This study investigates the structural invariance of the Achievement Goal Questionnaire (AGQ) in American, Chinese, and Dutch college students. Using confirmatory factor analyses (CFA), the authors found evidence for the four-factor structure of achievement goals in all three samples. Subsequent multigroup CFAs supported structural invariance of the AGQ across the samples.
AmesC.ArcherJ. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Students’ learning strategies and motivation processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 260–267.
2.
BentlerP. M. (1990). Comparative fit indices in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246.
3.
BentlerP. M. (2004). EQS 6: Structural equations program manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.
4.
BollenK. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York, NY: Wiley.
5.
BrislinR. W. (1980). Translation and content analysis of oral and written materials. In TriandisH. C.BerryJ. W. (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 389–444). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
6.
BrownT. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York, NY: Guilford.
7.
ByrneB. M. (2006). Structural equation modeling with EQS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
8.
CampbellH. L.BarryC. L.JoeJ. N.FinneyS. J. (2008). Configural, metric, and scalar invariance of the modified achievement goal questionnaire across African American and white university students. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 68, 988–1007.
9.
ChenC.LeeS.StevensonH. W. (1995). Response style and cross-cultural comparisons of rating scales among East Asian and North American students. Psychological Sciences, 6, 170–175.
10.
CheungG. W.RensvoldR. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 9, 233–255.
ConroyD. E.ElliotA. J.HoferS. M. (2003). A 2 × 2 achievement goals questionnaire for sport: Evidence for factorial invariance, temporal stability, and external validity. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 25, 456–476.
13.
CuryF.Da FonsécaD.RufoM.SarrazinP. (2002). Perceptions of competence, implicit theory of ability, perception of motivational climate, and achievement goals: A test of the trichotomous conceptualization of endorsement of achievement motivation in the physical education setting. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 95, 233–244.
14.
CuryF.ElliotA. J.Da FonsécaD.MollerA. C. (2006). The social-cognitive model of achievement motivation and the 2 × 2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 666–679.
15.
DweckC. S.LeggettE. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95, 256–273.
16.
DimitrovD. M. (2010). Testing for factorial invariance in the context of construct validation. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 43, 121–149.
17.
EcclesJ. S. (2005). Subjective task value and the Eccles et al. model of achievement-related choices. In ElliotA. J.DweckC. S. (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 105–121). New York, NY: Guilford.
18.
ElliotA. J.ChirkovV. I.KimY.SheldonK. M. (2001). A cross-cultural analysis of avoidance (relative to approach) personal goals. Psychological Science, 12, 505–510.
19.
ElliotA. J.ChurchM. A. (1997). A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 218–232.
20.
ElliotA. J.HarackiewiczJ. M. (1996). Approach and avoidance achievement goals and intrinsic motivation: A mediational analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 461–475.
21.
ElliotA. J.McGregorH. A. (2001). A 2×2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 16, 244–254.
22.
ElliotA. J.MurayamaK. (2008). On the measurement of achievement goals: Critique, illustration, and application. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 613–628.
23.
FinneyS. J.DiStefanoC. (2006). Nonnormal and categorical data in structural equation models. In HancockG. R.MuellerR. O. (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: A second course (pp. 269–314). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
24.
FiskeA.KitayamaS.MarkusH. R.NisbettR. E. (1998). The cultural matrix of social psychology. In GilbertD.FiskeS.LindzeyG. (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., pp. 915–981). San Francisco, CA: McGraw-Hill.
25.
FrenchB. F.FinchW. (2011). Model misspecification and invariance testing using confirmatory factor analytic procedures. Journal of Experimental Education, 79, 404–428.
26.
GrouzetF. M.KasserT.AhuviaA.DolsJ. M.KimY.LauS.. . . SheldonK. M. (2005). The structure of goal contents across 15 cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 800–816.
27.
HopwoodC. J.DonnellanM. B. (2010). How should the internal structure of personality inventories be evaluated?Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14, 332–346.
28.
KellowayE. K. (1995). Structural equation modeling in perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16, 215–224.
29.
KimU.TriandisH. C.KagitcibasiC.ChoiS.-C.YoonG. (1994). Individualism and collectivism: Theory, method, and applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
30.
LiemA. D.LauS.NieY. (2008). The role of self-efficacy, task value, and achievement goals in predicting learning strategies, task disengagement, peer relationship, and achievement outcome. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 486–512.
31.
LeeC.TinsleyC.BobkoP. (2003). Cross-cultural variance in goal orientations and their effects. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 52, 272–297.
32.
MacCallumR. C.BrowneM. W.SugawaraH. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1, 130–149.
33.
MarkusH. R.KitayamaS. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224–253.
34.
MatsumotoD.YooS. H. (2006). Toward a new generation of cross-cultural research. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 234–250.
MurayamaK. (2003). Test of undifferentiated performance-goal hypothesis. Developmental Studies in Social Motivation, 2, 3–11.
37.
MurayamaK.ElliotA. J.YamagataS. (2011). Separation of performance-approach and performance-avoidance achievement goals: A broader analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 238–256.
38.
MurayamaK.ZhouM.NesbitJ. C. (2009). A cross-cultural examination of the psychometric properties of responses to the achievement goal questionnaire. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69, 266–286.
39.
NichollsJ. G. (1984). Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice, and performance. Psychological Review, 91, 328–346.
40.
NienC.-L.DudaJ. L. (2008). Antecedents and consequences of approach and avoidance achievement goals: A test of gender invariance. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 9, 352–372.
41.
NunnallyJ. C. (1967). Psychometric theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
42.
PekrunR.ElliotA. J.MaierM. A. (2009). Achievement goals and achievement emotions: Testing a model of their joint relations with academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 115–135.
43.
SatorraA.BentlerP. M. (1994). Corrections to test statistics and standard errors in covariance structure analysis. In von EyeA.CloggC. C. (Eds.), Latent variables analysis: Applications for developmental research (pp. 399–419). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
44.
SatorraA.BentlerP. M. (2001). A scaled difference chi-square test statistic for moment structure analysis. Psychometrika, 66, 507–514.
45.
SchwartzS. H.BilskyW. (1990). Toward a theory of the universal content and structure of values: Extensions and cross cultural replications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 878–891.
46.
SmallN. J. H. (1980). Marginal skewness and kurtosis in testing multivariate normality. Applied Statistics, 29, 85–87.
47.
SteenkampJ. B.BaumgartenH. (1998). Measurement issues in cross-cultural research, Journal of International Business Studies, 26, 597–619.
48.
SteigerJ. H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 173–180.
49.
TanakaA.OkunoT.YamauchiH. (2002). Achievement motives, cognitive and social competence, and achievement goals in the classroom. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 95, 445–458.
50.
TanakaA.YamauchiH. (2001). A model for achievement motives, goal orientations, intrinsic interest, and academic achievement. Psychological Reports, 88, 123–135.
51.
UrdanT. (2004). Predictors of academic self-handicapping and achievement: Examining achievement goals, classroom goal structures, and culture. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 251–264.
52.
UrdanT.MestasM. (2006). The goals behind performance goals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 354–365.
53.
Van de VijerF. J. R.LeungK. (1997). Methods and data analysis for cross-cultural research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
54.
Van YperenN. W. (2006). A novel approach to assessing achievement goals in the context of the 2 × 2 framework: Identifying distinct profiles of individuals with different dominant achievement goals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 1432–1445.
55.
WangC. K. J.BiddleS. J. H.ElliotA. J. (2007). The 2 × 2 achievement goal framework in a physical education context. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 8, 147–168.
56.
XiangP.LeeA.ShenJ. (2001). Conceptions of ability and achievement goals in physical education: Comparisons of American and Chinese students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26, 348–365.
57.
ZientekL. R.ThompsonB. (2009). Matrix summaries improve research reports: Secondary analysis using published literature. Educational Researcher, 38, 343–352.
