Journal of Sports Sciences, 2001, 19, 397± 409
Empirical links between achievement goal theory and
self-determination theory in sport
NIKOS NTOUMANIS*
School of Leisure and Sport Studies, Leeds Metropolitan University, Beckett Park Campus, Leeds LS6 3QS, UK
Accepted 12 February 2001
The aim of this study was to examine the empirical links between achievement goal theory and self-determination
theory in sport. Addressing theoretical and methodological limitations of previous research, the study tested
the independent and interactive eþ ects of goal orientations and perceived competence on seven motivational
variables with diþ erent degrees of self-determination. Regression analyses of data collected from 247 British
university students showed that task orientation predicted motivational variables with high self-determination.
In contrast, ego orientation predicted motivational variables with low self-determination. Perceived competence
predicted both high self-determined and low self-determined motivational variables. A signi® cant interaction
emerged between task and ego orientations in predicting external regulation. The results suggest the adaptive
role of task orientation in facilitating self-determined motivation in sport. However, the ® ndings are not conclusive, as the variance explained in most analyses was relatively small. Suggestions are oþ ered for a more
comprehensive empirical testing of the links between the two theories.
Keywords: goal orientations, interaction, perceived competence, self-determination theory.
Introduction
Two well-known theories of motivation are achievement
goal theory (Nicholls, 1989) and self-determination
theory (Deci and Ryan, 1985; Ryan and Deci, 2000).
These theories have extensive applications in sport
and exercise and have facilitated our understanding of
motivated behaviour and related cognitive, aþ ective and
behavioural outcomes (for reviews, see Vallerand and
Losier, 1999; Duda, in press). Although other theorists
(e.g. Dweck and Leggett, 1988) have developed similar
achievement goal theories, the work of Nicholls is
reviewed here, as it has been the most in¯ uential in
sport and exercise. The present study tries to provide
empirical evidence for the links between key constructs
of achievement goal theory and self-determination
theory. Speci® cally, it aims to show how diþ erent
achievement criteria and perceived competence predict
independently and in interaction diþ erent degrees
of self-determination. Such evidence can be used to
facilitate future theoretical eþ orts to integrate the two
theories. From an applied perspective, an under* e-mail: [email protected]
standing of how diþ erent achievement criteria and
perceived competence predict diþ erent degrees of selfdetermination can help practitioners to oþ er a more
comprehensive framework of psychological support.
This paper presents a brief overview of the two theories
and discusses their theoretical links. Furthermore, I
review the theoretical and methodological limitations
of empirical studies that have looked at the relationships
between goal orientations and self-determination. I
show how these limitations can be addressed to advance
our understanding of the two theories.
Achievement goal theory
Achievement goal theory postulates that, in the achievement setting of sport, two goal orientations are evident:
task and ego. These goal orientations are linked to
two diþ erent conceptions of ability. The ® rst is the
undiþ erentiated (or less diþ erentiated) conception of
ability, evident in most individuals below the age of
about 12 years, whereby eþ ort, luck and task diý culty
cannot be distinguished from ability (or they are partly
distinguished) as causes of outcomes (Nicholls, 1989).
Journal of Sports Sciences ISSN 0264-0414 print/ISSN 1466-447X online Ó
http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
2001 Taylor & Francis Ltd
398
For example, high eþ ort is assumed to result in more
learning, which is interpreted as indicative of high
ability. The second conception of ability, the differentiated conception, is observed at the age of about
12 years, when, through various cognitive stages,
eþ ort, luck and task diý culty are diþ erentiated as
causes of outcomes. Nicholls (1989) also labelled the
diþ erentiated conception of ability as `ability as current
capacity’ , because children who hold this conception
realize that eþ ort can increase performance only
up to the limits of their present capacity on the task at
hand.
After the age of about 12 years, individuals can adopt
the diþ erentiated or undiþ erentiated conception of
ability depending on the salience of situational cues
(Nicholls, 1989). If the situational emphasis is on
competition and the public evaluation of skills, a differentiated conception of ability will be observed. In
contrast, when the situational focus is on learning and
individual improvement, individuals will use a less
diþ erentiated conception. A diþ erentiated conception
of ability leads to normative evaluations and standards
(e.g. winning), because individuals strive to achieve
success by demonstrating superior ability; an ego goal
orientation is then salient. Alternatively, a less diþ erentiated conception of ability leads to self-referenced
evaluations (e.g. personal improvement and learning),
because the emphasis is on success through high eþ ort
and learning; a task goal orientation is then evident
(Nicholls, 1989). As Duda (in press) has emphasized,
goal orientations should not be confused with one’ s
goal-setting eþ orts; goal orientations are dispositional
tendencies re¯ ecting diþ erent ways of cognitively
processing achievement in a given activity. Duda (in
press) also distinguished between goal orientations and
states of goal involvement. Speci® cally, task involvement
and ego involvement represent transitory and situationspeci® c goal states that are the outcomes of the interaction between dispositional goal orientations and
motivational climates (i.e. perceptions of situational
evaluative cues; see Ntoumanis and Biddle, 1999).
A review of the literature by Duda and Whitehead
(1998) showed that variations in goal orientations can
lead to observed diþ erences in individuals’ cognition,
aþ ect and behaviour. These variations have been more
or less observed across samples diþ ering in competitive
standard, sex, age and culture. For example, high task
orientation has been related to pro-social views about
the role of sport (Duda, 1989), high enjoyment and
interest (Hom et al., 1993), fairplay (Lee et al., 1999)
and successful coping with stress (Ntoumanis et al.,
1999). Based on Nicholls’ (1989) theory, it has been
assumed (but not tested) that these adaptive motivational patterns are evident in all individuals with high
task orientation irrespective of their perceived com-
Ntoumanis
petence. This is because those with high task orientation
do not judge their self-worth based on the adequacy
of their ability and the demonstration of superiority.
In contrast, according to Nicholls (1989), perceived
competence plays an important moderating role in
determining the motivational outcomes of ego orientation. This is because individuals with high ego orientation tend to be more preoccupied with the adequacy
of their ability. When they perceive themselves as highly
competent, they exhibit motivational patterns similar
to those with high task orientation (Nicholls, 1989;
Hardy, 1997). In contrast, when ego orientation is
coupled with low perceived ability, negative outcomes
are observed, for example a low investment in learning
(Cury et al., 1997) and personally uncontrollable
attributions (Vlachopoulos and Biddle, 1997). When an
individual with a high ego orientation and low perceived
competence also has low task orientation, negative
motivational outcomes are even more profound (Fox
et al., 1994). Despite the prediction by Nicholls (1989)
that ego orientation and perceived competence interact
to predict motivational outcomes, such interactive
eþ ects have rarely been tested in the literature (for a
recent criticism, see Hardy, 1997).
Self-determination theory
Variations in achievement goals have been linked to
diþ erences in self-determination. Before the available
evidence is reviewed, it is informative to present brie¯ y
self-determination theory. According to Deci and Ryan
(1991), central elements of their theory are the active
organism and the social context. The ® rst term refers
to how one integrates `new experiences and regulatory
processes with one’ s intrinsic self’ (p. 239). Selfdetermination theory argues that, throughout their lives,
individuals strive to achieve integration and cohesion of
new ideas and interests both within themselves and with
others. This is referred to as the `organismic integration
process’. The social context is also important because it
can support or undermine these integrative processes.
Social factors (e.g. cooperation, provision of choice) will
facilitate the organismic integration process and will
promote self-determination if they satisfy three innate
psychological needs for autonomy, competence and
relatedness. Deci and Ryan (1991) de® ned the need for
autonomy as individuals’ eþ orts to determine their own
behaviour. The need for competence was described
as individuals striving to experience eþ ectance. Lastly,
the need for relatedness was de® ned as individuals’
attempts to have a satisfying and coherent involvement
with others.
Deci and Ryan (1985) argued that people do not
always internalize and integrate external values and
399
Achievement goals and self-determination
experiences. In such circumstances, motivation is less
self-determined and more controlling or amotivating.
Deci and Ryan (1985) proposed a self-determination
continuum to describe motivational variables with
diþ erent degrees of self-determination. From higher to
lower self-determination, these are: intrinsic motivation,
extrinsic motivation (integrated regulation, identi® ed
regulation, introjected regulation and external regulation) and amotivation.
Intrinsically motivated behaviour has the highest selfdetermination, occurs without the incentive of external
rewards (e.g. trophies) and is undertaken out of interest
in the activity itself rather than the outcomes of the
activity. Three dimensions of intrinsic motivation have
been identi® ed by Pelletier et al. (1995), which represent
the same degree of self-determination. The ® rst is the
motivation to know; this describes circumstances in
which individuals ® nd satisfaction while learning new
things or skills. The second dimension is the motivation
to accomplish; this describes the pleasure experienced
while individuals strive to improve on already learned
skills. Vallerand and Fortier (1998) emphasized that this
dimension describes the process of accomplishment
rather than the end result. The third dimension of
intrinsic motivation refers to the motivation to experience stimulation and pleasant sensations (e.g. a
`runner’s high’).
Extrinsic motivation refers to activities that are
carried out as a means to an end and not for their own
sake (Deci and Ryan, 1991). Extrinsic motivation is
also multidimensional and comprises four dimensions.
The ® rst, integrated regulation, represents the most
self-determined form of the internalization process. It
refers to behaviours that are performed out of choice
to harmonize and bring coherence to diþ erent parts of
the self. For example, one may choose to participate
in sport, have a good diet and a balanced social life
to achieve the overarching goal of a healthy lifestyle.
Unfortunately, none of the existing sport motivation
questionnaires assesses this dimension. The second
dimension, identi® ed regulation, describes behaviours
that are highly valued and performed out of choice but,
unlike integrated regulation, the choice is limited to
the particular activity. For example, some individuals
may participate in sport because they believe that this
is a good way to develop their ® tness. Both integrated
and identi® ed regulation represent self-determined
forms of behaviour; however, they are extrinsic, because
individuals perform them to achieve personal goals
and not for their inherent appeal (Deci and Ryan,
1991).
The third dimension of extrinsic motivation is introjected regulation, which refers to behaviours that
individuals perform to achieve social recognition or
avoid internal pressures and feelings of guilt. The fourth
dimension, external regulation, describes behaviours
regulated through external means, such as rewards or
constraints. Both introjected regulation and external
regulation are considered to be controlling or low selfdetermined types of motivation. The last type described
by Deci and Ryan (1991) is amotivation, or a lack of
intrinsic or extrinsic motivation. Amotivation is evident
when individuals perceive no contingencies between
their actions and the end result and question whether
they should still be involved in a particular activity. It is
viewed as a non-self-determined type of motivation.
Reviews by Vallerand and Fortier (1998) and
Vallerand and Losier (1999) in sport have indicated
that self-determined regulation is more likely to lead to
positive cognitive (e.g. high concentration), aþ ective
(e.g. enjoyment) and behavioural (e.g. persistence) outcomes, compared to controlling and amotivated
regulation.
Links between the two theories
There is both theoretical and empirical evidence to
show that the two goal orientations are linked to different types of motivation. As discussed earlier, Deci
and Ryan (1991) argued that factors which satisfy the
needs for autonomy, competence and relatedness will
promote self-determined types of motivation. I argue
here that high task orientation can ful® l one or more of
these needs and, therefore, can enhance self-determined
motivation. In contrast, high ego orientation, especially
when coupled with low perceptions of competence, is
not conducive to the satisfaction of these needs.
Speci® cally, there is evidence in the literature to
suggest that the controlling features of ego orientation
undermine autonomy and foster an external locus of
causality, whereas task orientation facilitates the
autonomy of behaviour (Ryan, 1982; Brunel, 1999).
When individuals have high ego orientation, they are
more interested in the anticipated outcomes of a
particular activity rather than in the activity itself
(Nicholls, 1989). The attainment of social approval and
rewards, the demonstration of superior ability and other
expected outcomes will control their behaviour. In such
circumstances, individuals are less likely to ® nd personal
satisfaction in the inherent aspects of an activity and
in the process (eþ ort) of task mastery. Therefore, ego
orientation is more likely to relate to controlling than to
self-determined types of motivation. In support of this
argument, Brunel (1999) reported that ego orientation
was positively related to introjected regulation and
external regulation in 160 French undergraduate students enrolled on a badminton course. Furthermore,
Ryan (1982) showed that ego involvement undermined
intrinsic interest in hidden-® gures puzzles.
400
In contrast, task orientation facilitates the autonomy
of behaviour, because when individuals are taskinvolved, their motivation to perform a task is derived
from its intrinsic properties and not from its expected
outcomes (e.g. attainment of social approval, demonstration of normative competence). In such circumstances, individuals experience satisfaction while they
strive to learn or master sport skills. In an academic
context, Butler (1987) showed that mastery (task) goals
promoted intrinsic motivation by fostering challengeseeking and task persistence. In sport, positive relationships between task orientation and the diþ erent forms
of intrinsic motivation have been reported by Brunel
(1999).
Task orientation can satisfy not only the need for
autonomy, but also the need for competence. Duda
(1992, in press) argued that individuals with high task
orientation are less likely to feel incompetent in sport
than those with high ego orientation. This is because
the former use self-referenced criteria to judge their
competence. These criteria are more controllable and,
therefore, more achievable. In contrast, perceptions of
competence are fragile when one has high ego orientation, because competence is construed on the basis
of normative criteria (e.g. winning), which are more
diý cult and not under one’s control. Of course, it could
be suggested that individuals with high ego orientation
and high perceived competence can be self-determined,
as sport achievement satis® es their need for competence. However, Deci and Ryan (1985) argued
that high perceived competence will lead to selfdetermined types of motivation only under conditions
of autonomy. As mentioned above, individuals with
high ego orientation are not likely to feel or behave
autonomously because their conception of ability as
capacity will lead to a preoccupation with the adequacy
of their competence, which will control their behaviour.
Compared to ego orientation, task orientation is unlikely to undermine the need for relatedness. Although
at present there is no direct evidence to support this
claim, it is logical to assume that the constant interindividual comparison promoted by ego orientation
(Duda, 1992) is unlikely to strengthen social links
among athletes. In contrast, task orientation downplays
normative comparisons and rivalry among athletes
and, therefore, it should not undermine their social
aý liations.
Similarities and diþ erences between the two
theories
Goal achievement theory and self-determination theory
share certain characteristics. Brie¯ y, both are social
cognitive theories of motivation which emphasize that
Ntoumanis
the way individuals construe the meaning of an activity
will in¯ uence the quality of their engagement in it.
However, as Butler (1989) and Ryan and Deci (1989)
argued, each theory focuses on a diþ erent body of
meaning and perceptions that should be viewed as
complementary rather than contradictory. Speci® cally,
achievement goal theory focuses primarily on the
eþ ects of task and ego involvement on performance
and preferences for task diý culty, whereas selfdetermination theory examines the eþ ects of goal
involvement on intrinsic motivation. Both theories
emphasize the role of social factors (e.g. cooperation,
competition, social evaluation, normative feedback)
as antecedents of achievement-related behaviour.
Achievement goal theory examines how perceptions of
task- and ego-promoting climates, created by signi® cant
others (e.g. parents, teachers, coaches), interact with
dispositional goals to in¯ uence cognition, aþ ect and
behaviour in achievement contexts. In contrast,
self-determination theory examines how social factors ±
that is, human and non-human factors in social
environments (Vallerand, 1997) ± impact on human
motivation through the mediating variables of competence, autonomy and relatedness.
Both theories underline the role of perceived competence in guiding achievement behaviour. However, goal achievement theory distinguishes between a
diþ erentiated and a less diþ erentiated conception of
ability. In contrast, self-determination theory views
competence as a unitary human need, the satisfaction
of which will promote self-determined motivation. As
a result, self-determination theory fails to explain how
social contexts impact on motivation by promoting
one rather than another conception of competence
(Butler, 1989). On the other hand, the exclusive focus of
achievement goal theory on perceptions of competence
may lead to an incomplete understanding of motivation
in achievement contexts, such as sport. In such contexts,
individuals strive also to have a choice in their actions
(i.e. a need for autonomy) and feel aý liated to others in
a meaningful way (i.e. a need for relatedness).
Goal orientations and motivational types can be
located within the same stage of generality in Vallerand’ s
(1997) hierarchical model of motivation. Vallerand presented a motivational sequence in which social factors
in¯ uence diþ erent types of motivation through the three
needs for competence, autonomy and relatedness. In
turn, the motivational types predict various cognitive,
aþ ective and behavioural outcomes. This motivational
sequence is posited to exist at three stages of generality:
global (i.e. trait), contextual (i.e. context-speci® c) and
situational (i.e. state). Most previous studies, as well as
the present one, have examined goal orientations and
types of motivation at the contextual stage of generality.
It should be noted, however, that goal orientations are
401
Achievement goals and self-determination
not an explicit part of Vallerand’s (1997) model. This
is a limitation of the model, as self-determination
theory posits the in¯ uence of both social and individual
factors on human motivation. Ferrer-Caja and Weiss
(2000) presented a model in which goal orientation
mediated the in¯ uence of social factors on the variables
of autonomy and perceived competence. Their results
show that task orientation mediated the in¯ uence of
learning social climate on perceived competence and
autonomy. In turn, the latter two variables predicted
intrinsic motivation. In contrast, ego orientation
mediated the in¯ uence of performance social climate
on perceived competence. These ® ndings provide preliminary evidence for the co-existence of goal orientations, perceived competence and self-determination at
the same stage of generality, with goal orientations
having an antecedent role.
As the research evidence in this section shows, the
two theories have the potential to explain motivated
behaviour in achievement contexts by complementing
each other. Indeed, both Butler (1989) and Ryan and
Deci (1989) have encouraged attempts to integrate
the two theories. However, before such initiatives are
undertaken, it is important to ascertain the empirical
links between some of the key variables of the two
theories. Unfortunately, as the discussion in the next
section shows, previous research that has tried to
measure such links has been aþ ected by conceptual
and methodological limitations.
Empirical testing to date
Several studies have looked at the relationship between
goal orientations and intrinsic motivation in sport and
physical education (PE). Duda et al. (1995) showed that
intrinsic interest and eþ ort in sport were positively
related to task orientation and negatively related or
unrelated to ego orientation in two samples of undergraduate students. Vlachopoulos and Biddle (1996) and
Dorobantu and Biddle (1997), in the context of British
and Romanian PE respectively, reported that the most
intrinsically motivated students were those with high
task orientation irrespective of their ego orientation.
Furthermore, Newton and Duda (1999) examined
potential interactions between goal orientations, motivational climates and perceptions of competence in a
sample of junior female volleyball players. None of the
interactions were signi® cant. Main eþ ects showed that
enjoyment or interest in volleyball was positively predicted by a task-promoting motivational climate and
perceived competence and negatively predicted by
ego orientation. Eþ ort or importance was positively
predicted by task orientation and perceived competence
and negatively predicted by ego orientation. Lastly,
Ferrer-Caja and Weiss (2000) used a sample of highschool PE students to test a model in which task and
ego goal orientations in¯ uenced intrinsic motivation
through the mediation of perceived competence and
autonomy. The results for both the male and female
sample showed strong direct positive paths linking
task orientation with intrinsic motivation and small
direct negative paths linking ego orientation with
intrinsic motivation. Task orientation also had very
small indirect paths through perceived competence and
self-determination.
However, these studies have several limitations. First,
with the exception of Ferrer-Caja and Weiss (2000),
they used the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (McAuley
et al., 1989), which measures antecedents (competence)
and outcomes (enjoyment or interest, eþ ort, low tension
or pressure) of intrinsic motivation rather than intrinsic
motivation by itself (Markland and Hardy, 1997;
Vallerand and Fortier, 1998). Ferrer-Caja and Weiss
(2000) used a measure that, despite the authors’ claims,
assessed both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation.
Secondly, these studies viewed intrinsic motivation as a
unidimensional as opposed to a multidimensional construct. Thirdly, relationships between goal orientations
and identi® ed regulation, introjected regulation,
external regulation and amotivation were overlooked.
Fourthly, Ferrer-Caja and Weiss (2000) assigned a
mediator role to perceived competence, although it
has a moderator role in Nicholls’ (1989) theory (for a
distinction between mediators and moderators, see
Baron and Kenny, 1986).
Goudas et al. (1994) overcame some of these limitations by using a conceptually appropriate multidimensional measure of motivation (i.e. a PE adaptation
of the Academic Self-Regulation Questionnaire; Ryan
and Connell, 1989). However, Goudas et al. (1994)
combined the diþ erent motivational types into a selfdetermination index. Using this index can be problematic, because it obscures the unique antecedents
and outcomes of the diþ erent types of motivation
(Vallerand, 1997). The most comprehensive empirical
test of the links between achievement goal theory and
self-determination theory in sport was carried out by
Brunel (1999). However, this study (like all previously
mentioned studies, with the exception of Newton and
Duda, 1999) can be criticized for not assessing the
moderating role of perceived competence.
The present study
This study was designed to address the limitations
of, and expand on, previous research in several ways.
First, it examined whether goal orientations and perceived competence could predict each of the diþ erent
402
motivational types. Speci® cally, I hypothesized that task
orientation would positively predict intrinsic types of
motivation and identi® ed regulation, but would not predict introjected regulation, external regulation or amotivation. Similar hypotheses were made for perceived
competence; the only exception was that perceived competence was expected to negatively predict amotivation.
In contrast, I hypothesized that ego orientation would
positively predict introjected regulation and external
regulation, but would not predict intrinsic forms of
motivation, identi® ed regulation or amotivation.
I expected to observe a similar pattern of predictions
for both males and females. Although diþ erences have
been shown between the sexes in the mean levels of goal
orientations, perceived competence and motivational
types (e.g. Lirgg, 1991; Duda et al., 1995; Fortier et al.,
1995; Li et al., 1996), from a theoretical viewpoint, the
pattern of associations between these variables should not
diþ er across the two sexes. For example, task orientation
should positively predict the three intrinsic types of
motivation in both males and females.
The second way in which the present study expanded
on previous research was by looking at the interactive
eþ ects of goal orientations and perceived competence
on the diþ erent types of motivation. Whereas previous
studies (e.g. Duda et al., 1995; Vlachopoulos and
Biddle, 1996; Dorobantu and Biddle, 1997) on goal
orientations overlooked diþ erent levels of perceived
competence, this study took this variable into account.
According to achievement goal theory (Nicholls, 1989),
perceived competence can moderate the impact of ego
orientation on achievement-related variables. I expected
that when ego orientation was high, more controlling
motivation (i.e. introjected and external regulation)
and less amotivation would be reported when perceived
competence was high rather than low. I did not expect
that, under conditions of high ego orientation, perceived
competence would impact on self-determined motivation (i.e. intrinsic motivation types and identi® ed
regulation). Individuals with high ego orientation and
high perceived competence are likely to be driven in
sport by rewards and external recognition and not by
their desire to learn new skills and work hard on their
weaknesses. In contrast, those with high ego orientation
who doubt their ability are likely to be amotivated and
to lack intrinsic or extrinsic motivation. No signi® cant
interactions between task orientation and perceived
competence were expected, as these were not theorized
by Nicholls (1989).
Hardy (1997, 1998) has criticized the literature for
examining the two goal orientations in isolation from
each other, despite Nicholls’ (1989) theorizing that the
two goal orientations are orthogonal and can be found
to diþ erent extents within the same person. Hardy
(1997, 1998) pointed out that the orthogonal nature of
Ntoumanis
the two goal orientations implies that they can interact
with each other to predict various motivational outcomes. Because of this argument, it was important
to examine in this study whether task and ego goal
orientations interact to predict motivational types with
diþ erent degrees of self-determination. Both Hardy
(1998) and Duda (in press) have suggested the use of
moderated hierarchical regression analysis to test for
interaction eþ ects, instead of the four-factor one-way
analysis of variance, which has traditionally been used in
the literature.
I expected that, under conditions of high task orientation, greater controlling motivation would be observed
when ego orientation was high rather than low. No
diþ erences in amotivation were expected. Both high
task/low ego and high task/high ego individuals are
expected to be motivated; however, the former will
depend less on controlling motivation because of their
weaker ego orientation. Furthermore, under conditions
of high task orientation, no signi® cant diþ erences were
expected in self-determined motivation as an outcome
of diþ erent levels of ego orientation. That is, the interaction between ego orientation and task orientation in
predicting self-determined types of motivation was
not expected to be signi® cant. One could object to this
hypothesis and argue that, because of its association
with controlling motivation, ego orientation could
potentially reduce the self-determination of a predominantly task-oriented individual. However, this
argument would assume a pattern of strong negative
relationships between controlling and self-determined
types of motivation. This is unlikely to be the case, as
distant types of motivation in the self-determination
continuum are not highly correlated (see Li and
Harmer, 1996, on the simplex structure of the selfdetermination continuum).
Extending the two-way interactions and based on
similar analysis by Newton and Duda (1999), three-way
interactions were also tested between goal orientations
and perceived competence. I expected that high ego
orientation would predict the greatest controlling
motivation and amotivation, and the least selfdetermined motivation, when perceived competence
and task orientation were low. When individuals depend
heavily on comparative criteria, make little or no use
of self-referenced criteria and doubt their ability, they
are unlikely to be self-determined in sport.
Methods
Participants
The participants were 268 British university athletes
(154 males, 108 females; 6 did not specify their sex)
403
Achievement goals and self-determination
from a wide variety of sports, studying at a large university in the North of England. The age range of the
sample was 18± 36 years (20.4 ± 2.7 years; mean ± s),
but approximately 90% of the participants were aged
18± 23 years. Most were of a relatively high competitive
standard. Speci® cally, 45% of the sample had achieved
their highest competitive standard competing for a district or county team, and a further 22% had achieved
their highest competitive standard competing for a
regional or national team.
Measures
The two goal orientations were
Goal orientations.
measured with the Task and Ego Orientation in Sport
Questionnaire (Duda and Nicholls, 1992). This questionnaire has seven items that measure task orientation
and six items that measure ego orientation. When completing the questionnaire, participants are asked to think
of when they feel most successful in their sport and then
indicate their agreement with items describing task and
ego orientation. An example of a task orientation item
is `Something that I learn makes me want to go and
practise more’; an example of an ego orientation item
is `Others mess things up and I don’t’ . Responses are
reported on 5-point scales ranging from 1 (`strongly
disagree’) to 5 (`strongly agree’). An extensive review
by Duda and Whitehead (1998) has shown that the
Task and Ego Orientation in Sport Questionnaire is
a well-established measure of goal orientations with
good reliability and validity. In this study, the alpha
coeý cients were 0.76 for task orientation and 0.84 for
ego orientation.
Seven motivational types were
Motivational types.
assessed using the multidimensional Sport Motivation
Scale (Pelletier et al., 1995). When completing this
scale, athletes are asked why they practise their sport;
they then respond to items re¯ ecting the diþ erent
types of motivation. Three diþ erent types of intrinsic
motivation are measured: intrinsic motivation to
know (e.g. `for the pleasure of discovering new training
techniques’), intrinsic motivation to accomplish (e.g.
`for the pleasure I feel while improving some of my
weak points’) and intrinsic motivation to experience
stimulation (e.g. `for the pleasure I feel in living exciting
experiences’). The scale also measures three types of
extrinsic motivation: identi® ed regulation (e.g. `because
it is a good way to learn lots of things which could
be useful to me in other areas of my life’ ), introjected
regulation (e.g. `because I must do sports to feel good
about myself’ ) and external regulation (e.g. `because
people around me think it is important to be in shape’ ).
Lastly, the scale measures amotivation (e.g. `I used to
have good reasons for doing sports, but now I am asking
myself if I should continue doing it’ ). All types of motivation have four items and are measured on 5-point
scales ranging from 1 (`does not correspond at all’ ) to 7
(`corresponds exactly’ ). The reliability and validity of
the Sport Motivation Scale have been shown in an
extensive review by Vallerand and Fortier (1998). In
the present study, the alpha coeý cients were 0.84
for intrinsic motivation to know, 0.75 for intrinsic
motivation to accomplish, 0.72 for intrinsic motivation
to experience stimulation, 0.72 for identi® ed regulation,
0.75 for introjected regulation, 0.74 for external
regulation and 0.77 for amotivation.
The perceived competence of
Perceived competence.
the athletes was assessed using ® ve items taken from the
Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (McAuley et al., 1989).
The ® ve items were slightly modi® ed because, in the
original study, they referred to a discrete basketball
task. An example item is `I think I am pretty good in
my sport’ . The ® ve items are measured on 5-point scales
ranging from 1 (`strongly disagree’) to 7 (`strongly
agree’). McAuley et al. (1989) reported relatively high
standardized item loadings and a Cronbach’s alpha
of 0.84 for the perceived competence subscale. In the
present study, the alpha was 0.81.
Procedure
All athletes were approached through their coaches or
the University Athletic Union. The three questionnaires
were administered on a single occasion in the order they
are presented in the `Measures’ section. Data collection
lasted about 3 weeks and was carried out by the author
at mutually convenient times. All athletes were asked to
sign an informed consent form. During administration
of the questionnaires, the athletes were informed they
could withdraw at any time. Furthermore, they were
reassured that their responses would be kept in strict
con® dence and would not be available to any third
party.
Results
Preliminary analyses
At the beginning, all univariate and multivariate outliers
were removed using Boxplots and the Mahalanobis
distance criterion respectively. Thus, the ® nal sample
included 247 athletes. Table 1 presents the means
and standard deviations for all the variables in the
study. The results show that the athletes had a relatively
good motivational pro® le. Speci® cally, they reported
high task orientation, perceived competence and selfdetermined motivation, moderate ego orientation and
404
Ntoumanis
Table 1. Descriptive statistics for all
variables (mean ± s)
Variables
Task orientation
Ego orientation
Perceived competence
IM-knowledge
IM-accomplishment
IM-stimulation
Identi® ed regulation
Introjected regulation
External regulation
Amotivation
4.07 ± 0.44
3.13 ± 0.85
5.12 ± 0.88
4.59 ± 1.07
5.07 ± 0.92
5.00 ± 0.95
4.33 ± 1.08
3.98 ± 1.29
3.56 ± 1.16
2.00 ± 0.93
Note: Task orientation and ego orientation were
measured on 5-point scales; all other variables
were measured on 7-point scales.
Abbreviation: IM = intrinsic motivation.
controlling motivation, and low amotivation. It was
not a purpose of this study to examine diþ erences in
goal orientations, perceived competence and diþ erent
types of motivation between the sexes. Nevertheless,
to assess the diþ erences between males and females, a
one-way multivariate analysis of variance was carried
out. The results showed that males were signi® cantly
higher than females on ego orientation, perceived
competence, external regulation, intrinsic motivation
to accomplish, intrinsic motivation to experience
stimulation and identi® ed regulation. However, eþ ect
sizes (g2) showed that these diþ erences were of very little
practical signi® cance, as they explained at most 8%
of the variance (mean g2 = 0.03). Furthermore,
Fisher’s transformation formula showed no signi® cant
diþ erences in the size of correlations among the
variables in the two sexes. This ® nding indicates that
the relationships were largely independent of the sex
of the individual.
Moderated hierarchical regression analyses
A series of moderated hierarchical regression analyses
was conducted to determine whether the two goal
orientations and perceived competence could predict
independently and in interaction the seven motivational
types. In each of the regressions, task orientation, ego
orientation and perceived competence were ® rst entered
individually to ascertain their unique contribution to
the amount of variance explained. Next, three two-way
interactions were entered individually: ego orientation
with perceived competence, task orientation with
perceived competence, and task orientation with ego
orientation. Then, the three-way interaction term of
these variables was entered in the last step. Following
Fig. 1. Signi® cant interaction between task and ego goal
orientations in predicting external regulation. r , high ego
orientation; j , low ego orientation.
the suggestions by Aiken and West (1991) and Jaccard
et al. (1990), goal orientations and perceived competence were standardized before the analyses to avoid
multicollinearity between these variables (i.e. ® rst-order
terms) and their interaction terms.
A signi® cant interaction eþ ect was inferred by a
signi® cant increment in R2 when an interaction term
was entered in the equation. As recommended by Aiken
and West (1991), a step-down hierarchical procedure
was used. This approach begins with the full regression
equation; non-signi® cant terms are then omitted
sequentially in stages beginning with the highest-order
term in the equation. When evaluating the results
of moderated hierarchical regression analysis, Jaccard
et al. (1990) recommended the use of unstandardized
regression coeý cients, which should be interpreted in
the spirit of standardized scores. A summary of the ® nal
regressions on each dependent variable is reported in
Table 2.
One two-way interaction was signi® cant: external
regulation was predicted by the interaction between task
and ego goal orientations. To determine the form of the
interaction, two regression lines were plotted to depict
the regression of task orientation on external regulation
as a function of low (1 standard deviation below the
mean) and high (1 standard deviation above the mean)
ego orientation (Aiken and West, 1991). As Fig. 1
shows, when task orientation was low, diþ erent levels of
ego orientation did not impact on external regulation.
However, when task orientation was high, high ego
orientation predicted signi® cantly higher external
regulation than when ego orientation was low.
The results also showed several signi® cant main
eþ ects. All self-determined motivation types (i.e.
the three types of intrinsic motivation and identi® ed
regulation) were positively predicted by task orientation
and perceived competence. Intrinsic motivation to
405
Achievement goals and self-determination
Table 2. Summary of ® nal moderated hierarchical regression analyses
R2 change
F change
b
t
IM-knowledge
Task orientation
Perceived competence
0.10
0.05
28.7***
15.7***
0.34
0.25
5.35***
3.96***
IM-accomplishment
Task orientation
Perceived competence
0.20
0.10
59.5***
36.7***
0.40
0.30
7.71***
6.06***
IM-stimulation
Task orientation
Ego orientation
Perceived competence
0.13
0.03
0.06
36.1***
7.7**
17.9***
0.34
0.15
0.24
6.01***
2.77**
4.23***
Identi® ed regulation
Task orientation
Perceived competence
0.04
0.06
10.3***
17.4**
0.22
0.28
3.22**
4.18***
Introjected regulation
Ego orientation
0.03
7.3**
0.22
2.71**
0.13
0.07
0.05
36.6***
21.4***
16.2***
0.41
0.31
0.24
6.05***
4.63***
4.03***
0.08
20.6***
-0.26
-4.54***
Predictors
External regulation
Ego orientation
Perceived competence
Task orientation ´ ego
orientation
Amotivation
Perceived competence
Abbreviation: IM = intrinsic motivation. ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001.
experience stimulation was also positively predicted by
ego orientation. The two controlling motivation types
(i.e. introjected regulation and external regulation)
were positively predicted by ego orientation. External
regulation was also positively predicted by perceived
competence. Lastly, amotivation was negatively predicted by perceived competence. However, it should be
noted that the variance explained in these regressions
was relatively small (mean R2 = 0.16).
Discussion
This study examined how key constructs of achievement goal theory (Nicholls, 1989) and self-determination theory (Deci and Ryan, 1985) are linked in
sport. Although the conceptual links between these two
theories have previously been described (Duda, 1992),
their empirical testing to date has been insuý cient.
Achievement goal theory argues that two goal orientations, namely task and ego, are evident in sport. These
orientations re¯ ect diþ erent criteria for cognitively
processing achievement in a given activity (Duda,
in press). Perceived competence has an important but
distinct role in both theories. Achievement goal theory
suggests that normatively referenced perceived competence can moderate the in¯ uence of ego orientation
on motivational outcomes. In self-determination theory,
competence is conceived as a need, the satisfaction of
which can lead to self-determined motivation.
A review of the literature shows that achievement goals, notions of competence and intrinsic and
extrinsic motivation are common themes in both
theories, although there are certain diþ erences in
the conceptualization and the emphasis placed upon
these variables by each theory. Therefore, to examine
empirical links between achievement goal theory and
self-determination theory, this study focused on the
independent and interactive eþ ects of diþ erent goal
orientations and levels of perceived competence on
types of motivation with varying degrees of selfdetermination.
Independent eþ ects of goal orientations and perceived
competence on diþ erent types of motivation
Regression analyses showed that task orientation
positively predicted all three types of intrinsic motivation as well as identi® ed regulation. The positive links
between task orientation and self-determined types
406
of motivation are in accordance with Nicholls’ (1989)
theorizing and with results of previous research (e.g.
Duda et al., 1995; Vlachopoulos and Biddle, 1996;
Dorobantu and Biddle, 1997). This ® nding is also in
accordance with the hypotheses of this study. There
is a tendency for athletes with high task orientation
to feel self-determined, because they enjoy the challenge
of learning a new skill and improving on their weaknesses (Duda, 1992). The reasons that predominantly
task-oriented athletes have to participate in sport
are not likely to be related to avoidance of guilt (i.e.
introjected regulation) or the attainment of extrinsic
rewards (i.e. external regulation). This hypothesis was
also supported in the present study, as like the results
reported by Brunel (1999), task orientation did not
predict introjected and external regulation. Furthermore, task orientation did not predict amotivation.
This makes sense, because task orientation represents
an adaptive achievement orientation that guides individuals to set controllable and achievable goals. These
goals will encourage individuals to stay motivated and
committed in sport.
High perceived competence was positively related to
self-determined motivation. This is in accordance with
Deci and Ryan’ s (1985) theorizing that the more competent individuals perceive themselves at some activity,
the more intrinsically motivated they will feel (provided
that they also feel autonomous to perform the activity).
However, perceived competence positively predicted
external regulation. Pelletier et al. (1995) also reported a
positive relationship between external regulation and
perceived competence. Although this ® nding was not
expected, a closer look at the items in the external
regulation sub-scale of the Sport Motivation Scale
shows that they measure the extent to which individuals
participate in sport for the `prestige of being an athlete’
and to `show others how good I am at my sport’ . Therefore, individuals with perceptions of high competence
will be more likely to associate competence with these
extrinsic outcomes. It appears that competence can control athletes’ behaviour when it becomes the means by
which they can please signi® cant others or demonstrate
their superiority. As expected, perceived competence
negatively predicted amotivation. Pelletier et al. (1995)
also reported a negative relationship between these two
variables. This ® nding makes conceptual sense, because
both achievement goal theory and self-determination
theory predict that high perceived competence will
sustain and increase one’s motivation. In contrast,
amotivation has been linked by Vallerand (1997) to
learned helplessness, characterized, among other things,
by lack of ability beliefs.
In accordance with the hypotheses of this study, ego
orientation positively predicted introjected regulation
and external regulation. This is probably because indi-
Ntoumanis
viduals with high ego orientation participate in sport
mainly out of extrinsic reasons, such as to demonstrate
competence and superiority, and to attain rewards
and acknowledgment from signi® cant others (Nicholls,
1989; Duda et al., 1995). Extrinsic goals can potentially
control their behaviour and undermine their selfdetermination in sport. Indeed, this was the case in the
present study, as ego orientation was not a signi® cant
predictor of most types of self-determined motivation.
The only exception was that ego orientation positively
predicted intrinsic motivation to experience stimulation. This was not expected and it may be attributed to
the possibility that athletes with high ego orientation will
report positive sensations and excitement when they
are able to meet their criteria for success (i.e. winning
and outperforming others). Lastly, amotivation was
not predicted by ego orientation. This makes sense theoretically, because ego orientation motivates individuals
to strive and achieve certain comparative goals. Brunel
(1999) reported relatively similar results with ego
orientation predicting external regulation only from
the self-determination continuum.
Interactive eþ ects of goal orientations and perceived
competence on diþ erent types of motivation
A further aim of this study was to look at potential
interactive eþ ects of task orientation, ego orientation
and perceived competence on types of motivation
with diþ erent degrees of self-determination. Based on
Nicholls’ (1989) argument that perceived competence
moderates the achievement patterns of ego orientation,
interactions between ego orientation and perceived
competence were expected. Furthermore, drawing from
Hardy’ s (1997, 1998) criticism of the achievement
goal literature for its failure to acknowledge the
orthogonality of goal orientations, this study tested
interactive eþ ects between task orientation and ego
orientation. Furthermore, extending the two-way interactions, potential three-way interactions between ego
orientation, task orientation and perceived competence
were tested.
The interactions between ego orientation and
perceived competence and the three way-interaction
between task orientation, ego orientation and perceived
competence were not signi® cant. These results are
contrary to the predictions of achievement goal theory
and the hypotheses of this study and can be partially
attributed to the high perceived competence of the
participants (85% scored 4 or above on a 7-point scale).
This restriction in the range of scores can reduce the
statistical power of an interaction eþ ect (Finney
et al., 1984; Aguinis and Stone-Romero, 1997). Future
studies should overcome this limitation by using
samples with more diverse competitive standards. It
407
Achievement goals and self-determination
is also possible that the non-signi® cant interactions
involving perceived competence could have been due
to the wording of the items in the Intrinsic Motivation
Inventory (e.g. `I think I am pretty good in my
sport’ ; `I am pretty skilled at my sport’ ). Such items
do not make explicit whether perceived competence
is assessed based on comparative or self-referenced
criteria. From an achievement goal theory viewpoint, perceived competence can play a moderating role
only when it is construed on the basis of comparative
criteria.
From a self-determination perspective, one could
argue that perceived competence was not a moderator
in this study because the athletes may not have felt
autonomous. Deci and Ryan (1985) argued that
autonomy will mediate the eþ ects of perceived competence on self-determined motivation. Although there
was no evidence in this study to support the claim that
the athletes did not feel autonomous, it would be interesting to examine in the future whether there is a
case for mediated moderation (Baron and Kenny,
1986). That is, it is worth determining whether the
moderating eþ ect of perceived competence on motivated behaviour, predicted by achievement goal theory,
is mediated by perceptions of autonomy.
Of the two hypothesized interactions between task
orientation and ego orientation, only one was signi® cant. Contrary to what was expected, the interaction
between the two goal orientations in the prediction
of introjected regulation was not signi® cant. For the
most extreme form of extrinsic motivation, external
regulation, the interaction was signi® cant. As predicted,
when task orientation was high, lower external regulation was observed when ego orientation was low than
when it was high. In contrast, when task orientation
was low, diþ erent degrees of ego orientations did not
impact on external regulation. This ® nding shows that
a combination of high task and low ego orientation
may be needed for lower levels of extreme extrinsic
motivation. From a theoretical viewpoint, this makes
sense. When individuals have high task orientation and
low ego orientation, they are unlikely to participate
in sport to pursue extrinsic goals, such as the demonstration of superior ability and the attainment of social
approval and rewards (Duda, 1992). However, when
high task-oriented individuals also have high ego
orientation, such extrinsic goals become important for
sport participation.
In accordance with the hypothesis of this study, ego
orientation was not in¯ uential in determining the selfdetermination of high-task oriented individuals, as the
interactions between the two goal orientations were
not signi® cant. High task orientation predicted high
self-determination irrespective of ego orientation. This
provides further support to the potentially important
role of high task orientation in safeguarding selfdetermination in sport (Duda, 1992, in press).
Conclusion
In conclusion, the results of this study suggest the
adaptive role of high task orientation in promoting
self-determination in sport. However, the results
should be viewed as preliminary, because there are no
similar ® ndings in the literature to make appropriate
comparisons. That is, no previous studies have tested
interactions between goal orientations and perceived
competence on all seven motivational types. Furthermore, the cross-sectional nature of the research design
precludes any causal inferences regarding the links
between the two theories. It should also be noted that
the variance explained in the regression analyses was
small and, therefore, the empirical framework of this
study should be replicated and extended before any
conclusions are drawn.
This study could be improved on in several ways.
Future research should examine empirical links
between the two motivational theories using participants with more diverse competitive standards or
from other physical activity contexts, such as physical
education classes and ® tness clubs. In this way,
variations in perceived competence will be greater
than in the present study and, therefore, the interplay of goal orientations and perceived competence
should be more evident. Also, perceived competence
measures should be developed that will unambiguously
assess perceived normative competence. Furthermore,
longitudinal studies are needed to test the potentially
dynamic interrelationship of the two theories and the
possibility of reciprocal mechanisms.
In extending this study, future research could explore
the links of the two theories at the situational stage
of generality (Vallerand, 1997) by looking at whether
states of goal involvement can predict self-determined
and controlling situational motivation. Furthermore,
a more comprehensive integrative model of the two
theories is needed that will take into account perceptions of autonomy and relatedness, besides those
of competence. Autonomy and relatedness are not
discussed by achievement goal theory; however,
they are very important in the self-determination
theoretical framework and can play an important
role in the competitive context of sport (Vallerand
and Losier, 1999). Attempts to integrate the two
theories can oþ er a more comprehensive understanding
of motivation in physical activity by showing the
mechanisms through which diþ erent achievement
criteria can facilitate or hinder self-regulation and selfmotivation.
408
References
Aguinis, H. and Stone-Romero, E.F. (1997). Methodological
artifacts in moderated multiple regression and their
eþ ects on statistical power. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82,
192± 206.
Aiken, L.S. and West, S.G. (1991). Multiple Regression: Testing
and Interpreting Interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Baron, R.M. and Kenny, D.A. (1986). The moderator±
mediator variable distinction in social psychological
research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51,
1173± 1182.
Brunel, P. (1999). Relationship between achievement goal
orientations and perceived motivational climate on intrinsic
motivation. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in
Sports, 9, 365± 374.
Butler, R. (1987). Task-involving and ego-involving properties
of evaluation: Eþ ects of diþ erent feedback conditions
on motivational perceptions, interest, and performance.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 474± 482.
Butler, R. (1989). On the psychological meaning of information about competence: A reply to Ryan and Deci’s
comment on Butler (1987). Journal of Educational
Psychology, 81, 269± 272.
Cury, F., Biddle, S.J.H., Sarrazin, P. and Famose, J.P. (1997).
Achievement goals and perceived ability predict investment in learning a sport task. British Journal of Educational
Psychology, 67, 293± 309.
Deci, E.L. and Ryan, R.M. (1985). Intrinsic Motivation and
Self-Determination in Human B ehavior. New York: Plenum
Press.
Deci, E.L. and Ryan, R.M. (1991). A motivational approach
to self: Integration in personality. In Nebraska Symposium on
Motivation. Vol. 38: Perspectives on Motivation (edited by
R. Deinstbier), pp. 237± 288. Lincoln, NB: University of
Nebraska Press.
Dorobantu, M. and Biddle, S.J.H. (1997). The in¯ uence of
situational and individual goals on the intrinsic motivation
of Romanian adolescents towards physical education.
European Yearbook of Sport Psychology, 1, 148± 165.
Duda, J.L. (1989). Relationship between task and ego orientation and the perceived purpose of sport among high-school
athletes. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 11,
318± 335.
Duda, J.L. (1992). Motivation in sport settings: A goal perspective approach. In Motivation in Sport and Exercise
(edited by G.C. Roberts), pp. 57± 91. Champaign, IL:
Human Kinetics.
Duda, J.L. (in press). Goal perspective research in sport:
Pushing the boundaries and clarifying some misunderstandings. In Advances in Motivation in Sport and Exercise
(edited by G.C. Roberts). Champaign, IL: Human
Kinetics.
Duda, J.L. and Nicholls, J.G. (1992). Dimensions of achievement motivation in schoolwork and sport. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 84, 290± 299.
Duda, J.L. and Whitehead, J. (1998). Measurement of
goal perspectives in the physical domain. In Advances
in Sport and Exercise Psychology Measurement (edited
Ntoumanis
by J.L. Duda), pp. 20± 47. Morgantown, WV: Fitness
Information Technology.
Duda, J.L., Chi, L., Newton, M.L., Walling, M.D., and Catley,
D. (1995). Task and ego orientation and intrinsic
motivation in sport. International Journal of Sport Psychology,
26, 40± 63.
Dweck, C.S. and Leggett, E.L. (1988). A social-cognitive
approach to motivation and personality. Psychological
Review, 95, 256± 273.
Ferrer-Caja, E. and Weiss, M.R. (2000). Predictors of intrinsic
motivation among adolescent students in physical
education. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 71,
267± 279.
Finney, J.W., Mitchell, R.E., Cronkite, R.C. and Moos, R.H.
(1984). Methodological issues in estimating main and
interactive eþ ects: Examples from coping/social support
and stress ® eld. Journal of Health and Social B ehavior, 25,
85± 98.
Fortier, M.S., Vallerand, R.J., Briere, N.M. and Provencher,
P.J. (1995). Competitive and recreational sport structures
and gender: A test of their relationship with sport
motivation. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 26,
24± 39.
Fox, K., Goudas, M., Biddle, S., Duda, J. and Armstrong, N.
(1994). Children’ s task and ego goal pro® les in sport. British
Journal of Educational Psychology, 64, 253± 261.
Goudas, M., Biddle, S. and Fox, K. (1994). Achievement goal
orientations and intrinsic motivation in physical ® tness
testing with children. Pediatric Exercise Science, 6, 159± 167.
Hardy, L. (1997). The Coleman Roberts Griý th Address:
Three myths about applied consultancy work. Journal of
Applied Sport Psychology, 9, 277± 294.
Hardy, L. (1998). Responses to the reactants on three
myths in applied consultancy work. Journal of Applied Sport
Psychology, 10, 212± 219.
Hom, H.L., Duda, J.L. and Miller, A. (1993). Correlates of
goal orientations among young athletes. Pediatric Exercise
Science, 5, 168± 176.
Jaccard, J., Turrisi, R. and Wan, C.K. (1990). Interaction Eþ ects
in Multiple Regression. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Lee, M., Whitehead, J., Ntoumanis, N. and Hatzigeorgiadis,
A. (1999). The Eþ ect of Values, Achievement Goals, and
Perceived Ability on Moral Attitudes in Youth Sport. Report
for the Economic and Social Research Council. Swindon:
ESRC.
Li, F. and Harmer, P. (1996). Testing the simplex assumption
underlying the Sport Motivation Scale: A structural
equation modeling analysis. Research Quarterly for Exercise
and Sport, 67, 396± 405.
Li, F., Harmer, P. and Acock, A. (1996). The Task and Ego
Orientation in Sport Questionnaire: Construct equivalence
and mean diþ erences across gender. Research Quarterly for
Exercise and Sport, 68, 228± 238.
Lirgg, C.D. (1991). Gender diþ erences in self-con® dence in
physical activity: A meta-analysis of recent studies. Jour nal
of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 8, 294± 310.
Markland, D. and Hardy, L. (1997). On the factorial and
construct validity of the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory:
Conceptual and operational concerns. Research Quarterly for
Exercise and Sport, 68, 20± 32.
Achievement goals and self-determination
McAuley, E., Duncan, T.E. and Tammen, V.V. (1989).
Psychometric properties of the intrinsic motivation
inventory in a competitive sport setting: A con® rmatory
factor analysis. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport,
60, 48± 58.
Newton, M. and Duda, J.L. (1999). The interaction of
motivational climate, dispositional goal orientations, and
perceived ability in predicting indices of motivation.
Inter national Jour nal of Sport Psychology, 30, 63± 82.
Nicholls, J.G. (1989). The Competitive Ethos and Democratic
Education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Ntoumanis, N. and Biddle, S.J.H. (1999). A review of
motivational climate in physical activity. Journal of Sports
Sciences, 17, 643± 665.
Ntoumanis, N., Biddle, S.J.H. and Haddock, G. (1999). The
mediating role of coping strategies on the relationship
between achievement goals and aþ ect in sport. Anxiety,
Stress and Coping, 12, 299± 327.
Pelletier, L.G., Fortier, M.S., Vallerand, R.J., Tuson, K.M.
Brière, N.M. and Blais, M.R. (1995). Toward a new
measure of intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, and
amotivation in sports: The Sports Motivation Scale (SMS).
Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 17, 35± 53.
Ryan, R.M. (1982). Control and information in the intrapersonal sphere: An extension of cognitive evaluation
theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43,
450± 461.
Ryan, R.M. and Connell, J.P. (1989). Perceived locus of
causality and internalization: Examining reasons for acting
409
in two domains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
57, 749± 761.
Ryan, R.M. and Deci, E.L. (1989). Bridging the research
traditions of task/ego involvement and intrinsic/
extrinsic motivation: Comment on Butler (1987). Journal
of Educational Psychology, 81, 265± 268.
Ryan, R.M. and Deci, E.L. (2000). Self-determination theory
and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68± 78.
Vallerand, R.J. (1997). Toward a hierarchical model of
intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (edited by M. Zanna), pp. 271± 360.
New York: Academic Press.
Vallerand, R.J. and Fortier, M.S. (1998). Measures of intrinsic
and extrinsic motivation in sport and physical activity:
A review and critique. In Advances in Sport and Exercise
Psychology Measurement (edited by J.L. Duda), pp. 81± 101.
Morgantown, WV: Fitness Information Technology.
Vallerand, R.J. and Losier, G.F. (1999). An integrative analysis
of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in sport. Jour nal of
Applied Sport Psychology, 11, 142± 169.
Vlachopoulos, S. and Biddle, S.J.H. (1996). Achievement
goal orientations and intrinsic motivation in a track and
® eld event in school physical education. European Physical
Education Review, 2, 158± 164.
Vlachopoulos, S. and Biddle, S.J.H. (1997). Modeling the
relation of goal orientations to achievement-related aþ ect
in physical education: Does perceived ability matter?
Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 19, 169± 187.