Goals and achievement orientations of anglo and mexican-american adolescents in sport and the classroom

mremoriowl Journal of hrrrculrural R~larronr. Vol. 9. pp. 131-150. 1985 Printed in the USA. All rights reserved.

0147-1767/8553.00+.00 Copyright 0 1985 Pergamon Press Ltd.

GOALS AND ACHIEVEMENT ORIENTATIONS OF ANGLO AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN ADOLESCENTS IN SPORT AND THE CLASSROOM

JOAN

L. DUDA

Department of Kinesiology University of California, Los Angeles llrepurpose of this study was to analyze the definitions of success and ABSTRACT. failure (achievement goals) and preferred meons to goal attainment (achievement orientations) among male and female Anglo and Mexican-American high school students Jathletes in sport and the classroom. Based on a recent conceptualization of achievement motivation, it was assumed that definitions of success andfailure could be equated to personal characteristics, behaviors, or outcomes and reflect an emphasis on either effort or ability. Further, it was assumed that there are two major achievement orientations: In one, the means to goal attainment entoil social comparison; in the second, goal attainment isprocessed according to mastery criteria. Results revealed cultural and sex difSerences in athletic goals. Anglo males were more likely to define sport success in terms of ability while Anglo females and MexicanAmerican athletes tended to equate athletic success to the demonstration of effort. The reverse was true for sport failure-Anglo males emphasized low effort while the other groups stressed low ability. Variations in preferred achievement orientations were also revealed. For example, in the athletic setting, females showed the least preference for sport success which reflected on the individual and involved social comparison. Males indicated the least preference for individual-oriented, social comparison-based athletic failure.

The concept of achievement motivation has been applied frequently in the psychological literature to account for behaviors of different people in diverse contexts. The major theoretical perspectives (i.e., Atkinson, 1964; McClelland, 1961; Weiner, 1974) which have laid the basis for this extensive body of research have recently been labelled as ethnocentric and biased toward white, middle class, American males (Frieze, Francis, & Hanusa, in press; Maehr, 1974a, 1974b; Maehr & Nicholls, 1980; Parsons & Goff, 1980). Moreover, past theories of achievement motivation have been criticized in This research was made possible by grants from the Sigma Xi Research Society and the Graduate College at the University of Illinois. Special thanks go to Glyn Roberts, Marty Maehr, and Douglas Kleiber for their constructive criticisms of an earlier draft of this manuscript. Requests for reprints should be sent to Dr. Joan L. Duda, Department of Kinesiology. University of California, Los Angeles, 405 Hilgard Avenue, Los Angeles. CA 90024. 131

132

Joan L. Duda

respect to their cross-situational generalizability (Maehr, 1974a, 1974b). According to Maehr and Nicholls (1980), previous work on achievement motivation has not highlighted the point that a person’s achievement behavior is directly related to his/ her social background and the immediate social context. Specifically, in the view of these theorists, achievement goals and the preferred means to attain those goals are situationally and culturally determined. The contention that achievement motivation is a function of situational and social factors (Maehr & Nicholls, 1980) has been reinforced in studies focused on the school (Frieze, Shomo, & Francis, 1979), business (Parsons & Goff, 1980), and sports settings (Ewing, 198 1; Spink & Maehr, 1980; Spink & Roberts, 1980). Maehr and Nicholls’ (1980) perspective on achievement motivation has also received preliminary support from comparative studies. Using a semantic differential methodology, Fyans and colleagues (Fyans, Salili, Maehr, & Desai, 1983) found differences in the subjective meanings of achievement-related concepts such as “success” and “failure” among samples from the United States, Iran, Japan, and Thailand. Freeman and others (Freeman, Romney, Ferreira-Pinto, Klein, & Smith, 1981), on the basis of multidimensional scaling procedures, report distinctions between the definitions of achievement held by Guatemalan and U.S. males. In two studies focused on cultural and contextual differences in conceptions of success and failure, Duda and Allison found variations in the perspectives on achievement emphasized by black and white students (Duda & Allison, 1981) and Navajo adolescents (Allison, 1979, 1980; Allison & Duda, 1982; Duda, 1980). In more recent cross-cultural work with Navajo and Anglo’ high school students specifically, Duda (198 1) proposed a new theoretical conceptualization of the motivation to achieve which is held to more sensitively account for cultural, sex-linked, and situational differences. Extending models of achievement motivation suggested by Maehr and Nicholls (1980) and Nicholls (1980), Duda’s (198 1) conceptualization assumed that individuals emphasize different conceptions of success and failure in different situations. These concepts of success and failure are held to be the focus of achievementoriented behavior and can be equated to socially-valued characteristics, actions, or outcome/ products. It is assumed that in an achievement setting, a person will behave in a manner which will secure subjectively defined success and/ or avoid subjectively defined failure. This new perspective on achievement motivation, as suggested by Duda (1981). also assumed that individuals stress different social-psychological processes or means to goal attainment by which they try to meet the focus of their achievement behavior. These processes are referred to as achievement orientations and it is argued that there are two major types (see Nicholls, ‘The word “Anglo” is the common regional members of white, mainstream society.

term in the southwest

United States to describe

Goals and Achievement

Orientations

I33

1980). In the first, labeled ego-involvement, judgements of goal attainment are based on social comparison. Success (or failure) in an ego-involved situation means demonstrating that one possesses more (or less) of a desirable characteristic, behavior, or outcome than significant others. In the second achievement orientation, referred to as task-involvement, goal attainment is mastery-based. That is, in task-involved situations, perceptions of success or failure are made in reference to the person’s own capabilities or the requirements of the task. It is assumed in this model of achievement motivation (Duda, 1981) that ego-involved or task-involved achievement orientations can be defined in reference to the individual or group. In the present study, this new approach to the study of achievement motivation is employed to examine possible cultural and sex-linked distinctions in perceived goals and preferred achievement orientations between Mexican-American and Anglo males and females in sport and the classroom. Emphasizing standards of excellence, success and failure evaluations, and personal responsibility for behavior (Maehr, 1974b), both the academic and athletic contexts have long been considered to be achievement situations. Importantly, there are significant theoretical and methodological reasons to investigate possible differences in motivational perspective in these two achievement settings between Mexican-American and Anglo adolescents and males and females.

THE MEXICAN-AMERICAN

CULTURE

Past research on the Mexican-American has characterized this ethnic group as being low in the need to achieve (Anderson & Johnson, 1968; Heller, 1966; Madsen, 1965; McClelland, 1961; Ramirez & Price-Williams, 1976; Ramirez, Taylor, & Peterson, 1971), low in educational achievement and performance (Carter, 1982a; Stoddard, 1973), and high in anxiety about achieving in American classrooms (Rodriguez, 1982; Willig, Harnisch, Hill, & Maehr, 1983). In much of the previous work on the Mexican-American, both the reported lack of achievement motivation and the poor academic performance among this ethnic group have been blamed on the home environment and prevailing culture. According to Ramirez and Castaneda (1974), many studies in the social sciences have contributed to the view of Mexican-American children and adolescents as “products of a culture dominated by values that make learning difficult.” For example, in the view of Heller (1966, pp. 34-35) The kind of socialization that Mexican American children receive at home is not conducive to the development of the capacities needed for advancement in a dynamic industrialized society. This type of upbringing creates stumbling blocks for future advancements by stressing values that hinder mobility-family ties, honor, masculinity, and living in the present-and by neglecting values that are conducive to it-achievement, independence, and deferred gratification.

134

Joan

L. Duda

The above cultural characteristics (see Carter, 1970; Goodman & Beman, 1971; Guerra, 1972; Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck, 1961; Murillo, 1971) have been found when factors such as age, occupation, and educational level have been controlled (Chandler, 1979). Thus, as pointed out by McClintock (1974, p. 353) given the American school environment which uses “competitive motives to promote and reward academic achievement and performance, one can ask whether Mexican-American children may not be ontogenetically out of phase with the educational system of the majority culture.” This perspective of “blaming the victim” to account for the lower motivation and academic accomplishments of Mexican-American students has been severely criticized (Brischetto & Arciniega, 1973; Garza, 1977; Hirsch, 1973; Ramirez & Castaneda, 1974; Wright, Salinas, & Kurlesky, 1973). Stoddard (1973) claims that the Mexican-American does not suffer from a lack of motivation, but, rather, is victimized by alienation and structural barriers between this ethnic group and the society at large. Carter (1982a, 1982b) attributes the motivational difficulties of this ethnic group to the academic context and larger social system. He points out that the Mexican-American student encounters predominantly Anglo teachers in the educational setting (see Gomez, 1982; Uranga, 1973) who are not knowledgeable of and sensitive to the Mexican-American culture. Further, Carter (1982b) maintains that the Mexican-American adolescent lives in a society which does not reward his/ her achievement strivings and provides little social mobility. Thus, what we may have in this situation is not a case of inadequate motivation among Mexican-Americans but, rather, qualitatively different motivational perspectives existing between members of this ethnic group and the mainstream culture (Maehr & Nicholls, 1980). After detailing the dangers of stereotyping the value system of the MexicanAmerican culture (see Carter, 1982a, 1982b; Grebler, Moore, & Guzman, 1970) Ramirez and Castaneda (1974, p. 40) state that it is still important for researchers and practitioners to recognize “that there is a common core of values on which Mexican-American culture is based-values which, in one way or another, affect the lives of most Mexican-Americans.” Importantly, for the purposes of the present comparative work, this core of values or sociocultural premises of Mexican-American culture might influence the type of motivational perspective (rather than thedegree of motivation, cf., Maehr & Nicholls, 1980) manifested in members of this ethnic group. In particular, three dimensions of Mexican-American culture would seem to be related to “what” (subjective definitions of success and failure) and “how”(the preferred achievement orientations) Mexican-American adolescents want to achieve in specific contexts. These three value clusters are: (a) the emphasis on individual versus group identity, (b) the preference for competitive versus cooperative interpersonal relationships, and (c) the predominant perspective on time. In the Mexican-American culture, there is a tendency to emphasize the group over the individual (Ramirez & Castaneda, 1974; Ramirez & Price-

Goals and Achievement

Orientations

135

Williams, 1976; Stoddard, 1973; Zintz, 1969). According to Ramirez and Castaneda (1974, p. 42) the Mexican-American culture is based on the premise that “the needs and interests of the individual are considered secondary to those of the family.. . and (his/ her) actions and accomplishments reflect on (his/ her) family.” This emphasis on the group in the Mexican-American value system “contrasts with the emphasis that the culture represented in most (American) schools places on a sense of separate identity” (Ramirez & Castaneda, 1974, p. 43) and the prevailing focus on individualism in past perspectives on achievement motivation (Duda, 198 1; Maehr & Nicholls, 1980). In the present study, therefore, one interesting contrast entailed examining possible differences in the achievement orientations of Mexican-American and Anglo students in respect to this individual/ group identity focus. The second important premise of Mexican-American culture which would seem to influence motivational perspective is the emphasis placed on mutual dependence and cooperation in interpersonal relationships (Kagan, 1977; Ramirez 8c Castaneda, 1974; Stoddard, 1973; Zintz, 1969). Summing up his work focused on social motives among children in experimental game situations, Kagan (1977, p. 46) states that: Compared to other children, Mexican-American children are more concerned with certain cooperative motives. . . and when presented with behavioral alternatives in experimental situations. they more often choose alternatives that maximize those cooperative motives rather than alternatives that might satisfy competitive motives.

This apparent focus on cooperation in the Mexican-American value system contrasts with the “achievement through individual competition encouraged by the culture of (American) schools” and the focus on social comparison and competitive outcomes which predominates past work on achievement motivation (Duda, 1981; Maehr & Nicholls, 1980; Parsons & Goff, 1980). Consequently, in the present study, a second comparison entailed examining possible differences in preferred achievement orientations between MexicanAmerican and Anglo students based on reported cultural distinctions in orientations to competition and cooperation (Ramirez & Castaneda, 1974). The third feature of Mexican-American culture which would probably relate to motivational perspective is the prevailing orientation to time. In past work (e.g., Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck, 1961; Wright, Salinas, & Kurlesky, 1973; Zintz, 1969) it has been suggested that Mexican-Americans are more likely to emphasize present, rather than future, experiences. This orientation to the present time contrasts with the future-time emphasis stressed in American schools (Ramirez & Castaneda, 1974) and the future goal perspective maintained in much of the previous work on achievement motivation (e.g., Atkinson, 1964; McClelland, 1961). Thus, in the present study, a third contrast entailed examining whether cultural variations in time

perspective would relate to differences in defining success and failure to characteristics, behaviors, or outcomes between Mexican-American and Anglo students.

SEX ROLES AND ACHIEVEMENT

MOTIVATION

In previous work examining the motivation to achieve among males and females, femaies have been found to be lower in achievement motivation and less competitive in achievement contexts (Deaux, 1976; Maehr & Nicholls, 1980). Moreover, according to Parsons and Goff (1980), females are more likely to be process-oriented while males tend to emphasize products in achievement situations. When explaining achievement outcomes, females are more likely than males to attribute their successes to high effort or external factors and their failures to low ability (Dwek & Goetz, 1978; Lenny, 1977). This attributional pattern tends to be especially true for women who are more “feminine” in their sex role orientation (Deaux, 1976). The majority of past investi~tions on sex differences in achievement motivation have been based on Anglo males and females. In research focused on Mexican-American males and females, Mexican-American females have been found to be lower in competitiveness than their male counterparts (Kagan, 1977). Senour (1977) states that Mexican-American females are particularly not encouraged to achieve in academic and professional environments. In general, the roles of “male” and “female” are held to be more culturally distinct among Mexican-Americans in achievement contexts and other life domains (Martinez, 1977). Drawing from the above literature, it is believed that the motivational perspective of Anglo and Mexican-American males and females might differ in interesting and important ways. Moreover, since previous theoretical approaches to achievement motivation have been criticized as being ethnocentric and sex-biased (Duda, 1981; Maehr, 1974a, 1974b; Maehr & Nicholls, 1980; Parsons & Goff, 1980), the present data might serve as a methodological negative case to challenge past perspectives (Blumer, 1962; Denzin, 1978). This comparative study between male and female members of two diverse cultures should highlight the need for future research on achievement motivation which is sensitive to the complexity and muhidimensionality of this construct.

METHOD Subjects The subjects for this study were 50 male and 71 female Anglo students and 30 male and 30 female Mexican-American students from a high school in northwest New Mexico. The selected high school was located in a small

Goals and Achievement

Orientations

137

border town (population 20,000). The subjects, all of whom were of the lower to lower-middle economic class, resided within the town limits. The subjects averaged 17.3 years in age and were predominantly from the 1 lth and 12th grades. All the students in this study were also interscholastic athletes and, consequently, members of the boys’ or girls’ varsity sport teams at the high school.

Procedures In a classroom setting, each student/ athlete was administered a questionnaire tapping his/ her definitions of success and failure and achievement orientations in the classroom or sport. Demographic information concerning the race and ethnic background, sex, age, grade in school, and socioeconomic status of the students/athletes was also collected during questionnaire administration. Questionnaires were filled out anonymously. Similar to the method used by Duda and Allison in their work with the Navajo Indians (Allison & Duda, 1982; Duda, 1980,1981), the students/athletes were asked to respond to a series of open-ended questions requesting them to describe a personal success and failure situation in the classroom/ or sport. The second part of the questionnaire was designed to specifically determine the respondent’s emphasis on either ability or effort-based goals (Maehr & Nicholls, 1980; Nicholls, 1976) in an academic/athletic success or failure situation. Subjects were asked in a forcedchoice format, given that they do well (or poorly) in school/sport, would they prefer to be someone who does well (or poorly) because of having (or not having) ability or because of trying (or not trying) hard. The third part of the inventory focused on assessing the achievement orientations of subjects in school/sport. Specifically, this section tried to determine the student’s/athlete’s orientation to task-involved and egoinvolved goals which are focused on either the individual or group in both success and failure situations. To assess achievement orientations, each subject was presented with several hypothetical situations involving a student/athlete in an achievement-oriented classroom/sport setting. In each situation, the student does (or does not) achieve an individual (or group) task-involved or ego-involved goal. To determine the respondent’s preference for each type of achievement orientation, he/she was asked “Would you like this student/athlete really to be you ?” The subject was requested to indicate his/ her preference on a 9-point Likert-type scale which ranges from a low point of “not at all” to a high point of “very much so.” RESULTS

Definitions of Success and Failure The definitions of success and failure in sport/ the classroom this study were categorized with respect to a conceptualization

obtained in previously

138

Joan L. Duda

TABLE 1 Definitions of Success and Failure In the Clararoom Characteristics

Anglo males Anglo females Mexican-American Mexican-American

males females

(in percentages)

Behaviors

Outcomes

Success

Failure

Success

Failure

Success

Failure

18.2 14.6 5.9 15.4

10.0 17.1 16.7 0.0

9.1 7.3 23.5 15.4

10.0 22.0 27.8 21.4

72.7 78.0 70.6 69.2

80.0 61.0 55.6 78.6

suggested by Duda ( 198 1, 198 1). Specifically, athletic and academic success and failure and classified as a(n): Characteristic-response referred to a particular attribute concerning the individual (e.g., has a good personality, is lazy) or the group (e.g., has a good family); Behavior-response referred to an action or something the person has done or is currently doing which is oriented to the individual (e.g., studies hard, messes around) or other people (e.g., talks back to the coach, helps her friends); Outcome-response referred to some consequence or product, symbolic or material, which is in the possession of the individual (e.g., grades, money, poor job) or group (e.g., team victories) or to some social consequence which is individual-oriented (e.g., respect, disapproval) or focused on the group (e.g., team becomes famous). There were no significant differences between Anglo and MexicanAmerican males and females in defining success, X2 (6) = 3.93, p > .05, and failure, X2 (6) = 4.58, p > .05, in the classroom. As can be seen in Table 1, all groups predominantly defined academic success and failure with respect to outcomes. There were no significant differences between Anglo and MexicanAmerican males and females in defining athletic success, X2 (6) = .91, p > .05. As illustrated in Table 2, most athletes equated success in sport to outcomes.

TABLE 2 Deflnltlonr of Success and Fallure In Sport (In percentages) Characteristics Success Anglo males Anglo females Mexican-American Mexican-American

males females

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Behaviors

Outcomes

Failure

Success

Failure

Success

Failure

0.0 20.0 0.0 22.2

0.0 16.7 12.5 28.6

0.0 20.0 50.0 44.4

100.0 83.3 87.5 71.4

100.0 60.0 50.0 33.3

139

Goals and Achievemenr Orientations

TABLE 3 Emphasls on Ablllty or Effort in Academic Success and Failure (in percentages)

success Anglo males Anglo females Mexican-American Mexican-American

males females

Failure

Ability

EffOrt

Ability

Effort

17.2 27.7 23.1 29.4

82.8 72.3 76.9 70.6

64.3 55.9 57.7 52.9

35.7 44.1 42.3 47.1

There were no significant differences between groups in defining athletic failure, X2 (6) = 3.37, p > .05. As can be seen in Table 2, however, there was a slight tendency for Anglo males to place more emphasis on outcomes in defining failure in sport than Anglo females and Mexican-American males and females.

Emphasis on Ability or Effort in Success and Failure There were no significant differences between Anglo and MexicanAmerican males and females in preferring to be someone who succeeds in school because of being able or trying hard, X2 (3) = 1.49, p > .OS.As shown in Table 3, all groups predominantly emphasized effort as a preferred cause of academic success. There were no significant differences between groups in preferring to be a student who fails in school because of lack of ability or effort, X2 (3) = .76, p > .05. These findings can be seen in Table 3. There was a significant difference between Anglo and Mexican-American males and females in preferring to be an athlete who is successful in sport because of ability or effort, X2 (3) = 9.19, p < .03. Anglo males strongly preferred to be the athlete who is successful in sport as a result of his ability in comparison to Anglo females and Mexican-American males and females. These results can be seen in Table 4.

TABLE 4 Emphaslr on Ablllty or Effort In Athletic Succew and Fallun, (In percentages) Success

Anglo males Anglo females Mexican-American Mexican-American

males females

Failure

Ability

Effort

Ability

Effort

77.8 14.3 33.3 20.0

22.2 85.7 66.7 80.0

11.1 85.7 71.4 80.0

88.9 14.3 28.6 20.0

140

Joan L. Duda

There was a significant difference between groups in preferring to be an athlete who fails in sport because of a lack of ability or effort, X2 (3) = 13.00, p > .005. As seen in Table 4, Anglo males predominantly preferred, in contrast to Anglo females and Mexican-American males and females, to be an athlete who fails in athletics as a function of not trying hard. Achievement

Orientations

To analyze the data obtained from the classroom and sport questionnaires, a 2 X 2 X 2 X 2 X 2 analysis of variance was performed in each case with Sex (male/female), Culture (Anglo/ Mexican-American), Goals (individual/group), Involvement (task/ego), and Outcome (success/failure) as factors and a measure of preference as the dependent variable. Post hoc Newman-Keuls tests were utilized where appropriate. The criterion level of significance was p < .OS for all analyses. Analysis of variance based on data from the classroom inventory revealed that the main effects of Goals, F( 1,160) = 18.18, p < .OOl, and Outcome, F (1,160) = 433.24, p < .001, were statistically significant. These main effects were superceded by two-way and three-way interactions. A significant Sex X Goal X Outcome interaction emerged in the classroom situation, F (1,160) = 5.5 1, p < .02. Females had significantly more preference for group academic success and significantly less preference for group academic failure than males. Post hoc tests also revealed that female students placed significantly more emphasis on group academic success than individual success in the classroom. Males had significantly less preference for individual classroom failure than academic failure which reflected on the group. Analysis of variance based on data from the sport inventory revealed the main effects of Involvement, F (1,140) = 7.34, p < .Ol, and Outcome, F (1,40) = 76.47, p < .OOl. These main effects were superceded by three-way and four-way interactions. There was a significant interaction between Sex X Culture X Outcome, F (1,40) = 8.65, p < .Ol. Anglo males placed significantly less emphasis on athletic failure than Anglo females and Mexican-American males and females. A significant Sex X Involvement X Goals X Outcome interaction emerged, F (1,40) = 4.00, p < .05. Post hoc tests revealed that females had significantly less preference for individual, ego-involved athletic success than males. Males placed significantly less emphasis on individual, ego-involved failure than females. To further highlight and clarify the sex-linked and cultural variations in achievement orientations which emerged, as well as accentuate situational contrasts for the reader, an achievement orientation profile was determined for each social group from both the sport and classroom data. These

Goals and Achievement

Orientations

141

very much so t

n Classroom/Success

I

0

Classroom/Failure

0

Sporl/Success

0

Sporl/Fa~lure

1

lndwduol Task- Involved

Group Task -Involved

lndwdual Ego- Involved

Group Ego-Involved

FIGURE 1. Achievement orlentatlon proflle of Anglo male8 In sport and the clauroom.

motivation profiles graphically illustrate the emphasis placed on each achievement orientation by Anglo and Mexican-American males and females in success and failure conditions in an academic and athletic context. The achievement orientation profile for Anglo males can be seen in Figure 1. In both success and failure situations, the salience of sport achievement over achievement in the classroom is suggested for Anglo males. Figure 1 also depicts the tendency for Anglo males to stress ego-involvement (particularly when focused on the individual) as the preferred means to success and the least preferred means to failure in an athletic and academic context. As shown in Figure 2, Anglo females seem to prefer athletic success over classroom success particularly when this success is not attained through an individual-oriented, ego-involved process. It is suggested, however, that it is accepted for Anglo females to be ego-involved in academic and athletic settings if that social comparison focuses on the group. As seen in the failure conditions, failure in sport does not appear to be as salient as classroom failure to Anglo females. The achievement orientation profile for Mexican-American males can be seen in Figure 3. The findings seem to suggest that sport success is important to Mexican-American males as long as this athletic success is mastery-based. In the classroom situation, there is a tendency to stress group-oriented social comparison as the preferred achievement orientation. From the standpoint of Mexican-American males, ego-involvement focused on the individual does not seem to be the preferred means to athletic and academic failure.

142

Joan L. Duda

very much so t

I

lndlwduol Task-Involved

I

Group Task -Involved

lndlwdual Ego- Involved

Group Ego-Involved

FIGURE 2. Achievement orlentatlon proflle of Anglo females In sport and the clarrroom.

As depicted in Figure 4, the achievement orientation profile for MexicanAmerican females seems to be similar to the pattern found for Anglo females. Mexican-American females appear to prefer sport success which is mastery-based. It is suggested that an individual, ego-involved achievement orientation is the least-preferred means to athletic success in the view of Mexican-American females.

verv much so

n Classroom/Success U

Classroom/Fa~lure

l Sport/Success 0

Spori/Fa~lure

I

lndlwdual Task-Involved

Group Task -Involved

lndlvlduol Ego- Involved

FIGURE 3. Achievement orlentatlon proflle of Mexican-Amerlcan claorroom.

Ego

Group Involved

males In sport and the

Goals and Achievement

Orientations

143

very muchso # #.

Classroo”/S”ccess

u

Y

1

0

Classroom/Failure

_

I

1

lndwduol Task-Involved

Group Task -Involved

1

Individual Ego-Involved

FIGURE 4. Achievement orlentatlon protlle of Mexican-Amettcan the classroom.

Group Ego-Involved

femalw In sport and

DISCUSSION The present research was based on a recent conceptualization of achievement motivation which assumes that achievement goals and the preferred means to attain those goals may vary as a function of social background factors and the immediate social context (Duda, 1981). Specifically, the purpose of the present investigation was two-fold. First, this study attempted to determine whether male and female Anglo and Mexican-American high school students/athletes define success and failure differently in both sport and classroom situations. A specific focus was to examine whether male and female members of both cultures differentially attribute their success and failure experiences, in sport and the classroom, to ability or effort. Second, this study attempted to determine whether Anglo and Mexican-American males and females differentially emphasize an individual or group-directed ego-involved or task-involved achievement orientation. The preferred achievement orientation of each group was examined in success and failure sport and classroom situations.

Variations in Achievement

Orientations

Before discussing cultural, sex-linked, and situational differences and similarities in the perceived definitions and antecedents of success and failure, distinctions in the achievement orientations emphasized by Anglo and Mexican-American students/athletes will be highlighted. The results of

144

Joan L. Duda

the present investigation seem to suggest that an emphasis on an egoinvolved or task-involved achievement orientation which is focused on the individual or group is related to social group membership and the situation at hand. In the classroom situation, for example, sex differences in achievement orientations were revealed. Female students seemed to prefer means to goal attainment which reflected on the group while male students tended to stress achievement orientations which were individual-oriented. These results are consistent with past work (Duda, 1981; Parsons & Goff, 1980) which has suggested that females are more likely to emphasize group goals and accomplishments while males tend to focus on personal achievements. The present findings revealed no significant cultural variations in preferred achievement orientations in the academic context. Although MexicanAmerican and Anglo students did differ slightly in emphasizing individual or group-based, task- or ego-involved academic goals, culture did not play a prominent role in relation to preferred means to goal attainment. This result was surprising when one considers previous social science literature which suggests that Mexican-American and Anglo students stress distinct values in mainstream classrooms (e.g., Ramirez & Castaneda, 1974; Zintz, 1969). The fact that pronounced cultural differences in achievement orientations did not emerge in the present data might be due to several reasons. First, the number of Mexican-American subjects included in the present sample was fairly small. Consequently, the probability of finding significant cultural differences in this investigation was diminished. Second, as pointed out by Carter (1982a) and others (Ramirez & Castaneda, 1974), when considering the value orientations of Mexican-Americans in educational environments one must keep in mind that this is not a monolithic culture. That is, it is difficult to generalize about a sample of Mexican-Americans-one must consider the possibility of group diversity in an ever-changing society. It could be that in the present sample of Mexican-American and Anglo students, there were more similarities than differences in their academic values and orientations to classroom achievement. Finally, it is important to remember that in any achievement context such as the classroom, there are probably different subcultural value structures operating within that situation. Thus, in different achievement situations, the preferred goals and means to goal attainment of an individual are influenced by his/her significant reference groups (i.e., ethnicity, sex, age, economic class). Varying achievement contexts are likely to maximize distinctions among different social groups. In the present study, perhaps the academic setting is perceived differently and has a different motivational meaning to a student as a function of his/ her sex rather than his/ her cultural background. Sex-linked distinctions in preferred achievement orientations also emerged in the sport setting. Females placed the least preference on athletic success which was focused on the individual and ego-involved. Males, in contrast to

Goals and Achievement

Orientations

14.5

females, indicated that they least preferred individual, ego-involved failure in sport. Since the very structure of sport in mainstream American society is held to be both geared to the individual and competitive in nature (Lueschen, 1967), this finding brings light to the research which suggests that athletics do not tend to be a salient arena of achievement for females (Berlin, 1974; Birrell, 1978; McHugh, Duquin, & Frieze, 1978). Moreover, similar to the pattern of results found when examining preferred achievement orientations in the classroom, perhaps the athletic context is especially conducive to maximizing social group differences related to the sex of the subject. An examination of the preferred means to goal attainment held by different social groups in different settings, according to the conceptualization of achievement motivation proposed by Duda (1981), provides only half of the picture. It is also necessary to examine the perceived focus of a social group’s goals in various contexts. As suggested in the present data, it is possible for a social group to emphasize the same achievement orientation in two distinct situations while the individuals involved focus their behavior on conceptually different goals. For example, Anglo males tended to place an emphasis on an individual, ego-involved achievement orientation in sport and the classroom. In the athletic context, this achievement orientation tended to focus on outcomes which reflect individual ability. In the classroom, however, there was a trend for Anglo males to stress success outcomes which were effort-based.

Conceptions of Success and Failure Present results revealed no significant cultural, sex-linked or situational differences in equating success and failure to characteristics, behaviors, or outcomes in an academic or athletic setting (Duda, 1980). MexicanAmerican and Anglo males and females predominantly defined success and failure in sport and the classroom to outcomes (e.g., wins or grades, respectively). The perceived antecedents of academic and athletic success and failure were also determined in the present study. Specifically, the present investigation examined whether Anglo and Mexican-American males and females emphasize ability or effort as the preferred attributions for success and failure. In the classroom context, all the students seemed to stress trying hard as the most important means to achievement. This finding reinforces previous research by Weiner (1974; Weiner 8c Kukla, 1970) and Covington and Omelich (1979) which has highlighted the salience of effort in American school systems. As pointed out by Zintz (1969, p. 41), value in the American classroom “is imputed to hard work and meticulous planning for the future.” In the sport setting, Anglo males preferred ability-based athletic success while Anglo females and Mexican-American males and females tended to emphasize sport success which reflected effort. When encountering sport

146

Joan L. Duda

failure, though, Anglo males predominantly preferred to be the athlete who failed because of not trying hard. Mexican-American athletes, and particularly Anglo females, were more likely to prefer athletic failure tied to a lack of ability. In the case of Anglo athletes, these findings coincide with previous research which has found sex differences in attributions for sport success and failure (Ewing, 1981; McHugh, Duquin, & Frieze, 1978). Although athletic achievement seems to be important among Mexican-American adolescents (Guerra, 1972), the preferred attributions for sport outcomes among MexicanAmerican athletes has not been investigated. It is interesting to note that the tendency to infer athletic success to effort and attribute athletic failure to a lack of ability held for both male and female Mexican-American students involved in interscholastic sports. In conclusion, the results of the present study suggest that there are cultural, sex-linked, and situational variations in achievement goals (definitions of success and failure) and the preferred means to attain these goals (achievement orientations). An awareness of such differences between distinct cultures in diverse achievement situations may lead to a better understanding of the achievement behaviors of individuals. That is, by realizing that Anglo and Mexican-American males and females may stress different achievement incentives and achievement orientations, more insight will be gained into individual behaviors such as task choice, persistence, risk taking, and actual performance (see Atkinson, 1964). Further, by being sensitive to the differences in perspectives on achievement motivation suggested in this study, sport and educational psychologists can now begin to think of how it is possible to enhance performance and foster enjoyment experienced in sport, classroom, and other achievement settings. It is believed that an approach is forwarded which will lay the basis for maximizing motivation in multicultural athletic and academic contests. REFERENCES ALLISON, M.T. (1979). Competition and cooperation: A socio-cultural perspective. In A.T. Cheska (Ed.), Pray as context. West Point, NY: Leisure Press. ALLISON, M.T. (1980). A structural analysis of Navajo basketball. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. ALLISON, M.T., & DUDA, J.L. (1982). Socio-cultural influences on definitions of achievement: The case of the Navajo Indian. In J. W. Loy (Ed.), Paradoxes ofplay. West Point, NY: Leisure Press. ANDERSON, J., &JOHNSON, W. (1968, February). Socioculturaldererminants of achievements among Mexican-American students: An interim report of the mathematics education program. Paper presented at the National Conference of

Educational Opportunities for Mexican-Americans, Austin, TX. ATKINSON, J.W. (1964). An introduction to motivation. Princeton, Nostrand.

NJ: Van

Goals and Achievement

Orientations

147

BERLIN, P. (1974). The woman athlete. In P. Berlin, J. Felshin, & E. Gerber (Eds.), Z&e American woman in sport. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. BIRRELL, S. (1978). Achievement related motives and the woman athlete. In CA. Oglesby (Ed.), Women and sport: From myth to reality. Philadelphia: Lea and Febiger. BLUMER, H. (1962). Society as symbolic interactionism. In A. Rose (Ed.), Human behavior and socialprocesses. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. BRISCHETTO, R., & ARCINIEGA, T. (1973). Examining the examiners: A look at the educators’ perspectives on the Chicano student. In R.O. de la Garza, A. Kruszewski, & T. A. Arciniega (Eds.), Chicanos and Native Americans: 7he territorial minorities. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. CARTER, T. (1970). Mexican-Americans in school: A history of educational neglect. New York: College Entrance Examination Board. CARTER, T.P. (1982a). Mexican-Americans: How the school has failed them. In Duran, L.I., & Bernard, H.R. (Eds.), Introduction to Chicano Srudies. New York: Macmillan. CARTER, T.P. (1982b). Preparing teachers for Mexican-American children. In Duran, L.I., & Bernard, H.R. (Eds.), Introduction to Chicano studies. New York: Macmillan. CHANDLER, CR. (1979). Traditionalism in a modern setting: A comparison of Anglo-and Mexican-American value orientations. Human Organization, 38, (2) 153-159. COVINGTON, M.V., & OMELICH, C.L. (1979). It’s best to be able and virtuous too: Student and teacher evaluative responses to successful effort. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(5), 686700. DEAUX, K. (1976). Sex: A perspective on the attribution process. In J.H. Harvey, W.J. Ickes, & R.F. Kidd (Eds.), New directions in attribution research. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. DENZIN, N. (1978). The research act. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co. DUDA, J.L. (1980). Achievement motivation among Navajo Indians: A conceptual analysis with preliminary data. Ethos, 9(4), 3 16-33 I. DUDA, J.L. (198 1). A cross-cultural analysis of achievement motivation in sport and the classroom. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. DUDA, J.L., & ALLISON, M.T. (1981, April). Variations in achievement values: Race, sex, and situational influences. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for the Anthropological Study of Play, Fort Worth, TX. DWECK, C.S., & GOETZ, T.E. (1978). Attributions and learned helplessness. In J.H. Harvey, W.J; Ickes, & R.F. Kidd (Eds.), New direcrions in attribution research. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. EWING, M.E. (1981). Achievement orientations and sport behavior of males and females. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at UrbanaChampaign. FREEMAN, H.E., ROMNEY, A.K., FERREIRA-PINTO, J., KLEIN, R.E., & SMITH, T. (198 I). Guatemalan and U.S. concepts of success and failure. Human Organizafion, 4(2), 140-145. FRIEZE, I.H., FRANCIS, W.D., & HANUSA, B.H. (in press). Defining success in classroom settings. In J. Levine & M. Wang (Eds.), Teacher and student perceptions: Implications for learning. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

148

Joan L. Duda

FRIEZE, I.H., SHOMO, K.H., & FRANCIS, W.D. (1979. October). Dererminants of subjective feelings of success. Paper presented at the LRDC Conference, “Teacher and student perceptions of success and failure: Implications for learning,” Pittsburgh, PA. GARZA, R.T. (1977). Personal control and fatalism in Chicanos and Anglos: Conceptual and methodological issues. In J.L. Martinez (Ed.), Chicano psychology. New York: Academic Press. GOMEZ, D. (1982). Somos Chicanos: Strangers in our own land. In L. 1. Duran & H.R. Bernard, Introduction to Chicano studies. New York: Macmillan. GOODMAN, M.E., & BEEMAN, A. (1971). Child’s ego-view of life in an urban barrio. In N.N. Wagner & M. J. Haug (Eds.), Chicanos. St. Louis: C.V. Mosby co. GREBLER, L., MOORE, J., & GUZMAN, R.C. (1970). The Mexican-American people. New York: Macmillan. GIJERRA, M.H. (1972). The Mexican-American child. In E. Simmen (Ed.), Pain andpromise: The Chicano toda_y. New York: Mentor. HELLER, C. (1966). Mexican-American yourh: Forgotten youth at the crossroads. New York: Random House. HIRSCH, H. (1973). Political scientists and other camarades: Academic mythmaking and racial stereotypes. In R.O. de la Garza, A. A. Kruszewski, JL T.A. Arciniega (Eds.), Chicanos and Native Americans: The territorial minorities. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. KAGAN, S. (1977). Social motives and behaviors of Mexican-American and AngloAmerican children. In J.L. Martinez (Ed.), Chicano psychology. New York: Academic Press. KLUCKHOHN, F.R., & STRODTBECK, F.L. (1961). Variations in value orientations. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson, and Co. LENNEY, E. (1977). Women’s self-confidence in achievement settings. Psychological Bulletin, 84, l-13. LUESCHEN, G. (1967). The interdependence between sport and culture. Inrernational Review of Sport Sociology, 14(2), 127-141. MAEHR, M.L. (1974a). Culture and achievement motivation. The American Psychologist, 29(12), 887-986. MAEHR, M.L. (1974b). Sociocultural origins of achievement. Monterey, CA: Brooks-Cole. MAEHR, M.L., & NICHOLLS, J.G. (1980). Cultureand achievement motivation: A second look. In N. Warren (Ed.), Studies in cross-culturalpsychology (Vol. 3). New York: Academic Press. MADSEN, W. (1965). 7’he Mexican Americans of South Texas. New York: Halt, Rinehart, & Winston. MARTINEZ, J.L. (1977). Cross-cultural comparison of Chicanos and Anglos on the semantic differential: Some implications for psychology. In J.L. Martinez (Ed.), Chicano psychology. New York: Academic Press. MCCLELLAND, D.C. (1961). The achieving society. New York: Free Press. McCLINTOCK, C.G. (1974). Development of social motives in Anglo-American and Mexican-American children. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 29, 348-354.

Goals and Achievement

Orientations

149

MCHUGH, M.C., DUQUIN, M.E., & FRIEZE, I.H. (1978). Beliefs about success and failure: Attribution and the female athlete. In C.A. Oglesby (Ed.), Women and sport: From myth to reality. Philadelphia: Lea and Febiger. MURILLO, N. (1971). The Mexican-American family. In N.N. Wagner & M.J. Haug (Eds.), Chicanos. St. Louis: C.V. Mosby Co. NICHOLLS, J.G. (1976). Effort is virtuous, but it’s better to have ability: Evaluative responses to perceptions of ability and effort. Journal of Research in Personality, 10,306315.

NICHOLLS, J.G. (1980, July). Striving to demonstrate anddevelop ability: A theory of achievement motivation. Paper presented at a symposium entitled “Attributional approaches to human motivation,*’ Center for Interdisciplinary Research, University of Bielefeld, West Germany. PARSONS, J.E., & GOFF, S.B. (1980). Achievement motivation and values: An alternative perspective. In L.J. Fyans (Ed.), Achievement motivation: Recent trends in theory and research. New York: Plenum. RAMIREZ III, M., & CASTANEDA, A. (1974). Cultural democracy, bicognitive development, and education. New York: Academic Press. RAMIREZ, M., & PRICE-WILLIAMS, D.R. (1976). Achievement motivation in children of three ethnic groups in the United States. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology, 1, 49-60. RAMIREZ, M., TAYLOR, C., & PETERSON, B. (1967). Mexican-American cultural membership and adjustment to school. Developmental Psychology, 73, 3-11. RODRIGUEZ, R. The new American scholarship boy. In L. I. Duran & H.R. Bernard (Eds.), Introduction to Chicano studies. New York: Macmillan. SENOUR, M.N. (1977). Psychology ofthe Chicana. In J.L. Martinez(Ed.), Chicano psychology. New York: Academic Press. SPINK, K., & MAEHR, M. (1980). Contingent andnon-contingent conditions, task meaning, and continuing motivation. Unpublished manuscript, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. SPINK, K., & ROBERTS, G. (1980). Ambiguity of outcome and causal attributions. Journal of Sport Psychology, 2,237-244. STODDARD, E.R. (1973). Mexican Americans. New York: Random House. URANGA, S.N. (1973). The study of Mexican-American education in the Southwest: Implications of research by the Civil Rights Commission. In R.O. de la Garza, A. Kruszewski, & T.A. Arciniega (Eds.), Chicanosand Native Americans: Z&e territorial minorities. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. WEINER, B. (Ed.). (1974). Achievement motivation and attribution theory. Morristown, NJ: General Learning Corporation. WEINER, B., & KUKLA, A. (1970). An attributional analysis of achievement motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 15, I-70. WILLIG, A., HARNISCH, D.L., HILL, K.T., & MAEHR, M.L. (1983). Sociocultural and educational correlates of success-failure attributions and evaluation anxiety in the school setting for black, Hispanic, and Anglo children. American Educational Research Journal, 20(3), 385-410. WRIGHT, D.E., SALINAS, E., & KURLESKY, W.P. (1973). Opportunities for social mobility for Mexican-American youth. In R.O. de la Garza, A. Kruszewski,

I50

Joan L. Duda

and T.A. Arciniega (Eds.), Chicanos and Native Americans: The territorial minorities. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. ZINTZ, M.V. (1969). Education acroxs cultures. Dubuque, IA: Kendall-Hunt Publishing Co.

ABSTRACT

TRANSLATIONS

Le but de cette Etude Etait d'analyser les dgfinitions de succ&s et d'gchec (objectifs de la performance) ainsi que les moyens utilisEs pour atteindre ces objectifs (stratggies de In performance) chez des sujets Anglo- et Hexicain-Americains. Les participants e'taient des 1ycEens et 1ycGennes observss dans un context acad&ique et sportif. A partir d'une conceptualisation r&ente de la motivation, il a GtG considEr6 que les dsfinitions de succe's et d'Echec reflPtent les caractgristiques personnelles et comportementales des individus, et qu'elles reflgtent soit une emphase sur l'effort, soit une emphase sur la comp6tence. De plus, il a Et6 consid6rE qu'il existe deux directions principales de la motivation: Dsns l'une, les moyens d'atteindre l'objectif sent bas6s sur une comparaison sociale; dans l'autre l'objectif est atteint 2 partir de critsres de comp& Les rssultats indiquent des diffgrences culturelles tence personnelle. et sexuelles dans les objectifs Z caractsre sportif. Les Angloiinwricains sent plus susceptibles de dgfinir le succe's sportif en termes de compstence, nlors que les Anglo-Americaines et les sujets Mexicain-Americains ont tendance a dgfinir le SUCC~S nthletique L'inverse a 6te' ohserG en ce qui concfrne 1' en termes d'effort. Les sujcts Anglo-Americains l'ont &hec sur le plan athlstique. dEfini en termes de manque d'effort nlors que les nutres groupes l'ont dEfini en termes de manque de compGtence. Des variations Par dans les stratEgies de rGalisntion sont Ggalement apparues. example, dans le c"ntexte sportif, les sujets fe'minis "nt choisi le mains souvent le succEs sportif qui impliquait l'individu et la comparison sociale. Les su.jets mnsculins ont mains s"uvent choisi d'expliquer 1'Gchec sportif par les caract6ristiques individuelles et la comparaison socialf. (author supplied abstract) El motive de este estudio es analisar las definiciones de1 Exit" y de1 fracas" (objetivos J realizar), y 10s medios preferidos para alcanzar estos ohjetivos (preparaci6n para la realizacio'n), entre 10s estudianteslatletas de In escuela secondaria, hombres tan c"m" mujeres, angles y mejicanos-americanos, en el deporte asi corn" en la clase. Basado en un reciente conceptualismo de c&l es el dnimo de 13 realizaci&, se suponia que las definiciones de1 e'xito y de1 fracas" podrian equivalerse R las caracteristicas personales, al comportamiento o a 10s resultados, y que &tos rfflejan un Gnfasis, o en el esfuerzo o en la capacidad. Ademds se suponia haber dos maneras principales de preparar para la realizaci6n: en el uno, 10s medios de lograr se tratan de la comparaci6n social; en el otr", el En 10s objetivos logro se juzga segCin el criteria de1 dominio. atle'ticos, 10s resultados mostraron las diferencias culturales y SeXUaleS. Los hombres angles igualaron el &ito atlgtico mds a la capacidad; en cambio, las mujeres anglas y 10s atletas mejicanosamericanos igualaron el Exit" atl6tico mZs al esfuerzo mostrado. En cas" de1 fracas" atlgtico, fui lo contrario -- 10s hombres angles pusieron Gnfasis en pot" esfuerzo, mientras 10s otros grupos pusieron cnfasis en pocn cnpacidad. Las variaciones en 1x3 preparaciones Par preferidas de alcanznr 10s objetivos tambik se manifestaron. ejemplo, en el ambiente atlgtico, Ins mujeres mostraron men"s preferencia par el kit" deportivo en que se reflej6 el individuo y que 1.0s hombres m"straron men"s prese trat6 de la comparaci6n social. ferencin por el fracaso atl6tico basado en In prepnrnci6n individual y en In comparaci6n social. (author supplied abstract)