End game effects: Considering the potential benefit of using performance-avoidance goals within an academic achievement goal context

Performance-avoidance goals consistently predict negative outcomes in academic achievement situations. These avoidance goals, however, may not be maladaptive for all students all of the time. For students who are trying to improve their grades after prior poor performance, avoidance goals may help to increase test performance. The current study examined the conditions that may be necessary for performance-avoidance goals to result in increased scores and effort. In this study, participants were provided with an argument evaluation learning tutorial and then provided with false (positive or negative) feedback after being tested. Participants were then assigned a goal (performance-approach, performance-avoidance, or no-goal) to adopt for the rest of the evaluated test session. It was predicted that, among participants in the negative feedback condition, those who were also assigned a performance-avoidance goal would score higher relative to others in the no-goal condition. It was predicted that participants who received positive feedback and were assigned a performance-approach goal would score higher relative to participants in either of the other conditions. Individual differences in regulatory focus were also examined. For outcome performance on the test, the feedback and assigned goal manipulation alone was not found to significantly impact test performance. These results were then further examined by including the individual difference variable prevention focus to predict performance. In this analysis, a marginally significant three-way interaction was found. For participants in the performance-avoidance goal condition who reported lower levels of prevention focus, the type of feedback influenced performance. Specifically, performance was higher for individuals who received negative as opposed to positive feedback when paired with a performance-avoidance goal. It was also hypothesized that after receiving negative feedback, participants assigned a performance-avoidance goal would spend more time on the extra credit task relative to participants not assigned a goal. Among the participants who chose to do the extra credit, the achievement context did effect effort. Specifically, after receiving negative feedback, participants who were encouraged to endorse performance-avoidance goals spent more time on the extra credit opportunity than did participants who were assigned to the no-goal condition. The implications and limitations of these findings are discussed.