A meta-analytic review of achievement goal orientation correlates in competitive sport: A follow-up to Lochbaum et al. (2016)

Abstract

Recent quantitative research in competitive sport using the Task and Ego Orientations in Sport Questionnaire (TEOSQ) and Perceptions of Success Questionnaire (POSQ) pointed to a potential critical issue that the two questionnaires did not agree across a number of tested hypotheses (Lochbaum, et al., 2016). Thus, the present quantitative review examined whether correlates of the two achievement goal orientations were moderated by the two measures. To achieve this purpose, 772 unique correlates (489 TEOSQ, 283 POSQ; 402 task orientation, 370 ego orientation) from 93 studies spanning 1989-2016 from 32 countries with 26,387 participants were placed into 15 different categories and meta-analyzed. The task goal orientation was significantly and small to moderate in meaningfulness related to adaptive success factors (rw=.29), maladaptive success factors (rw=-.12), desirable behaviors (rw=.28), positive emotions (rw=.35), amotivation (rw=-.13), extrinsic motivation (rw=.20), external regulations (rw=.12), internal regulations (rw=.34), intrinsic motivation (rw=.47), the mastery/task climate (rw=.38), perceived competence (rw=.26), and trait self-esteem (rw=.35). The ego goal orientation was significantly and small in meaningfulness related to adaptive success factors (rw=.10), maladaptive success factors (rw=.12), negative emotions (rw=.11), undesirable behaviors (rw=.23), amotivation (rw=.16), extrinsic motivation (rw=.28), external regulation (rw=.21), intrinsic motivation (rw=.14), performance/ego climate (rw=.28), and perceived competence (rw=.17). The questionnaire measure was a significant moderator for the task goal orientation relationship with desirable behaviors (POSQ rw=.24; TEOSQ rw=.37), internal regulations (POSQ rw=.26; TEOSQ rw=.39), and trait self-esteem (POSQ rw=.45; TEOSQ rw=.32) and for the ego goal orientation relationship with performance/ego climate (POSQ rw=.34; TEOSQ rw=.24). Overall, the extent of the questionnaire type being a concern when examining correlates was fortunately minimal. Yet, differences in the two dominant measures exit. Recommendations for future research examining both the TEOSQ and POSQ were proposed.