The link between athlete and parental achievement goals : parenting practices and contingency of self-esteem as mediators

(1)

The Link Between Athlete and Parental Achievement Goals:

Parenting Practices and Contingency of Self-Esteem as Mediators

C.S. Sanabria Martinez

The Link Between Athlete and Parent Achievement Goals: Parenting Practices and Contingency of Self-Esteem as Mediators

Master Thesis

C.S. Sanabria Martinez 5960096

Supervisor: G.M. Weltevreden November 17, 2014

(2)

Abstract

Objective: In this study we investigated achievement goals. Specifically we examined whether the link between parental achievement goals and athlete achievement goals is mediated by parenting practices and contingency of self-esteem. Method: Participants were sampled from the CrossFit

community. They filled in a survey containing scales measuring achievement goals (Achievement Goals Questionnaire-Revised), parental autonomy

support (Autonomy Support Scale), parental conditional positive and negative regard (Domain-specific Perceptions of Parental Conditional Regard Scale), psychological control (Psychological Control Scale - Youth Self Report), contingency of self-esteem (Sources of Self Esteem), general self-esteem (Rosenberg Self Esteem Scale) and anxiety (Competitie Beleving Vragenlijst). Results: Results showed that parental achievement goals predict both athlete achievement goals and parenting practices. In turn parenting practices

predicted contingency of self-esteem. Finally, it showed that contingency of self-esteem predicts athlete achievement goals, general self-esteem and anxiety. Conclusions: This study provides support for the construct of self-esteem as a feedback mechanism rather than merely a psycho-emotional outcome, as proposed by Vonk and Smit (2012). Further experimental research is recommended on contingency of self-esteem in relation to achievement goals.

(3)

Achievement Goals have been linked to important outcomes in performance settings, such as achievement and anxiety as well as other responses, both adaptive and maladaptive (Senko, Hulleman & Harackiewicz, 2011; Hulleman, Schrager, Boddman & Harackiewicz, 2010; Payne, Youngcourt & Beaubien, 2007). The literature shows that a person's achievement goals partly depend on the achievement goals held by parents, or most involved parent, for that person as a child (Friedel, Cortina, Turner & Midgley, 2006; Duda & Hom, 1993). This study proposes this relationship is mediated by parenting practices and contingency of self-esteem and tests this hypothesis.

Achievement Goal Theory describes the motives driving competence-relevant behavior (Elliot & McGregor, 2001) and explains adaptive and maladaptive consequences (Dweck, 1986). These motives, called achievement goals, are differentiated on two dimensions, the mastery-performance dichotomy and the approach-avoidance dichotomy. Mastery goals represent the motivation to develop competence, while performance goals represent the motivation to demonstrate competence (Dweck, 1996). An approach orientation reflects a focus on striving towards success, whereas an avoidance orientation reflects a focus on averting failure. This yields a 2 x 2

(5)

achievement goal framework, consisting of mastery approach, mastery avoidance, performance approach and performance avoidance goals.

This operationalization of achievement goals is strongly supported by the literature (Elliot & McGregor, 2001). Mastery approach goals are related to a host of adaptive responses, including persistence, cooperation, high

interest, deep processing and positive emotions (Darnon, Butera, & Harackiewicz, 2007; Harackiewicz, Barron, Tauer, Carter, & Elliot, 2000; Karabenick, 2003; Levy, Kaplan, & Patrick, 2004; Pekrun, Elliot, &

Maier, 2006; Wolters, 2004). In contradiction to theory however, findings fail to consistently link mastery goals to high achievement (Senko et al., 2011;

Hulleman et al., 2010; Payne et al., 2007). Alternatively, both positive and negative relations have been found between performance approach goals and achievement, as well as anxiety, effort, interest and self-efficacy

(Hulleman et al., 2010). Mastery avoidance and performance avoidance goals alike are consistently linked to maladaptive responses, such as fear of failure, disorganized study habits, and low interest and performance (Elliot & Church, 1997; Elliot, McGregor, & Gable, 1999; Van Yperen, Elliot, & Anseel, 2009). We expect our study to be reflective of previous findings. Therefore

relationships between achievement goals and anxiety were hypothesized as follows:

• H1a: Performance approach goals predict anxiety. • H1b: Mastery avoidance goals predict anxiety.

• H1c: Performance avoidance goals predict anxiety.

Given the consequences of achievement goals for performance and wellbeing it's relevant to gain a clear understanding of its antecedents. One

(6)

such antecedent is the achievement goals set by a person's parents. It has been found that children generally adopt achievement goals that they

perceive their parents to emphasize (Friedel et al., 2006; Duda & Hom, 1993). When discussing parental achievement goals in this study, we specifically refer to achievement goals set by the parent for the athlete, as perceived by the athlete. Further, these parental achievement goals carry consequences, for example, children whose parents emphasize performance goals run a higher risk for dysfunctional perfectionism than children whose parents emphasize mastery goals (Ablard & Parker, 1997). In light of these findings, we expect parental achievement goals, specified as maternal and paternal, to predict athlete achievement goals, specifically hypothesized as follows:

• H2a: Maternal mastery approach goals predict athlete mastery approach goals.

• H2b: Maternal mastery avoidance goals predict athlete mastery avoidance goals.

• H2c: Maternal performance approach goals predict athlete performance approach goals.

• H2d: Maternal performance avoidance goals predict athlete performance avoidance goals.

• H2e: Paternal mastery approach goals predict athlete mastery approach goals.

• H2f: Paternal mastery avoidance goals predict athlete mastery avoidance goals.

• H2g: Paternal performance approach goals predict athlete performance approach goals.

(7)

• H2h: Paternal performance avoidance goals predict athlete performance avoidance goals.

Parental Practices

It remains unclear how parent achievement goals lead to similar

achievement goals in the athlete. Parenting practices help understanding this relationship. Parental practices are specific behaviors parents use to socialize their children (Darling & Steinberg, 1993). This study will focus on four

different parenting practices, ranging from most autonomy supporting to most controlling. The most autonomy supporting is parental autonomy support (PAS), which involves parents providing a rationale and intrinsic value

demonstration for the behaviors they desire from their children (Roth & Assor, 2009).

On the other extreme, the most controlling, is psychological control (PC), which is defined as parenting behaviors that intrude upon children's thoughts and feelings (Barber & Harmon, 2002). This can be expressed through a variety of manipulative techniques such as guilt induction, contingent love and love withdrawal, instilling anxiety and invalidating the child's perspective (Barber, 1996). This socialization strategy has been shown to lead to internalization of problems such as anxiety and depression

(Soenens & Vansteenkiste, 2010).

An intermediate of autonomy supporting and controlling would be parental conditional regard (PCR) (Rogers, 1951; Sears, Maccoby, & Levin, 1957) which involves parents providing attention and affection relative to the extent to which their child displays desired behavior and attributes (Roth &

(8)

Assor, 2009). More specifically, withdrawing attention and affection in case of a child failing expectations is referred to as parental conditional negative regard (PCNR), whereas providing more attention and affection in case of a child meeting expectations is referred to as parental conditional positive regard (PCPR). Note that both PCPR and PCNR are techniques used in PC as well (contingent love and love withdrawal, respectively). However, in isolation PCNR and PCNR are more common than PC, which includes many other techniques as well and is considered more detrimental to psychological wellbeing.

Parenting practices are determined by the values held by parents and the goals towards which they socialize their children (Darling & Steinberg, 1993; Dornbusch, Ritter, Leiderman, & Roberts, 1987; Symonds, 1939). In case of performance approach goals, parents set positive goals that their children can work towards and that demonstrate competence. Upon

completion of these goals parents might reward their child with attention and affection. Alternatively, in case of performance avoidance goals, parents set negative goals that their children should avoid. Upon failing these goals parents might punish their child by withdrawing attention and affection. Given these processes we add the following hypotheses:

• H3a: Maternal performance approach goals predict PCPR. • H3b: Maternal performance avoidance goals predict PCNR. • H3c: Paternal performance approach goals predict PCPR. • H3d: Paternal performance avoidance goals predict PCNR.

For parental mastery approach and mastery avoidance goals it's not clear how these might lead to certain parenting practices, therefore we will inspect these relations in an explorative manner.

(9)

To proceed, it has been shown that the practices of PCNR, PCPR and PAS respectively lead to disengagement, grade-focused engagement and interest-focused engagement (Assor & Roth, 2009). These outcomes bear resemblance to different achievement goals. A grade-focused engagement suggests competence demonstration and therefore performance goals. An interest-focused engagement suggests intrinsic value and therefore mastery goals. This link between parenting practices and achievement goals might be explained by contingency of self-esteem.

Contingency of Self-Esteem

Theorists argue that PCR prompts contingent self-esteem (SE) (Assor, Roth, & Deci, 2004; Grolnick, Deci, & Ryan, 1997; Harter, 1993; Roth, 2008). Contingent self-esteem refers to a sense of self-esteem that is dependent on conditions, as opposed to a sense of self-esteem that is stable and

unconditional. Assor & Tal (2009) demonstrate that adolescents’ perceptions of their parents as using PCPR enhances development of fragile and unstable self esteem, fluctuating between feelings of grandiosity and shame.

Vonk and Smit (2012) have elaborated on the self-esteem literature by differentiating intrinsic and extrinsic contingency of self-esteem and upward and downward contingency of self-esteem. Intrinsic contingency refers to a sense of self-esteem that is dependent upon self-growth and self-congruency, the degree to which one acts in accordance with one's personal values.

Providing a rationale for desired behaviors, part of PAS, will promote the formation of personal values, which are a requisite for self-congruency. Therefore we expect PAS to predict an intrinsic contingency. Further,

(10)

self-growth is partly achieved by competence development, the aim of mastery goals. Thus mastery goals help fulfill the need for self-growth and thus offer a way to raise and maintain self-esteem. Therefore we expect an intrinsic contingency to predict mastery goals.

Extrinsic contingency refers to a sense of self-esteem that is dependent upon external events, feedback and validation from others.

Providing or withdrawing attention and affection in case of success or failure, PCR, will promote a feeling that one is only worthy in case of certain external outcomes and promote a need for feedback and validation from others in order to feel worthy. Therefore we expect that PCR will predict an extrinsic contingency. Further, external events, feedback and validation from others are achieved through demonstrating competence, the aim of performance goals. Thus performance goals help fulfill the need for favorable external events, feedback and validation from others and thus offer a way to maintain and raise self-esteem. Therefore we expect an extrinsic contingency to predict performance goals.

Additionally, upward contingency refers to a sense of self-esteem that is raised by positive events and downward contingency refers to a sense of self-esteem that is lowered by negative events. Vonk and Smit (2012) argue that a downward extrinsic contingency is detrimental to psychological health, but a downward intrinsic contingency isn't. Whether one acts in accordance with one's own values is under one's own control and feedback is immediate because it is internal. Therefore negative fluctuations in self-esteem are easily corrected for and can in fact become a catalyst for congruency and self-growth, if self-esteem is intrinsic. If self-esteem is extrinsic however, then

(11)

correction is more difficult, since external events and validation from others are not under one's own control and external feedback can be ambiguous.

Additionally this leads to anxiety in case of an extrinsic downward contingency because in such a case self-esteem drops in response to

negative external events, which are out of one's full control, and feedback can be ambiguous. Thus we expect both upward and downward intrinsic

contingency and upward extrinsic contingency to predict general self-esteem, whereas we expect a downward extrinsic contingency to predict general self-esteem inversely. Further, we expect a downward extrinsic contingency to predict anxiety. Given the previously described processes described we posit the following hypotheses:

• H4a: Maternal PAS predicts an intrinsic upward contingency of SE. • H4b: Maternal PAS predicts an intrinsic downward contingency of SE. • H4c: Maternal PCPR predicts an extrinsic upward contingency of SE. • H4d: Maternal PCNR predicts an extrinsic downward contingency of SE. • H4e: Paternal PAS predicts an intrinsic upward contingency of SE. • H4f: Paternal PAS predicts an intrinsic downward contingency of SE. • H4g: Paternal PCPR predicts an extrinsic upward contingency of SE. • H4h: Maternal PCNR predicts an extrinsic downward contingency of SE.

• H5a: Intrinsic upward contingency of SE predicts mastery approach goals. • H5b: Intrinsic downward contingency of SE predicts mastery avoidance goals. • H5c: Extrinsic upward contingency of SE predicts performance approach

goals.

• H5d: Extrinsic downward contingency of SE predicts performance avoidance goals.

(12)

• H6a: Intrinsic upward contingency of SE predicts general SE. • H6b: Intrinsic downward contingency of SE predicts general SE. • H6c: Extrinsic upward contingency of SE predicts general SE.

• H6d: Extrinsic downward contingency of SE predicts general SE inversely.

• H7a: Extrinsic downward contingency of SE predicts anxiety.

Mediation

In previous paragraphs we argued that parental achievement goals predict parenting practices, that parenting practices predict contingency of self-esteem and that contingency of self-esteem predicts athlete achievement goals. Effectively, this suggests a mediation effect. By setting external

outcomes as goals for their children and granting or withdrawing attention and affection respective of those outcomes, parents foster a sense in the child that one's worthiness of attention and affection is dependent on meeting these outcomes. In wanting to receive attention and affection children will seek to achieve these outcomes. In other words, children will want to demonstrate their competence at whatever is desired of them. This is how parental

performance goals will lead to parental conditional regard, which will foster an extrinsic contingency of self-esteem leading to athlete performance goals. Given the described processes we add the following hypotheses:

• H8a: Maternal performance goals predict athlete performance goals through maternal conditional regard and an extrinsic contingency of SE.

• H8b: Paternal performance goals predict athlete performance goals through paternal conditional regard and an extrinsic contingency of SE.

(13)

To summarize, this study examines a mediational model of achievement goals, as illustrated in figure 1. This study proposes the relationship between parental achievement goals and athlete achievement goals is mediated by parenting practices and contingency of self-esteem and tests this hypothesis.

Figure 1. Mediational model of achievement goals.

Methods

Participants

To recruit participants an advertisement was placed on the CrossFit Netherlands Facebook page asking members to participate in an online survey. Additionally all 150 members of the CrossFit AKA box received an email from the owner and head coach also asking to participate in the survey. As an incentive one month of free CrossFit box membership was raffled amongst participants.

(14)

Questionnaires

Achievement Goals

Achievement Goals were measured with the Dutch sports version of the revised Achievement Goals Questionaire (AGQ-R; Elliot & Murayama, 2008). The questionnaire measures achievement goals along a 2 x 2 framework, comprising of mastery-approach, mastery-avoidance,

performance-approach and performance-avoidance. The scale consists of 12 items, 3 items per subscale, measured on a 7-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Examples are "I want to learn as much as possible in my sport" (mastery-approach), "I want to avoid leaving learning opportunities unutilized in my sport" (mastery-avoidance), "I want to do better than others in my sport" (performance-approach) and "I want to avoid doing worse than others in my sport" (performance-avoidance). The participant filled in three versions of this questionnaire, to measure the participant's achievement goals for him or herself, the mother's achievement goals for the participant and the father's achievement goals for the participant. Reliability was found to be good to strong for athlete achievement goals, with Cronbach’s α's of mastery-approach: α = 0.77, mastery-avoidance: = α = 0.70, performance-approach: α = 0.80 and performance-avoidance: α = 0.84. Reliability was found to be strong to excellent for maternal achievement goals, with Cronbach’s α's of maternal mastery-approach: α = 0.89, maternal

mastery-avoidance: = α = 0.90, maternal performance-approach: α = 0.94 and maternal performance-avoidance: α = 0.90. Finally, reliability was found to be excellent for paternal achievement goals, with Cronbach’s α's of paternal mastery-approach: α = 0.96, paternal mastery-avoidance: = α = 0.94, paternal

(15)

performance-approach: α = 0.98 and paternal performance-avoidance: α = 0.96.

Psychological Control

Psychological Control was measured with the Dutch version (Soenens et al., 2006) of the Psychological Control Scale - Youth Self Report (PSC-YSR; Barber, 1996). Participants rate 14 items, 7 in regard to each parent's behavior, for example "My father/mother is less friendly to me if I don't see things like he/she does". Responses were measured on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (totally true) to 5 (totally not true). Reliability was excellent, with Cronbach’s α's for reports of maternal and paternal psychological control of 0.86 and 0.92, respectively.

Parental Conditional Positive Regard and Parental Conditional Negative Regard

Parental Conditional Positive Regard and Parental Conditional

Negative Regard was measured with a Dutch translation of the sports domain subscales of the Domain-specific Perceptions of Parental Conditional Regard Scale (Assor et al., 2004). The conditional positive regard subscale and the conditional negative regard subscale consist of 6 and 8 items respectively and were administered once for each parent, for a total of 28 items. Participants were asked to indicate their parent's behavior towards them following participants' performance outcomes in sport contexts. Examples are "If I perform well or win, my mother/father will be more friendly towards me than usual." (CPR) and "If I perform badly or lose, my mother/father will tell me I

(16)

should be ashamed of myself" (CNR). Reliability for the PCPR was excellent, with Cronbach α's of α = 0.84 and α = 0.91 for maternal and paternal

conditional positive regard respectively. Reliability for PCNR was also excellent, with Cronbach α's of α = 0.96 and α = 0.98 for maternal and paternal conditional negative regard respectively.

Autonomy Support

Parental Autonomy Support was measured with the Dutch version (Soenens & Van Steenkiste, 2005) of the Autonomy Support Scale, a subscale from the Perceptions of Parents Scales (Grolnick et al, 1991). Participants rate 16 items, 8 in regard to each parent's behavior, for example "My mother/father, whenever possible, allows me to choose what to do". Responses were measured on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (totally true) to 5 (totally not true). Reliability was excellent, with Cronbach’s α's for reports of maternal and paternal autonomy support of 0.85 and 0.90, respectively.

Contingency of Self Esteem

Contingency of Self-Esteem was measured with four subscales of the Sources of Self Esteem questionnaire (Vonk & Smit, 2012), the intrinsic upward subscale, the intrinsic downward subscale, the performance upward subscale and the performance downward subscale. Each subscale contains 4 items, for a total of 16 items, scored on a 7-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (no effect) to 7 (strong effect). Participants were asked to what extent an outcome would positively or negatively affect their self-esteem. Examples are

(17)

"Discovering a new side of myself" (intrinsic upward), "Not being true to myself" (intrinsic downward), "Being good at what I do" (performance upward) and "Feeling incompetent or stupid" (performance downward). Reliability for these subscales was strong, with Cronbach's α's of intrinsic upward: α = 0.84, intrinsic downward: α = 0.85, performance upward α = 0.80 and performance downward α = 0.85.

General Self-Esteem

General Self-Esteem was measured with the Dutch translation (Everaert et al., 2010) of the Rosenberg Self Esteem Scale. The scale consists of 10 items, measured on a 4-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree). An example of an item is "I feel that I have a number of good qualities". Reliability was moderate with a Cronbach’s α of α = 0.61.

Anxiety

Anxiety was measured with the Competitie Beleving Vragenlijst (CBV; Bakker, 1995), which measures anxiety in a sports context. The questionnaire consists of 15 items, of which 10 actual items and 5 distraction items. All items were scored on a 3-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (almost never) to 3 (almost always). An example is "I am calm before a game". Reliability was excellent with a Cronbach's α of α = 0.93.

(18)

Procedure

Upon following the link to the online survey participants first received additional information explaining the aim of the study and electronically agreed to an informed consent. Next they were asked for demographical information after which the questionnaires were administered. Upon completion they were free to fill in contact information to both enter in the raffle for a month of free CrossFit membership and to receive feedback about results of this research.

Results

A total of 170 athletes participated, 59 from CrossFit AKA and 111 from the CrossFit Netherlands Facebook page. Of these athletes 86 were male and 84 were female, aged within a range of 17 to 59 with a mean of 31 (SD = 7.8). Athletes lived across the country and had varying educational backgrounds, most having completed Hoger Beroeps Onderwijs (Higher Vocational

Education) or university. From the total number of respondents 67 did not fully complete the survey, yielding 103 complete cases. Cases were excluded pairwise.

Anxiety and Athlete Achievement Goals

Spearman's correlation analysis was used to test whether athlete achievement goals predict anxiety. Correlations are shown in table 1. The following hypotheses was confirmed:

• H1a: Performance approach goals predict anxiety. • H1c: Performance avoidance goals predict anxiety.

(19)

The following hypothesis was not confirmed:

• H1b: Mastery avoidance goals predict anxiety.

Table 1

Correlations Between Athlete Achievement Goals and Anxiety

1 2 3 4 5

1. Athlete Mastery Approach -

2. Athlete Performance Approach .318** -

3. Athlete Mastery Avoidance .497** .130 -

4. Athlete Performance Avoidance .185** .620** .377** -

5. Pre-Competitive Anxiety .005 .214* .014 .284** -

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (1-tailed). *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (1-tailed). Correlations involving hypothesis are bolded.

Parental Achievement Goals and Athlete Achievement Goals

Spearman's correlation analysis has been used to test whether parental achievement goals predict athlete achievement goals. The correlations are shown in table 2 and 3. The following hypotheses were confirmed:

• H2b: Maternal mastery avoidance goals predict athlete mastery avoidance goals.

• H2c: Maternal performance approach goals predict athlete performance approach goals.

• H2d: Maternal performance avoidance goals predict athlete performance avoidance goals.

• H2f: Paternal mastery avoidance goals predict athlete mastery avoidance goals.

• H2g: Paternal performance approach goals predict athlete performance approach goals.

(20)

• H2h: Paternal performance avoidance goals predict athlete performance avoidance goals.

Alternatively, the following hypotheses were not confirmed:

• H2a: Maternal mastery approach goals predict athlete mastery approach goals.

• H2e: Paternal mastery approach goals predict athlete mastery approach goals.

Table 2

Correlations Between Athlete Achievement Goals and Maternal Achievement Goals

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

5. Maternal Mastery Approach .113 .068 .149* -.039 -

6. Maternal Performance Approach .112 .203** .143* .181* .647** -

7. Maternal Mastery Avoidance .111 .055 .296** .096 .795** .650** -

8. Maternal Performance Avoidance .147* .182* .254** .290** .577** .842** .721** -

Table 3

Correlations Between Athlete Achievement Goals and Paternal Achievement Goals

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

5. Paternal Mastery Approach .014 .012 .132 -.085 -

6. Paternal Performance Approach .018 .188* .074 .146* .654** -

7. Paternal Mastery Avoidance -.041 -.064 .180* -.025 .850** .664** -

8. Paternal Performance Avoidance .021 .083 .151* .165* .567** .880** .685** -

(21)

Parental Achievement Goals and Parenting Practices

Spearman's correlation analysis has been used to test whether parent achievement goals predict parenting practices. Correlations are shown in table 4 and 5. The following hypotheses were confirmed:

• H3a: Maternal performance approach goals predict PCPR. • H3b: Maternal performance avoidance goals predict PCNR. • H3c: Paternal performance approach goals predict PCPR.

• H3d: Paternal performance avoidance goals predict PCNR.

Exploratively we examined whether any parental achievement goals are related to PAS and psychological control. Correlations show that maternal and paternal mastery approach goals predict parental autonomy support, as does paternal mastery avoidance goals. No parental achievement goals predicted psychological control, but paternal mastery approach goals did inversely predict psychological control.

Table 4

Correlations Between Maternal Achievement Goals and Maternal Parenting Practices

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1. Maternal Mastery Approach -

2. Maternal Performance Approach .647** -

3. Maternal Mastery Avoidance .795** .650** -

4. Maternal Performance Avoidance .577** .842** .721** -

5. Maternal Autonomy Support .188* -.081 .087 -.067 -

6. Maternal PCPR .336** .289** .364** .308** .173* -

7. Maternal PCNR .116 .309** .182* .258** -.508** .139 -

8. Maternal Psychological Control -.019 .089 -.010 .090 -.642** -.107 .539** -

(22)

Table 5

Correlations Between Paternal Achievement Goals and Paternal Parenting Practices

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1. Paternal Mastery Approach -

2. Paternal Performance Approach .654** -

3. Paternal Mastery Avoidance .850** .664** -

4. Paternal Performance Avoidance .567** .880** .685** -

5. Paternal Autonomy Support .330** -.005 .217** -.059 -

6. Paternal PCPR .370** .180* .322** .164* .430** -

7. Paternal PCNR -.043 .134 -.024 .151 -.498** .018 -

8. Paternal Psychological Control -.228** .086 -.102 .126 -.786** -.282** .526** -

Parenting Practices and Contingency of Self-Esteem

Spearman's correlation analysis was used to test whether parenting practices predict contingency of self-esteem. Correlations are shown in table 6 and 7. The following hypotheses were confirmed:

• H4c: Maternal PCPR predicts an extrinsic upward contingency of SE. • H4d: Maternal PCNR predicts an extrinsic downward contingency of SE. • H4h: Paternal PCNR predicts an extrinsic downward contingency of SE.

• H4a: Maternal PAS predicts an intrinsic upward contingency of SE. • H4b: Maternal PAS predicts an intrinsic downward contingency of SE. • H4e: Paternal PAS predicts an intrinsic upward contingency of SE. • H4f: Paternal PAS predicts an intrinsic downward contingency of SE. • H4g: Paternal PCPR predicts an extrinsic upward contingency of SE.

(23)

Table 6

Correlations Between Contingency of Self-Esteem and Maternal Parenting Practices

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1. Intrinsic Upward Contingency -

2. Intrinsic Downward Contingency .574** -

3. Extrinsic Upward Contingency .418** .270** -

4. Extrinsic Downward Contingency .012 .206* .439** -

5. Maternal Autonomy Support .092 .092 -.086 .008 -

6. Maternal PCPR .037 .151 .183* .148 .173* -

7. Maternal PCNR -.076 -.038 .078 .173* -.508** .139 -

8. Maternal Psychological Control -.057 -.010 .055 .176* -.642** -.107 .539** -

Table 7

Correlations Between Contingency of Self-Esteem and Paternal Parenting Practices

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

5. Paternal Autonomy Support .069 .068 -.077 -.176* -

6. Paternal PCPR -.043 .014 .104 .109 .430** -

7. Paternal PCNR -.173* -.141 .076 .175* -.498** .018 -

8. Paternal Psychological Control -.093 -.181* .078 .123 -.786** -.282** .526** -

Contingency of Self-Esteem and Athlete Achievement Goals

Spearman's correlation analysis was used to test whether contingency of self-esteem predicts athlete achievement goals. Correlations are shown in table 8. The following hypothesis was confirmed:

• H5c: Extrinsic upward contingency of SE predicts performance approach goals.

(24)

• H5d: Extrinsic downward contingency of SE predicts performance avoidance goals.

The following hypotheses were not confirmed:

• H5a: Intrinsic upward contingency of SE predicts mastery approach goals. • H5b: Intrinsic downward contingency of SE predicts mastery avoidance goals.

Table 8

Correlations Between Athlete Achievement Goals and Contingency of Self-Esteem

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

5. Intrinsic Upward Contingency .119 -.005 .236** .156 -

6. Intrinsic Downward Contingency -.033 -.063 .102 .111 .574** -

7. Extrinsic Upward Contingency .145 .233** .179* .340** .418** .270** -

8. Extrinsic Downward Contingency -.046 .076 -.078 .232** .012 .206* .439** -

General Self-Esteem and Contingency of Self-Esteem

Spearman's correlation analysis was used to test whether contingency of self-esteem predict general self-esteem. Correlations are shown in table 9. The following hypotheses have been confirmed:

• H6a: Intrinsic upward contingency of SE predicts general SE.

• H6d: Extrinsic downward contingency of SE predicts general SE inversely. The following hypotheses have not been confirmed:

• H6b: Intrinsic downward contingency of SE predicts general SE. • H6c: Extrinsic upward contingency of SE predicts general SE.

(25)

Table 9

Correlations Between Contingency of Self-Esteem and General Self-Esteem

1 2 3 4 5

5. General Self-Esteem .202* .104 -.162* -.624** -

Anxiety and Contingency of Self-Esteem

Spearman's correlation analysis was used to test whether contingency of self-esteem predicts anxiety. Correlations are shown in table 10. The following hypothesis was confirmed:

• H7: Extrinsic downward contingency of SE predicts anxiety.

Table 10

Correlations Between Contingency of Self-Esteem and Anxiety

1 2 3 4 5

5. Anxiety .010 .170* .122 .426** -

Mediation

Inspection of foregoing results indicates two possible mediational pathways. First, the relationships between athlete performance approach goals, maternal performance approach goals, maternal conditional positive regard and extrinsic upward contingency are all significant. Similarly the

(26)

relationships between athlete performance avoidance goals, maternal performance avoidance goals, maternal conditional negative regard and extrinsic downward contingency are also all significant.

Regression analysis was performed to test whether the relationship between maternal performance goals and athlete achievement goals were mediated by maternal conditional regard and an extrinsic contingency of self-esteem. However, results showed that the assumptions of normality and heteroscedasticity had not been met. Therefore data transformation was applied through the square root method and the log method. Unfortunately, the violation of assumptions was of such a degree that subsequent regression analysis again showed a lack of normality and heteroscedasticity. Additionally not all relationships were significant.

Therefore none of the following hypotheses have been confirmed:

• H8a: Maternal performance goals predict athlete performance goals through maternal conditional regard and an extrinsic contingency of SE.

• H8b: Paternal performance goals predict athlete performance goals through paternal conditional regard and an extrinsic contingency of SE.

Discussion

The present study proposed that the link between parental

achievement goals and athlete achievement goals is mediated by parenting practices and contingency of self-esteem. Results offer no support for this proposed mediation. Several other important findings were revealed however.

First, this study established the link between parent achievement goals and athlete achievement goals. This is a replication of earlier studies. For

(27)

example, Friedel and colleagues (2006) as well as Duda and Hom (1993) found that children adopt the goals they perceive their parents to emphasize. In the present study both maternal and paternal achievement goals were found to predict the same achievement goals in athletes, except for mastery approach goals.

Parenting practices are determined by the values held by parents and the goals towards which they socialize their children (Darling & Steinberg, 1993; Dornbusch et al., 1987; Symonds 1939). The present study supports this claim by finding that maternal performance approach and maternal

performance avoidance goals predict maternal conditional positive regard and maternal conditional negative regard respectively, that paternal performance approach goals predict paternal conditional positive regard and that maternal mastery approach, paternal mastery approach and paternal mastery

avoidance goals predict parental autonomy support. Also, paternal mastery approach goals inversely predicted psychological control. Given the

importance of parenting practices in socializing children, parents should choose the goals they have for their children wisely. For example, children whose parents emphasize performance goals run a higher risk for

dysfunctional perfectionism than children whose parents emphasize mastery goals (Ablard & Parker, 1997).

Further a link was found between parenting practices and contingency of self-esteem. Specifically maternal conditional positive regard predicted an extrinsic upward contingency and both a maternal and paternal conditional negative regard predict an extrinsic downward contingency. This was as expected. PCPR and PCNR respectively reward good performance through

(28)

granting love and attention and punish bad performance through withdrawing love and attention. Over time this is internalized and will lead to an increase or diminish in feelings of self-worth in case of a good or bad performance

respectively. Effectively these are an extrinsic upward contingency of self-esteem and an extrinsic downward contingency of self-self-esteem.

Contingency of self-esteem was found to influence athlete achievement goals. Specifically, an extrinsic upward contingency predicted athlete

performance approach goals and an extrinsic downward contingency predicted athlete performance avoidance goals. Surprisingly there was no such link between an intrinsic contingency and mastery goals. This may be due to the fact that an extrinsic contingency was measured through items with an emphasis on performance thus overlapping with performance goals, for example, "being good at what I do" and "feeling incompetent or stupid". In contrast, there was no such overlap between the measures of intrinsic contingency, which focuses on self-congruency, and mastery goals, which focus on competence development.

Further, contingency of esteem was also linked to general self-esteem. An intrinsic upward contingency predicted general self-self-esteem. An extrinsic upward contingency inversely predicted general self-esteem. Finally, an intrinsic downward contingency of self-esteem was unrelated to general sense of self-esteem whereas an extrinsic downward contingency inversely predicted general self-esteem. This is in line with contingency theory (Vonk & Smit, 2012), which proposes that a intrinsic downward contingency isn't detrimental to psychological wellbeing and can in fact be beneficial. This is

(29)

contrasted by an extrinsic downward contingency, which is psychologically maladaptive.

This redefines the role of self-esteem, which is often thought of as a psycho-emotional outcome. Instead, when properly rooted, self-esteem can function as an effective feedback mechanism. An intrinsic contingency of esteem for example, is a sense of esteem that is rooted in

self-congruency. Meaning that one feels worthy because one acts in accordance with one's personal values. This allows a big measure of personal control because it involves one's personal behavior. Further, feedback is direct and internal. These features make it easy to adjust accordingly and quickly in response to negative fluctuations in self-esteem. In contrast, an extrinsic contingency depends on external performance outcomes. These offer a limited measure of control. Further feedback can be ambiguous and indirect. This makes it hard to adjust in response to negative fluctuations in self-esteem.

Contrary to expectations, an extrinsic upward contingency predicted general self-esteem inversely. Thus the more people say they feel better about themselves in response to favorable external performance outcomes, the less they feel good about themselves. Possibly the tendency to feel better in response to external success corresponds closely to the tendency to feel worse in case of external failures. In fact, the extrinsic upward and downward contingencies showed a highly significant correlation of .44. However, if a person possesses both an upward and downward extrinsic contingency of self-esteem then the logical consequence should be that they cancel each other out. Of course, this is given the assumption that success and failure are

(30)

equally common occurrences. This might not be the case. Additionally, as pointed out repeatedly, feedback is often ambiguous and this might negatively distort the perceived ratio between success and failure even further. Clearly, a better strategy for self-esteem regulation would be to adopt an intrinsic

contingency of self-esteem.

The theory of Vonk and Smit (2012) was further supported by the finding that contingency of self-esteem was related to anxiety. As expected, an extrinsic downward contingency predicted anxiety. An extrinsic downward contingency only offers the possibility of experiencing low self-esteem in case of failure. There is solely the anticipation of events that carry negative

implications for the self. This is anxiety producing. An extrinsic upward contingency is also dependent on external outcomes but still provides the possibility of experiencing high self-esteem in case of success. In terms of self-esteem, positive events are anticipated. Intrinsic upward contingency is equal in this sense. Therefore both extrinsic upward and intrinsic upward contingencies are unrelated to anxiety. Somewhat surprisingly intrinsic downward contingency does predict anxiety. As illustrated, an intrinsic

downward contingency relies on internal processes that are unambiguous and under direct control. Therefore negative fluctuations in self-esteem are quickly restored and anxiety seems unnecessary. However, a person with a

downward contingency, whether intrinsic or not, still anticipates events that carry negative implications for the self, which is anxiety producing.

Athlete achievement goals were related to anxiety as well. Our finding that performance approach and performance avoidance goals are related to anxiety is in line with the literature on Achievement Goals (Senko et al., 2011;

(31)

Hulleman et al., 2010; Payne et al, 2007). Mastery avoidance goals were unrelated to anxiety. This contradicts our expectations, but not necessarily the literature, as findings regarding this relationship have been mixed (Senko et al., 2011; Hulleman et al., 2010; Payne et al, 2007).

Finally, the relationship between athlete achievement goals and parental achievement goals was not mediated by parenting practices and contingency of self-esteem. Closer inspection of the distribution of variables revealed extreme cases of non-normality and heteroscedasticity. Data transformation was insufficient to correct for this. The specific distribution of maternal performance approach and avoidance goals, maternal conditional negative regard and extrinsic upward contingency showed alarmingly frequencies at the lowest or highest levels. This might indicate socially desirable answer tendencies. Given the nature of named variables this is conceivable. Curiously, all measures were previously validated

questionnaires. This issue deserves additional care in future research.

Limitations

Most notably this research involved a survey. Therefore all

relationships are ultimately correlational and not causal. As a consequence the directions of relationships are not clear. For example, in this study a link was found between parental achievement goals and athlete achievement goals. Presumably the athletes adopted their parents’ goals. It is possible however, that in fact athletes choose their own goals at a young age and that parents pick up on the goal type of their child and seek to provide support and a framework and in doing so set the same type of goals of their children

(32)

aspire to. Experiments with manipulations would provide proof for the direction of the relationships in this study.

Admittedly experiments involving manipulation of parenting behaviors such as parenting practices and parental achievement goal types pose a challenge, especially in the long term. Short-term manipulations should be more feasible and can provide answers as well.

Conclusion

Based on the findings in this study we have expanded our understanding of goals aiding in the successful pursuit of goals and subsequently meeting personal needs. To achieve optimal goal setting

parents should emphasize mastery approach goals to facilitate the adoption of mastery approach goals in their child. Conjointly parental mastery goals will lead to parenting practices that will support a sense of autonomy in their child. Further it is recommended that athletes base their self-esteem on intrinsic measures instead of extrinsic measures and that parents and coaches strive to stimulate this in their children or athletes. An intrinsic contingency of self-esteem will enable athletes to adapt quickly and easily in response to any negative fluctuations in their self-esteem, which thus acts as an internal feedback mechanism. As an effect their general sense of self-esteem will be higher and more stable across time. Additionally, an intrinsic contingency of self-esteem will lead to mastery achievement goals and to lower levels of anxiety, especially an intrinsic upward contingency.

In summary this study has found that parent achievement goals predict both athlete achievement goals and parenting practices. Parenting practices

(33)

in turn predict contingency of self-esteem, which in turn predict athlete achievement goals. Additionally contingency of self-esteem predicts anxiety. And finally contingency of self-esteem also predicts general self-esteem, providing support for the construct of self-esteem as a feedback mechanism rather than merely a psycho-emotional outcome. In conclusion further

experimental research is recommended on contingency of self-esteem in relation to achievement goals.

(34)

Literature

Ablard, K. E., & Parker, W. D. (1997). Parents' achievement goals and perfectionism in their academically talented children. Journal of Youth

and Adolescence, 26(6), 651-667.

Assor, A., Roth, G., & Deci, E. L. (2004). The emotional costs of parents' conditional regard: A self‐determination theory analysis. Journal of

Personality, 72(1), 47-88.

Assor, A., & Tal, K. (2012). When parents’ affection depends on child’s achievement: Parental conditional positive regard,

self-aggrandizement, shame and coping in adolescents. Journal of

Adolescence, 35(2), 249-260.

Barber, B. K. (1996). Parental psychological control: Revisiting a neglected construct. Child development, 67(6), 3296-3319.

Barber, B. K., & Harmon, E. L. (2002). Violating the self: Parental psychological control of children and adolescents.

Darling, N., & Steinberg, L. (1993). Parenting style as context: An integrative model. Psychological Bulletin, 113(3), 487.

(35)

Darnon, C., Butera, F., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2007). Achievement goals in social interactions: Learning with mastery vs. performance

goals. Motivation and Emotion, 31(1), 61-70.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The" what" and" why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological

inquiry,11(4), 227-268.

Dornbusch, S.M., Ritter, P.L., Leiderman, P.H., Roberts, D.F., & Fraleigh, M.J. (1987). The relation of parenting style to adolescent school

performance. Child development, 1244-1257.

Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American

Psychologist, 41(10), 1040.

Dweck, C. S. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and

development. London, UK: Psychology Press.

Duda, J. L., & Hom, H. L. (1993). Interdependencies between the perceived and self-reported goal orientations of young athletes and their

parents. Pediatric Exercise Science, 5, 234-234.

Elliot, A. J., & Church, M. A. (1997). A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 72(1), 218.

Elliot, A. J., & McGregor, H. A. (2001). A 2× 2 achievement goal framework.

(36)

Elliot, A. J., McGregor, H. A., & Gable, S. (1999). Achievement goals, study strategies, and exam performance: A mediational analysis. Journal of

Educational Psychology, 91(3), 549.

Friedel, J. M., Cortina, K. S., Turner, J. C., & Midgley, C. (2007). Achievement goals, efficacy beliefs and coping strategies in mathematics: The roles of perceived parent and teacher goal emphases. Contemporary

Educational Psychology, 32(3), 434-458.

Gonzalez, A. R., Doan Holbein, M. F., & Quilter, S. (2002). High school

students' goal orientations and their relationship to perceived parenting styles. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27(3), 450-470.

Grolnick, W. S., Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1997). Internalization within the family: The self-determination theory perspective. In J. E. Grusec & L. Kuczynski (Eds.), Parenting and children's internalization of values: A

handbook of contemporary theory (pp. 135-161). New York, NY: Wiley

Harackiewicz, J. M., Barron, K. E., Tauer, J. M., Carter, S. M., & Elliot, A. J. (2000). Short-term and long-term consequences of achievement goals: Predicting interest and performance over time. Journal of Educational

(37)

Harter, S. (1993). Causes and consequences of low self-esteem in children and adolescents. In Self-esteem (pp. 87-116). New York, NY: Springer

Hulleman, C. S., Schrager, S. M., Bodmann, S. M., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2010). A meta-analytic review of achievement goal measures: Different labels for the same constructs or different constructs with similar labels? Psychological Bulletin, 136(3), 422.

Karabenick, S. A. (2003). Seeking help in large college classes: A person-centered approach. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28(1), 37-58.

Levy, I., Kaplan, A., & Patrick, H. (2004). Early adolescents' achievement goals, social status, and attitudes towards cooperation with

peers. Social Psychology of Education, 7(2), 127-159.

Payne, S. C., Youngcourt, S. S., & Beaubien, J. M. (2007). A meta-analytic examination of the goal orientation nomological net. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 92(1), 128.

Pekrun, R., Elliot, A. J., & Maier, M. A. (2006). Achievement goals and discrete achievement emotions: A theoretical model and prospective test. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(3), 583.

(38)

Rogers, C. R. (1951). Client-centered therapy: Its current practice,

implications and theory. London, UK: Constable.

Roth, G. (2008). Perceived parental conditional regard and autonomy support as predictors of young adults' self‐versus other‐oriented prosocial tendencies. Journal of Personality, 76(3), 513-534.

Roth, G., Assor, A., Niemiec, C. P., Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2009). The emotional and academic consequences of parental conditional regard: comparing conditional positive regard, conditional negative regard, and autonomy support as parenting practices. Developmental

Psychology, 45(4), 1119.

Sears, R. R., Maccoby, E. E., & Levin, H. (1976). Patterns of Child Rearing. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.

Senko, C., Hulleman, C. S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2011). Achievement goal theory at the crossroads: Old controversies, current challenges, and new directions. Educational Psychologist, 46(1), 26-47.

Soenens, B., & Vansteenkiste, M. (2010). A theoretical upgrade of the concept of parental psychological control: Proposing new insights on the basis of self-determination theory. Developmental Review, 30(1), 74-99.

(39)

Symonds, P.W. (1939). The psychology of parent-child relationships.

Van Yperen, N. W., Elliot, A. J., & Anseel, F. (2009). The influence of mastery‐avoidance goals on performance improvement. European

Journal of Social Psychology, 39(6), 932-943.

Wolters, C. A. (2004). Advancing Achievement Goal Theory: Using Goal Structures and Goal Orientations to Predict Students' Motivation,

Cognition, and Achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(2), 236.

Vonk, R., & Smit, H. (2012). Optimal self‐esteem is contingent: Intrinsic versus extrinsic and upward versus downward

The link between athlete and parental achievement goals : parenting practices and contingency of self-esteem as mediators