TY - JOUR
T1 - Four-dimensional classroom goal structure model
T2 - Validation and investigation of its effect on students' adoption of personal achievement goals and approach/avoidance behaviors
AU - Peng, Shu Ling
AU - Cherng, Biing Lin
AU - Lin, Yen Ying
AU - Kuo, Chih Wei
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 Elsevier Inc.
PY - 2018/1
Y1 - 2018/1
N2 - In this study, based on the 2 × 2 achievement goal framework (Elliot & McGregor, 2001), a four-dimensional classroom goal structure model (4CGS model) containing mastery-approach, mastery-avoidance, performance-approach, and performance-avoidance goal structures was proposed and tested using the data of 941 7th-grade Taiwanese students. The results of exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis and a discriminant validity test supported the independence of the four CGS constructs and revealed that the 4CGS model provided a far better fit than the other alternative models. Latent variable regression analysis disclosed differential associations between the 4CGS model and several important consequences (i.e., personal achievement goals, approach behaviors, and avoidance behaviors). Taken together, this study showed that CGS could indeed be divided into four distinct constructs that had differential predictive effects on these consequences.
AB - In this study, based on the 2 × 2 achievement goal framework (Elliot & McGregor, 2001), a four-dimensional classroom goal structure model (4CGS model) containing mastery-approach, mastery-avoidance, performance-approach, and performance-avoidance goal structures was proposed and tested using the data of 941 7th-grade Taiwanese students. The results of exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis and a discriminant validity test supported the independence of the four CGS constructs and revealed that the 4CGS model provided a far better fit than the other alternative models. Latent variable regression analysis disclosed differential associations between the 4CGS model and several important consequences (i.e., personal achievement goals, approach behaviors, and avoidance behaviors). Taken together, this study showed that CGS could indeed be divided into four distinct constructs that had differential predictive effects on these consequences.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85038823129&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85038823129&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.lindif.2017.12.004
DO - 10.1016/j.lindif.2017.12.004
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85038823129
SN - 1041-6080
VL - 61
SP - 228
EP - 238
JO - Learning and Individual Differences
JF - Learning and Individual Differences
ER -