Effects of assigned versus participatively set goals, knowledge of results, and individual differences on employee behavior when goal difficulty is held constant.

In Exp I, 60 female clerical workers were randomly assigned to participative, assigned, and "do best" goal conditions on a clerical test. Specific goals led to higher performance than did the "do best" goals. With goal difficulty held constant, there was no significant difference between the assigned and participative conditions on performance or goal acceptance. Goal attainment, however, was higher in the assigned condition than it was in the participative condition. No main or interaction effects were found for knowledge of results (KR) or for individual difference measures with performance or goal acceptance. However, high self-esteem Ss who received KR attained their goals more often than did Ss with low self-esteem when the goals were participatively set. Exp II was conducted with 28 employees from the same sample in a performance-appraisal setting over an 8-mo period. Assigned goals resulted in higher performance and greater goal acceptance than participatively set goals. There was a positive linear relationship between goal difficulty and performance in the participative condition only. (10 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Goal setting and task performance: 1969–1980.

Results from a review of laboratory and field studies on the effects of goal setting on performance show that in 90% of the studies, specific and challenging goals led to higher performance than easy goals, "do your best" goals, or no goals. Goals affect performance by directing attention, mobilizing effort, increasing persistence, and motivating strategy development. Goal setting is most likely to improve task performance when the goals are specific and sufficiently challenging, Ss have sufficient ability (and ability differences are controlled), feedback is provided to show progress in relation to the goal, rewards such as money are given for goal attainment, the experimenter or manager is supportive, and assigned goals are accepted by the individual. No reliable individual differences have emerged in goal-setting studies, probably because the goals were typically assigned rather than self-set. Need for achievement and self-esteem may be the most promising individual difference variables. (3? p ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Comparison of participatively set and assigned goals in the reduction of alcohol use.

The effects of setting goals on goal commitment, self-efficacy for goal achievement, and goal achievement in the context of an alcohol use intervention were examined using an experimental design in which participants were randomized to participatively set goals, assigned goals, and no goal conditions. One hundred and twenty-six heavy-drinking college students received a single cognitive-behavioral assessment/intervention session and completed measures of goal commitment, self-efficacy for goal achievement, and alcohol use. Results were consistent with, and expanded upon, previous research by demonstrating that having a goal for limiting alcohol consumption was predictive of lower quantity and frequency of alcohol use relative to not having a goal. Participation in goal setting yielded greater goal commitment and self-efficacy for goal achievement than assigned goals, but did not result in significantly greater reductions in alcohol use relative to assigned goals. Goal commitment and self-efficacy explained unique variance in the prediction of alcohol use at follow-up. Findings support the importance of goal setting in alcohol interventions and suggest areas for further research. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of goals and feedback on performance in groups.

In the first study, 26 undergraduate pairs and 52 individuals worked on a perceptual speed task for 20 min to win prizes based on performance. The pairs set group goals and individual goals to be attained, whereas the individuals set only individual goals. Despite the equal levels of individual goals set, goal acceptance and performance were significantly higher for the pairs than for the individuals. A stepwise hierarchical regression analysis supported the contributions of goal acceptance and group goals to performance. In the second study, 50 undergraduate pairs were assigned a goal to be attained as teams on a perceptual speed task lasting 15 min. Group and individual task feedback, given after 7? min of work, significantly improved performance only for those subjects who were below target for either group or individual feedback, yielding interaction effects on performance. The implications of the findings for group goal setting, social loafing, and organizational effectiveness are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Importance of participative goal setting and anticipated rewards on goal difficulty and job performance.

In Study 1, 76 engineers/scientists either participated in the setting of, or were assigned, specific behavioral goals during their performance appraisal. Participative goal setting resulted in more difficult goals being set than was the case when the goals were assigned. Perceptions of goal difficulty, however, were not significantly different in the 2 goal-setting conditions. In Study 2, the analysis of the performance data collected 6 mo later on 132 engineers/scientists revealed main effects for both goal setting and anticipated rewards. Only participative goal setting led to significantly higher performance than a "do your best" and a control group condition. There was no significant difference between the performance of the latter 2 conditions despite the fact that the individuals in the do-your-best group received knowledge of results. (20 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Connaissance des résultats et contr?le spatiotemporel dans une tache d'anticipation-co?ncidence chez des enfants de 6 à 10 ans.

Studied the effects of knowledge of results (KR), either spatial or temporal, on performance of a coincidence-timing task among Canadian children. Human subjects: 90 male and female Canadian children (aged 6–10 yrs). Ss were divided into 3 age groups (mean age 6.8 yrs, 8.3 yrs, and 10.2 yrs). Each age group was divided into 3 experimental groups: 1 group received spatial KR, 1 group received temporal KR, and 1 group received no KR during practice sessions for a coincidence-timing task. The task consisted of moving an object horizontally with the hand to a spot corresponding to the movement of a visual stimulus. The object was to reach the correct spot at the same time as the visual stimulus, which came from either the right or the left at speeds of 100 or 152 cm/s. The results were analyzed according to Ss' age, speed of stimulus, direction of stimulus, type of KR training, and whether or not the S's object arrived before or after the visual stimulus. A multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was used. (English abstract) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Influence of ability, assigned goals, and normative information on personal goals and performance: A challenge to the goal attainability assumption.

58 undergraduates were assigned randomly to 1 of 6 experimental conditions representing 2 levels of goal difficulty (easy vs very hard) and 3 levels of normative information, indicating that the goal had been achieved by 95, 50, or 5% of students previously tested. Ss then set their own performance goals for a creativity task, which they performed over 10 repeated trials. Following Trial 10, Ss were allowed to choose to continue working on from 0 to 5 more trials. As hypothesized, personal performance goals were strongly influenced by assigned goals, but ability, as measured by pretest performance, had no relation to personal goals. Normative information did not influence personal goals directly but did, unexpectedly, interact with assigned goals. Both assigned goals and ability had significant and independent effects on performance, as hypothesized. The results of a path analysis revealed that assigned goals influenced performance both indirectly, through their influence on personal goals, and directly, due to the fact that most Ss assigned very difficult goals set personal performance goals at or above their ability ceiling. Ss assigned goals beyond their immediate reach did not evidence any decrement in intrinsic motivation when compared with those assigned easier goals. (16 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Erratum to Latham, Mitchell, and Dossett.

Reports an error in the original article by Gary P. Latham, Terence R. Mitchell, and Dennis L. Dossett (Journal of Applied Psychology, 1978, Vol. 63, No. 2, pp. 163-171). In Table 1 of the article, the mean for assigned goal setting and public recognition is incorrect. The corrected mean is given. (The following abstract of this article originally appeared in record 1979-02470-001.) In Study 1, 76 engineers/scientists either participated in the setting of, or were assigned, specific behavioral goals during their performance appraisal. Participative goal setting resulted in more difficult goals being set than was the case when the goals were assigned. Perceptions of goal difficulty, however, were not significantly different in the 2 goal-setting conditions. In Study 2, the analysis of the performance data collected 6 mo later on 132 engineers/scientists revealed main effects for both goal setting and anticipated rewards. Only participative goal setting led to significantly higher performance than a "do your best" and a control group condition. There was no significant difference between the performance of the latter 2 conditions despite the fact that the individuals in the do-your-best group received knowledge of results. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of job enrichment and task goals on satisfaction and productivity: Implications for job design.

A 2-phase research project investigated the effects of job enrichment and goal setting on employee productivity and satisfaction in a well-controlled, simulated job environment. In the 1st phase, 2 conditions of goal setting (assigned goals vs no goals) and 2 conditions of job enrichment (enriched vs unenriched) were established, producing 4 experimental conditions in which 42 part-time workers took part. Job enrichment had a substantial impact on job satisfaction but little effect on productivity. Goal setting, on the other hand, had a major impact on productivity and a less substantial impact on satisfaction. In the 2nd phase (after 2 days' work), Ss with unenriched jobs worked under the enrichment conditions and Ss originally without goals were assigned goals. Again, job enrichment had a positive effect on job satisfaction, while goal setting had a positive effect on performance. Results are discussed in terms of the current theoretical approaches for understanding employee motivation on the job. (32 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Productivity and extra-role behavior: The effects of goals and incentives on spontaneous helping.

Examined the effects of goals and monetary incentives on performance and extra-role behavior. 154 Ss worked on an order-processing task for 20 min under easy, moderate, or difficult goals and were paid either a flat rate or a bonus for goal attainment. During the experimental task, a confederate co-worker attempted to elicit help from the S. Results indicate that goals were positively related to performance, that goals were negatively related to extra-role behavior among individuals committed to the goals, and that the lowest extra-role behavior was observed among Ss assigned to difficult goals and paid on the basis of goal attainment. Implications are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of self- and competitor goals on performance in an interdependent bargaining task.

We investigated the relation between goal specificity and difficulty and performance on an interdependent bargaining task. In all, 102 subjects competed as buyers and sellers in a 25-min market simulation in which each negotiator was assigned either a nonspecific do-your-best objective or a specific easy, moderate, or difficult goal. Results showed that negotiators who were assigned specific, difficult goals were individually more profitable than negotiators who were assigned easier or nonspecific goals. Concerning dyadic performance, nonspecific or easy goals led to compromise agreements. Integrative agreements that benefited both parties to the transaction were facilitated by assigning both negotiators a moderate goal or difficult-moderate disparate goals. When both negotiators had difficult goals, dyadic performance did not approach the integrative level. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Knowledge of results and motor learning: A review and critical reappraisal.

Examines some critical definitional and experimental-design problems that underlie the principles of knowledge of results (KR) and learning, the KR literature, and how newer principles of KR lead to notions of how KR works in human motor-learning situations. KR is defined as augmented feedback, where the KR is additional to those sources of feedback that are naturally received when a response is made. Transfer tests, usually under no-KR conditions, are essential for unraveling the temporary effects of KR manipulations from their relatively permanent learning effects. When this is considered, the literature reveals findings that produce reasonable agreement, although there are a number of inconsistencies in studies examining the same variables. When learning vs performance effects of KR are separated, a number of contradictions occur; new principles that emerge include the notion that KR acts as guidance, that it is motivating or energizing, and that it has a role in the formation of associations. It is suggested that KR may guide an S to the proper target behavior, with other processes (e.g., simple repetition) being the critical determinants of learning. (4 p ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Memory performance and beliefs as a function of goal setting and aging.

This research examined the impact of goals on memory and memory beliefs. Older and younger adults completed memory beliefs questionnaires and list recall at baseline. After additional recall trials, the questionnaires were repeated. In Experiment 1, participants were assigned to low challenge or high challenge goals. In Experiment 2, moderate challenge goals were compared to control. In both studies, participants were given a specific goal based on their own performance and received positive feedback for memory gains. Both older and younger adults responded to the goals, showing improved performance across trials, with little change in the control condition. Memory beliefs changed in the moderate and low challenge goal conditions, showing more striking changes for the older groups. These results confirmed that self-regulatory processes related to goal setting can have considerable impact on memory across the adult life span. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Proximal versus distal goal setting and intrinsic motivation.

A. Bandura and D. H. Schunk (see record 1982-07527-001) demonstrated that proximal goal setting can develop self-efficacy and intrinsic motivation from previously low levels. The present study examined the effect of goal proximity on intrinsic motivation when initial task interest was high. 66 female undergraduates were assigned either proximal or distal performance goals, or were not provided with goals, prior to completing a series of enjoyable word puzzles. Distal goal setting enhanced subsequent intrinsic motivation relative to conditions involving proximal goals or no goals. Proximal goal setting, however, produced more positive goal attainment expectations over the course of task engagement and enhanced final perceptions of performance quality to a lesser degree. Findings are interpreted according to E. L. Deci's (1975) cognitive evaluation theory of intrinsic motivation. (45 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

"Effect of previously assigned goals on self-set goals and performance": Correction to Locke, Frederick, Buckner, and Bobko.

Reports an error in "Effect of previously assigned goals on self-set goals and performance" by Edwin A. Locke, Elizabeth Frederick, Elizabeth Buckner and Philip Bobko (Journal of Applied Psychology, 1984[Nov], Vol 69[4], 694-699). The third line was left out on p. 696, top right column. The entire section should read as follows: "Figure 1 compares the goals on T-1 with the mean goals chosen on T-2 by the same groups of subjects (i.e., grouped according to T-1 goals). On T-2 the mean goal levels of the seven original groups ranged from 4.8 to 12.9, in contrast with the T-1 range of 2 to 26." (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 1985-08583-001.) 231 undergraduates were asked to list from 2–26 uses for common objects depending on the level of difficulty of the section (1 of 7) to which they were assigned. Ss were given a 1-min practice trial after task explanations and were then administered 2 experimental trials. Ss were told they were free to change their goals to a higher or lower level for the 2nd trial if they did not like the goal they had been assigned. Results show that Ss chose more difficult goals, if the assigned goals had been easy, and easier goals, if the assigned goals had been difficult. Ss were heavily influenced in their self-set goals by their previously assigned goals. The performance of Ss with impossible goals did not drop on the 2nd trial. A goal–expectancy interaction was found on the 2nd trial that was due to expectancy being positively related to performance at the higher but not the lower goal levels. (8 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effect of previously assigned goals on self-set goals and performance.

[Correction Notice: An erratum for this article was reported in Vol 70(2) of Journal of Applied Psychology (see record 2008-10965-001). The third line was left out on p. 696, top right column. The entire section should read as follows: "Figure 1 compares the goals on T-1 with the mean goals chosen on T-2 by the same groups of subjects (i.e., grouped according to T-1 goals). On T-2 the mean goal levels of the seven original groups ranged from 4.8 to 12.9, in contrast with the T-1 range of 2 to 26."] 231 undergraduates were asked to list from 2–26 uses for common objects depending on the level of difficulty of the section (1 of 7) to which they were assigned. Ss were given a 1-min practice trial after task explanations and were then administered 2 experimental trials. Ss were told they were free to change their goals to a higher or lower level for the 2nd trial if they did not like the goal they had been assigned. Results show that Ss chose more difficult goals, if the assigned goals had been easy, and easier goals, if the assigned goals had been difficult. Ss were heavily influenced in their self-set goals by their previously assigned goals. The performance of Ss with impossible goals did not drop on the 2nd trial. A goal–expectancy interaction was found on the 2nd trial that was due to expectancy being positively related to performance at the higher but not the lower goal levels. (8 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Perceived performance norm as a mediator in the effect of assigned goal on personal goal and task performance.

We conducted two experiments to test the hypothesis that assigned goals affect personal goals and task performance, in part, by providing normative information about the task. Normative information inferred from the goal was expected to influence performance expectancy and performance valence, which, in turn, would affect personal goal and, ultimately, performance. In Experiment 1, 60 undergraduate students were assigned performance goals of varying difficulty on a brainstorming task, and measures of perceived norm, performance expectancy, performance valence, personal goal, and task performance were obtained. Results of analyses of covariance and path analysis were generally consistent with the proposed cognitive mediation model. In Experiment 2, information about the performance norm was manipulated independently of goal difficulty for 135 undergraduates working on the same brainstorming task. Results of similar analyses revealed that (a) the effects of goal difficulty observed in Experiment 1 were attenuated by the presentation of normative information and (b) performance norm had significant effects on all of the dependent variables. The findings have implications for the integration of motivation theories and for the use of goal setting as a motivational technique. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of two types of feedback on goal acceptance and personal goals.

Effects of two types of performance feedback, goal discrepancy (GDF) and past-performance discrepancy (PDF), on acceptance of assigned goals and personal goal levels were examined. Subjects were 110 introductory psychology students, 90 in an experimental and 20 in a control condition, who performed an anagram task for seven trials. Assigned goals for experimental subjects became increasingly difficult. As predicted, assigned goals were rejected when GDF became sufficiently negative. GDF and PDF differed both in sign and magnitude of effects on acceptance and personal goals, indicating that subjects used these feedback discrepancies differently in the goal evaluation process. Unexpectedly, personal goals and performance remained high even after assigned goals were rejected. The importance of understanding factors affecting goal acceptance was discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Knowledge of results and signal rate in monitoring: A transfer of training approach.

This study investigated the transfer effects of training with 3 signal rates and 3 levels of knowledge of results (KR) in a visual monitoring task. Each S monitored for 48 min. under 1 of 9 signal rate-KR conditions on Day 1. On Day 2 all Ss monitored under the medial signal rate with no KR. Results show: (a) on Day 1 mean probability of detection increased with signal rate and amount of KR, (b) these differences persisted on Day 2 when KR was withdrawn, and (c) commissive errors were higher with partial KR than with either full KR or none. It is concluded that training a monitor with KR and high signal rates may improve performance when he must monitor with low signal rates and no feedback. (28 ref.) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Influence of information, choice and task complexity upon goal acceptance, performance, and personal goals.

Tested the hypothesis that information about a goal and/or task, choice in setting a strategy to achieve a goal, and task complexity interact to influence goal acceptance, personal goals, and performance. A laboratory experiment with 96 college students working on a class-scheduling task was used to test the hypothesis. The task consisted of producing mock class schedules consisting of 5 nonredundant classes. The Ss were assigned to either high-information, choice manipulation, or task-complexity conditions. Ss were administered a questionnaire assessing goal acceptance, personal goals, and performance prior to and on completion of the task. Results of 3-way ANOVA conducted on measures of goal acceptance, personal goals, and performance supported the hypotheses that choice in goal-setting and the provision of information interact as do information and task complexity. A 2nd study conducted to generalize these findings also supported the hypotheses. In the 2nd study, 40 animal caregivers (average age 28 yrs) were participants in a replication of the laboratory experiment with task complexity as a repeated-measures factor. Findings are discussed as a means of expanding the position of participation within the goal-setting model. (15 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)