Antecedents of Educational Goal Commitment: An Experimental lnvestigation of the Role of Goal Abstraction, Integration, and Importance

Transcription

1 : An Experimentl lnvestigtion of the Role of Gol Abstrction, Integrtion, nd Importnce Gentine Boudrenghien Mrine Freny Université ctholique de Louvin Etienne Bourgeois Université de Genève Sturt A. Krbenick Jcquelynne S. Eccles University of Michign Abstrct This study investigted the ntecedents of eductionl gol commitment regrding the trnsition from high school to college mong 702 highschool students. A theoreticl model bsed on ssumptions from the expectncyvlue frmework (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002) nd the hierrchicl gol structure (Crver & Scheier, 1998) ws tested. This model is composed of one proximl ntecedent gol importnce nd two distl ntecedents gol bstrction nd integrtion. The distl ntecedents were experimentlly mnipulted. The results showed tht () gol commitment is influenced by gol bstrction nd integrtion, nd (b) gol importnce is meditor of this effect. In ddition to theoreticl implictions, suggested prgmtic outcome is the development of tool to guide students in the more effective structuring of their eductionl gols. Students commitment to their eductionl gol t the end of high school hs been shown to be n importnt predictor of choice ctuliztion, commitment to the chosen field of study, nd cdemic djustment in higher eduction. These fctors re in turn predictive of college students cdemic chievement (Germeijs & Verschueren, 2007). However, we know much less bout the fctors tht influence this commitment. Identifying these fctors is crucil to guiding students in the construction of their eductionl gols nd helping them chieve their plns. Eductionl gols re the gols tht students pursue when choosing their progrm of study. Gol commitment is defined s the extent to which prticulr gol is ssocited with strong sense of determintion nd with the willingness to invest effort in ttining it (Brunstein, 1993; Hollenbeck & Klein, 1987). The ntecedents of gol commitment hve minly been investigted for ssigned gols in the frmework of golsetting theory (Hollenbeck & Klein, 1987). Reserch is needed to explore how commitment to personl gols develops. A theoreticl model of the fctors influencing the commitment to personl (eductionl) gols hs been suggested by Boudrenghien, Freny, Bourgeois, Krbenick, nd Eccles (submitted). The present study is imed t empiriclly testing most of the ssumptions of this model. They re presented below. Gol commitment is hypothesized to be directly influenced by gol importnce. This ssumption is supported by severl theoreticl nd empiricl rguments. The expectncyvlue model ssumes direct impct of ttinment vlue (i.e., the personl importnce of doing well t given tsk) on tsk choice (i.e., the decision of whether or not to begin or continue to invest effort in the tsk) (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002). Severl empiricl studies hve pplied this ssumption to the study of gols nd confirmed tht gol commitment is influenced by gol vlue or gol importnce (Boudrenghien, Freny, & Bourgeois, 2011; Klinger, Brt, & Mxeiner, 1980). Two distl ntecedents re postulted to indirectly influence gol commitment, through their impct on gol importnce. Crver nd Scheier (1998) suggest tht the importnce of gol is influenced by its position within n individul s gol hierrchy, which is determined by its degree of integrtion nd level of bstrction. We define the degree of integrtion of gol s the extent to which the gol is linked to other gols within the hierrchy. A gol tht is linked to other gols is supposed to be more importnt thn n isolted gol (Crver & Scheier, 1998; Sheldon & Ksser, 1995). Moreover, gol tht is formulted t high level of bstrction concerns being prticulr kind of person ( begol), wheres gol tht is formulted t low level of bstrction concerns completing prticulr kind of ction ( dogol) (Crver & Scheier, 1998). A begol is represented in the higher levels of the hierrchicl gol structure nd generlly pplies for long time, wheres dogol is represented in the lower levels of the structure nd generlly pplies for short time. Crver & Scheier (1998) rgue tht begols re more fundmentl to the overriding sense of self nd re therefore intrinsiclly more importnt thn dogols. Abstrction level nd degree of integrtion hve rrely been empiriclly studied with reference to the model developed by Crver nd Scheier Volume 11, Number 1, 2012

2 (1998). Other theories hve been empiriclly tested, but these studies hve focused on only one of the two dimensions (Emmons, 1992; Sheldon & Emmons, 1995; Sheldon & Ksser, 1995; Vllcher & Wegner, 1989). the best of our knowledge, only one study hs investigted both dimensions (Boudrenghien et l., 2011). This study showed medition of the impcts of gol bstrction nd integrtion on gol commitment, by gol importnce. However, its correltionl design did not llow cusl reltionships to be tested. The present study is imed t experimentlly investigting the impct of gol bstrction nd integrtion on gol commitment nd importnce. In ddition to the positive min effect of ech of these distl ntecedents, we postulte n interction effect. Bsed on the wellknown ssumption tht distl gols result in lower motivtion thn proximl ones (e.g., Locke & Lthm, 2002; Schunk, 1990; Zimmermn, 1989), we suggest tht begols do not lwys enhnce gol commitment. The interction effect we postulte tkes into ccount these two contrdictory ssumptions concerning the impct of bstrction on motivtion. We hypothesize tht the positive impct of bstrction on gol commitment (ssumed by Crver nd Scheier, 1998) pper when the gol is perceived s highly integrted. This interest in combining high levels of bstrction nd integrtion is in line with Bndur s (1986) ssumption tht we need to combine distl spirtions (i.e., begols) with proximl selfguidnce (i.e., integrtion with other gols, including concrete ones) to obtin the best personl development. However, we hypothesize tht, in circumstnces of low integrtion, we will observe the negtive impct of bstrction ssumed by Locke nd Lthm (2002). When there is not much integrtion, the focus on begol, which is too fr off to undertke ctions in immedite situtions, is not (sufficiently) compensted for by n wreness of the concrete hierrchicl pths to progress towrd this gol. On the contrry, the focus on dogol compenstes for this lck of integrtion by giving clerer ide of the ctions which need to be completed. This resoning suggests tht, when the gol is rther isolted, the lower the level of bstrction, the greter the commitment. We formulted three hypotheses, one for ech min effect nd one for the interction effect. The combintion of these hypotheses within the sme theoreticl model (Boudrenghien et l., submitted) implies tht the positive impct of bstrction when integrtion is high should be stronger thn its negtive impct when integrtion is low. The min effects s well s the interction effect re ssumed to be medited by gol importnce. Hypothesis 1. The higher the level of bstrction of gol, the greter the commitment to this gol, becuse of the incresed gol importnce. Hypothesis 2. The higher the degree of integrtion of gol, the greter the commitment to this gol, becuse of the incresed gol importnce. Hypothesis 3. When gol is highly integrted, the higher the level of gol bstrction, the greter the commitment to this gol, becuse of the incresed gol importnce. When gol is not much integrted, the higher the level of gol bstrction, the lower the commitment to this gol, becuse of the decresed gol importnce. Method Design nd Prticipnts This study employed 2 (bstrction level: high or low) x 2 (degree of integrtion: integrted or unintegrted) betweenprticipnts design. Dt were collected from Mrch to My 2008 in nine Frenchspeking high schools in Belgium. The smple consisted of 702 Grde 12 students enrolled in comprehensive eduction progrm. Prticipnts were rndomly ssigned to one of four conditions: 175 students, to condition (high level of bstrction plus integrtion); 175 students, to condition b (high level of bstrction but unintegrted); 179 students, to condition c (low level of bstrction plus integrtion); nd 173 students, to condition d (low level of 19 bstrction nd unintegrted). Some 49.7% of the prticipnts were femle nd 44.7% were mle (39 missing vlues); 68.9% of them hd their eighteenth birthdy in 2008 (4.8% were younger nd 21.8%, older) (31 missing vlues). Procedure Dt were collected in clss, during 50minute sessions. Ech student received document including ll the instructions, mesures, nd mnipultions. Four documents were developed, one for ech condition. In ech clss, we rndomly gve out the four types of documents, which were not distinguishble from their cover pge. In ll four documents, the experiment proceeded in three steps nd took pproximtely 40 minutes. First, the prticipnts completed selfreport questionnire. They were sked to imgine tht they hd to pick progrm of study t college now, nd to write down the eductionl gol they were pursuing by choosing this progrm. Students provided informtion concerning this gol, which llowed us to collect bseline mesures. Second, gol bstrction nd integrtion were mnipulted (see below). Finlly, second selfreport questionnire ws dministered. It gin sked the students to give their eductionl gol, nd then mesured gol commitment nd its ntecedents. At the end of the study, the prticipnts were debriefed. The objective of the mnipultion of the bstrction level ws to mke students dopt either n bstrct expression of their eductionl gol (worded in terms of begol) or concrete expression (worded in terms of dogol). Students were sked to select the one tht suited them best from three expressions of eductionl gols. Depending on the condition to which the prticipnt hd been ssigned (high or low level of bstrction), the expressions mong which he/she hd to choose were either ll worded in terms of begol or ll worded in terms of dogol. Students ssigned to the high level of bstrction condition were presented with the three following begols: to be person working in this domin to be competent in this

3 20 domin, nd to be recognized by people working in this domin. By contrst, students ssigned to the low level of bstrction condition hd to choose between the following dogols: to ttend courses in this domin, to trin myself in this domin, nd to study in this domin. 2 1 The objective of the integrtion mnipultion ws to encourge students to perceive their eductionl gol s either linked to, or isolted from, other gols in their life. All the students were sked to select the gols they pursued in their life from list of 30 begols nd list of 30 dogols. The next three steps were different depending on the My idel self condition to which the prticipnt hd been ssigned. Students in the integrted condition were told tht most people perceived their gols s highly linked, nd were given some exmples of this perception (e.g., in order to become competent in medicine, it is of course necessry to succeed in high Fig. 1 Hierrchicl digrm used for mnipultion in the integrted condition Fmily Study/work Friends school, but it could lso be importnt to do student job, for exmple in the medicl domin). Then, these students were sked to indicte which of the gols they hd selected from the two lists were relted to their eductionl gol. Finlly, these prticipnts were sked to write down their eductionl gol nd the other gols tht were Other Leisure Fig. 2 Lifespheres digrm used for mnipultion in the unintegrted condition relted to this gol on the hierrchicl digrm represented on Figure 1 (begols in Line 1 nd dogols in Line 2). be consistent with the mnipultion of bstrction level, if they hd been ssigned to the condition of high level of bstrction they were sked to write their eductionl gol in Line 1, wheres if they hd been ssigned to the condition of low level of bstrction they were sked to write it in Line 2. Students in the unintegrted condition were told tht most people perceived their gols s isolted, s belonging to different life spheres. Some exmples of this perception were given (e.g., tht the gol of becoming competent in medicine hs got nothing to do with other gols pursued in life, such s to be good prent). Then, these students were sked to indicte which of the gols they hd selected from the two lists were different from their eductionl gol nd belonged to other life spheres thn the study/work sphere. Finlly, these prticipnts were presented with digrm showing five life spheres (Figure 2), nd sked to write their eductionl gol in the study/work sphere nd their other (different) gols in the other spheres s pproprite. Mesures Most items on the selfreport questionnires were rted on 5point Likerttype scles, from 1 (strongly disgree) to 5 (strongly gree). The exceptions re presented below. Abstrction level. As explined bove, before nd fter the mnipultions, prticipnts were sked to stte their eductionl gol. The expressions students used to formulte their eductionl gol were coded for their level of bstrction on scle from 0 to 2. Code 2 ws ttributed to n expression tht reltes to being certin kind of person (high level of bstrction). Code 0 ws ttributed to n expression tht reltes to doing certin kind of thing (low level of bstrction). If the expression mixes chrcteristics from both levels of bstrction, it ws coded 1. This coding ws conducted by the first uthor using blind procedure (i.e., without knowing the experimentl

4 conditions in which the expressions were formulted). An index of interrter greement ws computed for rndom smple of 50 gols. The intrclss correltion coefficient reched the vlue of.83 (p <.001), which indictes very high interrter greement. Some exmples of bstrction level coding re presented in Tble 1. mnipultions, this item referred to the eductionl gol written in the first questionnire; fter the mnipultions, it referred to the gol in the second questionnire. Absolute importnce. As suggested by Brdi, Lee, Hofmnnwfigh, nd Soutr (2009), Tble T blle 1 Exmples E xm mplles off Eductionl Eductionll Gols Golls nd their tthe heir Abstrction Abstrction Level Level Index Inde Ind x L Low ow llevel evel off bstrction bstrction: dogo dogols gols (c (code ode = 0) M Medium edium level level off bstrction bstrctionb (c (code ode = 1) 1. T o sstudy tudy ssomething omething ttht ht I llove ove nd which nd iin nw hich I could could be useful useful llter. ter. 2. be hppy hppy in in my my job job 2. T o ttend ttend mth mth clsses. clsses. while while eerning rning good lliving. iving. 3. T help other o he lp ot her people, people, to to be 3. study study one of the the vrious vrious p prt rtt off their life. t he i r l i f e. brnches medicine. brnches off m edicine. 4. be doctor doctor working working 4. work work hrd hrd for for the the brod bro d f for or hum humnitrin nitrin subjects subjects tht tht I love. love. orgniztion. orgniztion. work ork hrd hrd in in job job tht tht 5. T ow 5. T o de develop velop m myy lnguge lnguge mee to to be useful useful to llows llows m skills. skills. others. ot hers. 1. study study tt tthe he School School of M Mngement. ngement. 1. T o be re recognized cognized in in my my job. job. 2. T o be ccivil ivil eengineer. ngineer. become 3. T o be come n n iimportnt mportnt person. pe rson. my 4. T o be ttotlly otlly fulfilled fful ulffiilled in in my jjob. ob. 5. T o be become come n n openopenm minded inded pe person. rson. n n eexpression xpression ttht reltes doing ertin kind kind off thing thing ht re ltes tto o doi ng ccertin n n eexpression xpression ttht mixes the low bstrction low nd nd high high levels levels off bstrction ht m ixes cchrcteristics hrcteristics off the c n n eexpression xpression ttht reltes being ertin kind kind off person person ht re ltes to be ing ccertin b One item, developed from definitions of the degree of integrtion (Crver & Scheier, 1998; Sheldon & Ksser, 1995), ws used to mesure gol integrtion before nd fter the mnipultions: I see clerly how certin other gols in my life will help me chieve this gol. Before the Reltive importnce. Another of Sideridis s (2001) items sked students if they gree tht top priority should be given to their eductionl gol in clssifiction of the vrious things they try to be or to do in their life: Working towrds this gol is the most importnt thing for me (ninepoint Likerttype scle). Absolute commitment. H High igh llevel evel of bstrction bstrctionc: begols begols (c (code ode = 2) Degree of integrtion. (ninepoint Likerttype scle from 1 [strongly disgree] to 9 [strongly gree]). 21 we distinguished between bsolute nd reltive importnce, nd investigted the impct of this distinction in n explortory wy. One item tken from Sideridis (2001) sked students to estimte the importnce of their eductionl gol without ny comprison to their other gols: This gol is extremely importnt to me The sme distinction between bsolute nd reltive hs been introduced into our mesure of commitment. Thirteen items, dpted from Brunstein (1993), nd Hollenbeck, Klein, O Lery, nd Wright (1989), sked students to estimte their commitment to their eductionl gol without ny comprison to their other gols (α =.85). An explortory fctor nlysis showed tht the thirteen items loded on unique fctor. Six of the thirteen items (e.g., I m strongly committed to pursuing this gol ) were used before the mnipultions (α =.76), nd the other seven (e.g., It wouldn t tke much to mke me bndon this gol (reversed item)) were used fter it (α =.79). Reltive commitment. Three of the items mesuring bsolute commitment were lso used, in slightly dpted form, to sk students to estimte their commitment to their T Tble ble 2 D Descriptive escriptive Sttistics Sttttistics nd Correltions Correltions bbetween ettwe ween Scles Sclees V Vribles ribles 1. A Abstrction bstrction level level (BM) 2. A Abstrction bstrction llevel evel (AM (AMb) 3. D Degree egree off integrtion integrtion (BM) (BM) 4. D Degree egree off integrtion integrtion 5. A Absolute bsolute iimportnce mportnce Reltive 6. Re ltive iimportnce mportnce 7. A Absolute bsolute ccommitment ommitment (BM) (BM) 8. A Absolute bsolute ccommitment ommitment 9. Re Reltive ltive commitment commitment (BM) (BM) 10. Re Reltive ltive commitment commitment M SD *** ***.11**.11**.09* *.09* *.47***.16***.14***.32***.25***.23***.11**.11**.20***.17***.28***.25***.23***.10**.57***.44***.53***.28***.34***.29***.41***.21***.38***.62***.29***.34***.33***.47***.23*** Note. Note. * p <.05,.05, ** p <.01,.01, *** p <.001 b before mnipultionb before mnipultionb fter fter mnipultion mnipultion

5 22 eductionl gol in comprison to other gols. An explortory fctor nlysis showed tht the three items loded on unique fctor. One of these three items ( I m redy to put in more effort into chieving this gol thn into chieving my other gols ) ws used before the mnipultions. The other two items (e.g., I m more determined to pursue other gols thn this one (reversed item)) were used fter the mnipultions (α =.71). Results Eight prticipnts hd some outliers (+/ 3 stndrd devitions from the men) nd were excluded from the nlyses. The descriptive sttistics nd correltions re presented in Tble 2. Mnipultion Checks Gol bstrction. A betweenprticipnts ANCOVA ws conducted to check the effectiveness of the bstrction mnipultion on the bstrction level fter the mnipultion, controlling for its level before the mnipultion. More specificlly, the two mnipultions nd their interction were introduced s independent vribles to check if there ws only min effect of the bstrction mnipultion, or whether the other mnipultion or the interction hd n effect. The results indicte significnt min effect of the bstrction mnipultion (F(1, 678) = ; p <.001; η p ² =.13), no min effect of the integrtion mnipultion (F(1, 678) = 0.80; ns), nd no interction effect (F(1, 678) = 2.48; ns). After the mnipultion, the gol expression ws more bstrct in the high level of bstrction condition (M = 1.15, SD = 0.85) thn in the low level of bstrction condition (M = 0.55, SD = 0.77). Before the mnipultion, the men in the high level of bstrction condition (M = 0.59, SD = 0.77) nd tht in the low level of bstrction condition (M = 0.58, SD = 0.78) did not differ (F(1, 684) = 0.03; ns). We conducted two dditionl withinprticipnt ANOVAs to improve our understnding of the bstrction mnipultion s effect. In the high level of bstrction condition, the gol expression ws more bstrct fter the mnipultion (M = 1.15, SD = 0.85) thn before (M = 0.59, SD = 0.77) (F(1, 338) = ; p <.001; η p ² =.26). However, in the low level of bstrction condition, the gol expression ws not significntly less bstrct fter the mnipultion thn before (F(1, 343) = 0.40; ns). It therefore seems to be esier to led students to express their eductionl gol more s n identity to develop, thn to led them to express their gol more s n ction to complete. Hving sid tht, the results confirm tht the mnipultion creted two groups significntly different in terms of their bstrction level. Gol integrtion. A betweenprticipnts ANCOVA ws conducted to check the effectiveness of the integrtion mnipultion on the degree of integrtion fter the mnipultion, controlling for its level before the mnipultion. Agin, the two mnipultions nd their interction were introduced s independent vribles. The results indicte significnt min effect of the integrtion mnipultion (F(1, 670) = 4.91; p <.05; η p ² =.01), no min effect of the bstrction mnipultion (F(1, 670) = 0.80; ns), nd no interction effect (F(1, 670) = 0.02; ns). After the mnipultion, students in the integrted condition perceived their gol s more integrted (M = 3.69, SD = 0.92) thn students in the unintegrted condition (M = 3.59, SD = 0.90). The two conditions did not differ before the mnipultion (F(1, 678) = 1.21; ns). We conducted two dditionl withinprticipnt ANOVAs to improve our understnding of the integrtion mnipultion s effect. Students in the integrted condition perceived their gol s more integrted fter the mnipultion (M = 3.69, SD = 0.92) thn before (M = 3.45, SD = 0.96) (F(1, 340) = 20.72; p <.001; η p ² =.06). However, in the unintegrted condition, the gol ws not perceived differently before (M = 3.53, SD = 0.91) nd fter the mnipultion (F(1, 333) = 1.71; ns). It seems therefore to be esier to increse the perception of gol s linked to other gols thn to decrese this perception. Hving sid tht, the results confirm tht the mnipultion creted two groups significntly different in terms of their perception of gol integrtion. Impct of the Mnipultions Gol commitment. Two betweenprticipnt ANOVAs tested the impct of the mnipultions on the bsolute nd reltive gol commitment. The first nlysis did not show ny min effect of the mnipultions on the bsolute commitment (mnipultion of bstrction: F(1, 683) = 0.08; ns; mnipultion of integrtion: F(1, 683) = 2.51; ns). Nor ws there n interction effect (F(1, 683) = 1.38; ns). The second ANOVA lso showed no min effect of the mnipultions on the reltive commitment (mnipultion of bstrction: F(1, 676) = 0.01; ns; mnipultion of integrtion: F(1, 676) = 0.28; ns). However there ws significnt interction effect (F(1, 676) = 4.88; p <.05; η p ² =.01). The reltive commitment ws highest in condition (M = 3.61, SD = 0.92) nd lowest in condition b (M = 3.42, SD = 0.93). It ws intermedite in conditions c (M = 3.45, SD = 0.92) nd d (M = 3.57, SD = 0.99). The scores of the students in the four conditions did not differ before the mnipultions (F(3, 682) = 1.40; ns). A simple effects nlysis ws conducted to look t the effect of ech mnipultion t individul levels of the other mnipultion. This reveled significnt difference between conditions nd b (F(1, 677) = 3.75; p =.05; η p ² =.01). The interction effect of the mnipultions on the reltive commitment is presented in the top prt of Figure 3. Gol importnce. Two betweenprticipnt ANOVAs tested the impct of the mnipultions on bsolute nd reltive gol importnce. The first ANOVA did not show ny min effect of the mnipultions on the bsolute importnce (mnipultion of bstrction: F(1, 683) = 0.08; ns; mnipultion of integrtion: F(1, 683) = 2.51; ns); nor did it show n interction effect (F(1, 683) = 1.38; ns). The second ANOVA lso showed no min effect of the mnipultions on the reltive importnce (mnipultion of bstrction: F(1, 681) = 0.33; ns;

6 23 mnipultion of integrtion: F(1, 681) = 0.04; ns). However it did disply significnt interction effect (F(1, 681) = 4.98; p <.05; η p ² =.01). The reltive importnce ws the highest in condition (M = 5.99, SD = 2.03) nd the lowest in condition c (M = 5.55, SD = 2.07). It ttined intermedite levels in conditions b (M = 5.67, SD = 2.15) nd d (M = 5.93, SD = 2.02). The simple effects nlysis reveled significnt difference between conditions nd c (F(1, 682) = 4.01; p <.05; η p ² =.01). The interction effect of the mnipultions on the reltive importnce is presented on the bottom prt of Figure 3. Meditionl Anlysis Gol importnce hs been postulted s meditor of the impct of bstrction nd integrtion on gol commitment. The first two conditions for meditionl model (Bron & Kenny, 1986) were checked by investigting the impct of the mnipultions. We found tht the interction between the two mnipultions hd significnt impct (1) on the reltive commitment, nd (2) on the reltive importnce. complete the test of the medition, betweenprticipnt ANCOVA ws conducted, with the two mnipultions nd their interction s independent vribles, the reltive importnce s covrite, nd the reltive commitment s the dependent vrible (Muller, Yzerbyt, & Judd, 2008). The impct of the reltive importnce on the reltive commitment, controlling for the impct of the two mnipultions, ws significnt (F(1, 671) = ; p <.001; η p ² =.14). Importnce nd commitment were positively linked (r =.38; p <.001). The ANCOVA lso showed tht the impct of the interction between the mnipultions on the reltive commitment disppered (F(1, 671) = 2.60; ns) once the impct of the reltive importnce Fig. 3 The impct of the mnipultions tions on gol commitment ment nd gol importnce hd been tken into ccount. All four conditions for full medition were therefore stisfied. Discussion This study ws, to the best of our knowledge, first ttempt to empiriclly test Crver nd Scheier s (1998) ssumptions bout the hierrchicl gol structure, nd to experimentlly investigte the ntecedents of eductionl gol commitment. Although there re certin limittions, which will be discussed below, three min conclusions cn be drwn: (1) the representtion students hve of their eductionl gol cn be chnged; (2) gol commitment nd importnce re influenced by gol bstrction nd integrtion; (3) the impct of gol bstrction nd integrtion on gol commitment is medited by gol importnce. With respect to the first conclusion, the representtion students hve of their eductionl gol (in terms of bstrction level nd degree of integrtion) cn be chnged. However, lthough it could be mde more bstrct nd more integrted, it could not be mde less bstrct or less integrted. Why? If it is esier to increse the bstrction level of n eductionl gol thn to decrese it, this is probbly due to the low men level of bstrction before mnipultion: most of the eductionl gols were coded 0 on the scle from 0 to 2. For most of the students in the low level of bstrction condition, it ws therefore impossible to decrese their bstrction level further. It hs lso been shown tht it is esier to increse students perceptions of the degree to which their gols re integrted, thn to decrese them. One explntion for this symmetricl effect of the integrtion mnipultion my be tht the perception of integrtion is t higher level of complexity thn tht of isoltion (Pscrell & Terenzini, 2005). Students who hve lredy ttined this level of complexity do not redily return to less developed perception. Another explntion of this limit could lie in the integrtion mesure. Gol commitment differed in conditions nd b, lthough these only vried on the integrtion dimension. Two explntions for this difference re possible. Either it is just due to n incresed degree of integrtion in condition, or it is due to both n incresed degree of integrtion in condition nd decresed degree of integrtion in condition b. If the second option is correct, then the nonsignificnt effectiveness of the mnipultion in the unintegrted condition my be due to the inbility of our mesure to detect the decrese in integrtion. This mesure should be improved in future reserch. However, in the present study, the comprison between the four conditions still mkes

7 24 sense given the significnt differences observed in terms of bstrction nd integrtion between the four conditions. Our second conclusion is tht the impct of the mnipultions of gol bstrction nd integrtion on gol commitment nd importnce hs been confirmed. Three chrcteristics of this impct were consistent in the investigtions of commitment nd importnce, which gives them dditionl weight. First, the mnipultions only ffected the commitment nd importnce ttched to the eductionl gol in comprison to other gols. This my be becuse the reltive dimension is more flexible thn the bsolute dimension (which is reltively stble). Therefore, the externl influence of the mnipultions ws more esily reflected by the reltive dimension. The second consistent result is tht only the interction between the two mnipultions hd n impct on gol commitment nd importnce; neither of the mnipultions ws effective on its own. In other words, Hypotheses 1 nd 2 were not supported, but we found n interction tht is exctly in line with Hypothesis 3. As ssumed by this hypothesis, if the gol ws perceived to be linked to other gols, gol commitment nd importnce incresed when moving from low to high level of bstrction. However, if the gol ws perceived s unintegrted, gol commitment nd importnce decresed when moving from low to high level of bstrction. If gol ws perceived s integrted, Crver nd Scheier s (1998) hypothesis of positive impct of begols is supported. This first prt of the interction is in line with Bndur s (1986) ssumption tht personl development is best served by combining distl spirtions with proximl selfguidnce. However, if gol is perceived in isoltion, the results re more supportive of Locke nd Lthm s (2002) proposition tht dogols, which re generlly more proximl, enhnce motivtion. How cn we explin the bsence of ny min effect? This is due to the crossover interction we found. The negtive impct of bstrction when integrtion ws low ws pproximtely s strong s its positive impct when integrtion ws high. We suggest tht this strong negtive impct is due to the extremely low level of integrtion which students in the unintegrted condition experienced. These students were sked to complete digrm representing their eductionl gol s totlly isolted from their other gols. The representtion to which students in condition b were therefore confronted ( begol lone, without ny link to other gols) gives them no ides on how to chieve their eductionl gol. This hs strong negtive impct on their commitment. We suggest tht, outside such n experimentl setting, this totlly isolted representtion is quite rre. Students t low degree of integrtion perceive few links between their eductionl gol nd other gols. However, the few links they do perceive mke the focus on begol not s negtive s in condition b. The third consistent result is tht students reched the highest level of both gol commitment nd importnce in condition. Moreover, the simple effects nlyses reveled this condition s hving significntly higher degree of commitment thn condition b, nd significntly higher level of importnce thn condition c. In other words, commitment nd importnce were both significntly higher only if the two conditions were present together: the student ws focused on begol nd this gol ws perceived s linked to other gols in his/her life. This result brings second support to Bndur s (1986) nd Crver nd Scheier s (1998) ssumptions. The prticipnts in condition d reched position just below those in condition on both commitment nd importnce. The fct tht this condition did not differ significntly from condition is in line with Hypothesis 3. However, unlike condition, condition d ws not significntly different from either conditions b or c. A difference between conditions d nd b would hve brought second support to Locke nd Lthm s (2002) ssumption. The bsence of significnt difference between it nd the other conditions mkes the position of condition d quite difficult to explin. Future reserch should include control conditions in 3 (gol bstrction: high low control) x 3 (gol integrtion: integrted unintegrted control) experimentl design. This would revel more bout the specific impct of ech condition on gol commitment nd importnce. The min difference between the results on gol commitment nd those on gol importnce concerns the clssifiction of conditions b nd c. Bsed on Hypothesis 3, these conditions re ssumed to be t significntly lower level of gol commitment nd importnce thn conditions or d. However, only condition b ws t significntly lower level of commitment thn condition, nd only condition c ws t significntly lower level of importnce thn condition. The negtive impct, observed in condition b, of focus on n isolted begol on gol commitment is in line with Hypothesis 3. This difference between conditions (n bstrct gol integrted in hierrchicl structure of bstrct nd concrete gols) nd b (n bstrct gol isolted from other gols) cn be viewed s n illustrtion of the distinction between relitybsed gols nd empty drems nd fntsies (Miller & Brickmn, 2004). The eductionl gol in condition b ppered too fr off nd isolted to develop high commitment to its chievement. However, students in condition b did not ttch significntly less importnce to their gol s postulted by Hypothesis 3. Although it is difficult for students to commit to n isolted begol, they do not necessrily ttch less importnce to this drem thn to relitybsed gol. The importnce of the link to concrete gols or subgols hs been demonstrted for gol commitment. However, this conclusion should not overshdow the importnce of the begols to which these subgols re nchored (Bndur, 1986; Miller & Brickmn, 2004). Our results show tht the impct of the mnipultions on importnce in condition c ws significntly less good thn in condition. This negtive impct of n integrted dogol on gol importnce is in line with Hypothesis 3. It is difficult for students to ttch lot of importnce to concrete gol, expressed s n ction to undertke. This is more specificlly true when this dogol is perceived s integrted with other gols. Indeed, in this cse, the reltive importnce of the

8 gol is significntly lower becuse the concrete gol ppers t the very bottom of hierrchy nd is only seen s tool to rech other gols. However, students re not significntly less committed to this integrted dogol s hypothesized by Hypothesis 3. The perception tht working on this concrete gol cn contribute to the ttinment of more bstrct gols probbly helps them to mintin this commitment. sum up, our results offer strong support to Hypothesis 3. The crossover interctions re in line with this hypothesis, nd do not support the min effects we postulted. Additionl support for Crver nd Scheier s (1998) ssumptions ws provided by the simple effects nlyses. Our finl conclusion concerns the role of gol importnce within the impct of gol bstrction nd integrtion on gol commitment. We showed tht the higher the reltive importnce of gol, the greter the reltive commitment to tht gol. This result supports the hypothesis tht gol importnce is direct ntecedent of gol commitment, which ws minly bsed on the expectncyvlue model (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002). Moreover, the mediting role of the reltive importnce of the gol is supported. The interctive impct of bstrction nd integrtion on reltive commitment is completely medited by the reltive importnce. The representtion of gol within the hierrchicl gol structure influences its reltive importnce, nd therefore, indirectly, the reltive commitment to tht gol. Three limittions to the present study should be noted. First, gol integrtion nd gol importnce were both singleitem mesures. However, these mesures were not imed t investigting the constructs of integrtion nd importnce in ll their complexity. Their im ws to nlyze the chnge of the four experimentl conditions in terms of (some spects of) integrtion nd importnce. However, the mesures do need further vlidtion. Second, lthough the impct of our mnipultions hs been demonstrted, their effect sizes were quite smll. This ws expected, given tht these mnipultions were performed during one short period of time. The im of our study ws to investigte the cuslity of the link between gol commitment nd its possible ntecedents, not to develop progrm to influence commitment in the long run. However, it would be interesting to develop n intervention study with this im. Third, our finl dependent vrible, gol commitment, ws mesured s n intention nd not s behvior. This study provided snpshot of students perceptions of nd motivtions towrds their eductionl gol t the end of high school, before they hd to choose their progrm of study nd to commit to this choice by registering, ttending courses, nd tking exmintions. The ntecedents identified in this study re those of the students intentions to commit to their gol. Although previous reserch hs lredy shown link between eductionl gol commitment nd chievementrelted behviors (e.g., Germeijs & Verschueren, 2007), our results need to be completed by n investigtion of the students behviorl commitment to their gol fter entry to college. Becuse our study breks new ground in the explntion of eductionl gol commitment, its prcticl implictions remin tenttive. Our results give rise to the development of tool for counseling interventions. This tool would be n empty digrm representing the hierrchicl gol structure (like Figure 1). The first purpose of such tool could be to increse students wreness of their own representtion of their eductionl gol, by sking them to complete the digrm with their gols. This incresed wreness of their own representtion nd its potentil consequences on their commitment nd on gol ctuliztion my llow them to control these consequences better. A second im of the tool could be to guide students in the development of their hierrchicl gol structure. People vry in their knowledge of the pths they cn tke to chieve their longterm gols (Miller & Brickmn, 2004). This tool could be useful wy of providing some informtion bout possible routes between gols nd subgols, while leving students free to drw their own digrm of their relevnt gols nd the pths between them. References 25 Bndur, A. (1986). Socil foundtions of thought nd ction: A socil cognitive theory. New Jersey: Prentice Hll. Brdi, A., Lee, J. A., Hofmnnwfigh, N., & Soutr, G. (2009). The structure of intrindividul vlue chnge. Journl of Personlity nd Socil Psychology, 97(5), Bron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The modertormeditor vrible distinction in socil psychology reserch: Conceptul, strtegic, nd sttisticl considertions. Journl of Personlity nd Socil Psychology, 51(6), Boudrenghien, G., Freny, M., & Bourgeois, E. (2011). L trnsition de l enseignement secondire vers l enseignement supérieur: Rôle des représenttions et motivtions à l égrd de son projet de formtion [The trnsition from highschool to college eduction: Role of representtions nd motivtions towrds one s eductionl gol]. L Orienttion Scolire et Professionnelle, 40(2), Boudrenghien, G., Freny, M., Bourgeois, E., Krbenick, S. A., & Eccles, J. S. (submitted). A theoreticl model of the ntecedents of eductionl gol commitment. Brunstein, J. C. (1993). Personl gols nd subjective wellbeing: A longitudinl study. Journl of Personlity nd Socil Psychology, 65(5), Crver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1998). On the selfregultion of behvior. Cmbridge: Cmbridge University Press. Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivtionl beliefs, vlues, nd gols. Annul Review of Psychology, 53, Emmons, R. A. (1992). Abstrct versus concrete gols: Personl striving level, physicl illness, nd psychologicl wellbeing. Journl of Personlity nd Socil Psychology, 62(2), Germeijs, V., & Verschueren, K. (2007). High school students creer decisionmking process: Consequences for choice implementtion in higher

9 26 eduction. Journl of Voctionl Behvior, 70(2), Hollenbeck, J. R., & Klein, H. J. (1987). Gol commitment nd the golsetting process: Problems, prospects, nd proposls for future reserch. Journl of Applied Psychology, 72(2), Hollenbeck, J. R., Klein, H. J., O Lery, A. M., & Wright, P. M. (1989). Investigtion of the construct vlidity of selfreport mesure of gol commitment. Journl of Applied Psychology, 74(6), Klinger, E., Brt, S. G., & Mxeiner, M. E. (1980). Motivtionl correltes of thought content frequency nd commitment. Journl of Personlity nd Socil Psychology, 39(6), doi: /h Locke, E. A., & Lthm, G. P. (2002). Building prcticlly useful theory of gol setting nd tsk motivtion: A 35yer odyssey. Americn Psychologist, 57(9), Miller, R. B., & Brickmn, S. J. (2004). A model of futureoriented motivtion nd selfregultion. Eductionl Psychology Review, 16(1), Muller, D., Yzerbyt, V. Y., & Judd, C. M. (2008). Adjusting for meditor in models with two crossed tretment vribles. Orgniztionl Reserch Methods, 11(2), Pscrell, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How college ffects students (Vol. 2). Sn Frncisco: JosseyBss. Schunk, D. H. (1990). Gol setting nd selfefficcy during selfregulted lerning. Eductionl Psychologist, 25(1), Sheldon, K. M., & Emmons, R. A. (1995). Compring differentition nd integrtion within personl gol systems. Personlity nd Individul Differences, 18(1), Sheldon, K. M., & Ksser, T. (1995). Coherence nd congruence: Two spects of personlity integrtion. Journl of Personlity nd Socil Psychology, 68(3), Sideridis, G. D. (2001). The cusl role of gol importnce for the explntion of student study behviour: Crossvlidtion with multiple smples. Eductionl Psychology, 21(3), Vllcher, R. R., & Wegner, D. M. (1989). Levels of personl gency: Individul vrition in ction identifiction. Journl of Personlity nd Socil Psychology, 57(4), Zimmermn, B. J. (1989). A socil cognitive view of selfregulted cdemic lerning. Journl of Eductionl Psychology, 81(3),