On the Meaning and Measurement of Goal Commitment
Recent research by Tubbs and Dahl (1991) and Tubbs (1993) has proposed that discrepancy measures of goal commitment are superior to self-report measures. We explore the theoretical, practical, and empirical problems with discrepancy measures of goal commitment. We reanalyzed some of the relationship...
Saved in:
Published in | Journal of applied psychology Vol. 79; no. 6; pp. 795 - 803 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
Washington, DC
American Psychological Association
01.12.1994
American Psychological Association, etc |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | Recent research by
Tubbs and Dahl (1991)
and
Tubbs (1993)
has proposed that discrepancy measures of goal commitment are superior to self-report measures. We explore the theoretical, practical, and empirical problems with discrepancy measures of goal commitment. We reanalyzed some of the relationships discussed by these authors using their data and demonstrate that the failure to control for ability leads to incorrect conclusions regarding the relative usefulness of discrepancy versus self-report measures. In addition, we conducted a separate study to further compare the usefulness of these different measures. Finally, we discuss the meaning of goal commitment and the role of goals in the motivational process. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | ObjectType-Article-2 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-1 content type line 23 ObjectType-Article-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 |
ISSN: | 0021-9010 1939-1854 |
DOI: | 10.1037/0021-9010.79.6.795 |