Achievement Motivation and Test Anxiety
- 1. Achievement motivation and approach motivation
- (1) Murray's Explorations of Personality
- (a) Exploration in Personality
- (b) Conceptual identification of needs
- (2) McClelland and the Need for achievement
- (a) n-ach and the achievement of nations
- i) Greek civilization and Greek literature
- ii) n-ach in primers and later economic growth
- (b) induction of n-ach and national growth
- (3) Atkinson and the theory of risk preference
- (a) formal model of risk preference
- i) Expectancy * Value model
- ii) Motives other than Drive
- (b) dynamic model of change in behavior
- i) The dynamics of action
- ii) Formal model of motivation and choice
- (4) Weiner and attribution theory
- (a) emphasis upon causal attributions
- i) stability, globality, internality
b) Issues in Measurement
- (1) Projective measures of motives
- (a) can't trust self report of motives
- (b) ambiguous stimuli will lead to interpretations in terms of motives
- i) hunger
- ii) achievement
- (2) poor reliability
- (3) Weiner's 3 points
- (a) TAT is the best way to measure motivation
- (b) TAT is the worst way to measure motivation
- (c) People who use the TAT believe 1, those who do not believe 2
2. Original static theory of achievement motivation
- a) Achievement motivation - the joy of success
- (1) approach motivation
- (2) Atkinson's early theory of Risk Preference (1957, 1964)
- (a) General Model
- i) Tendency = Value x Expectancy
- (1) Value = Motive x Incentive
- ii) Tendency = Motive x Incentive x Expectancy
- (b) Specific Assumptions for achievement
- i) Expectancy = subjective probability of success (Ps)
- ii) Motive = Individual's need for achievement
- iii) Incentive = difficulty = 1 - probability of success = 1-Ps
- (c) Conclusion for achievement motivation:
- i) Ts = Ms x Ps x (1-Ps)
- ii) Tendency to engage in task to strive for achievement =
- iii) Motive to succeed x Probability of success x (1-Ps)
b) Fear of failure -- the pain of failure
- (1) very similar to test anxiety
- (2) avoidance motivation
- (3) Specific Assumptions for fear of failure:
- (a) Expectancy of failure = Pf = 1 - Ps
- (b) Motive to avoid failure = fear of failure = Maf
- (c) Incentive of failure = - easiness = - Ps
- (4) Conclusion for fear of failure (anxiety)
- (a) Taf = Maf x Pf x (-Ps) = Maf x (1-Ps) x (-Ps)
c) Resultant tendency = tendency to engage in task for success + tendency to avoid failing + extrinsic tendencies
- (1) Tr = Ts + Taf + Text
- (2) Tr = Ms x Ps x (1-Ps) + Maf x (1-Ps) x (-Ps) =
- (3) Tr = (Ms - Maf) x Ps x (1 - Ps)
- (4) Graphic representation of theory
3. Tests of original theory
- a) Motivation and risk preference: the ring toss
- (1) Hamilton
- (2) Heckhausen
b) Motivation, risk preference and persistence under failure
- (1) Norman Feather 1964
- Persistence
- Motive Strength Task
- High
- easy (.7) 6 2
- difficult (.05) 2 7
- Low
- easy (.7) 3 6
- difficult (.05) 6 2
c) Revisions to Atkinson's theory:
- (1) Joel Raynor and the concept of future orientation:
- (a) most events are not independent, but are contingent upon success in prior events.
- (b) Probability of success at eventi = ½ Psj = Ps1x Ps2 x ... x Psi
- i) Consider the example of a freshman starting psychology:
- A10 B01 B05 C01 C98 grad MA Ph.D. Job tenure promotion ...
- .9 .81 .73 .66 .59 .53 .48 .43 .39
- (c) Tendency to engage in a task = sum of tendencies for tasks contingent upon that task.
- i) Trn = … {Ms-Maf) x Psic x (1-Psic) + Text}
- (d) Evidence for Raynor's revision
- i) Course grade as f(motive strength and major/non major)
- (1) Study 1
- Gradepoint as a function of
- Motive Strength Importance to Future
- Low High
- High 2.9 3.4
- Low 3.0 2.6
- (2) Study 2
- Motive Strength Importance to Future
- Low High
- High 3.0 3.5
- Low 3.4 3.4
- (e) Implications of Raynor's revision:
- i) high achievers should set distant goals,
- (1) low achievers (high fear of failure) should set immediate goals.
- ii) preferences for task difficulty should vary as function of
- (1) number of outcomes contingent upon particular task outcome
- (2) curvilinear performance models
4. Dynamic theory
- a) Recognition of inertial properties of motivation
- (1) a motive persists until satisfied
- (a) the "Herr Ober" demonstrations of memory persistence
- (b) Zeigarnik effect
- i) completed tasks
- ii) uncompleted tasks
- (2) trial to trial carry over of motivation
- (a) Weiner and Schneider carryover effects
- i) success and failure interact with n-ach
- (b) Revelle and Michaels -- task difficulty model
- i) motivation carries over from trial to trial
- (1) success reduces motivation
- (2) failure does not reduce motivation (or less than success)
- ii) hard tasks have more failure than easy tasks
- iii) asymmetry of goal preference as function of goal difficulty
b) Original formalization -- the Dynamics of Action
- (1) Action tendencies -- approach motivation
- (a) Action Tendencies change when acted upon
- i) Action Tendencies -- latent needs
- ii) Instigating Forces -- situational stimulation
- iii) Consumatory Forces -- need satisfaction
- iv) change in action tendency = f(instigating forces - consumatory forces)
- (1) if ongoing dT=F-cT
- (2) if not ongoing dT=F
- (3) action tendencies will grow if not satisfied
- v) stable state is achieved overtime dt= 0 <=> T=F/c
- (b) Behavior reflects dominant action tendency
- i) To = strength of ongoing action tendency
- ii) Ta, Tb= strength of alternative action tendencies
- iii) types of change
- (1) To stable, Ta increasing
- (2) To decreasing, Ta stable or increasing
- (3) To increasing, Ta increasing more rapidly
- iv) Even in a constant environment, behavior will change
- (1) To will stabilize over time
- (2) Ta will grow until dominant
- (c) example: a dinner party
- i) early: medium F, low c
- ii) middle: high F low c
- iii) late: high F, high c
- (2) Avoidance and inhibitory motivation -- negaction
- (a) Negaction tendencies inhibit behavior
- (b) Inhibitory forces increase negaction
- (c) Resistance forces decrease negaction
- (d) dN=I-rN ,<=> N -> I/r at limit
- (3) Inhibition delays onset, does not stop behavior
- (a) Resultant action tendency = T-N
- (b) Resultant action Tr= will grow if not ongoing
- (c) example: a classroom with an authoritarian teacher
- i) strong inhibitory force lowers Tr but not T
- ii) release of inhibition releases "bottled up action tendency"
- (4) Instigating and consumatory lags are needed to prevent ³chatter² and reflect motivational inertia
- (a) instigating lag -- lag of attention
- (b) consumatory lag -- lag of consummation
c) Personality traits as rates of change in states
- (1) what is stable is how rapidly one changes
- (a) sociability as rate of becoming sociable
- (b) anxiety as rate of change of becoming anxious
- (c) intelligence as rate of change in problem space
- (d) n-ach as rate of growth in approach motivation when faced with achievement goals and achievement tasks
- (2) growth rates, decay rates, inhibition rates
- (a) growth of Ta when stimulated
- (b) decay of Ta when ongoing
- (c) strength of inhibitory processes
d) Revised dynamics of action
- (1) Cues --> Action Tendencies --> Actions
- (2) Actions reduce Action Tendencies
- (3) Actions are incompatible (mutually inhibitory)
- (a) mutual inhibition as a fundamental decision rule
- (b) examples of mutual inhibition
- i) in the newt
- ii) in the human
e) Computer simulation as a formal model of theory
- (1) theory as a system of differential equations
- (2) simulation in terms of difference equations
- (3) predictions are consequences of model and not always obvious
- (4) computer simulations of CTA model
- (a) dynamic variables
- i) Tendencies dT=mC-cA
- ii) Actions dA=eT-iA
- (b) situational variables
- i) cues for reward and punishment
- (c) stable person variables
- i) m=memory associating cues to tendencies
- ii) c=consumatory effect of action on tendencies
- iii) e=excitatory effect of tendencies on actions
- iv) i=inhibition of actions on othe actions
f) implications of dynamic theory
- (1) Types of variables changes
- (a) frequency of initiation
- (b) duration or persistence
- (c) latency
- (d) choice
- (2) Traits may be seen as affecting the rates of change in achieving states
- (3) Predictions
- (a) behaviors change over time, even in stable environment
- (b) Probability of initiating an activity is an increasing function of time since last doing that activity
- (c) Probability of continuing an activity is a decreasing function of time since initiation
- (d) Traits can affect frequency of choice as well as intensity of behavior
- i) Those traits that affect the intensity of simulation will affect frequency of onset (the slope of the growth of a need or tendency)
- ii) Those traits that affect the intensity of decay of behavior affect the duration of a behavior
- iii) Those traits that affect the mutual inhibition of behaviors affect the intensity of response as well as the frequency and duration
5. Theory of cumulative performance
- a) Cumulative performance = Ability X Efficiency X Time Spent
b) effeciency
- (1) curvilinear function of motivational intensity
- (2) tests are seen as more motivating than in class performance
c) time spent is an increasing function of motivation