The effect of multiple-goal strategies on performance outcomes in training and competition

Abstract

Many sport psychologists have been fighting against the pervasive “winning is everything” mentality and have encouraged athletes to set only self-referenced performance and process goals. However, studies that have explored the practices of successful performers have found that they do in fact make effective use of outcome goals (Weinberg, Burton, Yukelson, & Weigand, 1993; Jones & Hanton, 1996). The aim of this study was to examine empirically Hardy, Jones, and Gould's (1996) suggestion, that consultants should now be promoting the use of a multiple-goal strategy. Forty participants were split into five groups of equal number and matched for ability on a soccer task. Four of the groups used different combinations of outcome, performance, and process goals while the other acted as a control group. Performance on the soccer task was measured over a 5-week training period, and then in a competition. Two-factor (Group X Test) ANOVA's indicated significant differences (p < .05) between the groups for both training and competition performance. The superior performance of the groups using multiple-goal strategies provided evidence to support the efficacy of maintaining a balance between the use of outcome, performance, and process goals.