Cargando…
Examining Approach and Avoidance Valences of the 3 X 2 Achievement Goal Types on an Engineering Student Sample: A Validity Approach
Development of the 3 × 2 achievement goal questionnaire (AGQ) advanced approach and avoidance goals in three goal types within the achievement goal framework: task-, self-, and other-based. The purpose of the present study was to examine empirical support for the construct validity, reliability, and...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8458832/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34566740 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.628004 |
_version_ | 1784571386587512832 |
---|---|
author | Hunsu, Nathaniel Oje, Adurangba V. Jackson, Andrew Olaogun, Olanrewaju Paul |
author_facet | Hunsu, Nathaniel Oje, Adurangba V. Jackson, Andrew Olaogun, Olanrewaju Paul |
author_sort | Hunsu, Nathaniel |
collection | PubMed |
description | Development of the 3 × 2 achievement goal questionnaire (AGQ) advanced approach and avoidance goals in three goal types within the achievement goal framework: task-, self-, and other-based. The purpose of the present study was to examine empirical support for the construct validity, reliability, and measurement invariance of factors on the questionnaire and compare model fit of the 3 × 2 configuration to other alternatives. In addition to validating some of the findings reported in earlier studies, especially the inclusion of task-based goal orientations, the study highlights a limitation and potential boundary of the 3 × 2 AGQ. While the 3 × 2 model was found to be structurally valid, we found multiple validity supports for a definition-based model of the AGQ scale, which does not differentiate between goal approach or avoidance. The study provides some indications that approach and avoidance goals can be indistinguishable to some respondents. Nonetheless, the scale was invariant across multiple groups making group comparison possible. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8458832 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-84588322021-09-24 Examining Approach and Avoidance Valences of the 3 X 2 Achievement Goal Types on an Engineering Student Sample: A Validity Approach Hunsu, Nathaniel Oje, Adurangba V. Jackson, Andrew Olaogun, Olanrewaju Paul Front Psychol Psychology Development of the 3 × 2 achievement goal questionnaire (AGQ) advanced approach and avoidance goals in three goal types within the achievement goal framework: task-, self-, and other-based. The purpose of the present study was to examine empirical support for the construct validity, reliability, and measurement invariance of factors on the questionnaire and compare model fit of the 3 × 2 configuration to other alternatives. In addition to validating some of the findings reported in earlier studies, especially the inclusion of task-based goal orientations, the study highlights a limitation and potential boundary of the 3 × 2 AGQ. While the 3 × 2 model was found to be structurally valid, we found multiple validity supports for a definition-based model of the AGQ scale, which does not differentiate between goal approach or avoidance. The study provides some indications that approach and avoidance goals can be indistinguishable to some respondents. Nonetheless, the scale was invariant across multiple groups making group comparison possible. Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-09-09 /pmc/articles/PMC8458832/ /pubmed/34566740 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.628004 Text en Copyright © 2021 Hunsu, Oje, Jackson and Olaogun. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Psychology Hunsu, Nathaniel Oje, Adurangba V. Jackson, Andrew Olaogun, Olanrewaju Paul Examining Approach and Avoidance Valences of the 3 X 2 Achievement Goal Types on an Engineering Student Sample: A Validity Approach |
title | Examining Approach and Avoidance Valences of the 3 X 2 Achievement Goal Types on an Engineering Student Sample: A Validity Approach |
title_full | Examining Approach and Avoidance Valences of the 3 X 2 Achievement Goal Types on an Engineering Student Sample: A Validity Approach |
title_fullStr | Examining Approach and Avoidance Valences of the 3 X 2 Achievement Goal Types on an Engineering Student Sample: A Validity Approach |
title_full_unstemmed | Examining Approach and Avoidance Valences of the 3 X 2 Achievement Goal Types on an Engineering Student Sample: A Validity Approach |
title_short | Examining Approach and Avoidance Valences of the 3 X 2 Achievement Goal Types on an Engineering Student Sample: A Validity Approach |
title_sort | examining approach and avoidance valences of the 3 x 2 achievement goal types on an engineering student sample: a validity approach |
topic | Psychology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8458832/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34566740 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.628004 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hunsunathaniel examiningapproachandavoidancevalencesofthe3x2achievementgoaltypesonanengineeringstudentsampleavalidityapproach AT ojeadurangbav examiningapproachandavoidancevalencesofthe3x2achievementgoaltypesonanengineeringstudentsampleavalidityapproach AT jacksonandrew examiningapproachandavoidancevalencesofthe3x2achievementgoaltypesonanengineeringstudentsampleavalidityapproach AT olaogunolanrewajupaul examiningapproachandavoidancevalencesofthe3x2achievementgoaltypesonanengineeringstudentsampleavalidityapproach |