<%BANNER%>

Relationship between Collegiate Track Runners' Achievement Goal Orientations and Perceptions of Motivational Climate

xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID E20110114_AAAABG INGEST_TIME 2011-01-14T09:35:34Z PACKAGE UFE0007261_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES
FILE SIZE 104288 DFID F20110114_AAATUY ORIGIN DEPOSITOR PATH mcmanus_s_Page_39.jp2 GLOBAL false PRESERVATION BIT MESSAGE_DIGEST ALGORITHM MD5
6fe76d1e345ed568ef6c0b8548971419
SHA-1
23f61c097913022f0a9a824eaf5ea94254db4d70
5624 F20110114_AAATZV mcmanus_s_Page_13thm.jpg
32372ff72868e4309e3563885340aa33
b6256c3d6336f39dcf2f542152072e104e846747
20144 F20110114_AAATSA mcmanus_s_Page_23.QC.jpg
e46292438abdb6a578001af775aa2b8e
19af186777d55dbeff85c908925281039a33164e
132578 F20110114_AAATUZ mcmanus_s_Page_40.jp2
3b815a8e4ad0b626b71db88a945f5968
9bcb0f73440bd5615a2a9e2254d831e537331b78
21113 F20110114_AAATZW mcmanus_s_Page_14.QC.jpg
3fd51db523b360d064c508338d6f26c4
8a7baed323c53bacd5dc239866efa2113a5073a0
6637 F20110114_AAATSB mcmanus_s_Page_11thm.jpg
fce8b1fb5a4fff6297494538fe7db4ab
3f2603df847b6f688df966e1c9808cbc87764a18
5753 F20110114_AAATZX mcmanus_s_Page_14thm.jpg
a3bdfb2fee2ea1e841f3c4f90a6d3e7d
ec3537dd3afc20c404fd65a6647f99f14b38de64
24136 F20110114_AAATSC mcmanus_s_Page_40.QC.jpg
679bbf24e77ec9a8d945ba41ee03c33f
927c30ce7ad1c0abcb42cf831fe2059f55b24eb1
49304 F20110114_AAATXA mcmanus_s_Page_15.pro
bff33cac578679f138521439fd110419
0029b48003af9ab8f81300f6cf25d493b323e3aa
6510 F20110114_AAATZY mcmanus_s_Page_15thm.jpg
0e94c35c8682b5b2a247ae9fe7a91d3a
d6c7352bc7c890031b3add38e4fae72a6bfe39a6
102709 F20110114_AAATSD mcmanus_s_Page_16.jp2
0b7aa97e9e432eca0bcef2584ed3b3b9
03e87154eec64cf83ce43cdf9ea1ee81b4194ec5
46746 F20110114_AAATXB mcmanus_s_Page_16.pro
64f78e9ec2250f4fe584a9337d2ae7d7
916223631ed8f4a4ae2963a3f6552c2933af02b4
6286 F20110114_AAATZZ mcmanus_s_Page_16thm.jpg
d1b67e25f68cee3f45a640199094ae26
ba222cdd748f26f102e578ee2dd15a045e60bde0
23493 F20110114_AAATSE mcmanus_s_Page_19.QC.jpg
872f6223b483fb01a61580099fcb086e
ce1891fc71a7d1efb82c7b76e2f95ffe509da504
46703 F20110114_AAATXC mcmanus_s_Page_17.pro
7bc0f811fa6a08aa71299f4d1c4ddaa1
c00c1a47da6515e293a091d36c85a0ad6f846966
367 F20110114_AAATSF mcmanus_s_Page_33.txt
e143debfcfce63fd7b14a70aa3066037
d2114fa88f5bffa466933b73c5f7d6c4e816527a
47427 F20110114_AAATXD mcmanus_s_Page_18.pro
79524ec4e1f881f275605fd16546c593
07e63e870e831982778b33a2c83e5f4e147b9e50
21429 F20110114_AAATSG mcmanus_s_Page_08.QC.jpg
80a5845d3752f58e9ed909d681896dd9
e7473769afa3c4e9abcab8276e7713351531e595
51284 F20110114_AAATXE mcmanus_s_Page_19.pro
cef4303dbf9fb46a214f0ee03afd5e68
bc88278cd2f1a5dbf3bc159f56895b530cb182bb
2700 F20110114_AAATSH mcmanus_s_Page_02.txt
0d3a2104fef2342af9db976856813427
08bb8d19732513c3ab6dd70be88d731ec2950a9b
49605 F20110114_AAATXF mcmanus_s_Page_20.pro
bc67e6898172bb96824e452f5335e10c
3a08a4c110ab58732df81aef54db8edbcaeb1a94
37436 F20110114_AAATXG mcmanus_s_Page_21.pro
382154a8c8a2434444bd81fe65098719
f97ee03ebf1e692e5c1b61acb2d34c41eb59ae5b
66572 F20110114_AAATSI UFE0007261_00001.xml FULL
b5f103a65999a4849a21f896e8710170
f9638cb69657fea50e4051ebb23e98ce8fe3630c
39315 F20110114_AAATXH mcmanus_s_Page_22.pro
af4922b955c4af4be1eecf33e8452f7b
52f0050921844f84429b91264640a932bb5048b7
38565 F20110114_AAATXI mcmanus_s_Page_23.pro
85e44b0ba8e0da348879521b05ec6f9e
9ea98caa922a8c9cd4f55d0c4c5f77be01608bab
43892 F20110114_AAATXJ mcmanus_s_Page_24.pro
1daea462243b060bd6cfe5f2e8888c38
1822250531751589cbc192b8ad9aa6e8cb592064
25223 F20110114_AAATSL mcmanus_s_Page_01.jpg
ab296510461371bee63381cd61e01d3f
72955a2ae3b0cca5c711e26435cfc23a06605df0
35350 F20110114_AAATXK mcmanus_s_Page_26.pro
810c30d8466839fb6a6799aae9c59375
1a580c6071895f6c1a49a56362887a081ae7a4bf
55544 F20110114_AAATSM mcmanus_s_Page_02.jpg
1ccc103b815cc3238fca75e89fb6052b
1ef79d7c570a10f40801e483a9880463c75c0bcd
29228 F20110114_AAATXL mcmanus_s_Page_27.pro
dc111ce53b08ab5d8afa7c71f202be4c
563e6f5a81f87d19b40c130f982b823a69486d8d
31920 F20110114_AAATSN mcmanus_s_Page_03.jpg
9a3865de8fbdb59110fcbf7e006dc965
0bf3903586059938c00e37613653750ac3f08361
38488 F20110114_AAATXM mcmanus_s_Page_28.pro
57ba0ca7f84d32873958af8a2e780f2c
9301459f454ace4ce23595ee5941cd0eff481f04
34360 F20110114_AAATSO mcmanus_s_Page_04.jpg
12d620c214ea45281db6cb457323ff95
1e7d8835b7bb80fafbf42f24b0cbfc45ebdc50ed
57245 F20110114_AAATSP mcmanus_s_Page_05.jpg
9e605a91167f79229d0642aa23b7469e
4caf2ae037e621ff19b9b9473aadfea910f48f49
39968 F20110114_AAATXN mcmanus_s_Page_29.pro
68fb9bf4b3ecc5c234dd5c509fede63a
2e022bd7ceb13f4a3d1670500fa25ddf09c307d7
63170 F20110114_AAATSQ mcmanus_s_Page_06.jpg
157fbe8ea9aa255b2d64312102550bd8
28aa1db92adcec326cef279e9a67d8c1545f235e
49049 F20110114_AAATXO mcmanus_s_Page_30.pro
ddb5b5263ceb48cf7c757b5f1a4cd3e4
9aba63bb804db38258594fc9bc4a8553ca5a3978
57182 F20110114_AAATSR mcmanus_s_Page_07.jpg
c589a6de7867588832c6c3235d466795
4c4bcce03c033182e96abb639cb3610dc43b8136
50006 F20110114_AAATXP mcmanus_s_Page_31.pro
e12e1f45be30c897e1654054819ade9a
b8f20ebbbffa37541dfb7f8c82977eade937d66e
68040 F20110114_AAATSS mcmanus_s_Page_08.jpg
ba556e47b5c720e4832e6d20501ecad0
85e7355694f48fa577b1713b44c8342bc210881f
44215 F20110114_AAATXQ mcmanus_s_Page_32.pro
35d26003de65fe3baa641db7b339876f
de1a7afe9b90527d054fb91ebe0ad96687be0da7
77320 F20110114_AAATST mcmanus_s_Page_09.jpg
63f63acf2b297f9b9352d465040f71a0
eb431ccf6e9717e06d558297e2992040dfe0dbed
6980 F20110114_AAATXR mcmanus_s_Page_33.pro
b663ed5693d94a47843ce699e59a861d
79c7287be524f2b15302b1a06ee166df7f56dcf4
63089 F20110114_AAATSU mcmanus_s_Page_10.jpg
266b6fbc986aa83ed99841bd51289ae9
fdd3e778f63759dbbef404f3d62adacf0b0b947f
31025 F20110114_AAATXS mcmanus_s_Page_34.pro
a28076632aa706ebc84c0a003d2c76b8
3d04ab13c408c14c1c06b2f91da7cfe8b089ec17
73100 F20110114_AAATSV mcmanus_s_Page_11.jpg
1e55c6ebef5dfa9211ca9a3171ac1469
17bb45f1407cce6f004d847507f7ec3e2120c889
41987 F20110114_AAATXT mcmanus_s_Page_35.pro
2f90dd3f1c4e90cf445759698d01d359
27f8e331607e729b6b6004d2987e48cce0d64629
57237 F20110114_AAATSW mcmanus_s_Page_12.jpg
ec9cd810ee1c612734ced892a3e9631f
44b44e18aede4e31138d16e4852c3661b51ee13e
54249 F20110114_AAATXU mcmanus_s_Page_36.pro
66d48e8110becf17f170f24aa47aab22
92c9c2222121e322d5d902a22a5457f110a42f92
59318 F20110114_AAATSX mcmanus_s_Page_13.jpg
b9ccfaae34e77a6c1f53fac80cc8772a
a200538ca24da8da00115386c2fc885e34ee2625
61138 F20110114_AAATXV mcmanus_s_Page_37.pro
06a9db319582e60ff9eb771b0270118c
115379d7f16caf725bd9d71d2680521a05b219bf
4736 F20110114_AAATQA mcmanus_s_Page_27thm.jpg
0078363e73006b50dea58bee386f6253
ae35ac8aa79619842720f9a962c91a910b719789
65463 F20110114_AAATSY mcmanus_s_Page_14.jpg
ff5e8b275c16f08138ce8116d76b7dc7
5b391e820d652b7bcc88b9841b222a3e9de8e68f
27210 F20110114_AAATXW mcmanus_s_Page_38.pro
9980d8e7e309f68f3437fe1d241dda39
827b9d168234717fa5b1628a6b4670f62185e619
6494 F20110114_AAATQB mcmanus_s_Page_20thm.jpg
bb7e3ea834506fd4166c476a0c20aaee
37f1c730b2eabbc848246bed8b7297f9fd56e10a
66153 F20110114_AAATSZ mcmanus_s_Page_16.jpg
df5900754a49052bc4b31a2bd27ce7e8
82384f690efd1d816cb5fe8648bd8375827da5f4
47341 F20110114_AAATXX mcmanus_s_Page_39.pro
29e04ae7aa5b51f2639f603622444c37
a34aa113fd68c645aee0724bfd64c48717c23a60
826721 F20110114_AAATQC mcmanus_s_Page_04.jp2
e095fe8019b573039b28bd6293500dcb
30b0fa5b64881530dbf35ca0dc70c466fbf32c3c
16941 F20110114_AAATQD mcmanus_s_Page_33.jpg
b374b59e1df9bc4df5815cc19bf245ed
b07979067579880120335ae509b7e9114b45d058
90955 F20110114_AAATVA mcmanus_s_Page_41.jp2
f2fdfbc3990b50af5e2e39587c2a04d6
c8d53ac2e74c7bc8be2e991019fb60213ba03b15
62063 F20110114_AAATXY mcmanus_s_Page_40.pro
8eae20aa54e8251225a3a50d939541ce
e012abe15335285ee0cb9deee0e6f2564b67da6b
1053954 F20110114_AAATQE mcmanus_s_Page_18.tif
532296e3f95ae1848c25c9333ae8067e
37d9f3a12808ce43ab86f2be4e3139a182177abc
61969 F20110114_AAATVB mcmanus_s_Page_42.jp2
ec654c964f53ee984cfd1008f933bf75
c72679b6731e5e59b86c3d5fbb2b6e5f492a0f79
40475 F20110114_AAATXZ mcmanus_s_Page_41.pro
0420e1ea5f0d3b0d9a5e9519ea665e92
61d6d576677131024ed18b25dc14525b6c749503
F20110114_AAATQF mcmanus_s_Page_24.tif
ba39026a75e5159ea4d1582c7d02e25b
383978da7e1b403ba61c25432e6faf90804833b3
F20110114_AAATVC mcmanus_s_Page_01.tif
898e8ebd54ca04897ba5131e2f0e5b93
15419256958a7e823a996b19d6c6109c3ae736b6
25271604 F20110114_AAATVD mcmanus_s_Page_02.tif
6684478a6048093ed76e761a1a4aa594
8488c8712cf0f1f94c9b8338291cc53d72558fba
70669 F20110114_AAATQG mcmanus_s_Page_15.jpg
87305e38acad9f9ec793311c0331325e
badfb71fcf4c7131afd42c9e188e1e672e27cb87
F20110114_AAATVE mcmanus_s_Page_03.tif
757b05019f91573ce0aeff341aef58d5
3f50d7b3769399ed8960fb93650343b2fa847aed
3608 F20110114_AAATQH mcmanus_s_Page_25thm.jpg
d9aef734ecd0105a349a1c6cdbc27c57
52a362dbacbc3cf78681d1449179dac2e62adf93
F20110114_AAATVF mcmanus_s_Page_05.tif
66245b6bdf7db7eb259cc1f243a97d7e
1062d0752816c714c184105c5fb97bad5c131a23
14112 F20110114_AAATQI mcmanus_s_Page_42.QC.jpg
be463a3fc0c5d055ba896f3cf1c3dbf9
2ec0cbe65762cbe7d923a58607658e9d5dbdbaf4
F20110114_AAATVG mcmanus_s_Page_06.tif
c03dd1da2cb42fd4cdfd3c8947b452b4
21d45676f2533bac9e34674f3cd198e1de8c3438
64728 F20110114_AAATQJ mcmanus_s_Page_02.pro
dadb3a1fcd176aeea045c285c2f082a4
d184233368aeef17395e10b82038d8b21da2f901
F20110114_AAATVH mcmanus_s_Page_07.tif
18917f1d0b637dab99d6a772da2bad57
2458c0370f1f9a3a768c0f57c4e5c7238fcfffc7
88371 F20110114_AAATQK mcmanus_s_Page_13.jp2
edd772b322d608ec8011da49478a3853
1e7450208d10946d1385b54f92b01a8430a608d2
F20110114_AAATVI mcmanus_s_Page_08.tif
bdcc969bef4c3fa5269c050677cb8baa
7ee7f5662dc9717f65dfc7f96d6ed9362516a1c9
F20110114_AAATVJ mcmanus_s_Page_09.tif
c0de41858a588ca62220171b76456ab4
495594fd2ac3673018ff5c4a7a83cabd932b1aab
55778 F20110114_AAATQL mcmanus_s_Page_26.jpg
1cf7df6671c20d2df915700d38d0013f
844f6dcc5d52aa6bc5df25e61b1f921844f854b5
F20110114_AAATVK mcmanus_s_Page_10.tif
d9a325ed6f0a4e46dd8f37941ad5e8c6
667d0861215417dc7686a5875d2b4000fbdc9232
87871 F20110114_AAATQM mcmanus_s_Page_23.jp2
a0b61835d91fc583a313efc25b040a53
1ba1190af10b4ce06125a1bcfe2e729677227ef1
22226 F20110114_AAATQN mcmanus_s_Page_30.QC.jpg
8c4be326e16b9bf512e6d939c8b7405e
fca41509d9887c675e6844a2bf286404cdb77779
F20110114_AAATVL mcmanus_s_Page_11.tif
e8787cbfbfb03f16f274cd4dc4b59f76
cd6e82466937f76d65eae99df634a2a64695651b
F20110114_AAATQO mcmanus_s_Page_17.tif
d1bfd17cc80d82abb102c4e0d07aa41c
643c3cd12cd24960d617cc17fbe922ec95b04499
F20110114_AAATVM mcmanus_s_Page_13.tif
14122c12bff86284cc16fee58b822a91
9b989d02a57cc5f7ad4ffcdc15cc7b5fb0d30afb
67878 F20110114_AAATQP mcmanus_s_Page_17.jpg
6b6c7a321ab68870cb9fff70fe71826f
d25bc3f9b259042e79f1c671c1753b353eb2d6f4
F20110114_AAATVN mcmanus_s_Page_14.tif
0e6f2864820221c7b01bd421225fc9fe
40e04ebda9e89e3968af4ff71474ed8f6538313c
44043 F20110114_AAATQQ mcmanus_s_Page_42.jpg
05646ae684c2d0414b1eaaefce9a4c5b
f34f056ee1cd6dd6bcba8ddb9f5369e787c66109
F20110114_AAATVO mcmanus_s_Page_15.tif
f25be8267932faa67f00f0b7e724ed03
824533aa8ebe7171e55632cc39f81973295dacc3
108337 F20110114_AAATQR mcmanus_s_Page_20.jp2
042ca121cd94edfd851242b81ad492d0
011f3056a0ae52bb1fad26f1f87363c03bae78f3
F20110114_AAATVP mcmanus_s_Page_16.tif
2a75cd35149cd52c2a5c999d5c5d400e
cbfdf757b231db09dcbcc8230df5dffeed8c3eb9
5984 F20110114_AAATQS mcmanus_s_Page_08thm.jpg
5b21f8f5fc8a4adfd32dbbc6e3f9c107
eabca7f65d89b6f31a0e9e1eb2fc9e7213dc9bfa
F20110114_AAATVQ mcmanus_s_Page_19.tif
96784b40e7788db9f9ed3053b94abd7a
5d324537c161db8f30c2308f8adb2c56cb4700e8
F20110114_AAATQT mcmanus_s_Page_12.tif
63242ab644ed27516086b1f85f82f7f6
dd79360130d56118d040c78b695d97820ace4218
F20110114_AAATVR mcmanus_s_Page_20.tif
8fce4f563b7f39e7e2fa766312e571fb
3e9339af29630204471f45f5191556397432d6f6
22090 F20110114_AAATQU mcmanus_s_Page_24.QC.jpg
1706f04ae855d3181b6231095fc7a74d
4fe2a93c39e0fdc5570e7f13831d8410d445e3bd
F20110114_AAATVS mcmanus_s_Page_21.tif
2fe624fa153b8fac391ec637c40e49e0
5b94dfc6337f846109a2a60aef419d264b2fb1cc
50865 F20110114_AAATQV mcmanus_s_Page_27.jpg
b60f34533779d6ae62cb210002a889eb
364a3e584936af116ef9f2707727cee5b2acd512
F20110114_AAATVT mcmanus_s_Page_22.tif
b26da57f7937dda0b7b190e30ce379f2
ec828b825782cc5273b418afe5735008c345d95e
66029 F20110114_AAATQW mcmanus_s_Page_24.jpg
471014e8a9c5fb95a2c82e8ff188bdbd
2a06d69c6a4ad14089c6a650a8725c83773265f2
F20110114_AAATVU mcmanus_s_Page_23.tif
c3128fe1d7824cf6f5f56b72d396dbc1
4b3db96d5e59dbc2006e77be24589c161d7966d0
2028 F20110114_AAATQX mcmanus_s_Page_19.txt
01926557ec9a0082932a7a84eac90ddf
cef751c800a2bcce1aa829ff9779d76554f6b2a5
F20110114_AAATVV mcmanus_s_Page_25.tif
bcba418d1ae9115bd1cfc8dcaa68957e
6cab19d544c8c3f847e4bd4c9f7795b85600ef2e
1704 F20110114_AAATQY mcmanus_s_Page_13.txt
72d647359b61bd3cab742bddcc2e4262
b70007b5badcf6da8dcb8461a45c30815016b9ef
F20110114_AAATVW mcmanus_s_Page_26.tif
8e8269fd298895863d024f3c8bd22062
34c85ad94d260ea031bba67ba0bb388742e1b936
19780 F20110114_AAATQZ mcmanus_s_Page_22.QC.jpg
bcad3f31d0e00aac6f05bf3286d7afca
c58d82df065d7ec44a53c35d1010da8666360f54
F20110114_AAATVX mcmanus_s_Page_27.tif
74e876c0a7022ac9efa556dadc8bc05b
e4fb9a4ab657a338166230b3dd742b0798edbce5
67846 F20110114_AAATTA mcmanus_s_Page_18.jpg
9c081d15d4e023325200a82770100e65
bffdacd44ebd82e3118731ab94dbd55adce0ab69
F20110114_AAATVY mcmanus_s_Page_28.tif
b685a309a758477f4c7023517216c4d4
1b12cd4cf7111a802ddc92ea550336c2589759a3
72933 F20110114_AAATTB mcmanus_s_Page_19.jpg
17b0a197df394e8fc6c55a9eca7f1ded
411c237fad040d56765c45032a05ee55b4c0f661
F20110114_AAATVZ mcmanus_s_Page_29.tif
5fbc1974e73c3fdd55a23256fc28338c
0a70ed2b5607aa746723d6c3745019fdabed32b4
70739 F20110114_AAATTC mcmanus_s_Page_20.jpg
f439399ba302f9baca99934e599ccf57
5e4e0c1192d1f4e6c45736062a3367fbcb0c911c
55915 F20110114_AAATTD mcmanus_s_Page_21.jpg
ed6c827b847ebf8bf68a6c296f164da0
aafd18b1fc3c18369ef7b35fa4e01483aaf945fa
26872 F20110114_AAATYA mcmanus_s_Page_42.pro
0547d705701a067528e916232b5b4143
50b2eb6ec4e97adbcba6a22e7cc7f6726d67d654
21423 F20110114_AAAUAA mcmanus_s_Page_17.QC.jpg
06dca4f3d21a9c6c74f738c54a5fd52e
9fdf4ab19c97c7858201e85e2e144d2c7aafdeaa
61677 F20110114_AAATTE mcmanus_s_Page_22.jpg
b24dea636d8f4b74856a6146477dd19b
ec73300d0d79d6a4cffd12c5a1e20c5d6b8fbba2
1029 F20110114_AAATYB mcmanus_s_Page_03.txt
4a3f2d19c558a80460cd8024cc5f161f
aa606ba8737f180e856562995c9bf130dfb10834
6363 F20110114_AAAUAB mcmanus_s_Page_17thm.jpg
eb1f02183350abd3aa31f566252308fc
0092dbf6d86f156876be90e4e6e62b476bc70b13
60100 F20110114_AAATTF mcmanus_s_Page_23.jpg
7897e48fa59ac72ee30821ab149c9c56
5d1a217178584a78105894436bce227a5af0a6ae
999 F20110114_AAATYC mcmanus_s_Page_04.txt
b5b73a5e5a8b33f718fc1df1fed7dd0c
55503be6ab867eb1b01e350f5269cf9a6440c173
22048 F20110114_AAAUAC mcmanus_s_Page_18.QC.jpg
38d4f5500a1f8c6b122ce70314b041ff
f0aae6df71c48d9dd9c843bcc07c85640012963e
39108 F20110114_AAATTG mcmanus_s_Page_25.jpg
d8da7ff3e4161b566948931fa0109296
eda98d3a5ad49b4476510afa5185ef65fc93a48d
1736 F20110114_AAATYD mcmanus_s_Page_06.txt
365aadda151a8dae1a987b45b6b8c1e1
8d16fa4bfe2c10e95c5f9b4b1443fe8f922d481d
6383 F20110114_AAAUAD mcmanus_s_Page_19thm.jpg
35c498b681c4279b17c3bf08ec0fdf59
c5e5e23ce88eab31d205244df7f9794c41fb0387
59185 F20110114_AAATTH mcmanus_s_Page_28.jpg
06ee0b5344ac02471892428805ad68a3
62c4fcd744609b045dc8066880cb21bbff5807c3
1574 F20110114_AAATYE mcmanus_s_Page_07.txt
b18a5ca9861fcf10093e8d7130723370
88292e91f06883c3768fab8fa68b08d422f16ea7
23274 F20110114_AAAUAE mcmanus_s_Page_20.QC.jpg
5f066ce9961b785f01ece9864067d330
50e6694716c11384af2a80e266b54bb019571ffb
2267 F20110114_AAATYF mcmanus_s_Page_09.txt
7341e3e1517efd48e9b2bd699d3130c5
e0710aa65e2a664743757114145b07b9804a0fdd
18269 F20110114_AAAUAF mcmanus_s_Page_21.QC.jpg
6d051e00b5d7fa175ecb99c29b37e54e
380cb29ef534ac56877ed670357eeb49588c2fd2
62305 F20110114_AAATTI mcmanus_s_Page_29.jpg
adee283d758972a4f9af11be1cc443ce
c29b3b963692250b2fe7092310bfb43608222b4c
1860 F20110114_AAATYG mcmanus_s_Page_10.txt
75d97b23a110e23e0e0873273c4cb3f3
54f086e61fec9f9fd00433d6a6fd4417f32506cb
5231 F20110114_AAAUAG mcmanus_s_Page_21thm.jpg
ba04efa67c5c79b3c0d3a6eae112107b
7b7cfa99ae22bf8415a254afd6f13f5f72b520d2
1808 F20110114_AAATYH mcmanus_s_Page_14.txt
24794df24634b5db38f2e4765d144000
faec3d53ce2f3ad7c7cb94155563da6812061d65
5759 F20110114_AAAUAH mcmanus_s_Page_22thm.jpg
224813382c5d6d8ea27eafda06c6db1d
922f1185e8e61f5b783c7c011e2b45f97a97f590
68772 F20110114_AAATTJ mcmanus_s_Page_30.jpg
9babf5515ef6c63b184cab34b656fa5c
bb7ad00f53e962dd5e5a1ba90f71c306e94950d9
1943 F20110114_AAATYI mcmanus_s_Page_15.txt
6989b55fa2146a8297a3d76afedd58fc
30a0aafec52b0d915e7f4754f8cac1eb356b1e07
5846 F20110114_AAAUAI mcmanus_s_Page_23thm.jpg
2cf7457c90c197eff83105e0bafc5a81
6b678b1b6f3286ce572f1a5e61cd95aa43449852
70808 F20110114_AAATTK mcmanus_s_Page_31.jpg
3ce7b274cd7edfc3519947d6c5047ca9
010228a62bbbd14e884ea51efca4c88399907523
1861 F20110114_AAATYJ mcmanus_s_Page_17.txt
cacd5288af4c48f5103f74ad29ce0da4
707975a361b586f61d62e8033b211f1a0d31010e
6187 F20110114_AAAUAJ mcmanus_s_Page_24thm.jpg
446e79b4807d0c8a5a41b38d8ca20b6c
988ce87587adcaa49afd85646e856b4ba187c089
64098 F20110114_AAATTL mcmanus_s_Page_32.jpg
6093efc043d3140b4101ffa8982a9343
594024fafc8cda4ab106a2702630bca76143d398
1905 F20110114_AAATYK mcmanus_s_Page_18.txt
b91fb95514f78e8896e8f04d250a69cd
8d9751d82800e0e456911de5574526397f6450c2
12732 F20110114_AAAUAK mcmanus_s_Page_25.QC.jpg
f698c25e9d3fa423ca718f560b8a7471
5452e5c10ea4b446a814278b48cd5f6dd1571693
66558 F20110114_AAATTM mcmanus_s_Page_35.jpg
9bcc4ce70415adbd3887d44e985d050e
3003a4e0f8307da7d5b0cc56de0e0df1e1e72796
1623 F20110114_AAATYL mcmanus_s_Page_21.txt
859cb8dd70c7a8f83b1769244f45fed0
b6c883f9d4e1066be92f90b5a008898039ece75d
18049 F20110114_AAAUAL mcmanus_s_Page_26.QC.jpg
8779167582dbf22e6362a4f6aa59cdc6
80ea6460f0b932fb2eb0ca5119361056f322ccf5
72656 F20110114_AAATTN mcmanus_s_Page_36.jpg
94c0aa54b9276cdcd8e30e8cfa2b2415
9ab4a9b1e49ec416a72aa45b7c7b3b93e49bab92
1712 F20110114_AAATYM mcmanus_s_Page_22.txt
5be025dbeef692fa4c61e3d6e4cd409b
918777030b66ebe004355ccafe4a8337cf3a86f0
5167 F20110114_AAAUAM mcmanus_s_Page_26thm.jpg
5f7421fb18e63ac7f8f810adf7192bbd
41906a6d31ee58dfc232f7c020ec80f404de72bd
84010 F20110114_AAATTO mcmanus_s_Page_37.jpg
66de0c5c2e68c7e48150dd8f7e7f2aac
fc673e53c1e3fa93ce9886244efa3ba2edd7ef62
1719 F20110114_AAATYN mcmanus_s_Page_23.txt
cfee36efd5b104e60c03e10612882919
f3392136e753b4794250b2dcb4bc09deab09ca1c
19147 F20110114_AAAUAN mcmanus_s_Page_28.QC.jpg
f2155b87cad035854ee769260d45cfd7
8e6daa4c587723aeee1da34be8fff4c183da4c9a
41858 F20110114_AAATTP mcmanus_s_Page_38.jpg
75ed6dfa1121634787673b1dcfeb7fd1
55668b1cbcbb4e7ad0453513b3abcdc92e89db78
5636 F20110114_AAAUAO mcmanus_s_Page_28thm.jpg
80ee89b9d81261dc9d9c311c22510b5c
67c2158576bea0f0b2d140bda589c6368819ccff
69071 F20110114_AAATTQ mcmanus_s_Page_39.jpg
29281ab904c2f911c596dd40fd9cbbfc
9e009fbe1b405c32f76355b24fc37b88af25f0ec
1885 F20110114_AAATYO mcmanus_s_Page_24.txt
b8a3adecc90b69e76c409fc20b699bd9
d45344a4e2042bd4144ba9391f477aefd3c35fd9
20049 F20110114_AAAUAP mcmanus_s_Page_29.QC.jpg
b06595e6c86692775c959e4ef7701b2c
11355f9dfe78e6a7cb7b74189e753a46c1abe2c3
85388 F20110114_AAATTR mcmanus_s_Page_40.jpg
f2862f82ef0c6558ac3ff52ce7566224
8e62f5c4ef0080936fdb8b181c42ef7285fec1ab
982 F20110114_AAATYP mcmanus_s_Page_25.txt
345cbc5ee26c999c5c14bea5c549bab7
69d10ab68b21e36eb96fce892bc2abb4bb90bbba
5818 F20110114_AAAUAQ mcmanus_s_Page_29thm.jpg
07b77e0672f1025987cb6009afca1af0
f51bd278029a2a53585b5a26220cddbb2fd038e5
58261 F20110114_AAATTS mcmanus_s_Page_41.jpg
6f98df64c5e310a87ea41382cd6934c2
9a3d1d2aead0932a3b6a5277a11018b5b7d2f64b
1748 F20110114_AAATYQ mcmanus_s_Page_26.txt
78393d9ad0fb20c7de099357da24aa82
de24810243deccf1bd529effc66f6bacd57d4f4b
6075 F20110114_AAAUAR mcmanus_s_Page_30thm.jpg
0311b041b2119f0f057ee57c0314f07d
b00f7167543c99da5ea96d7569b82ee0a4b081d5
28365 F20110114_AAATTT mcmanus_s_Page_01.jp2
249c94a0dc7f59a31824e5688b3749cb
053e5dc4cf348e2471bbc7e8f34aa25b555b85f2
1698 F20110114_AAATYR mcmanus_s_Page_27.txt
f88163d20622b6d6132af0e51f434b9b
51db7e1242555c3ff41c8b4b7d90192528c22530
22705 F20110114_AAAUAS mcmanus_s_Page_31.QC.jpg
d74cfe6a1a36822bc41b28c13ce9d973
05564428685d9e4e8a9696f74953f7c79fb7e484
1051985 F20110114_AAATTU mcmanus_s_Page_02.jp2
5354243b1123b338794d4f88f919cec9
0b08576d67ca563e094c8d77638bb7863407df45
1811 F20110114_AAATYS mcmanus_s_Page_28.txt
9b8bb809553f80e7b008457bc85c15a0
5f289bfcec22577160881a2ec246d30af52af300
6374 F20110114_AAAUAT mcmanus_s_Page_31thm.jpg
8b0be9aee455428b91b9b7af3e73ef25
9fa5ba5d620f0d80351289f4847eb1b10f772153
700652 F20110114_AAATTV mcmanus_s_Page_03.jp2
9930f7e4a590c5edd381de9ed91d2af9
cccde74f178de08994954c6e5911457a4e4a7d03
1910 F20110114_AAATYT mcmanus_s_Page_29.txt
79eb0d301457d0d9544ef37daf9b69e0
2f2e5c36e112f19389c766d5cbb76ce91d9bb7e8
20726 F20110114_AAAUAU mcmanus_s_Page_32.QC.jpg
10d4a91dfe8d3b8c3fa9f8500a3856b2
b44b53710cae4bd550183cb242d25c2ecc69d57c
84485 F20110114_AAATTW mcmanus_s_Page_05.jp2
fcd2c3c21016c0bba49d2e448e294399
ce1525da60af8e909f06162b53c833bcdbcda1e2
1982 F20110114_AAATYU mcmanus_s_Page_31.txt
d349a7b5982aa2434844240c7af17b93
d2cdd5519d89314a24ae2cc7bd961668f56b8905
84637 F20110114_AAATTX mcmanus_s_Page_07.jp2
9cf6f1601de9767420106e4a0f3bdd53
3003c6eb2b54251f2b29a9d886eb49987f6723b7
1799 F20110114_AAATYV mcmanus_s_Page_32.txt
80e90c064e4584f7fe0908fd73fb588d
281fa4eec7b76ec3885979077d1db9d13dda4763
5820 F20110114_AAAUAV mcmanus_s_Page_33.QC.jpg
a7d3aa1469bdfa311dbceca200a5eb25
949017f308c722f9f5e2eb0271009ecc95719d79
24216 F20110114_AAATRA mcmanus_s_Page_25.pro
a6877d6ba5694263b1677674d1cd55f0
db78a2643f2c314ca137cab70ad7915ff024ee04
103542 F20110114_AAATTY mcmanus_s_Page_08.jp2
1b0745579ec8a8b94badf3a22ad1ed75
13ea30c169f104f85516c1f3f1ce2def463ee5b0
1552 F20110114_AAATYW mcmanus_s_Page_34.txt
eb43f1ed04ddb4ac47d74a70cb7a821e
823b8a6b02f151c984c25db78db095fbb2e457e7
2037 F20110114_AAAUAW mcmanus_s_Page_33thm.jpg
3002c678f6aac310927213b75b47158a
0ee81887eff06b6a2fd26f245bce92ba01de0ea9
6267 F20110114_AAATRB mcmanus_s_Page_18thm.jpg
b5a6efe585894af764907712f6141eb5
0961f51581e818bacb76029d19e4d9c512b5f0a5
113623 F20110114_AAATTZ mcmanus_s_Page_09.jp2
a88f5d4557c0c9c4fe1875b8fa477a2b
dba45e09ad61db3a2b5e4dc694d71704a0528c3f
2172 F20110114_AAATYX mcmanus_s_Page_36.txt
87370a48c34529829d8d363a1da9af2f
4b9665fee3a55be49dc29c28129dad5d77570f5c
5312 F20110114_AAAUAX mcmanus_s_Page_34thm.jpg
7f949cb6efa02bb61e2a1c28b0d15ba2
fb497de83d8d5ae4342edeccbce97cc936054649
1961 F20110114_AAATRC mcmanus_s_Page_20.txt
eaad1ca254e284ffc942dcb132031e82
c4ee363382249e981a5e430b1da99b4f359b2f67
F20110114_AAATWA mcmanus_s_Page_30.tif
1f463d295fca6ffb02ce3399d608a0da
f5e71d480e25a1fe2111cbb0ea1107aa037963b6
2451 F20110114_AAATYY mcmanus_s_Page_37.txt
4cafbe8e3a1f87447832256245bababd
ea57c89c9aa4d3d4d0650e72d702c88759f78110
19363 F20110114_AAAUAY mcmanus_s_Page_35.QC.jpg
89eab7aca7cde158a92e17cd2d2f9853
862dd04e011b5283853c593210f45cb6d23cb31b
20294 F20110114_AAATRD mcmanus_s_Page_06.QC.jpg
7986432eb0026524041a35fff6df36f4
494e490e96f871e041efd2b4ba9ab498baeb231d
F20110114_AAATWB mcmanus_s_Page_31.tif
88e7b115d4e3ad055ba38f0b42917964
b72a827313ac8185e4848dc0a21fdd8ef60fd5ec
1070 F20110114_AAATYZ mcmanus_s_Page_38.txt
d26430e47e07a7513d6d071a066f911f
0ef023cff15da85bef4ce3196e6c9194dce58d75
20542 F20110114_AAAUAZ mcmanus_s_Page_36.QC.jpg
d81d3edce5d18a32b3e75e08a65b9a5b
8dc5b7a547383bd8df5286aaca3f537f4a549d0d
489 F20110114_AAATRE mcmanus_s_Page_01.txt
8985db0ae78371413f6662c9342e0707
97c308fc2951e5656d07e641392fd08ffdec6448
F20110114_AAATWC mcmanus_s_Page_32.tif
19673d64f214b88ac71335f9fb4b2531
77dc73e1892a9e9546f447360d6ce01ce9f1c763
19784 F20110114_AAATRF mcmanus_s_Page_39.QC.jpg
213245166ad56d556196e4c9b169ee07
5815868f5ae2a761253df1f1e27f1c19ccf18ec0
F20110114_AAATWD mcmanus_s_Page_33.tif
d339772cc51df112bb8efd75a67fcd6e
cba446ecff81e53bba7a93c0eb63b2384a0283f8
1554 F20110114_AAATRG mcmanus_s_Page_12.txt
cb204cbe9607678ea33141cf59605d68
e17882d356ceabb2f753df6625e4ee022c4dcf40
F20110114_AAATWE mcmanus_s_Page_34.tif
26157f74616fc75978ccf40bbfcdf569
d95d30b3484c905c47bf2976e77bc82cf700d062
18504 F20110114_AAATRH mcmanus_s_Page_34.QC.jpg
45c6e988e52d2b48d407f90d7bbaa946
81174bbd4a298e38c5d376f8de0f7cb4d1e8fcf5
F20110114_AAATWF mcmanus_s_Page_35.tif
ca4ae4b4d0e686e02730256d4953e036
097f32bfe2c07216e79579d60116f4bb01abbe7a
59511 F20110114_AAATRI mcmanus_s_Page_34.jpg
1753893aac0b5a20c9eed5f2a3b027b7
fee86e1a853e0299a40cd68cbe47719af6d360cb
F20110114_AAATWG mcmanus_s_Page_36.tif
d50549f156a723d740cc8ad5a2a53f15
5ffab460022674ec00aab9f8003cc436b318d886
8895 F20110114_AAATRJ mcmanus_s_Page_03.QC.jpg
59e10bf22b35eb689af180ed626016fc
631538836c0364eb3853317821ce868c64bcf6d5
F20110114_AAATWH mcmanus_s_Page_37.tif
30ee33b6d5b55050bf45624fea8b1657
67d532c38d441f27c8719a7cc1dc280a239c7f13
17030 F20110114_AAATRK mcmanus_s_Page_27.QC.jpg
6d19ae4a0640a821b47de20d682bf8dc
1fbe606b3eeb33fcdd7a83778139829bd15b87c2
F20110114_AAATWI mcmanus_s_Page_38.tif
0678bd961eb0f965400a12e522e0b250
06df7522e25a38d4764960702a0a8359162553ba
21856 F20110114_AAATRL mcmanus_s_Page_16.QC.jpg
edaa4268b3465c575bf13903f012c26f
11f5721d7b991485fc4b30f89b1e1cd0799b1e4b
F20110114_AAATWJ mcmanus_s_Page_39.tif
29e3295f9221ed95a6687d7a52be8987
bb5fe39368e5ce8b706ee3880e04c847af6aa184
7554 F20110114_AAATRM mcmanus_s_Page_01.QC.jpg
914e4d44616aad950b55297ad6cd3e5c
49d4a120a2884cabb34eb13a3dbc9f338e693a2e
F20110114_AAATWK mcmanus_s_Page_40.tif
c8ee443df66a2fb54a4131e6d5c1fa0d
59a99cacd040419c7de3c6a109cd6744721c360b
F20110114_AAATRN mcmanus_s_Page_04.tif
2f4ba248f9fb50702e48b9c6caa1e8f3
8c8285eae8b6d99a961a3dbabbe3239c43ba0c1a
F20110114_AAATWL mcmanus_s_Page_41.tif
3f4b8b6032d33b64ddded31ed3ccc5cd
3e36f71f5e0d5df68119bb6440e2998842d996b5
1941 F20110114_AAATRO mcmanus_s_Page_30.txt
a8a68a1e1c98ecf00d5191c273230717
5bde10b361dc8a504581be60aa1e435d04e6cead
2042 F20110114_AAATRP mcmanus_s_Page_11.txt
28497321cbb2cdc788a15ba1c194dc59
f220bff9d982b8f2b27ce9a455573b96fc4c5dac
F20110114_AAATWM mcmanus_s_Page_42.tif
63c8aa3ef2582d7564a84d7a675dbc94
818cb6b7fdc67f03c40e82e6708322501bfcd531
17588 F20110114_AAATRQ mcmanus_s_Page_05.QC.jpg
997076db0d10ea71e5132864bed11256
dc8881e823238cd738a92cd329f777ad74c94e26
9878 F20110114_AAATWN mcmanus_s_Page_01.pro
bd89edee71353c8de9f3d87c1b523b41
38c6c607de31b04be5a13e9218ff852c81058731
23521 F20110114_AAATRR mcmanus_s_Page_11.QC.jpg
86d97ee58d7aa3e6092161974766d711
755ed75b1651320101284270db6e4464e19c487e
26150 F20110114_AAATWO mcmanus_s_Page_03.pro
937fd8a1c7c4df8302544c507f1c335b
67e98db8d76b3e863efefa5fc2401af4e0b4a107
71845 F20110114_AAATRS mcmanus_s_Page_26.jp2
f6ab4ce6450aa4bf44c9b836e4f7adae
ae0f4cd1a0eab9f43874cdfa61d40e9670d425ab
24226 F20110114_AAATWP mcmanus_s_Page_04.pro
fd726fdf6ab1c674c8d1e005b87ec0ce
43d88bfe2ea05320038b076f8d7f56b4eacfe938
5911 F20110114_AAATRT mcmanus_s_Page_32thm.jpg
0b6a53e9c292f26ea9c3e724faeb8f33
19cf45218ed47149c8cc4be35405b7f67e67a353
37723 F20110114_AAATWQ mcmanus_s_Page_05.pro
a422ec29d8a6983e0d563ae65e04fb93
d9b02890b891e9fe596cd6b9578a8e2d7d87ab82
5359 F20110114_AAATRU mcmanus_s_Page_35thm.jpg
a6ee9ffc9dab93dcc4f3308d766c99af
2b2b23aa95d0162c7a74147578c7a3f2cc0da2bd
43590 F20110114_AAATWR mcmanus_s_Page_06.pro
ae67f6bc6a97be427c1ba7e35b7ef63c
6cf8953ee4640aece639aa8bf709e426b700a16a
96284 F20110114_AAATRV mcmanus_s_Page_06.jp2
bb409154ff7b3a4ec213e9b315638222
00e1a8ece845522d2dfdec311e6bc96e27204af1
37465 F20110114_AAATWS mcmanus_s_Page_07.pro
4a25f2124db08d13b2a2c19fbfd665c7
7ab173450ab9bfb81e8de0661fadf4344b5b3b1e
5592 F20110114_AAATRW mcmanus_s_Page_36thm.jpg
4e91e19b53c7ed19267f730d662c5c90
03b07e558db76b61d30f7bcbc7fa32febf832d2e
48821 F20110114_AAATWT mcmanus_s_Page_08.pro
60d6a2fd0275846c270c0d3c83a138bd
9e6e547a363daa110189a6e03c1318f5fd0de2e7
2141 F20110114_AAATRX mcmanus_s_Page_08.txt
cffff6c7266fc416af88645a5ee03857
6ee707f69412f66ca3138957000682c5e2666605
53353 F20110114_AAATWU mcmanus_s_Page_09.pro
209f4b4b4ba2a7fbd28912cc7cf63bfb
a82c4de6613fb65f342512644c536849225f2dda
1923 F20110114_AAATRY mcmanus_s_Page_35.txt
f806a5d20fa200edc9e998e66e4e1f79
b8709bd181d013de839cf57ba63784561c1c47b6
43654 F20110114_AAATWV mcmanus_s_Page_10.pro
441c4c2f02b8c1ba694398633fc42f83
91403d1d48e772e623c3bc855065a2562c0bc371
22774 F20110114_AAATRZ mcmanus_s_Page_15.QC.jpg
7d02c410799e4c6974ca1734d9ca618d
26151631fe6b837b3eca9540ccb37b623b040f9f
51967 F20110114_AAATWW mcmanus_s_Page_11.pro
a9fb5d3f0aac3b8452335b83d11a05af
a84967575850508324da40949730ce5c2b084325
38569 F20110114_AAATWX mcmanus_s_Page_12.pro
7b01992f3fc9d81c6e655cd609741b42
b8c53d82075db4df437825213aca7bc2689cb777
94672 F20110114_AAATUA mcmanus_s_Page_10.jp2
6ba439bba9bc3a32e7d470a23d50a462
7b09ba28ff32df02ae57dbbeff8855980489fa3e
40336 F20110114_AAATWY mcmanus_s_Page_13.pro
ae48a9c18f0107b057784b9afbddd515
04edfc7423851368eb02d29b77350d03ed7d2a83
110627 F20110114_AAATUB mcmanus_s_Page_11.jp2
4453a05c537b9b87ad3f5fb709004860
ebfbceae4d871729f337af51591d73272e473f4a
45468 F20110114_AAATWZ mcmanus_s_Page_14.pro
bec7156468eba8f482a4e6916ba300cc
519ca195d943c871b5118fc0d0517473a6488133
85678 F20110114_AAATUC mcmanus_s_Page_12.jp2
7e60c7fe4894bc6b5fe026fadc4b2762
8179ca64ca9111d7e5792fceec08f02412d6182e
23688 F20110114_AAAUBA mcmanus_s_Page_37.QC.jpg
7be626a15bea2b66214d1af6ace0413c
bcde7de5a66d9fc3d03c6f016e014e025919271e
98646 F20110114_AAATUD mcmanus_s_Page_14.jp2
fb3545376520ef6521bad875bac68899
71693c06f7709d3306bac7551979a10e7e11d4d3
1975 F20110114_AAATZA mcmanus_s_Page_39.txt
22c62fa099b47ff7d71cd57ddf2d7240
3410caea1562269e353c34718b139bcbb54b0eb5
6170 F20110114_AAAUBB mcmanus_s_Page_37thm.jpg
f28d7edecfcafcdb682945fce81cd24b
c41a6d66b31c36b7a9129ca13ab83fb0abfe9eb9
109530 F20110114_AAATUE mcmanus_s_Page_15.jp2
2de650bd89119a30cefa39c1d346f6db
757cb0ef49b8b0c13de5b82d8ebee036368fe4bb
2555 F20110114_AAATZB mcmanus_s_Page_40.txt
d06620c6fdba5c9d715983ccdc70e509
f4b78cc9db6a02ee6160e96065228c1352c9afd5
11710 F20110114_AAAUBC mcmanus_s_Page_38.QC.jpg
25482ed807cb3662264b291fb61b9279
e04553f60bed6ce7d2fd74a77173176e9d34b917
102189 F20110114_AAATUF mcmanus_s_Page_17.jp2
ae4ea7c542a8e214775f34ab61bbca23
2b28d4521ec5014f66ad101356c5bbe1e62a9612
1693 F20110114_AAATZC mcmanus_s_Page_41.txt
26ab1bf336794f71c2fb40463949a6c4
daaf6279d4acb03bd0f346808b6b4f7412418d6f
3489 F20110114_AAAUBD mcmanus_s_Page_38thm.jpg
2793a694ad372d1dfaeb571b28f6798b
10e8a07d8593718e48c35b6f3a3e51aee019260c
103553 F20110114_AAATUG mcmanus_s_Page_18.jp2
b961c48d78d8492e7a9a93f202ac4209
260b662959340929e6778d9f26cacaeea1961321
1136 F20110114_AAATZD mcmanus_s_Page_42.txt
b765d27fbc7f9ee85484115ac138b468
8d89234d5806120e74d3a86f1aef67ba30c98963
5644 F20110114_AAAUBE mcmanus_s_Page_39thm.jpg
66a796487ee100f018cb735042b0fe21
be69793cccba66e717ed510ddf48cde838835415
110125 F20110114_AAATUH mcmanus_s_Page_19.jp2
6590a8710495b10c95f0b5fe2eb2d698
57230ed1a0dc26f05c28c23061486d7ebe7d3ac8
247380 F20110114_AAATZE mcmanus_s.pdf
b6ab03cb6b8681a0633a72e7ef909a07
de606d305fd940cbbbb6b0b5a11feda8a4604bdb
6429 F20110114_AAAUBF mcmanus_s_Page_40thm.jpg
fd557711a9d0937d3605f3fe4baef63b
f568d85223b2cab1ecede7131f27f51497edd214
82021 F20110114_AAATUI mcmanus_s_Page_21.jp2
460218348e0c89868b14d3d6dce3ab96
e9ea4b9d1290b3a28e13ab82c00e59cb864a29b5
2681 F20110114_AAATZF mcmanus_s_Page_01thm.jpg
4b07352930b185f160056a7882a932e7
242b4f2eb6e936a94cc873f80b610cb790a28c92
17361 F20110114_AAAUBG mcmanus_s_Page_41.QC.jpg
8875a0599a92bc654d78b9b945c065cb
42cb9d4960e60805c913f81cd9b6de15d9248f9b
86548 F20110114_AAATUJ mcmanus_s_Page_22.jp2
50784aafd69ef8f08d912af530b5621a
cccb3bd81004432515bf5944d0edca4ac9daf489
14738 F20110114_AAATZG mcmanus_s_Page_02.QC.jpg
f4745542dd2c34617f85c2a7bfad7b78
eee1233d36451387e810d462e9ee9f1ae83eb208
2630 F20110114_AAATZH mcmanus_s_Page_03thm.jpg
c8eb7ac3feb072aa8bfc0adaca73b36e
b333bdf0cd2efac4619ce7bc308bde98a030af16
5003 F20110114_AAAUBH mcmanus_s_Page_41thm.jpg
b6418ba968471c67c38e22388e666c52
2b22657c763c6f490749334fdef79ff861783867
95530 F20110114_AAATUK mcmanus_s_Page_24.jp2
00ca61f2c1e365b71a78b73a6054476f
d87b2d403f8489b8b0233b7b53d9a70d6101c4fa
10338 F20110114_AAATZI mcmanus_s_Page_04.QC.jpg
41c0cc66b533f4e2c4e1bec2ac533880
66830b658682b84ffdb66b97714cc9d3ba66d111
4146 F20110114_AAAUBI mcmanus_s_Page_42thm.jpg
3a281d5ffbf70dda2442304d0f50d6d4
31e3ab6a82c1805b10324a0b1e0ddf97bb6585b3
55135 F20110114_AAATUL mcmanus_s_Page_25.jp2
8230abcf20135bb7f7805baa6e3f4ed2
87d0cd85f073bd0c657b2a6a261b903dbb4e78bd
3173 F20110114_AAATZJ mcmanus_s_Page_04thm.jpg
b92596385954717e8c4e23b45c7f6baf
95bae50b6b35bebefef6d01d142d5ab356227e2e
51874 F20110114_AAAUBJ UFE0007261_00001.mets
bd2e89636a19ae55e1acaaa21e9abb9a
d4151a4455c24acd7f2e8cbd9082fc603d3abee2
57305 F20110114_AAATUM mcmanus_s_Page_27.jp2
71cf45b1ec49c1f2f3c5dbef6170e3d1
6cd782a5dad0c82ec159f0d135dc219810f63a3e
5278 F20110114_AAATZK mcmanus_s_Page_05thm.jpg
86ad0005d7ab657412accec1f87fb61d
912456c7c3241ca9b632dd8e72c4b145330e09ad
80505 F20110114_AAATUN mcmanus_s_Page_28.jp2
99f4f5a162873b166f6236f4ed5582dc
4081aca2fc968633086d2f9f0007e028e7a7f5fd
5767 F20110114_AAATZL mcmanus_s_Page_06thm.jpg
d4db14ddb2f5e6b1cfc7d676ddcfe225
174e66340a8793a5f14ffb8550e912d4133326ed
84887 F20110114_AAATUO mcmanus_s_Page_29.jp2
e65e0b9dd1f4da1b5be3a69f85f20585
4d32c22741138d5a402e15229269d00d7ebc460c
18199 F20110114_AAATZM mcmanus_s_Page_07.QC.jpg
d4a6d45ecf47828da4dedfdedcf86797
05f15b194cb0abe1e9f0eb0abb45cf4083c64048
105926 F20110114_AAATUP mcmanus_s_Page_30.jp2
98961e666838fb428c9ecdc95150654d
547759a2dfeda11e41b24f6d9aebe2904e77e1ab
5063 F20110114_AAATZN mcmanus_s_Page_07thm.jpg
6f21d1fe723477f1b07082ab6fcc2395
6cfbe44fff22f861758809dbb4c7ac99ad09aac8
107138 F20110114_AAATUQ mcmanus_s_Page_31.jp2
aa473dd7419fe3130ac2b96e5d4f671a
a81c837da39f6d0440deff0208ea87c56ce5d4aa
22649 F20110114_AAATZO mcmanus_s_Page_09.QC.jpg
14da6723afd1788d33d8a85b4385ecb5
c573291c5a59e6bb3fe93cdc6239cf21758ffbdd
96050 F20110114_AAATUR mcmanus_s_Page_32.jp2
6ab38b9de388b7025f5796b5c27cbbf6
d8786cf658bb33c63a9bbea7d34abbe5bc9a96b8
18477 F20110114_AAATUS mcmanus_s_Page_33.jp2
c796c981689c320a967632ccc864d4cf
35947efeacb6c7a67802239a9b2d82b5744949d6
6220 F20110114_AAATZP mcmanus_s_Page_09thm.jpg
b36081d7b6b61058d06db4841a8c55e1
3b155ee983863e894516daa59da79174a994c42c
723419 F20110114_AAATUT mcmanus_s_Page_34.jp2
42e9b683edaaaa537936d7faf01879a0
57df42c0812c0b06794ccae96042e8b79692baa5
20313 F20110114_AAATZQ mcmanus_s_Page_10.QC.jpg
127cd5eccf70731a0f2f3a06cae5359d
b986dead35a0f550b11228c4c1ec3c553cc132ad
848286 F20110114_AAATUU mcmanus_s_Page_35.jp2
7a291ffc6750b87abf25fcba20070428
26fcc40a8102d50555714a697f8ae0b708363c3d
4019 F20110114_AAATPX mcmanus_s_Page_02thm.jpg
e0755002194d2dcf0a2d7ac24ea1c2e2
aa450d2a6e448d15402a9658b41e94dedd55c44e
5670 F20110114_AAATZR mcmanus_s_Page_10thm.jpg
fa7617cb12c77923cba85c46e15effac
4c50f574561a985b8ba90006d1b4337adc569f92
109760 F20110114_AAATUV mcmanus_s_Page_36.jp2
e36eb0f327207c8a0e54a52a14d3d449
0b9ceac59f063d44e93a2eddc5cf2c47c9036ca2
1863 F20110114_AAATPY mcmanus_s_Page_16.txt
e131d5a812cfd644f934538872e24f18
ce2646c42f8b8b7a005ad1f86b0a0df82863f09f
18549 F20110114_AAATZS mcmanus_s_Page_12.QC.jpg
255d25ab969af02508a03e1862651237
f30b2e142b5649cc3b16c4c5431f8c9b9521a0fe
121832 F20110114_AAATUW mcmanus_s_Page_37.jp2
887cf058e84e8d39ba8d33b409ea5407
3f21bb8ff03a695508351ad7058ac8a57e85ea84
1640 F20110114_AAATPZ mcmanus_s_Page_05.txt
d794de941fd3163adcc3e1accd827261
81337f0c418136326cd3d314018f89230f548607
5181 F20110114_AAATZT mcmanus_s_Page_12thm.jpg
660d280a01fee677fbdf4f4b2ab6f73b
611378fcb5b8411a601b645745c2e20aedce87cc
58747 F20110114_AAATUX mcmanus_s_Page_38.jp2
fa41fb6e5383ffea45d66f8cccdc7eed
5d4271f3d9027c81f9dbc722fab5fe8f56a4d028
19272 F20110114_AAATZU mcmanus_s_Page_13.QC.jpg
0ca6478f5b3549c474b2506618dec42d
fe7d47a784b372a53f3f13d9f52108501ecbb8d9



PAGE 1

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN COLLEGIATE TRACK RUNNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT GOAL ORIENTATIONS AND PERCEPTI ONS OF MOTIVATIONAL CLIMATE By SEAN P. MCMANUS A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE IN EXERCISE AND SPORT SCIENCES UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2004

PAGE 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS page LIST OF TABLES.......................................................................................................iv ABTRACT.....................................................................................................................v CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................1 Purpose of Study.......................................................................................................2 Research Questions...................................................................................................2 Definitions.................................................................................................................3 Limitations................................................................................................................4 Assumptions..............................................................................................................4 Significance of the Study..........................................................................................4 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE...................................................................................7 Achievement Goal Theory........................................................................................7 Task-Orientation...................................................................................................8 Ego-Orientation....................................................................................................8 Achievement Goal Orientat ion and Competitive Level.....................................10 Achievement Goal Orientation and Gender.......................................................10 Achievement Goal Orientation and Time of Season..........................................11 Perceived Motivational Climate..............................................................................12 Relationship of Perceived Motivational Climate and Achievement Goal Orientation.................................................................................................1 2 3 METHODS.............................................................................................................15 Participants..............................................................................................................15 Instruments..............................................................................................................16 Procedure................................................................................................................17 Data Analysis..........................................................................................................18 ii

PAGE 3

4 RESULTS...............................................................................................................20 Discussion...............................................................................................................23 Future Research.......................................................................................................26 APPENDIX A TASK AND EGO ORIENTATION IN SPORT QUESTIONNAIRE...................28 B PERCEIVED MOTIVATIONAL CLIMATE IN SPORT QUESTIONNAIRE....29 C LETTER OF INTRODUCTION.............................................................................30 D SCRIPT TO BE RE AD TO PARTICIPANTS.......................................................31 REFERENCE LIST.....................................................................................................33 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH.......................................................................................36 iii

PAGE 4

LIST OF TABLES Table page 1 Examples of TEOSQ Responses ...........................................................................16 2 Examples of PMCSQ Responses...........................................................................17 3 Skewness and Kurtosis Calculations.....................................................................18 4 Results of t-test Examining Task-Orientation........................................................20 5 Results of t-test Examining Ego-Orientation.........................................................21 6 Results of t-test Ex amining Mastery-Perceptions..................................................21 7 Results of t-test Examining Performance-Perceptions..........................................22 8 Results of Pearson-Product Co rrelation Examining Distance Runners.................23 9 Results of Pearson-Product Correlation Examining Sprinters...............................23 iv

PAGE 5

Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of th e University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for th e Degree of Master of Science in Exercise and Sport Sciences RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN COLLEGIATE TRACK RUNNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT GOAL ORIENTATIONS AND PERCEPTI ONS OF MOTIVATIONAL CLIMATE By Sean P. McManus December 2004 Chair: John R. Todorovich Major Department: Health Education and Behavior The purpose of this study was to inves tigate the achievement goal orientations and perceptions of motivational cl imate exhibited by intercollegiate athletes competing in track’s two running disciplines—sprinting and distance running—and then to examine the relationship between the at hletes’ goal orientations and perceptions of motivational climate. Previous research in motivation in sport failed to make the distinction between these two different event groups within the sp ort of track. This failu re to recognize track as being composed of two distinctly di fferent event groups may have confounded the results of studies utilizing track athletes in examinations of motiv ation in sport across age, gender, time of seas on, and other variables. Data collection relied upon two que stionnaires, the Task and Ego in Sport Questionnaire (TEOSQ) and the Perceived Moti vational Climate in Sport Questionnaire (PMCSQ). From these, sprinters and distan ce runners were assigned group means for task v

PAGE 6

and ego goal orientations, and for perceptions of masteryand performance-involved motivational climates. There were 20 subj ects in the distance runner group and 19 subjects in the sprinter group. Independent t-tests were utili zed to determine differences in these variables between the two groups. Pearson-Product Moment Correlations were used to determine the relationships that exis ted between goal orientat ions and perceptions of motivational climate for each group. Results indicated that differences in goal orientation and perc eptions of motivational climate do exist between the tw o groups. Specifically, distance runners exhibited higher levels of task-orientation a nd higher perceptions of master y-involved climates. Sprinters scored higher in perceptions of performance-involved climates. Examination of the relationship be tween goal orientation and perceptions of motivational climate indicated positive co rrelations between task-orientation and perceptions of mastery-involved climat es for both groups. Additional positive correlations between ego-orientation and performance-involved climate perceptions existed among distance runners, and between task-orientation and performance-involved climate perceptions among sprinters. A nega tive correlation between ego-orientation and mastery-involved climate perceptions was identified among the distance runners. The results of this study suggest the failure to separate track athletes into these two groups in previous studies may have confounded results. Future research on motivation in sport utilizing track athletes must carefully select partic ipants, so as to not confound results. vi

PAGE 7

1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Understanding the role of motivation ha s been one of the most popular research topics in both sport psychology and pedagogy. Th eoretical frameworks of differing types have emerged in each. Most recently, resear ch focusing on individuals’ self-perceptions and those perceptions’ influence on motivated behavior has contribut ed greatly to the body of knowledge in sports psychology and pedagogy (Todorovich & Curtner-Smith, 2002). This study will adopt a theore tical framework originally utilized in the educational domain that has b een successfully applied in the sport context (Treasure & Roberts, 1998). In short, achievement goal th eory will serve as the framework in which achievement-related cognitions and behaviors are measured. Achievement goal theory, in this study, has two dimensions that act and interact to affect behavior and cognition (Nicholls, 1989). These two dimensions are achievement goal orientation and perceived motivational climate. Achievement goal theory research conducted in the sports realm has primarily examined achievement motivation and perceive d climates within a single sport. These studies have compared same-sport athletes across age, gender, and time of competitive season. To date, studies have not examined the relationship of goal orientations and perceived climates for athletes participating in different sports, events or positions. 1

PAGE 8

2 Athletes are often placed into sub-gr oups of the overall team. This separation of athletes may be between offense and defense, endurance and speed, or weight class. Due to this division, it is of interest to gain in sight into how the different sub-groups of the same team exhibit achievement goal orient ations and perceive their motivational climates. The purpose of the present study is to examine the goal orientations and perceived motivational climates exhibited by intercollegiate athletes participating in track’s two running disciplines—d istance running and sprinting. Purpose of Study The purpose of this study is to inve stigate the goal orienta tion and perception of motivational climate exhibited by intercollegi ate athletes particip ation in track’s two running disciplines—sprinting and distance running—and to examine the relationship between the athletes’ goal or ientations and perceptions of motivational climate. Research Questions 1. Is there a difference in the goal orientat ion and perception of mo tivational climate between sprinters and distance runners competing at the Division I collegiate level? The four subquestions are as follows: a. Is there a difference in mean score on the Task and Ego in Sport Questionnaire (TEOSQ) for sprinters and distance runne rs related to task orientation? b. Is there a difference in mean scor e on the TEOSQ for sprinters and distance runners related to ego orientation? c. Is there a difference in mean scor e on the PMCSQ for sprinters and distance runners related to mastery-involvement? d. Is there a difference in mean scor e on the PMCSQ for sprinters and distance runners related to performance-involvement? 2. What is the relationship between an at hlete’s goal orientations and the athlete’s perception of mo tivational climate? The eight subquestions are as follows:

PAGE 9

3 a. What is the relationship between the spri nters’ scores for task orientation on the TEOSQ and perceived mast ery climate on the Perceived Motivational Climate in Sport Questionnaire (PMCSQ)? b. What is the relationship between th e sprinters’ scores for ego orientation on the TEOSQ and perceived performance climate on the PMCSQ? c. What is the relationship between th e sprinters’ scores for task orientation on the TEOSQ and perceived performance climate on the PMCSQ? d. What is the relationship between th e sprinters’ scores for ego orientation on the TEOSQ and perceived mastery climate on the PMCSQ? e. What is the relationship between th e distance runners’ scores for task orientation on the TEOSQ and perceived mastery climate on the PMCSQ? f. What is the relationship between the distance runners’ scores for ego orientation on the TEOSQ and perceived performance climate on the PMCSQ? g. What is the relationship between the distance runners’ scores for task orientation on the TEOSQ and perceived performance climate on the PMCSQ? h. What is the relationship betw een the distance runners’ scores for ego orientation on the TEOSQ and perceived mastery climate on the PMCSQ? Definitions The following definitions were used in this study. 1. Achievement goal orientation addresses a pattern of beliefs that leads to different ways of approaching, engaging in, and responding to achievement situations. 2. Achievement goal theory is the framework in which achievement-related cognitions and behaviors are measured. Ac hievement goal orientation and perceived motivational climate fall under the larger umbrella of achievement goal theory. 3. Dispositional and situational orientations refer to achievement goal orientations and perceptions of motiva tional climate, respectively. 4. Ego orientation refers to the belief that ability is measured by how well one does in relation to another person. 5. Extreme score describes individuals who score 4.0 or higher or 1.9 or lower on a 5point Likert scale.

PAGE 10

4 6. Motivation is the direction and intensity of an i ndividual’s effort toward a specific task (Weinberg & Gould, 1999). 7. Motivational climate is the social climate of achieve ment settings created by others. 8. Task orientation refers to the belief that ability is a self-referenced measurement. 9. Mastery-involved describes a climate in which indi viduals perceive significant others promote hard work and pe rsistence as criteria for success. 10. Performance-involved describes a climate in which in dividuals perceive significant others promote winning as criterion for success. 11. TEOSQ is the acronym for Task and Ego Orie ntation in Sport Questionnaire. The TEOSQ measures task-ori entation and ego-orientation. 12. PMCSQ is the acronym for the Perceived Motiva tional Climate in Sport Questionnaire. The PMCSQ measures percep tion of mastery-involved or performance-involved climate. 13. Sprinters are track runners competing at distances 400m and shorter. 14. Distance runners are track runners competing at distances 800m and longer. Limitations The following limitations apply to this study. 1. Data collection depended on each part icipant returning two questionnaires each. 2. Data collection was de pendent upon participants’ honesty. Assumptions The following assumptions were made in this thesis. 1. The participants were candid and truthful. 2. The methodology used in the study wa s appropriate for the research question. Significance of the Study Track and field is a unique sport com posed of several different event groups that come together under the larger umbrella of “tra ck and field.” In the field events, there are

PAGE 11

5 throwing events, horizontal and vertical jumps, and the pole vault. On the track, there are sprinting events and distance events. Prior ps ychological studies utilizing track and field athletes as subjects (Fairall & Rodgers, 1997; Goudas, Biddle, Fox, & Underwood, 1995; Harger & Raglin, 1994; Huddleston, Kamphof f, Suchan, Mack, Bian, Bush, Mintah, Dutler, & Wee, 2002) have examined a vari ety of cognitive topics, including anxiety, goal setting, mood states and motivation. Howe ver, these studies failed to identify the event group to which subjects belonged. This is problematic, as fundamental differences exist between each group that may alter their psychological profiles. For the scope of this study, only athlete motivation will be examined and only athletes participating in the two running disciplines will partic ipate in our investigation. Th erefore, the two groups will collectively be referred to as “track” athletes. There are considerable differences between the sprint and distance disciplines. While a sprinter and a distan ce runner are both tr ack runners, the physical preparation for each discipline is so vastly different that two athletes on the same team may never even meet. Sprint training utilizes anaerobic work, weight lifting, and pays strict attention to running form. Additionally, it is important to practice the use of starting blocks and the passing of relay batons. The majority, if not entirety, of sprint training is done on the track. Distance training entails predominantly aerobic development and hill work. Thus, distance training is done primarily away from the track, in the way of distance running or longer workouts on grass. The need for differe nt training environments generally results in a complete separation of sprint and dist ance athletes. It is unclear whether this separation of event groups play s a role in how athletes’ goal orientations develop or how they perceive their motivational climates.

PAGE 12

6 In addition to the differing physical requirements and the separation of training groups, there are characteris tics of sprinting and distan ce running that may promote different motivational climates and/or athlet e goal orientations. US television and media coverage generally focus on sprints. For ex ample, the media award the term “World’s Fastest Man” to the winner of the Olympic 100m final, while the winner of the marathon receives no such accolade. Another potential contributor to a ny psychological differences that may exist between sprinters and distance runners is the success of US elite athletes over shorter distances. With equal opportuni ties for distance runners and sprinters to earn medals, Americans have won 67 Olympic medals in th e sprint events since 1972, while merely 7 medals have been earned in the distance events Finally, the large disp arity in the margin of time that separates winners from non-wi nners in sprints and distances may also contribute to differing psychologi cal profiles. A mediocre colle giate sprinter may be one second slower than the Olympic 100m cham pion. Meanwhile, a mediocre collegiate 10,000m runner may be six minutes slower than the Olympic champion. This study is significant because it will explain differences that exist in achievement goal orientations and perceptions of motivational climate, and explain how the two relate, for two distinctly different gr oups of athletes previ ously considered one sport.

PAGE 13

7 CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE The purpose of this literature review is to define and describe achievement goal theory in general, and how it has devel oped in the sports realm in particular. Achievement goal theory is reviewed with th e perspective that indi viduals participating in sports have varying goal orientations and perceptions of motivational climate. A review of achievement goal theory from th is perspective reveals the theoretical perspective and background re lative to the present study. Achievement Goal Orientation Goal orientation theorists contend fee lings of success stem fr om the attainment of goals. The types of goals athletes describe as valuable are evidence of their goal orientation. Feelings of success are achieved by the interplay of the achievement of goals and the respective value athlet e’s place on their attainment (Nicholls, Cheung, Lauer, & Pastashnick, 1989). For example, what is mo re important to a tr ack runner, winning a race or running the best race possible? How successful would the r unner feel winning the race, but not putting forth maximum effort? Th ese feelings of success are dependent on the athlete’s goal orientation. Research on goal orientation has yielded the existence of two independent conceptual views of success that combine to form an individual’s achievement goal orientation (Duda & Nicholls, 1992). These ach ievement goal orientations, also known as dispositional goal orientations, are states of task and ego th at exist in all individuals. 7

PAGE 14

8 Task-Orientation Individuals in achievement settings may perceive or judge their competence or ability to perform a task in a self-referenced manner and maintain their conceptions of ability and effort, at least to some degree, as undifferentiated concepts (Nicholls & Miller, 1984). Those with this undifferentiated conception of ability and effort tend to feel successful when an increase in their e ffort at a task increases their level of performance. Moreover, individuals with this undifferentiated conception of ability and effort tend to pursue tasks that are more chal lenging because they perceive tasks that are easy to perform are not likely to improve their skills, performance, or overall ability (Jagacinski & Nicholls, 1987). Individuals with this undifferentiated conception of ability and effort are considered task-oriented because performance of a task is conceived as an end in itself. Researchers indicate that task-ori ented individuals tend to adopt more adaptive behaviors in achievement settings than i ndividuals that do not have a strong taskorientation. Among the adaptive behaviors a dopted by individuals with a strong taskorientation are the use of deep learning strate gies (Nolen, 1988), incr eased persistence at a task (Elliot & Dweck, 1988), pride and satisfa ction with putting fort h effort (Jagacinski & Nicholls, 1987), and a preference for enga ging in challenging tasks (Ames & Archer, 1988). Ego-Orientation In contrast to a task-oriented indivi dual, individuals that ex hibit ego-orientations in an achievement setting become self-consciously concerned about their ability to perform a task. An ego-oriented individual ex hibits a differentiated conception of ability

PAGE 15

9 and effort, and they perceive themselves as being less capable if they put forth more effort than someone else to reach the same level of competence at a task (Jagacinski & Nicholls, 1987). According to this view of ego-orientati on, individuals will comparatively perceive themselves as being more skillful if they do better at a task with less effort than someone else. Researchers have indicated that indi viduals with ego-orient ations tend to adopt maladaptive behaviors in achievement setti ngs; however, the findings associated with maladaptive behaviors are less consistent th an those associated with adaptive behavior patterns. Some identified maladaptive behaviors of ego-oriented individuals as the use of superficial learning strategies (Nolen, 1988) negative feelings when not successful (Jagacinski & Nicholls, 1987), and the avoida nce of challenging tasks (Elliot & Dweck, 1988). Interestingly, others have found some positive aspects associated with an egoorientation. For example, Midgley, Anderman, and Hicks (1995) found that ego-oriented middle school students’ performance goals were associated with the increases in selfefficacy. Recently, researchers have suggested th at ego-orientation should be separated into two components. This approach partitions e go-orientation into approach and avoidance components (Elliot & Church, 1997; Elliot & Harackiewicz, 1996; Elliot, McGregor, & Gable, 1999). The resulting trichotomous model then includes a task-orientation, an egoavoidance-orientation, and an ego-approach-o rientation. However, regardless of whether the ego-oriented individual pursues success by striving to be superior to another or to avoid being found inferior, the comparative aspe ct of ego-orientation remains consistent. Future research specifically addressing th is trichotomous model may explain differences

PAGE 16

10 among ego-oriented behavioral patterns. Mo st would still argue, however, that egoorientation is less desirable than a task -orientation when one is involved in an achievement setting. No studies comparing the goal orienta tion of athletes partic ipating in different sports or events have been conducted. There is however, research th at evaluates the goal orientation of athletes playi ng the same sport, as well as large groups of athletes not separated by sport. These studies compared athletes across competitive levels, gender, and time of season. Achievement Goal Orientat ion and Competitive Levels A study by Carpenter and Yates (1997) compared the goal orientations of amateur and semiprofessional soccer players. The study showed amateur soccer players scored significantly higher on of task-o rientation than the semiprofe ssional players. Scores for ego-orientation, while higher for semiprofessi onals, were not signifi cantly different. A multiple-sport study by White and Ze llner (1996) looked into goal orientations of male and female athletes participating in a variety of sports at three competitive levels of play: intercollegiate, organized high sc hool and college-aged recreational. The study found that high school athletes were signi ficantly more ego-oriented than the intercollegiate athletes and th at college-aged recreational at hletes were the highest in task-orientation. In this study pa rticipants were not separated by the sports they played. Achievement Goal Or ientation and Gender Another factor that may contribute to an athlete’s goal orientation is gender. In examining the goal orientation of participan ts in a summer basketball camp, Duda and Horn (1993) found no significant gender-relat ed differences in goal orientation.

PAGE 17

11 Duda, Chi, Newton, Walling and Catle y (1995) evaluated the goal orientation of members of a college tennis class and re vealed a significant difference in taskorientation, with females scori ng significantly higher in task -orientation than males. No significant difference was found re lated to ego-orientation. In a study by Duda (1989), varsity hi gh school athletes involved in individual and team sports were investigated to detect differences between male and female goal orientations. A significa nt difference in goal orientations was detected between male and females. No sport-specific comparisons of th e goal orientation of th e participants were made. Results indicated a significantly highe r score for females on task-orientation and a significantly higher ego-orientation score for males. Li, Harmer and Acock (1996) studied the goal orientations of 467 undergraduate students enrolled in a variety of physical education classes. Examination of means for taskand ego-orientation reve aled significant differences onl y related to ego-orientation with males scoring significantly higher than females. No significant differences were found related to task-orientation. Achievement Goal Orientat ion and Time of Season Another possible influence in the deve lopment of goal orientations of athletes is the time of competitive season. That is, will an athlete’s goal orientation change as the athlete progresses through the competitive season? A study by Williams (1998) utilizing adolescent female softball players suggests a co rrelation exists between an athlete’s goal orientation at the beginning of a competitiv e season and the end of the season. Despite slight change from early to late season there was a positive correlation ( r = .77) between

PAGE 18

12 early and late season task-ori entation scores. A correlation between early to late season ego-orientation scores also existed ( r = .64). Perceived Motivational Climate While Achievement goal orientation is concerned with dis positional traits, the second dimension of achievement goal theo ry, perceived motivational climate, is situational. Perceived motivational climate refers to individuals’ perceptions of what a teacher, parent, coach or significant other promotes or expects. Similar to goal orientations, environments may be classified as either task-involve d or ego-involved. To avoid confusion, these environments shall be referred to as mastery-involved and performance-involved climates, respectively. When one perceives an environm ent as a mastery-involved climate, that individual perceives a climate that facilitate s feelings of satisfaction derived from hard work and persistence in the face of di fficulty (Ames, 1992; Roberts & Ommundsen, 1996). When individuals feel a teacher or coach promotes mala daptive patterns, a performance-involved perception prevails. Mala daptive patterns in this instance might include demonstration of superiority relative to the skills of teammates or opponents as the criterion for success (Ames, 1992; Roberts & Ommundsen, 1996). Relationship of Perceived Motivational C limate and Achievement Goal Orientation There have been several studies examining the relationship of motivational climate and goal orientations of athletes. Duda and Horn (1993), utilizing young athletes participating in a summer basketball cam p, examined the relationship between the athlete’s achievement goal or ientation and their percepti on of their parents’ goal orientation. The study revealed a positive corr elation between task-orientation scores of

PAGE 19

13 the athlete and the athlete’s perception of the parent’s task-orientation. Similarly, the athlete’s that with high degrees of ego-orie ntation were likely to believe parents would also exhibit ego-oriented beha viors. The findings of this study indicated that the young athlete’s perceived motivational climate was related to his/her ow n goal orientation. Research by Goudas, Biddle, Fox and Underwood (1995) studied how a different facet of motivational climate, style of instruc tion, affected goal orientation. In this study, twenty-four females participating in a 10-w eek track class were instructed using two different teaching styles. The first instructional style, di rected instruction, involved teachers making decisions and directing stude nts on activity selection and duration. The differentiated style allowed students to choose activities and workout intensity. Students instructed with the differentiated approach were found to be more task-oriented. This study indicates that students in a physical activity sett ing respond to a motivational climate that is primarily mastery-goal oriented by exhibiting characte ristics that are more task-oriented. An athlete’s perceptions of the athl etic climate can be dictated by actions as simple as asking questions (Ames, 1992). Th e manner in which a coach directs questions can give clear messages of the value they place on aspects of the athletic environment. If coaches ask athletes how they did, rather than if they won, athletes are able to express their own set of values. It was found that the elements of competitive environments, including coaches, that demand adaptive beha vior, striving for personal best and skill development, facilitated ta sk-oriented motivation goals among athletes (Ames, 1992). Research by Ames (1988) found a correlation between motivational climate and demonstrated motivation in the field sett ing. Those who perceived their motivational

PAGE 20

14 climate as mastery-involved preferred ch allenging tasks and believed success were directly related to effort. The study suggested taskand e go-orientation varied with interpretation of class structure. Work by Roberts and Ommundsen (1996) investigated 148 students at the Norwegian University of Sport and Physical Education to determine how athletes’ goal orientations may impact their perceptions of motivational climate. Results indicated athletes who are primarily task-oriented perceive their motivational climate as masteryinvolved. Similarly, athletes who are primarily ego-oriented perceive their motivational climate as performance-involved. Walling, Duda and Chi (1993) found that athletes’ perceptions of competitive climate produce degrees of satisfaction w ith participation levels and levels of performance worry. The researchers found that athletes who perceived their environment as mastery-involved demonstrated greater feelings of satisf action from participation on a team and lower levels of performance worr y. Likewise, athletes that perceived the environment to be performance-involve d demonstrated less satisfaction from participation on a team and greater levels of performance worry. Finally, there is evidence through work done by Dweck and Leggett (1988) that one of the two constructs, if strong enough, ma y override the other. For example, if a mastery or performance climate is perceive d, but its cues are w eak, an individual’s predisposition towards task or ego should hold sway. However, if the situational cues are strong in favor of either mastery-invo lved or performance-involved climates, dispositional orientations may be overridde n (Treasure & Roberts, 1998). For these reasons, it is important to investigate th e relationships that may exist between achievement goal orientation and perceived motivational climate.

PAGE 21

15 CHAPTER 3 METHOD Participants Five coaches of NCAA Division I track programs were contacted by phone for potential participants in this study. They were each contacted with a brief description of the study. The coaches willing to take part informed their at hletes about the opportunity to participate in the study. All potential particip ants must have particip ated in at least one semester of competition at the university level. Informed consent forms, approved by the University of Florida’s Institutional Review Board for human subjects, were delive red to the coach of each participating team for administration to their athletes. Student -athletes wishing to participate signed and returned the consent forms to their coach. Th e researcher collected all volunteers’ forms before the administration of any questionnaires. Athletes completed the Task and Ego in Sport Questionnaire (TEOSQ), the Perceived Motivational Climate in Sport Qu estionnaire (PMCSQ), and some general biographical information. This biographical in formation included information about the primary event in which the athlete competes This will serve to determine whether the athlete is a sprinter or distance runner. A total of 39 athletes, 20 distance runners and 19 sprinters participated in the study. Of the 20 distance runners, 9 were male and 11 were female. The sprinter group was comprised of 10 males and 9 females. 15

PAGE 22

16 Instruments To obtain the dispositional-orientation data, participants filled out the Task and Ego in Sport Questionnaire (TEOSQ). The TEO SQ was created and verified for validity and reliability by Duda and Nicholls (1992). Items on the TEOSQ were prefaced with the heading “I feel really succe ssful in sport when...” Exampl es of task-oriented and egooriented responses appear in Table 1. Table 1: Examples of TEOSQ Responses Task-oriented Responses Ego-Oriented Responses I learn a new skill and it makes me want to practice more I’m the only one who can do the play or skill I learn something that is fun to do I can do better than my friends I work really hard The others can’t do as well as me I do my very best I score the most points Participants rated items on a 5-point Likert type scale. Each athlete received a score for task and ego. High task was consider ed any score greater than or equal to 3.00. Low task was considered below 3.00. Extreme ta sk was considered any score greater than or equal to 4.00 or less than 2.00. The same s cale was utilized for determination of egoorientation. A copy of the Task and Ego Orie ntation in Sport Questionnaire appears in Appendix A. Perceived motivational climat e was assessed through a Perceived Motivational Climate in Sport Questionnaire (PMCSQ). Developed and verified for validity and reliability by Walling, Duda, and Chi (1993) the PMCSQ consists of 11 mastery-

PAGE 23

17 involved and 14 performance-involved items. St atements begin with “On this sports team... ” and offer mastery-involved and perf ormance-involved responses. Examples of both mastery-involved and performance-invo lved statements appear in Table 2. Table 2: Examples of PMCSQ Responses Mastery-involved Responses Pe rformance-involved Responses Trying hard is rewarded Players fe el good when they do better than their teammates Coaches make sure players improve on skills they are not good at Players are punished when they make mistakes The focus is to improve each competition Playing better than teammates is important Players are encouraged to work on weaknesses Coaches favor some players more than others Answers were ranked on a 5-point Likert type scale, ranging from (1) strongly disagree to (5) st rongly agree. All athletes re ceived a score for mastery and performance perceptions. High mastery percep tions were scores of 3.00 and higher. Low mastery scores were scores below 3.00. Th e same process was used for performance perception. A copy of the Perc eived Motivational Climate in Sport Questionnaire appears in Appendix B. Procedure After coaches verbally agreed to allo w their athletes to participate, and informed athlete consent forms were collected, coaches were sent a packet of information that included a letter of intr oduction (Appendix C), a script to be read aloud to participants

PAGE 24

18 (Appendix D), the TEOSQ (Appendix A), the PMCSQ (Appendix B), and enough pencils for each member of the team. Coaches were in structed to remind participants that their involvement in the study is voluntary, anonym ous, and will not affect their status on the team. After completion of the questionnaire s, the coaches collected all forms, placed them in a self-addressed stamped envelope a nd returned them to the researcher. Data collection took place in February 2004, during the indoor track season. While research by Williams (1998) suggests goal orientations do not change during the course of the competitive season, there is no research inve stigating how perceptions of motivational climate may change during the course of a competitive season. Thus, all data was collected within the same two-week period, in the early stages of the season. Data Analysis After the researcher received the comp leted questionnaires, individual and group means were calculated for task-orientation a nd ego-orientation scores on the TEOSQ and for scores of mastery-involved and perf ormance-involved climate perceptions on the PMCSQ. Before analyzing the data with more powerful parametric statistics, the skewness and kurtosis of the data were checked. This assures normality in distribution and variance, the two assumptions that must be met for use of parametric statistics. As seen in Table 3, the data are of acceptable nor mal distribution and variance, thus meeting the two assumptions. Table 3: Skewness and Kurtosis Calculations TEOSQ PMCSQ All Data Skewness -0.7 -0.4 -0.5 Kurtosis 0.2 0 0.2

PAGE 25

19 Having met the assumptions of normality and variance, independent t-tests were utilized to determine differences in sprinter s’ and distance runners’ goal orientations and perceptions of motivational climate. A total of four independent t-tests were carried out in order to compare sprinter and distance r unner task-orientation, e go-orientation, masteryinvolved climate perception, and performanceinvolved climate per ception. The level of significance was set at p<.05. Next, to determine what relationships exis t between the athletes’ goal orientations and perceptions of motivati onal climate, a Pearson Produc t Moment Coefficient of Correlation was used. This analysis investigat ed the eight possible relationships of goalorientation to perceived motivational climate. These eight relations hips are previously identified as the subquestions of research que stion 2. The level of significance was set at p<.05.

PAGE 26

20 CHAPTER 4 RESULTS The collected data was utilized to answer research questions 1 and 2, posed in Chapter 1. The results of the investigati on of sprinters’ and distance runners’ goal orientations, as outlined in re search questions 1a and 1b, appe ar in Tables 4 and 5. Tables 6 and 7 display the results of the comparison of distance runners and sprinters perceptions of motivational climate, as outlined in research questions 1c and 1d. Finally, the relationships between sprinters’ and distance runners’ goal-orientat ions and perceptions of motivational climate, outlined in research questions 2a-2h, appear in Tables 8 and 9. Table 4 displays the findings of research question 1a. With a mean taskorientation score of 4.2, distance runners e xhibited extreme task-orientation. This was significantly greater than the sprinter group’s score of 3.7. It is important to note that the sprinter group’s score still falls in the high task-orientation range. Table 4: Results of t-test Examining Task-Orientation Distance Runners Sprinters Mean: 4.2 3.7 Variance: .26 .87 Number of Obs.(n): 20 19 Pooled Variance .56 Df: 37 tcalc: 2.10 tcrit: 2.03 Conclusion: There is a difference with regard to task-orientation 20

PAGE 27

21 Table 5: Results of t-test Examining Ego-Orientation Distance Runners Sprinters Mean: 2.9 3.0 Variance: .95 .53 Number of Obs.(n): 20 19 Pooled Variance .74 Df: 37 tcalc: -0.36 tcrit: 2.03 Conclusion: No difference with regard to ego-orientation Table 5 displays the findings of research question 1b. With mean ego-orientation scores of 2.9 for distance runners and 3.0 for sprinters, there was no significant difference between the two groups. Though both were close to the median split, distance runners ego-orientation scores fell in the low range while sprinters were in the high range. Table 6: Results of t-test Examining Mastery-Perceptions. Distance Runners Sprinters Mean: 3.7 3.0 Variance: .38 .48 Number of Obs.(n): 20 19 Pooled Variance .43 Df: 37 tcalc: 3.38 tcrit: 2.03 Conclusion: There is a difference with regards to masteryperception

PAGE 28

22 Table 6 displays the findings of research question 1c. Distance runners average mastery-perception scores on the PMCSQ we re significantly higher than sprinters. However, with scores of 3.7 and 3.0 respectiv ely, both groups were in the high range for mastery-involved perceptions of motivational climate. Table 7 displays the results of research question 1d. Distance runners had an average PMCSQ performance-perception score of 2.9. This falls in the low range and is significantly lower than the av erage score of the sprinter group. The sprinter group’s average performance-perception of 3.5 falls in the high range. Table 7: Results of t-test Ex amining Performance-Perceptions. Distance Runners Sprinters Mean: 2.9 3.5 Variance: .41 .30 Number of Obs.(n): 20 19 Pooled Variance .36 Df: 37 tcalc: -3.16 tcrit: 2.03 Conclusion: There is a difference with regards to performanceperception. Table 8 shows the findings of research questions 2a-2d. The distance runners exhibited a significant positive correlation (r = 0.48) between task-orientation and the perception of motivational climates as mastery-involved. This group exhibited no significant correlation between task-orientation and perf ormance-involved climate perceptions. The distance runne rs exhibited a significant ne gative correlation (r = -0.50)

PAGE 29

23 between ego-orientation and perceptions of mastery-involved climates. Finally, a significant correlation (r = 0.75) existed be tween ego-orientation and performanceinvolved climate perceptions. Table 8: Results of Pearson-Product Correlation Examining Distance Runners Mastery-involved perception Performance-involved perception Task-orientation 0.48* -0.14 Ego-orientation -0.50* 0.75* *significant finding Table 9 shows the results of resear ch questions 2e-2h. The sprinters exhibited significant positive correlation between task -orientation and mastery-involved climate perceptions (r = 0.46). This group also exhi bited a significant positive correlation between task-orientation and pe rceptions of performance-i nvolved motivational climates (r = 0.65). The sprinters did not exhibit a signi ficant correlation be tween ego-orientation with either mastery-involved or perform ance-involved climate perceptions. Table 9: Results of Pearson-Produc t Correlation Examining Sprinters Mastery-involved perception Performance-involved perception Task-orientation 0.46* 0.65* Ego-orientation 0.27 0.33 *significant finding Discussion Goal orientation is the set of personal goals that relate to beliefs about success and failure. An athlete’s perception of motivationa l climate is the degree to which an athlete perceives a sporting climate to be either mastery-involved or pe rformance-involved. It

PAGE 30

24 was the purpose of this study to analyze bot h the goal orientation and perceptions of motivational climate of track athletes repr esenting varsity programs at Division I universities. After describing the two groups of athletes, sp rinters and distance runners, and analyzing their differences related to goal orientation an d perceptions of motivational climate, the relationship between goal orie ntation and perceived motivational climate within the two groups of athletes was examined. The results of this study indicate that there are differen ces in goal orientation between distance runners and sprinters. While no difference emerged related to egoorientation, the distance runners displayed higher levels of task-orienta tion than sprinters. The sprinters’ task-orientation scores were in the defined “high” range, while the distance runners were in the “extreme high” range. Both groups’ ego-orientation scores were around the median of the e go-orientation scale. Analyses of perceptions of motiva tional climate indicate that differences exist between sprinters and distance runners with respect to both mastery-involved and performance-involved perceptions. While both groups were in the “high” range, distance runners’ mastery-involved percep tions were greater than thei r sprinting counterparts. The two groups also displayed differences in pe rformance-involved clim ate perceptions, with distance runners’ marks falling in the “low ” range and sprinters marks falling in the “high” range. Previous research indicates a re lationship exists between an athlete’s goalorientation and motivational climate. Goudas, Biddle, Fox, and Underwood (1995) found that a mastery-involved motivational climate created by an instructor was significantly associated with the fostering of task-involved goal orientations. This trend appears in the

PAGE 31

25 current study as well, as both sprinters and distance runners displayed positive correlations between task-o rientation and mastery-involved climate perceptions. Distance runners showed a negati ve correlation between ego-orientation and mastery-involved climate perceptions. On th e other hand, this group displayed a positive correlation between ego-orientation and perfor mance-involved climate perceptions. Finally, the distance runners showed an insignificant negative correlation between task-orientation and performance-involved clim ate perceptions. While the final finding is insignificant, it suggests a trend may exist between task-orienta tion and performanceinvolved climate perceptions. Intuitively, ta sk-orientation and performance-perception would correlate negatively, as was the case in the current study. However, until future research on the subject is conducte d, no conclusion can be drawn. The relationships between sprinter s’ goal orientations and perceptions of motivational climate were not as clear as the distance runners’. No correlation existed between ego-orientation with either climate perception. Furt her, while task-orientation was positively correlated with mastery-invol ved perceptions of climate, it was more strongly positively correlated with performanc e-involved climate perceptions. This final finding is unexpected. A possibl e explanation could be the participants possessed an inherently strong task orientation that pr evailed despite the strong perception of a performance-involved motivational climate. Further investigation of this finding is required to advance this theory beyond specu lation. The findings of this study should be a useful tool for all track and field coaches. It will allow them to better understand what drives their athletes, and to create a trai ning environment and motivational climate that best suits their team.

PAGE 32

26 Future Research The results of this study indicate th at there are differences in goal orientation and perceptions of motivational cl imate between sprinters and distance runners. Thus, it is important for future research on motivation in sport to carefully assign participants to the correct group and not lump all track athletes together. Previous research utilizing track athletes failed to make this distinction betw een sprinter and distance runner. As a result, research utilizing track athlet es may require re-evaluation. Fu rther, work should be done to identify motivational differences between other sports as well. Future research examining the relationships between goal-orientation and perceptions of motivational cl imate should attempt to expand on the findings of Goudas, Biddle, Fox, and Underwood (1995). Specifi cally, with a relationship between goalorientation and perceived motivational climat e established, is it possible to determine a causal relationship between the two? Does either goal-orientation or perceived motivational climate operate as a predicto r of the other? Also of importance is determining how inherent goal-orientations determine which sport or event group an individual chooses to participate in. Future research may also examine how achievement goal orientation and perceived motivational climate affect perceptions of success. If one construct is low and the other high, how will an individual percei ve causes of success? In this potential research stream, goal orientations and percep tions of motivational climate would operate as the independent variables and perceptions of success would serve as the dependent variable.

PAGE 33

27 Finally, additional research on track at hletes’ goal orientations and perceptions of motivational climate should increase the number of participants to bolster the power of the findings, and expand to include the ju mping and throwing field event groups.

PAGE 34

28 APPENDIX A TASK AND EGO ORIENTATION IN SPORT QUESTIONNAIRE DIRECTIONS: Give your reaction to the following statements in regards how you usually or generally feel about the sport of snow skiing as if YOU were the athlete. You are asked to rank your reaction by indicating 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Di sagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly Agree I feel most successful in track when… 1. I’m the only one who can do the play or skill. 1 2 3 4 5 2. I learn a new skill and it makes me want to practice more. 1 2 3 4 5 3. I can do better than my friends. 1 2 3 4 5 4. The others can’t do as well as me. 1 2 3 4 5 5. I learn something that is fun to do. 1 2 3 4 5 6. Others mess up and I don’t. 1 2 3 4 5 7. I learn a new skill by trying hard. 1 2 3 4 5 8. I work really hard. 1 2 3 4 5 9. I score the most points/goals/hits, etc. 1 2 3 4 5 10. Something I learn makes me want to go and practice more. 1 2 3 4 5 11. I’m the best. 1 2 3 4 5 12. A skill I learn really feels right. 1 2 3 4 5 13. I do my very best. 1 2 3 4 5 28

PAGE 35

29 APPENDIX B PERCEIVED MOTIVATIONAL CLIMA TE IN SPORT QUESTIONNAIRE DIRECTIONS: Give your reaction to the fo llowing statements in regards to how you usually or generally feel about the team you are on. You are asked to rank your reaction by indicating 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Di sagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly Agree On this team... Players feel good when they do better than their teammates 1 2 3 4 5 Trying hard is rewarded 1 2 3 4 5 Players are punished when they make a mistake 1 2 3 4 5 Coaches make sure players improve on skills they're not good at 1 2 3 4 5 The focus is to improve each game 1 2 3 4 5 Players are taken out of the game for mistakes 1 2 3 4 5 Playing better than teammtes is important 1 2 3 4 5 Coaches give most of their attention to the "stars" 1 2 3 4 5 Doing better than others is important 1 2 3 4 5 Players work hard because they want to learn more about the activities 1 2 3 4 5 Coaches favor some players more than others 1 2 3 4 5 Players are encourage to outplay their teammates 1 2 3 4 5 Players are encourage to work on their weaknesses 1 2 3 4 5 Everyone wants to be the high scorer 1 2 3 4 5 Everyone feels that they have an important role on the team 1 2 3 4 5 Coaches want us to try new skills 1 2 3 4 5 Players like playing when the teams are evenly matched 1 2 3 4 5 Only the top players "get noticed" by the coaches 1 2 3 4 5 Most of the players get to play in the game 1 2 3 4 5 Players are afraid to make mistakes 1 2 3 4 5 Only a few players can be the stars 1 2 3 4 5 29

PAGE 36

30 APPENDIX C LETTER OF INTRODUCTION Dear Coach, I would like to thank you for your assistance in the completion of this project. I know that practice time is precious and I will try to make this activity brief. The Task Ego Orientation in Sport Questionn aire (TEOSQ) is designed to quantify the degree of involvement of Task and Ego in the Goal Orientation of at hletes. The Perceived Motivational Climate in S port Questionnaire (PMCSQ) is designed to quantify the athlete's perception of what is important on the team. It is the intent of this research to better define the types of athl etes participating in the spor t track and field. By defining the athlete we may be able to better define aspects of the sport itself. Enclosed you will find questionnaires, pencils, instructions to be read prior to giving the questionnaire, and an envelope to return the completed questionnaires. It's important that the athletes understand that their particip ation in the study is both voluntary and anonymous. The questionnaires should be administered at the beginning of a normal practice. Once the participants have been given the questionn aires, please read them the instructions, and give them time to complete the questionnaires. Ten minutes should be a sufficient amount of time for most of them to complete the questionnaires. If you have any questions in regards to th e study please contact my advisor or me at: Sean McManus(352) 895-6896 or via e-mail at smcmanus@alumni.nd.edu Dr. John Todorovich(352) 392-0584 or via e-mail at jtodorov@hhp.ufl.edu Again, I would like to express my gratitude to you for your participation in the study, which is part of my work towards a master’s degree at the University of Florida. If you're interested in the results I will be glad to se nd you a copy. It is my belie f that the better we understand our athletes the better we function as coaches. I hope that the results of this study will assist in the furthe ring of our understanding of the athletes we work with. Sincerely, Sean P. McManus 30

PAGE 37

31 APPENDIX D SCRIPT TO BE READ TO PARTICIPANTS Motivation and the Sport of Track and Field Instructions for the administ ration of the TEOSQ and PMCSQ Have participants seated in chairs or on th e floor. Pencils are incl uded for the marking of the questionnaire. The questionnaire should be administered at the beginning normal practice when ever possible. Participants should work alone and be quiet until all participants have completed the questionnaire. Please read the following statement prior to allowing the participants to begin. The questionnaires I am giving you are part of a masters resear ch project for the University of Florida. The graduate student doing the research is also a coach and is interested in the psychology of success. Your participation is completely voluntary and anonymous. I will not look at your complete d questionnaire. If you decide not to participate, your decision will not in any way affect your standing with the team. The following statement is from the coach doing the research. I would like to thank you for giving your time to voluntarily participate in my study. I am attempting to analyze athlete goal orientati on and perception of the motivational climate on the team he/she is particip ating on. Participants in th is study are track athletes participating at the NCAA Div I level. The que stionnaires that you are about to complete will assist in the comparison of these athletes. Your participation in the st udy will be kept anonymous a nd I ask that you not sign the questionnaires. By completing the questionnai res you give implied consent to the use of the data generated by your responses to the statements. Questionnaire 1: Ego and Task Orie ntation in Sport Questionnaire Goal orientation is the value that you place on aspects of the competitive environment. The questionnaire asks you to respond to 13 st atements about your feelings of success. You will give your reaction to the statements in regards to the sport of track and field. Respond to the statement “I feel most succe ssful in track and field when…” by circling one of the numbers to the right of the statem ent that most represents the way you usually or generally feel about the sport of track. 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Di sagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly Agree 31

PAGE 38

32 After completing the questionnai re give it to the coach ad ministering the questionnaire and please remain quiet until all your teammates have completed the questionnaire before beginning the second questionnaire. Questionnaire 2: Perceived Motivationa l Climate in Sport Questionnaire Motivational Climate is the way we perceive coaches’ values with respect to sport participation. The questionnaire asks you to respond to 21 statements about your perception of the motivational climate on your team. You will give your reaction to the statements in regards the team you are currently on. Respond to the statement “On this team…” by ci rcling one of the numbers to the right of the statement that most represents the way you usually or generally feel about the team you are on. 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Di sagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly Agree After completing the questionnai re give it to the coach ad ministering the questionnaire and please remain quiet until all your teammates have completed the questionnaire.

PAGE 39

33 REFERENCE LIST Ames, C. (1992). Achievement goals, motivational climate, and motivational processes. In G. Roberts (Ed.) Motivation in sport and exercise (pp. 161-176). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Ames, C., & Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goa ls in the classroom: Students’ learning strategies and motivation processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80 260267. Carpenter, P.J., & Yates, B. (1997). Rela tionship between achievement goals and the perceived purposes of soccer for semiprofessional and amateur players. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 19, 302-311. Duda, J.L. (1989). Relationship between task and ego orientation and the perceived purpose of sport among high school athletes. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 11, 318-335. Duda, J.L., Chi, L., Newton, M. L., Walling, M. D., & Catley, D. (1995). Task and ego orientation and intrinsic motivation in sport. International Jo urnal of Sport Psychology, 26, 40-63. Duda, J.L., & Horn, H.L. (1993). Interdepe ndencies between the perceived and selfreported goal orientations of young athletes and their parents. Pediatric Exercise Science, 5, 234-241. Duda, J.L., & Nicholls, J. (1992). Dimensions of achievement motivation in schoolwork and sport. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89 290-299. Dweck, C.S., & Leggett, E. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 2, 256-273. Elliot, A.J., & Church, M.A. (1997). A hierar chical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72 218232. Elliot, A.J., & Harackiewicz, J.M. (1996). A pproach and avoidance achievement goals and intrinsic motivation: A mediational analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70 461-475. 33

PAGE 40

34 Elliot, A.J., McGregor, H.A., & Gable, S. (1999). Achievement goals, study strategies and exam performance: A mediational analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91 549-563. Elliot, E.S., & Dweck, C.S. (1988). Goals: An approach to motivation and achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54 5-12. Fairall, D.G., & Rodgers, W.M. (1997). Th e effects of goal-setting method on goal attributes in athletes: A field experiment. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 19 (1), 1-16. Goudas, M., Biddle, S., Fox, K., & Underw ood, M. (1995). It ain't what you do, it's the way that you do it! Teaching style aff ects children's motivation in track and field lessons. The Sport Psychologist, 9, 254-264. Harger, G.J., & Raglin, J.S. (1994). Corre spondence between actual and recalled precompetition anxiety in collegiate track and field atheltes. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 16 (2), 206-211. Huddleston, S., Kamphoff, C.S., Suchan, T.M., Mack, M.G., Bian, W., Bush, D., Mintah, J.K., Dutler, K.E., & Wee, R.J. (2002). M ood state changes in collegiate track and field athletes. International Sports Journal, 6 (1), 75-83. Jagacinski, C.M., & Nicholls, J.G. (1987). Co mpetence and affect in task involvement and ego involvement: The impact of social comparison information. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79 (2), 107-114. Li, F., Harmer, P., & Acock, A. (1996). Th e task and ego orientation in sport questionnaire: construct equivalence and mean differences across gender. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 68, 228-238. Midgley, C., Anderman, E., & Hicks, L. ( 1995). Differences between elementary and middle school teachers and stude nts: A goal theory approach. Journal of Adolescence, 15 90-113. Nicholls, J.G. (1989). The competitive ethos and democratic education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Nicholls, J.G., Cheung, P.C., Lauer, J., & Pa stashnick, M. (1989). Individual differences in academic motivation: Perceived ability, goals, beliefs, and values. Learning and Individual Differences, 1, 63-84. Nicholls, J.G., & Miller, A.T. (1984). Development and its discontents: The differentiation of the concept of ab ility. In J. G. Nicholls (Ed.), Advances in motivation and achievement: The development of achievement motivation (Vol. 3, pp. 185-218). Greenwhich, CT: JAI.

PAGE 41

35 Nolen, S.B. (1988). Reasons for studying: Moti vational orientations and study strategies. Cognition and Instruction, 5 269-287. Roberts, G. C., & Ommundsen, Y. (1996). E ffect of goal orientation on achievement beliefs, cognition and strate gies in team sport. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine Science and Sport, 6, 46-56. Todorovich, J.R., & Curtner-Smith, M.D. (2002) Influence of the physical education classroom motivational climat e on sixth grade students’ ta sk and ego orientations. European Physical Education Review, 8 (2), 119-138. Treasure, D., & Roberts, G. (1998). Relationship between female adolescents’ achievement goal orientations, perceptions of the motivational climate, belief about success and sources of satisfaction in basketball International Journal of Sports Psychology, 29 211-230. Walling, M.D., Duda, J.L., Chi, L. (1993). The perceived motivational climate in sport questionnaire: Constr uct and predictive validity. Journal of Sports and Exercise Psychology, 15 172-183. Weinberg, R.S., & Gould, D. (1999). Foundations of sport and exercise psychology (2nd ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. White, S.A., & Zellner, S.R. (1996). The rela tionship between goal or ientation beliefs about the cause of sport success, and trait anxiety among high school intercollegiate, and recrea tional sport participants. The Sport Psychologist, 10 5872. Williams, L. (1998). Contextual influences and goal perspectives among female youth sport participants. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 69 (1) 47-57.

PAGE 42

36 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Sean McManus is a 2001 graduate of the University of Notre Dame, where he received a Bachelor of Science degree in ci vil engineering. Sean al so competed for the university’s intercollegiate track team. It was during these ye ars of competition with the track team that he first noticed potential differences in motivation between sprinters and distance runners. Having decided upon a career change, from engineering to coaching track, Sean entered the University of Florida’s Master of Science program in health science education. It was during these educational purs uits that he became familiar with studies examining motivation in sport and the pr inciples of achievement goal theory. Through this study and others Sean hopes to explore motivational differences between sprinters and distance runners, and to use the findings in practice as a coach. Understanding what drives an athlete to co mpete and persevere through adversity is a valuable tool in getting the at hlete’s absolute best effort. 36


Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0007261/00001

Material Information

Title: Relationship between Collegiate Track Runners' Achievement Goal Orientations and Perceptions of Motivational Climate
Physical Description: Mixed Material
Copyright Date: 2008

Record Information

Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UFE0007261:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0007261/00001

Material Information

Title: Relationship between Collegiate Track Runners' Achievement Goal Orientations and Perceptions of Motivational Climate
Physical Description: Mixed Material
Copyright Date: 2008

Record Information

Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UFE0007261:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text











RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN COLLEGIATE TRACK RUNNERS' ACHIEVEMENT
GOAL ORIENTATIONS AND PERCEPTIONS OF MOTIVATIONAL CLIMATE













By

SEAN P. MCMANUS


A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE IN EXERCISE AND SPORT SCIENCES

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


2004















TABLE OF CONTENTS
page

L IST O F T A B L E S ........ .... ...... ..... ... .. ........ .......................... .. ........ ......... iv

A B TR A C T ............. ................................................................................ v

CHAPTER

1 INTRODUCTION .................. ..................................... ................ 1

P purpose of Study ............................................... ........................ 2
Research Questions ............................................. .... .......... ..... ......... 2
D e fin itio n s ..................................................... ................ .. 3
L im ita tio n s ................................................................................................................4
A ssu m option s ...................................... ............................... ................ .. 4
Significance of the Study .......................................................................... ...........4

2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE ...........................................................................7

A chievem ent G oal Theory ............................................................... ...............7
T ask -O rien tatio n .............................. .......... ... .. .............. ................ 8
Ego-O orientation ............................ .. ... .... ... ................. .......... .. 8
Achievement Goal Orientation and Competitive Level...................................10
Achievement Goal Orientation and Gender.....................................................10
Achievement Goal Orientation and Time of Season............. .................11
Perceived M otivational Clim ate.......................................................... ................ 12
Relationship of Perceived Motivational Climate and Achievement Goal
O rien tatio n ........................................................................ 12

3 M E T H O D S ....................................................... ................ 15

Participants ............ ..................................... 15
In stru m en ts ...................................... ............ ................ ................ 16
P ro cedu re ...........................................................................17
D ata A analysis .......................................................... .. ..................... 18









4 R E S U L T S ............................................................................................................... 2 0

D isc u ssio n ............................................................................................................... 2 3
F u tu re R e se arch ................................................................................................. 2 6

APPENDIX

A TASK AND EGO ORIENTATION IN SPORT QUESTIONNAIRE ...................28

B PERCEIVED MOTIVATIONAL CLIMATE IN SPORT QUESTIONNAIRE ....29

C LETTER OF IN TR OD U CTION .................................................. .....................30

D SCRIPT TO BE READ TO PARTICIPANTS ................................................. 31

R E F E R E N C E L IS T .......................................................................... ....................33

BIO GRAPH ICAL SK ETCH ............................................... ............................ 36















LIST OF TABLES


Table page

1 Examples of TEOSQ Responses ................... ....................................... 16

2 Examples of PMCSQ Responses..................... .................................... 17

3 Skewness and Kurtosis Calculations ........................................ ............... 18

4 Results of t-test Examining Task-Orientation..................................................20

5 Results of t-test Examining Ego-Orientation................ .... .... ...............21

6 Results of t-test Examining Mastery-Perceptions.................... .................21

7 Results of t-test Examining Performance-Perceptions ..................................22

8 Results of Pearson-Product Correlation Examining Distance Runners.................23

9 Results of Pearson-Product Correlation Examining Sprinters............. ...............23















Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in
Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Exercise
and Sport Sciences

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN COLLEGIATE TRACK RUNNERS' ACHIEVEMENT
GOAL ORIENTATIONS AND PERCEPTIONS OF MOTIVATIONAL CLIMATE

By

Sean P. McManus

December 2004


Chair: John R. Todorovich
Major Department: Health Education and Behavior

The purpose of this study was to investigate the achievement goal orientations and

perceptions of motivational climate exhibited by intercollegiate athletes competing in

track's two running disciplines-sprinting and distance running-and then to examine

the relationship between the athletes' goal orientations and perceptions of motivational

climate. Previous research in motivation in sport failed to make the distinction between

these two different event groups within the sport of track. This failure to recognize track

as being composed of two distinctly different event groups may have confounded the

results of studies utilizing track athletes in examinations of motivation in sport across

age, gender, time of season, and other variables.

Data collection relied upon two questionnaires, the Task and Ego in Sport

Questionnaire (TEOSQ) and the Perceived Motivational Climate in Sport Questionnaire

(PMCSQ). From these, sprinters and distance runners were assigned group means for task









and ego goal orientations, and for perceptions of mastery- and performance-involved

motivational climates. There were 20 subjects in the distance runner group and 19

subjects in the sprinter group. Independent t-tests were utilized to determine differences

in these variables between the two groups. Pearson-Product Moment Correlations were

used to determine the relationships that existed between goal orientations and perceptions

of motivational climate for each group.

Results indicated that differences in goal orientation and perceptions of motivational

climate do exist between the two groups. Specifically, distance runners exhibited higher

levels of task-orientation and higher perceptions of mastery-involved climates. Sprinters

scored higher in perceptions of performance-involved climates.

Examination of the relationship between goal orientation and perceptions of

motivational climate indicated positive correlations between task-orientation and

perceptions of mastery-involved climates for both groups. Additional positive

correlations between ego-orientation and performance-involved climate perceptions

existed among distance runners, and between task-orientation and performance-involved

climate perceptions among sprinters. A negative correlation between ego-orientation and

mastery-involved climate perceptions was identified among the distance runners.

The results of this study suggest the failure to separate track athletes into these two

groups in previous studies may have confounded results. Future research on motivation in

sport utilizing track athletes must carefully select participants, so as to not confound

results.
















CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

Understanding the role of motivation has been one of the most popular research

topics in both sport psychology and pedagogy. Theoretical frameworks of differing types

have emerged in each. Most recently, research focusing on individuals' self-perceptions

and those perceptions' influence on motivated behavior has contributed greatly to the

body of knowledge in sports psychology and pedagogy (Todorovich & Curtner-Smith,

2002).

This study will adopt a theoretical framework originally utilized in the

educational domain that has been successfully applied in the sport context (Treasure &

Roberts, 1998). In short, achievement goal theory will serve as the framework in which

achievement-related cognitions and behaviors are measured. Achievement goal theory, in

this study, has two dimensions that act and interact to affect behavior and cognition

(Nicholls, 1989). These two dimensions are achievement goal orientation and perceived

motivational climate.

Achievement goal theory research conducted in the sports realm has primarily

examined achievement motivation and perceived climates within a single sport. These

studies have compared same-sport athletes across age, gender, and time of competitive

season. To date, studies have not examined the relationship of goal orientations and

perceived climates for athletes participating in different sports, events or positions.






2


Athletes are often placed into sub-groups of the overall team. This separation of

athletes may be between offense and defense, endurance and speed, or weight class. Due

to this division, it is of interest to gain insight into how the different sub-groups of the

same team exhibit achievement goal orientations and perceive their motivational

climates. The purpose of the present study is to examine the goal orientations and

perceived motivational climates exhibited by intercollegiate athletes participating in

track's two running disciplines-distance running and sprinting.

Purpose of Study

The purpose of this study is to investigate the goal orientation and perception of

motivational climate exhibited by intercollegiate athletes participation in track's two

running disciplines-sprinting and distance running-and to examine the relationship

between the athletes' goal orientations and perceptions of motivational climate.

Research Questions

1. Is there a difference in the goal orientation and perception of motivational climate
between sprinters and distance runners competing at the Division I collegiate level?
The four subquestions are as follows:

a. Is there a difference in mean score on the Task and Ego in Sport Questionnaire
(TEOSQ) for sprinters and distance runners related to task orientation?

b. Is there a difference in mean score on the TEOSQ for sprinters and distance
runners related to ego orientation?

c. Is there a difference in mean score on the PMCSQ for sprinters and distance
runners related to mastery-involvement?

d. Is there a difference in mean score on the PMCSQ for sprinters and distance
runners related to performance-involvement?

2. What is the relationship between an athlete's goal orientations and the athlete's
perception of motivational climate? The eight subquestions are as follows:









a. What is the relationship between the sprinters' scores for task orientation on the
TEOSQ and perceived mastery climate on the Perceived Motivational Climate in
Sport Questionnaire (PMCSQ)?

b. What is the relationship between the sprinters' scores for ego orientation on the
TEOSQ and perceived performance climate on the PMCSQ?

c. What is the relationship between the sprinters' scores for task orientation on the
TEOSQ and perceived performance climate on the PMCSQ?

d. What is the relationship between the sprinters' scores for ego orientation on the
TEOSQ and perceived mastery climate on the PMCSQ?

e. What is the relationship between the distance runners' scores for task
orientation on the TEOSQ and perceived mastery climate on the PMCSQ?

f What is the relationship between the distance runners' scores for ego orientation
on the TEOSQ and perceived performance climate on the PMCSQ?

g. What is the relationship between the distance runners' scores for task
orientation on the TEOSQ and perceived performance climate on the PMCSQ?

h. What is the relationship between the distance runners' scores for ego
orientation on the TEOSQ and perceived mastery climate on the PMCSQ?

Definitions

The following definitions were used in this study.

1. Achievement goal orientation addresses a pattern of beliefs that leads to different
ways of approaching, engaging in, and responding to achievement situations.

2. Achievement goal theory is the framework in which achievement-related
cognitions and behaviors are measured. Achievement goal orientation and perceived
motivational climate fall under the larger umbrella of achievement goal theory.

3. Dispositional and situational orientations refer to achievement goal orientations
and perceptions of motivational climate, respectively.

4. Ego orientation refers to the belief that ability is measured by how well one
does in relation to another person.

5. Extreme score describes individuals who score 4.0 or higher or 1.9 or lower on a 5-
point Likert scale.









6. Motivation is the direction and intensity of an individual's effort toward a specific
task (Weinberg & Gould, 1999).

7. Motivational climate is the social climate of achievement settings created by others.

8. Task orientation refers to the belief that ability is a self-referenced measurement.

9. Mastery-involved describes a climate in which individuals perceive significant
others promote hard work and persistence as criteria for success.

10. Performance-involved describes a climate in which individuals perceive significant
others promote winning as criterion for success.

11. TEOSQ is the acronym for Task and Ego Orientation in Sport Questionnaire. The
TEOSQ measures task-orientation and ego-orientation.

12. PMCSQ is the acronym for the Perceived Motivational Climate in Sport
Questionnaire. The PMCSQ measures perception of mastery-involved or
performance-involved climate.

13. Sprinters are track runners competing at distances 400m and shorter.

14. Distance runners are track runners competing at distances 800m and longer.

Limitations

The following limitations apply to this study.

1. Data collection depended on each participant returning two questionnaires each.

2. Data collection was dependent upon participants' honesty.

Assumptions

The following assumptions were made in this thesis.

1. The participants were candid and truthful.

2. The methodology used in the study was appropriate for the research question.

Significance of the Study

Track and field is a unique sport composed of several different event groups that

come together under the larger umbrella of "track and field." In the field events, there are









throwing events, horizontal and vertical jumps, and the pole vault. On the track, there are

sprinting events and distance events. Prior psychological studies utilizing track and field

athletes as subjects (Fairall & Rodgers, 1997; Goudas, Biddle, Fox, & Underwood, 1995;

Harger & Raglin, 1994; Huddleston, Kamphoff, Suchan, Mack, Bian, Bush, Mintah,

Dutler, & Wee, 2002) have examined a variety of cognitive topics, including anxiety,

goal setting, mood states and motivation. However, these studies failed to identify the

event group to which subjects belonged. This is problematic, as fundamental differences

exist between each group that may alter their psychological profiles. For the scope of this

study, only athlete motivation will be examined and only athletes participating in the two

running disciplines will participate in our investigation. Therefore, the two groups will

collectively be referred to as "track" athletes.

There are considerable differences between the sprint and distance disciplines.

While a sprinter and a distance runner are both track runners, the physical preparation for

each discipline is so vastly different that two athletes on the same team may never even

meet. Sprint training utilizes anaerobic work, weight lifting, and pays strict attention to

running form. Additionally, it is important to practice the use of starting blocks and the

passing of relay batons. The majority, if not entirety, of sprint training is done on the

track. Distance training entails predominantly aerobic development and hill work. Thus,

distance training is done primarily away from the track, in the way of distance running or

longer workouts on grass. The need for different training environments generally results

in a complete separation of sprint and distance athletes. It is unclear whether this

separation of event groups plays a role in how athletes' goal orientations develop or how

they perceive their motivational climates.









In addition to the differing physical requirements and the separation of training

groups, there are characteristics of sprinting and distance running that may promote

different motivational climates and/or athlete goal orientations. US television and media

coverage generally focus on sprints. For example, the media award the term "World's

Fastest Man" to the winner of the Olympic 100m final, while the winner of the marathon

receives no such accolade.

Another potential contributor to any psychological differences that may exist

between sprinters and distance runners is the success of US elite athletes over shorter

distances. With equal opportunities for distance runners and sprinters to earn medals,

Americans have won 67 Olympic medals in the sprint events since 1972, while merely 7

medals have been earned in the distance events. Finally, the large disparity in the margin

of time that separates winners from non-winners in sprints and distances may also

contribute to differing psychological profiles. A mediocre collegiate sprinter may be one

second slower than the Olympic 100m champion. Meanwhile, a mediocre collegiate

10,000m runner may be six minutes slower than the Olympic champion.

This study is significant because it will explain differences that exist in

achievement goal orientations and perceptions of motivational climate, and explain how

the two relate, for two distinctly different groups of athletes previously considered one

sport.
















CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE

The purpose of this literature review is to define and describe achievement goal

theory in general, and how it has developed in the sports realm in particular.

Achievement goal theory is reviewed with the perspective that individuals participating

in sports have varying goal orientations and perceptions of motivational climate. A

review of achievement goal theory from this perspective reveals the theoretical

perspective and background relative to the present study.

Achievement Goal Orientation

Goal orientation theorists contend feelings of success stem from the attainment of

goals. The types of goals athletes describe as valuable are evidence of their goal

orientation. Feelings of success are achieved by the interplay of the achievement of goals

and the respective value athlete's place on their attainment (Nicholls, Cheung, Lauer, &

Pastashnick, 1989). For example, what is more important to a track runner, winning a

race or running the best race possible? How successful would the runner feel winning the

race, but not putting forth maximum effort? These feelings of success are dependent on

the athlete's goal orientation.

Research on goal orientation has yielded the existence of two independent

conceptual views of success that combine to form an individual's achievement goal

orientation (Duda & Nicholls, 1992). These achievement goal orientations, also known as

dispositional goal orientations, are states of task and ego that exist in all individuals.









Task-Orientation

Individuals in achievement settings may perceive or judge their competence or

ability to perform a task in a self-referenced manner and maintain their conceptions of

ability and effort, at least to some degree, as undifferentiated concepts (Nicholls &

Miller, 1984). Those with this undifferentiated conception of ability and effort tend to

feel successful when an increase in their effort at a task increases their level of

performance. Moreover, individuals with this undifferentiated conception of ability and

effort tend to pursue tasks that are more challenging because they perceive tasks that are

easy to perform are not likely to improve their skills, performance, or overall ability

(Jagacinski & Nicholls, 1987). Individuals with this undifferentiated conception of ability

and effort are considered task-oriented because performance of a task is conceived as an

end in itself.

Researchers indicate that task-oriented individuals tend to adopt more adaptive

behaviors in achievement settings than individuals that do not have a strong task-

orientation. Among the adaptive behaviors adopted by individuals with a strong task-

orientation are the use of deep learning strategies (Nolen, 1988), increased persistence at

a task (Elliot & Dweck, 1988), pride and satisfaction with putting forth effort (Jagacinski

& Nicholls, 1987), and a preference for engaging in challenging tasks (Ames & Archer,

1988).

Ego-Orientation

In contrast to a task-oriented individual, individuals that exhibit ego-orientations

in an achievement setting become self-consciously concerned about their ability to

perform a task. An ego-oriented individual exhibits a differentiated conception of ability









and effort, and they perceive themselves as being less capable if they put forth more

effort than someone else to reach the same level of competence at a task (Jagacinski &

Nicholls, 1987). According to this view of ego-orientation, individuals will

comparatively perceive themselves as being more skillful if they do better at a task with

less effort than someone else.

Researchers have indicated that individuals with ego-orientations tend to adopt

maladaptive behaviors in achievement settings; however, the findings associated with

maladaptive behaviors are less consistent than those associated with adaptive behavior

patterns. Some identified maladaptive behaviors of ego-oriented individuals as the use of

superficial learning strategies (Nolen, 1988), negative feelings when not successful

(Jagacinski & Nicholls, 1987), and the avoidance of challenging tasks (Elliot & Dweck,

1988). Interestingly, others have found some positive aspects associated with an ego-

orientation. For example, Midgley, Anderman, and Hicks (1995) found that ego-oriented

middle school students' performance goals were associated with the increases in self-

efficacy.

Recently, researchers have suggested that ego-orientation should be separated into

two components. This approach partitions ego-orientation into approach and avoidance

components (Elliot & Church, 1997; Elliot & Harackiewicz, 1996; Elliot, McGregor, &

Gable, 1999). The resulting trichotomous model then includes a task-orientation, an ego-

avoidance-orientation, and an ego-approach-orientation. However, regardless of whether

the ego-oriented individual pursues success by striving to be superior to another or to

avoid being found inferior, the comparative aspect of ego-orientation remains consistent.

Future research specifically addressing this trichotomous model may explain differences









among ego-oriented behavioral patterns. Most would still argue, however, that ego-

orientation is less desirable than a task-orientation when one is involved in an

achievement setting.

No studies comparing the goal orientation of athletes participating in different

sports or events have been conducted. There is, however, research that evaluates the goal

orientation of athletes playing the same sport, as well as large groups of athletes not

separated by sport. These studies compared athletes across competitive levels, gender,

and time of season.

Achievement Goal Orientation and Competitive Levels

A study by Carpenter and Yates (1997) compared the goal orientations of amateur

and semiprofessional soccer players. The study showed amateur soccer players scored

significantly higher on of task-orientation than the semiprofessional players. Scores for

ego-orientation, while higher for semiprofessionals, were not significantly different.

A multiple-sport study by White and Zellner (1996) looked into goal orientations

of male and female athletes participating in a variety of sports at three competitive levels

of play: intercollegiate, organized high school and college-aged recreational. The study

found that high school athletes were significantly more ego-oriented than the

intercollegiate athletes and that college-aged recreational athletes were the highest in

task-orientation. In this study participants were not separated by the sports they played.

Achievement Goal Orientation and Gender

Another factor that may contribute to an athlete's goal orientation is gender. In

examining the goal orientation of participants in a summer basketball camp, Duda and

Horn (1993) found no significant gender-related differences in goal orientation.









Duda, Chi, Newton, Walling and Catley (1995) evaluated the goal orientation of

members of a college tennis class and revealed a significant difference in task-

orientation, with females scoring significantly higher in task-orientation than males. No

significant difference was found related to ego-orientation.

In a study by Duda (1989), varsity high school athletes involved in individual and

team sports were investigated to detect differences between male and female goal

orientations. A significant difference in goal orientations was detected between male and

females. No sport-specific comparisons of the goal orientation of the participants were

made. Results indicated a significantly higher score for females on task-orientation and a

significantly higher ego-orientation score for males.

Li, Harmer and Acock (1996) studied the goal orientations of 467 undergraduate

students enrolled in a variety of physical education classes. Examination of means for

task- and ego-orientation revealed significant differences only related to ego-orientation

with males scoring significantly higher than females. No significant differences were

found related to task-orientation.

Achievement Goal Orientation and Time of Season

Another possible influence in the development of goal orientations of athletes is

the time of competitive season. That is, will an athlete's goal orientation change as the

athlete progresses through the competitive season? A study by Williams (1998) utilizing

adolescent female softball players suggests a correlation exists between an athlete's goal

orientation at the beginning of a competitive season and the end of the season. Despite

slight change from early to late season there was a positive correlation (r = .77) between









early and late season task-orientation scores. A correlation between early to late season

ego-orientation scores also existed (r = .64).

Perceived Motivational Climate

While Achievement goal orientation is concerned with dispositional traits, the

second dimension of achievement goal theory, perceived motivational climate, is

situational. Perceived motivational climate refers to individuals' perceptions of what a

teacher, parent, coach or significant other promotes or expects. Similar to goal

orientations, environments may be classified as either task-involved or ego-involved. To

avoid confusion, these environments shall be referred to as mastery-involved and

performance-involved climates, respectively.

When one perceives an environment as a mastery-involved climate, that

individual perceives a climate that facilitates feelings of satisfaction derived from hard

work and persistence in the face of difficulty (Ames, 1992; Roberts & Ommundsen,

1996). When individuals feel a teacher or coach promotes maladaptive patterns, a

performance-involved perception prevails. Maladaptive patterns in this instance might

include demonstration of superiority relative to the skills of teammates or opponents as

the criterion for success (Ames, 1992; Roberts & Ommundsen, 1996).

Relationship of Perceived Motivational Climate and Achievement Goal Orientation

There have been several studies examining the relationship of motivational

climate and goal orientations of athletes. Duda and Horn (1993), utilizing young athletes

participating in a summer basketball camp, examined the relationship between the

athlete's achievement goal orientation and their perception of their parents' goal

orientation. The study revealed a positive correlation between task-orientation scores of









the athlete and the athlete's perception of the parent's task-orientation. Similarly, the

athlete's that with high degrees of ego-orientation were likely to believe parents would

also exhibit ego-oriented behaviors. The findings of this study indicated that the young

athlete's perceived motivational climate was related to his/her own goal orientation.

Research by Goudas, Biddle, Fox and Underwood (1995) studied how a different

facet of motivational climate, style of instruction, affected goal orientation. In this study,

twenty-four females participating in a 10-week track class were instructed using two

different teaching styles. The first instructional style, directed instruction, involved

teachers making decisions and directing students on activity selection and duration. The

differentiated style allowed students to choose activities and workout intensity. Students

instructed with the differentiated approach were found to be more task-oriented. This

study indicates that students in a physical activity setting respond to a motivational

climate that is primarily mastery-goal oriented by exhibiting characteristics that are more

task-oriented.

An athlete's perceptions of the athletic climate can be dictated by actions as

simple as asking questions (Ames, 1992). The manner in which a coach directs questions

can give clear messages of the value they place on aspects of the athletic environment. If

coaches ask athletes how they did, rather than if they won, athletes are able to express

their own set of values. It was found that the elements of competitive environments,

including coaches, that demand adaptive behavior, striving for personal best and skill

development, facilitated task-oriented motivation goals among athletes (Ames, 1992).

Research by Ames (1988) found a correlation between motivational climate and

demonstrated motivation in the field setting. Those who perceived their motivational









climate as mastery-involved preferred challenging tasks and believed success were

directly related to effort. The study suggested task- and ego-orientation varied with

interpretation of class structure.

Work by Roberts and Ommundsen (1996) investigated 148 students at the

Norwegian University of Sport and Physical Education to determine how athletes' goal

orientations may impact their perceptions of motivational climate. Results indicated

athletes who are primarily task-oriented perceive their motivational climate as mastery-

involved. Similarly, athletes who are primarily ego-oriented perceive their motivational

climate as performance-involved.

Walling, Duda and Chi (1993) found that athletes' perceptions of competitive

climate produce degrees of satisfaction with participation levels and levels of

performance worry. The researchers found that athletes who perceived their environment

as mastery-involved demonstrated greater feelings of satisfaction from participation on a

team and lower levels of performance worry. Likewise, athletes that perceived the

environment to be performance-involved demonstrated less satisfaction from

participation on a team and greater levels of performance worry.

Finally, there is evidence through work done by Dweck and Leggett (1988) that

one of the two constructs, if strong enough, may override the other. For example, if a

mastery or performance climate is perceived, but its cues are weak, an individual's

predisposition towards task or ego should hold sway. However, if the situational cues are

strong in favor of either mastery-involved or performance-involved climates,

dispositional orientations may be overridden (Treasure & Roberts, 1998). For these

reasons, it is important to investigate the relationships that may exist between

achievement goal orientation and perceived motivational climate.
















CHAPTER 3
METHOD

Participants

Five coaches of NCAA Division I track programs were contacted by phone for

potential participants in this study. They were each contacted with a brief description of

the study. The coaches willing to take part informed their athletes about the opportunity

to participate in the study. All potential participants must have participated in at least one

semester of competition at the university level.

Informed consent forms, approved by the University of Florida's Institutional

Review Board for human subjects, were delivered to the coach of each participating team

for administration to their athletes. Student-athletes wishing to participate signed and

returned the consent forms to their coach. The researcher collected all volunteers' forms

before the administration of any questionnaires.

Athletes completed the Task and Ego in Sport Questionnaire (TEOSQ), the

Perceived Motivational Climate in Sport Questionnaire (PMCSQ), and some general

biographical information. This biographical information included information about the

primary event in which the athlete competes. This will serve to determine whether the

athlete is a sprinter or distance runner.

A total of 39 athletes, 20 distance runners and 19 sprinters participated in the

study. Of the 20 distance runners, 9 were male and 11 were female. The sprinter group

was comprised of 10 males and 9 females.









Instruments

To obtain the dispositional-orientation data, participants filled out the Task and

Ego in Sport Questionnaire (TEOSQ). The TEOSQ was created and verified for validity

and reliability by Duda and Nicholls (1992). Items on the TEOSQ were prefaced with the

heading "I feel really successful in sport when..." Examples of task-oriented and ego-

oriented responses appear in Table 1.

Table 1: Examples of TEOSQ Responses

Task-oriented Responses Ego-Oriented Responses

I learn a new skill and it makes me want to I'm the only one who can do the play or

practice more skill

I learn something that is fun to do I can do better than my friends

I work really hard The others can't do as well as me

I do my very best I score the most points



Participants rated items on a 5-point Likert type scale. Each athlete received a

score for task and ego. High task was considered any score greater than or equal to 3.00.

Low task was considered below 3.00. Extreme task was considered any score greater than

or equal to 4.00 or less than 2.00. The same scale was utilized for determination of ego-

orientation. A copy of the Task and Ego Orientation in Sport Questionnaire appears in

Appendix A.

Perceived motivational climate was assessed through a Perceived Motivational

Climate in Sport Questionnaire (PMCSQ). Developed and verified for validity and

reliability by Walling, Duda, and Chi (1993), the PMCSQ consists of 11 mastery-









involved and 14 performance-involved items. Statements begin with "On this sports

team... and offer mastery-involved and performance-involved responses. Examples of

both mastery-involved and performance-involved statements appear in Table 2.

Table 2: Examples of PMCSQ Responses

Mastery-involved Responses Performance-involved Responses

Trying hard is rewarded Players feel good when they do better than

their teammates

Coaches make sure players improve on Players are punished when they make

skills they are not good at mistakes

The focus is to improve each competition Playing better than teammates is important

Players are encouraged to work on Coaches favor some players more than

weaknesses others



Answers were ranked on a 5-point Likert type scale, ranging from

(1) strongly disagree to (5) strongly agree. All athletes received a score for mastery and

performance perceptions. High mastery perceptions were scores of 3.00 and higher. Low

mastery scores were scores below 3.00. The same process was used for performance

perception. A copy of the Perceived Motivational Climate in Sport Questionnaire appears

in Appendix B.

Procedure

After coaches verbally agreed to allow their athletes to participate, and informed

athlete consent forms were collected, coaches were sent a packet of information that

included a letter of introduction (Appendix C), a script to be read aloud to participants








(Appendix D), the TEOSQ (Appendix A), the PMCSQ (Appendix B), and enough pencils

for each member of the team. Coaches were instructed to remind participants that their

involvement in the study is voluntary, anonymous, and will not affect their status on the

team.

After completion of the questionnaires, the coaches collected all forms, placed

them in a self-addressed stamped envelope and returned them to the researcher. Data

collection took place in February 2004, during the indoor track season. While research by

Williams (1998) suggests goal orientations do not change during the course of the

competitive season, there is no research investigating how perceptions of motivational

climate may change during the course of a competitive season. Thus, all data was

collected within the same two-week period, in the early stages of the season.

Data Analysis

After the researcher received the completed questionnaires, individual and group

means were calculated for task-orientation and ego-orientation scores on the TEOSQ and

for scores of mastery-involved and performance-involved climate perceptions on the

PMCSQ. Before analyzing the data with more powerful parametric statistics, the

skewness and kurtosis of the data were checked. This assures normality in distribution

and variance, the two assumptions that must be met for use of parametric statistics. As

seen in Table 3, the data are of acceptable normal distribution and variance, thus meeting

the two assumptions.

Table 3: Skewness and Kurtosis Calculations

TEOSQ PMCSQ All Data
Skewness -0.7 -0.4 -0.5
Kurtosis 0.2 0 0.2


F











Having met the assumptions of normality and variance, independent t-tests were

utilized to determine differences in sprinters' and distance runners' goal orientations and

perceptions of motivational climate. A total of four independent t-tests were carried out in

order to compare sprinter and distance runner task-orientation, ego-orientation, mastery-

involved climate perception, and performance-involved climate perception. The level of

significance was set at p<.05.

Next, to determine what relationships exist between the athletes' goal orientations

and perceptions of motivational climate, a Pearson Product Moment Coefficient of

Correlation was used. This analysis investigated the eight possible relationships of goal-

orientation to perceived motivational climate. These eight relationships are previously

identified as the subquestions of research question 2. The level of significance was set at

p<.05.















CHAPTER 4
RESULTS

The collected data was utilized to answer research questions 1 and 2, posed in

Chapter 1. The results of the investigation of sprinters' and distance runners' goal

orientations, as outlined in research questions la and lb, appear in Tables 4 and 5. Tables

6 and 7 display the results of the comparison of distance runners and sprinters perceptions

of motivational climate, as outlined in research questions Ic and Id. Finally, the

relationships between sprinters' and distance runners' goal-orientations and perceptions

of motivational climate, outlined in research questions 2a-2h, appear in Tables 8 and 9.

Table 4 displays the findings of research question la. With a mean task-

orientation score of 4.2, distance runners exhibited extreme task-orientation. This was

significantly greater than the sprinter group's score of 3.7. It is important to note that the

sprinter group's score still falls in the high task-orientation range.

Table 4: Results of t-test Examining Task-Orientation

Distance Runners Sprinters
Mean: 4.2 3.7
Variance: .26 .87
Number of Obs.(n): 20 19
Pooled Variance .56
Df: 37
tcalc: 2.10
terit: 2.03
Conclusion: There is a difference with

regard to task-orientation









Table 5: Results of t-test Examining Ego-Orientation

Distance Runners Sprinters
Mean: 2.9 3.0
Variance: .95 .53
Number of Obs.(n): 20 19
Pooled Variance .74
Df: 37

tcalc: -0.36
tcrit: 2.03
Conclusion: No difference with regard

to ego-orientation



Table 5 displays the findings of research question lb. With mean ego-orientation

scores of 2.9 for distance runners and 3.0 for sprinters, there was no significant difference

between the two groups. Though both were close to the median split, distance runners

ego-orientation scores fell in the low range, while sprinters were in the high range.

Table 6: Results of t-test Examining Mastery-Perceptions.

Distance Runners Sprinters
Mean: 3.7 3.0
Variance: .38 .48
Number of Obs.(n): 20 19
Pooled Variance .43
Df: 37

tcalc: 3.38
terit: 2.03
Conclusion: There is a difference with

regards to mastery-

perception









Table 6 displays the findings of research question Ic. Distance runners average

mastery-perception scores on the PMCSQ were significantly higher than sprinters.

However, with scores of 3.7 and 3.0 respectively, both groups were in the high range for

mastery-involved perceptions of motivational climate.

Table 7 displays the results of research question Id. Distance runners had an

average PMCSQ performance-perception score of 2.9. This falls in the low range and is

significantly lower than the average score of the sprinter group. The sprinter group's

average performance-perception of 3.5 falls in the high range.

Table 7: Results of t-test Examining Performance-Perceptions.

Distance Runners Sprinters
Mean: 2.9 3.5
Variance: .41 .30
Number of Obs.(n): 20 19
Pooled Variance .36
Df: 37
tcalc: -3.16
terit: 2.03
Conclusion: There is a difference with

regards to performance-

perception.



Table 8 shows the findings of research questions 2a-2d. The distance runners

exhibited a significant positive correlation (r = 0.48) between task-orientation and the

perception of motivational climates as mastery-involved. This group exhibited no

significant correlation between task-orientation and performance-involved climate

perceptions. The distance runners exhibited a significant negative correlation (r = -0.50)









between ego-orientation and perceptions of mastery-involved climates. Finally, a

significant correlation (r = 0.75) existed between ego-orientation and performance-

involved climate perceptions.

Table 8: Results of Pearson-Product Correlation Examining Distance Runners

Mastery-involved Performance-involved

perception perception

Task-orientation 0.48* -0.14
Ego-orientation -0.50* 0.75*
*significant finding

Table 9 shows the results of research questions 2e-2h. The sprinters exhibited

significant positive correlation between task-orientation and mastery-involved climate

perceptions (r = 0.46). This group also exhibited a significant positive correlation

between task-orientation and perceptions of performance-involved motivational climates

(r = 0.65). The sprinters did not exhibit a significant correlation between ego-orientation

with either mastery-involved or performance-involved climate perceptions.

Table 9: Results of Pearson-Product Correlation Examining Sprinters

Mastery-involved Performance-involved

perception perception

Task-orientation 0.46* 0.65*
Ego-orientation 0.27 0.33
*significant finding

Discussion

Goal orientation is the set of personal goals that relate to beliefs about success and

failure. An athlete's perception of motivational climate is the degree to which an athlete

perceives a sporting climate to be either mastery-involved or performance-involved. It









was the purpose of this study to analyze both the goal orientation and perceptions of

motivational climate of track athletes representing varsity programs at Division I

universities. After describing the two groups of athletes, sprinters and distance runners,

and analyzing their differences related to goal orientation and perceptions of motivational

climate, the relationship between goal orientation and perceived motivational climate

within the two groups of athletes was examined.

The results of this study indicate that there are differences in goal orientation

between distance runners and sprinters. While no difference emerged related to ego-

orientation, the distance runners displayed higher levels of task-orientation than sprinters.

The sprinters' task-orientation scores were in the defined "high" range, while the distance

runners were in the "extreme high" range. Both groups' ego-orientation scores were

around the median of the ego-orientation scale.

Analyses of perceptions of motivational climate indicate that differences exist

between sprinters and distance runners with respect to both mastery-involved and

performance-involved perceptions. While both groups were in the "high" range, distance

runners' mastery-involved perceptions were greater than their sprinting counterparts. The

two groups also displayed differences in performance-involved climate perceptions, with

distance runners' marks falling in the "low" range and sprinters marks falling in the

"high" range.

Previous research indicates a relationship exists between an athlete's goal-

orientation and motivational climate. Goudas, Biddle, Fox, and Underwood (1995) found

that a mastery-involved motivational climate created by an instructor was significantly

associated with the fostering of task-involved goal orientations. This trend appears in the









current study as well, as both sprinters and distance runners displayed positive

correlations between task-orientation and mastery-involved climate perceptions.

Distance runners showed a negative correlation between ego-orientation and

mastery-involved climate perceptions. On the other hand, this group displayed a positive

correlation between ego-orientation and performance-involved climate perceptions.

Finally, the distance runners showed an insignificant negative correlation between

task-orientation and performance-involved climate perceptions. While the final finding is

insignificant, it suggests a trend may exist between task-orientation and performance-

involved climate perceptions. Intuitively, task-orientation and performance-perception

would correlate negatively, as was the case in the current study. However, until future

research on the subject is conducted, no conclusion can be drawn.

The relationships between sprinters' goal orientations and perceptions of

motivational climate were not as clear as the distance runners'. No correlation existed

between ego-orientation with either climate perception. Further, while task-orientation

was positively correlated with mastery-involved perceptions of climate, it was more

strongly positively correlated with performance-involved climate perceptions. This final

finding is unexpected. A possible explanation could be the participants possessed an

inherently strong task orientation that prevailed despite the strong perception of a

performance-involved motivational climate. Further investigation of this finding is

required to advance this theory beyond speculation. The findings of this study should be a

useful tool for all track and field coaches. It will allow them to better understand what

drives their athletes, and to create a training environment and motivational climate that

best suits their team.









Future Research

The results of this study indicate that there are differences in goal orientation and

perceptions of motivational climate between sprinters and distance runners. Thus, it is

important for future research on motivation in sport to carefully assign participants to the

correct group and not lump all track athletes together. Previous research utilizing track

athletes failed to make this distinction between sprinter and distance runner. As a result,

research utilizing track athletes may require re-evaluation. Further, work should be done

to identify motivational differences between other sports as well.

Future research examining the relationships between goal-orientation and

perceptions of motivational climate should attempt to expand on the findings of Goudas,

Biddle, Fox, and Underwood (1995). Specifically, with a relationship between goal-

orientation and perceived motivational climate established, is it possible to determine a

causal relationship between the two? Does either goal-orientation or perceived

motivational climate operate as a predictor of the other? Also of importance is

determining how inherent goal-orientations determine which sport or event group an

individual chooses to participate in.

Future research may also examine how achievement goal orientation and

perceived motivational climate affect perceptions of success. If one construct is low and

the other high, how will an individual perceive causes of success? In this potential

research stream, goal orientations and perceptions of motivational climate would operate

as the independent variables and perceptions of success would serve as the dependent

variable.






27


Finally, additional research on track athletes' goal orientations and perceptions of

motivational climate should increase the number of participants to bolster the power of

the findings, and expand to include the jumping and throwing field event groups.















APPENDIX A
TASK AND EGO ORIENTATION IN SPORT QUESTIONNAIRE
DIRECTIONS: Give your reaction to the following statements in regards how you
usually or generally feel about the sport of snow skiing as if YOU were the athlete. You
are asked to rank your reaction by indicating

1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly Agree

Ifeel most successful in track when...



1 F'm the on1\ one \\ho can do the 1 2 3 4 5
pla\ o1 skill

2. I learn a new skill and it makes me 1 2 3 4 5
want to practice more.

3. I can do better than my friends. 1 2 3 4 5

4. The others can't do as well as me. 1 2 3 4 5

5 Learn something that is funi to do I2 3 -4 5

6. Others mess up and I don't. 1 2 3 4 5

7. I learn a new skill by trying hard. 1 2 3 4 5

8. Work really hard. 1 2 3 4 5

C I score the most points goals hits. 1 2 3 4 5
etc

10. Something I learn makes me want 1 2 3 4 5
to go and practice more.

11. I'm the best. 1 2 3 4 5

12. A skill I learn really feels right. 1 2 3 4 5

13. Ido my very best. 1 2 3 4 5

















APPENDIX B
PERCEIVED MOTIVATIONAL CLIMATE IN SPORT QUESTIONNAIRE



DIRECTIONS: Give your reaction to the following statements in regards to how you
usually or generally feel about the team you are on. You are asked to rank your reaction
by indicating

1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly Agree

On this team...


Players feel good when they do better than
their teammates
Trying hard is rewarded
Players are punished when they make a
mistake
Coaches make sure players improve on skills
they're not good at
The focus is to improve each game
Players are taken out of the game for
mistakes
Playing better than teammates is important
Coaches give most of their attention to the
"stars"
Doing better than others is important
Players work hard because they want to lea
more about the activities
Coaches favor some players more than others
Players are encourage to outplay their
teammates
Players are encourage to work on their
weaknesses
Everyone wants to be the high scorer
Everyone feels that they have an important
role on the team
Coaches want us to try new skills
Players like playing when the teams are
evenly matched
Only the top players "get noticed" by the
coaches
Most of the players get to play in the game
Players are afraid to make mistakes
Only a few players can be the stars


1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 1 2 3 41 5


2 3 4 5


1 2 3 4 5


1 2 3 4 5


2 3 4 5
2 3 4 5


1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 T3 4T 5


2 3 4 5


1 2 3 4 5















APPENDIX C
LETTER OF INTRODUCTION


Dear Coach,

I would like to thank you for your assistance in the completion of this project. I know that
practice time is precious and I will try to make this activity brief.

The Task Ego Orientation in Sport Questionnaire (TEOSQ) is designed to quantify the
degree of involvement of Task and Ego in the Goal Orientation of athletes. The Perceived
Motivational Climate in Sport Questionnaire (PMCSQ) is designed to quantify the
athlete's perception of what is important on the team. It is the intent of this research to
better define the types of athletes participating in the sport track and field. By defining
the athlete we may be able to better define aspects of the sport itself.

Enclosed you will find questionnaires, pencils, instructions to be read prior to giving the
questionnaire, and an envelope to return the completed questionnaires. It's important that
the athletes understand that their participation in the study is both voluntary and
anonymous.

The questionnaires should be administered at the beginning of a normal practice. Once
the participants have been given the questionnaires, please read them the instructions, and
give them time to complete the questionnaires.

Ten minutes should be a sufficient amount of time for most of them to complete the
questionnaires.

If you have any questions in regards to the study please contact my advisor or me at:

Sean McManus- (352) 895-6896 or via e-mail at smcmanus@alumni.nd.edu

Dr. John Todorovich- (352) 392-0584 or via e-mail atjtodorov@hhp.ufl.edu

Again, I would like to express my gratitude to you for your participation in the study,
which is part of my work towards a master's degree at the University of Florida. If you're
interested in the results I will be glad to send you a copy. It is my belief that the better we
understand our athletes the better we function as coaches. I hope that the results of this
study will assist in the furthering of our understanding of the athletes we work with.

Sincerely,
Sean P. McManus















APPENDIX D
SCRIPT TO BE READ TO PARTICIPANTS



Motivation and the Sport of Track and Field

Instructions for the administration of the TEOSQ and PMCSQ

Have participants seated in chairs or on the floor. Pencils are included for the marking of
the questionnaire. The questionnaire should be administered at the beginning normal
practice when ever possible. Participants should work alone and be quiet until all
participants have completed the questionnaire.

Please read the following statement prior to allowing the participants to begin.

The questionnaires I am giving you are part of a masters research project for the
University of Florida. The graduate student doing the research is also a coach and is
interested in the psychology of success. Your participation is completely voluntary and
anonymous. I will not look at your completed questionnaire. If you decide not to
participate, your decision will not in any way affect your standing with the team. The
following statement is from the coach doing the research.

I would like to thank you for giving your time to voluntarily participate in my study. I am
attempting to analyze athlete goal orientation and perception of the motivational climate
on the team he/she is participating on. Participants in this study are track athletes
participating at the NCAA Div I level. The questionnaires that you are about to complete
will assist in the comparison of these athletes.

Your participation in the study will be kept anonymous and I ask that you not sign the
questionnaires. By completing the questionnaires you give implied consent to the use of
the data generated by your responses to the statements.

Questionnaire 1: Ego and Task Orientation in Sport Questionnaire

Goal orientation is the value that you place on aspects of the competitive environment.
The questionnaire asks you to respond to 13 statements about your feelings of success.
You will give your reaction to the statements in regards to the sport of track and field.

Respond to the statement "I feel most successful in track and field when..." by circling
one of the numbers to the right of the statement that most represents the way you usually
or generally feel about the sport of track.

1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly Agree










After completing the questionnaire give it to the coach administering the questionnaire
and please remain quiet until all your teammates have completed the questionnaire before
beginning the second questionnaire.

Questionnaire 2: Perceived Motivational Climate in Sport Questionnaire

Motivational Climate is the way we perceive coaches' values with respect to sport
participation. The questionnaire asks you to respond to 21 statements about your
perception of the motivational climate on your team. You will give your reaction to the
statements in regards the team you are currently on.

Respond to the statement "On this team..." by circling one of the numbers to the right of
the statement that most represents the way you usually or generally feel about the team
you are on.

1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly Agree

After completing the questionnaire give it to the coach administering the questionnaire
and please remain quiet until all your teammates have completed the questionnaire.















REFERENCE LIST


Ames, C. (1992). Achievement goals, motivational climate, and motivational
processes. In G. Roberts (Ed.) Motivation in sport and exercise (pp. 161-176).
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Ames, C., & Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Students' learning
strategies and motivation processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 260-
267.

Carpenter, P.J., & Yates, B. (1997). Relationship between achievement goals and the
perceived purposes of soccer for semiprofessional and amateur players. Journal of
Sport and Exercise Psychology, 19, 302-311.

Duda, J.L. (1989). Relationship between task and ego orientation and the perceived
purpose of sport among high school athletes. Journal of Sport and Exercise
Psychology, 11, 318-335.

Duda, J.L., Chi, L., Newton, M. L., Walling, M. D., & Catley, D. (1995). Task and ego
orientation and intrinsic motivation in sport. International Journal of Sport
Psychology, 26, 40-63.

Duda, J.L., & Horn, H.L. (1993). Interdependencies between the perceived and self-
reported goal orientations of young athletes and their parents. Pediatric Exercise
Science, 5, 234-241.

Duda, J.L., & Nicholls, J. (1992). Dimensions of achievement motivation in schoolwork
and sport. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 290-299.

Dweck, C.S., & Leggett, E. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and
personality. Psychological Review, 2, 256-273.

Elliot, A.J., & Church, M.A. (1997). A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance
achievement motivation. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 72, 218-
232.

Elliot, A.J., & Harackiewicz, J.M. (1996). Approach and avoidance achievement goals
and intrinsic motivation: A mediational analysis. Journal ofPersonality and
Social Psychology, 70, 461-475.









Elliot, A.J., McGregor, H.A., & Gable, S. (1999). Achievement goals, study strategies
and exam performance: A mediational analysis. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 91, 549-563.

Elliot, E.S., & Dweck, C.S. (1988). Goals: An approach to motivation and achievement.
Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 54, 5-12.

Fairall, D.G., & Rodgers, W.M. (1997). The effects of goal-setting method on goal
attributes in athletes: A field experiment. Journal of Sport & Exercise
Psychology, 19(1), 1-16.

Goudas, M., Biddle, S., Fox, K., & Underwood, M. (1995). It ain't what you do, it's
the way that you do it! Teaching style affects children's motivation in track and
field lessons. The Sport Psychologist, 9, 254-264.

Harger, G.J., & Raglin, J.S. (1994). Correspondence between actual and recalled
precompetition anxiety in collegiate track and field atheltes. Journal of Sport &
Exercise Psychology, 16(2), 206-211.

Huddleston, S., Kamphoff, C.S., Suchan, T.M., Mack, M.G., Bian, W., Bush, D., Mintah,
J.K., Dutler, K.E., & Wee, R.J. (2002). Mood state changes in collegiate track and
field athletes. International Sports Journal, 6(1), 75-83.

Jagacinski, C.M., & Nicholls, J.G. (1987). Competence and affect in task involvement
and ego involvement: The impact of social comparison information. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 79(2), 107-114.

Li, F., Harmer, P., & Acock, A. (1996). The task and ego orientation in sport
questionnaire: construct equivalence and mean differences across gender.
Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 68, 228-238.

Midgley, C., Anderman, E., & Hicks, L. (1995). Differences between elementary and
middle school teachers and students: A goal theory approach. Journal of
Adolescence, 15, 90-113.

Nicholls, J.G. (1989). The competitive ethos and democratic education.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Nicholls, J.G., Cheung, P.C., Lauer, J., & Pastashnick, M. (1989). Individual differences
in academic motivation: Perceived ability, goals, beliefs, and values. Learning
and Individual Differences, 1, 63-84.

Nicholls, J.G., & Miller, A.T. (1984). Development and its discontents: The
differentiation of the concept of ability. In J. G. Nicholls (Ed.), Advances in
motivation and achievement: The development of achievement motivation (Vol. 3,
pp. 185-218). Greenwhich, CT: JAI.










Nolen, S.B. (1988). Reasons for studying: Motivational orientations and study strategies.
Cognition and Instruction, 5, 269-287.

Roberts, G. C., & Ommundsen, Y. (1996). Effect of goal orientation on achievement
beliefs, cognition and strategies in team sport. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine
Science and Sport, 6, 46-56.

Todorovich, J.R., & Curtner-Smith, M.D. (2002). Influence of the physical education
classroom motivational climate on sixth grade students' task and ego orientations.
European Physical Education Review, 8(2), 119-138.

Treasure, D., & Roberts, G. (1998). Relationship between female adolescents'
achievement goal orientations, perceptions of the motivational climate, belief
about success and sources of satisfaction in basketball. International Journal of
Sports Psychology, 29, 211-230.

Walling, M.D., Duda, J.L., Chi, L. (1993). The perceived motivational climate in
sport questionnaire: Construct and predictive validity. Journal of Sports and
Exercise Psychology, 15, 172-183.

Weinberg, R.S., & Gould, D. (1999). Foundations of sport and exercise psychology (2nd
ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

White, S.A., & Zellner, S.R. (1996). The relationship between goal orientation beliefs
about the cause of sport success, and trait anxiety among high school
intercollegiate, and recreational sport participants. The Sport Psychologist, 10, 58-
72.

Williams, L. (1998). Contextual influences and goal perspectives among female youth
sport participants. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 69(1), 47-57.















BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Sean McManus is a 2001 graduate of the University of Notre Dame, where he

received a Bachelor of Science degree in civil engineering. Sean also competed for the

university's intercollegiate track team. It was during these years of competition with the

track team that he first noticed potential differences in motivation between sprinters and

distance runners.

Having decided upon a career change, from engineering to coaching track, Sean

entered the University of Florida's Master of Science program in health science

education. It was during these educational pursuits that he became familiar with studies

examining motivation in sport and the principles of achievement goal theory.

Through this study and others Sean hopes to explore motivational differences

between sprinters and distance runners, and to use the findings in practice as a coach.

Understanding what drives an athlete to compete and persevere through adversity is a

valuable tool in getting the athlete's absolute best effort.