JOURNAL OF SPORT & EXERCISE PSYCHOLOGY, 1996,18,264-280

O 1996 Human Kinetics Publishers, Inc.

Motivation in Physical Activity Contexts: The Relationship

of Perceived Motivational Climate to Intrinsic Motivation
and Self-Efficacy

Maria Kavussanu and Glyn C. Roberts

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

This study examined the relationship between perceived motivationalclimate and

intrinsic motivation and self-efficacy and determined the role of goal orientation
and perceived motivational climate in predicting intrinsicmotivation and self-effi-
cacy. College students (N= 285) enrolled in beginning tennis classes completed a
battery of questionnaires assessing perceived motivational climate, goal orienta-
tion, intrinsic motivation, self-efficacy, and perceived ability. Perceptions of mas-
tery climate were positively associated with enjoyment, effort, perceived
competence, and self-efficacy and were inversely related to tension. In males, dis-
positional goal orientation and perceived motivational climate emerged as equally
important predictors of intrinsic motivation, while mastery motivational climate
was the only significant predictor of self-efficacy. In females, performance moti-
vational climate was the strongest predictor of intrinsic motivation and self-effi-
cacy. Perceived normative ability accounted for a substantial amount of unique
variance in intrinsic motivation and self-efficacy in both males and females. The
motivational implications of the findings are discussed, and directions for future
research are provided.

Key words: goal orientation, perceived ability, gender differences

A viable framework for understanding motivation in physical activity con-

texts stems from achievement goal theory (Ames, 1984, 1992; Ames & Archer,
1988;Duda, 1992,1993;Dweck, 1986;Elliott & Dweck, 1988;Maehr & Braskarnp,
1986; Maehr & Nicholls, 1980; Nicholls, 1984, 1989; Roberts, 1984, 1992).
Achievement goal theory examines motivation from the perspective of goals indi-
viduals pursue in achievement contexts. The basic premise of this theory is that
individuals engage in achievement contexts in order to demonstrate competence.
Competence or ability, however, can be construed in different ways, based upon
the individual's goal of action (Nicholls, 1984, 1989). Nicholls (1984, 1989) has
demonstrated that two conceptions of ability exist and manifest themselves in
achievement contexts: (a) an undifferentiated conception of ability, where ability

Maria Kavussanu and Glyn C. Roberts are with the Department of Kinesiology at the
University of Illinois, 211 Louise Freer Hall, Urbana, IL 61801.
 Motivation in Physical Activity / 265

is not differentiated from effort and is construed as improvement, and (b) a differ-
entiated concept of ability, where effort and ability are differentiated from each
other, and ability is construed as capacity.
These two conceptions of ability are embedded within two achievement goal
perspectives consistent with the conception of ability used, namely, task involve-
ment and ego involvement. The task-involved individual uses the undifferentiated
conception of ability to judge demonstrated competence, conceives ability as im-
provement, and is concerned with learning or mastery of the task. In contrast, the
ego-involved person uses the differentiated conception of ability to judge demon-
strated competence, perceives ability as capacity, and is concerned with outper-
forming others and demonstrating superior ability to others (Nicholls, 1984, 1989).
Achievement goal theory suggests that the predominant goal perspective held
by the individual at a given achievementcontext is a function of the interplay between
dispositional and situational factors (Dweck & Leggett, 1988;Nicholls, 1984, 1989).
Individuals approach an achievementcontext with the predisposition to be task or ego
involved or both, but the structure of the context will also have a powerful effect on
the adopted goal of action. Dweck and Leggett (1988) have stated, "Dispositions are
seen as individual differencevariables that determine the a priori probability of adopt-
ing a particular goal and displaying a particular behavior pattern, and situational fac-
tors are seen as potentially altering these probabilities" (p. 269).
Ames and her colleagues (Arnes, 1992;Ames &Archer, 1988)have used the
term motivational climate to refer to the situational goal structure, and have adopted
the terms mastery and performance to refer to task- and ego-involving achieve-
ment situations, respectively. The motivational climate of a context involves spe-
cific cues that make salient a mastery (i.e., task) or a performance (i.e., ego) goal,
or both. Situations that emphasize interpersonal competition, normative feedback,
public evaluation, and social comparison facilitate ego involvement, whereas con-
texts that encourage effort, learning, mastery of the task, and participation foster
task involvement.
The motivational climate is assumed to have an imuact on intrinsic motiva-
tion of individuals who engage in achievement contexts. Individuals are said to be
intrinsically motivated when they engage in an activity in the absence of extrinsic
rewards or constraints. A task-involving goal perspective has been both conceptu-
ally (Nicholls, 1984, 1989) and empirically (as indicated by self-report measures)
linked to intrinsic motivation, whereas an ego-involving perspective has been in-
versely associated with intrinsic interest (Butler, 1987;Duda, Chi, & Newton, 1990;
Duda, Chi, Newton, Walling, & Catley, 1995).
In task involvement, the individual engages in the activity for its own sake
and experiences it as an end in and of itself (Nicholls, 1989), which is a fundamen-
tal element of intrinsic motivation (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Deci, Vallerand, Pelletier,
& Ryan, 1991). In addition, the person focuses on learning and personal improve-
ment and uses self-referenced criteria to judge demonstrated competence. Thus,
there is a greater chance perceived competence will be enhanced in task involve-
ment. variations in perceived competence have been suggested as one of the psy-
chological processes that underlie changes in intrinsic motivation (Deci & Ryan,
1980, 1985; Ryan, 1982). More specifically, intrinsic motivation is presumably
enhanced when one's perceived competence is increased (Deci & Ryan, 1985).
Thus, task involvement entails the conditions prerequisite to foster intrinsic moti-
266 1 Kavussanu and Roberts

In contrast, ego involvement by its defining features is incompatible with

intrinsic motivation. The ego-involved individual views achievement striving as a
means to an end; namely, the demonstration of superior ability (Nicholls, 1989).
The main concern of the person is on obtaining favorablejudgments regarding his
or her ability rather than on learning and improving the present skill level; the
intrinsic rewards associated with learning and mastery are secondary in this case.
Further, perceptions of competence are other-referencedin ego involvement. The
person feels competent when he on she compares favorably with others. This de-
pendence on social comparison reduces the probability that perceived competence
will be enhanced, and consequently limits the opportunity to foster intrinsic moti-
vation (Duda et al., 1995).
Theoretical predictions were corroborated by a recent study (Seifriz, Duda,
& Chi, 1992), which examined the relationship of mastery (i.e., task-involving)
versus performance (i.e., ego-involving) motivational climate to intrinsic motiva-
tion in basketball. Seifriz et al. (1992) found that athletes who predominantly
perceived a mastery-oriented climate in their team, experienced higher intrinsic
motivation-as indicated by self-report measures-than did athletes who viewed
their team's climate as being low in mastery orientation.
In addition to their effect on intrinsic motivation, goal perspectives are ex-
pected to influence self-confidence (Dweck & Leggett, 1988), a variable of critical
importance in all achievement endeavors. The individual is more likely to feel
self-confident when task involved, because in this state of involvement, percep-
tions of competence are self-referenced, and the main concern of the person is on
mastering the task and improving current ability at the task. In contrast, in ego
involvement, perceptions of competence are inextricably linked to the performance
of others, and primarily depend on how the individual's performance compares
with that of others. This is a factor over which the individual has no control; con-
sequently, the development and maintenance of confidence is more difficult in ego
involvement. As Dweck and Leggett (1988) have suggested, perception of confi-
dence is fragile in ego involvement, especially for those participants who already
doubt their ability.
In the physical activity domain, self-efficacy, a situation-specific form of
self-confidence (Bandura, 1982, 1986), has particular importance (see McAuley,
1992).Although general feelings of confidence are important, in physical educa-
tion and sport contexts, specific perceptions of confidence to perform the task at
hand become crucial. Indeed, self-efficacy theory implies that the techniques used
by coaches affect performance and behavior through their effects on self-efficacy
(Gill, 1986). Self-efficacy is considered an important mediating variable between
instructional strategies and athletic performance (Gill, 1986).
Two recent laboratory experiments have provided evidence to suggest that
self-efficacy may be affected by the goal perspective adopted by the individual. In
the first study, Wood and Bandura (1989) found that participants who were told that
performance on a cognitive task reflected their ability as an inherent aptitude (i.e.,
ego involvement) showed a decline in self-efficacy when they faced difficulty, low-
ered their performance goals, and experienced a decline in actual performance of
the task. In contrast, individuals who were told that performance on the task re-
flected an acquirable skill (i.e., task involvement) maintained high self-efficacy, set
challenging goals, and produced higher performance. In the second study, Jourden,
Bandura, and Banfield (1991) examined the impact of different conceptions of ability
 Motivation in Physical Activity / 267

on self-efficacy and performance over a series of trials on the pursuit-rotor task.

Participants assigned to the acquirable skill condition reported a progressive increase
in self-efficacy, exhibited better performance, and spent more time in the task during
a free choice period than individuals assigned to the inherent aptitude condition.
In sum, preliminary evidence suggests an enhancement of self-efficacy in
individuals who were led to believe that performance in a motor task is an acquir-
able skill (Jourden et al., 1991), as well as a link between a mastery motivational
climate and intrinsic motivation in a sport setting (Seifriz et al., 1992). Both intrin-
sic motivation and self-efficacy are desirable outcomes in physical activity con-
texts: While the former is a necessary ingredient of meaningful and enjoyable ac-
tivities (Deci & Ryan, 1985), the latter is considered an important mediator of
persistence in physical activity (Feltz, 1992; McAuley, 1992). Thus, identifying
the conditions that have the potential to foster their development is of interest to
sport psychologists. To date, no attention has been given to examining the relation-
ship of perceived motivational climate to intrinsic motivation in physical activity
classes. Further, research has not addressed the question of how the situational
goal structure is related to self-efficacy in a real world setting.
The primary purpose of this study was to extend the work described above
by examining the relationship between perceived motivational climate and intrin-
sic motivation and self-efficacy students participating in physical activity classes.
It was hypothesized that perceptions of a mastery motivational climate would be
associated with high levels of intrinsic motivation and high self-efficacy. It was
also hypothesized that perceptions of a performance motivational climate would
correspond to low levels of intrinsic motivation and self-efficacy.
A secondary purpose was to determine the role of perceived motivational
climate and dispositional goal orientation in predicting intrinsic motivation and
self-efficacy. We considered it important to determine the relative effect of dispo-
sitional versus situational factors on these variables, because as achievement goal
theory suggests, in a given achievement context, both factors influence the adopted
goal perspective and consequently the patterns of involvement.Thus, by consider-
ing both situational and dispositional factors we could obtain a more complete
picture of the motivational processes that take place in achievement settings.

Method
Participants and Procedure
Students (N = 285) enrolled in 17 beginning tennis classes at a large Mid-
western university participated in this study. The sample comprised 147 males and
119 females (19 subjects did not specify their sex). The instructors of the tennis
classes were contacted to seek volunteers for this research project. All students
who were present in class on the day of data collection participated in the study.
Students completed a battery of questionnaires given by one investigator at the end
of a class session during the last week of instruction. Students were encouraged to
answer the questions as honestly as possible and were assured that their individual
responses would be kept anonymous. It was emphasized that participation was
voluntary and that participants could withdraw at any time.
The 17 tennis classes were taught by seven different instructors, and data
were collected over three consecutive school terms (spring, summer, and fall). All
268 1 Kavussanu and Roberts

instructors met departmental teaching qualificationsand were experienced in teach-

ing tennis. Most of them had been involved with tennis as athletes for many years.
Thus, there was some consistency in the knowledge of tennis these instructors
possessed.

Measures
Perceived Motivational Climate. The motivational climate of each class
was measured by an adapted version of the Perceived Motivational Climate in
Sport Questionnaire (PMCSQ). This 21-item inventory was designed by Seifriz et
al. (1992) to assess the degree to which basketball players perceive the motiva-
tional climate of their team as emphasizing performance or mastery goals. The
PMCSQ consists of two subscales measuring performance (12 items) and mastery
(9 items) motivational climates.
For the purpose of this study, the inventory was slightly modified to fit the
class context. Only 17 items were included because the remaining 4 items were
specific to a team sport context (e.g., "Most players get to play in the games,"
"Everyone wants to be the high scorer") and therefore deemed inappropriate for
use in the present study. Examples of items that were retained are "Students feel
good when they do better than their classmates" and "The teacher wants us to try
new skills" for the performance and mastery subscales, respectively. Students were
asked to think about what it was like participating in this class. The stem for each
item was "In this class . . .," and responses were indicated on a 5-point Likert scale
anchored by strongly disagree (1) and strongly agree (5). Separate scores were
calculated for each subscale by adding students' responses on the items of each
subscale and dividing by the number of items.
The PMCSQ has demonstrated satisfactory internal consistency. In Seifriz et
al.'s (1992) study, alpha coefficientswere .84 and .80 for the performance and mas-
tery subscales,respectively. Confirmatory factor analysis has suggested an accept-
able fit of the data with the hypothesized model (Walling, Duda, & Chi, 1993).
Goal Orientations. The Perception of Success Questionnaire (POSQ; Rob-
erts & Balague, 1989, 1991) was used to assess dispositional goal orientation.
POSQ is a 12-item sport specific measure of achievement goal orientation. It con-
sists of two six-item subscales measuring task and ego goals. Participants respond
on a 5-point Likert scale anchored by strongly disagree (1) and strongly agree (5).
The stem for each item is "I feel most successful in sport when. . . ." Examples of
items constituting the ego subscale are "I beat other people," and, "I outperform
my opponents." Examples of items constituting the task subscale are "I overcome
difficulties," and, "I perform to the best of my ability." Separate scores are calcu-
lated for each subscale, by adding students' responses (1-5) on the six items of the
respective subscale, and dividing by the number of items. The POSQ has demon-
strated acceptable internal consistency in previous research (e.g., Cronbach alpha
coefficients of .90 and .84 for the Task and Ego subscales, respectively, in Roberts,
Treasure, & Hall, 1994).
PerceivedAbility. Based on the more recent work of Nicholls, Cobb, Wood,
Yackel, and Patashnick (1990), perceived normative ability was assessed by a single
item asking participants to indicate how they rate their physical ability relative to
their peers on a 7-point scale ranging from bottom 10%(1) to top 10%(7). This
measure taps general physical ability. We elected to take this approach in measur-
 Motivation in Physical Activity / 269

ing physical ability because most of these students had no previous experience
with tennis on which to base their general perception of normative tennis ability.
Intrinsic Motivation. Dimensions of intrinsic motivation were assessed us-
ing the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (IMI). The IMI was developed by Ryan (1982)
and comprises four subscales measuring Interest-Enjoyment(e.g., "Participating in
this tennis class was fun to do"), consisting of seven items; Effort-Importance (e.g.,
"I put a lot of effort into this tennis class"), consisting of five items; Perceived
Competence (e.g., "I think I am pretty good at tennis"), which consists of six items;
and Pressure-Tension (e.g., "I felt very tense while participating in this tennis class"),
which comprises five items. In the physical activity domain, the four subscales
have demonstrated adequate internal consistency with alpha coefficients of .78 for
Interest-Enjoyment, .80 for Perceived Competence, .84 for Effort-Importance, and
.68 for Pressure-Tension (McAuley, Duncan, & Tammen, 1989).
Self-Eficacy. Self-efficacy was measured with a 14-itemquestionnairedevel-
oped specifically for this study. The questionnaire included four subscales measuring
self-efficacy for the forehand and backhand ground strokes (4 items each), volley (3
items), and serve (3 items). We chose to assess self-efficacy for these specific strokes
because these are the strokes typically taught in all beginning tennis classes. Al-
though some instructors teach additional strokes such as the overhead or the service
return, we limited our assessment to the aforementioned strokes in order to ensure
the use of the same dependent variables for all students. The nature of these tennis
strokes necessitated the employment of 4 items for forehand and backhand self-effi-
cacy (because of the typical lead-up activities used by teachers), and only 3 items for
volley and serve self-efficacy. This decision was made after we consulted with tennis
instructors, as well as experts on the measurement of self-efficacy.
To assess forehand self-efficacywe asked the students to indicate how confi-
dent they are when they perform the forehand ground stroke that they will success-
fully (a) bounce and hit the ball in the court, (b) hit the ball in the court when
someone else tosses it to them, (c) return the ball in the court when someone hits it
to them from half court, and (d) return the ball in the court when someone hits it to
them from the baseline. The same iqems were used for the assessment of backhand
self-efficacy. Volley self-efficacy was measured by asking students how confident
they are that they will successfully hit the ball in the court when (a) it is tossed to
them underhand, (b) someone hits it to them from half court, and (c) someone is
feeding it to them from the baseline. Finally, for serve self-efficacy students were
asked to indicate how confident they are they will (a) accurately toss the ball, (b)
accurately toss the ball and prepare the racket to hit the ball, and (c) synchronize
the motion and accurately contact the ball on the racket strings.
The items we employed to assess self-efficacy reflected progressively more
difficult levels of performance. Students indicated their degree of confidence of
achieving each level of performance by choosing a percentage value from 0 (no
confidence) to 100 (absolute con.dence). Self-efficacy scores were determined by
summing scores on the items of each subscale and dividing by the number of items.
Acomposite self-efficacy score was calculated by summing the scores of the indi-
vidual subscales. Although we could assess overall tennis self-efficacy by asking
students to indicate their degree of confidence in putting all skills together to play
a tennis match, we elected to assess self-efficacy for the specific tennis strokes
because most instructors in beginning tennis classes put more emphasis on learn-
ing these strokes and less on employing them in real match situations.
270 I Kavussanu and Roberts

Not surprisingly, all subscales were significantly related to each other (all p <
.01). More specifically, self-efficacy for forehand had a correlation of .71 with back-
hand self-efficacy, a correlation of .63 with volley self-efficacy, and a correlation of
.46 with serve self-efficacy. Correlationsof .56 and .46 were observed between back-
hand and volley self-efficacy and between backhand and serve self-efficacy. Finally,
the correlation between volley and serve self-efficacy was .43. Because self-efficacy
subscales were correlated, we employed only the composite self-efficacy score in
data analyses.

Results
Psychometric Properties of the Scales
Factor analysis of the PMCSQ using principal components methods with
oblique rotation, revealed two factors representing Mastery (7 items) and Perfor-
mance (10 items) motivational climate. Eigenvalues were 4.74 for the Performance
factor and 2.36 for the Mastery factor, explaining 28 and 14% of the variance of
students' responses, respectively. The interfactor correlation was -.20, and the
correlation between the two subscales was -.30, p < .01, which is consistent with
past research (Seifriz et al., 1992; Walling et al., 1993). In the present study, the
PMCSQ demonstrated satisfactory internal consistency with alpha coefficients of
.74 for the Mastery and .77 for the Performance subscale.
The remaining subscales also demonstrated satisfactoryinternal consistency.
Alpha coefficients for the POSQ were .88 for the Task and .90 for the Ego subscale,
while the intercorrelation between the two subscales was low, r = .20,p < .01. With
regard to reliability of the IMI subscales, alpha coefficients were .86 for Interest-
Enjoyment, .86 for Perceived Competence, .81 for Effort-Importance, and .73 for
Pressure-Tension. Finally, alpha coefficients of the self-efficacy subscales were
.91 for forehand, .94 for backhand, .90 for volley, .93 for serve efficacy, and .94 for
the composite self-efficacy scale.

Descriptive Statistics and Gender DifSerences

Means and standard deviations of perceptions of motivational climate, goal
orientations, dimensions of intrinsic motivation, self-efficacy, and perceived abil-
ity are reported in Table 1. Statistics are provided for the whole sample, as well as
for males and females separately.
A one-way MANOVA was conducted to test for gender differences in per-
ceptions of motivational climate, goal orientations, dimensions of intrinsic moti-
vation, self-efficacy, and perceived ability. A significant multivariate main effect
emerged, F(10,255) = 7 . 6 6 , <~ .001. Subsequent univariate analyses (see Table 1)
indicated that males reported significantly higher perceptions of a performance
climate, F(1, 264) = 4.37, p < .05; higher ego, F(l, 264) = 25.32, p < .001; lower
task orientation, F(l, 264) = 4.49, p < .05; higher self-efficacy,F(l, 264) = 8 . 3 9 , ~
< .01; and higher perceived ability than females, F(1, 264) = 48.86, p < .001.
Females tried harder, F(l, 264) = 4.46, p < .05, but perceived themselves as less
competent in the activity than males, F(1,264) = 7 . 8 7 , ~< .01. Discriminant analysis
indicated that perceived ability contributed the most to this multivariate effect,
followed by ego orientation, self-efficacy, and perceived competence (discrimi-
 Motivation in Physical Activity 1 271

Table 1 Means and Standard Deviations of the Motivational Climate, Indices

of Intrinsic Motivation, Self-Efficacy, and Perceived Ability

All participants Males Females

(N = 285) (n = 147) (n = 119)

Variable M SD M SD

Motivational climate
Mastery
Performance
Goal orientation
Task
Ego
Intrinsic motivation
Interest
Effort
Competence
Tension
Self-efficacy
Perceived ability

nant function coefficients were .78, .57, .33, and .31, for perceived ability, ego
orientation, self-efficacy, and perceived competence,respectively). Because a gen-
der effect was found in this sample of students, all subsequent analyses were con-
ducted separately for males and females.
Simple correlations were calculated to determine the relationship between
perceived motivational climate and dispositional goal orientations. Correlations
were computed for the whole sample, as well as for males and females separately.
Performance climate was positively related to ego orientation (r = .39, p < .01, for
the total sample; r = .41, p < .01, for males; and r = .33, p < .01, for females) and
negatively related to task orientation (r = -.26, p < .01, for the total sample; r = -
.22, p < .01, for males; and r = -.30, p < .01, for females). Mastery climate was
positively and moderately related to task orientation (r = .49, p < .01, for the total
sample; r = .50, p < .01, for males; and r = .55, p < .01, for females), whereas the
correlation with ego orientation was nonsignificant (r = -.05 for the total sample; r
= -.08 for males; and r = -.05 for females).

Group Comparisons
To examine the effects of perceptions of motivational climate on intrinsic moti-
vation and self-efficacy, consistent with Seifriz et al. (1992), we classified students
into four groups based on a median split on the Mastery and Performance subscales.
Although the median of the Mastery Climate was the same for both genders (4.14),
the median of the Performance Climate was slightly higher for males (2.50) than for
272 / Kavussanu and Roberts

females (2.30). Thus, we used the same criterion score to classify males and fe-
males into high and low mastery groups, but gender specific criteria to classify
them into high and low performance groups.
Students who scored above the median in the Mastery Climate subscale were
categorized as the high mastery group (n = 74 for males, n = 74 for females),
whereas students who scored below the median in this subscale were categorized
as the low mastery group (n = 73 for males, n = 45 for females). Similarly, students
with scores above the median in the Performance Climate subscale were classified
as the high-performance group (n = 67 for males, n = 52 for females), whereas
students with below the median scores in this subscale were classified as the low-
performance group (n = 72 for males, n = 55 for females). We conducted two 2 x 2
MANOVAs (one for males, one for females) with the two levels of mastery cli-
mate (high-low) and the two levels of performance climate (high-low) as the in-
dependent variables, and dimensions of intrinsic motivation and self-efficacy as
the dependent variables.
Males. MANOVA for males revealed a significant multivariate main effect
for mastery, F(5, 131) = 3.56, p < .01, whereas the multivariate effect for perfor-
mance climate was nonsignificant. Subsequent univariate analyses indicated that
males, who perceived their class climate to be high mastery oriented, reported
significantly more interest in the activity (M = 43.33), F(l, 135) = 1 6 . 7 7 , <~ .001,
and exerted more effort (M = 26.86), F(1, 135) = 4.43, p < .05, than did students
who perceived their class climate to be low in mastery (M = 40.00 for interest, and
M = 24.90 for effort).
To determine whether a mastery or performance climate have higher impact on
indices of intrinsic motivation and self-efficacy when perceived ability is controlled
for, we included perceived ability as a covariate in a 2 x 2 MANCOVA. A significant
multivariate main effect emerged for mastery,F(5,130) = 4 . 2 9 , ~ < .01. In addition to
the effects already observed, which remained robust, univariate analyses indicated
that males who perceived their class climate as high in mastery felt more competent,
< .05, and reported higher self-efficacy, F(1,134) = 6 . 7 2 , <
F(1, 134) = 5 . 8 8 , ~ ~ .05,
than did students who perceived their class climate as low in mastery.
Females. MANOVA for females revealed significant multivariate effects
for mastery, F(5,99) = 3.82, p < .01, and performance climate, F(5,99) = 2.65, p
< .05. Univariate analyses indicated that females, who perceived their class cli-
mate as high in mastery, expressed more interest in the activity (M = 43.92), F (1,
103) = 13.79,p< .001; appliedmoreeffort (M=28.57), F(l, 103) = 1 0 . 9 9 , .01; ~~
felt more competent (M = 31.46), F(l, 103) = 7.30, p < .01; and reported higher
self-efficacy (M = 307.86), F(1, 103) = 8.08, p < .01, than did those female stu-
dents who perceived their class climate as low in mastery (M = 39.14 for interest,
M = 25.20 for effort, M = 27.45 for competence, and M = 272.05 for self-efficacy).
In addition, females who perceived a high performance climate in their class expe-
rienced more tension (M = 14.67) than did females who perceived a low perfor-
mance climate in their class (M = 11.26), F(l, 103) = 10.70, p < .01.
A 2 x 2 MANCOVA in which perceived ability was used as a covariate
revealed significant multivariate main effects for mastery, F(5,98) = 2.44, p < .05,
and performance, F(5,98) = 3 . 6 2 , < ~ .01. Subsequent univariate analyses showed
that females who perceived their class climate as high in performance felt less
competent, F(l, 102) = 4.90, p < .05, and experienced more tension, F(l, 102) =
15.03, p < .001, whereas those female students who perceived a high mastery
 Motivation in Physical Activity / 273

climate reported more interest in the activity, F(1, 102) = 8.88,p < .01, and exerted
more effort, F(1,102) = 8.76, p < .01.

Canonical Correlations
We conducted canonical correlation analyses in order to examine the multi-
variate relationship between perceived motivational climate and indices of intrin-
sic motivation and self-efficacy.
Males. One significant function emerged, Wilks's lambda = .70, F(10,280)
= 5.40, p < .001; canonical correlation was .50. As shown in Table 2, there was a
high positive loading for mastery climate and a moderately high negative loading
for performance climate. Perceptions of a mastery climate were positively related
to enjoyment, effort, and perceived competence, and were inversely related to ten-
sion. Loadings greater than .30 were considered significant (Tabachnick & Fidell,
1989). The redundancy statistic indicated that this function explained 15% of the
variance in students' intrinsic motivation and self-efficacy.
Females. For females, canonical analysisrevealed two significantfunctions,
Wilks's lambda = .68, F(10,224) = 4.76,p < .001; canonical correlations were .49
for Function 1 and .32 for Function 2. Because the first function accounted for most
of the explained variance, we will discuss only this function. As can be seen in
Table 3, a strong positive mastery climate and a negative performance climate were
related to experienced enjoyment, exerted effort, perceived competence, and self-
efficacy, and were inversely associated with tension experienced during participa-
tion in the activity. The redundancy statistic indicated that this function accounted
for 17% of the variance in dimensions of intrinsic motivation and self-eficacy.

Dispositional VersusSituational Factors

We conducted hierarchical regression analysis to determine whether intrin-
sic motivation and self-efficacy are best predicted by perceived motivational cli-

Table 2 Canonical Loadings for Motivational Climate, Indices of Intrinsic

Motivation, and Self-Efficacy for Males

Canonical loadings

Predictor variables
Motivational Climate
Mastery 390
Performance -.666
Criterion variables
Intrinsic Motivation
Enjoyment .953
Effort .559
Competence .371
Tension -.525
Self-efficacy .274
274 / Kavussanu and Roberts

Table 3 Canonical Loadings for Motivational Climate, Indices of Intrinsic

Motivation, and Self-Efficacyfor Females

Canonical loadings

Predictor variables
Motivational Climate
Mastery .873
Performance -.776
Criterion variables
Intrinsic Motivation
Enjoyment .924
Effort .561
Competence .584
Tension -.615
Self-efficacy .701

mate, dispositional goal orientation, or both factors. In these analyses we used the
composite intrinsic motivation score which we computed by adding the scores of
the four subscales. Prior to this calculation we recomputed the tension score in a
reverse manner, so that high scores in this scale would reflect lower tension, thus
higher intrinsic motivation. We used the test method of SPSS statistical program
which calculates the amount of unique variance in criterion variables accounted
for by the predictors regardless of their order of entry into the regression equation.
Perceived ability was also included in these analyses as a predictor because of the
important role of this variable in intrinsic motivation and self-efficacy.
Males. As shown in Table 4, task orientation and performance climate
emerged as equally important predictors of intrinsic motivation in the expected
direction; that is, task orientation was a positive predictor, whereas performance
climate was a negative predictor of intrinsic motivation. Mastery climate and ego
orientation accounted for a minimal percentage of unique variance in overall in-
trinsic motivation levels. Not surprisingly, the strongest predictor of self-efficacy
was perceived ability; however, perceptions of a mastery motivational climate also
contributed a significant amount of unique variance in this construct.
Females. Performance motivational climate emerged as a negative predic-
tor of intrinsic motivation, while perceived ability was a positive predictor of in-
trinsic interest. With regard to self-efficacy, perceived ability contributed the larg-
est amount of unique variance followed by performance motivational climate, which
emerged as a negative predictor of self-efficacy. These findings are presented in
Table 5.

Discussion
In this study, we examined the relationship between perceived motivational
climate, intrinsic motivation, and self-efficacy and investigated the role of moti-
vational climate and dispositional goal orientation in predicting overall levels of
 Motivation in Physical Activity / 275

Table 4 Percentage of Unique Variance in Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Efficacy

Accounted for by Variables in Males

Variable Beta RZchange F P

Intrinsic motivation
Mastery climate .16 .02
Performance climate -.27 .05
Task orientation .28 .05
Ego orientation .15 .O 1
Perceived ability .24 .05

Self-efficacy
Mastery climate .18 .02
Performance climate -.04 .OO
Task orientation .03 .OO
Ego orientation .04 .OO
Perceived ability .53 .27

Note. Total R2 = .336, F(5, 141) = 14.29, p < .001, for intrinsic motivation. Total R2 =
3.07, F(5, 141) = 1 2 . 4 6 , ~< .001, for self-efficacy.

Table 5 Percentage of Unique Variance in Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Efficacy

Accounted for by Variables in Females

Variable Beta R2change F P

Intrinsic motivation
Mastery climate .13 .O 1
Performance climate -.27 .05
Task orientation .05 .OO
Ego orientation .01 .oo
Perceived ability .52 .21

Self-efficacy
Mastery climate .07 .OO
Performance climate -.22 .03
Task orientation .04 .OO
Ego orientation .07 .OO
Perceived ability .59 .26

Note. Total R2 = .46, F(5, 113) = 19.41, p < .001, for intrinsic motivation. Total RZ= .492,
F(5, 113) = 2 1 . 8 9 , ~< .001, for self-efficacy.
276 1 Kavussanu and Roberts

intrinsic motivation and self-efficacy. It should be noted that motivational climate

in the present study was a naturally occurring one, as we did not manipulate it.
And the students, in general, perceived a high mastery motivational climate in
their class.

Perceived Motivational Climate and Intrinsic Motivation

Congruent with our hypothesis, perceptions of a mastery motivational cli-
mate were associated with enjoyment, effort, perceived competence, and low ten-
sion experienced during participation in the activity, while perceptions of a perfor-
mance climate were linked to high tension. Thus, those students who perceived
their class climate to emphasize personal improvement and skill mastery were
more likely to focus on the intrinsic rewards of learning, enjoyed participation in
the tennis class more, exerted more effort, and had higher perceived competence.
In contrast, individuals who viewed their class climate as stressing social compari-
son and competition with fellow classmates, felt more pressure during participa-
tion in the activity. Although several significant relationships were observed be-
tween the variables of interest in this sample of students, it is important to note that
the magnitude of these relationships was moderate.
Our findings support previous research that has linked perceptions of a mas-
tery climate to experienced enjoyment, exerted effort, and overall intrinsic motiva-
tion levels (e.g., Seifriz et al., 1992; Walling et al., 1993) and are consistent with
the predictions of achievement goal theory. In contexts that emphasize personal
progress and mastery, the individual is more likely to engage in the task for its own
sake and focus on the intrinsic rewards of learning. In such contexts students are
more likely to focus on personal improvement in the task and, as a result, maintain
high perceptions of competence. Enhancement of perceived competence has been
suggested as one of the psychological processes that underlie changes in intrinsic
motivation (Deci & Ryan, 1985).
In contrast, contexts that draw the individual's attention to social compari-
son, competition, and outperforming others have the potential of diminishing par-
ticipants' intrinsic motivation (Deci & Ryan, 1980; Ryan, 1982). In such contexts,
achievement striving becomes a means to an end, that end being the demonstration
of superior ability. Indeed, past research (e.g., Deci, Betley, Kahle, Abrams, & Porac,
1981; Vallerand, Gauvin, & Halliwell, 1986) has indicated that situations that em-
phasize competitive success may have debilitating effects on intrinsic motivation.

Perceived Motivational Climate and Self-eficacy

We expected that perceptions of a mastery motivational climate would cor-
respond to high self-efficacy. Our findings are discussed in light of the gender
differences that emerged in this sample. Women, who perceived that individual
improvement and learning were the important objectives of the class context, re-
ported high self-efficacy, whereas men did not. But men reported high self-effi-
cacy when we controlled for perceived normative ability. This may suggest that
women are more responsive to the motivational climate than men and seek envi-
ronmental cues to determine their self-efficacy. Men may be more secure in their
own perceived ability, and are generally less responsive to the environment, until
we control for perceived ability. This speculation is partially supported by the fact
that men reported higher perceptions of normative ability than women.
 Motivation in Physical Activity 1 277

It may be argued that a mastery motivational climate becomes more important

when the individual's perceptions of normative ability are low. For men, who gener-
ally hold stronger beliefs regarding their physical competence, the structure of the
situation may not be as crucial as it may be for women, who usually have doubts
regarding their physical competence. Indeed, achievement goal theory suggests that
it is the individual who questions his or her ability that will benefit the most from a
mastery motivational climate. Individuals with high perceptions of ability perform-
ing under ego-involving conditions display the same adaptive motivational patterns
as their task-involved counterparts (see Dweck, 1986; Roberts & Treasure, 1992).

Dispositional Versus Situational Factors

Task orientation and performance motivational climate emerged as equally
important predictors of overall levels of intrinsic motivation in males, whereas
perceptions of a mastery motivational climate contributed minimally to the predic-
tion of intrinsic motivation. Our findings suggest that although an individual's
own predisposition towards the activity could influence experienced enjoyment,
how the activity is structured may also have an impact on intrinsic interest. Previ-
ous research (e.g., Seifriz et al., 1992) and this study suggest that intrinsic interest
in the activity does not flourish in contexts that stress social comparison and com-
petitive goals. In classes that value mastery, learning, and skill improvement, en-
joyment and interest in the activity are more likely to be enhanced.
In females, performance climate emerged as a negative predictor of intrinsic
motivation, whereas dispositional goal orientations did not account for a signifi-
cant amount of unique variance in this construct. Thus, female students who per-
ceived their class climate as emphasizing social comparison experienced low in-
trinsic interest in the activity.Apparently, the structure of the context plays a much
more important role in the experienced enjoyment of females than do dispositional
variables. One factor that may be responsible for these gender differences is the
lower perception of competence this sample of female students held regarding
tennis skills along with prior sport experience. Although prior participation in sport
was not assessed in this sample, anecdotal evidence suggests that females, in gen-
eral, have less sport experience than males. For many female students participat-
ing in the present study, these tennis classes were the first contact with physical
activity in terms of systematic instruction. In the early stages of learning an activ-
ity, the structure of the situation, including the frequency and quality of reinforce-
ment, may be a more important factor influencing experienced enjoyment than is
one's tendency to define success in individualistic or normative terms.
Motivational climate also was a significant predictor of self-efficacy,whereas
dispositions did not contribute to self-efficacy prediction. Although the percentage
of unique variance accounted for in self-efficacy was minimal, this finding is con-
sistent with previous research (e.g., Jourden et al., 1991; Wood & Bandura, 1989)
that has reported an increase in self-efficacy cognitions when the individual per-
forms a task under the conception that ability is an acquirable skill. It is suggested
that the structure of the situation may influence self-efficacy regardless of the
individual's preexisting goal orientation.As self-efficacy theory suggests, mastery
experiences provide the most important source of self-efficacy information
(Bandura, 1986). Thus, environments that stress mastery, learning, and personal
progress, and de-emphasize social ranking should set the ideal conditions for the
enhancement of self-efficacy.
278 / Kavussanu and Roberts

Future Research
Although several significant relationships have been observed between the
variables of interest in this sample of students, a large amount of variance remains
unexplained. Researchers could direct their efforts toward identifying the variables
responsible for the unexplained variance in intrinsic motivation and self-efficacy.
Such variables may include the degree of variety in class activities, prior sport
participation, skill level, or magnitude of improvement throughout the course. Fur-
ther, the social context of the class, including relationships with the instructor and
classmates, may influence experienced enjoyment.
Research is also needed to investigate the complex relationships between dis-
positional goal orientation and perceived motivational climate. DOGone's disposi-
tion influence the way the situation is perceived? In both Seifriz et al. (1992) and the
present study, low-to-moderate correlations between motivational climate and goal
orientation were observed. Perhaps people's goal orientations predispose them to
attend to certain cues in the environmentand interpret the situation in a way consis-
tent with their orientation. It would be interesting to investigate to what environmen-
tal cues students attend to determine the type of climate created by the instructor.
Finally, we add our voice to others (Seifriz et al., 1992;Walling et al., 1993)
in a plea for experimental studies that enable us to establish cause-and-effect rela-
tionships. In particular, longitudinal field experiments are needed encompassing
the manipulation of the environment to determine its effect on motivational pro-
cesses and behavior.

References
Ames, C. (1984). Competitive, cooperative, and individualistic goal structures: A motiva-
tional analysis. In R. Ames & C. Ames (Eds.), Research on motivation in education:
Student motivation (pp. 177-207). New York: Academic Press.
Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educa-
tional Psychology, 84,261-271.
Ames, C., & Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Students' learning
strategies and motivational processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80,260-
267.
Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacymechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37,
122-147.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Butler, R. (1987). Task-involving and ego-involvingproperties of evaluation: The effects of
different feedback conditions on motivational perceptions, interest, and performance.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 79,474-482.
Deci, E.L., Betley, G., Kahle, J., Abrams, L., & Porac, J. (1981). When hying to win: Com-
petition and intrinsic motivation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 7,79-
83.
Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R. M. (1980). The empirical exploration of intrinsic motivation pro-
cesses. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 13,
pp. 39-80). New York: Academic Press.
Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human
behavior. New York: Plenum.
 Motivation in Physical Activity 1 279

Deci, E.L., Vallerand, R.J., Pelletier, L.G., & Ryan, R.M. (1991). Motivation and education:
The self-determination perspective. Educational Psychologist, 26(3 & 4), 325-346.
Duda, J.L. (1992). Motivation in sport settings: A goal perspective approach. In G.C. Roberts
(Ed.), Motivation in Sport and Exercise (pp. 57-92). Champaign, Ei Human Kinetics.
Duda, J.L. (1993). Goals: A social cognitive approach to the study of achievement motiva-
tion in sport. In R.N. Singer, M. Murphey, & L.K. Tennant (Eds.), Handbook of
research on sportpsychology (pp. 421-436). New York: Macmillan.
Duda, J.L., Chi, L., &Newton, M. (1990, May). Psychometric characteristics of the TEOSQ.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the North American Society for the Psy-
chology of Sport and Physical Activity, University of Houston.
Duda, J.L., Chi, L., Newton, M., Walling, M.D., & Catley, D. (1995). Task and ego orientation
and intrinsic motivation in sport. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 26,40-63.
Dweck, C.S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning.American Psychologist, 41,
1040-1048.
Dweck, C.S., & Leggett, E.L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and per-
sonality. Psychological Review, 95(2), 256-273.
Elliott, E., & Dweck, C.S. (1988). Goals: An approach to motivation and achievement.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54,5-12.
Feltz, D.L. (1992). Understanding motivation in sport: A self-efficacy perspective. In G.C.
Roberts (Ed.), Motivation in sport and exercise (pp. 93-106). Champaign, IL: Hu-
man Kinetics.
Gill, D.L. (1986). Psychological dynamics of sport. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Jourden, F.J., Bandura, A., & Banfield, J. (1991). The impact of conceptions of ability on
self-regulatory factors and motor skill acquisition. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psy-
chology, 8,213-226.
Maehr, M . , & Braskamp, L.A. (1986). The motivation factor: A theory of personal invest-
ment. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
Maehr, M., & Nicholls, J. G. (1980). Culture and achievement motivation: A second look.
In N. Warren (Ed.), Studies in cross-cultural psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 221-267). Or-
lando, FL: Academic Press.
McAuley, E. (1992). Understanding exercise behavior: A self-efficacy perspective. In G.C.
Roberts (Ed.), Motivation in sport and exercise (pp. 107-128). Champaign, IL: Hu-
man Kinetics.
McAuley, E., Duncan, E., & Tarnrnen, V.V. (1989). Psychometric properties of the Intrinsic
Motivation Inventory in a sport setting: A confirmatory factor analysis. Research
Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 60,48-58.
Nicholls, J.G. (1984). Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experi-
ence, task choice, and performance. Psychological Review, 91(3), 328-346.
Nicholls, J.G. (1989). The competitive ethos and democratic education. Cambridge: Harvard
University Press.
Nicholls, J.G., Cobb, P., Wood, T., Yackel, E., & Patashnick, M. (1990). Assessing students
theories of success in mathematics: Individual and classroom differences. Journal
for Research in Mathematics Education, 21, 109-122.
Roberts, G.C. (1984). Achievement motivation in children's sport. In J.G. Nicholls (Ed.),
Advances in motivation and achievement: Vol. 3. The development of achievement
motivation (pp. 251-281). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Roberts, G.C. (1992). Motivation in sport and exercise: Conceptual constraints and conver-
gence. In G.C. Roberts (Ed.), Motivation in sport and exercise (pp. 3-30). Champaign,
IL: Human Kinetics.
280 1 Kavussanu and Roberts

Roberts, G.C., & Balague, G. (1989). The development of a social-cognitive scale in moti-
vation. Paper presented at the SeventhWorld Congress of Sport Psychology, Singapore.
Roberts, G.C., & Balague, G. (1991). The development and validation of the Perceptions of
Success Questionnaire. Paper presented at the FEPSAC Congress, Cologne, Ger-
many.
Roberts, G.C., & Treasure, D.C. (1992).Children in sport. Sport Science Review, 2,46-64.
Roberts, G.C., Treasure, D.C., & Hall, H. (1994). Parental goal orientations and beliefs
about the competitive sport experience of their child. Journal of Applied Social Psy-
chology,24,63 1-645.
Ryan, R.M. (1982).Control and information in the interpersonal sphere:An extension of cog-
nitive evaluation theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43,450-461.
Seifriz, J.J., Duda, J.L., & Chi, L. (1992). The relationship of perceived motivational cli-
mate to intrinsic motivation and beliefs about success in basketball. Journal of Sport
& Exercise Psychology, 14,375-391.
Tabachnick, B.G., & Fidell, L.S. ( 1989). Using multivariate statistics. New York: Harper &
Row.
Vallerand, R.J., Gauvin, L.I., & Halliwell, W.R. (1986). Negative effects of competition on
children's intrinsic motivation. Journal of Social Psychology, 126,649-657.
Walling, M.D., Duda, J.L., & Chi, L. (1993). The perceived motivational climate in sport
questionnaire: Construct and predictive validity. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psy-
chology, 15,172-183.
Wood, R., & Bandura, A. (1989). Impact of conceptions of ability on self-regulatory mecha-
nisms and complex decision-making.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
56,407-415.

Manuscript submitted: May 19, 1995

Revision received: February 14, 1996