The Effects of Performance and Process Goals on Anxiety and Performance of a Racquetball Task. Trendell Clark

Transcription

1 The Effects of Performance and Process Goals on Anxiety and Performance of a Racquetball Task Trendell Clark Thesis submitted to the School of Physical Education at West Virginia University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Physical Education Edward Etzel, Ed. D, Chair Roy Tunick, Ed. D Jack Watson II, Ph. D School of Physical Education Morgantown, WV 2004 Keywords: Goal Setting, Anxiety, Performance

2 ABSTRACT The Effects of Performance and Process Goals on Anxiety and Performance of a Racquetball Task Trendell L Clark The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of three types of goal setting: performance goals, process goals and no goals, on a racquetball skill task, competitive state anxiety, and goal commitment. Forty college undergraduate students enrolled in racquetball classes were randomly assigned to one of three goal setting groups. Performance and anxiety were evaluated over two competitions conducted over a five week period. The instruments used were the Modified CSAI-2 (Jones & Swain, 1992) for anxiety, the Goal Commitment Questionnaire (Filby et al., 1999) for commitment and a goal manipulation check to measure goal setting changes. Participants were provided with goal setting instruction appropriate to their group, engaged in a competition, reevaluated the goals they had previously set, and engaged in another competition. There were no significant findings. Several limitations including length of study and the nature of the sample utilized were discussed. Future research directions for examining different types of goal setting on performance and anxiety were offered.

3 iii Dedication This thesis could not have been completed without the assistance and support of so many people. It was difficult but I can finally say that I am finished. I dedicate this thesis to the following people. First of all to my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, who gave me the strength to see the project through to the end when I so frequently did not want to do it. To my loving wife Laurie, who gave me tremendous encouragement to finish the project and tremendous motivation to get my behind in gear. Your love and support have made the task easier and she has made the rest of my life stable to free me to work on this project. To Dr. Ed Etzel, who gave me good nudges to complete the project. He was always there to help when I needed it and was always speedy in his reply. Even when I mentioned that I would not go forward to get my doctorate at WVU, you still helped me and encouraged me with my masters thesis. To Dr. Jack Watson, who was right there beside Dr. Etzel in pushing me to get this finished. I thank you for all your hard work. To Dr. Roy Tunick, who helped me refine the project and was there to help me understand it more. To the rest of the people in my department who helped make the fun times fun and who helped me take my mind off the project. Finally, to my parents and friends from all over, who gave me their love and support when I needed it. I greatly appreciate all the inquiries and the little positive statements that made finishing this project easier.

4 iv Acknowledgments A special thanks is given to Dr. Lynn Housner for his help with using racquetball classes to complete this project as well as to Scott Dietrich, Tony Pritchett, Brandonn Harris, and John Geer who allowed me to use their classes to conduct my study and to help me learn more about racquetball.

5 v Table of Contents Page Abstract Dedication Acknowledgments List of Tables List of Appendices ii iii iv vi vii Introduction 1 Method 8 Participants 8 Research Design 9 Instrumentation 11 Procedure 13 Results 16 Preliminary Analyses 16 Racquetball Performance 16 Competitive Anxiety 17 Goal Commitment 17 Additional Goal Setting 18 Discussion 18 References 24 Tables 32 Appendices 35

6 vi List of Tables Page Means and Standard Deviations of the Goal Groups (Performance, Process and No Goal) During Both Competitions 32 Means and Standard Deviations of Cognitive Anxiety Intensity and Direction, Somatic Anxiety Intensity and Direction, and Self-Confidence Intensity and Direction at both Competitions for Each Goal Group 33 3x2 (Group x Time) ANOVAs for Performance, Cognitive Anxiety Intensity and Direction, Somatic Anxiety Intensity and Direction and Self-Confidence Intensity and Direction 34

7 vii List of Appendixes Appendix Page Institutional Review Board Approval 35 Informed Consent Letter 37 Demographic Questionnaire 39 Modified Competitive State Anxiety Inventory-2 41 Goal Commitment Questionnaire 43 Goal Manipulation Check 45 Goal Training Program 48 Schematic of Study 50 Review of Literature 52 Introduction 53 The Competitive Anxiety/Performance Relationship 53 The Goal Setting/Performance Relationship 59 Problems with Goal Setting Theory in the Physical Domain 62 Goal Setting Strategies and Effects on Performance and Anxiety 67 Goal Setting and Commitment 69 Summary 70

8 Goal Setting & Anxiety 1 Introduction Goal setting has been one of the most studied and strongly supported theoretical constructs in the social sciences. As many as 90% of goal setting studies show either full or partial support for its behavior change efficacy (Locke & Latham, 1990) and for enhancing performance in physical domains (Kyllo & Landers, 1995). Goal setting behavior has been studied in numerous field and laboratory settings, in several countries including the United States, Canada, Japan, and Germany, and using different tasks such as pain tolerance, can collecting, jumping and puzzles. The central assumptions of Locke s (1968) goal setting theory are that: 1) a linear relationship exists between the degree of goal difficulty and performance, and 2) the harder the goals, the greater the performance and 3) those specific, hard goals would lead to greater performance enhancement than vague or no goals. Research on goal setting has evolved from examining these suppositions to inspecting goal setting in various other ways, including how goal setting works in competition (e.g., Bar-Eli et al., 1997), and how group goal setting may be different from individual goal setting (e.g., Johnson, Ostrow, Perna, & Etzel, 1997). The encouraging results of goal setting studies in other domains have led to its extensive study in the sport and exercise sciences. Researchers in sport and exercise have not only examined the major tenets of goal setting theory (e.g., Weinberg, Bruya, Longino, & Jackson, 1988; Weinberg, Fowler, Jackson, Bagnall, & Bruya, 1991), but also other constructs likely related to goal setting such as self efficacy (e.g., Miller & McAuley, 1987) and goal orientation (e.g., Duda, Chi, Newton, Walling, & Catley, 1995).

9 Goal Setting & Anxiety 2 A recently studied area of goal setting involves the nature of three different types of goals: 1) performance, 2) outcome and 3) process (Filby, Maynard, & Graydon, 1999; Kingston & Hardy, 1997; Zimmerman & Kitsantas, 1996). Performance goals described as self-referenced center on what an individual determines to help improve his or her own performance (Kingston & Hardy, 1997). An example of a performance goal is improving racquetball serving percentage by 10%. Outcome goals focus on the outcomes of a particular event and are usually based on social comparison processes (Kingston & Hardy, 1997). An example of this type of goal is to finish first in a racquetball competition. Process goals specify particular behaviors that performer will engage in during training or competition (Kingston & Hardy, 1997), as in racquetball players working to achieve a smoother forehand motion. As with other domains (e.g., business), goal setting in sport and exercise has been found to be effective. Based upon a review by Burton, Naylor, and Holliday (2001) of fifty-six published goal setting studies, 78.6% or 44 demonstrated moderate or strong goal setting effects. These studies examined goal setting using many types of tasks, such as weight lifting, basketball, tennis, golf, and rifle shooting. Furthermore, identifying how goal setting may work with different experience levels has been examined utilizing beginners and professionals (Frierman, Weinberg, & Jackson, 1990). Lastly, goal setting has been examined as an intervention with respect to how different aspects of Locke s (1968) goal setting theory are supported in sport and exercise science. Although goal setting has been shown to be effective, it remains unclear how it actually affects performance. Two views have been proposed. One is the direct mechanistic view (Locke & Latham, 1990), which presumes that such goals direct

10 Goal Setting & Anxiety 3 attention to the task performed, cause more effort expenditure, cause people to be more persistent at the task, and prompt the development of task strategies. An example of this view would be that having a goal of creating a more effective serve in racquetball would lead to an individual creating a strategy to improve his/her serve and cause the individual to focus and spend more time on serve improvement. The other has been called the indirect thought-process view (Weinberg & Gould, 1999). This perspective proposes that goals influence performance indirectly by affecting the performer s psychological state, (e.g., anxiety level). This view proposes that because an individual has a goal, he/she would have higher or lower levels of anxiety. These higher or lower levels of anxiety would then affect performance, so that the goal indirectly affects performance by affecting another construct, in this case anxiety. Whereas direct mechanisms have been studied frequently, the effects of goal setting on psychological state have been studied little (Burton, 1989b, Kingston & Hardy, 1997). Anxiety An examination of how goal setting can affect psychological states would appear beneficial, particularly in the area of anxiety. Anxiety is a construct made up of several components that influence how an individual perceives situations and different physiological changes can result from these perceptions. Athletes are constantly looking for ways to reduce the negative effects of anxiety. It is quite possible that different goal types may affect anxiety and performance another way because different types of goals require the individual to focus on separate elements of the task at hand. Outcome goals force individuals to compare their performance with the performance of others. Because

11 Goal Setting & Anxiety 4 an individual may be concerned with the performance of others, an event he or she cannot control, anxiety may increase when evaluated. Performance goals force an individual to focus on the end product without taking into account how it is achieved and could be anxiety provoking, as individuals get closer to achieving their goals. Process goals focus on refining techniques and letting the results take care of themselves. Process goals can limit anxiety by causing individuals to focus on the activity producing the results and not worry about being evaluated, which is a key component of both outcome and performance goals. If different types of goals can affect performance differently, then they may also affect anxiety another way by prompting the individual to focus on different parts of an evaluative situation that can either be more or less anxiety producing. Therefore, it is would seem useful to examine the relationship between these different goal types and anxiety. The Anxiety/Performance Relationship The anxiety/performance relationship has been studied extensively (e.g., Hanton & Jones, 1995; Jones & Swain, 1992; Perry & Williams, 1998). Several theories have been developed to describe this relationship, which include both the multidimensional anxiety theory (Martens, Burton, Vealey, Bump, & Smith, 1990) and the catastrophe model of anxiety (e.g., Hardy & Parfitt, 1991). Both of these theories suggest that anxiety is a complex construct, composed of cognitive and somatic subcomponents. Since the development of multidimensional anxiety theory (Martens et. al, 1990), many researchers have investigated the anxiety/performance relationship by looking at the three main subcomponents that make up competitive anxiety. Those components are somatic anxiety, cognitive anxiety, and self-confidence. Researchers have also begun to

12 Goal Setting & Anxiety 5 examine the antecedents to each type of anxiety (e.g., Jones, Swain, & Cale, 1990). General trends have suggested that there are different antecedents for each subcomponent of competitive anxiety and that they may differ from sport to sport (Hanton & Jones, 1995; Jones, Swain, & Cale 1990). Other investigations of the anxiety performance relationship have involved examining the interpretation of anxiety and ways to cope with it (e.g., Hale & Whitehouse, 1998; Terry, Mayer, & Howe, 1998). Some researchers have examined the notion that anxiety always affects performance negatively and found that individuals did not differ on anxiety intensity, but those performing better thought of their anxiety as being more facilitative (e.g., Jones & Swain, 1992; 1995). Other researchers have examined ways to control anxiety. For example, relaxation and imagery (e.g., Terry et. al, 1998) have been found to be effective in controlling anxiety. Modification of self-talk has also been found to be effective in controlling anxiety (e.g., Elko & Ostrow, 1991). Another possible method to controlling anxiety could be goal setting, especially if multiple goal setting strategies may affect anxiety in different ways. Yet, there has been little research conducted in this area. In order to understand this research, however, one must understand the broader goal-setting literature. How Goal Setting Affects Performance Much of the goal setting research has focused on how goal setting affects performance, in particular the relationship of specific, difficult, short and long-term goals to performance (e.g., Boyce, 1990, Hall & Byrne, 1988). Many of these studies have found equivocal results. Several studies examining goal specificity found that specific goals would improve performance more than vague ones (e.g., Burton, 1989a; Hall,

13 Goal Setting & Anxiety 6 Weinberg, & Jackson, 1987). However, other studies did not support this finding (e.g., Hollingsworth, 1975; Weinberg, Bruya, & Jackson, 1985). Research concerning goal difficulty has also been equivocal, with many studies not supporting the hypothesis that more difficult goals lead to better performance (e.g., Weinberg, Bruya, Jackson, & Garland, 1990; Weinberg et al., 1991). Research concerning goal proximity has also not been clear, with several studies supporting the hypothesis that short and long-term goals will lead to better performance than long-term goals alone (e.g., Hall & Byrne, 1988; Tenenbaum, Pinchas, Elbaz, Bar-Eli, & Weinberg, 1991), whereas other studies have not (e.g., Frierman, Weinberg, & Jackson, 1990; Howe & Poole, 1992). However, in an attempt to clarify the understanding of goal setting in sport, Kyllo and Landers (1995), in their meta-analysis, found no differences in the effectiveness between specific and vague goals. They also found that moderately difficult goals improved performance the most and that a combination of short-term and long-term goals led to greater performance enhancements than long-term goals alone. How Different Goal Types Affect Performance and Anxiety Recent research has examined the effect of different types of goals on performance (e.g., Burton, Weinebrg, Yukelson, & Weigand, 1998; Kingston & Hardy, 1997). Several studies have found that process goals have enhanced performance more than either performance or outcome goals (Kingston & Hardy, 1997; Zimmerman & Kitsantas, 1996). Furthermore, a study examining the nature of combinations of different types of goals found that those individuals engaging in setting multiple different types of goals performed better than those only setting one type of goal or not setting any goals (Filby, Maynard, & Graydon, 1999).

14 Goal Setting & Anxiety 7 The few studies that have examined how goal setting affects anxiety have involved different goal setting strategies. Burton (1989b) examined the nature of different goal types on anxiety among swimmers. He found that those individuals using performance goals had lower levels of anxiety when compared to an outcome goal group. Furthermore, Kingston and Hardy (1997) examined the effects of goal setting on anxiety and found no difference between individuals engaged in setting performance and process goals. These are the only studies that have investigated this particular topic. Goal Setting and Commitment There has been little research investigating goal commitment, and that research that has been conducted centers around the issue of whether self-set or assigned goals lead to greater commitment (e.g., Boyce & Wayda, 1994). Most research in the sport context has revealed that self-set goals lead to greater commitment than assigned goals (Kyllo & Landers, 1995). There have been no known published studies that have examined how goal type may affect commitment. Most studies that have examined goal setting in the sport and exercise sciences focused mostly on performance. The few that have examined anxiety have done so by focusing on multiple cognitions or psychological states. Testing to see the effects of anxiety alone, with the possibility of goal setting being a specific intervention, like imagery, to reduce anxiety, has not been done. In addition, the possibility that goal commitment may differ based on goal type has not been examined at all. The purpose this study was to investigate these possibilities by examining three fundamental questions: 1) what effect(s) might different goal setting strategies have upon competitive anxiety intensity and direction? 2) What effect(s) might different goal setting strategies have on

15 Goal Setting & Anxiety 8 racquetball performance? and 3) are there differences in goal commitment between different goal setting strategies? Based on previous work by Kingston and Hardy (1997), it was hypothesized that individuals in the process goal setting group would exhibit the most improvement in competitive anxiety levels. This meant that either lower levels of cognitive and somatic anxiety intensity and higher levels of self confidence or a more facilitative interpretation of cognitive and somatic anxiety and self-confidence, in relation to the other groups. Furthermore, the performance group would exhibit more improvement in competitive anxiety levels than the no goal group due to the idea that some type of goal setting would be better than no type of goal setting on improving anxiety levels. Additionally, the individuals in the process group would exhibit the greatest overall performance, with the performance group exhibiting the second greatest performance (Kingston & Hardy, 1997). Lastly, due to the exploratory nature of examining goal commitment in the manner this study proposes to examine it, there would be no difference in goal commitment based on goal type. Method Participants Forty undergraduate students enrolled in beginning racquetball classes at a large mid-atlantic university volunteered to participate in this research investigation. The average age of the participants was years with a standard deviation of The approval of the university's Institutional Review Board for the Protection of Human Subjects was granted prior to the beginning of the study. Informed consent was also obtained from all participants prior to the commencement of this study by participants

16 Goal Setting & Anxiety 9 reading a consent letter they were given and informing the researcher of their willingness desire to participate. Research Design The study employed a 3 x 2 (group x time) mixed factorial design for competitive anxiety intensity and direction and racquetball performance with between groups on intervention and repeated measures on time. A 2 x 3(group x time) mixed factorial design was employed for goal commitment. A repeated measures design was used for both performance and process goal commitment. The two independent variables were group (process goal, performance goal, and no goal) and time. The two time measurement points for competitive anxiety intensity and direction and racquetball performance were during weeks three and five. The three time measurement points for goal commitment were during weeks three, four, and five. The eight dependent variables were cognitive anxiety intensity and direction, somatic anxiety intensity and direction, self-confidence intensity and direction, racquetball performance and goal commitment. The intervention was a 30-minute initial session describing goal-setting procedures, followed by a 20-minute goal evaluation session during week four of the study. Participants wrote down their goals, during the initial goal setting session and were asked to review them before each competition. Information on anxiety levels prior to competition and racquetball performance in competition was collected during weeks three and five during the two competitions. This study spanned five weeks with the initial meeting being counted as week one. This was not the case for 16 participants whose data was collected during the summer and had a total time period of three weeks. These individuals did meet with the researcher five times just like the

17 Goal Setting & Anxiety 10 other participants. Information regarding goal commitment, using the Goal Commitment Questionnaire (GCQ) (Filby, Maynard, & Graydon, 1999), was collected during weeks three, four, and five. Furthermore, the Goal Manipulation Check Survey (GMCS) (Watson, Clark & Housner, 2002) was administered during both competitions. A potential problem with this design is that it assumed each participant had an approximately equal amount of practice time, because they participated in a structured racquetball class. A problem arose if participants missed multiple classes, or practiced on their own outside of class. If a large number of participants in one group missed class or practiced in addition to class, then results could be impacted due to differences in practice time between groups. This was controlled by asking on the Goal Manipulation Check (Watson, Clark, & Housner, 2002) how many classes each participant missed throughout the semester and using the number of missed classes as a covariate if necessary. Another potential problem with this design was that poor racquetball players may have thought that they could not win a competition. If this were the case, the motivation for these students to do well would be low, leading these students to not try hard. An attempt to control for this problem was to flight both competitions so that there were two flights in each class, such that students competed against others around their own ability. This was achieved by using the scores obtained from the first week of class. The students were placed in groups using stratified random sampling. The students were ranked based on the first score and were split into threesomes ( i.e., Rank 1, 2, and 3 with each other and 4, 5, and 6 with each other, etc.) with one from each threesome being randomly placed into each of the three groups. This process was continued until each individual was in a group with equal amounts of individuals in each flight.

18 Goal Setting & Anxiety 11 Instrumentation A demographic questionnaire was used to obtain information on each participant. The questionnaire contained questions concerning age, prior goal setting experience and prior racquetball experience. Furthermore, the questionnaire contained a description of the task and asked students how they thought they would do on the task. Competitive State Anxiety. A modified version of the Competitive State Anxiety Inventory-2 (CSAI-2) (Jones & Swain, 1992) was used in this study. It is a 27-item selfreport measure of competitive state anxiety and is comprised of three subscales: cognitive anxiety, somatic anxiety, and self-confidence (Martens, Burton, Vealey, Bump, & Smith, 1990). The responses to each question were: 1=Not at all, 2=Somewhat, 3=Moderately so, and 4=Very much so. Furthermore, the modified version has a directional component to which individual s rate how facilitative or debilitative their state anxiety is on a scale ranging from 3(very debilitative) to +3(very facilitative) (Jones & Swain, 1992). The CSAI-2 is scored by adding the responses of the items for each subscale to get a score that ranges from 9 to 36. The directional component is also scored by adding the responses of each subscale item to get a score ranging from -27 to +27. An example of an individual s score for cognitive state anxiety would be 25 for intensity and +20 for interpretation, which would mean that the individual has a high level of cognitive state anxiety, but this state anxiety is being viewed as facilitative to performance. The reported internal consistency for the CSAI-2 ranges from.79 to.90 (Martens et al., 1990). The concurrent validity of the instrument was obtained by correlating the scales of the CSAI-2 with the SCAT. Correlations found between the SCAT and the cognitive subscale of the CSAI-2, the somatic subscale and the self-confidence subscale

19 Goal Setting & Anxiety 12 were.4,.6, and -.51 respectively. Furthermore, construct validity was obtained by Martens et al. (1990) investigating the best times to administer the CSAI-2. The results showed that somatic state anxiety increased as the instrument was administered closer to the competition and that cognitive state anxiety showed no significant difference in intensity due to time administered. This particular finding showed that the two subscales were independent of each other and therefore provided support for the idea that somatic and cognitive state anxiety are separate constructs. Goal Commitment. Goal commitment was measured using the Goal Commitment Questionnaire, a four-item questionnaire that is designed to measure the level of commitment to a particular goal (Filby et al., 1999). The participants answered each question using a 6-point scale, ranging from 1(strongly disagree) to 6(strongly agree). To get a score on this instrument, one adds the score for each item to get an aggregate score that ranges from 4 to 24. The internal consistency for this instrument ranges from.83 to.93 (Filby et al., 1999). There has been no validation work done with this scale. Goal Manipulation. The Goal Manipulation Check (Watson, Clark, & Housner, 2002) is an open-ended questionnaire designed to measure if individuals set goals in addition to those discussed at the beginning of the study. Furthermore, it is designed to measure the perceived difficulty of the goals for the individual. Individuals were asked to rate the perceived difficulty on a scale ranging from 1(not at all difficult) to 9(very difficult). Furthermore, this questionnaire measured how many times the participant played racquetball outside of class and how many classes the individual missed. Racquetball Performance. The Racquetball Performance task consisted of hitting ten balls with a kill shot with the forehand from the receiving line into a scoring grid

20 Goal Setting & Anxiety 13 painted on the front wall of the racquetball court. Each participant was instructed to hit the ball as hard as possible in order for the shot to be counted. The participants stood within a hitting area located three feet from the sidewall. This hitting area was four feet wide. When hitting a forehand, the receiving area was located on the left hand side of the court for the right-handed players and on the right hand side for the left-handed players. The participant stood at the receiving line and contacted balls that were served to him/her from the opposite side of the court via the front wall. For the shot to be counted, the serve must have gone directly to the participant and be in the receiving area between the participant s knees and navel (Watson, Clark, & Housner, 2002). If a serve did not meet these requirements, then the score was not counted. This process continued until 10 legal serves were hit with the forehand. The scoring grid consisted of several rectangles painted on the front wall. It was eight feet wide and five feet tall. Hitting the area within the grid one foot from the floor was worth ten points. Hitting the ball in the area between one and two feet from the floor was worth eight points, between two and three feet was worth six points, between three and four feet was worth four points and between four and five feet was worth two points. The individual serving the ball kept score. The maximum score on the task was 100 and the minimum was 0. The inter-rater reliability for this task was.85. Procedure Approval was gained from the administrators and instructors of the racquetball classes at the university with each administrator and instructor granting permission. Following these approvals, individuals were contacted during a class period by the researcher regarding the current study. They were given a cover letter explaining the

21 Goal Setting & Anxiety 14 study and were encouraged to participate. If they agreed to participate, and after giving a verbal agreement to that effect, they completed a demographic questionnaire and were assigned a code number. After completing the demographic questionnaire, they completed the task of hitting 10 forehand kill shots during the first week of the study as an attempt to familiarize them with the task and to provide information for flighting the groups. The individuals in the study were assigned into one of the three goal groups and were taught about goal setting. Individuals learned about their type of goals during an initial thirty minute session, where they were taught about goals, what type of goals they would be asked to set, and what makes for an effective goal. Individuals then set their own goals from within their goal type for the rest of the study which was for three additional weeks, with the exception of sixteen participants whose data was collected during a summer session and had only an additional two and a half weeks with their goal. They wrote these goals down for future reference and these goals were checked by the researcher. All individuals were told that they would be involved in two competitions during this session. The goal setting instruction was adapted from the United States Olympic Committee Sport Psychology Training Manual (1999). During competition weeks three and five, each individual was provided with the goals that they wrote down and were asked to fill out a modified CSAI-2, GCQ, and GMC prior to doing the racquetball task. They were also told that they would be filmed during the competition as a possible way to create a greater variability in their anxiety levels. Although a video camera was set up and directed at the participants, no tape was ever placed in the camera. After the study was completed, the participants were debriefed

22 Goal Setting & Anxiety 15 about lack of film in the camera. The participants were also told that they had a maximum of three minutes to warm up, if they need it, before the competitions began. Then they performed the racquetball task. Not only was the total score tabulated, but the number of times a participant missed the target was also tracked. They were told prior to each competition that the winner of each flight would win twenty dollars. With the difference in numbers of participants in each semester, the numbers in each flight ranged from 4 to 6. During re-evaluation week four, the participants also had the opportunity to evaluate their goals. Each evaluation period involved the individuals first completing the GCQ and then answering the following questions: 1) What was your goal(s)? 2) How would you rate yourself as progressing towards your goal(s)? 3) Do you think you can still accomplish your goal(s)? and 4) What do you think will be the biggest obstacle to accomplishing your goal(s)? These questions were asked of the participants and they responded to the questions on paper concerning their individual goals. They were then given their original goals to see how their answers to these questions matched up with the goals they had originally set. Results Preliminary Analysis In order to determine the type of analysis to conduct in regard to performance, Pearson product Moment Correlations were conducted to determine if racquetball experience, amount of practice, and amount of class missed should be used as covariates with performance. Based on the results of the correlations run, none of the three variables were found to be covariates because the r-values were too low. Additionally, a one-way

23 Goal Setting & Anxiety 16 ANOVA was conducted to determine group differences in performance prior to goal setting intervention. None was found (F (2, 36) =.58, p >.05). Due to the lack of covariates, a 3 X 2 (group X time) repeated measures ANOVA was conducted to examine each variable. Due to the number of ANOVA s run, the p-value was set to.001 to limit possibility of Type I error. Racquetball Performance The racquetball performance means and standard deviations of the three groups at both measurement times are presented in Table 1. A 3 (goal group) X 2 (competition) ANOVA with repeated measures on the last factor was utilized to compare performance on the racquetball task. There were no significant findings between groups, (F (2, 36) =.09, p >.01) or within groups over time. However, the differences in performance over the two competitions did approach significance (F (1, 36) = 5.22, p =.03). Furthermore, there was not a significant interaction effect (F (2, 36) =.60, p >.01) between groups and time. Additionally, the number of misses per group, described as earning zero points, was also analyzed using a 3 X 2 repeated measures ANOVA. There were no significant between group effects (F (2, 36)=.11, p >.01) or interaction effects ( F (2, 36)=.96, p >.01). Furthermore, there was not a significant effect between the competitions, but the number missed over time did approach significance (F (1, 36) = 4.57, p =.04) with participants missing slightly more shots during the first competition than the second one. See Table 1 for further reference on performance analyses. Competitive Anxiety The means and standard deviations of cognitive anxiety intensity and direction, somatic anxiety intensity and direction and self confidence intensity and direction at both

24 Goal Setting & Anxiety 17 measurement times are presented in Table 2. Six, 3 X 2 repeated measures ANOVAs were conducted to compare differences between groups on cognitive anxiety intensity and direction, somatic anxiety intensity and direction, and self-confidence intensity and direction. Although there were not any significant results, there were a few that approached statistical significance. Differences between the goal groups on cognitive anxiety intensity approached significance, with the process goal group reporting higher levels of cognitive anxiety than the no goal group (F (2, 36)= 3.94, p =.03). Another finding that approached significance was a self-confidence interaction effect with time where self-confidence increased over time for both the performance and process goal groups, but decreased over from competition one to competition two for the no goal group (F (2, 36)= 3.42, p =.04). The rest of the findings did not approach significance and the F-values for these findings are presented in Table 3. Goal Commitment A 2 (goal group) X 3 (time) repeated measures ANOVA was conducted to examine differences in goal commitment. There were no significant results found either between the process and performance goal groups (F (1, 13) =.04, p >.05) or within the groups (F (2, 26) =.79, p >.05). Additional Goal Setting In order to calculate if any additional goals were set, participants were asked via questionnaire if they set any additional goals, and if so what they were. A total of 28.2% of the sample responded that they did set additional goals. Of those persons who set additional goals, 9.1% set goals that were specific, defined as not writing To do my

25 Goal Setting & Anxiety 18 best, or To improve without giving a specific number or percentage of how they would improve. Discussion The primary purpose of this investigation was to examine the potential effects of different goal setting strategies on self-reported competitive anxiety and observed racquetball performance. Additionally, the potential effects of goal setting strategies on goal commitment were also examined. Based on previous goal setting literature, it was hypothesized that a process goal setting group would improve their performance more than the performance goal group, which would improve performance more than the no goal group. Furthermore, the process goal group was hypothesized to have demonstrated lower levels of cognitive and somatic anxiety and higher levels of self confidence in relation to the performance goal group, which in turn would have similar results in relation to the no goal group. Moreover, it was hypothesized that the process goal group would perceive their levels of cognitive anxiety, somatic anxiety, and selfconfidence in a more positive way than the performance goal group, which would have similar results in relation to the no goal group. Lastly, it was hypothesized that there would be no difference between goal groups in goal commitment. The overall findings of this investigation did not provide support for the first two hypotheses. Furthermore, the findings that approached significance were contradictory to the hypotheses. The trend was for the process goal group to have higher levels of cognitive anxiety than the no goal group. However, the hypothesis for goal commitment was supported with no differences found between the groups.

26 Goal Setting & Anxiety 19 A limited amount of research has been conducted examining the influence of goal setting on anxiety, suggesting that there is no difference between process goals and performance goals (Kingston & Hardy, 1997). Although there have not been any findings of a difference between the two, Kingston and Hardy (1997) proposed that process goals may direct attention towards improving the behaviors which are more controllable and create a greater sense of control in the individual. However, performance goals direct attention toward an evaluative situation, which can be more anxiety producing. Furthermore, Kingston and Hardy (1997) suggest that process goals may aid concentration or directing attentional resources during competition, which can help keep anxiety at appropriate levels. The current study reflected the results found in the Kingston and Hardy (1997) study, but the limitations of both studies should lead to further investigation and not the discontinuation of examining goal setting in this manner. Limited research has also been conducted comparing the effects of process and performance goals on performance, and has shown that process goals lead to greater performance improvement than performance goals. However, the present study did not find similar results to the previous findings. Kingston and Hardy (1997) found that process goals were better than performance goals for the enhancement of golf performance. Zimmerman and Kitsantas (1996) found similar results using dart throwing. However, both studies did create a meaningful situation (Kingston & Hardy, 1997) or they monitored interest in the task (Zimmerman & Kitsantas, 1996). Because of anecdotal comments by numerous participants, like I didn t feel anxiety or I was relaxed the entire time, this task did not seem to create a meaningful situation.

27 Goal Setting & Anxiety 20 Few of the previous studies examining goal commitment have examined it in conjunction with goal type. The study that is the exception was conducted by Filby, Maynard and Graydon (1999). The suggestion that there is a difference seems to be more of an issue of goal preference, with individuals maintaining commitment to a certain type of goal because they like that type of goal. The finding of the current study suggests that there may not be a difference between types of goals on goal commitment and this is supported by Filby et al (1999). The findings of the present study do reflect results from earlier studies conducted examining goal setting in sport, where many findings were not significant when testing Locke s (1968) goal setting theory. Using the suggestions offered by Kyllo and Landers (1995) of utilizing specific, difficult and time-delineated goals, the primary investigator sought to limit this problem, but other limitations arose making the results nonsignificant. A majority of the limitations of this study are due to the sample utilized. The use of physical education students was a sample of convenience and due to the make up of the sample, obtaining sufficient power was problematic. The sample was comprised of students who wanted to learn racquetball and students that wanted to get enough credits to graduate. This was problematic because of the effort expended in the study by those who wanted to improve racquetball skills could very well be different than those who wanted to graduate. Future studies should utilize random samples and random assignment in a population that would find the task meaningful, because if a task is not meaningful, then there is a greater likelihood that there will not be enough uncertainty to produce differences in anxiety. Some possibilities for increasing the uncertainty in future studies

28 Goal Setting & Anxiety 21 with a like sample would be to link the study to their grade (i.e., meeting with instructors to have performance evaluation in their grade, with the task being a way to have their performance evaluated) or to have other individuals watch participants compete to increase anxiety due to social facilitation. Another limitation of the study due to the sample was the length of classes. The class length was eight weeks making a study longer than five weeks difficult, because a study designed for more than ten meetings put collecting the data for all participants in jeopardy. Although previous research has shown goal setting to be effective in less time (Filby, Maynard, & Graydon, 1999; Zimmerman & Kitsantas, 1996), research conducted similar to this study (Kingston & Hardy, 1997) utilized a much longer time span. Because of the eight week length of class, some students did not finish the study because they missed several classes and could not make up parts of the study they missed or instructors of classes let weeks that were intended to collect data be optional so that data was not collected because students did not have to come to class that week. A third limitation associated with this sampling method springing from sample used was the number of students who could be gathered from each class. Many classes had persons drop out of the class bringing the total number of students that could be used in the study beneath the total number necessary to complete the study. This situation led to a domino effect of limitations, where the duration of the study had to be extended into another semester because the number of participants in each class had shrunk. The shrinking of the participant pool led to the increase of the number of instructors utilized to four instead of one, which could be seen as adding a new intervention after the fact. Furthermore, the number of participants proposed was not gathered because the total time

29 Goal Setting & Anxiety 22 to collect all participants was extending beyond a reasonable time frame. It took just under one year to collect forty participants, after forty-eight were proposed. Therefore the sample size was small, bringing the power of the study into question, but even with limitations on class number, there were ways to increase participation. Some possible ways to would be to link the study to the individual s grade and increase prize money offered. This factor created another large limitation to this study. Because of difficulty in gathering participants, some participants were gathered from summer session classes. These classes had the same number to meetings that regular semesters do but do so in a three-week time frame. This limitation is huge because of the possibility that there are differences between those students who participated in the full semester versus the summer semester. With the many limitations to this study, future research concerning goal setting and anxiety can capitalize on these mistakes and branch out in many different directions. One such direction would be to look at differences in trait anxiety to make sure that each group has the same mixture of individuals who are high and low on trait anxiety. Another would be to standardize the goals of the participants so that everybody participates in setting their own goal but everyone definitively has the same goal type. Although the current study did not reveal any significant findings, the purpose of examining the concept that different types of goals may affect anxiety and performance differently is still worth investigating. The implications are that if there is a difference between the types of goals, then individuals who seek to do their best in sport can be taught different goal setting techniques to help them achieve their ultimate goals. Some

30 Goal Setting & Anxiety 23 important insights for future researchers are to choose appropriate samples and to create a meaningful situation. If these techniques are used and there are significant findings, then a goal setting program that utilizes all types of goals can be used as an effective technique in both increasing performance and positively controlling anxiety.

31 Goal Setting & Anxiety 24 References Bar-Eli, M., Tenenbaum, G., Pie, J. S., Kudar, K., Weinberg, R., & Barak, Y. (1997). Aerobic performance under different goal orientations and different goal conditions. Journal of Sport Behavior, 20, Boyce, B.A. (1990). Effects of goal specificity and goal difficulty upon skill acquisition of a selected shooting task. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 70, Boyce, B. A. (1992). The effects of goal proximity on skill acquisition and retention of a shooting task in a field-based setting. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 14, Boyce, B. A., & Wayda, V. K. (1994). The effects of assigned and self-set goals on task performance. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 16, Burton, D. (1988). Do anxious swimmers swim slower? Reexamining the elusive anxiety performance relationship. Journal of Sport Psychology, 10, Burton, D. (1989a). The impact of goal specificity and task complexity on basketball skill development. The Sport Psychologist, 3, Burton, D. (1989b). Winning isn t everything: Examining the impact of performance goals on collegiate swimmers cognitions and performance. The Sport Psychologist, 3, Burton, D., Naylor, S., & Holliday, B. (2001). Goal setting in sport: Investigating the goal effectiveness paradox. In R. Singer, H. Hausenblas, & C. Janelle (Eds.) Handbook of sport psychology (pp ). New York: John Wiley & Sons.

32 Goal Setting & Anxiety 25 Burton, D., Weinberg, R.S., Yukelson, D., & Weigand, D.A. (1998) The goal effectiveness paradox in sport: Examining the goal practices of collegiate athletes. The Sport Psychologist, 12, Duda, J. L., Chi, L., Newton, M. L., Walling, M. D., & Catley, D. (1995). Task and ego orientation and intrinsic motivation in sport. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 26, Edwards, T. & Hardy, L. (1996). The interactive effects of intensity and direction of cognitive and somatic anxiety and self-confidence upon performance. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 18, Elko, P. K., & Ostrow, A. C. (1991). Effects of a rational-emotive education program on a heightened anxiety levels of female collegiate gymnasts. The Sport Psychologist, 5, Fairall, D. G., & Rodgers, W. M. (1997). The effects of goal-setting method on goal attributes in athletes: A field experiment. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 19, Filby, W. C. D., Maynard, I. W., & Graydon, J. K. (1999). The effect of multiple-goal strategies on performance outcomes in training and competition. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 11, Frierman, S. H., Weinberg, R. S., & Jackson, A. (1990). The relationship between goal proximity and specificity in bowling: A field experiment. The Sport Psychologist, 4, Garland, H. (1985) A cognitive mediation theory of task goals and human performance. Motivation and Emotion, 9,

33 Goal Setting & Anxiety 26 Gould, A., Finch, L.M., & Jackson, S.A. (1993). Coping strategies used by national champion figure skaters. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 64, Hale, B.D., & Whitehouse, A. (1998). The effects of imagery-manipulated appraisal on intensity and direction of competitive anxiety. The Sports Psychologist, 12, Hall, H. K., & Byrne, A. T. J. (1988). Goal setting in sport: Clarifying recent anomalies. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 10, Hall, H. K., Weinberg, R. S., & Jackson, A. (1987). Effects of goal specificity, goal difficulty and information feedback on endurance performance. Journal of Sport Psychology, 9, Hanton, S., & Jones, G. (1995). Antecedents of multidimensional state anxiety in elite competitive swimmers. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 26, Hardy, L., & Parfitt, C.G. (1991). A catastrophe model of anxiety and performance. British Journal of Psychology, 82, Hollingsworth, B. (1975). Effects of performance goals and anxiety on learning a gross motor task. Research Quarterly, 46, Howe, B., & Poole, R. (1992). Goal proximity and achievement motivation of high school boys in a basketball shooting task. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 11, Johnson, S. R., Ostrow, A. C., Perna, F. M., & Etzel, E. F. (1997). The effects of group versus individual goal setting on bowling performance. The Sport Psychologist, 11,