Inducing Maximal Versus Typical Learning Through the Provision of a Pretraining Goal Orientation

Goal setting has been used in a variety of contexts in an effort to induce maximal effort and to facilitate greater performance outcomes than would otherwise be achieved through an individual's more typical efforts. Do pretraining goals induce trainees to maximize learning efforts in training? Does the type of goal matter? We meta-analytically cumulated the results of 61 independent studies (N = 10,151) that examined the efficacy of pretraining goals. Results suggest pretraining goals (regardless of type) yield higher performance on posttraining cognitive, skill, and affective learning assessments than “no-goal” conditions. Performance-oriented goals facilitated better performance on measures of declarative knowledge, whereas mastery-oriented goals yielded greater learning on higher levels of cognitive learning and for all levels of skill-based learning. Further, mastery-oriented goals fostered greater posttraining self-efficacy, more positive attitudes toward training, and better intentions to transfer training material than performance-oriented goals and no-goal conditions. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

Notes

¹The use of the terms performance goal and mastery goal can be confusing when discussed in the context of maximal and typical performance. Those familiar with the literature on maximal versus typical performance would likely expect that a performance goal would yield maximal performance across the board (and over that which results from a mastery goal), because the focus of such a goal is in fact on maximizing performance. Although this is true, when it comes to the level and type of learning which results from a training intervention, a performance goal may indeed maximize efforts in training, but it will not focus trainee attention on the aspects of training curriculum that will promote the greatest levels of learning (and therefore the greatest performance on learning assessments).