Performance-approach goals are directly related to the use of surface cognitive and resource management strategies in effective self-regulators¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2008 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? In the effective self-regulator model, performance-approach goals had direct positive effects on surface cognitive strategies (β=.10) and resource management strategies (β=.15). → Anneke Vrugt & Frans J. Oort 2008

Evidence¶

Anneke Vrugt & Frans J. Oort 2008¶

Anneke Vrugt & Frans J. Oort. (2008). Metacognition, achievement goals, study strategies and academic achievement: pathways to achievement. Metacognition Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-008-9022-4

q2 · i? · associational · r3

Path analysis for effective self-regulators (N=421); Table 2 part (a) reports standardized direct effects of performance-approach goals of .10 on surface cognitive strategies and .15 on resource management. The authors had hypothesized that performance-approach goals would impel efforts to devise a structured study regimen and seek instrumental help.

"Consistent with expectation, performance-approach goals were directly related to the use of surface cognitive strategies and resource management strategies."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• For effective self-regulators, mastery goals have a large positive and performance-avoidance goals a small negative effect on metacognition — related
• Metacognition positively affects the use of all four study strategies, with medium effects on metacognitive, deep cognitive and resource management strategies and a small effect on surface strategies — related
• Six relationships in the model differ for less effective self-regulators, including performance-avoidance goals being unrelated to metacognition — related