Toward an Integration of Goal Setting Theory and the Automaticity Model

Two laboratory experiments were conducted to assess the extent to which goal setting theory explains the effects of goals that are primed in the subconscious on task performance. The first experiment examined the effect on performance of three primes that connote the difficulty levels of a goal in the subconscious. Participants (n = 91) were randomly assigned to one of three conditions where they were primed with either a photograph of a person lifting 20 pounds (easy goal), 200 pounds (moderately difficult goal), or 400 pounds (difficult goal). Following a filler task, participants were asked to “press as hard as you can” on a digital weight scale. Participants who were primed with the difficult goal exerted more effort than those who were primed with the moderate or easy goal. The second experiment examined whether choice of goal difficulty level can be primed. Participants (n = 133) were randomly assigned to one of two conditions. Those primed with a difficult goal consciously chose to set a more difficult goal on a brainstorming task than those who were primed with an easier goal. Similarly, their performance was significantly higher. Conscientiousness moderated the subconscious goal–performance relationship while the self‐set conscious goal partially mediated the subconscious goal–performance relationship.     

Reactions to Feedback in Goal Choice and Goal Change Processes1

Two laboratory studies were conducted to test the effects of reactions to feedback on propensity to change an initial self-selected performance goal. In Study 1, the performance of 228 subjects on a word search task was manipulated by varying puzzle difficulty. In Study 2, two-dimensional goals (i.e., time and quantity) were first assigned and then chosen by 75 subjects. In Study 1, satisfaction with performance and self-efficacy predicted goal change beyond the effects of past performance. Subjects lower in both satisfaction and self-efficacy tended to lower initial goals, whereas those higher in either or both variables tended to raise them. In a post-hoc analysis, goal-performance discrepancies and motivational force interacted to explain satisfaction with performance for subjects experiencing negative feedback. This result was replicated in Study 2 for self-selected quantity goals. In Study 2, satisfaction with performance explained goal choice beyond the effects of past performance for initial time goals and final quantity goals. Trade-offs in the selection of dual goals occurred, with subjects selecting a difficult goal on one dimension and an easy goal on the other. Suggestions for future research and practice on self-regulation of goals and performance are provided.     

Effects of participative vs assigned goals and feedback in a multitrial task

A dynamic multitrial perspective on goal setting was adopted in order to investigate the effects of both goals (assigned vs participative) and goal-discrepant performance feedback on subsequent goal commitment and performance. Eighty subjects were initially assigned to either an assigned or participative goal condition, and performed a multitrial task with all subjects receiving goal discrepant performance feedback following the first task trial. Assigned rather than participative goal setting led to higher goal commitment, and large goal/feedback discrepancies led to greater reductions in subsequent goals. Because of these goal changes, the ability of initial goals to predict performance decreased over trials. However, when goal commitment, which reflects revised goals, was also considered, the ability to predict performance actually increased over trials. A moderating effect for need achievement was obtained such that higher-need achievers were more goal committed and performed better under participative goal setting than low-need achievers. Discussion focused on the practical and theoretical importance of a dynamic goal-setting perspective in explaining and predicting responses to goals and feedback systems.     

Can I Do It? Will I Try? Personal Efficacy,Assigned Goals,and Performance Norms as Motivators of Individual Performance1

This study tested concurrent influences of personal efficacy, assigned goals, and performance norms on individual performance, mediated by personal goals and task‐specific self‐efficacy. Seventy‐seven undergraduate students performed a verbal task in this laboratory experiment that manipulated assigned goal level (low, high) and information about the performance of others (low, high). Relations among variables, including general, domain, and task‐specific self‐efficacy, as well as performance were examined through structural equation modeling. Results demonstrated simultaneous effects of assigned goals and normative information on self‐efficacy, personal goals, and subsequent performance, as well as mediated effects of domain efficacy on performance.     

The Effects of Choice and Incentives on the Overestimation of Future Performance

Two studies were designed to investigate factors hypothesized to influence the accuracy of performance-related statements (both performance predictions and self-set goals). In Experiment 1, subjects were either allowed to choose a specific version of the performance task or were assigned a version of the task prior to making performance-related statements. In Experiment 2, monetary incentives were manipulated prior to requests for either estimates or self-set goals. Results indicate significant sex-by-choice and sex-by-incentives interactions on both predictions and goals. In general, males responded to incentives and choice by becoming more extreme in their performance predictions and goals. However, females did not respond to incentives and choice as would be predicted by general principles such as "wishful thinking" (Slovic, 1966) and "illusion of control" (Langer, 1975). These results are discussed in the context of gender research in achievement settings and organizational theories of motivation.     

THE EFFECTS OF PARTICIPATION AND GOAL DIFFICULTY ON PERFORMANCE

Previous research comparing the effects of assigned versus participatively set goals on performance were essentially tests of the null hypothesis in that goal difficulty level was not systematically manipulated. The present laboratory study investigated the effects of assigned versus participatively set goals, and the effects of varying goal difficulty level on an arithmetic task. Eighty-six college students were assigned to either a participative goal condition or one of three assigned goal conditions. In two of the assigned goal conditions participants were assigned goals equal to those set in the participative condition, the difference being that individuals in one group were assigned goals at random and those in the other group were assigned goals on the basis of their premeasure scores. Participants in the third assigned goal condition were randomly assigned a goal in the top quartile of the goals set participatively. As hypothesized, individuals with hard assigned goals had higher performance than peers with lower goals set in a participative manner. Contrary to modern organizational theory, individuals with participatively set goals did not have higher performance than those with assigned goals of equal difficulty. Personality traits were not found to moderate the effects of goal setting on performance.     

Risk Versus Effort in the Assessment of Motor Fatigue

The choice of probability leffort (COPE) devices require fatigued subjects to choose between risk and effort. In a first experiment, where fatigue was induced by an intense or by a prolonged motor task and where the required effort was perceptual, the fatigue did not generalize to the test mode. A second experiment used motor fatigue of the arm or leg, and tested with arm muscle effort, showing that subjects fatigued with either limb chose riskier alternatives in order to avoid the effort. The data correlated with self-rated fatigue, and closely paralleled earlier work using perceptual fatigue and perceptual effort.     

The Influence of Commitment to Assigned Goals and Performance on Subsequent Self-Set Goals and Performance1

Seventy-seven undergraduates were assigned a performance goal for the first of two trials of a word game, and set goals for themselves on a second trial. Goal commitment was hypothesized to moderate the influence of goal level on performance within both trials. In addition, commitment to the assigned Trial I goals was hypothesized to moderate the relationship between goal attainment and self-set goals for the second trial. Subjects' initial performance on a practice trial was also hypothesized to interact with the goal levels they were assigned on the first trial, such that individuals who performed relatively well on the practice trial were expected to evidence a greater positive relationship between goal level and performance than individuals who performed relatively poorly on the practice trial. The results of three moderated regression analyses yielded no support for the hypothesized within-trial moderating influence of goal commitment on goal level-performance relations. However, commitment to assigned goals and goal attainment did interact as related to personal goals for Trial 2. Further, the hypothesized influence of practice trial performance and assigned goal level on Trial I performance was supported. The results are discussed in terms of how goal levels should be determined and assigned to employees, and the role of goal commitment in goal setting predictions.     

Unattainable Goal Choice as a Self-Handicapping Strategy1

Selection of an extremely difficult performance goal is conceptualized as a self-handicapping strategy–an attempt to externalize outcomes threatening one's self-image. In a laboratory study, male college students were led to believe they had succeeded at a task that was either relevant or irrelevant to their self-images. In conjunction with this, subjects were led to believe that the success they had experienced was either contingent upon or not contingent upon their effort. Consistent with a self-handicapping strategy, extremely difficult performance goals were selected on a subsequent task when success at a previous task was not contingent upon workers' e]ffort, but only in the personally relevant condition-i.e., when task performance had attributional implications for workers' s]elf-images. Personally irrelevant tasks led to a realistic downward revision of performance aspirations in response to noncontingent success.     

Goal Difficulty and Creative Performance: The Mediating Role of Stress Appraisal

We investigated whether the effect of goal difficulty on creativity may be clarified by examining how people appraise their working conditions. In an experiment, 157 undergraduate students completed a divergent thinking task for which goal difficulty was manipulated. Stress appraisals were assessed through self-reports, and creativity was evaluated by independent judges. Results indicated that difficult goals, although categorized as a challenge stressor, can also be appraised as a hindrance and/or a threat. Although there was a direct positive effect of difficult goals on creative performance, hindrance appraisals partially mediated a negative relationship between goal difficulty and creative performance. Results highlight that stress appraisals can help clarify inconsistent effects of stressors, with implications for managing creativity.     

Motivation of men and women in mathematics and language

Based on the multiple goal perspective it is argued that mastery and performance goals contribute to different motivational variables-mastery goals to self-efficacy and performance goals to social comparison-that contribute through affect to achievement. The first aim of this study was to determine whether this model is applicable irrespective of sex and subject. The expected relationships occurred for female students studying Dutch and mathematics, and for male students studying Dutch. The second aim was to test a model in which the perceived gender appropriateness of the subject affects the pursued achievement goal. We expected that subjects perceived as gender-appropriate--Dutch for female and mathematics for male students--would result in strong relationships between mastery goals, self-efficacy, affect, and achievement, and that less gender-appropriate subjects--mathematics for women and Dutch for men--would result in strong relationships between performance goals, social comparison, affect, and achievement. Several of the expected relationships occurred for female and males students studying Dutch and mathematics. Furthermore, female students obtained higher course grades in Dutch than male students, while male students studying mathematics scored higher on self-efficacy and affect than female students.     

The influence of monetary incentives on goal choice,goal commitment,and task performance

This study was designed to investigate the mechanism by which monetary incentives influence goal choice, goal commitment, and task performance. It is hypothesized that the explanation for incentive effects on goals and performance is in their influence on mediating events. A model attempting to explain the process of goal choice, work motivation, and performance in terms of cognitions is presented. Subjects were recruited for 5 days of part-time employment in a simulated organization to perform a clerical data transfer task. The 130 subjects were assigned randomly to 7 experimental conditions differing in terms of the magnitude of incentive offered for various levels of performance. The quantity and quality of performance was recorded daily and research questionnaires were administered at different times during their employment. Results provide support for the model presented and therefore suggest that the process of goal choice and commitment is central to understanding how incentives influence goals, motivation, and performance. The model provides a useful basis for investigating the relationships between organizational context and employee cognitions and for integrating goal setting with expectancy theory. The findings and future research issues are discussed.     

Processes That Mediate the Relationship Between a Group Goal and Group Member Performance

The impact of a group goal on the performance of anonymous and nonin- teracting group members performing an additive group task was tested. Pro- cesses believed to mediate the effect, the role of self-set individual goals, the impact of information about the group's previous performance on the task (group knowledge of results; GRPKR) on goal commitment, and the motiva- tional basis of the goal were also assessed. Seventeen groups of three to five people performed two trials of an idea generation task. In the GOAL/GRPKR condition, group members were assigned a group goal for Session 2 and received information about the group's performance for Session 1. In the goal without knowledge of results (GOAL/NOKR) condition, group mem- bers were assigned a group goal for Session 2 without GRPKR. In the NO- GOAL condition, group members worked without a goal and without GRPKR. In each condition, group members worked on the task without talk- ing to other group members and individual contributions to the group prod- uct were unknown to others. Self-reports of effort, changes in individual performance strategies from Rial 1 to Rial 2, self-set individual goals, goal commitment, and personal challenge were collected. Results showed that (a) group members working toward a performance goal outperformed those working without a goal, b) information about the group's previous perfor- mance on the task did not influence commitment to the goal or performance, (c) changes in individual performance strategies mediated the group goal ef- fect but self-reports of effort invested in the task did not, (d) g m ~ p members working toward a group goal felt more personal challenge than group mem- bers working without a goal, and (e) self-set individual goals can not account for the group goal effect. The implications of these results for models of group goals and group performance are discussed.     

成就目标与任务投入的关系

采用实验室实验的方法,探讨了不同的任务阶段成就目标对任务投入的影响。将被试随机分配至掌握目标组或成绩目标组,考察两组被试在任务前、中、后三个阶段的任务投入水平,及相关动机变量的情况。研究结果表明,成就目标对任务投入的作用差异主要体现在任务结束之后,成绩目标组对尚未完成的实验任务的继续投入明显少于掌握目标组,并且成绩目标组在实验过程中较少体验到愉悦感,对实验任务的内在兴趣也较低。     

Challenge versus threat effects on the goal–performance relationship

This study tested the situational effects of goals and stress on the performance of complex tasks and on adaptation to change in the task. Difficult goals often exceed the individual's resources and thus create stress. However, stress may be appraised as either challenge or threat. Challenge is experienced when there is an opportunity for self-growth with available coping strategies, whereas threat is experienced when the situation is perceived as leading to failure with no available strategies to cope with it. We hypothesized that participants who appraised the situation as a challenge would perform better and adapt better to changes under difficult goal conditions, as compared with general goals or strategy goals. By contrast, threat appraisals would be better addressed by strategy goals rather than difficult goals. One hundred and fifty five students performed a task, which required their making predictions concerning the value of 120 companies' stocks based on three manipulated cues. We used a three by three by two factorial design in which goals, stress, and change (as a repeated factor) were varied to test the hypotheses. Results supported the main hypotheses and demonstrated that the same level of goal difficulty may lead to high or low performance and adaptation to change depending on the appraisal of the situation as challenging or threatening. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings are further discussed.     

Two Investigations of the Relationships among Group Goals,Goal Commitment,Cohesion, and Performance

This paper presents two studies exploring the operation of group cohesion and goal processes (difficulty and commitment) on group performance. The results from the first study, using a sample of college students in naturally occurring groups, revealed significant relationships among these variables and suggested that goals are the more immediate determinants of performance, mediating the effects of cohesion on performance. The second study employed a different design and task to address some limitations of the first study and to replicate those findings. The results from the second study were highly consistent with the first. The implications of these findings are discussed.     

Goal regulation across time: the effects of feedback and affect

This research focused on the processes individuals use to regulate their goals across time. Two studies examined goal regulation following task performance with 6 samples of participants in a series of 8-trial task performance experiments. The experiments involved: (a) 3 task types, (b) 2 goal types, and (c) actual or manipulated performance feedback referring to the focal participant's own performance or to the participant's performance compared with others' performance. Applying multilevel methods, the authors examined (a) how performance feedback influences subsequent goals within individuals across both negative and positive performance feedback ranges, and (b) the mediating role of affect in explaining the relationship between feedback and subsequent goal setting. Results showed that participants adjusted their goals downwardly following negative feedback and created positive goal-performance discrepancies by raising their goals following positive feedback. In each sample, affect mediated substantial proportions of the feedback-goals relationship within individuals.     

Some conditions affecting the choice to cooperate or compete

Three experiments investigated conditions affecting the choice to cooperate or compete. Experiment I compared the effects first of an individual activity, then of a competitive task as an alternative to cooperation. For both comparisons, subjects could earn more by cooperating. Choice of competition, but not individual activity, was found to depend on the task choice contingencies. Competition predominated when both subjects could compete if either or both chose competition. Previously competitive pairs cooperated when both subjects could cooperate if either or both chose cooperation. Experiment II investigated the effects of differences in magnitude of the reinforcers for cooperating or competing. Choice between the two alternatives was manipulated in all pairs by varying reinforcer difference. Competition was chosen over cooperation only within the limits within which competition was potentially profitable. Experiment III replicated the findings of Experiment II using triads. Subjects in triads, however, were more likely to withdraw from the experiment. Thus, the data for pairs and triads suggest an orderly relation between reinforcer difference for cooperating or competing and task choice. Motivation of subjects to maximize relative gain by competing can be overridden by moderate reinforcer differences favoring cooperation.     

Prospect Theory Predictions When Escalation Is Not the Only Chance to Recover Sunk Costs

Two experiments tested the effect of risk of alternative investment opportunities on decision behavior in an escalation context. In the first experiment (n = 170), the risk of the reinvestment option, which had been unsuccessful and incurred a sunk cost, was held equal to that of an alternative investment project. Responsibility for the previous decision was manipulated between these subjects. Subjects were required to choose between the reinvestment option and the alternative. Responsible subjects demonstrated classic reinvestment (escalation) tendencies, and nonresponsible subjects exhibited a significant tendency to avoid reinvestment. Subjects in the second experiment (n = 195) completed the same decision task and were also assigned to high and low responsibility conditions. In this experiment the risk of investing further in a previously chosen project, relative to the risk of the alternative project, was manipulated. Those subjects who were responsible for the first decision (a) demonstrated no preference for or against continued pursuit of the initial project (i.e., there was no escalation tendency) and (b) preferred the less risky of the second investments, regardless of whether it was or was not the initially chosen project. Nonresponsible subjects showed no risk preference or proclivity for reinvestment. The results of these experiments suggest that salient information concerning relative risk dominates the effect of prior performance information when alternative investments are considered. We discuss the implications of these findings for decision theory and for methodology in commitment escalation research.