| Summary: | 博士 === 國立體育大學 === 教練研究所 === 97 === Purpose: This study was first to examine the mediational effects of 2 × 2 sport achievement goals on implicit theories of ability and perceived ability in predicting sport performance and sport motivation. Second, this study also examined the interactive effects of implicit theories of ability and perceived ability in predicting 2 × 2 sport achievement goals. Method: This study has recruited 667 adolescent athletes. Self-reported inventories were used as primary research method. Participants were asked to complete a series of Implicit Theories of Ability Scale, Multiple Perceived ability Questionnaire, Revised 2 X 2 Achievement Goals Questionnaire for Sport, Self-rating Sport Performance Scale, Others-rating Sport Performance Scale, and Sport Motivation Scale. With respect to data analysis, multiple hierarchical regression analysis and multiple simultaneous regression analysis were primarily used. Results: First, incremental theory (IT) and perceived ability (both self-reference and normative reference) were the positive predictors of self-determined motivational patterns and the negative predictors of none self-determined motivational pattern, whereas entity theory (ET) was the positive predictor of extrinsic motivation and amotivation. Second, IT was the positive predictor of performance-approach goals, whereas ET was the negative predictor of mastery-approach goals. The perception of normatively referenced ability was the positive predictor of performance-approach goals and the negative predictor of avoidance goal patterns (mastery-avoidance goals and performance-avoidance goals); moreover, the perception of self referenced ability was the positive predictor of mastery-approach goals. Third, mastery-approach goals were the positive predictors of intrinsic motivation and self-rating performance and the negative predictor of amotivation. Performance-approach goals were the positive predictors of identified motivational regulation, extrinsic motivational regulation (approaching significance), and self-rating performance. Mastery-avoidance goals were the negative predictors of identified motivational regulation and self-rating performance. Performance-avoidance goals were the positive predictors of introjected motivational regulation, extrinsic motivational regulation (approaching significance), and amotivation and the negative predictors of self-rating performance (approaching significance). Fourth, mastery- approach goals were able to partially mediate the prediction of the perception of self referenced ability on intrinsic motivation, self-rating performance, and amotivation and the prediction of ET on amotivation. Performance-approach goals were also able to partially mediate prediction of the perception of normatively referenced ability on identified motivational regulation. Fifth, the interactive product of IT and the perception of self referenced ability and the interactive product of ET and the perception of normative referenced ability were not the significant predictors of 2 X 2 achievement goals in sport. Conclusion: Totally, implicit theories of ability and perceived ability have relatively distinctive prediction on sport performance and sport motivation. Camparing the perception of self referenced ability, the perception of normative referenced ability is dicisive in valencing 2 X 2 achievement goals in sport. Mastery-approach goals and performance-avoidance goals represent the most adaptive motivational function and the most nonadaptive motivational function respectively. 2 X 2 achievement goals in sport can not fully mediate implicit theories of ability and perceived ability in predicting sport performance and sport motivation and perceived ability can not moderate the prediction of implicit theories of ability on 2 X 2 achievement goals in sport.
|
|---|
