FALL 2001 CAMPUS SURVEY READING GUIDE
Harackiewicz, Barron, Carter,
Lehto, & Elliot (1997). Predictors
& consequences of achievement goals in the college classroom: Maintaining interest and making the grade. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
73, 1284-1295.
Read the above article with an eye toward answering the
following questions:
1. What is a mastery goal, a performance goal
and a work avoidance goal?
2. What does Harackiewicz et al.’s research
say about how each of those goals is related to interest in a college course
and performance in that course?
3. What scales did they use to find the
relationships you described in #2 and what method did they use (how did they
run the study)?
The statistics used in the results section are very complex
and it might be best to merely skim the results section looking for words! Also, don’t worry too much about the
personality predictors of achievement goals (“workmastery-competitiveness”
distinction). For the campus survey project, we are not as interested in those
results as we are in the consequences of achievement goal results.
Article 2
Wolfe, C. &
Crocker, J. (in press). What does
the self want? Contingencies of self-worth and goals. Chapter to appear in the upcoming Ontario
Symposium Volume.
Read the above book chapter with an eye toward answering the
following questions:
1. What is meant by
a “contingencies of self-worth” perspective on self-esteem?
2. What are some
examples of contingencies of self-worth?
3. What do the authors speculate some
motivational consequences of contingencies of worth might be? What empirical evidence currently exists for
these assertions?
4. What do
the authors suggest in response to the question of whether contingencies of
worth are likely to be assets or liabilities (or both)? In what ways are they
assets or liabilities?
Don’t worry about the section on “Conscious or Unconscious
Contingencies of Self-Worth.” You may
read that section if you are interested, but the basic points I’d like you to
master for the campus survey project are contained in the other sections of the
chapter.
Kamins & Dweck (1999). Person
versus process praise and criticism:
Implications for contingent self-worth and coping. Developmental Psychology, 35, 835-847.
Read this article with an eye toward answering the below
questions.
1. What is meant by a “helpless” versus “mastery – oriented”
response to failure?
2. What is the
distinction between “process” feedback
and “person” feedback?
3. What were the
overall results for Study 1?
4. What were the
overall results for Study 2?
5. What do
the results for both studies suggest about how people will (or learn to)
respond to failure in domains where they believe their self-worth is on the
line?
As with the first article, don’t worry too much about the
specific details and, particularly, the statistical analyses used. Focus on the
overall points the article makes (and the questions I’ve provided).
Our campus survey will measure (among other things) students’
goals for their introductory psychology class and their reliance on three
contingencies of worth: school
competency, competition, and the opinions of other people. For our class discussion, consider how
holding school competency (or competition, or the opinions of other people)
might impact on the goal a student has when he or she begins a new class.