Goals and Motivation - Students - Corrected

Sport Psychology
Academic Year 2021-2022
Jochen Delrue
Lesson 4: Goals and motivation
Jochen Delrue
Contents
1. Defining motivation
2. Theories of motivation
3. Achievement Goal Theory
4. Self-Determination Theory
5. Combining the What and Why of Achievement Motivation
Defining motivation
…
24/10/2022 Sport Psychology 5

Defining Motivation
Motivation ~ movere, Latin for bringing into movement.
= the direction and intensity of one’s effort.

• Direction: What attracts individuals to certain situations/activities
• e.g.,: attracted to track and field, swimming, aerobics…
• e.g.,: to be the best 3000m steeple runner of the training group
• Intensity: how much effort is put forth in a particular situation/activity
• e.g.,: attending psychology class, but not putting much effort in during class
• e.g.,: wanting to make winning putt and becoming overly motivated, tightening
up and in turn performing poor
In reality both (direction and intensity) are closely related
Approaches to Motivation
1. Trait-centered view
• Participant-centered
• Motivated behavior is primarily function of individual characteristics
(personality, needs, goals…)
• Coaches: “this athlete is a real winner”
• ~personal setup that makes you motivated or not
What about the situation/context?

2. Situation-centered view
• >< trait-centered view

• Motivated behavior is primarily determined by the situation
(coaching style, environmental factors, previous performance, the opponent…)
• Competitive game versus friendly
• But despite situational circumstances that should be detrimental for motivation,

people may put effort into the activity.
• E.g., a demotivating coach does not necessarily cause you to quit sport

3. Interactional view
• Motivation results from the interaction between both trait-like features and
situational circumstances.
Situational circumstances
E.g.,
Canadian
Swimmers
Trait-like feature
Approval-oriented = looking how to get approval from others
Rejection-
threatened = looking how to avoid rejection from others
E.g.,
Canadian Swimming alone Swimming in relay
Swimmers
Trait-like feature
Approval-oriented
Rejection-
threatened
E.g.,
Canadian Swimming alone Swimming in relay
Swimmers
Trait-like feature
Approval-oriented Lower performance Best performance
Rejection-
threatened Best performance Lower performance
Personal Factors Situational Factors
Personality Coaching
Interests Teammates
Motivational orientation Participant-by-Situation Competitive situation
… Interaction
….
Participant Motivation

Theories of Motivation
Theories on Motivation
Need achievement theory (Atkinson, 1974, McClelland, 1961).

Approaching success vs. avoiding failure
PERSONALITY
Motive to
achieve
High achievers (High on motive to achieve success AND low on motive to avoid
success failure)
Low achievers (Low on motive to achieve success and High on motive to avoid
failure)
Motive to
avoid
failure


PERSONALITY SITUATION
High achievers (High on motive to achieve success AND low on motive to avoid
failure)
Motive to - Enjoy evaluating their ability
Probability
achieve - Not preoccupied with thoughts of failure
of success - 50-50 chance of success is an incentive to engage in achievement behavior
success
Low achievers (Low on motive to achieve success and High on motive to avoid
failure)
- Worry about evaluation
Motive to Incentive - Preoccupied with thoughts of failure
- 50-50 chance of success is debilitating for achievement behaviors, because losing
avoid value of
to an evenly matched opponent might maximize shame of failure
failure success


Behavioral High achievers (High on motive to achieve success AND low
Tendency
on motive to avoid failure)
- Enjoy evaluating their ability
Motive to - Not preoccupied with thoughts of failure
Probability Approach
achieve - 50-50 chance of success is an incentive to engage in
of success success achievement behavior
success
Low achievers (Low on motive to achieve success and High
on motive to avoid failure)
- Worry about evaluation
Motive to Incentive - Preoccupied with thoughts of failure
Avoid - 50-50 chance of success is debilitating for achievement
avoid value of
Failure behaviors, because losing against an evenly matched
failure success opponent might maximize shame of failure


Behavioral Emotional Achievement Behavior
Tendency Reactions
-Seek out
Motive to Focus on achievement
Probability Approach situations
achieve pride of -Look for challenges
of success success
success success -Increased
performance
-Avoid achievement
Motive to Incentive Focus on situations
Avoid
avoid value of shame of -Avoid
Failure risk/challenges
failure success failure
-Poor performance

Significance of Need Achievement Theory
• Its performance predictions serve as framework for all contemporary explanations

for achievement motivation.
• Despite different explanations of the underlying thought processes, the
behavioral predictions of high and low achievers are basically the same.
• Most important predictive contribution:

• Task preference
• Performance

Attribution Theory (Weiner, 1985; 1986)

Attributions ~how people explain their success and failure
3 basic attribution categories:

• Stability: a factor to which one attributes success or failure is either permanent or
unstable (e.g., the weather conditions are fairly unstable)
• Locus of Causality: a factor is either external or internal to the individual (e.g., the
weather conditions are clearly external)
• Locus of Control: a factor is either under control of not under control of the
individual (e.g., the weather conditions are clearly not under one’s control)

Attribution of success of winning a swimming race

• A stable factor (e.g., your talent or good ability)
• An unstable factor (e.g., good luck)
• An internal cause (e.g., your tremendous effort in the last 50 meters)

• An external cause (e.g., an easy field of competitors)
• A factor you control (e.g., your race plan)

• A factor out of your control (e.g., your opponents’ lack of physical conditioning).

Attribution of failing to win a soccer game

• A stable factor (e.g., your lack of talent)
• An unstable factor (e.g., a bad referee call)
• An internal cause (e.g., a small injury)

• An external cause (e.g., a long travel to the soccer pitch)
• A factor you control (e.g., a poor execution of tactical plan)

• A factor out of your control (e.g., a poor tactical decision of the coach)

Why are attributions important?

• Attributions affect expectations of future success and failure
• Attributions affect emotional reactions
Attributing success to
• Stable factors  expectations of future success.
If success is due to your own ability, then you can expect success to occur again in the
future. Moreover, you’ll feel confident and motivated.
• Unstable factors  no expectations of future success
If success is due to being lucky, then you will not expect success to occur again. Your
confidence and motivation will not increase.
Attributions to internal factors and to factors in our control (e.g., ability and effort)
cause emotional reactions like pride and shame, depending on whether we were
successful or not.
E.g.,
When winning is attributed to ability and effort, one experiences more pride
When failing is attributed to (lack of) ability and effort, one experiences more shame

ATTRIBUTIONS PSYCHOLOGICAL RESULT
Stability of factors Expectancy of future success

- Stable - Increased expectations
- Unstable - Decreased expectations
Causality of factors Emotional influences

- Internal causes - Increased pride or shame
- External causes - Decreased pride or shame
Control on factors Motivational influences

- In one’s control - Increased motivation
- Out of one’s control - Decreased motivation
Based on Weinberg & Gould (2015)

Two dominant theories about motivation (both in research and practice)
- Achievement Goal Theory
- Self-Determination Theory

Achievement Goal Theory
Direction of effort, the What of Achievement Motivation
Achievement Goal Theory is concerned with

- what people aim for when confronted with an achievement situation (e.g., an
academic test, a competition, …)
And
- The consequences of those aims in terms of cognitions, emotions, performance...

Think about your latest competitive event

What did you aim for? What was your most important goal?

Early Achievement Goal Theorists (Ames, 1992; Nicholls 1989) stated people can be
oriented towards an achievement situation in two broad manners:
Ego orientation Task orientation

Ego orientation
E.g., Nathalie competes in 10k road run because she wants to win trophies and be the
best runner in the region. When she wins she feels really good about herself, but when
she doesn’t she feels like failure.
- External focus of demonstrating ability to others (ego-serving purposes)

- Comparing her own ability with others and aim to outperform others.
- When she succeeds in outperforming others, it is a sign of competence.
- When she does not outperform others, it is a sign of incompetence
She defines her own competence relative to others.
Task orientation
E.g., Emily also likes to compete in 10k road running events. She takes part to see how
much she can improve her physique and stamina. When she improves or approaches her
personal best, she feels good about her performance. When she doesn’t, it informs her
to keep on working hard.
- Internal focus of developing ability (mastery purposes)
- ‘comparing’ her own ability relative to the demands of the task or her previous
performance.
- When she succeeds in mastering these demands, it is a sign of competence
- Her competence is not dependent on the performance of others.

Ego orientation
Difficult to maintain high
perceived competence (no
control, fragile)
Failure = low perceived

competence  reduce
effort.
Faced with difficult
challenges  self-
handicapping

Task orientation
Competence under own
control  less fragile
Protects them from

disappointment when
others perform better
Greater persistence and

motivation in the face of
failure

Ego and task orientation are broad constructs, containing more than just achievement
goals/aims.
• Ego-orientation is about
• outperforming others (~demonstrating ability)
• Serving ego (cf. Ego-involvement)
• Task orientation is about
• mastering tasks and improving skills (~developing skills)
• Intrinsically rewarding
We cannot aim to outperform others because we love to compete?

The process of aiming to perform better than others cannot be intrinsically motivating?
 A first Revision of the constructs by stripping the orientations of all things that are
not goals
Result of revision: Redefining achievement goals as pure aims.
Ego-orientation  Performance goal: the aim to perform better than others
Task-orientation  Task goal: the aim to master task or to perform better than before

Problems
Inconsistent research findings:

E.g., Performance goals were sometimes related to better performance, sometimes to
worse performance than task goals.
Remember Achievement Need Theory!
Some are motivated to achieve success, others to avoid failure.

 2nd Revision of the construct: approaching success, avoiding failure
Performance Task
Performance-approach goal = aiming to Task-approach goal = aiming to master the

Approach focus perform better than others task or perform better than before
Performance-avoidance goal = aiming to Task-avoidance goal = aiming to avoid not

Avoidance focus avoid performing worse than others mastering the task or to perform worse than
others.

 3rd and final revision of the construct: splitting task goals

Task goals
• Task-based goals: performance is compared to task demands
• Self-based goals: performance is compared to own previous performance

Other-based Self-based Task-based
Self-approach goal =
Approach focus Other-approach aiming to perform Task-approach goal
better than before
Other-avoidance goal = Task-avoidance goal =

aiming to avoid
Avoidance focus Self-avoidance goal aiming to avoid not
performing worse than mastering the task
others

Empirical evidence?
Approach goals: mostly adaptive in terms of emotions, well-being and performance

Avoidance goals: mostly maladaptive (fear of failure and competitive anxiety)
Task-approach goals: most adaptive in terms of emotions and well-being, not always
best for performance.
Other-approach goals: mixed findings. Sometimes better, sometimes worse
performance. sometimes positive, sometimes negative well-being
Self-approach goals: mostly adaptive, but less adaptive than task goals when faced with
failure.
In Sum:
Achievement goal theory is concerned with the achievement aims of athletes when
confronted with an achievement situation.
The goals pursuit have influence on their cognitions, emotions and performance in that
achievement context.
Athletes can compare their performance with that of others, with their own previous
performance or with what the demands of the task.

Self-Determination Theory
Regulating intensity, The why of Achievement Motivation
Your current personal sport activity/activities

Why do you put effort into this activity?
What are/could be the reasons for other people to put effort in sport?
EXTRINSIC MOTIVATION INTRINSIC MOTIATION
External Introjected Identified Intrinsic

regulation regulation regulation motivation
External
Internal
reward/punishment
reward/punishment The activity is
/expectancies The activity is fun,
/expectancies personally important
Vb. financial reward, challenging or interesting
Vb. guilt, fear, pride, or valuable
disapproval of
shame
others
CONTROLLED MOTIVATION AUTONOMOUS MOTIVATION

I put effort in my sport :
1. Because I would feel bad about myself if I did not.
2. Because others would be angry at me if I did not.
3. Because I enjoy my sport.
4. Because I would feel like a failure if I did not.
5. Because I feel like it’s good for me.
6. Because people would think I'm a weak person if I did not.
7. Because I feel like I have no choice; others make me do it.
8. Because it is a challenge to accomplish my goals in sport.
9. Because I believe sport helps me feel better.
10. Because it's fun.
11. Because I worry that I would get in trouble with others if I did not.
12. Because it feels important to me personally to accomplish this goal.
13. Because I feel guilty if I do not exercise regularly.
14. Because I want others to acknowledge that I am doing what I have been
told I should do.
15. Because it is interesting to see my own improvement.
16. Because feeling healthier is an important value for me
Scoring the SRQ-E. To score this questionnaire, first calculate the subscale scores for each
of the four subscales: external regulation, introjected regulation, identified regulation, and
intrinsic motivation by averaging the responses to each of the subscale’s items. Listed below
are the item numbers associated with each of the four subscales.
External Regulation: 2, 7, 11, 14

Introjected Regulation: 1, 4, 6, 13
Identified Regulation: 5, 9, 12, 16
Intrinsic Motivation: 3, 8, 10, 15
You can use the individual subscale scores in your analyses, and you can also use the Relative
Autonomy Index (RAI). To form the RAI for this scale, use the following formula to combine
the subscale scores:
2 X Intrinsic + Identified - Introjected - 2 X External
Positive score = more autonomous than controlled motivated

Adapted from the SRQ-E: https://selfdeterminationtheory.org/self-regulation-questionnaires/

3 Basic Psychological Needs (~central to SDT)

Autonomy
Need for Autonomy
To feel ownership over behavior
Need for Competence Competence
To feel competent and self-efficacy
Need for Relatedness
To care for others and have them cared for you
Relatedness

3 Basic Psychological Needs (~central to SDT)

Autonomy
• Universal
Apply to all people: young and old, men and women, …
Competence
• Inherent
We are born with these needs
Relatedness
• Multiple domains
In school, work, sports, relationships, …
INTERNALIZATION PROCESS
Taking in external ‘demands’, resulting in more ownership of the
behavior.
NEED SATISFACTION is the driving force of internalization
24/10/2022 Sport Psychology

Need Satisfaction Autonomous motivation

- Feeling ownership
- Feeling competent/effective
- Caring and feeling cared for
Need frustration
- Feeling controlled Controlled motivation
- Feeling
incompetent/ineffective
- Feeling alienated/excluded

Self-Determination Theory - More enjoyment
- More well-being
- Less dropout
Autonomous - More performance
Need Satisfaction (?)
motivation
- More flow
experience
- …
- More perceived
exhaustion!
Need frustration Controlled motivation - More dropout
- More burnout
- Higher tendency for
substance use
- …
Let’s repeat!
Because it’s important for examination!
Other-based Self-based Task-based
Self-approach goal =
Approach focus Other-approach aiming to perform Task-approach goal
better than before
Other-avoidance goal = Task-avoidance goal =

aiming to avoid
Avoidance focus Self-avoidance goal aiming to avoid not
performing worse than mastering the task
others

EXTRINSIC MOTIVATION INTRINSIC MOTIvATION
External Introjected Identified Intrinsic

regulation regulation regulation motivation
External
Internal
reward/punishment
reward/punishment The activity is
/expectancies The activity is fun,
/expectancies personally important
Vb. financial reward, challenging or interesting
Vb. guilt, fear, pride, or valuable
disapproval of
shame
others
CONTROLLED MOTIVATION AUTONOMOUS MOTIVATION

INTERNALIZATION PROCESS
NEED SATISFACTION is the driving force of internalization
24/10/2022 Sport Psychology

Need Satisfaction Autonomous motivation

- Feeling ownership
Need frustration
- Feeling controlled Controlled motivation
- Feeling

- More well-being
- Less dropout
motivation
- More flow
experience
- …
- More perceived
exhaustion!
Need frustration Controlled motivation - More dropout
- More burnout
substance use
- …
Elite athletes in general: Are they need satisfied?
Autonomy?
Competence?
Relatedness?
Elite athletes in general: Are they need satisfied?
Autonomy? Doing what they love to do, BUT strictly prescribed diet & training schedule
Competence? They are the best in what they do, BUT success and failure are matter of
inches, seconds or less… AND High expectations of others (can it be good enough?)
Relatedness? Perhaps supported by fans, BUT often longtime from home and family
In the core, they love doing their sport ( intrinsic motivation). However, to become
the best and stay at that high level of performance, there are a lot of external factors,
inherent to the elite sport context, which challenge that intrinsic motivation and need
satisfaction
Tell tail sign: Decompensation behavior. After the competitive event (e.g., Olympic
event) they all state they want to “do something with family” (i.e., relatedness), “just do
whatever they want to do” (i.e., autonomy), “drink beer and eat pizza” (i.e., autonomy).
(cf. After exam period)

- More well-being
- Less dropout
motivation
- More flow
Coaches (and experience
parents & - …
practitioners) can
play a major role - More perceived
exhaustion!
Need here!
frustration Controlled motivation - More dropout
- More burnout
substance use
- …
In sum
Achievement Goal Theory accounts for WHAT athletes are aiming for in an achievement
situation.
• 6 different categories of achievement goals: other-approach, other avoidance…
Self-Determination Theory accounts for WHY athletes participate in activities (including

goal pursuit!).
• 2 different categories of reasons: autonomous reasons and controlled reasons

Combining What and Why of Achievement Motivation
A more complete view on athlete’s achievement motivation
Athletes set themselves a certain type of achievement goal for a specific competitive
event.
In their pursuit for that achievement goal, they need to regulate their behavior in order
to achieve the goal.
e.g.,
• College swimmers need to get up early in the morning to train, before they head to
school.
• Marathon runners need to train for many many miles in order to be able to finish
their run.
• Boxers need to adhere to a rigorous training AND diet to optimally perform within
their weight class.
The quality of this behavioral regulation comes down to the reasons WHY athletes put
effort.
Thus, a complete picture of athlete motivation asks for taking into account both What
athletes are aiming for and Why they are aiming for it.
What: Achievement Goal Theory
Why: Self-Determination Theory

Other-
Other-approach avoidance Self-approach Self-avoidance Task-approach Task-avoidance
Goal Goal Goal Goal Goal Goal
the I aim to I aim to avoid I aim to I aim to avoid I aim to avoid

achievement perform better performing perform better performing I aim to master not mastering
goal than others worse than than before worse than the task the task
others before
because I enjoy because it is a because I enjoy because it is a because I enjoy because it is a

Autonomous the challenge or challenge or I the challenge or challenge or I the challenge or challenge or I
reasons find I personally find it find I personally find it find I personally find it
important personally importan personally importan personally
important important important
because only because only because only because only because only because only
then I feel then I feel then I feel then I feel then I feel then I feel
Controlled worthy or worthy or worthy or worthy or worthy or worthy or
reasons others want me others want me others want me others want me others want me others want me
to to to to to to

Study in Runners (2016)
N = 212 runner
63% males
Various levels of experience
Measures
Self-based achievement goals + underlying reasons
Challenge & Threat appraisals, Need satisfaction, self-talk, flow and performance

Study in Runners (2016)
Faster aspired running time

before the race
Self-Approach Goal
Faster performance
after the race

+ +
Autonomous reasons Need
Need satisfaction
satisfaction Performance
+
Positive Self-talk +
Controlled reasons + Flow
Negative Self-talk -
Note: The more pressure runners experienced to achieve their goal, the more they needed to use self-regulating strategies during the race.
Self-talk is one such strategy. The more positive the self-talk the more they were able to get themselves back into something like a flow state.
The more negative theirs self-addressed statements, the less flow they experienced.
 remember what athlete do to get back into flow (building self-confidence, make positive statements…)


Combining the What and Why of Achievement Motivation
Explanation of the above slide:

This study also assessed through survey how runners appraised their upcoming race.
Did they think of it as a challenge or did they feel threatened by it, did they feel like a
bad performance would be bad for their self-esteem?
Results showed that the more autonomous runners were in their goal pursuit, the more
challenge they experienced (logically, because part of autonomous motivation is doing
it for the challenge). Contrary, the more controlled they were in their goal pursuit, the
more threatened they felt by the race.
Also, it appeared that combining a self-avoidance goal with controlled reasons resulted
in the most threatened appraisal of the race. (see figure on previous slide)

Study in soccer players (unpublished)

197 male soccer players
Mean age = 26.57 years
11 soccer teams
In amateur divisions
• Measures Pre-game:
Achievement goal for the game, underlying reasons
• Measures Post-game:
Challenge and threat appraisals, performance as rated by the coach

Most of the players selected a task-approach goal: aiming to master the demands of the task.
+
Autonomous reasons Challenge appraisal
-
-
Controlled reasons Threat appraisal Rated performance
+ -

Influencing Goals and Motivation
Coach behavior, Extrinsic Rewards, Message Framing
Coaching style from Self-Determination Theory (SDT) Perspective
Need-supportive Need satisfaction Autonomous motivation
- Feeling ownership
Need-thwarting Need frustration Controlled motivation

- Feeling controlled
- Feeling
Autonomy-supportive:
Need-supportive Letting athletes participate in decision-making, offer them choice about exercises, tactical plays etc.
Knowing athletes and attuning your exercises, and explanation to athletes’ interests, goals and
competence level.
Structuring:
Making clear expectations about behavior and goals. Clarifying rules of engagement and decisions.
Guiding athletes towards goal achievement with provision of feedback and guidance.
Need-thwarting
Controlling:
Demanding athletes to follow your instructions and to perform as they should. Stressing their duties.
Being Domineering* towards athletes so they act in line with your demands, calling them names,
making appreciation contingent upon performance.
Chaotic:
*To be Domineering = to assert one's will over
Acting more awaiting. See if athletes will figure out themselves. Giving no feedback or is too late to
another in an arrogant way.
intervene. (~laissez faire)
Abandoning athletes if they not succeed in following guidelines. Stop showing commitment to
/involvement in the coach-athlete relationship.

Explanation for previous slide
These different coaching styles can be depicted in this wheel formation.

It makes clear that some types of coaching behaviors are closer to each other than others.
For example. The participative approach of (offering choice, asking athletes opinion etc.) is situated next to the awaiting approach
(letting it all happen, without intervention, let them figure out). Hence, if a coach is too participative and not providing enough
direction, he/she may end up being awaiting.
Further, also clarifying and demanding are situated closely next to each other.
Being too controlling in clarifying your decisions, the rules that need to be followed etc. you may end up being demanding.
There is even a danger of cascading towards abandoning your athletes. E.g., being late for practice.
Clarifying: it is important to start practice on time, so we can finish all tactical drills we need for the upcoming game.
Demanding: it is your duty to be here on time.
Domineering: if you’re late again, you will not be selected for upcoming game.
Abandoning: Whatever, I don’t care if you’re late. If you don’t care getting here on time, I don’t bother coaching you anymore.

Study in soccer players (2017)

197 male soccer players
Mean age = 26.57 years
11 soccer teams
In amateur divisions
• Measures Pre-game:
Coach behaviors (need support & need thwarting) + moral disengagement (i.e., objectification).
• Measures Post-game:
Prosocial and antisocial behavior towards opponent and referee.

Need-supportive
Antisocial behavior
towards opponent
+
+
Objectification of the - Prosocial behavior
Need-thwarting
opponent towards opponent
+
Resentment towards
referee

Most coaches know the benefits of need-support and the hazards of need-thwarting
coaching.
How come some of them still make use of those need-thwarting strategies?

Antecedents of need-supportive and need-thwarting coaching behaviors. (e.g., Matosic et al., 2016)
Need-thwarting coach
behaviors
Antecedents of need-supportive and need-thwarting coaching behaviors. (e.g., Matosic et al., 2016)
Pressures from above Pressures from within Pressures from below
- A club environment focused on - Beliefs about effective coaching - Athlete controlled or lack of
quick results motivation
- Coach Contingent Self-Esteem
- Club statements of - Athlete poor engagement
continuation contingent upon - Need frustration
performance of athletes - …
- Time constraints - Psychological exhaustion
Need-thwarting coach
behaviors
The use of extrinsic rewards

Extrinsic rewards are very prevalent in sports
• Trophies for winning competition
• Monetary rewards for reaching the semi-finals of champions league football
• Monetary rewards for winning a game or race
• Personal trophy: Most Valuable Player (MVP), Player of the year, athlete of the year…
What is their motivational value??

Behaviorism (cf. Rat studies)

Extrinsic rewards serve as positive re-enforcement.
Giving a rat some food after he displayed specific behavior will cause the rat to repeat
that specific behavior more often.
Cf. Giving athlete money after finishing a hard power training, should cause the athlete
to do more hard power training. Extrinsic rewards can be effective!

However!
If the monetary reward is stopped, the athlete will stop doing the hard power training.
 The behavior became dependent on/controlled by external forces.

Extrinsic rewards foster extrinsic motivation (i.e., external regulation).
What if athlete is highly intrinsically motivated (i.e., loving the activity, doing it
because it intrinsically rewarding)???

Studies in work, sports and children clearly show that extrinsic rewards for an
intrinsically motivating activity, undermines intrinsic motivation.
E.g., paying children for building tower blocks.

Message framing to influence goal selection
Coach’s pre-game speech

Coach’s pre-game speech
We’re playing the best team in the league this
We’re playing the best team in the league this
weekend. Currently we’re six points behind them in the
weekend. Currently we’re six points behind them in the
ranking.
ranking.
Losing this game, probably means losing touch with
Winning this game will get us back in the race. We’ll be
the leaders. If we’re to be champions, we CANNOT lose
able to keep pressure on them for a little longer.
this game.
= Gain-framing
=Loss-framing
Approach goal Avoidance goal

Coming up…
Coming up…
Friday 22/10/2021: Consult
After autumn break: 4 sessions
- Teams and group dynamics

- Arousal regulation
- Imagery
- Self-confidence
- Goal setting

Goals and Motivation - Students - Corrected

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Goals and Motivation - Students - Corrected

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Goals and Motivation - Students - Corrected

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sport Psychology

Academic Year 2021-2022

24/10/2022 Sport Psychology 5

Motivation ~ movere, Latin for bringing into movement.

= the direction and intensity of one’s effort.

What about the situation/context?

24/10/2022 Sport Psychology 7

• >< trait-centered view

• But despite situational circumstances that should be detrimental for motivation,

24/10/2022 Sport Psychology 8

Approval-oriented = looking how to get approval from others

Approval-oriented Lower performance Best performance

Personal Factors Situational Factors

24/10/2022 Sport Psychology 12

Need achievement theory (Atkinson, 1974, McClelland, 1961).

24/10/2022 Sport Psychology 14

Need achievement theory (Atkinson, 1974, McClelland, 1961).

24/10/2022 Sport Psychology 15

Need achievement theory (Atkinson, 1974, McClelland, 1961).

24/10/2022 Sport Psychology 16

Need achievement theory (Atkinson, 1974, McClelland, 1961).

24/10/2022 Sport Psychology 17

Significance of Need Achievement Theory

• Its performance predictions serve as framework for all contemporary explanations

• Most important predictive contribution:

24/10/2022 Sport Psychology 18

Attribution Theory (Weiner, 1985; 1986)

3 basic attribution categories:

24/10/2022 Sport Psychology 19

Attribution of success of winning a swimming race

• An internal cause (e.g., your tremendous effort in the last 50 meters)

• A factor you control (e.g., your race plan)

24/10/2022 Sport Psychology 20

Attribution of failing to win a soccer game

• An internal cause (e.g., a small injury)

• A factor you control (e.g., a poor execution of tactical plan)

24/10/2022 Sport Psychology 21

Why are attributions important?

24/10/2022 Sport Psychology 23

ATTRIBUTIONS PSYCHOLOGICAL RESULT

Stability of factors Expectancy of future success

Causality of factors Emotional influences

Control on factors Motivational influences

Based on Weinberg & Gould (2015)

24/10/2022 Sport Psychology 24

Two dominant theories about motivation (both in research and practice)

- Achievement Goal Theory

24/10/2022 Sport Psychology 25

Achievement Goal Theory is concerned with

- The consequences of those aims in terms of cognitions, emotions, performance...

24/10/2022 Sport Psychology 27

Think about your latest competitive event

24/10/2022 Sport Psychology 28

Ego orientation Task orientation

24/10/2022 Sport Psychology 29

- External focus of demonstrating ability to others (ego-serving purposes)

24/10/2022 Sport Psychology 31