A number of contemporary motivational theories were examined in the previous articles in the present Understanding Motivation in Games series. The current article will focus on Goal-Orientation Theory and its application in examining motivation in games.
Goal-Orientation Theory
Goal-orientation theory posits achievement goal orientations influence individuals’ cognitive self-regulation processes toward goal accomplishments (Covington, 2000). Goal orientations are defined as situated orientations or overarching purposes of actions and behaviors. Goal orientations influence interpretation of events, which elicits different cognitive, affective and behavioral consequences. Goal orientations vary across situations and individuals. Two major and contrasting types of achievement goal orientations were identified, namely mastery and performance (Ames 1992). Mastery goals concern learning, understanding, and developing new skills and ability for personal improvement and growth. Mastery goals are often associated with positive outcomes, such as enhanced self-efficacy, persistence, and positive affect. On the other hand, performance goals concern demonstrating skills, ability and success by comparing with others’ ability. Public recognition of achievements is a central focus in performance goal orientations. Performance goals can further be distinguished into performance-approach goals and performance-avoidance goals (Elliot & Harackiewicz, 1996). Performance-approach goals refer to a focus on achieving success and recognition of competence, whereas performance-avoidance goals refer to a focus on avoiding failure and the appearance of incompetence. Performance-approach goals have been found to be associated with persistence and positive affect. In contrast, performance-avoidance goals were found to be associated with low efficacy and anxiety.
Elliot and Church (1997) proposed a hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation (Figure 1).
Figure 1. A hierarchical model of achievement motivation.
In this hierarchical model, motive dispositions (achievement motivation, fear of failure) and perceived competence influence achievement goal adoption, where achievement goals determine achievement-related behaviors (intrinsic motivation, performance). Specifically, achievement motivation is posited to influence the adoption of approach-oriented goals (mastery, performance-approach goals). Fear of failure is posited to influence the adoption of both performance-approach and performance-avoidance goals. Task specific perceived competence acts as an independent antecedent of goal adoptions. High level of perceived competence is hypothesized to influence the adoption of performance-approach and mastery goals whereas low level of perceived competence influences the adoption of performance-avoidance goals. Finally, goal adoptions exert direct influence on achievement-relevant behaviors. Mastery goals are presumed to facilitate intrinsic motivation and with limited impact on performance. While performance-approach goals are suggested to improve performance, and have a null effect on intrinsic motivation, performance-avoidance goals are found to be detrimental to both intrinsic motivation and performance (Figure 2).
Figure 2. The influence of motivational antecedents on goal orientations and motivational outcomes.
GOAL-orientation Theory and Game Motivation Research
Game researchers have applied Goal-Orientation Theory for investigating the impact of mode of play (Plass et al., 2013), enjoyment (Quick & Atkinson, 2014), player psychology (Juul, 2009; Tondello, Arrambide, Ribeiro, Cen, & Nacke, 2019), and performance (Alexiou & Schippers, 2018; Blair, 2011).
In a mixed methods study by Hoffman and Nadelson (2010), factors for influencing motivation and engagement in games were examined among university students. Interviews were conducted to understand perceptions and behaviors of game playing. In addition, four surveys were administered to identify variance among individuals’ goal orientations, affect, need for cognition, and perceptions of engagement and flow. Results indicated that game playing can satisfy recreational, social, and esteem needs. Specifically, game playing can provide a controllable and supportive environment with opportunities for socialization and achieving competence through overcoming challenges, which resulted in feelings of satisfaction, accomplishment, and contentment. Socialization was found to be an important catalyst to play. In addition, predetermined interest and goal attainment were identified as two important antecedents of engagement, whereas goal orientations were found to have insignificant impact on engagement. Authors argued the finding was resulted from two competing and equal motivations that players experienced during game playing, the needs for achievement and socialization. Hoffman and Nadelson concluded games can provide a pleasurable and motivating experience for achieving competence through providing feedback to allow players to learn from mistakes and failures.
In sum, Goal-Orientation Theory allows game researchers and designers to understand how antecedents influence the adoption of different goal orientations and their motivational consequences. It allows games to be designed to facilitate and elicit specific motivational outcomes for enhancing motivation and engagement in games.
References
Alexiou, A., & Schippers, M. C. (2018). Digital game elements, user experience and learning: A conceptual framework. Education and Information Technologies, 23(6), 2545-2567.
Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of educational psychology, 84(3), 261.
Ames, C., & Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Students’ learning strategies and motivation processes. Journal of educational psychology, 80(3), 260.
Blair, L. (2011). The use of video game achievements to enhance player performance, self-efficacy, and motivation.
Covington, M. V. (2000). Goal theory, motivation, and school achievement: An integrative review. Annual review of psychology, 51(1), 171-200.
Elliot, A. J., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (1996). Approach and avoidance achievement goals and intrinsic motivation: A mediational analysis. Journal of personality and social psychology, 70(3), 461.
Hoffman, B., & Nadelson, L. (2010). Motivational engagement and video gaming: A mixed methods study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(3), 245-270.
Juul, J. (2009). Fear of failing? the many meanings of difficulty in video games. The video game theory reader, 2(01), 2009.
Plass, J. L., O’Keefe, P. A., Homer, B. D., Case, J., Hayward, E. O., Stein, M., & Perlin, K. (2013). The impact of individual, competitive, and collaborative mathematics game play on learning, performance, and motivation. Journal of educational psychology, 105(4), 1050.
Quick, J. M., & Atkinson, R. K. (2014). Modeling gameplay enjoyment, goal orientations, and individual characteristics. International Journal of Game-Based Learning (IJGBL), 4(2), 51-77.
Tondello, G. F., Arrambide, K., Ribeiro, G., Cen, A. J. L., & Nacke, L. E. (2019, September). “I don’t fit into a single type”: A Trait Model and Scale of Game Playing Preferences. In IFIP Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 375-395). Springer, Cham.
