40 2.22 SD 2.19 2.99 2.62 7.91 4.35 10.19 8.10 9.51 9.38 7.93 7.05 0.47 Possible range 315 315 315 1050 630 1050 1155 945 1155 1155 1155 14 Observed range 615 315 314 950 725 1050 1144 1145 1150 1153 1145 1.23.7

Note. The data are from participants who completed the measures both at the beginning and at the end of the semester. GPA grade point average.

average factor loading was .78. This three-factor model fit significantly better than a two-factor model comprised of mastery goals and omnibus performance goals (performance-approach and performance-avoidance goals collapsed together), 2(2) 25.62, p .001. Table 3 displays the descriptive statistics for each of the variables in the study. Table 4 presents the Pearson product moment correlations among these same variables.

Achievement Goals as Predictors of Achievement Emotions

Simultaneous multiple regression analyses were conducted to examine the predictive relationships between the achievement goal and achievement emotion variables, with separate analyses for the different emotions. The influence of gender was also examined in preliminary analyses, and gender was retained in the model when significant (Judd & Kenny, 1981).3 All relations with a standardized coefficient at or exceeding .20 are reported below. Table 5 presents a summary of the results from these analyses. The enjoyment regression revealed that mastery goals were a positive predictor of enjoyment, F(1, 97) 14.99, p .01 ( .37). A gender effect, F(1, 97) 11.17, p .01 ( .32), indicates that men reported more enjoyment than did women. In the hope regression, mastery goals were a positive predictor of hope, F(1, 97) 9.92, p .01 ( .31). A gender effect, F(1, 97) 9.88, p .01 ( .31), indicates that men reported more hope than did women. The pride regression revealed that mastery goals, F(1, 97) 11.70, p .01 ( .32) were a positive predictor of pride. Again, there was a gender effect, F(1, 97) 11.38, p .01 ( .32), indicating that men reported more pride than did women. No other relationships were significant for any of the positive emotions. The boredom regression revealed that mastery goals were a negative predictor of boredom, F(1, 98) 9.81, p .01 ( .30). In the anger regression, mastery goals were a negative predictor of anger, F(1, 97) 3.96, p .05 ( .20). A gender effect, F(1, 97) 3.89, p .05 ( .20), indicates that women reported more anger than did men. The anxiety regression showed that performance-avoidance goals are a positive predictor of anxiety, F(1, 98) 11.28, p .01 ( .43). The hopelessness

regression indicates that performance-avoidance goals evidenced a positive trend as a predictor of hopelessness, F(1, 97) 2.41, p .12 ( .20). A gender effect, F(1, 97) 6.35, p .01 ( .25), indicates that women reported more hopelessness than did men. Finally, the shame regression did not yield any significant relations with achievement goals. However, there was a trend for a positive link between performance-avoidance goals and shame, F(1, 97) 2.37, p .13 ( .20). No other relationships were significant for any of the negative emotions. Following the examination of individual goals, we conducted additional analyses to test for multiple goal effects. Specifically, the two-way interactions among the achievement goal variables were added to the model, and the initial analyses were repeated. Interaction terms were computed after centering the variables. We did not have any a priori expectations for such effects, and not a single interaction attained significance in these analyses.

Achievement Goals as Predictors of Achievement Emotions Controlling GPA

Next, we repeated the initial analyses with GPA included in the model. The analyses demonstrated the robustness of the relations when controlling for GPA. Each of the significant relations reported in the initial analyses remained significant with GPA controlled (see Table 5), and the effect sizes of the coefficients remained the same.

Discussion
The preliminary findings of this study corroborated the factor structure of the AGQ in a sample of German students. The threefactor model was clearly superior to a two-factor mastery versus performance goal model in a CFA, and the pattern of factor loadings supported the item structure of each of the goal scales. The primary results revealed clear links between students courserelated achievement goals at the beginning of the semester and
We also examined Gender Goal interactions but did not find any consistent, replicable interaction effects across the two studies.
3

GOALS AND EMOTIONS 13

589

Table 4 Pearson ProductMoment Correlations for the Study Variables (Study 1)

Note. The data are from participants who completed the measures both at the beginning and at the end of the semester. GPA grade point average. * p .10. ** p .05. *** p .01.

.17* .18* .30*** .22** .28*** .30*** .10 .04 .00 .11 .01 .23*

their emotions experienced while studying for the course 3 months later. In line with Hypothesis 1, mastery goals were positively related to subsequent enjoyment of learning and were negatively related to subsequent boredom and anger. In addition, mastery goals were positively related to hope and pride. Contrary to Hypothesis 2, however, performance-approach goals were unrelated to subsequent hope and pride. In accord with Hypothesis 3, performanceavoidance goals were positively related to subsequent anxiety, and there were trends for similar links with hopelessness and shame. No evidence for multiple goal effects, beyond the main effects of the three goals, was found. The unexpected link between mastery goals and both hope and pride calls for an explanation. We believe that it may well be that students not only focus on ongoing learning activities per se when oriented toward mastery goals but that they also think prospectively about the chance to gain competence and retrospectively about the competence gains already acquired. Prospective and retrospective thoughts of this kind may facilitate prospective hope and retrospective pride, thus accounting for why mastery goals predicted these two emotions. Furthermore, Lewis and Sullivan (2005) have distinguished between task-based pride (i.e., pride in ones accomplishment per se) and self-based pride (i.e., hubris at ones superiority), and it may be the former that is linked to mastery goals. In addition to being linked to goals, five of the emotions were significantly related to gender. More specifically, there was evidence that male students experienced more enjoyment of learning, more hope and pride, and less anger and hopelessness while studying for the course than did female students. These gender effects may have been due to the fact that the material in the introductory-level courses was focused on statistics in psychology. Affective attitudes toward mathematics and statistics are known to be gender-linked (Hyde, Fennema, Ryan, Frost, & Hopp, 1990). Specifically, male students have been found to experience more positive emotions, and female students more negative emotions, toward mathematics-related topics, which is likely due to different self-perceptions of ability and different interests in this domain (Zirngibl, 2004). Our findings are in line with this evidence. In summary, with the exception of shame, all of the emotions examined in this study were significantly predicted by achievement goals, with most of the links being congruent with our hypotheses. These findings are impressive given that the goals were assessed 3 months prior to the assessment of emotions. The findings proved to be quite robust, as they remained the same when gender and high school GPA were controlled.

.66*** .11 .00 .21** .00 .19** .15 .02 .32*** .23** .02

.05 .01 .15 .11 .23** .33*** .16 .32*** .11 .15

.79*** .83*** .53*** .48*** .45*** .51*** .24** .04 .23**

.78*** .45*** .62*** .61*** .72*** .39*** .08 .23**

.40*** .35*** .38*** .51*** .21** .04 .23**

.54*** .26*** .34*** .30*** .04 .03

.72*** .74*** .54*** .05 .17*

.87*** .71*** .10 .22**

.66*** .21** .26***

10

.04 .08

11

.01

12

Mastery goals Performance-approach goals Performance-avoidance goals Enjoyment Hope Pride Boredom Anger Anxiety Hopelessness Shame GPA Gender

Study 2
Study 2 had two major aims. A first aim was to examine whether the relations between the achievement goals and achievement emotions observed in Study 1 would replicate in another culture (Germany vs. the United States) and with different types of emotions (class-relevant rather than learning-relevant). A second aim was to determine whether these relations would hold when social desirability, positive and negative temperament, and competence expectancy were held constant (see Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff, 2003).

Variable

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13.

590
Note. The tabled values are standardized regression coefficients. The data are from participants who completed the measures both at the beginning and at the end of the semester. The first entry is the beta without controlling for grade point average (GPA) and the second entry is the beta controlling for GPA. * p .10. ** p .05. *** p .01. .05/.05 .19/.24* .20/.16 Shame

PEKRUN, ELLIOT, AND MAIER

Method Participants and Procedure

Two hundred twenty-five (148 female and 77 male) undergraduates in a psychology course (Social Personality) in the United States participated in the study in return for extra course credit (age: M 19.54, SD 1.39 years). Participants completed the measures in three different assessments. Positive and negative temperament were assessed in a large group session the 1st day of the semester. Participants completed the achievement goal, competence expectancy, and social desirability measures in a take-home packet at the end of the 2nd week of the semester, at a point in time when students have undoubtedly formed goals for their classes. The achievement emotions measure was completed in a take-home packet later in the semester, approximately 14 weeks after completion of the other measures, thus ensuring that there was a clear temporal separation of the assessment of goals and emotions. One hundred and sixty-seven (114 female and 53 male) students completed the measures at all three assessments. Attrition analyses revealed no differences between those who completed and those who did not complete the measures at all three assessments.

Hopelessness Anxiety

Table 5 Simultaneous Multiple Regression Analyses for Achievement Goals as Predictors of Achievement Emotions (Study 1)

.20**/.21** .13/.15 .16/.16

Anger

.05/.06 .10/.06 .43***/.37***

.08/.09 .10/.03 .20/.19

Measures
Achievement goals. The same AGQ used in Study 1 was used in this study, only the focus was on classes in general, rather than a specific class (mastery goal: .84, performance-approach goal: .93, performance-avoidance goal: .89). Achievement emotions. The class-related emotion scales of Pekrun et al.s (2002) AEQ were used to assess participants individual emotions for their classes in general. The instructions for the measure asked respondents to describe how they felt, typically, while in class. The scales assess eight different emotions: enjoyment of classroom learning (10 items; e.g., I enjoy being in class), hope (8 items; e.g., I am full of hope), pride (9 items; e.g., I am proud of myself), boredom (11 items; e.g., I get bored), anger (9 items; e.g., I feel anger welling up in me), anxiety (12 items; e.g., I feel nervous in class), hopelessness (10 items; e.g., I feel hopeless), and shame (11 items; e.g., I am ashamed). Participants responded on a 1 (not at all) to 5 (very much) scale, and the scores were summed to form the emotion indexes (enjoyment: .86, hope: .85, pride: .81, boredom: .93, anger: .86, anxiety: .86, hopelessness: .89, shame: .90). Social desirability. The 33 item MarloweCrowne Social Desirability Scale (Crowne & Marlowe, 1960) was used to assess social desirability (e.g., Im always willing to admit it when I make a mistake). Participants responded on a truefalse (true 1, false 0) scale, and scores were summed to create the social desirability index ( .79). Positive and negative temperament. Clark and Watsons (1995) Brief Temperament Survey was used to assess positive and negative temperament. The positive temperament measure consisted of 13 items (e.g., In my life, interesting and exciting things happen every day), and the negative temperament measure was comprised of 14 items (e.g., Sometimes I feel edgy all day). Participants responded on a truefalse (true 1, false 0) scale, and scores were summed to create the positive temperament ( .78) and negative temperament ( .86) indexes. Competence expectancy. Elliot and Churchs (1997) two-item measure was used to assess participants competence expectancies for their classes (e.g., I expect to do well in my classes). Participants responded on a 1 (not at all true of me) to 7 (very true of me) scale, and scores were summed to create the competence expectancy index ( .81).

Mastery goals Performance-approach goals Performance-avoidance goals

Variable

.37***/.37*** .07/.10 .02/.03

Enjoyment

.31***/.32*** .06/.09 .01/.02

Hope

.32***/.32*** .14/.13 .05/.05

Pride

.30***/.31*** .18/.20 .18/.18

Boredom

GOALS AND EMOTIONS

591

Results Preliminary Analysis, Descriptive Statistics, and Intercorrelations

Prior to the primary analyses, a CFA was conducted to document that the revised AGQ retained the same structural properties as the original scale. The analysis was the same as that conducted in Study 1. The results confirmed that the hypothesized threefactor solution had a good fit to the data, 2(24, N 225) 33.28, p .05; 2/df ratio 1.38; CFI .99; TLI .99; RMSEA .042. All factor loadings were significant, and the average factor loading was .85. This three-factor model fit significantly better than a two-factor model comprised of mastery goals and omnibus performance goals, 2(2) 280.24, p .001. Table 6 displays the descriptive statistics for each of the variables in the study. Table 7 presents the Pearson productmoment correlations among these same variables.

Achievement Goals as Predictors of Achievement Emotions

Simultaneous multiple regression analyses were conducted to examine the predictive relationships between the achievement goal and achievement emotion variables, with separate analyses for the different emotions. The influence of gender was also examined in preliminary analyses, and gender was retained in the model when significant (Judd & Kenny, 1981). All relations with a standardized coefficient at or exceeding .20 are reported below. Table 8 presents a summary of the results from these analyses. The enjoyment regression revealed that mastery goals were a positive predictor of enjoyment, F(1, 163) 10.10, p .01 ( .25). In the hope regression, mastery goals were a positive predictor of hope, F(1, 163) 11.00, p .01 ( .26). The pride regression revealed that mastery goals, F(1, 163) 6.59, p .05 ( .20), and performance-approach goals, F(1, 163) 6.33, p .05 ( .24), were both positive predictors of pride. No other relationships were significant for any of the positive emotions.

In the boredom regression, mastery goals were a negative predictor of boredom, F(1, 163) 15.45, p .01 ( .30), whereas performance-avoidance goals were a positive predictor, F(1, 163) 5.10, p .05 ( .21). The anger regression indicated that mastery goals were a negative predictor of anger, F(1, 163) 8.11, p .01 ( .23). In the anxiety regression, performance-avoidance goals were a positive predictor of anxiety, F(1, 163) 4.08, p .05 ( .20). Similarly, the hopelessness regression revealed that performance-avoidance goals were a positive predictor of hopelessness, F(1, 163) 6.09, p .05 ( .24). Finally, the shame regression did not yield any significant relations with achievement goals. However, there was a trend for a positive link between performance-avoidance goals and shame, and gender was a positive predictor of shame, F(1, 162) 5.22, p .05 ( .18), indicating that women reported more shame than did men. No other relationships were significant for any of the negative emotions. Following the examination of individual goals, we conducted additional analyses to test for multiple goal effects. Specifically, the two-way interactions among the achievement goal variables were added to the model, and the initial analyses were repeated. Interaction terms were computed after centering the variables. There were no a priori expectations for such effects, and not a single interaction attained significance in these analyses.

Achievement Goals as Predictors of Achievement Emotions Controlling Social Desirability

Next, we repeated the initial analyses with social desirability included in the model. The Pearson productmoment correlations (see Table 7) indicate that social desirability was significantly correlated with mastery goals and six of the eight emotion variables. Thus, it is possible that the observed relations were simply due to the influence of social desirability bias. The analyses demonstrated the robustness of the relations when controlling for social desirability. Each of the significant relations reported in the

Table 6 Descriptive Statistics for the Study Variables (Study 2)

Variable Mastery goals Performance-approach goals Performance-avoidance goals Enjoyment Hope Pride Boredom Anger Anxiety Hopelessness Shame Social desirability Positive affectivity Negative affectivity Competence expectancy M 16.86 13.68 12.23 31.90 27.17 30.18 29.58 14.06 22.98 14.89 22.89 14.44 7.75 6.65 10.95 SD 3.15 4.31 4.68 6.70 5.53 6.12 9.26 5.11 7.34 5.41 8.90 5.20 3.33 4.02 2.10 Possible range 321 321 321 1155 840 945 1155 945 1260 1050 1155 033 013 014 214 Observed range 721 321 321 1751 1240 1445 1155 935 1242 1036 1151 427 013 014 314

Note. The data are from participants who completed the measures both at the beginning and at the end of the semester.

592
16

PEKRUN, ELLIOT, AND MAIER .54*** .66*** .65*** .71*** .49*** .47*** .37*** .54*** .66*** .71*** .49*** .37*** .38*** .74*** .66 .09 .27*** .35*** .20** .22*** .10 .09 .04 .16** .18** .24*** .26*** .24*** .18** .19** .26*** .44*** .41*** .07 .41*** .25*** .25*** .13* .28** .28*** .26*** .25*** .08 .20** .09 .05 .01 .08 .13* .17** .05 .05 .07 .16** .13*

initial analyses remained significant with social desirability controlled (see Table 9).

15

14

Achievement Goals as Predictors of Achievement Emotions Controlling Temperament

Next, we repeated the initial analyses with positive temperament and negative temperament included in the model. The Pearson productmoment correlations (see Table 7) indicate that the temperament variables were significantly correlated with two of the three achievement goals and all eight of the emotion variables. Thus, it is indeed possible that the observed relationships were simply due to the influence of temperament. The analyses demonstrated the robustness of the relations when controlling for temperament. Each of the significant relations reported in the initial analyses remained significant with positive and negative temperament controlled, with a single exceptionthe relation between performance-avoidance goals and anxiety became .14 ( p .14; see Table 9).4

10

11

12

13

Achievement Goals as Predictors of Achievement Emotions Controlling Competence Expectancy

Note. The data are from participants who completed the measures both at the beginning and at the end of the semester. * p .10. ** p .05. *** p .01.

Table 7 Pearson ProductMoment Correlations for the Study Variables (Study 2)

.14* .13* .59*** .29*** .11 .29*** .06 .26*** .17** .33*** .04 .24*** .02 .08 .03 .16** .02 .04 .05 .19** .11 .18** .06 .06 .16** .37*** .09 .05 .08

.08 .09 .06 .23*** .14* .16** .19** .11 .09 .08 .20** .15** .05

Next, we repeated the initial analyses with competence expectancy included in the regression model. The Pearson product moment correlations (see Table 7) indicate that competence expectancy was significantly correlated with two of the three achievement goals and seven of the eight emotion variables. Thus, it is conceivable that the observed relations were simply due to the influence of competence expectancy. The analyses demonstrated the robustness of the relations across competence expectancy. Each of the significant effects reported in the initial analyses remained significant or (in two instances) approached significance ( p .07) with competence expectancy controlled, with a single exceptionthe relationship between performance-avoidance goals and anxiety became .15 ( p .14; see Table 9). To examine whether competence expectancy interacted with the achievement goals in predicting emotions, we added the Competence Expectancy Achievement Goal interactions to the model

.76*** .68*** .57*** .34*** .25*** .37*** .26*** .21*** .35*** .10 .28*** .07

.72*** .48*** .32*** .42*** .53*** .36** .17** .28*** .16** .35** .08

4 To examine whether positive and negative temperament influenced achievement goal adoption, we regressed each achievement goal variable on positive temperament and negative temperament. The mastery goal regression revealed that positive temperament was a positive predictor of mastery goals, F(1, 164) 4.97, p .05 ( .18), whereas negative temperament was unrelated to mastery goals. The performance-approach goal regression revealed that negative temperament was a marginally significant positive predictor of performance-approach goals, F(1, 163) 3.66, p .058 ( .15), whereas positive temperament was unrelated to performance-approach goals. The performance-avoidance goal regression revealed that negative temperament was a positive predictor of performance-avoidance goals, F(1, 163) 6.14, p .05 ( .20), whereas positive temperament was unrelated to performance-avoidance goals. These results, coupled with those showing that achievement goals predicted the emotion variables above and beyond temperament suggest that temperament leads to achievement goal adoption and that achievement goals themselves have an independent influence on emotions.

1 Variable

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16.

Mastery goals Performance-approach goals Performance-avoidance goals Enjoyment Hope Pride Boredom Anger Anxiety Hopelessness Shame Social desirability Positive affectivity Negative affectivity Competence expectancy Gender

GOALS AND EMOTIONS

593

Table 8 Simultanoues Multiple Regression Analyses for Achievement Goals as Predictors of Achievement Emotions (Study 2)
Variable Mastery goals Performance-approach goals Performance-avoidance goals Enjoyment .25*** .15 .13 Hope .26*** .09 .11 Pride .20** .24** .17* Boredom .30*** .04 .21** Anger .23*** .01 .11 Anxiety .05 .08 .20** Hopelessness .11 .11 .24** Shame .03 .00 .12

Note. The tabled values are standardized regression coefficients. The data are from participants who completed the measures both at the beginning and at the end of the semester. * p .10. ** p .05. *** p .01.

and redid the analyses. The interaction terms were computed after centering the variables. Not a single interaction attained significance in these analyses. Thus, achievement goals have their influence on emotions largely independent of, and not in interaction with, competence expectancy.

Discussion
With a few exceptions, the links between achievement goals and achievement emotions in Study 2 proved to be the same as those in Study 1, despite differences in the cultural context and the focus of the emotions. In line with the findings of Study 1, mastery goals were positively related to subsequent enjoyment of classroom instruction, hope and pride, and were negatively related to subsequent boredom and anger. Likewise, performance-avoidance goals were positively related to subsequent anxiety and hopelessness, and again there was a trend for a positive link between performance-avoidance goals and shame. In addition, and in line with our hypothesis, performance-approach goals were positively related to pride. As in Study 1, there was no evidence for multiple goal effects in the data. Thus, the pattern of results that we observed was largely consistent with that from Study 1 and with the hypotheses derived from our model. As in Study 1, the results proved to be robust when gender was controlled. Also, controlling social desirability and temperament did not change the findings, with the exception that the positive relation between performance-avoidance goals and anxiety became a positive trend with temperament controlled. Likewise, when controlling for competence expectancy the findings remained the same, with the exception that the positive relation between performance-avoidance goals and anxiety became a positive trend. The overall pattern of these findings suggests that the relations between goals and emotions were not due to shared response sets, general temperaments, or perceptions of competence. Finally, examination of the Achievement Goal Competence Expectancy product terms revealed no significant interactions between goals and expectancies in predicting emotions. In summary, as in Study 1, and again with the exception of the nonsignificant trend for shame, all of the emotions examined in this study were significantly predicted by achievement goals. As in Study 1, the time between the assessment of goals and the assessment of emotions was considerable, suggesting that the links observed were quite stable. The findings again proved quite robust, as they held up to several different control variables.

discrepancies in the results, particularly regarding significance level, not direction of relation. This prompted us to examine the obtained results by using a meta-analytic procedure, the Stouffer method (Rosenthal, 1978). In this method, the Z scores of the findings from different studies are combined, affording an overarching test of the focal hypothesis. The meta-analytic results yielded even stronger support for our predicted relations between achievement goals and achievement emotions. Mastery goals were shown to be a positive predictor of enjoyment about learning (Z 4.79, p .001), hope (Z 4.54, p .001), and pride (Z 4.14, p .001), and a negative predictor of anger (Z 3.38, p .001) and boredom (Z 4.97, p .001). Performance-approach goals were shown to be a positive predictor of pride (Z 2.55, p .05). Performance-avoidance goals were shown to be a positive predictor of anxiety (Z 3.77, p .001), hopelessness (Z 2.82, p .01), and shame (Z 1.92, p .05). In summary, achievement goals were significant predictors of all eight of the achievement emotions, including shame, which had shown a trend in the two individual studies.

General Discussion
Achievement emotions are important for students engagement, performance, and well-being, as well as for their personal growth and agency more generally (Pekrun et al., 2002; Schutz & Pekrun, in press; Zeidner, 1998). Given the functional and practical relevance of achievement emotions, the individual and social antecedents of these emotions need to be studied more extensively. In the present research, we focused on one type of individual antecedent achievement goals. Previous research on achievement goals and emotions has typically used dichotomous conceptions of goals (mastery vs. performance goals) and of emotions (positive vs. negative affect). Dichotomous conceptions disregard important qualitative differences between goals, and between discrete emotions, which is probably one reason why findings of the extant research lack consistency. In the present research, we articulated a theoretical model of the relationships between achievement goals and emotions that uses more differentiated conceptions of both goals and emotions by linking the trichotomous model of achievement goals (Elliot & Church, 1997; Elliot & Harackiewicz, 1996) to students discrete achievement emotions (Pekrun et al., 2002). We tested this model in two prospective studies by using samples of students from two different cultural contexts, namely, German and American universities. CFA findings from both studies show that the trichotomous model of achievement goals was empirically superior to a twofactor mastery versus performance goal model. This result con-

Meta-Analysis Across Studies 1 and 2

There was a very high degree of consistency in the results obtained across the two studies. However, there were a few minor

594
Table 9 Simultanoues Multiple Regression Analyses for Achievement Goals as Predictors of Achievement Emotions Controlling Social Desirability, Trait Affectivity, and Competence Expectancy (Study 2)
Mastery goals .21***/19**/19** .23***/.21**/.17** .18**/.16**/.15* .24***/.28***/.25*** .18**/.23***/.22*** .01/.01/.04 .10/.10/.05 .01/.02/.07 Performance-approach goals .18*/.18**/.12 .11/.11/.04 .25***/.26***/.22** .09/.06/.01 .05/.02/.01 .12/.12/.04 .12/.12/.07 .04/.05/.03 Performance-avoidance goals .14/.13/.10 .11/.09/.04 .18*/.17*/.14 .22**/.18**/.18* .12/.09/.11 .21**/.14/.15 .24**/.22**/.20** .12/.06/.07 Note. The tabled values are standardized regression coefficients. The data are from participants who completed the measures both at the beginning and at the end of the semester. The first entry is the beta controlling for social desirability, the second entry is the beta controlling for trait affectivity, and the third entry is the beta controlling for competence expectancy. * p .10. ** p .05. *** p .01.

PEKRUN, ELLIOT, AND MAIER

ceptually replicates the findings of previous research (Elliot & Church, 1997; Middleton & Midgley, 1997; Skaalvik, 1997), and verifies that the approachavoidance distinction is a structurally important component of achievement goals. Concerning goal emotion links, the results from both studies clearly indicated that students achievement goals were systematic predictors of their subsequent learning-related (Study 1) and classrelated (Study 2) emotions. Specifically, the following links were found: (a) Mastery goals were positive predictors of enjoyment of learning, hope, and pride and were negative predictors of boredom and anger about learning; (b) performance-approach goals were positive predictors of pride, both in Study 2 and in the metaanalysis across the two studies; and (c) performance-avoidance goals were positive predictors of anxiety, hopelessness, and shame. The link to shame was a trend in both studies and was significant when combined meta-analytically across studies. The findings were robust when controlling for gender (Studies 1 and 2), high school GPA (Study 1), and social desirability, positive and negative temperament, and competence expectancy (Study 2). The results were highly consistent across cultures and foci of emotion, and competence expectancy did not moderate any of the observed relations. The vast majority of these relations were in line with our theoretical proposals. However, our hypothesized link between performance-approach goals and hope was not supported. In addition, although not contradicting our hypotheses, the relations between mastery goals and both hope and pride were not anticipated. A possible reason for the null relation between performance-approach goals and hope is that the hope scales of the Achievement Emotions Questionnaire do not explicitly focus on hope as an outcome emotion, which was the way that it was conceptualized in our theoretical model. With regard to pride, the pride items used in our studies focused on both task-based pride and self-based pride (Lewis & Sullivan, 2005), which may be why it was linked to mastery goals as well as to performance-approach goals. These exceptions notwithstanding, the overall pattern of results clearly indicates that there are systematic links between the goals of the trichotomous achievement goal model and the emotions of the 2 2 taxonomy of achievement emotions. With regard to goals, our findings highlight the importance of attending to the approachavoidance distinction as well as the mastery-performance distinction when predicting emotions. Pride was predicted by performance-approach goals, whereas anxiety, hopelessness, and shame were predicted by performance-avoidance goals. With regard to emotions, our findings highlight the importance of differentiating more specific groups of emotions, beyond the general distinction between positive and negative affect. For example, the negative emotions boredom and anger were linked to mastery goals, whereas the negative emotions anxiety, hopelessness, and shame were linked to performance-avoidance goals. Although the relations between achievement goals and emotions were significant and, for the most part, of considerable magnitude, the effect size of some of the relations was not very substantial. In interpreting effect size, however, three issues must be taken into account. First, in both studies there was a long time lag (3 months) between the assessment of goals and the assessment of emotions. Second, in both studies, broad measures of goals and emotions were used, rather than more precise measures of goals and emo-

Variable

Enjoyment

Hope

Pride

Boredom

Anger

Anxiety

Hopelessness

Shame

GOALS AND EMOTIONS

595

tions experienced in a specific situation (e.g., goals and emotions regarding a specific exam). Third, emotions are undoubtedly influenced by a number of factors in addition to goals, including students socialized dispositions (e.g., motives; McClelland, Atkinson, Clark, & Lowell, 1953) and self-relevant beliefs (e.g., academic self-concepts and implicit theories of ability; Dweck, 1999; Pekrun, 2000), as well as a host of situational factors (see Ames, 1992). By implication, it would not be reasonable to expect achievement goals to explain all or even most of the variance in students achievement emotions. A number of limitations of the present research may be noted and used to suggest directions for future research. First, mastery goals were conceptualized as mastery-approach goals in the present studies; mastery-avoidance goals were not addressed. We are fully aware of the importance of considering masteryavoidance goals in achievement goal research, but we also think it is reasonable to begin the process of examining complex patterns of relations (such as those examined herein) with a simplified goal model that focuses on the goals most commonly endorsed in undergraduate classrooms (see Elliot & McGregor, 2001). Nevertheless, in future research, systematic attempts should be made to link the full 2 2 model of achievement goals (Elliot, 1999) to the 2 2 taxonomy of achievement emotions. Second, in conceptualizing and assessing emotions, we used constructs that differentiate qualitatively distinct human emotions (like enjoyment about learning, pride, and shame), but we did not subdivide these constructs further. It may well be that further subdivision will help to fully reveal the richness of the goal emotion links that we focused on in our work. For example, as hinted at above, it may be worthwhile to conceptualize separate constructs and measures for task-based versus self-based pride (Lewis & Sullivan, 2005) and maybe even for task-based versus self-based hope and anxiety. Third, as noted above, we used a molar approach for assessing goals and emotions in the present research, in that both the goals and the emotions focused on an entire semester-long course or on all courses being taken during a semester. In subsequent research, more fine-grained analyses addressing goals and emotions in specific situations should be used. Studies of this type would make it possible to analyze the impact of goals on the attentional foci and appraisal processes that are presumed to be responsible for the goal emotion links observed in our research. Finally, the model and studies presented herein were designed to examine the influence of goals on emotions. As highlighted in Linnenbrink and Pintrichs (2002) bidirectional model of goals and positive versus negative affect, emotion-based variables may also influence goal adoption, implying that goals and emotions may be linked by reciprocal rather than unidirectional causation. Discrete emotions are known to imply specific action tendencies (e.g., fight, flight, and resignation in anger, anxiety, and hopelessness, respectively). Therefore, emotions can be assumed to contribute to the instigation of subsequent action-related goals, in addition to being influenced by preceding goals themselves. Also, students academic performance can contribute to these reciprocal relationships, as both achievement goals and students emotions can influence students performance and can be influenced by the students past performance history themselves. In future research, such reciprocal links should be studied through the use of experimental designs as well as cross-lagged longitudinal designs.

In closing, the present research links achievement goals, one of the (if not the) most prominent constructs in the contemporary achievement motivation literature, to discrete achievement emotions, an understudied construct to date. In so doing, we brought together two domains of inquirymotivation and emotionthat have developed in relative isolation from each other and that have, in the main, focused on quite different types of research questions. We believe that our findings highlight the potential fruitfulness of integrating these constructs and these domains of inquiry. Achievement goal researchers have argued that classroom environments, assessment procedures, and educational interventions should be designed to encourage the adoption of mastery goals (more specifically, mastery-approach goals; Ames, 1992; Elliot & Moller, 2003; Urdan, 1997). Our data suggest that these types of environments, assessments, and interventions would not only influence achievement goal adoption but would also, indirectly, influence the achievement emotions that are implicated in selfregulation, performance, persistence, interest, and well-being. Future intervention research would do well to design classroom environments with both goals and emotions in mind (Pekrun, 2005), in order to learn more about the complex relations between achievement environments, achievement goals, and discrete achievement emotions.

References
Ainley, M., Corrigan, M., & Richardson, N. (2005). Students, tasks, and emotions: Identifying the contribution of emotions to students reading of popular culture and popular science texts. Learning and Instruction, 15, 433 447. Ames, C. (1992). Achievement goals, motivational climate, and motivational processes. In G. Roberts (Ed.), Motivation in sports and exercise (pp. 161176). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics Books. Ashby, F. G., Isen, A. M., & Turken, A. U. (1999). A neuropsychological theory of positive affect and its influence on cognition. Psychological Review, 106, 529 550. Astleitner, H. (2000). Designing emotionally sound instruction: The FEASP-approach. Instructional Science, 28, 169 198. Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1995). The Brief Temperament Survey (BTS). Unpublished manuscript, Department of Psychology, University of Iowa, Iowa City. Clore, G., & Ketelaar, T. (1997). Minding our emotions: On the role of automatic, unconscious affect. In R. S. Wyer Jr. (Ed.), Advances in social cognition: Vol. 10. The automaticity of everyday life (pp. 105 120). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Crowne, D. P., & Marlowe, D. (1960). A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 24, 349 354. Cury, F., Elliot, A. J., Sarrazin, P., Da Fonseca, D., & Rufo, M. (2002). The trichotomous achievement goal model and intrinsic motivation: A sequential mediational analysis. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 473 481. Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41, 1040 1048. Dweck, C. S. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Philadelphia: Psychology Press. Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. (1988). A social cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95, 256 273. Elliot, A. J. (1997). Integrating classic and contemporary approaches to achievement motivation: A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. In P. Pintrich & M. Maehr (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (Vol. 10, pp. 143179). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

596

PEKRUN, ELLIOT, AND MAIER of achievement-relevant processes prior to task engagement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 381395. Meece, J. L., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Hoyle, R. H. (1988). Students goal orientation and cognitive engagement in classroom activities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 514 523. Meinhardt, J., & Pekrun, R. (2003). Attentional resource allocation to emotional events: An ERP study. Cognition and Emotion, 17, 477500. Meyer, D. K., Turner, J. C., & Spencer, C. A. (1997). Challenge in mathematics classrooms: Students motivation and strategies in projectbased learning. Elementary School Journal, 97, 501521. Middleton, M. J., & Midgley, C. (1997). Avoiding the demonstration of lack of ability: An underexplored aspect of goal theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 710 718. Nicholls, J. G. (1984). Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice, and performance. Psychological Review, 91, 328 346. Nicholls, J. G. (1989). The competitive ethos and democratic education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Nicholls, J. G., Patashnik, M., & Nolen, S. B. (1985). Adolescents theories of education. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 683 692. Nolen, S. B., & Haladyna, T. M. (1990). Motivation and studying in high school science. Journal of Research in Science Education, 27, 115126. Pajares, F., & Cheong, Y. F. (2004). Achievement goal orientations in writing: A developmental perspective. International Journal of Educational Research, 39, 437 455. Parrott, W. G., & Spackman, M. P. (2000). Emotion and memory. In M. Lewis & J. M. Haviland-Jones (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (pp. 476 490). New York: Guilford Press. Pekrun, R. (1988). Emotion, Motivation und Perso nlichkeit [Emotion, motivation, and personality]. Munich/Weinheim, Germany: Psychologie Verlags Union. Pekrun, R. (1992a). The expectancy-value theory of anxiety: Overview and implications. In D. G. Forgays, T. Sosnowski, & K. Wrzesniewski (Eds.), Anxiety: Recent developments in self-appraisal, psychophysiological and health research (pp. 23 41). Washington, DC: Hemisphere. Pekrun, R. (1992b). The impact of emotions on learning and achievement: Towards a theory of cognitive/motivational mediators. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 41, 359 376. Pekrun, R. (1992c). Kognition und Emotion in studienbezogenen Lern- und Leistungssituationen: Explorative Analysen [Achievement-related cognition and emotion in higher education: An exploratory analysis]. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 20, 308 324. Pekrun, R. (2000). A social cognitive, control-value theory of achievement emotions. In J. Heckhausen (Ed.), Motivational psychology of human development. Oxford, England: Elsevier Science. Pekrun, R. (2005). Progress and open problems in educational emotion research. Learning and Instruction, 15, 497506. Pekrun, R. (in press). The control-value theory of achievement emotions: Assumptions, corollaries, and implications for educational research and practice. Pekrun, R., & Frese, M. (1992). Emotions in work and achievement. In C. Cooper & I. Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 7, pp. 153200). Chichester, England: Wiley. Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Titz, W., & Perry, R. P. (2002). Academic emotions in students self-regulated learning and achievement: A program of quantitative and qualitative research. Educational Psychologist, 37, 91 106. Phillips, L. H., Bull, R., Adams, E., & Fraser, L. (2002). Positive mood and executive function: Evidence from Stroop and fluency tasks. Emotion, 2, 1222. Pintrich, P. R. (2000). Multiple goals, multiple pathways: The role of goal orientation in learning and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 544 555.

Elliot, A. J. (1999). Approach and avoidance motivation and achievement goals. Educational Psychologist, 34, 149 169. Elliot, A. J. (2005). A conceptual history of the achievement goal construct. In A. Elliot & C. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 5272). New York: Guilford Press. Elliot, A. J., & Church, M. A. (1997). A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 218 232. Elliot, A. J., & Fryer, J. W. (in press). The goal construct in psychology. In J. Shah & W. Gardner (Eds.), Handbook of motivational science. New York: Guilford Press. Elliot, A. J., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (1996). Approach and avoidance achievement goals and intrinsic motivation: A mediational analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 461 475. Elliot, A. J., & McGregor, H. (1999). Test anxiety and the hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 628 644. Elliot, A. J., & McGregor, H. A. (2001). A 2 x 2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 501519. Elliot, A. J., & Moller, A. (2003). Performance-approach goals: Good or bad forms of regulation? International Journal of Educational Research, 39, 339 356. Elliot, A. J., & Thrash, T. M. (2001). Achievement goals and the hierarchical model of achievement motivation. Educational Psychology Review, 12, 139 156. Elliott, E. S., & Dweck, C. (1988). Goals: An approach to motivation and achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 512. Frijda, N. H. (1986). The emotions. New York: Cambridge University Press. Hoyle, R., & Panter, A. (1995). Writing about structural equation models. In R. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 100 119). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Hyde, J. S., Fennema, E., Ryan, M., Frost, L. A., & Hopp, C. (1990). Gender comparisons of mathematics attitudes and affect: A metaanalysis. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 14, 299 324. Isen, A. M. (1999). Positive affect. In T. Dalgleish & M. Power (Eds.), Handbook of cognition and emotion (pp. 521539). New York: Wiley. Izard, C. E., & Ackerman, B. P. (2004). Motivational, organizational, and regulatory functions of discrete emotions. In M. Lewis & J. M. Haviland-Jones (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (pp. 253264). New York: Guilford Press. Judd, C., & Kenny, D. (1981). Process analysis: Estimating mediation in treatment evaluations. Evaluation Review, 5, 602 619. Kaplan, A., & Maehr, M. L. (1999). Achievement goals and student well-being. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24, 330 358. Krapp, A. (2005). Basic needs and the development of interest and intrinsic motivational orientations. Learning and Instruction, 15, 381395. Lewis, M., & Haviland-Jones, J. M. (Eds.). (2004). Handbook of emotions (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press. Lewis, M., & Sullivan, M. W. (2005). The development of self-conscious emotions. In A. J. Elliot & C. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 185201). New York: Guilford Press. Linnenbrink, E. A. (2005). The dilemma of performance-approach goals: The use of multiple goal contexts to promote students motivation and learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 197213. Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2002). Achievement goal theory and affect: An asymmetrical bidirectional model. Educational Psychologist, 37, 69 78. Linnenbrink, E. A., Ryan, A. M., & Pintrich, P. R. (1999). The role of goals and affect in working memory functioning. Learning and Individual Differences, 11, 213230. McClelland, D. C., Atkinson, J. W., Clark, R. A., & Lowell, E. L. (1953). The achievement motive. Oxford, England: Irvington. McGregor, H. A., & Elliot, A. J. (2002). Achievement goals as predictors

GOALS AND EMOTIONS Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879 903. Reisenzein, R. (2001). Appraisal processes conceptualized from a schematheoretic perspective. In K. R. Scherer, A. Schorr, & T. Johnstone (Eds.), Appraisal processes in emotion (pp. 187201). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. Roeser, R., Midgley, C., & Urdan, R. (1996). Perceptions of the school psychological climate and early adolescents self-appraisals and academic engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 408 422. Roseman, I. J. (2001). A model of appraisal in the emotion system: Integrating theory, research, and applications. In K. R. Scherer, A. Schorr, & T. Johnstone (Eds.), Appraisal processes in emotion (pp. 68 91). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. Rosenthal, R. (1978). Combining the results of independent studies. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 185193. Scherer, K. R., Schorr, A., & Johnstone, T. (Eds.). (2001). Appraisal processes in emotion. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. Schutz, P. A., & Lanehart, S. L. (Eds.). (2002). Emotions in education [Special issue]. Educational Psychologist, 37(2). Schutz, P. A., & Pekrun, R. (Eds.). (2006). Emotions in education. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Seifert, T. (1995). Academic goals and emotions: A test of two models. The Journal of Psychology, 129, 543552. Shweder, R. A., & Haidt, J. (2004). The cultural psychology of the emotions: Ancient and new. In M. Lewis & J. M. Haviland-Jones (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (pp. 397 414). New York: Guilford Press. Sideridis, G. D. (2003). On the origins of helpless behaviour of students with learning disabilities: Avoidance motivation? International Journal of Educational Research, 39, 497517. Sideridis, G. D. (2005). Goal orientation, academic achievement, and depression: Evidence in favor of a revised goal theory framework. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 366 375.

597

Skaalvik, E. M. (1997). Self-enhancing and self-defeating ego orientation: Relations with task and avoidance orientation, achievement, selfperceptions, and anxiety. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 71 81. Tellegen, A., Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1999). On the dimensional and hierarchical structure of affect. Psychological Science, 10, 297303. Turner, J. C., Thorpe, P. K., & Meyer, D. K. (1998). Students reports of motivation and negative affect: A theoretical and empirical analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 758 771. Turner, J. E., & Schallert, D. L. (2001). Expectancy-value relationships of shame reactions and shame resiliency. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 320 329. Urdan, T. C. (1997). Achievement goal theory: Past results, future directions. In M. Maehr & P. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (Vol. 10, pp. 243269). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological Review, 92, 548 573. Wolters, C. A., Yu, S. L., & Pintrich, P. R. (1996). The relation between goal orientation and students motivational beliefs and self-regulated learning. Learning and Individual Differences, 6, 211238. Zeidner, M. (1998). Test anxiety: The state of the art. New York: Plenum. Zirngibl, A. C. (2004). Students emotional experiences in mathematics: Examining the impact of culture, classroom climate and gender from a social-cognitive perspective. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Munich, Munich, Germany. Zusho, A., Pintrich, P. R., & Cortina, K. S. (2005). Motives, goals, and adaptive patterns of performance in Asian American and Anglo American students. Learning and Individual Differences, 15, 141158.

Received January 5, 2006 Revision received April 4, 2006 Accepted April 13, 2006