The main goal was to compare idiographic profiles of achievement goal dominance
(AGD) and motivational profiles based on 2x2 achievement goals to improve our
understanding of how the four achievement goals work in conjunction with one
another, and to discern which profiles are most adaptive in the Physical
Education context. A total of 351 students (203 males; 148 females)
(M = 14.26 ± 1.37 years) from 3 different
secondary schools agreed to participate. 86.6% (N =
303) showed AGD, mostly mastery-approach dominance (62.9%).We examined the four
AGD groups’ idiographic profiles and how they relate to certain
positive (autonomous motivation and positive affect) and negative variables
(controlled motivation and amotivation). The results supported the hypotheses of
AGD theory (MANOVA one-way, Wilks’ lambda
= .609, F(24, 298) = 7.96,
p < .001, η2 = .15).
Subsequently, k-means cluster analysis was performed, yielding
4 distinct achievement goal profiles. The most adaptive was named
“mastery goals”, while “high achievement
goals” were the second most adaptive. AGD
participants’distribution across the different motivational clusters
was also ascertained (MANOVA one-way, Wilks’ lambda
= .678, F(12, 910) = 12.01,
p < .001, η2 =
.12).