Search

Research on achievement goal promotion at University has shown that performance-approach goals are perceived as a means to succeed at University (high social utility) but are not appreciated (low social desirability). We argue that such a paradox could explain why research has detected that performance-approach goals consistently predict academic grades. First-year psychology students answered a performance-approach goal scale with standard, social desirability and social utility instructions. Participants' grades were recorded at the end of the semester. Results showed that the relationship between performance-approach goals and grades was inhibited by the increase of these goals' social desirability and facilitated by the increase of their social utility, revealing that the predictive validity of performance-approach goals depends on social value.

International audience; Socio-cognitive conflict has been defined as a situation of confrontation with a disagreeing other. Previous research suggests that individuals can regulate conflict in a relational way, namely by focusing on social comparison between relative levels of competences. Relational conflict regulation has been described as yielding particularly negative effects on social interactions and learning, but has been understudied. The present research addresses the question of the origin of relational conflict regulation by introducing a fundamental distinction between two types of regulation, one based on the affirmation of one's own point of view and the invalidation of the other's (i.e., " competitive " regulation), the other corresponding to the protection of self-competence via compliance (i.e., " protective " regulation). Three studies show that these modes of relational conflict regulation result from the endorsement of distinct performance goals, respectively performance-approach goals (trying to outperform others) and performance-avoidance goals (avoiding performing more poorly than others). Theoretical implications for the literature on both conflict regulation and achievement goals are discussed.

Expertise assignment has been proposed to improve unshared information pooling in group decision making. The current research revises this view by hypothesizing that expertise assignment is beneficial when group members have cooperative goals, but is detrimental when group members have competitive goals. Three-person groups were confronted with a hidden-profile task. Members were either assigned experts or not and were instructed to either cooperate or compete with other members. The results confirmed that expertise decreased unshared information pooling and repetitions in competition, while the reverse was found in cooperation. This interaction effect was mediated by self–other difference in perceived competence. Thus, expertise favours or hinders information sharing in group decision making as a function of members’ cooperative or competitive goals.

The present research investigates the moderating role of goal interdependence and dissent on individual preference confirmation in hidden-profile tasks. We propose that preference confirmation can be used strategically to deal with competition and dissent likely to arise in group decision making. In two studies, participants first received incomplete information about a car accident investigation, and then read a fictitious discussion with two other participants containing full information. The interaction with the fictitious participants was presented either as cooperative or competitive. We predicted and found preference confirmation to be higher in competition than cooperation, when initial preferences were dissenting (Studies 1 & 2), but to be higher in cooperation than in competition, when initial preferences were consensual (Study 2). Also, the increased versus decreased preference confirmation in competition with, respectively, dissent and no dissent were found to be predicted by self-enhancement strategies (Study 2). These findings contribute to a better understanding of the boundary conditions of preference confirmation in hidden profiles and shed a new light on the role of motivated information processing in these tasks.