David A Cook1, Becca L Gas, Anthony R Artino. 1. D.A. Cook is professor of medicine and medical education; research chair, Mayo Multidisciplinary Simulation Center; director of education science, Mayo Office of Applied Scholarship and Education Science; and consultant, Division of General Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota; ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2383-4633. B.L. Gas is education coordinator, Center for Clinical and Translational Science-Education Resources, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota; ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7140-4956. A.R. Artino Jr is professor, Department of Medicine, F. Edward Hébert School of Medicine, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland; ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2661-7853.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the validity of scores from three instruments measuring achievement goal motivation-related constructs: a shortened version of Dweck's Implicit Theories of Intelligence Scale (ITIS-S), measuring incremental and entity mindsets; Elliot's Achievement Goal Questionnaire-Revised (AGQ-R), measuring mastery-approach, mastery-avoidance, performance-approach, and performance-avoidance achievement goals; and Midgley's Patterns of Adaptive Learning Scales (PALS), measuring mastery, performance-approach, and performance-avoidance achievement goals. METHOD: High school students participating in a medical simulation training activity in May 2017 completed each instrument. The authors evaluated internal structure using reliability and factor analysis and relations with other variables using the multitrait-multimethod matrix. RESULTS: There were 178 participants. Internal consistency reliability (Cronbach alpha) was > 0.70 for all subscores. Confirmatory factor analysis of ITIS-S scores demonstrated good model fit. Confirmatory factor analysis of AGQ-R scores demonstrated borderline fit; exploratory factor analysis suggested a three-domain model (approach, mastery-avoidance, performance-avoidance). Confirmatory factor analysis of PALS scores also demonstrated borderline fit; exploratory factor analyses suggested consistent distinction between mastery and performance goals but inconsistent distinction between performance-approach and performance-avoidance goals. Correlations among AGQ-R and PALS scores were large for mastery (r = 0.72) and moderate for performance (≥ 0.45) domains; correlations among incremental and mastery scores were moderate (≥ 0.34). Contrary to expectations, correlations between entity and performance scores were negligible. Correlations between conceptually unrelated domains were small or negligible. CONCLUSIONS: All instrument scores had good internal consistency and generally appropriate relations with other variables, but empirically determined domain structures did not consistently match theory.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the validity of scores from three instruments measuring achievement goal motivation-related constructs: a shortened version of Dweck's Implicit Theories of Intelligence Scale (ITIS-S), measuring incremental and entity mindsets; Elliot's Achievement Goal Questionnaire-Revised (AGQ-R), measuring mastery-approach, mastery-avoidance, performance-approach, and performance-avoidance achievement goals; and Midgley's Patterns of Adaptive Learning Scales (PALS), measuring mastery, performance-approach, and performance-avoidance achievement goals. METHOD: High school students participating in a medical simulation training activity in May 2017 completed each instrument. The authors evaluated internal structure using reliability and factor analysis and relations with other variables using the multitrait-multimethod matrix. RESULTS: There were 178 participants. Internal consistency reliability (Cronbach alpha) was > 0.70 for all subscores. Confirmatory factor analysis of ITIS-S scores demonstrated good model fit. Confirmatory factor analysis of AGQ-R scores demonstrated borderline fit; exploratory factor analysis suggested a three-domain model (approach, mastery-avoidance, performance-avoidance). Confirmatory factor analysis of PALS scores also demonstrated borderline fit; exploratory factor analyses suggested consistent distinction between mastery and performance goals but inconsistent distinction between performance-approach and performance-avoidance goals. Correlations among AGQ-R and PALS scores were large for mastery (r = 0.72) and moderate for performance (≥ 0.45) domains; correlations among incremental and mastery scores were moderate (≥ 0.34). Contrary to expectations, correlations between entity and performance scores were negligible. Correlations between conceptually unrelated domains were small or negligible. CONCLUSIONS: All instrument scores had good internal consistency and generally appropriate relations with other variables, but empirically determined domain structures did not consistently match theory.