Manipulating Achievement Motivation in Physical Education By Manipulating the Motivational Climate

European Journal of Sport Science, vol. 2, issue 1 2002 by Human Kinetics Publishers and the European College of Sport Science Manipulating Achievement Motivation in Physical Education By Manipulating the Motivational Climate Daniel A. Weigand and Shane Burton This study examined the effect of manipulating the motivational climate on achievement goal orientations, satisfaction/boredom, and perceived competence in physical education (PE). Participants were 40 English students (M age = 15.9, SD = 0.51) participating either in an experimental group that included a series of highly task involving lessons, based on the manipulation of Epstein s (18, 19) TARGET structures, or a group receiving the school s existing style of PE lessons. Results of MANOVA and 2 2 (Group Time) mixed factor ANOVAs on the pre- and post-intervention data indicated that students in the mastery climate experienced significantly (all p <.05) higher levels of task orientation and perceptions of competence, and were more satisfied and less bored, post-intervention compared to pre-intervention and compared to the other group at either time. The mastery climate group s ego orientation also significantly decreased from pre- to postintervention, but did not significantly differ from the other group. The findings are discussed with regard to the implications of manipulating the task structure in PE and organized youth sport. Key Words: achievement motivation, motivational climate, goal orientations, youth sport, physical education Key Points: 1. Achievement goal theory suggests that an adaptive approach to motivation (evidenced, in part, through reports of higher amounts of perceived competence and satisfaction and lower amounts of perceived boredom) in sport-related contexts is revealed in individuals who adopt a more task than ego orientation. 2. Motivational climate theory suggests that significant others (e.g., teachers, coaches) can influence the adoption of goal orientations in sport-related contexts through their expectations and promotion of values and beliefs. 3. The manipulation of Epstein s (18, 19) TARGET variables in sport-related contexts may influence the perception of the motivational climate. It has been acknowledged by health and education specialists that positive affective experiences in PE and sport may increase the likelihood of engagement in active lifestyles in later life (32). PE and sport also provides an opportunity for the development of personal responsibility, social

2 Weigand and Burton cooperation, and sport-related skills. It is therefore important to understand the personal and situational factors that determine youngsters motivation in PE and sport because this knowledge should facilitate the structuring of sport-related tasks that are more satisfying and promote physical activity as part of everyone s lifestyle. Achievement Goals Recent research in education and sport (e.g., 1, 2, 4, 11, 12, 16, 17, 21 23, 27) has examined motivation using a social cognitive perspective. This framework suggests that behavioral variations are not manifestations of high or low levels of motivation, but the expression of different achievement goals pursued by individuals. Specifically, individuals internalize a personal definition of achievement in a given situation. They then focus on specific achievement goals in order to meet their specific achievement definition. Nicholls (21 23) suggested that achievement goals represent different conceptions of, and different reasons for, approaching and engaging in achievement activities. They involve different ways of thinking about tasks and the outcomes of tasks. According to Nicholls, overt behavior and the subjective experience of individuals should differ in predictable ways with different goals. He also believed that the primary goal in achievement contexts was the demonstration of ability; specifically, perceptions of success and failure are subjectively defined in accordance with the demonstration of ability. Nicholls proposed that two primary conceptions of ability exist and that two main types of achievement goals could be activated by individuals, depending on the specific conception of ability employed at any given time. In the first conception, task oriented individuals tend to utilize an undifferentiated conception of ability: ability is construed as improvement; levels of ability are self-referenced and dependent upon improvement and learning. Individuals tend to evaluate personal performance to determine whether effort was expended and mastery achieved. A greater gain in mastery of a task would indicate greater perceived competence. The higher the effort needed for mastery, the higher the perceived ability. Objective failure (via normative or direct comparison against others performance) would only signify that the current strategy may not be sufficient for the mastery of the task and may require revising. Therefore, sustained performance is likely, even in the event of objective failure. Furthermore, satisfaction, enjoyment, pride, and a sense of accomplishment is higher when greater effort is exerted. In contrast, ego oriented individuals tend to use a differentiated conception of ability (effort does not equal ability): Ability is perceived as capacity; self-perceptions of ability are demonstrated when outperforming others. In this conception, ego oriented individuals tend to view effort and ability as being inversely related: High effort implies low ability and low effort which leads to success implies high ability. In addition, it is assumed that ego oriented individuals with lower perceptions of ability will either participate in easy tasks, in order to maintain a level of perceived competence by achieving success with little effort, or withdraw effort in the face of objective failure. In contrast, if perceptions of competence remain high, adaptive achievement strategies (e.g., satisfaction, enjoyment, persistence) should ensue. As task and ego are orthoginal

Manipulating Motivation 3 orientations, it is possible to be higher or lower on both or higher on one while lower on the other; moreover, it is very likely that many individuals display moderately strong goal orientations and therefore do not score highly on either dimension. Research on goal orientations in sport-related contexts has revealed a consistent pattern of relationships. For example, in PE (e.g., 26, 28, 29, 33), higher task orientation has been shown to relate to a belief that success is due to greater effort, interest, and cooperation, and the perceived purposes of PE are to increase self-esteem, master tasks, and learn to cooperate. In contrast, higher ego orientation was related to a belief that success was due to superior ability and deception, and the purposes of PE are to enhance self-esteem and social status. As a consequence of the influence that achievement goals have upon individuals motivation, researchers have begun to examine individual variations in the adoption of these goals. Motivational Climate Initial work in this area suggests that the development and adoption of task and/or ego orientations occur as a result of both dispositional and situational criteria (e.g., 2, 23). Young children seemed to be exclusively task oriented, as the ability to understand that effort does not equal ability requires cognitive maturation (23). Thus, it is not until late childhood that individuals have the opportunity to develop an ego orientation. This maturational process allows an understanding to develop that effort does not equal ability. However, that does not mean that all individuals will then choose to see ability-based comparison as the only way to define success. Some individuals will continue to be task oriented and view success primarily in terms of self-referenced improvement and effort; others will choose to view both ability-based comparisons and self-reference mastery as success determinants. What is happening is that during late childhood, individuals become susceptible to situational influences and interactions with significant others such as parents, coaches, teachers, sport heroes, and sport scientists (see 34 for a review on the relative influence of significant others). In this way the adoption of goal orientations occurs when children respond to explicit expectations, demands, and rewards. If emphasis is placed on effort, improvement, cooperation, and self-referenced goals, then a task involving (i.e., mastery) climate develops (2). In such a climate, individuals typically adopt adaptive achievement strategies such as working hard, selecting challenging tasks, and task persistence. In contrast, if emphasis is placed on social comparison, winning competitions, and other-referenced goals, then an ego involving (i.e., performance) climate develops. In this case, individuals often adopt maladaptive achievement strategies if perceptions of competence are low. Research in PE (e.g., 6, 9, 20, 24, 28, 31) has revealed that a perceived mastery climate relates to higher task orientation, greater feelings of satisfaction and less boredom, higher perceived ability and intrinsic motivation, the belief that effort and ability are causes of success, and a more positive attitude toward PE. In contrast, a perceived performance climate has been related to higher ego orientation, less enjoyment, greater boredom, the belief that ability leads to success, and negatively related to the belief that success was due to effort and a positive attitude toward PE. TARGET Several structural features of the achievement context have been identified as influencing a wide range of motivational processes, which define the motivational climate of a situation. Epstein (18,

4 Weigand and Burton 19) established TARGET to represent the task, authority, recognition, grouping, evaluation, and time structures of achievement situations. According to Ames (2), TARGET variables can be manipulated by teachers to influence the perception of mastery and performance climates. In mastery climates, students work on different tasks and at their own ability level; students are encouraged and/or helped to set realistic, shortterm, self-referenced goals. Moreover, activities are designed for variety, individual challenge, and active involvement; cooperation is encouraged, more than competition. Students in these situations develop a sense of their own competence that is not dependent upon social norms, and there is less opportunity for social comparison. Consequently, students in mastery climates tend to develop a task orientation. Conversely, students in performance climates tend to work on a common task, usually in a competitive environment, where success is considered to be based on ability comparisons. These tasks induce an ego involvement, as performance differences are perceived to be due to differing levels of ability. The authority structure of learning refers to student involvement in the decision making process, the extent to which individuals can make choices concerning activities. When students in mastery climates are allowed to make some of the decisions about their lessons (e.g., choosing a task from a list of possible options), intrinsic motivation is increased. Furthermore, permitting students to make decisions promotes leadership, self-management, and self-monitoring skills. This also helps facilitate a task orientation. On the other hand, when all the decisions are made by the teacher, as is the tendency in performance climates, students are not given opportunities to develop leadership, self-management, and self-monitoring skills. In addition, this tends to foster an ego orientation. Ames also suggests that the reasons for recognition, and the opportunities for and distribution of rewards, is an extremely important part of the motivational climate. In mastery climates, the focus is on individual effort, knowledge, and skill development. Recognition is based on individual progress and improvement (equal opportunities for recognition are assured if based on self-referenced goals). In addition, rewards should be distributed in private, whenever possible. If recognition is appropriately provided, task orientation is more likely to develop. However, if recognition is based on individual ability/knowledge comparing individuals against others, or comparing one group against another, as often happens in a performance climate, then ego orientation is more likely to develop. In mastery climates, small groups or working alone is preferred to large groups. The use of flexible and heterogeneous grouping arrangements limits ability comparisons and therefore promotes task orientation. Ideally, students should be working alone pursuing self-referenced goals. In contrast, in performance climates, teachers tend to use large groups where social comparison is more obvious and ego orientation is promoted. According to Ames, evaluation in mastery climates uses criteria of individual progress, improvement, and task mastery. If students are working toward self-referenced goals, then they

Manipulating Motivation 5 could be involved in self-evaluation. Ames also suggests that evaluation should be made in private. Thus, teachers in mastery climates often use private feedback systems based on individual skill/knowledge development, which tends to facilitate task orientation. In contrast, evaluation in performance climates is based on ability comparison, which tends to be public, facilitating social comparison and ego orientation. The final aspect of Epstein s TARGET approach implies that time is an important structural component of achievement motivation. Ames suggests that mastery climates provide opportunities and time for improvement (i.e., time for practice). If each of the TARGET variables above is appropriately structured, students should have ample time to learn because success will be individually based, and self-improvement and mastery will be self-managed and monitored to promote the best use of time. Obviously, if not enough time is given for students to learn, they will not learn enough. Performance climates, due to their use of large groups, common tasks, and competition, often fail to provide sufficient time for all to learn. Usually, what happens is that individuals with higher ability tend to learn more than those with lower ability who tend to get frustrated with the lack of time to learn. Research in PE (e.g., 8, 20, 25, 28, 30) has shown that manipulation of TARGET variables can influence goal orientation as well as achievement-related cognition and affect. For example, Treasure (30) manipulated these structures in the introduction of basic soccer skills in PE. The results indicated that students who perceived a mastery climate manifested a significantly more adaptive pattern of achievement cognitions and affective responses than those who perceived a performance climate. The students in the mastery climate indicated that they preferred engaging in more challenging tasks, believed success was the result of motivation and effort, and experienced more satisfaction with the activity than did students who participated in the performance climate. Children who participated in the performance climate also reported that deception was the key to success. Papaioannou and Kouli (25) manipulated the structure of the PE context to be highly task involving. A combination of process and cooperative goals made students perceive a higher mastery and lower performance climate. The results indicated that more positive emotional experiences of students should be expected from a higher mastery and lower performance lesson. The mastery climate was also a positive predictor of loss of self-consciousness, consistent with Duda s (13) suggestion that task oriented individuals are intrinsically motivated and a task involving climate facilitates interest in the activity. Escartí and Gutiérrez (20) assessed the effect of a motivational climate upon PE students motivation and intention to practice physical activity or sport. The results indicated that a mastery, rather than performance, climate had an influence, directly or indirectly, on task orientation, intrinsic motivation, perceived competence, satisfaction, enjoyment, and the intention to practice physical activity or sport. The performance climate was related to ego orientation and tension-pressure and negatively related to enjoyment, perceived competence, and interest.

6 Weigand and Burton Finally, Cecchini et al. (8) examined the effects of manipulating the motivational climate in PE upon enjoyment, perceived ability, effort, and pre- and post-competition anxiety. They found that a mastery climate was linked with enjoyment, perceived ability, and effort, as well as to precompetition anxiety. In contrast, a performance climate was associated with post-competition anxiety. In summary, achievement goal theory suggests that an adaptive approach to motivation (evidenced, in part, through reports of higher amounts of perceived competence and satisfaction and lower amounts of perceived boredom) in PE is revealed in individuals who adopt a more task than ego orientation. Moreover, motivational climate theory suggests that teachers can influence the adoption of goal orientations in PE through their expectations and promotion of values and beliefs. Finally, the manipulation of TARGET variables in PE may influence the perception of the motivational climate (e.g., 8, 20, 25, 28, 31). However, what has not been assessed is how a mastery climate compares to an existing PE climate. Although education systems (e.g., the National Curriculum in England) often promote the use of structures that seem to fulfill some, if not all, of the positive aspects of TARGET, in practice the reality may not match the ideal. Previous studies in PE have manipulated the motivational climate to be either mastery or performance (or both), yet no research to date has compared a manipulated climate to a non-manipulated one. It was therefore the purpose of this study to compare the effects of a manipulated mastery climate against an existing PE climate in a group of English adolescents. In line with theory and previous research, it was hypothesized that the students in the mastery climate would report higher levels of task orientation, perceived competence, and satisfaction (and less boredom) post-intervention compared to pre-intervention. In contrast, students in the existing group would not report any changes in their achievement goal orientations, perceived competence, or satisfaction, from pre- to post-intervention. This stability in perceptions for the existing group was expected due to casual observations, which revealed that the climate appeared to be neither highly task nor ego involving. Method Subjects The subjects were 32 male and 8 female students (M age = 15.9, SD = 0.51) attending PE lessons in a comprehensive school in the east of England. Students had participated in the school s existing PE program for at least 2 years (M = 2.4, SD = 0.36). Measures Goal Orientations. In order to assess students orientations toward adopting task and ego goals, a modified PE version of the Task and Ego Orientation in Sport Questionnaire (TEOSQ; 33) was employed. Students were asked to indicate their proneness toward task and ego goals by reporting the degree of their agreement with 8 items reflecting task (e.g., I learn a new skill, and it makes me want to practice more. ) and 8 items reflecting ego (e.g., I can do better than my friends. ) orientations. The statements followed the stem: I feel most successful in physical education when... Responses were indicated on a 5-point Likert-type scale, ranging from 1

Manipulating Motivation 7 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Total scores were calculated for each scale to aid in the graphic presentation of the results (see Figure 1). The modified TEOSQ has been shown to be reliable and consistent with both school aged (33) and British children (14). Internal consistency in this study was satisfactory for both the task (alpha =.72) and ego sub-scales (alpha =.78). Perceived Competence. The children were asked to indicate their perception of competence in PE relative to their classmates on a 5-point Likert-type scale, ranging from 1 (one of the lowest) to 5 (one of the highest). Although this requires students to make comparisons to others, Figure 1 Achievement goal orientations, satisfaction/boredom, and perceived ability, pre- to post-intervention.

8 Weigand and Burton perceptions of competence according to Nicholls (21 23), can represent achieved task mastery. Thus, task oriented individuals with higher perceptions of competence are comparing their level of task mastery with others. Satisfaction/Boredom. The subjects responded to an 8-item scale that assessed their affective responses to PE. Duda and Nicholls (15) developed two subscales to assess satisfaction/enjoyment (five items; e.g., I find physical education interesting. ) and boredom (three items; e.g., I usually wish this lesson would end quickly. ). The statements followed the stem: During class... Responses were indicated on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Total scores were again calculated to aid in the graphic presentation of the data. The internal consistency was satisfactory for both the satisfaction/enjoyment (alpha =.84) and boredom subscales (alpha =.78). Procedure Approval and informed consent was obtained from the university s Ethics Committee, the school s Headmaster, the PE teacher, and all subjects. During debriefing, special care was taken to explain the treatment condition and the specific manipulations of the intervention. It was also explained why precise details of the manipulation were not disclosed pre-intervention. Subjects were randomly assigned to either the mastery climate group or the existing group (20 per group). Ten 1-hour lessons, over a 5-week period, were designed to develop soccer skills in the fundamental techniques of running with the ball, changing direction, dribbling, passing and control, heading, and shooting, as outlined in the National Curriculum for PE. The same skills were taught to both groups. Passing and control was taught in the first two sessions, running with the ball in the third session, dribbling was taught in Sessions 4 and 5, changing direction taught in Session 6, tackling in Session 7, shooting in Sessions 8 and 9, with all skills being emphasized in the final session. The only difference between groups was the structure of the lessons. (A copy of all lesson plans is available from the first author.) The motivational climate of the experimental group was manipulated using the TARGET structures developed by Epstein (18, 19) and Ames (2): (a) Different tasks were set per student dependent on his/her developmental level. (b) The authority structure for the task treatment group was autonomy related, in that choices of tasks and decision making opportunities were available to the students. Subjects could choose the tasks they wanted to learn (e.g., at the beginning of the intervention period the instructor listed a range of skills, and the children identified the ones they wanted to learn). Special attention was made to give more responsibility to lower achieving students. (c) Recognition was available to all and based on improvement and effort rather than performance. (d) Students worked on individual tasks so that their attainments were neither positively nor negatively related to others attainments, but based on personal improvement; however, when individual tasks were impractical, small group, cooperative tasks were set. (e) Evaluation was based on personal improvement, progress towards individual goals, participation, and effort, and was provided in private. (f) The teacher spent equal amounts of time with the students regardless of their level of ability, and because the tasks were individually

Manipulating Motivation 9 set, there was sufficient time to learn. (Detailed examples of each manipulation are available from the first author.) All lessons for both groups were delivered by the same teacher who was given the lesson plans in advance and supervised throughout the experiment by the researchers and the school s PE teacher. Effort was made to minimize experimenter bias wherever possible. Students completed the questionnaires in large groups immediately prior to the first lesson and immediately after the final lesson. All questionnaires were administered by the PE teacher and required approximately 15 min to complete. Results The descriptive statistics for task and ego goal orientations, perceived competence, satisfaction, and boredom, are presented in Table 1 and Figure 1. MANOVA results indicated there was a significant multivariate effect, F 10,29 = 31.23, p <.01. The significance level for subsequent 2 2 (Time Group) mixed factor ANOVAs with repeated measures of each dependent variable was set at p <.05; all p values therefore will be presented exactly. For task orientation, results revealed a significant interaction F 1,38 = 48.84, p =.00, as well as a main effect for time, F 1,38 = 30.00, p =.00. However, the main effect for group was not significant, F 1,38 = 3.54, p =.06. For ego orientation, results revealed a significant interaction F 1,38 = 34.45, p =.00, as well as a main effect for time, F 1,38 = 21.16, p =.00. However, the main effect for group was not significant, F 1,38 = 0.39, p =.53. For perceived competence, results revealed a significant interaction F 1,38 = 34.23, p =.00, a main effect for time, F 1,38 = 16.77, p =.00, and a main effect for group, F 1,38 = 4.83, p =.03. For perceived satisfaction, results revealed a significant interaction F 1,38 = 111.47, p =.00, as well as a main effect for time, F 1,38 = 101.56, p =.00. However, the main effect for group was not significant, F 1,38 = 2.30, p =.138. For perceived boredom, results revealed a significant interaction F 1,38 = 66.86, p =.00, as well as a main effect for time, F 1,38 = 9.62, p =.00. However, the main effect for group was not significant, F 1,38 = 3.14, p =.08. Table 1 Means and Standard Deviations By Pre- and Post-intervention Groups Group Experimental group (n = 20) Control group (n = 20) M SD M SD Pre-intervention Task orientation 23.55 9.46 23.50 8.72 Ego orientation 21.85 10.73 22.85 9.39 Perceived competence 3.40 1.31 3.20 0.95 Satisfaction/enjoyment 16.55 4.47 16.30 6.27 Boredom 7.60 2.58 7.70 3.01 Post-intervention Task orientation 31.80 5.80 22.50 8.08 Ego orientation 20.20 9.75 23.05 9.24 Perceived competence 4.25 0.78 3.05 1.05 Satisfaction/enjoyment 20.85 3.23 16.20 6.02 Boredom 5.60 2.06 8.60 3.43

10 Weigand and Burton Discussion The results of the MANOVA and 2 2 (Time Group) mixed factor ANOVAs revealed students in the mastery climate experienced significantly higher levels of task orientation and perceived competence, and were more satisfied and less bored, post-intervention compared to pre-intervention and compared to the other group at either time. The mastery climate group s ego orientation also significantly decreased from pre- to post-intervention, but did not significantly differ from the other group. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of a manipulated mastery climate against an existing PE climate in a group of English adolescents. In line with theory and previous research (e.g., 2, 6, 8, 9, 20, 23 25, 28, 30, 31), it was hypothesized that the students in the mastery climate would report higher levels of task orientation, perceived competence, and satisfaction (and less boredom) post-intervention compared to pre-intervention. In contrast, students in the existing group would not report any changes in their achievement goal orientation, perceived competence, or satisfaction, from pre- to post-intervention. The findings support the hypotheses. The results are consistent with previous theory and research in that the motivational climate successfully influenced students goal orientation and achievement-related cognition and affect. By manipulating TARGET structures established by Epstein and Ames, a PE teacher was able to construct a mastery climate, in which the demonstration of ability was based on effort and learning, that was internalized as an increase in task orientation. The purpose of the study was not to reduce ego orientation. Current achievement motivation research suggests that goal orientations are orthogonal (e.g., 23), and therefore an increase in levels of task orientation should not necessarily decrease levels of ego orientation. Contrary to this, present results suggest that inducing a mastery climate may also produce a decrease in the subjects ego orientation. Although this would appear to be an unexpected benefit of the manipulation, because a decrease in ego orientation lessens the possibility for maladaptive behavior (21 23), this is possibly an adverse finding. Ames and Archer (5) suggest that individuals with both a high task and high ego orientation may have the best motivation, as they focus on both mastery and the demonstration of ability. Further research needs to be conducted that investigates optimal goal profiles in PE. The motivational climate of the control group was not manipulated and, as expected, the goal orientations of these subjects were not significantly influenced by the existing style of teaching. This may serve as a manipulation check (i.e., a check that the experimental group received an intervention while the control group did not), or at least confirmation that the existing style of teaching was not promoting a mastery or performance climate sufficiently enough to change goal orientations. Perceived competence has paramount importance in achievement strivings (21 23). Consequently, one of the aims of the present study was to ascertain the effect that manipulation

Manipulating Motivation 11 of the achievement context to be highly task involving has on perceived competence. It was hypothesized that children in the experimental group would increase their perceptions of competence, but those in the control group would not. The results indicate that the formation of a mastery climate increased students levels of perceived competence. That is, when the demonstration of ability was based on personal improvement and effort, perceived competence increased. This supports Nicholls (21 23) belief that task oriented individuals evaluate personal performance to determine competence. Positive affective experiences are also vital for continued motivation in sport (e.g., 27). Therefore, the finding that students in the experimental group were significantly more satisfied (and less bored) with PE post- rather than pre-intervention has great importance. Previous research (e.g., 6, 20, 31) has indicated that a task orientation is related to feelings of satisfaction/enjoyment. Consequently, it is apparent that the increase in positive affect experienced by the students in this study was a result of being highly task involved. The increase in positive affect supports Nicholls (21 23) contention that task oriented individuals focus on mastery and learning, and that they experience striving for achievement as an end in itself. One possible practical implication of these findings relates to PE and sport involvement. Although research suggests that sport is experienced as a valued activity during childhood and adolescence (e.g., 7, 10), a large number of individuals discontinue their involvement in sport during this time. Ames and Archer (3) suggest that this attrition is a consequence of an overemphasis on competition. The relationship between perceived ability, satisfaction/enjoyment, and goal orientations may help to explain this attrition. It is possible that low perceived ability ego involved children discontinue in sport because they do not reach their goal of ability demonstration. It seems clear that in sport and PE, when the demonstration of ability is based on out-performing others, that ego involved children with a low perceived ability will not stay involved in a context in which positive evaluation is restricted to those who can outperform others. Therefore, structuring achievement contexts so as not to be based on the demonstration of ability will benefit those with a low perceived competence. The results of the present study demonstrate that the facilitation of a mastery climate fosters a significantly higher level of perceived competence in PE. Future research needs to assess this in youth sport. This study has two primary limitations that should be kept in mind when interpreting the results. First, although every effort was made to limit potential bias, this was a field study, not a highly controlled laboratory study. Therefore, the potential for confounding variables is higher than it would have been in a laboratory. Second, motivational climate was not objectively measured to verify the manipulation or the lack of change evident in the existing group. Currently, no objective measure of the climate exists, although current research (35) is attempting to develop one. Thus, there is a need for future research to objectively confirm manipulation of the climate to be mastery or performance. Future research also needs to be conducted longitudinally. Ames and Archer (5) suggest that positive affect towards the achievement context is enhanced by the number of years individuals

12 Weigand and Burton have had task involving experiences. Consequently, longitudinal studies are needed to assess potential fluctuations in goal orientations over time. Socialization influences also change over time (7), so PE teachers influence may differ at different developmental stages. Research in sport settings other than PE is also required. It was identified by Treasure (30) that manipulation of the task structures in a sport environment will be harder than in PE situations. This is because of the aim of sport is usually to win. It might therefore be difficult to induce a task involving climate for individuals in competitive sport, where the focus is more on winning than it is in PE. However, Ames and Archer (4) have stated that a motivational climate that is both highly task and ego involving may result in the greatest achievement motivation. Consequently, it may be best to induce a motivational climate that is highly task and ego involving. Future research needs to establish whether this can be achieved and the effect it has on affect, behavior, and cognition. Conclusion In conclusion, it has been well documented that achievement goal orientations play an important role in achievement behavior. Consequently, researchers have given paramount attention to the individual and situational variables which may influence affect, behavior, and cognition. Furthermore, researchers have been successful in manipulating the achievement context within PE. The present study extends this line of research by comparing a manipulated climate to an existing one and finding that a mastery climate promotes the adoption of a task orientation (and less ego orientation) as well as adaptive cognition and affect. References 1. Ames C. 1984. Competitive, cooperative, and individualistic goal structures: a motivational analysis. In: Ames R, Ames C, editors. Research on motivation in education: student motivation. New York: Academic Press. p. 177-207. 2. Ames C. 1992. Achievement goals, motivational climate, and motivational processes. In: Roberts GC, editor. Motivation in sport and exercise. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. p. 161-76. 3. Ames C, Archer J. 1987. Mother s beliefs about the role of ability and effort in school learning. J Educ Psychol 18: 409-414. 4. Ames C, Archer J. 1988. Achievement goals in the classroom: students learning strategies and motivational processes. J Educ Psychol 80:260-67. 5. Ames C, Archer J. 1990. Longitudinal effects of mastery goal structure on students learning strategies and motivation. Unpublished manuscript, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. 6. Carpenter PJ, Morgan K. 1999. Motivational climate, personal goal perspectives, and cognitive and affective responses in physical education classes. Eur J Phys Educ 4:31-41. 7. Carr S, Weigand DA, Hussey W. 1999. The relative influence of parents, teachers, and peers on children s and adolescent s achievement and intrinsic motivation and perceived competence in PE. Journal of Sport Pedagogy 5(1):28-51. 8. Cecchini J, González C, Carmona Á, Arruza J, Escartí A, Balagué G. 2001. The influence of the teacher of physical education on intrinsic motivation, self-confidence, anxiety, and pre- and post-competition mood states. Eur J Sport Sci 1(4). Available at <www.humankinetics.com/ejss>.

Manipulating Motivation 13 9. Christodoulidis T, Papaioannou A, Digelidis N. 2001. A year-long intervention to change motivational climate and attitudes towards exercise in Greek senior high school. Eur J Sport Sci 1(4). Available at <www.humankinetics.com/ejss>. 10. Csikszentmihalyi M, Larson R. 1984. Being adolescent. New York: Basic. 11. Duda JL. 1992. Motivation in sport settings: a goal perspective approach. In: Roberts GC, editor. Motivation in sport and exercise. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. p. 57-91. 12. Duda JL. 1993. Goals: a social cognitive approach to the study of achievement motivation in sport. In: Singer RN, Murphey M, Tennant LK, editors. Handbook on research in sport psychology. New York: Macmillan. p. 421-36. 13. Duda JL. 1996. Maximizing motivation in sport and physical education among children and adolescents: the case for greater task involvement. Quest 48:290-302. 14. Duda JL, Fox KR, Biddle SJH, Armstrong N. 1992. Children s achievement goals and beliefs about success in sport. Br J Educ Psychol 62:313-23. 15. Duda JL, Nicholls JG. 1992. Dimensions of achievement motivation in schoolwork and sport. J Educ Psychol 84:290-99. 16. Dweck CS. 1986. Motivational processes affecting learning. Am Psychol 41:1040-48. 17. Dweck CS, Leggett EL. 1988. A social cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychol Rev 95:1-18. 18. Epstein J. 1988. Effective schools or effective students? Dealing with diversity. In: Haskins R, MacRae B, editors. Policies for America s public schools. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. p. 89-126. 19. Epstein J. 1989. Family structures and student motivation: a developmental perspective. In Ames C, Ames R, editors. Research on motivation in education (Vol. 3). New York: Academic Press. p. 259-95. 20. Escartí A, Gutiérrez M. 2001. Influence of the motivation climate of physical education classes on the intention to practice physical activity or sport. Eur J Sport Sci 1(4). Available at <www.humankinetics.com/ejss>. 21. Nicholls JG. 1984. Achievement motivation: conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice, and performance. Psychol Rev 91:328-46. 22. Nicholls JG. 1989. The competitive ethos and democratic education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 23. Nicholls JG. 1992. The general and the specific in the development and expression of achievement motivation. In: Roberts GC, editor. Motivation in sport and exercise. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. p. 31-56. 24. Papaioannou A. 1995. Differential perceptual and motivational patterns when different goals are adopted. J Sport Exerc Psychol 17:18-34. 25. Papaioannou A, Kouli O. 1999. The effect of task structure, perceived motivational climate and goal orientations on students task involvement and anxiety. J Appl Sport Psychol 11:51-71. 26. Papaioannou A, McDonald AI. 1993. Goal perspectives and purposes of physical education as perceived by Greek adolescents. Physical Education Review 16:41-48. 27. Roberts G. 1992. Motivation in sport and exercise: conceptual constraints and convergence. In: Roberts G, editor. Motivation in sport and exercise. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. p. 3-29. 28. Solomon MA. 1996. Impact of motivational climate on students behaviors and perceptions in a physical education setting. J Educ Psychol 88:731-38. 29. Solomon MA, Boone J. 1993. The impact of student goal orientations in physical education classes. Res Q Exerc Sport 64:418-424. 30. Treasure D. 1993. A social-cognitive approach to understanding children s achievement behavior, cognitions, and affect in competitive sport [doctoral dissertation]. Urbana-Champaign, IL: University of Illinois. 31. Treasure DC. 1997. Perceptions of the motivational climate and elementary school children s cognitive and affective Response. J Sport Exerc Psychol 19:278-90.

14 Weigand and Burton 32. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 1996. Physicalactivity and health: a report of the Surgeon General. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. 33. Walling MD, Duda JL. 1995. Goals and their associations with beliefs about success in and perceptions of the purposes of physical education. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 14:140-56. 34. Weigand DA, Carr S, Petherick C, Taylor A. 2001. Motivational climate in sport and physical education: the role of significant others. Eur J Sport Sci 1(4). Available at <www.humankinetics.com/ejss>. 35. Weigand D, Sproule J, Morgan K, Carpenter P. Manuscript in preparation. Development of an objective, computer-based measure of motivational climate in PE and sport. Acknowledgment This investigation is based on an undergraduate honors degree study completed by Shane Burton under the supervision of Dan Weigand. About the Authors Daniel A. Weigand, Ph.D. <dweigand@dmu.ac.uk>, is a Principal Lecturer of Sport and Exercise Psychology in the Department of Sport Sciences at De Montfort University (UK). His primary research areas are assessing the effectiveness of mental skills training and evaluating socialization influences on achievement motivation in sport and exercise. Shane Burton is a graduate of De Montfort University (UK) and is currently serving in the British Royal Air Force.