0 Datasets
0 Files
Get instant academic access to this publication’s datasets.
Yes. After verification, you can browse and download datasets at no cost. Some premium assets may require author approval.
Files are stored on encrypted storage. Access is restricted to verified users and all downloads are logged.
Yes, message the author after sign-up to request supplementary files or replication code.
Join 50,000+ researchers worldwide. Get instant access to peer-reviewed datasets, advanced analytics, and global collaboration tools.
✓ Immediate verification • ✓ Free institutional access • ✓ Global collaborationJoin our academic network to download verified datasets and collaborate with researchers worldwide.
Get Free AccessMastery goals are generally considered the most adaptive achievement goals. In 2 studies, we tested whether, in line with self-determination theory, participants’ experiences of autonomy support and autonomy would affect the relations between mastery goals and psychological outcomes. In Study 1 (an experiment), 117 college students, randomly assigned to 3 groups (autonomy-supportive, autonomy-suppressive, neutral), adopted an intrapersonal-competence standard to improve graphic quality of handwriting. Results showed that mastery goals led to more positive emotional experiences when given in an autonomy-supportive context relative to the other two. Study 2 extended the research to natural settings and learners’ motives among 7th and 8th graders (n = 839) responding to questionnaires about a specific class. Results revealed stronger relations of mastery goals with interest and enjoyment and with behavioral engagement when students perceived their level of choice (experience of autonomy) as high rather than low. We therefore propose that research on achievement goals should consider both the contexts and the motives accompanying the goals.
Moti Benita, Guy Roth, Edward L. Deci (2013). When are mastery goals more adaptive? It depends on experiences of autonomy support and autonomy.. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(1), pp. 258-267, DOI: 10.1037/a0034007.
Datasets shared by verified academics with rich metadata and previews.
Authors choose access levels; downloads are logged for transparency.
Students and faculty get instant access after verification.
Type
Article
Year
2013
Authors
3
Datasets
0
Total Files
0
Language
English
Journal
Journal of Educational Psychology
DOI
10.1037/a0034007
Access datasets from 50,000+ researchers worldwide with institutional verification.
Get Free Access