Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 7-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Goal Missed, Self Hit: Goal-Setting, Goal-Failure, and Their Affective, Motivational, and Behavioral Consequences

Goal Missed, Self Hit: Goal-Setting, Goal-Failure, and Their Affective, Motivational, and... ORIGINAL RESEARCH published: 21 September 2021 doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.704790 Goal Missed, Self Hit: Goal-Setting, Goal-Failure, and Their Affective, Motivational, and Behavioral Consequences Jessica Höpfner * and Nina Keith Department of Psychology, Technical University of Darmstadt, Darmstadt, Germany Setting high and specic fi goals is one of the best-established management tools to increase performance and motivation. However, in recent years, potential downsides of goal-setting are being discussed. One possible downside is the high risk of failing the goal. In an approach to integrate research on the consequences of goal-failure and the basic assumptions of goal-setting theory, we investigated whether failure of a high and specific goal has detrimental effects on a person’s affect, self-esteem, and motivation. In Experiment 1, 185 participants received fictitious feedback about attaining or failing an assigned high and specific goal. In Experiment 2 with 86 participants, we manipulated goal-failure through task-difficulty and Edited by: Parul Rishi, we  included task choice as a behavioral measure of motivation. In both experiments, Indian Institute of Forest Management, participants who failed the high and specific goal showed a decrease in affect, self-esteem, India and motivation compared to participants who attained that goal. Results indicate that failing Reviewed by: Arianna Costantini, a high and specific goal can be damaging for self-related factors that may be crucial for University of Verona, Italy organizational long-term outcomes. We advise organizations to consider potential undesirable Andrea P. Malizia, effects when using goal-setting interventions. IMT School for Advanced Studies Lucca, Italy Keywords: goal-setting theory, goal-failure, affect, self-esteem, motivation, task choice *Correspondence: Jessica Höpfner [email protected] INTRODUCTION Specialty section: Over 1,000 studies have consistently shown that setting high and specific goals is linked to This article was submitted to Organizational Psychology, increased task performance, persistence, and motivation, compared to vague or easy goals (Locke a section of the journal and Latham, 2002, 2006). Given this empirical evidence, setting high (which means a high Frontiers in Psychology difficulty that only a certain percentage of individuals can reach) and specific (which means Received: 03 May 2021 tangible information on what needs to be attained) goals has become a highly recommended Accepted: 19 August 2021 motivational and leadership tool in organizations. However, in recent years, more and more Published: 21 September 2021 studies raised concerns about possible undesirable effects of goal-setting. For example, goals Citation: can narrow the attention focus on goal-related actions, so that other important issues are Höpfner J and Keith N (2021) Goal missed (Ordóñez et  al., 2009), goals may increase risk-taking and unethical behavior (Neale Missed, Self Hit: Goal-Setting, Goal- and Bazerman, 1985; Knight et  al., 2001; Schweitzer et  al., 2004), inhibit learning (Earley et  al., Failure, and Their Affective, 1989; Cervone et al., 1991), or create an overly competitive environment (Mitchell and Silver, 1990). Motivational, and Behavioral e c Th urrent research seeks to shed light on another possible downside of setting high and Consequences. specific goals: the possibility of goal-failure and the associated negative consequences. Locke and Front. Psychol. 12:704790. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.704790 Latham (1990, p.  349) advocated that (at least in laboratory settings) a high and specific goal Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 1 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure “that only 10% of the subjects can reach” should be  set to Some evidence was found that high and specific goals lead to achieve maximum individual performance (see, e.g., Locke et al., a decrease in ae ff ct, because individuals evaluate their performance 1989; Latham and Locke, 1991; Latham and Seijts, 1999; Welsh relatively to a reference point (Oliver et  al., 1994; om Th pson, and Ordóñez, 2014; Welsh et  al., 2019). However, this implies 1995; Galinsky et al., 2002). Even individuals who had objectively that only 10% of individuals are able to attain the high and good outcomes felt worse when they had a high and specific specific goal and 90% will fail the goal. What happens to those goal as their reference point (o Th mpson, 1995 ; Galinsky et  al., who fail the high and specific goal? Several theories have discussed 2002). What happens when individuals fall under their reference possible processes induced by goal-failure in general (Dweck point? Surprisingly, there is a lack of research on the consequences and Leggett, 1988; Carver and Scheier, 1990; Judge and Kammeyer- of failing a high and specific goal. It is important to examine Mueller, 2004), but there is a dearth of empirical research on the consequences of goal-failure of a high and specific goal the consequences of failure of a high and specific goal. since they are the key element of goal-setting interventions in We argue that failing a high and specific goal induces several organizations. We  propose that failing the high and specific processes that can harm a person’s aeff ct, self-esteem, and goal may induce detrimental processes for several intrapersonal motivation. Reducing such self-related factors can have serious and self-related factors. We  chose intrapersonal factors that have consequences for the person as well as the organizations, for been consistently demonstrated to be  strongly connected with example reduced extrarole performance (Judge and Kammeyer- organizational outcomes and hence impairing those has the Mueller, 2008), reduced organizational citizenship behavior (Welsh potential to harm the employee and the organization in the et al., 2020), or increased absenteeism (Shi et al., 2013). Decreased long-run. motivation may also lead to disengagement from challenging First, we  propose that goal-failure of a high and specific goal tasks (Seo and Ilies, 2009) or choosing tasks with low difficulty can damage a person’s ae ff ct. A person’s ae ff ct, which is a common (Nichols et  al., 1991). indicator for well-being (Sonnentag, 2015), refers to the positive While there is some evidence on the effects of goal-failure or negative personal reactions to experiences (Lazarus, 1982). on aeff ct (e.g., Martin et  al., 1993; Grieve et  al., 1994), to our Aeff ct is oen u ft sed as an umbrella term for mood, emotions, knowledge there are little to no studies that integrate research and evaluations. One can experience pleasant emotions or of failure with the basic assumptions of goal-setting theory. unpleasant ones (Diener, 2000). Several theories support the Hence, the present research seeks to close this research gap, notion that goal-failure can be  harmful for a person’s aeff ct. first, by replicating known effects of goal-failure on ae ff ct while First, self-regulation theory suggests that behavior is meta- using a high and specific goal and, second, by investigating the monitored by the individual and people seek to reduce discrepancy effects on additional self-related factors such as self-esteem and between their present actions and a reference value. If their motivation that are also crucial for organizational outcomes. In progress toward that reference value is sub-standard, they the next sections, we  will outline the underlying theories and experience negative aeff ct ( Carver and Scheier, 1990; Moberly potential processes that may lead to negative consequences aer ft and Watkins, 2010). Second, achievement goal theory suggests goal-failure of a high and specific goal. We  will describe in that individuals with a focus on an externally-set standard view detail the expected effects of goal-failure for ae ff ct, self-esteem, their skillset as fixed and unchangeable ( Dweck and Leggett, and motivation. We  will then describe two experimental studies 1988). Failing the standard for them then implies that their we  conducted to examine those effects. skills are insufficient and they view the failure as a negative judgement of their competence. u Th s, when individuals fail a high and specific goal, they experience a discrepancy between their skills and the goal and will experience negative aeff ct. THEORY AND HYPOTHESES Negative aeff ct can lead to severe consequences like reduced Setting high and specific goals is the basic recommendation by performance (Seo and Ilies, 2009), exhaustion (Halbesleben and goal-setting theory to increase performance (Locke and Latham, Wheeler, 2011), counterproductive work behavior (Scott and 1990, 2002, 2006); however, failing these goals may induce Barnes, 2011), and in the long-run even to burnout, which is processes that are damaging for one’s self. Goals can be described related to increased absenteeism (Ybema et  al., 2010). as objects of a person’s ambition that direct attention to goal- A number of studies have examined the consequences of relevant activities, mobilize effort, and motivate to develop task- goal-failure for a person’s aeff ct. However, these studies do not relevant strategies for goal-attainment (Locke et  al., 1981). In directly relate to goal-setting theory. For example, in one over 35 years of research, Locke and Latham (2002) developed experiment, goal level (primary vs. subgoals) and feedback of goal-setting theory to influence, predict, and explain performance success or failure were manipulated. Participants who received on organizational tasks through goals. eir Th core findings were a primary goal and feedback of goal-failure showed highest that high and specific goals increased performance, persistence, negative ae ff ct and decreased expectancy for future performance and motivation compared to vague or so-called “do-your-best” (Houser-Marko and Sheldon, 2008). In another study, participants goals (Locke and Latham, 1990). reported their negative ae ff ct; their ruminative self-focus, as well However, most past research focused on these core findings as their current goal and the importance of that goal eight and increasing performance as the main outcome, while ignoring times daily over 7 days (Moberly and Watkins, 2010). It was potential detrimental effects on intrapersonal and self-related found that low goal-success and high goal-importance were factors, especially when the high and specific goal is failed. associated with high negative ae ff ct. Rumination aer exp ft eriences Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 2 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure of failure was also examined in another investigation, in which failure condition showed reduced self-esteem aer ft the task. failure to attain prevention or promotion goals was manipulated However, in both studies, there was no assigned high and specific by letting participants recall past failure experiences (Jones et  al., goal. Both studies examined perceived failure on self-esteem 2013). It was found that failure experiences lead to increased and did not measure whether participants had a goal prior to rumination and intensified negative ae ff ct, especially for promotion the exam or the task. In another series of experiments, achievement goal failures. In a summary on goals and ae ff ct, Plemmons and goals were unconsciously activated with several methods (Bongers Weiss (2013) gathered previous findings on the effects of goal- et  al., 2010). Participants then performed different tasks that failure on subsequent ae ff ct. They concluded that goal-attainment were either easy or difficult to solve. Participants primed with has positive effects on aeff ct, whereas goal-failure has negative achievement goals reported lower levels of self-esteem aer t ft he effects on ae ff ct (see Plemmons and Weiss, 2013, pp.  121). None difficult tasks throughout all experiments. However, there were of these studies involved high and specific goals. We  found two no assigned high and specific goals and success and failure exceptions where high goals according to goal-setting theory were not manipulated, but depended on task difficulty condition, were used. In one study, goal-success and goal-failure were used meaning that all participants in the difficult task condition were as mood-inducing method (Henkel and Hinsz, 2004). In another classified as having failed the goal, even though the goal to investigation, goal-difficulty, goal source, and failure tolerance achieve was only unconscious and neither high nor specific. were manipulated in a scenario experiment in which participants Considering these previous findings, it becomes obvious that were confronted with a character who fails his fictitious exam there are some indications that failure and more specifically (Kim and Clifford, 1988 ). It was found that for very difficult goal-failure may have detrimental effects for a person’s self- goals that were assigned by someone else, feelings aer fa ft ilure esteem. The present research seeks to examine these effects when tended to be  more negative. However, the authors did not find using high and specific goals. We  propose that: unambiguous support for the relationship between goal-difficulty and responses to goal-failure, and the goal only was presented H2: Individuals who fail their high and specic fi goal show as an item on the scenario booklet; participants did not have lower self-esteem than individuals who attain their high to complete the goal themselves. and specific goal. Hence, there is some empirical evidence that goal-failure may have detrimental effects for an individual’s ae ff ct; however, research Third, we  propose that goal-failure of a high and specific is needed to test this effect for high and specific goals that are goal can reduce motivation for future tasks. Work-related the basic recommendation of goal-setting theory. We propose that: motivation is one of the most common topics in organizational psychology and is described as “an umbrella term meant to H1: Individuals who fail their high and specific goal will capture the dense network of concepts and their interrelations show a more negative ae ff ct than individuals who attain that underlie observable changes in the initiations, direction, their high and specific goal. intensity, and persistence of voluntary action” (Kanfer et  al., 2017, p.  339). Hence, we  base our conceptualization of work Second, we  propose that goal-failure of a high and specific motivation on the voluntarily change of intensity and persistence goal can damage a person’s self-esteem. A person’s self-esteem of an action toward any work-related activity. Work motivation reflects their evaluation of themselves and their abilities ( Rosenberg, ae ff cts how individuals develop their skills, the careers that they 1965). Identity theory describes self-esteem as an outcome of pursue, how they allocate their resources, and also aeff cts how the ratio between successes and goals (Stets and Burke, 2000; activities during work are tackled (Kanfer et  al., 2017). Setting Stryker and Burke, 2000), meaning the degree to which individuals high and specific goals is one of the best-known methods to are able to match their identity goal with their actual performance. increase work motivation. If the goal is failed, however, we propose If their identity goal matches with their actual performance, that several other processes can be  activated that are detrimental self-verification is successful. Successful self-verification leads to to motivation. higher self-esteem. In contrast, disruption of the self-verification According to achievement goal theory, individuals with process, for example goal-failure, can have negative consequences performance goals avoid challenges when confronted with for a person’s self-esteem. Reduced self-esteem can have severe obstacles, independently of their initial ability (Dweck and Leggett, long-term consequences, for the individual as well as for the 1988). While trying to attain a performance goal, individuals organization, for example increased turnover cognitions/intentions feel that their abilities are measured. When goal-failure occurs, (Gardner and Pierce, 2001), decreased citizenship behavior (Lee, individuals perceive their abilities as inadequate and themselves 2003), and lower organizational commitment (Van Dyne and as incompetent (Dweck and Leggett, 1988). Individuals who Pierce, 2004). Hence, it is crucial to examine the consequences view themselves as competent will react more positively to of goal-failure for self-esteem. responsibilities than individuals who see themselves as incompetent er Th e is only a small body of research on the consequences (Judge et  al., 1997). Accordingly, individuals who perceive of failure for a person’s self-esteem. In one study, it was found themselves as incompetent will react negatively to responsibilities that participants who received poor exam scores showed reduced and view themselves as less likely to succeed (Judge et  al., 1998). self-esteem (Heatherton and Polivy, 1991). The same was found es Th e individuals will react to failure with withdrawal of effort when failure was manipulated by assigning a puzzle task that and reduced persistence (Judge and Kammeyer-Mueller, 2004; was impossible to solve in the given time. Participants in the Yeo and Neal, 2004). Considering the described definition of Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 3 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure motivation as changes of intensity and persistence of voluntary STUDY 1 METHOD actions, we  conclude that goal-failure has the potential to reduce a person’s subsequent motivation. Design er Th e are few studies which have investigated the effects of Study 1 was an online-experiment with a one-factor between- goal-failure on subsequent motivation. Two studies manipulated subjects design. e b Th etween-subjects factor was feedback type goal type (learning vs. performance goals) and then used fictitious with three conditions: goal attained vs. goal failed vs. no feedback feedback of goal-failure to investigate the effects on subsequent (control condition). Participants all received the same high and motivation. In one study, students with a performance goal who specific goal in an intelligence test and aer ft ward a fictitious received feedback of goal-failure performed worse in a subsequent feedback whether they attained that goal or not (or no feedback task (Cianci et  al., 2010). In this study, subsequent performance at all in the control condition; the feedback is pictured in was used as an indicator for changes in motivation. In another Table 1). As dependent variables, we measured ae ff ct, self-esteem, research, subjects with a performance goal avoided more difficult and subsequent motivation. The same variables were assessed subsequent tasks aer g ft oal-failure ( Nichols et  al., 1991). In this before the task (baseline) and aer r ft eceiving the feedback. investigation, subsequent task choice aer fa ft ilure was used as an indicator of changes in motivation. In one study, participants Participants and Procedure completed a cycling task and received manipulated performance We computed our required sample size with G*Power, optimal feedback about attaining or failing their assigned goal before sample size is 111 (for between-subjects ANOVAs with three completing a subsequent cognitive task (Healy et  al., 2015). groups of Cohen’s f = 0.3, type-I error probability α = 0.05, and er Th e were no differences in subsequent performance between power 1-β = 0.80, according to G*Power; Faul et  al., 2007). goal-failure and goal-attainment conditions. The authors concluded Participants were 185 volunteers (93.5% female). Participants that a physical task may not have been suitable to manipulate were randomly recruited on different online-platforms and were goal-failure and that a physical task may enhance cognitive told that they would have the chance to test intelligence-test functioning, which could mask the detrimental effects of goal- questions that can appear in assessment-centers. Participation failure. Again, these studies did not integrate high and specific was completely voluntarily; there was no payment involved. goals. There is one exception, in which participants actually Majority of participants were employees (62.4%) of various received a high goal prior to the task (Vohs et  al., 2013), but professions (16.8% public service). Participants were not paid in this experiment, the goal was set so high that it was actually for participation; however, students (30.3%) received course credit unattainable and thus, again, did not match the basic assumptions if needed (only applicable to psychology students). Mean age of goal-setting theory. It was found that aer ft goal-failure, was 28.01 years (SD = 7.0). All participants were randomly assigned expectancy for future performance and interest in performing to experimental conditions by using a programmed randomization similar tasks, which were used as indicators of motivation, lfi ter, resulting in 67 subjects in the goal-attainment condition were lower. [34.6% female; 27.73 (SD = 7.75) years old; 13.0% high school Taken together, there is some evidence that goal-failure of absolvent or higher; 17.3% employees; and 9.7% students], 53 performance goals can have undesirable effects on subsequent subjects in the goal-failure condition [25.4% female; 28.58 motivation. We  seek to examine these effects when using high (SD = 6.90) years old; 11.9% high school absolvent or higher; and specific goals that are the key element of goal-setting 16.2% employees; and 7.0% students], and 65 subjects in the interventions. We  propose that: no-feedback control condition [33.5% female; 27.83 (SD = 6.73) years old; 14.1% high school absolvent or higher; 17.9% employees; H3: Individuals who fail their high and specic fi goal show and 13.5% students]. lower motivation than individuals who attain their high Aer g ft iving their consent and confirming that they are of and specific goal. legal age, participants answered an online-questionnaire. In this questionnaire, we assessed demographics, covariates, and baseline data for aeff ct, self-esteem, and motivation. Participants then all received the high and specific goal to solve seven out of 10 OVERVIEW OF STUDIES upcoming intelligence test items. We  asked how committed participants were to that goal. Participants then solved the 10 We conducted two experiments in which we  manipulated goal- intelligence test items. Aer co ft mpletion, participants received failure to examine the consequences of failure of a high and fictitious feedback (or no feedback in the control condition) specific goal. To manipulate goal-failure, we  used fictitious feedback in Study 1 and varied task difficulty in Study 2, so that goal-failure is independent from a person’s skill-level. In TABLE 1 | Fictitious feedback of goal-attainment/goal-failure in Study 1. Study 1, we  focused on the person’s aeff ct, self-esteem, and Goal-Attainment feedback: Goal-Failure feedback: subsequent self-reported motivation aer r ft eceiving feedback of goal-failure compared to feedback of goal-attainment or no “You have completed the intelligence- “You have completed the intelligence- feedback. Study 2 aimed at replicating the effects found in Study test task. Congratulations, you were test task. Unfortunately, you were not 1 and examined motivation more objectively by using task choice able to solve at least 7 out of 10 tasks able to solve at least 7 out of 10 tasks aer ini ft tial failure as a behavioral measure of motivation. correctly. Please continue the survey.” correctly. Please continue the survey.” Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 4 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure depending on their experimental condition. Aerft wards, Motivation we  assessed the post-measures for aeff ct, self-esteem, and Motivation was assessed with three self-developed items that motivation as well as perception of the goal and the feedback are based on common scales for measuring motivation. Items as manipulation checks. All study variables were assessed were “I approach even difficult tasks with motivation,” “I try immediately before or aer t ft he tasks, there were no breaks in everything to attain my goals,” and “When I cannot solve difficult between. Finally, participants were debriefed and dismissed. tasks immediately, I  lose interest.” Cronbach’s α ranged from 0.71 to 0.74. The response scale ranged from 1 ( strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). MATERIALS Control Variable Intelligence Test Task We measured goal-commitment as a control variable. Goal- In Study 1, we  used 10 intelligence test items from the freely commitment is one of the most influential moderators of the available General Intelligence-Test by Satow (2017). These 10 goal-performance relationship (Locke and Latham, 1990) and items included five matrices that test spatial imagination and thus may aeff ct the consequences of failure of a high and vfi e number sequences that test mathematical-logical abilities. specific goal. We  used this task because the items all have a medium difficulty of around 0.5 (which means an item difficulty of around 50%) Goal-Commitment and participants cannot unambiguously tell if they correctly Goal-commitment was assessed with three items by Hollenbeck solved an item. For that reason, participants cannot be  sure et  al. (1989) that were most appropriate for the goal-setting whether they solved the items correctly or not, which is essential context. For example, one item was “I am  strongly committed for using fictitious feedback. to this goal.” Cronbach’s α was 0.84. The response scale ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). There were no pre-experimental differences between the groups in goal- MEASURES commitment, F(2,182) = 1.46, p = 0.24, and η = 0.02. Dependent Variables Manipulation Checks All scales that were originally in English were translated into We used several manipulation checks to make sure participants German and then back-translated into English. Exact Cronbach’s adopted the assigned high and specific goal and also to test α for all conditions and measurement times are listed in Table  2. whether the manipulation of feedback type was successful. We  asked participants to repeat their assigned goal directly aer ft Affect the task. One hundred seventy-two participants correctly identified Aeff ct was assessed with a short-scale version ( Wilhelm and the assigned goal (93%). We  also asked participants to rate the Schoebi, 2007) of the Multidimensional Mood State Questionnaire assigned goal on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 ( not (MDMQ) by Steyer et  al. (1997). The short-scale consists of at all) to 5 (very). Participants perceived the assigned goal as six bipolar items (e.g., “tired – awake,” “tense – relaxed,” and medium to high (M = 3.62, SD = 0.83), difficult ( M = 3.61, SD = 0.91), Cronbach’s α ranged from 0.88 to 0.89) with a seven-point reasonable (M = 3.46, SD = 0.98), and fair (M = 3.56, SD = 0.93). scale, both endpoints labeled with “very.” We  kept participants who did not correctly identify the goal in our analyses, because further ratings indicated that all Self-Esteem participants perceived the goal as intended. Additionally, State self-esteem was assessed with the subscale performance we  checked whether the fictitious feedback was perceived as of the State-Self-Esteem Scale by Heatherton and Polivy (1991) credible. Participants rated the feedback as credible (M = 3.81, consisting of five items. For example, one item was “I feel SD = 1.96). There were no significant differences between the confident about my abilities.” Cronbach’s α ranged from 0.80 2 groups, F(2,144) =0.62, p = 0.54, and η = 0.01 (goal-failure to 0.85. The response scale ranged from 1 ( strongly disagree) condition: M = 3.66, SD = 1.87; goal-attainment condition: M = 3.72, to 5 (strongly agree). SD = 2.03). TABLE 2 | Cronbach’s α for feedback type conditions and measurement times. Feedback type Time Goal-Commitment Affect Self-Esteem Motivation 1 0.88 0.89 0.81 0.80 Goal-Failure 2 – 0.91 0.86 0.83 1 0.80 0.89 0.79 0.70 Goal-Attainment 2 – 0.91 0.85 0.66 1 0.83 0.87 0.81 0.65 Control 2 – 0.87 0.86 0.73 N = 185 Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 5 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure for participants who attained the goal, while it was reduced for STUDY 1 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION participants who failed the goal. Self-esteem levels for participants in the control conditions were in between the other two groups. Descriptive Statistics and Intercorrelations Hypothesis 3 assumed that individuals who fail the high and of Study Variables specific goal will show lower motivation than individuals who Table  3 lists the means, SDs, and correlations of all study attain the high and specific goal. An ANCOVA showed that variables. All study variables correlated in an expected manner, there was no significant main effect of feedback type on motivation, for example, the baseline measures correlated highly with the F(2,181) = 2.32, p = 0.10, and η = 0.03. However, planned post-measures. In preliminary analyses, we  made sure that there comparisons indicated, in line with what we  predicted that were no baseline differences in any of the study variables, motivation was lower for participants who failed the assigned including aeff ct [ F(2,182) = 0.08, p = 0.92, and η = 0.001], self- goal than for participants who attained the assigned goal. There esteem [F(2,182) = 0.02, p = 0.98, and η = 0.00], motivation was a statistically significant difference in motivation between [F(2,182) = 0.14, p = 0.87, and η = 0.002], or goal-commitment the goal-failure condition (M = 3.41, SD = 1.03) and the goal- [F(2,182) = 1.46, p = 0.24, and η = 0.02]. We  also centered and attainment condition (M = 3.62, SD = 0.92) of 0.21 (SE = 0.10), included goal-commitment, gender, and age in our analyses. t(2,181) = 2.11, p < 0.05, d = 0.22. u Th s, Hypothesis 3 was supported. es Th e variables did not change our results when included as e eff Th ect is depicted in Figure  1C. As illustrated, motivation covariates. We, therefore, report results of analyses without stayed at the same level for participants who attained the goal, these covariates. while it was reduced for participants who failed the goal. Motivation levels for participants in the control conditions were Main Effects of Goal-Failure on Affect, Self- in between the other two groups. Esteem, and Motivation In sum, all hypotheses were supported. As predicted, aeff ct We tested hypotheses using separate one-way ANCOVAs with was more negative and self-esteem and motivation were reduced centered baseline measures included as a covariate and with when the high and specific goal was failed. Interestingly, participants the between-subjects factor feedback type (three levels: goal who received no feedback at all showed similar tendencies attained, goal failed, and no feedback) for each dependent variable. throughout all dependent variables as participants who failed We  used post-hoc tests to compare the goal-failure condition the goal. We assume that since we chose task items with medium with the goal-attainment condition as this comparison reflects difficulty, participants in the no-feedback condition were not our hypotheses. sure about their performance and assumed that they did not Hypothesis 1 predicted that individuals who fail the high attain the high and specific goal; hence, they showed similar and specific goal will show a more negative ae ff ct than individuals tendencies as the participants who failed the goal. We  conclude who attain the high and specific goal. An ANCOVA showed a that the task we  used was indeed ambiguous as we  intended significant main effect of feedback type on ae ff ct, F(2,181) = 13.44, and the uncertainty about their own performance lead to p < 0.001, and η = 0.13. As planned comparisons indicated, in participants’ conclusion. However, to avoid uncertainty of their line with what we  predicted, aeff ct was more negative for performance and also being dependent of the credibility of the participants who failed the goal than for participants who attained fictitious feedback, we  sought to manipulate actual performance the goal. There was a statistically significant difference in ae ff ct in a second study, rather than just manipulating the feedback between the goal-failure condition (M = 3.78, SD = 1.47) and the about the performance. Moreover, feedback in day-to-day life goal-attainment condition (M = 4.46, SD = 1.40) of 0.67 (SE = 0.15), reflects actual performance and is not fictitious. To manipulate t(2,181) = 4.47, p < 0.001, and d = 0.48. Thus, Hypothesis 1 was actual performance, we  manipulated task difficulty in Study 2, supported. The effect is depicted in Figure  1A. As illustrated, so that participants can unambiguously tell how they performed ae ff ct increased for participants who attained the goal, while it and whether they attained or failed the goal. Furthermore, decreased for participants who failed the goal. Participants in we  sought to test the immediate behavioral effects aer fa ft ilure the control condition showed a pattern similar to that of of a high and specific goal. For that reason, we  used a behavioral participants who failed the goal. measure of motivation in Study 2. We  will describe Study 2  in Hypothesis 2 assumed that individuals who fail the high and detail in the following section. specific goal will show lower self-esteem than individuals who attain the high and specific goal. An ANCOVA showed that there was no significant main effect of feedback type on self- STUDY 2 METHOD esteem, F(2,181) = 2.35, p = 0.10, and η = 0.03. However, as planned comparisons indicated, in line with what we  predicted, self- Design esteem was lower for participants who failed the goal than for Study 2 was a laboratory experiment with a one-factor between participants who attained the goal. er Th e was a statistically subjects design. Between-subjects factor was goal-failure with significant difference in self-esteem between the goal-failure two conditions: goal attained vs. goal failed. Participants all condition (M = 3.49, SD = 1.01) and the goal-attainment condition received a high and specific goal how many matrices they (M = 3.70, SD = 0.90) of 0.22 (SE = 0.10), t(2,181) = 2.16, p < 0.05, should solve in a first round. Goal-failure was manipulated d = 0.22. Hypothesis 2 was supported. The effect is depicted in through task difficulty. In a second round, participants then Figure  1B. As illustrated, self-esteem stayed at the same level were asked to choose between two alternatives of the task Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 6 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 7 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 TABLE 3 | Descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations Study 1. S. No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1. Experimental condition – 2. Performance −0.01 – Covariates 3. Gender 0.12 0.06 – 4. Age 0.05 0.02 −0.07 – 5. Goal- −0.06 −0.14 0.03 −0.13 (0.84) Commitment Dependent variables 6. Affect Time 1 −0.02 0.08 0.09 0.10 0.07 (0.88) * ** 7. Self-Esteem 0.01 0.14 −0.01 0.16 −0.01 0.44 (0.80) Time 1 * ** ** 8. Motivation 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.11 0.17 0.28 0.52 (0.71) Time 1 ** ** ** 9. Affect Time 2 −0.13 0.10 0.10 0.05 0.11 0.79 0.42 0.24 (0.89) * ** ** ** ** 10. Self-Esteem −0.07 0.18 −0.02 0.10 −0.12 0.48 0.82 0.45 0.55 (0.85) Time 2 * * ** ** ** ** ** 11. Motivation −0.07 0.18 0.05 0.09 0.16 0.35 0.47 0.76 0.38 0.52 (0.74) Time 2 M 0.29 6.50 1.08 28.01 4.87 4.17 3.74 3.63 4.06 3.61 3.51 Total SD 0.45 2.26 0.33 7.04 1.57 1.31 0.82 0.81 1.41 0.95 0.86 M – 6.45 1.15 28.58 4.73 4.13 3.76 3.63 3.78 3.51 3.42 Goal-Failure SD – 2.20 0.46 6.90 1.65 1.41 0.80 0.86 1.47 0.98 0.90 Goal- M – 6.40 1.04 27.73 5.13 4.15 3.73 3.59 4.46 3.69 3.59 Attainment SD – 2.23 0.21 7.51 1.39 1.31 0.81 0.80 1.40 0.92 0.80 M – 6.65 1.06 27.83 4.72 4.22 3.74 3.66 3.88 3.60 3.51 Control SD – 2.37 0.30 6.73 1.66 1.24 0.85 0.79 1.30 0.96 0.91 * ** N = 185; experimental condition: no failure (goal-attainment condition and control condition) = 0, failure = 1; and gender: female = 0, other = 1. p < 0.05, p < 0.01. Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure randomly assigned to experimental conditions by using a common randomization table, resulting in 41 subjects in the goal-attainment condition and 45 subjects in the goal-failure condition. Aer g ft iving their consent and confirming that they are of legal age, participants answered a first paper-pencil questionnaire. In this questionnaire, we  assessed demographics, covariates, and baseline data for ae ff ct and self-esteem. Participants then all received the high and specific goal to solve four out of v fi e matrices in the upcoming “adding-to-ten” task. Participants then tried to solve the five matrices. Participants in the goal- attainment condition received matrices that were so easy that Effect of feedback type on affect any individual with a basic skill-level in arithmetic can solve them in the given amount of time to make sure that they all attain the assigned goal. Participants in the goal-failure condition received matrices that were so difficult that it was impossible to solve them in the given amount of time to make sure that they all fail the assigned goal. We tested whether the respective task-difficulty would lead to attaining or failing the goal in pilot studies and adjusted it accordingly. Hence, goal-failure was manipulated independently from an individual’s skill-level and solely based on our experimental manipulation of task difficulty. As intended, all participants attained or failed the assigned goal corresponding to our manipulation. Aer ft that first round, participants were asked to choose between Effect of feedback type on self-esteem two alternatives of the previous task with different levels of difficulty (medium vs. high, connected with different rewards). Aer co ft mpleting that second round, we  assessed the post- measures for ae ff ct and self-esteem and the manipulation check. Finally, participants received their reward of their respective amount of chocolate chips (depending on how many matrices they had solved in the second round), were debriefed and dismissed. MATERIALS Effect of feedback type on motivation Adding-to-Ten Task In Study 2, we  used the “adding-to-ten” task which has FIGURE 1 | Effects of feedback type on affect (A), self-esteem (B), and been used in several other studies (on the effects of goal- motivation (C) in Study 1. setting on unethical behavior) before (e.g., Mazar et  al., 2008; Welsh and Ordóñez, 2014; Keith, 2018). The original with different difficulties. Dependent variables were motivation task consists of matrices with 12 numbers with two decimal (task choice) in the second round as well as aeff ct and self- places of which two numbers sum up to 10. We  used this esteem. Aeff ct and self-esteem were assessed before the first task because it allows the respondents to unambiguously round (baseline) and aer t ft he second round. evaluate if they had solved the question correctly and because it is not viewed as one reflecting math ability (Mazar et  al., 2008). In this task, participants recognize their actual Participants and Procedure We computed our required sample size with G*Power, optimal performance and are not dependent on our feedback. For this study, we  developed three different levels of difficulty. sample size is 90 (for between-subjects ANOVAs with two groups of Cohen’s f = 0.3, type-I error probability α = 0.05, and power We  varied the level of difficulty by adding more columns or more decimal places. We  conducted a preliminary study 1-β = 0.80, according to G*Power; Faul et  al., 2007). Participants were 86 volunteers (67.4% female; 61.2% employees; and 55.4% to test our matrices for difficulty. The final matrices had nine numbers with one decimal place for the very easy high school graduation or higher) who were recruited at several public places throughout the city at which the authors’ university matrices, 12 numbers with two decimal places (as in the original) for the medium difficult matrices, and 36 numbers is located. Participants were not paid for participation, but were able to win chocolate chips depending on their performance. with three decimal places for the very difficult matrices (for an example, see Figure  2). We  also measured the time Mean age was 36.70 years (SD = 15.12). All participants were Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 8 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure it took participants to solve the very easy matrices in a Motivaton (Task Choice) preliminary study. Since participants solved five very easy Motivation was measured by task choice in the second round. matrices in less than 2 min, we  set the high and specific Participants were asked to choose between two alternatives: goal at four out of five matrices in 2 min in the goal- To solve medium difficult matrices, receiving one chocolate attainment condition. The same goal applied to the very for every correctly solved matrix; or to solve very difficult difficult matrices in the goal-failure condition because matrices, receiving three chocolates for every correctly solved we  expected it to be  impossible to solve those in 2 min. matrix. Hence, the difficult matrices were connected with In the second round, participants had another 2 min to a large reward, while the medium difficult matrices were solve as many matrices as possible. connected with a small reward. We  included this payoff to have an incentive to choose the difficult matrices. Choosing the difficult matrices indicated higher motivation. Task choice was measured as choice for medium difficult matrices MEASURES (0 = medium difficulty) or choice for difficult matrices Dependent Variables (1 = high difficulty). All Scales that were originally in English were translated into German and then back-translated into English. Exact Affect Cronbach’s α for all conditions and measurement times is Ae ff ct was assessed with the same scale used in Study 1. Cronbach’s listed in Table  4. α ranged from 0.65 to 0.75. FIGURE 2 | Examples for easy (top panel), medium (middle panel), and difficult (bottom panel) matrices in the “adding-to-ten” task. Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 9 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure TABLE 4 | Cronbach’s α for goal-failure conditions and measurement times. Feedback type Time Self-Efficacy Risk-Taking Perceived mental Affect Self-Esteem arithmetic 1 0.85 0.81 0.84 0.60 0.73 Goal-Failure 2 – – – 0.72 0.77 1 0.74 0.85 0.91 0.70 0.67 Goal-Attainment 2 – – – 0.75 0.60 N = 86. Self-Esteem to repeat their assigned goal directly aer t ft he task. Seventy- State self-esteem was assessed with the same scale used in Study four participants correctly identified the assigned goal (86%). 1. Cronbach’s α was 0.70 at both times. We also asked participants if they attained or failed the assigned goal. All 86 participants correctly indicated that they attained the goal in the goal-attainment condition or failed the goal Control Variables in the goal-failure condition. Hence, manipulation of goal- We measured self-efficacy, risk-taking, and perceived mental failure was successful. arithmetic ability as control variables. Self-efficacy is, besides self-esteem, considered as one of the four core traits that constitute core self-evaluations (Bono and Judge, 2003). Hence, self-efficacy STUDY 2 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION is expected to correlate substantially with self-esteem and as a trait may aeff ct the consequences of goal-failure. Risk-taking Descriptive Statistics and Intercorrelations was measured because it may aeff ct which task participants of Study Variables choose in the second round. Mental arithmetic ability may ae ff ct Table  5 lists the means, SDs, and correlations of all study how well participants perform in the “adding-to-ten” task. er Th e variables. All study variables correlated in an expected manner. were no pre-experimental differences between the groups in Experimental condition correlated highly with motivation (task any of the control variables. choice), ae ff ct, and also with self-esteem. In preliminary analyses, we  made sure that there were no baseline differences in any Self-Efficacy of the study variables, including ae ff ct [ t(84) = 1.72, p = 0.09, and Self-efficacy was assessed with the German version of the General d = 0.37], self-esteem [t(84) = 0.09, p = 0.93, and d = 0.03], self- Self-Efficacy Short Scale (ASKU) by Beierlein et  al. (2012). The efficacy [ t(84) = 1.67, p = 0.10, and d = 0.36], risk-taking scale consists of three items, for example, “I can rely on my [t(84) = −1.12, p = 0.27, and d = 0.24], or perceived mental arithmetic own abilities in difficult situations.” Cronbach’s α was 0.81. The ability [t(84) = −0.43, p = 0.67, and d = 0.09]. Some covariates response scale ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). seemed to correlate highly with the dependent variables, for example perceived mental arithmetic ability with motivation Willingness for Risk-Taking (task choice) or self-efficacy with self-esteem. For that reason, Willingness for risk-taking was assessed with the subscale “risk- we  centered and included these covariates in our analyses. These taking” from the TCU Adolescent Social Functioning Form by variables did not change our results when included as covariates. the TCU Institute of Behavioral Research (2010), consisting of We, therefore, report results of analyses without these covariates. seven items. For example, one item was “You like taking risks.” Cronbach’s α was 0.84. The response scale ranged from 1 ( strongly Main Effects of Goal-Failure on Affect, Self- disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Esteem, and Motivation (Task Choice) We tested Hypotheses 1 and 2 using separate one-way ANCOVAs Perceived Mental Arithmetic with centered baseline measure included as a covariate and with Perceived mental arithmetic ability was assessed with the subscale the between-subjects factor goal-failure for each dependent “attitude to fast mental arithmetic” from the “Trends in variable. We  tested Hypothesis 3 using logistic regression with International Mathematics and Science Study” (TIMSS) student goal-failure (two levels: goal attained, goal failed) as the between- questionnaire by Wendt et  al. (2017), consisting of six items. subjects factor and (motivation) task choice as dependent variable For example, one item was “Usually, I  am  very good at fast since logistic regression is recommended for dichotomous mental arithmetic.” Cronbach’s α was 0.88. The response scale dependent variables (Mood, 2010). ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree). Hypothesis 1 assumed that individuals who fail their assigned high and specific goal will show a more negative aeff ct than Manipulation Checks individuals who attain their assigned high and specific goal. We used two manipulation checks to make sure that participants An ANCOVA showed a significant main effect of goal-failure had adopted the assigned high and specific goal and that the on aeff ct, F(1,83) = 5.64, p < 0.05, η = 0.06, and d = 0.37. manipulation of goal-failure was successful. We asked participants Participants who failed their goal (M = 3.49, SD = 1.18) showed Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 10 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 11 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 TABLE 5 | Descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations Study 2. S. No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1. Experimental condition – Covariates 2. Gender 0.12 – 3. Age 0.21 0.07 – 4. Self-Efficacy −0.18 0.05 0.16 (0.81) 5. Risk-Taking 0.12 0.25 −0.17 0.07 (0.84) ** * 6. Perceived 0.05 0.34 0.05 0.18 0.26 (0.88) mental arithmetic Dependent variables 7. Affect Time 1 −0.18 0.00 −0.13 0.18 0.05 0.13 (0.65) ** ** 8. Self-Esteem −0.01 0.18 0.14 0.67 0.04 0.19 0.29 (0.70) Time 1 ** ** ** ** 9. Affect Time 2 −0.31 0.04 −0.09 0.44 0.00 0.10 0.59 0.38 (0.75) * ** ** ** 10. Self-Esteem −0.22 0.13 0.10 0.58 −0.05 0.19 0.16 0.67 0.51 (0.70) Time 2 ** ** 11. Motivation (Task −0.54 0.15 −0.21 0.03 0.08 0.36 0.15 −0.02 0.08 0.04 Choice) M 0.52 0.67 36.70 3.99 2.88 2.44 3.70 4.05 3.70 3.89 0.36 Total SD 0.50 0.47 15.12 0.54 0.73 0.70 0.92 0.48 1.07 0.59 0.48 M – 0.62 39.67 3.90 2.96 2.47 3.54 4.05 3.39 3.77 0.11 Goal-Failure SD – 0.49 16.06 0.55 0.68 0.62 0.91 0.44 1.04 0.60 0.32 Goal- M – 0.73 33.44 4.09 2.79 2.41 3.88 4.06 4.05 4.02 0.63 Attainment SD – 0.45 13.48 0.52 0.78 0.79 0.91 0.52 1.02 0.54 0.49 * ** N = 86; experimental condition: no failure = 0, failure = 1; gender: female = 0, male = 1; and task choice: medium difficult = 0, difficult = 1. p < 0.05, p < 0.01. Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure a significantly more negative ae ff ct than participants who attained their goal (M = 3.94, SD = 1.24). Hence, Hypothesis 1 was supported. The effect is depicted in Figure  3A. As illustrated, aeff ct increased for participants who attained the goal, while it decreased for participants who failed the goal. Hypothesis 2 assumed that individuals who fail their assigned high and specific goal will show lower self-esteem than individuals who attain their assigned high and specific goal. An ANCOVA showed a significant main effect of goal-failure on self-esteem, F(1,83) = 7.10, p < 0.01, η = 0.08, and d = 0.42. Participants who failed their goal (M = 3.77, SD = 0.58) showed Effect of goal-failure on affect (Study 2) significantly lower self-esteem than participants who attained their goal (M = 4.02, SD = 0.61). Hence, Hypothesis 2 was supported. The effect is depicted in Figure  3B. As illustrated, self-esteem stayed at the same level for participants who attained the goal, while it decreased for participants who failed the goal. Hypothesis 3 assumed that individuals who fail their assigned high and specific goal will show lower motivation than individuals who attain their assigned high and specific goal. We  used task choice as a behavioral indicator of motivation. A logistic regression showed that goal-failure is Effect of goal-failure on self-esteem (Study 2) a significant predictor of task choice, χ (1) = 27.19, p < 0.001, OR = 13.87, d = 1.45, 95%-CI(4.5, 42.76)], with a regression coefficient of −0.26. The model explained 37.2% (Nagelkerke R ) of the variance in task choice and correctly classified 76.7% of cases. Goal-failure was associated with a decreased likelihood of choosing the more difficult task. In the goal- attainment condition, 15 participants (36.6%) chose the medium difficult task and 26 participants (63.4%) chose the highly difficult task. In the goal-failure condition, 40 participants (88.9%) chose the medium difficult task and only five participants (11.1%) chose the highly difficult task. Effect of goal-failure on motivation (task choice) (Study 2) Hence, Hypothesis 3 was supported. The results are depicted in Figure  3C. FIGURE 3 | Effects of goal-failure on affect (A), self-esteem (B), and In sum, the results of Study 2 replicate and extend the motivation task choice (C) in Study 2. findings of our previous study. Specifically, we  found support for the harmful effect of goal-failure on ae ff ct and self-esteem. research on failure with high and specific goals that are As expected, aer g ft oal-failure participants showed decreased the focus of goal-setting theory. Our research aimed at ae ff ct and self-esteem, while aer ft goal-attainment participants shedding light on this important topic by examining the showed the same or slightly higher levels of aeff ct and self- effects of failing a high and specific goal on affect, self- esteem. Furthermore, we  demonstrated that goal-failure ae ff cts esteem, and motivation; factors which may have crucial subsequent motivation in terms of task choice. Aer g ft oal- implications for organizations. failure, the majority of participants chose the easier task and We conducted two studies to test for the expected avoided the challenging task. detrimental effects of failure of a high and specific goal on affect, self-esteem, and motivation. Study 1 showed goal- failure of the assigned high and specific goal lead to a GENERAL DISCUSSION decrease in affect, self-esteem, and motivation. We replicated these effects in Study 2 and were able to show the behavioral Setting high and specific goals has long been recommended as one of the most effective motivational and leadership consequences of the decreased motivation through task choice. In sum, we  were able to show that the failure of tools. Yet, setting high performance goals naturally leads to a considerable group of individuals who will fail that a high and specific goal can trigger potentially harmful consequences for self-related factors and can hinder a person goal. Past research on goal-failure indicates that it can cause a variety of undesirable and potentially harmful effects, for from tackling new challenges. We  discuss theoretical and practical implications, limitations, and future directions of the individual as well as for organizations; however, to our knowledge, there is little to no research that combines all the findings in the following sections. Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 12 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure sensitize supervisors and employees for the potential Theoretical and Practical Implications undesirable effects when setting high and specific goals and Our findings are an important contribution to research on find ways to counteract them. goal-setting theory by combining basic assumptions of achievement goal theory with goal-setting theory. Goal-setting theory focuses on those who attain the high and specific goal and states a so-called “high performance cycle” in which Limitations and Future Research individuals are satisfied with their performance and enter an A first limitation of this research is that we  did not test the ever-increasing cycle of increased motivation and performance effects of goal-failure in an actual work-setting. Hence, we cannot (Locke and Latham, 1990, 2002). Even though cautionary be  sure about the external validity of the findings. However, remarks have always been made about potential pitfalls when Study 2 was conducted in the field, at several public places applying goal-setting (Locke and Latham, 2002), the high risk with a rather heterogeneous sample of mainly working adults. of failing that goal is widely overlooked. One theory that takes Study 2 also allowed a face-to-face setting, which increases the possibility of goal-failure into account is achievement goal psychological realism. Given the large body of converging theory. Achievement goal theory states that goals can be framed findings across experimental laboratory and field research on as performance goals or learning goals. According to achievement goal-setting, we  assume that the used experimental designs goal theory, performance goals set an external standard. should be  suited for our investigations. Still, our experimental Individuals who fail that standard perceive their skills as fixed, research should be  complemented by field studies in actual thus, failing implies that their abilities are insufficient ( Dweck work-settings, preferably by longitudinal studies that investigate and Leggett, 1988). Hence, failing of a performance goal poses long-term effects of goal-setting and goal-failure. a threat for the self. Individuals will perceive themselves as A second limitation of our research is that we  solely used incapable aer fa ft iling a performance goal, which can be damaging self-reports to measure the person’s ae ff ct and self-esteem. To for their self-image. The high and specific goals used in goal- generalize the found effects, other components of a person’s setting interventions are usually framed as performance goals, well-being should be  examined, for example an individual’s for example, to produce a certain amount of products, to sell physical well-being and somatic health. Research showed that a certain amount, or to enroll a certain number of customers. the fulfillment of one’s goals plays an important role when Combining the assumptions of both theories, one can conclude coping with stressful events (Emmons and Kaiser, 1996). If a that failure of a high and specific goal has the potential to person is repeatedly faced with obstacles blocking the attainment pose a threat for a person’s self. We  were able to confirm this of their goals, the person may be  particularly susceptible to notion and found that failing a high and specific goal indeed experiences of helplessness, which are associated with health harmed self-related factors. risks (Brunstein et  al., 1998). Future research is needed to Our results imply that when using goal-setting interventions examine the consequences of goal-failure for a person’s physical in organizations, potentially harmful long-term effects should and mental health. In addition, we  only measured participants’ be considered. Setting high and specic fi goals is a very commonly general ae ff ct rather than discrete emotions. It is possible that used motivational tool because organizations oen s ft olely focus discrete emotions, like anger, anxiety, or depression, provide on the immediate results, especially on performance. However, more information on the outcomes of the goal process than setting high and specific goals can have serious detrimental generalized aeff ct ( Plemmons and Weiss, 2013). We  suggest consequences. In recent years, several undesirable effects of that future research examines the role of discrete emotions high and specific goals have been discussed. For example, a for processes induced by goal-failure. number of studies have explored the effects of goal-setting on Another limitation of our research is that we  used a self- unethical behavior (e.g., lying and cheating). The assumption developed scale for measuring motivation in Study 1. er Th efore, is that individual’s attention focus is narrowed on attaining we have no information about the validity of our scale. However, the goal, so that moral standards are ignored (Schweitzer et  al., we  used this scale because the common validated motivation 2004; Ordóñez et al., 2009; Welsh and Ordóñez, 2014). Unethical scales usually measure a more general attitude towards work, behaviors may be  particularly likely when attaining the goal while we sought to measure motivational change toward certain is tied to monetary rewards (Jensen, 2003). Furthermore, some work tasks. In Study 2, we  included a behavioral measure of researchers argue that high and specific goals make destructive that motivational change by measuring task-choice, which is leadership more likely by increasing leaders’ stress to meet a common behavioral measure of work motivation (o Th mas deadlines (Bardes and Piccolo, 2010). and Ward, 1983; Nicholls, 1984). Thereby, we  were able to Our findings show that failure of a high and specific combine attitudinal and behavioral measures of motivation. goal can harm a person’s self and motivation. These We  suggest that these findings should be  complemented by a consequences have the potential to harm not only the field study with an actual work task. employee but also the organization’s results in the long-run. An additional limitation is that we  were not able to examine Our results also implicate that failure of a high and specific long-term effects of failure of high and specific goals. In goal can have immediate behavioral consequences and can organizations, individuals are confronted with new goals discourage employees from engaging in new challenges; constantly, even if they were not able to attain previous goals. something employees face daily in their everyday life. Consecutive failure of high and specific goals might induce a We  recommend that organizations should find ways to downward spiral of harmful consequences which, in the Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 13 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure long-run, damage the organizational outcomes, for example, consequences for not performing it, increased their perceived reduced OCB, increased absenteeism, and disengagement from self-regulatory success. Furthermore, setting goals for the challenging tasks and burnout (Seo and Ilies, 2009; Ybema activity and emotion regulation also increased self-control et  al., 2010; Shi et  al., 2013; Welsh et  al., 2020). There are few (Hennecke et  al., 2019). Hence, when failure experiences studies which have investigated the effects of setting high and harm an employee’s motivation and well-being, self-regulatory specific goals consecutively ( Welsh and Ordóñez, 2014; Keith, strategies may be used to restore those resources for subsequent 2018). For example, it was found that consecutive goal-setting tasks. Especially evocation of negative affect can increase can have detrimental effects on an individual’s goal-commitment and prolong rumination after failure experiences, which in and perceived fairness (Keith, 2018). In another study, consecutive turn can increase negative affect (Jones et  al., 2013). There performance goals increased unethical behavior by depleting are various strategies that can be used to prevent detrimental self-regulatory resources (Welsh and Ordóñez, 2014). Future effects on one’s affect. For example, an employee might use research should investigate the long-term consequences of failure attentional deployment or focus on other aspects. After the of a high and specific goal or consecutive failure. affective state is already affected, an employee might regulate Furthermore, it has to be  noted that our sample in Study their emotions by reappraisal (Boss and Sims Jr., 2008). 1 consisted mainly of female participants (93.5%). Past research Thus, we  recommend the use of self-regulatory and emotion found that in an experiment, after failure, male participants regulation strategies to replenish those resources, stay chose more difficult goals in a subsequent task than did persistent, and counteract effects after goal-failure. female participants (Levy and Baumgardner, 1991). Additionally, A final strategy for counteracting undesirable effects aer g ft oal- it was found that individuals higher in self-esteem chose failure might be  to positively aeff ct goal striving as well as goal more difficult goals. We  were able to control for confounding revision. It has been shown that high self-efficacy and confidence effects of base self-esteem and self-efficacy and both variables in the own abilities can facilitate successful goal striving (Wolf did not affect our results, which is consistent with other et  al., 2018). Furthermore, research found that individuals use research on self-esteem and goal-choice (Hollenbeck and Brief, performance-goal discrepancies to make their goal revision decisions. 1987). We  cannot be  certain that our results also apply to It was found that large discrepancies, especially over a longer male individuals; however, gender did not affect our results period of time, led to a downward revision of their goal (Donovan in Study 2 and past research suggests that unambiguous and Williams, 2003). Accordingly, experiences of success lead to feedback to insure clear failure or success on a task eliminates an upward revision of their goal. Considering the previously gender differences in future success expectancies ( Feather and mentioned methods to enable mastery and to create experiences Simon, 1973; McMahon, 1973; Lenney, 1977). Nevertheless, of success, we  assume that these methods are also suitable to future research should replicate our findings with male positively ae ff ct goal striving and goal revision and in turn have individuals to rule out possible gender differences. the potential to counteract detrimental effects aer g ft oal-failure. Lastly, future research should explore methods to counteract the found undesirable effects. Drawing from achievement goal theory, one possible method may be  goal-framing. While CONCLUSION performance goals emphasize the attainment of an externally-set standard, learning goals emphasize increasing the own Our research contributes to research and practice of goal-setting by explicitly integrating research on failure with the basic competence or mastering something new. When individuals fail a learning goal, they do not blame the failure on themselves, recommendation of goal-setting theory and achievement goal theory. We  were able to elucidate a highly possible downside since they view their skills as changeable (Dweck and Leggett, 1988; Welsh et  al., 2019). Thus, failure of a high and specific of goal-setting interventions by showing that the failure of a high and specific goal can damage self-related factors like ae ff ct, learning goal should not pose a threat for a person’s self and framing the goal as a learning goal may counteract the found self-esteem, and motivation and can also have subsequent behavioral consequences. These short-term consequences may undesirable effects. A second possible method to counteract these undesirable lead to serious long-term consequences, especially when goals are failed consecutively and the person has no resources to effects is to let employees experience success. Past research found that success on previous tasks may breed success on subsequent counteract the effects. For that reason, employers need to be sensitized for the high possibility of failing a high and specific tasks (Fan et  al., 2020). When employees attain easy goals on previous tasks, goal-commitment increases through enactive goal when using goal-setting as a motivational and leadership tool and need to take actions to counteract these undesirable mastery. As a result, employees increase their personally-set goals and are able to self-motivate for upcoming tasks. Hence, effects, for example with self-regulatory or emotion regulation strategies or by experiences of success. organizations could increase employee’s confidence and enable mastery by setting easy goals first, to create experiences of success. A third possible method for counteracting the undesirable effects is to use self-regulatory strategies to increase one’s DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT self-control to engage in aversive tasks. Research on the topic found that individuals who focused on the positive The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will consequences of an aversive activity or the negative be made available by the authors, without undue reservation. Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 14 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure of the manuscript in this form. All authors contributed to the ETHICS STATEMENT article and approved the submitted version. Study 1 involving human participants was reviewed and approved by the Ethics committee of the Technical University of Darmstadt, FUNDING Darmstadt, Germany. Study 2 followed the same guidelines. e p Th articipants provided their written informed consent to i Th s research was supported by grant from the German Research participate in the studies. Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, grant no. KE 1377/5–1). AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS JH will have first authorship of this manuscript, and will also be  serving as the corresponding author. The author listed in We thank Anabela Dubravac, Paula Lanz and Lea Strutt for the byline has agreed to the byline order and to the submission data collection. Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., and Buchner, A. (2007). G*power 3: A REFERENCES flexible statistical power analysisprogram for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav. Res. Methods 39, 175–191. doi: 10.3758/BF03193146 Bardes, M., and Piccolo, R. F. (2010). “Goal setting as an antecedent of destructive Feather, N. T., and Simon, J. G. (1973). Fear of success and causal attribution for outcome. J. Pers. 41, 525–542. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1971.tb00060.x leader behaviors” in When Leadership Goes Wrong: Destructive Leadership, Mistakes, and Ethical Failures. eds. B. Schyns and T. Hansbrough (Charlotte, Galinsky, A. D., Mussweiler, T., and Medvec, V. H. (2002). Disconnecting outcomes and evaluations: the role of negotiator focus. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 83, 1131– NC: IAP Information Age Publishing), 3–22. Beierlein, C., Kovaleva, A., Kemper, C. J., and Rammstedt, B. (2012). Ein Messinstrument 1140. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.83.5.1131 Gardner, D. G., and Pierce, J. L. (2001). Self-esteem and self-efficacy within the zur Erfassung subjektiver Kompetenzerwartung - Allgemeine Selbstwirksamkeit Kurzskal (ASKU). GESIS  - Leibniz-Institut für Sozialwissenschaen. ft organizational context: a replication. J. Manage. Sys 13, 31–48. doi: 10.1177/1059601198231004 Bongers, K. C. A., Dijksterhuis, A., and Spears, R. (2010). On the role of consciousness in goal pursuit. Soc. Cogn. 28, 262–272. doi: 10.1521/soco.2010. 28.2.262 Grieve, F. G., Whelan, J. P., Kottke, R., and Meyers, A. W. (1994). Manipulating adults' achievement goals in a sport task: effects on cognitive, aeff ctive and Bono, J. E., and Judge, T. A. (2003). Core self-evaluations: a review of the trait and its role in job satisfaction and job performance. Eur. J. Personal. 17, behavorial variables. J. Sport Behav. 17, 227–245. Halbesleben, J. R. B., and Wheeler, A. R. (2011). I owe you  one: coworker 5–18. doi: 10.1002/per.481 Boss, A. D., and Sims, H. P., Jr. (2008). Everyone fails! using emotion regulation reciprocity as a moderator of the day-level exhaustion–performance relationship. J. Organ. Behav. 32, 608–626. doi: 10.1002/job.748 and self-leadership for recovery. J. Manag. Psychol. 23, 135–150. doi: 10.1108/02683940810850781 Healy, L. C., Ntoumanis, N., Stewart, B. D., and Duda, J. L. (2015). Predicting subsequent task performance from goal motivation and goal failure. Front. Brunstein, J. C., Schultheiss, O. C., and Grässmann, R. (1998). Personal goals and emotional well-being: the moderating role of motive dispositions. J. Pers. Psychol. 6:926. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00926 Heatherton, T. F., and Polivy, J. (1991). Development and validation of a scale Soc. Psychol. 75, 494–508. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.75.2.494 Carver, C. S., and Scheier, M. F. (1990). Origins and functions of positive and for measuring state self-esteem. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 60, 895–910. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.60.6.895 negative aeff ct: a control-process view. Psychol. Rev. 97, 19–35. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.97.1.19 Henkel, J. M., and Hinsz, V. B. (2004). Success and failure in goal attainment as a mood induction procedure. Soc. Behav. Personal. Int. J. 32, 715–722. doi: Cervone, D., Jiwani, N., and Wood, R. M. (1991). Goal setting and the differential inu fl ence of self-regulatory processes on complex decision-making performance. 10.2224/sbp.2004.32.8.715 Hennecke, M., Czikmantori, T., and Brandstätter, V. (2019). Doing despite disliking: J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 61, 257–266. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.61.2.257 Cianci, A. M., Klein, H. J., and Seijts, G. H. (2010). The effect of negative self-regulatory strategies in everyday aversive activities. Eur. J. Personal. 33, 104–128. doi: 10.1002/per.2182 feedback on tension and subsequent performance: the main and interactive effects of goal content and conscientiousness. J. Appl. Psychol. 95, 618–630. Hollenbeck, J. R., and Brief, A. P. (1987). The effects of individual differences and goal origin on goal setting and performance. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. doi: 10.1037/a0019130 Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well-being: the science of happiness and a proposal Process. 40, 392–414. doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(87)90023-9 Hollenbeck, J., Williams, C., and Klein, H. (1989). An empirical examination of for a national index. Am. Psychol. 55, 34–43. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.34 Donovan, J. J., and Williams, K. J. (2003). Missing the mark: effects of theantecedents of commitment to difficult goals. J. Appl. Psychol. 74, 18–23. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.74.1.18 time and causal attributions on goal revision in response to goal- performance discrepancies. J. Appl. Psychol. 88, 379–390. doi: Houser-Marko, L., and Sheldon, K. M. (2008). Eyes on the prize or nose to the grindstone? The effects of level of goal evaluation on mood and 10.1037/0021-9010.88.3.379 Dweck, C. S., and Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation motivation. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 34, 1556–1569. doi: 10.1177/0146167208322618 and personality. Psychol. Rev. 95, 256–273. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.256 Earley, P. C., Connelly, R., and Ekegren, G. (1989). Goals, strategy development Jensen, M. C. (2003). Paying people to lie: the truth about the budgeting process. Eur. Financ. Manag. 9, 379–406. doi: 10.1111/1468-036X.00226 and task performance: some comments on the efficacy of goal setting. J. Appl. Psychol. 74, 24–33. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.74.1.24 Jones, N. P., Papadakis, A. A., Orr, C. A., and Strauman, T. J. (2013). Cognitive processes in response to goal failure: a study of ruminative thought and its Emmons, R. A., and Kaiser, H. A. (1996). “Goal orientation and emotional well-being: linking goals and ae ff ct through the self ” in Striving and Feeling: ae ff ctive consequences. J. Soc. Clin. Psychol. 32, 482–503. doi: 10.1521/jscp.2013.32.5.482 Judge, T. A., Erez, A., and Bono, J. E. (1998). The power of being positive: the Interactions among Goals, Aeff ct, and Self-Regulation . eds. L. L. Martin and A. lesser (Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum), 79–98. relation between positive self-concept and job performance. Hum. Perform. 11, 167–188. doi: 10.1207/s15327043hup1102&3_4 Fan, J., Gómez-Miñambres, J., and Smithers, S. (2020). Make it too difficult and I’ll give-up; let me succeed and I’ll excel: the interaction between assigned Judge, T. A., and Kammeyer-Mueller, J. D. (2004). “Core self-evaluations, aspirations, success, and persistence: an attributional model” in Attribution Theory in the and personal goals. Manag. Decis. Econ. 41, 964–975. doi: 10.1002/mde.3151 Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 15 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure Organizational Sciences: Theoretical and Empirical Contributions . ed. M. J. Nicholls, J. G. (1984). Achievement motivation: conceptions of ability, subjective Martinko (Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing), 111–132. experience, task choice, and performance. Psychol. Rev. 91, 328–346. doi: Judge, T. A., and Kammeyer-Mueller, J. D. (2008). “Aeff ct, satisfaction, and 10.1037/0033-295X.91.3.328 performance” in Research Companion to Emotion in Organizations. eds. N. Nichols, A. L., Whelan, J. P., and Meyers, A. W. (1991). The effects of children's M. Ashkanasy and C. L. Cooper (Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar), 136–151. goal structures and performance feedback on mood, task choice, and task Judge, T. A., Locke, E. A., and Durham, C. C. (1997). The dispositional causes persistence. Behav. Ther. 22, 491–503. doi: 10.1016/S0005-7894(05)80341-7 of job satisfaction: a core evaluations approach. Res. Organ. Behav. 19, 151– Oliver, R. L., Balakrishnan, P. V., and Barry, B. (1994). Outcome satisfaction in 188. doi: 10.5465/ambpp.2006.27169037 negotiation: a test of expectancy disconfirmation. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Kanfer, R., Frese, M., and Johnson, R. E. (2017). Motivation related to work: Process. 60, 252–275. doi: 10.1006/obhd.1994.1083 a century of progress. J. Appl. Psychol. 102, 338–355. doi: 10.1037/apl0000133 Ordóñez, L. D., Schweitzer, M. E., Galinsky, A. D., and Bazerman, M. H. (2009). Keith, N. (2018). Undesirable effects of goal setting on perceived fairness, commitment, Goals gone wild: the systematic side effects of over-prescribing goal setting. and unethical behavior. Zeitschrift für Arbeits-und Organisationspsychologie 62, Acad. Manag. Perspect. 23, 6–16. doi: 10.5465/amp.2009.37007999 1–11. doi: 10.1026/0932-4089/a000267 Plemmons, S. A., and Weiss, H. M. (2013). “Goals and ae ff ct” in New Developments Kim, A., and Clifford, M. M. (1988). Goal source, goal difficulty, and individual in Goal Setting and Task Performance. eds. E. A. Locke and G. P. Latham difference variables as predictors of responses to failure. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. (New York, NY; Sussex, UK: Routledge/Taylor and Francis Group), 117–132. 58, 28–43. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8279.1988.tb00876.x Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the Adolescent Self-Image. Princeton, NJ: Knight, D., Durham, C. C., and Locke, E. A. (2001). The relationship of team Princeton University Press. goals, incentives, and efficacy to strategic risk, tactical implementation, and Satow, L. (2017). Allgemeine Intelligenz-Test (AIT): Test-und Skalendokumentation. performance. Acad. Manag. J. 44, 326–338. doi: 10.5465/3069459 [General Intelligence Test (AIT): Test and Scale Documentation. Available at: Latham, G. P., and Locke, E. A. (1991). Self-regulation through goal setting. http://www.drsatow.de (Accessed November, 2018). Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 50, 212–247. doi: Schweitzer, M. E., Ordóñez, L., and Douma, B. (2004). Goal setting as a motivator 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90021-K of unethical behavior. Acad. Manag. J. 47, 422–432. doi: 10.2307/20159591 Latham, G. P., and Seijts, G. H. (1999). The effects of proximal and distal Scott, B. A., and Barnes, C. M. (2011). A multilevel field investigation of emotional goals on performance on a moderately complex task. J. Organ. Behav. labor, ae ff ct, work withdrawal, and gender. Acadamy. Manage. J. 54, 116–136. 20, 421–429. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199907)20:4<421::AID- doi: 10.5465/amj.2011.59215086 JOB896>3.0.CO;2-# Seo, M., and Ilies, R. (2009). The role of self-efficacy, goal, and ae ff ct in dynamic Lazarus, R. S. (1982). Thoughts on the relations between emotion and cognition. motivational self-regulation. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 109, 120–133. Am. Psychol. 37, 1019–1024. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.37.9.1019 doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.03.001 Lee, J. (2003). An analysis of organization-based self-esteem as a mediator of Shi, Y., Sears, L. E., Coberley, C. R., and Pope, J. E. (2013). The association the relationship between its antecedents and consequences. Korean. Personnel. between modifiable well-being risks and productivity: a longitudinal study Administration. J. 27, 25–50. doi: 10.1080/0958519032000106207 in pooled employer sample. J. Occup. Environ. Med. 55, 353–364. doi: 10.1097/ Lenney, E. (1977). Women's self-confidence in achievement settings. Psychol. Bull. JOM.0b013e3182851923 84, 1–13. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.84.1.1 Sonnentag, S. (2015). Dynamics of well-being. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psych. Organ. Levy, P. E., and Baumgardner, A. H. (1991). Effects of self-esteem and gender Behav. 2, 261–293. doi: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032414-111347 on goal choice. J. Organ. Behav. 12, 529–541. doi: 10.1002/job.4030120606 Stets, J. E., and Burke, P. J. (2000). Identity theory and social identity theory. Locke, E. A., Chah, D.-O., Harrison, S., and Lustgarten, N. (1989). Separating Soc. Psychol. Q. 63, 224–237. doi: 10.2307/2695870 the effects of goal specificity from goal level. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Steyer, R., Schwenkmezger, P., Notz, P., and Eid, M. (1997). Der Mehrdimensionale Process. 43, 270–287. doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(89)90053-8 Benfi dlichkeitsfragebogen. Handanweisung [The Multidimensional Mood Locke, E. A., and Latham, G. P. (1990). A Theory of Goal Setting and Task Questionnaire (MDMQ)]. Hogrefe. Performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Stryker, S., and Burke, P. J. (2000). The past, present, and future of an identity Locke, E. A., and Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of theory. Soc. Psychol. Q. 63, 284–297. doi: 10.2307/2695840 goal setting and task motivation: a 35-year odyssey. Am. Psychol. 57, 705–717. TCU Institute of Behavioral Research. (2010). TCU Adolescent Client Evaluation doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.57.9.705 of Self and Treatment (CEST) Forms. Abgerufen am  30. Juni 2019 von TCU. Locke, E. A., and Latham, G. P. (2006). New directions in goal-setting theory. Available at: https://ibr.tcu.edu/forms/adolescent-thinking-forms/ Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 15, 265–268. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8721.2006.00449.x oTh mas, E. A. C., and Ward, W. E. (1983). e Th influence of own and other Locke, E. A., Shaw, K. N., Saari, L. M., and Latham, G. P. (1981). Goal setting outcome on satisfaction and choice of task difficulty. Organ. Behav. Hum. and task performance: 1969–1980. Psychol. Bull. 90, 125–152. doi: Perform. 32, 399–416. doi: 10.1016/0030-5073(83)90157-5 10.1037/0033-2909.90.1.125 o Th mpson, L. (1995). The impact of minimum goals and aspirations on judgments Martin, L. L., Tesser, A., and McIntosh, W. D. (1993). “Wanting but not having: of successin negotiations. Group Decis. Negot. 4, 513–524. doi: 10.1007/ the effects of unattained goals on thoughts and feelings” in Century Psychology BF01409713 Series. Handbook of Mental Control. eds. D. M. Wegner and J. W. Pennebaker Van Dyne, L., and Pierce, J. L. (2004). Psychological ownership and feelings of (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.), 552–572. possession: three field studies predicting employee attitudes and organizational Mazar, N., Amir, O., and Ariely, D. (2008). The dishonesty of honest individuals: citizenship behavior. J. Organ. Behav. 25, 439–459. doi: 10.1002/job.249 a theory of self-concept maintenance. J. Mark. Res. 45, 633–644. doi: 10.1509/ Vohs, K. D., Park, J. K., and Schmeichel, B. J. (2013). Self-affirmation can jmkr.45.6.633 enable goal disengagement. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 104, 14–27. doi: 10.1037/ McMahon, I. D. (1973). Relationships between causal attributions and expectancy a0030478 of success. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 28, 108–114. doi: 10.1037/h0035474 Welsh, D. T., Baer, M. D., and Sessions, H. (2020). Hot pursuit: the aeff ctive Mitchell, T. R., and Silver, W. S. (1990). Individual and group goals when workers consequences of organization-set versus self-set goals for emotional exhaustion are interdependent: effects on task strategies and performance. J. Appl. Psychol. and citizenship behavior. J. Appl. Psychol. 105, 166–185. doi: 10.1037/apl0000429 75, 185–193. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.75.2.185 Welsh, D., Bush, J., Thiel, C., and Bonner, J. (2019). Reconceptualizing goal Moberly, N. J., and Watkins, E. R. (2010). Negative aeff ct and ruminative self- settings’ dark side: the ethical consequences of learning versus outcome focus during everyday goal pursuit. Cognit. Emot. 24, 729–739. doi: goals. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 150, 14–27. doi: 10.1016/j. 10.1080/02699930802696849 obhdp.2018.11.001 Mood, C. (2010). Logistic regression: why we  cannot do what we  think we  can Welsh, D. T., and Ordóñez, L. D. (2014). The dark side of consecutive do, and what we  can do about it. Eur. Sociol. Rev. 26, 67–82. doi: 10.1093/ high performance goals: linking goal setting, depletion, and unethical esr/jcp006 behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 123, 79–89. doi: 10.1016/j. Neale, M. A., and Bazerman, M. H. (1985). The effect of externally set goals obhdp.  2013.07.006 on reaching integrative agreements in competitive markets. J. Occup. Behav. Wendt, H., Bos, W., Goy, M., and Jusufi, D. (eds.) (2017). “TIMSS 2015” 6, 19–32. doi: 10.1002/job.4030060103 in Skalenhandbuch zur Dokumentation der Erhebungsinstrumente und Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 16 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure Arbeit mit den Datensätzen (Münster, DE; New York, NY: Waxmann Conflict of Interest: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the Verlag GmbH). absence of any commercial or n fi ancial relationships that could be  construed as Wilhelm, P., and Schoebi, D. (2007). Assessing mood in daily life: structural a potential conflict of interest. validity, sensitivity to change, and reliability of a short-scale to measure three basic dimensions of mood. Eur. J. Psychol. Assess. 23, 258–267. doi: Publisher’s Note: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors 10.1027/1015-5759.23.4.258 and do not necessarily represent those of their ali ffi ated organizations, or those Wolf, B. M., Herrmann, M., and Brandstätter, V. (2018). Self-efficacy vs. action of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated orientation: comparing and contrasting two determinants of goal setting and in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed goal striving. J. Res. Pers. 73, 35–45. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2017.11.001 or endorsed by the publisher. Ybema, J. F., Smulders, P. G. W., and Bongers, P. M. (2010). Antecedents and consequences of employee absenteeism: a longitudinal perspective on the role Copyright © 2021 Höpfner and Keith. This is an open-access article distributed of job satisfaction and burnout. Eur. J. Work Organ. Psy. 19, 102–124. doi: under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, 10.1080/13594320902793691 distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original Yeo, G., and Neal, A. (2004). A multilevel analysis of the relationship between author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication effort and performance: effects of ability, conscientiousness and goal orientation. in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, J. Appl. Psychol. 89, 231–247. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.89.2.231 distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 17 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Frontiers in Psychology Unpaywall

Goal Missed, Self Hit: Goal-Setting, Goal-Failure, and Their Affective, Motivational, and Behavioral Consequences

Höpfner, Jessica; Keith, Nina
Frontiers in Psychology – Sep 21, 2021
Download PDF
17 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/unpaywall/goal-missed-self-hit-goal-setting-goal-failure-and-their-affective-vuRMzLv3wi

References (171)

Publisher
Unpaywall
ISSN
1664-1078
DOI
10.3389/fpsyg.2021.704790
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

ORIGINAL RESEARCH published: 21 September 2021 doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.704790 Goal Missed, Self Hit: Goal-Setting, Goal-Failure, and Their Affective, Motivational, and Behavioral Consequences Jessica Höpfner * and Nina Keith Department of Psychology, Technical University of Darmstadt, Darmstadt, Germany Setting high and specic fi goals is one of the best-established management tools to increase performance and motivation. However, in recent years, potential downsides of goal-setting are being discussed. One possible downside is the high risk of failing the goal. In an approach to integrate research on the consequences of goal-failure and the basic assumptions of goal-setting theory, we investigated whether failure of a high and specific goal has detrimental effects on a person’s affect, self-esteem, and motivation. In Experiment 1, 185 participants received fictitious feedback about attaining or failing an assigned high and specific goal. In Experiment 2 with 86 participants, we manipulated goal-failure through task-difficulty and Edited by: Parul Rishi, we  included task choice as a behavioral measure of motivation. In both experiments, Indian Institute of Forest Management, participants who failed the high and specific goal showed a decrease in affect, self-esteem, India and motivation compared to participants who attained that goal. Results indicate that failing Reviewed by: Arianna Costantini, a high and specific goal can be damaging for self-related factors that may be crucial for University of Verona, Italy organizational long-term outcomes. We advise organizations to consider potential undesirable Andrea P. Malizia, effects when using goal-setting interventions. IMT School for Advanced Studies Lucca, Italy Keywords: goal-setting theory, goal-failure, affect, self-esteem, motivation, task choice *Correspondence: Jessica Höpfner [email protected] INTRODUCTION Specialty section: Over 1,000 studies have consistently shown that setting high and specific goals is linked to This article was submitted to Organizational Psychology, increased task performance, persistence, and motivation, compared to vague or easy goals (Locke a section of the journal and Latham, 2002, 2006). Given this empirical evidence, setting high (which means a high Frontiers in Psychology difficulty that only a certain percentage of individuals can reach) and specific (which means Received: 03 May 2021 tangible information on what needs to be attained) goals has become a highly recommended Accepted: 19 August 2021 motivational and leadership tool in organizations. However, in recent years, more and more Published: 21 September 2021 studies raised concerns about possible undesirable effects of goal-setting. For example, goals Citation: can narrow the attention focus on goal-related actions, so that other important issues are Höpfner J and Keith N (2021) Goal missed (Ordóñez et  al., 2009), goals may increase risk-taking and unethical behavior (Neale Missed, Self Hit: Goal-Setting, Goal- and Bazerman, 1985; Knight et  al., 2001; Schweitzer et  al., 2004), inhibit learning (Earley et  al., Failure, and Their Affective, 1989; Cervone et al., 1991), or create an overly competitive environment (Mitchell and Silver, 1990). Motivational, and Behavioral e c Th urrent research seeks to shed light on another possible downside of setting high and Consequences. specific goals: the possibility of goal-failure and the associated negative consequences. Locke and Front. Psychol. 12:704790. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.704790 Latham (1990, p.  349) advocated that (at least in laboratory settings) a high and specific goal Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 1 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure “that only 10% of the subjects can reach” should be  set to Some evidence was found that high and specific goals lead to achieve maximum individual performance (see, e.g., Locke et al., a decrease in ae ff ct, because individuals evaluate their performance 1989; Latham and Locke, 1991; Latham and Seijts, 1999; Welsh relatively to a reference point (Oliver et  al., 1994; om Th pson, and Ordóñez, 2014; Welsh et  al., 2019). However, this implies 1995; Galinsky et al., 2002). Even individuals who had objectively that only 10% of individuals are able to attain the high and good outcomes felt worse when they had a high and specific specific goal and 90% will fail the goal. What happens to those goal as their reference point (o Th mpson, 1995 ; Galinsky et  al., who fail the high and specific goal? Several theories have discussed 2002). What happens when individuals fall under their reference possible processes induced by goal-failure in general (Dweck point? Surprisingly, there is a lack of research on the consequences and Leggett, 1988; Carver and Scheier, 1990; Judge and Kammeyer- of failing a high and specific goal. It is important to examine Mueller, 2004), but there is a dearth of empirical research on the consequences of goal-failure of a high and specific goal the consequences of failure of a high and specific goal. since they are the key element of goal-setting interventions in We argue that failing a high and specific goal induces several organizations. We  propose that failing the high and specific processes that can harm a person’s aeff ct, self-esteem, and goal may induce detrimental processes for several intrapersonal motivation. Reducing such self-related factors can have serious and self-related factors. We  chose intrapersonal factors that have consequences for the person as well as the organizations, for been consistently demonstrated to be  strongly connected with example reduced extrarole performance (Judge and Kammeyer- organizational outcomes and hence impairing those has the Mueller, 2008), reduced organizational citizenship behavior (Welsh potential to harm the employee and the organization in the et al., 2020), or increased absenteeism (Shi et al., 2013). Decreased long-run. motivation may also lead to disengagement from challenging First, we  propose that goal-failure of a high and specific goal tasks (Seo and Ilies, 2009) or choosing tasks with low difficulty can damage a person’s ae ff ct. A person’s ae ff ct, which is a common (Nichols et  al., 1991). indicator for well-being (Sonnentag, 2015), refers to the positive While there is some evidence on the effects of goal-failure or negative personal reactions to experiences (Lazarus, 1982). on aeff ct (e.g., Martin et  al., 1993; Grieve et  al., 1994), to our Aeff ct is oen u ft sed as an umbrella term for mood, emotions, knowledge there are little to no studies that integrate research and evaluations. One can experience pleasant emotions or of failure with the basic assumptions of goal-setting theory. unpleasant ones (Diener, 2000). Several theories support the Hence, the present research seeks to close this research gap, notion that goal-failure can be  harmful for a person’s aeff ct. first, by replicating known effects of goal-failure on ae ff ct while First, self-regulation theory suggests that behavior is meta- using a high and specific goal and, second, by investigating the monitored by the individual and people seek to reduce discrepancy effects on additional self-related factors such as self-esteem and between their present actions and a reference value. If their motivation that are also crucial for organizational outcomes. In progress toward that reference value is sub-standard, they the next sections, we  will outline the underlying theories and experience negative aeff ct ( Carver and Scheier, 1990; Moberly potential processes that may lead to negative consequences aer ft and Watkins, 2010). Second, achievement goal theory suggests goal-failure of a high and specific goal. We  will describe in that individuals with a focus on an externally-set standard view detail the expected effects of goal-failure for ae ff ct, self-esteem, their skillset as fixed and unchangeable ( Dweck and Leggett, and motivation. We  will then describe two experimental studies 1988). Failing the standard for them then implies that their we  conducted to examine those effects. skills are insufficient and they view the failure as a negative judgement of their competence. u Th s, when individuals fail a high and specific goal, they experience a discrepancy between their skills and the goal and will experience negative aeff ct. THEORY AND HYPOTHESES Negative aeff ct can lead to severe consequences like reduced Setting high and specific goals is the basic recommendation by performance (Seo and Ilies, 2009), exhaustion (Halbesleben and goal-setting theory to increase performance (Locke and Latham, Wheeler, 2011), counterproductive work behavior (Scott and 1990, 2002, 2006); however, failing these goals may induce Barnes, 2011), and in the long-run even to burnout, which is processes that are damaging for one’s self. Goals can be described related to increased absenteeism (Ybema et  al., 2010). as objects of a person’s ambition that direct attention to goal- A number of studies have examined the consequences of relevant activities, mobilize effort, and motivate to develop task- goal-failure for a person’s aeff ct. However, these studies do not relevant strategies for goal-attainment (Locke et  al., 1981). In directly relate to goal-setting theory. For example, in one over 35 years of research, Locke and Latham (2002) developed experiment, goal level (primary vs. subgoals) and feedback of goal-setting theory to influence, predict, and explain performance success or failure were manipulated. Participants who received on organizational tasks through goals. eir Th core findings were a primary goal and feedback of goal-failure showed highest that high and specific goals increased performance, persistence, negative ae ff ct and decreased expectancy for future performance and motivation compared to vague or so-called “do-your-best” (Houser-Marko and Sheldon, 2008). In another study, participants goals (Locke and Latham, 1990). reported their negative ae ff ct; their ruminative self-focus, as well However, most past research focused on these core findings as their current goal and the importance of that goal eight and increasing performance as the main outcome, while ignoring times daily over 7 days (Moberly and Watkins, 2010). It was potential detrimental effects on intrapersonal and self-related found that low goal-success and high goal-importance were factors, especially when the high and specific goal is failed. associated with high negative ae ff ct. Rumination aer exp ft eriences Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 2 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure of failure was also examined in another investigation, in which failure condition showed reduced self-esteem aer ft the task. failure to attain prevention or promotion goals was manipulated However, in both studies, there was no assigned high and specific by letting participants recall past failure experiences (Jones et  al., goal. Both studies examined perceived failure on self-esteem 2013). It was found that failure experiences lead to increased and did not measure whether participants had a goal prior to rumination and intensified negative ae ff ct, especially for promotion the exam or the task. In another series of experiments, achievement goal failures. In a summary on goals and ae ff ct, Plemmons and goals were unconsciously activated with several methods (Bongers Weiss (2013) gathered previous findings on the effects of goal- et  al., 2010). Participants then performed different tasks that failure on subsequent ae ff ct. They concluded that goal-attainment were either easy or difficult to solve. Participants primed with has positive effects on aeff ct, whereas goal-failure has negative achievement goals reported lower levels of self-esteem aer t ft he effects on ae ff ct (see Plemmons and Weiss, 2013, pp.  121). None difficult tasks throughout all experiments. However, there were of these studies involved high and specific goals. We  found two no assigned high and specific goals and success and failure exceptions where high goals according to goal-setting theory were not manipulated, but depended on task difficulty condition, were used. In one study, goal-success and goal-failure were used meaning that all participants in the difficult task condition were as mood-inducing method (Henkel and Hinsz, 2004). In another classified as having failed the goal, even though the goal to investigation, goal-difficulty, goal source, and failure tolerance achieve was only unconscious and neither high nor specific. were manipulated in a scenario experiment in which participants Considering these previous findings, it becomes obvious that were confronted with a character who fails his fictitious exam there are some indications that failure and more specifically (Kim and Clifford, 1988 ). It was found that for very difficult goal-failure may have detrimental effects for a person’s self- goals that were assigned by someone else, feelings aer fa ft ilure esteem. The present research seeks to examine these effects when tended to be  more negative. However, the authors did not find using high and specific goals. We  propose that: unambiguous support for the relationship between goal-difficulty and responses to goal-failure, and the goal only was presented H2: Individuals who fail their high and specic fi goal show as an item on the scenario booklet; participants did not have lower self-esteem than individuals who attain their high to complete the goal themselves. and specific goal. Hence, there is some empirical evidence that goal-failure may have detrimental effects for an individual’s ae ff ct; however, research Third, we  propose that goal-failure of a high and specific is needed to test this effect for high and specific goals that are goal can reduce motivation for future tasks. Work-related the basic recommendation of goal-setting theory. We propose that: motivation is one of the most common topics in organizational psychology and is described as “an umbrella term meant to H1: Individuals who fail their high and specific goal will capture the dense network of concepts and their interrelations show a more negative ae ff ct than individuals who attain that underlie observable changes in the initiations, direction, their high and specific goal. intensity, and persistence of voluntary action” (Kanfer et  al., 2017, p.  339). Hence, we  base our conceptualization of work Second, we  propose that goal-failure of a high and specific motivation on the voluntarily change of intensity and persistence goal can damage a person’s self-esteem. A person’s self-esteem of an action toward any work-related activity. Work motivation reflects their evaluation of themselves and their abilities ( Rosenberg, ae ff cts how individuals develop their skills, the careers that they 1965). Identity theory describes self-esteem as an outcome of pursue, how they allocate their resources, and also aeff cts how the ratio between successes and goals (Stets and Burke, 2000; activities during work are tackled (Kanfer et  al., 2017). Setting Stryker and Burke, 2000), meaning the degree to which individuals high and specific goals is one of the best-known methods to are able to match their identity goal with their actual performance. increase work motivation. If the goal is failed, however, we propose If their identity goal matches with their actual performance, that several other processes can be  activated that are detrimental self-verification is successful. Successful self-verification leads to to motivation. higher self-esteem. In contrast, disruption of the self-verification According to achievement goal theory, individuals with process, for example goal-failure, can have negative consequences performance goals avoid challenges when confronted with for a person’s self-esteem. Reduced self-esteem can have severe obstacles, independently of their initial ability (Dweck and Leggett, long-term consequences, for the individual as well as for the 1988). While trying to attain a performance goal, individuals organization, for example increased turnover cognitions/intentions feel that their abilities are measured. When goal-failure occurs, (Gardner and Pierce, 2001), decreased citizenship behavior (Lee, individuals perceive their abilities as inadequate and themselves 2003), and lower organizational commitment (Van Dyne and as incompetent (Dweck and Leggett, 1988). Individuals who Pierce, 2004). Hence, it is crucial to examine the consequences view themselves as competent will react more positively to of goal-failure for self-esteem. responsibilities than individuals who see themselves as incompetent er Th e is only a small body of research on the consequences (Judge et  al., 1997). Accordingly, individuals who perceive of failure for a person’s self-esteem. In one study, it was found themselves as incompetent will react negatively to responsibilities that participants who received poor exam scores showed reduced and view themselves as less likely to succeed (Judge et  al., 1998). self-esteem (Heatherton and Polivy, 1991). The same was found es Th e individuals will react to failure with withdrawal of effort when failure was manipulated by assigning a puzzle task that and reduced persistence (Judge and Kammeyer-Mueller, 2004; was impossible to solve in the given time. Participants in the Yeo and Neal, 2004). Considering the described definition of Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 3 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure motivation as changes of intensity and persistence of voluntary STUDY 1 METHOD actions, we  conclude that goal-failure has the potential to reduce a person’s subsequent motivation. Design er Th e are few studies which have investigated the effects of Study 1 was an online-experiment with a one-factor between- goal-failure on subsequent motivation. Two studies manipulated subjects design. e b Th etween-subjects factor was feedback type goal type (learning vs. performance goals) and then used fictitious with three conditions: goal attained vs. goal failed vs. no feedback feedback of goal-failure to investigate the effects on subsequent (control condition). Participants all received the same high and motivation. In one study, students with a performance goal who specific goal in an intelligence test and aer ft ward a fictitious received feedback of goal-failure performed worse in a subsequent feedback whether they attained that goal or not (or no feedback task (Cianci et  al., 2010). In this study, subsequent performance at all in the control condition; the feedback is pictured in was used as an indicator for changes in motivation. In another Table 1). As dependent variables, we measured ae ff ct, self-esteem, research, subjects with a performance goal avoided more difficult and subsequent motivation. The same variables were assessed subsequent tasks aer g ft oal-failure ( Nichols et  al., 1991). In this before the task (baseline) and aer r ft eceiving the feedback. investigation, subsequent task choice aer fa ft ilure was used as an indicator of changes in motivation. In one study, participants Participants and Procedure completed a cycling task and received manipulated performance We computed our required sample size with G*Power, optimal feedback about attaining or failing their assigned goal before sample size is 111 (for between-subjects ANOVAs with three completing a subsequent cognitive task (Healy et  al., 2015). groups of Cohen’s f = 0.3, type-I error probability α = 0.05, and er Th e were no differences in subsequent performance between power 1-β = 0.80, according to G*Power; Faul et  al., 2007). goal-failure and goal-attainment conditions. The authors concluded Participants were 185 volunteers (93.5% female). Participants that a physical task may not have been suitable to manipulate were randomly recruited on different online-platforms and were goal-failure and that a physical task may enhance cognitive told that they would have the chance to test intelligence-test functioning, which could mask the detrimental effects of goal- questions that can appear in assessment-centers. Participation failure. Again, these studies did not integrate high and specific was completely voluntarily; there was no payment involved. goals. There is one exception, in which participants actually Majority of participants were employees (62.4%) of various received a high goal prior to the task (Vohs et  al., 2013), but professions (16.8% public service). Participants were not paid in this experiment, the goal was set so high that it was actually for participation; however, students (30.3%) received course credit unattainable and thus, again, did not match the basic assumptions if needed (only applicable to psychology students). Mean age of goal-setting theory. It was found that aer ft goal-failure, was 28.01 years (SD = 7.0). All participants were randomly assigned expectancy for future performance and interest in performing to experimental conditions by using a programmed randomization similar tasks, which were used as indicators of motivation, lfi ter, resulting in 67 subjects in the goal-attainment condition were lower. [34.6% female; 27.73 (SD = 7.75) years old; 13.0% high school Taken together, there is some evidence that goal-failure of absolvent or higher; 17.3% employees; and 9.7% students], 53 performance goals can have undesirable effects on subsequent subjects in the goal-failure condition [25.4% female; 28.58 motivation. We  seek to examine these effects when using high (SD = 6.90) years old; 11.9% high school absolvent or higher; and specific goals that are the key element of goal-setting 16.2% employees; and 7.0% students], and 65 subjects in the interventions. We  propose that: no-feedback control condition [33.5% female; 27.83 (SD = 6.73) years old; 14.1% high school absolvent or higher; 17.9% employees; H3: Individuals who fail their high and specic fi goal show and 13.5% students]. lower motivation than individuals who attain their high Aer g ft iving their consent and confirming that they are of and specific goal. legal age, participants answered an online-questionnaire. In this questionnaire, we assessed demographics, covariates, and baseline data for aeff ct, self-esteem, and motivation. Participants then all received the high and specific goal to solve seven out of 10 OVERVIEW OF STUDIES upcoming intelligence test items. We  asked how committed participants were to that goal. Participants then solved the 10 We conducted two experiments in which we  manipulated goal- intelligence test items. Aer co ft mpletion, participants received failure to examine the consequences of failure of a high and fictitious feedback (or no feedback in the control condition) specific goal. To manipulate goal-failure, we  used fictitious feedback in Study 1 and varied task difficulty in Study 2, so that goal-failure is independent from a person’s skill-level. In TABLE 1 | Fictitious feedback of goal-attainment/goal-failure in Study 1. Study 1, we  focused on the person’s aeff ct, self-esteem, and Goal-Attainment feedback: Goal-Failure feedback: subsequent self-reported motivation aer r ft eceiving feedback of goal-failure compared to feedback of goal-attainment or no “You have completed the intelligence- “You have completed the intelligence- feedback. Study 2 aimed at replicating the effects found in Study test task. Congratulations, you were test task. Unfortunately, you were not 1 and examined motivation more objectively by using task choice able to solve at least 7 out of 10 tasks able to solve at least 7 out of 10 tasks aer ini ft tial failure as a behavioral measure of motivation. correctly. Please continue the survey.” correctly. Please continue the survey.” Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 4 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure depending on their experimental condition. Aerft wards, Motivation we  assessed the post-measures for aeff ct, self-esteem, and Motivation was assessed with three self-developed items that motivation as well as perception of the goal and the feedback are based on common scales for measuring motivation. Items as manipulation checks. All study variables were assessed were “I approach even difficult tasks with motivation,” “I try immediately before or aer t ft he tasks, there were no breaks in everything to attain my goals,” and “When I cannot solve difficult between. Finally, participants were debriefed and dismissed. tasks immediately, I  lose interest.” Cronbach’s α ranged from 0.71 to 0.74. The response scale ranged from 1 ( strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). MATERIALS Control Variable Intelligence Test Task We measured goal-commitment as a control variable. Goal- In Study 1, we  used 10 intelligence test items from the freely commitment is one of the most influential moderators of the available General Intelligence-Test by Satow (2017). These 10 goal-performance relationship (Locke and Latham, 1990) and items included five matrices that test spatial imagination and thus may aeff ct the consequences of failure of a high and vfi e number sequences that test mathematical-logical abilities. specific goal. We  used this task because the items all have a medium difficulty of around 0.5 (which means an item difficulty of around 50%) Goal-Commitment and participants cannot unambiguously tell if they correctly Goal-commitment was assessed with three items by Hollenbeck solved an item. For that reason, participants cannot be  sure et  al. (1989) that were most appropriate for the goal-setting whether they solved the items correctly or not, which is essential context. For example, one item was “I am  strongly committed for using fictitious feedback. to this goal.” Cronbach’s α was 0.84. The response scale ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). There were no pre-experimental differences between the groups in goal- MEASURES commitment, F(2,182) = 1.46, p = 0.24, and η = 0.02. Dependent Variables Manipulation Checks All scales that were originally in English were translated into We used several manipulation checks to make sure participants German and then back-translated into English. Exact Cronbach’s adopted the assigned high and specific goal and also to test α for all conditions and measurement times are listed in Table  2. whether the manipulation of feedback type was successful. We  asked participants to repeat their assigned goal directly aer ft Affect the task. One hundred seventy-two participants correctly identified Aeff ct was assessed with a short-scale version ( Wilhelm and the assigned goal (93%). We  also asked participants to rate the Schoebi, 2007) of the Multidimensional Mood State Questionnaire assigned goal on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 ( not (MDMQ) by Steyer et  al. (1997). The short-scale consists of at all) to 5 (very). Participants perceived the assigned goal as six bipolar items (e.g., “tired – awake,” “tense – relaxed,” and medium to high (M = 3.62, SD = 0.83), difficult ( M = 3.61, SD = 0.91), Cronbach’s α ranged from 0.88 to 0.89) with a seven-point reasonable (M = 3.46, SD = 0.98), and fair (M = 3.56, SD = 0.93). scale, both endpoints labeled with “very.” We  kept participants who did not correctly identify the goal in our analyses, because further ratings indicated that all Self-Esteem participants perceived the goal as intended. Additionally, State self-esteem was assessed with the subscale performance we  checked whether the fictitious feedback was perceived as of the State-Self-Esteem Scale by Heatherton and Polivy (1991) credible. Participants rated the feedback as credible (M = 3.81, consisting of five items. For example, one item was “I feel SD = 1.96). There were no significant differences between the confident about my abilities.” Cronbach’s α ranged from 0.80 2 groups, F(2,144) =0.62, p = 0.54, and η = 0.01 (goal-failure to 0.85. The response scale ranged from 1 ( strongly disagree) condition: M = 3.66, SD = 1.87; goal-attainment condition: M = 3.72, to 5 (strongly agree). SD = 2.03). TABLE 2 | Cronbach’s α for feedback type conditions and measurement times. Feedback type Time Goal-Commitment Affect Self-Esteem Motivation 1 0.88 0.89 0.81 0.80 Goal-Failure 2 – 0.91 0.86 0.83 1 0.80 0.89 0.79 0.70 Goal-Attainment 2 – 0.91 0.85 0.66 1 0.83 0.87 0.81 0.65 Control 2 – 0.87 0.86 0.73 N = 185 Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 5 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure for participants who attained the goal, while it was reduced for STUDY 1 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION participants who failed the goal. Self-esteem levels for participants in the control conditions were in between the other two groups. Descriptive Statistics and Intercorrelations Hypothesis 3 assumed that individuals who fail the high and of Study Variables specific goal will show lower motivation than individuals who Table  3 lists the means, SDs, and correlations of all study attain the high and specific goal. An ANCOVA showed that variables. All study variables correlated in an expected manner, there was no significant main effect of feedback type on motivation, for example, the baseline measures correlated highly with the F(2,181) = 2.32, p = 0.10, and η = 0.03. However, planned post-measures. In preliminary analyses, we  made sure that there comparisons indicated, in line with what we  predicted that were no baseline differences in any of the study variables, motivation was lower for participants who failed the assigned including aeff ct [ F(2,182) = 0.08, p = 0.92, and η = 0.001], self- goal than for participants who attained the assigned goal. There esteem [F(2,182) = 0.02, p = 0.98, and η = 0.00], motivation was a statistically significant difference in motivation between [F(2,182) = 0.14, p = 0.87, and η = 0.002], or goal-commitment the goal-failure condition (M = 3.41, SD = 1.03) and the goal- [F(2,182) = 1.46, p = 0.24, and η = 0.02]. We  also centered and attainment condition (M = 3.62, SD = 0.92) of 0.21 (SE = 0.10), included goal-commitment, gender, and age in our analyses. t(2,181) = 2.11, p < 0.05, d = 0.22. u Th s, Hypothesis 3 was supported. es Th e variables did not change our results when included as e eff Th ect is depicted in Figure  1C. As illustrated, motivation covariates. We, therefore, report results of analyses without stayed at the same level for participants who attained the goal, these covariates. while it was reduced for participants who failed the goal. Motivation levels for participants in the control conditions were Main Effects of Goal-Failure on Affect, Self- in between the other two groups. Esteem, and Motivation In sum, all hypotheses were supported. As predicted, aeff ct We tested hypotheses using separate one-way ANCOVAs with was more negative and self-esteem and motivation were reduced centered baseline measures included as a covariate and with when the high and specific goal was failed. Interestingly, participants the between-subjects factor feedback type (three levels: goal who received no feedback at all showed similar tendencies attained, goal failed, and no feedback) for each dependent variable. throughout all dependent variables as participants who failed We  used post-hoc tests to compare the goal-failure condition the goal. We assume that since we chose task items with medium with the goal-attainment condition as this comparison reflects difficulty, participants in the no-feedback condition were not our hypotheses. sure about their performance and assumed that they did not Hypothesis 1 predicted that individuals who fail the high attain the high and specific goal; hence, they showed similar and specific goal will show a more negative ae ff ct than individuals tendencies as the participants who failed the goal. We  conclude who attain the high and specific goal. An ANCOVA showed a that the task we  used was indeed ambiguous as we  intended significant main effect of feedback type on ae ff ct, F(2,181) = 13.44, and the uncertainty about their own performance lead to p < 0.001, and η = 0.13. As planned comparisons indicated, in participants’ conclusion. However, to avoid uncertainty of their line with what we  predicted, aeff ct was more negative for performance and also being dependent of the credibility of the participants who failed the goal than for participants who attained fictitious feedback, we  sought to manipulate actual performance the goal. There was a statistically significant difference in ae ff ct in a second study, rather than just manipulating the feedback between the goal-failure condition (M = 3.78, SD = 1.47) and the about the performance. Moreover, feedback in day-to-day life goal-attainment condition (M = 4.46, SD = 1.40) of 0.67 (SE = 0.15), reflects actual performance and is not fictitious. To manipulate t(2,181) = 4.47, p < 0.001, and d = 0.48. Thus, Hypothesis 1 was actual performance, we  manipulated task difficulty in Study 2, supported. The effect is depicted in Figure  1A. As illustrated, so that participants can unambiguously tell how they performed ae ff ct increased for participants who attained the goal, while it and whether they attained or failed the goal. Furthermore, decreased for participants who failed the goal. Participants in we  sought to test the immediate behavioral effects aer fa ft ilure the control condition showed a pattern similar to that of of a high and specific goal. For that reason, we  used a behavioral participants who failed the goal. measure of motivation in Study 2. We  will describe Study 2  in Hypothesis 2 assumed that individuals who fail the high and detail in the following section. specific goal will show lower self-esteem than individuals who attain the high and specific goal. An ANCOVA showed that there was no significant main effect of feedback type on self- STUDY 2 METHOD esteem, F(2,181) = 2.35, p = 0.10, and η = 0.03. However, as planned comparisons indicated, in line with what we  predicted, self- Design esteem was lower for participants who failed the goal than for Study 2 was a laboratory experiment with a one-factor between participants who attained the goal. er Th e was a statistically subjects design. Between-subjects factor was goal-failure with significant difference in self-esteem between the goal-failure two conditions: goal attained vs. goal failed. Participants all condition (M = 3.49, SD = 1.01) and the goal-attainment condition received a high and specific goal how many matrices they (M = 3.70, SD = 0.90) of 0.22 (SE = 0.10), t(2,181) = 2.16, p < 0.05, should solve in a first round. Goal-failure was manipulated d = 0.22. Hypothesis 2 was supported. The effect is depicted in through task difficulty. In a second round, participants then Figure  1B. As illustrated, self-esteem stayed at the same level were asked to choose between two alternatives of the task Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 6 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 7 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 TABLE 3 | Descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations Study 1. S. No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1. Experimental condition – 2. Performance −0.01 – Covariates 3. Gender 0.12 0.06 – 4. Age 0.05 0.02 −0.07 – 5. Goal- −0.06 −0.14 0.03 −0.13 (0.84) Commitment Dependent variables 6. Affect Time 1 −0.02 0.08 0.09 0.10 0.07 (0.88) * ** 7. Self-Esteem 0.01 0.14 −0.01 0.16 −0.01 0.44 (0.80) Time 1 * ** ** 8. Motivation 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.11 0.17 0.28 0.52 (0.71) Time 1 ** ** ** 9. Affect Time 2 −0.13 0.10 0.10 0.05 0.11 0.79 0.42 0.24 (0.89) * ** ** ** ** 10. Self-Esteem −0.07 0.18 −0.02 0.10 −0.12 0.48 0.82 0.45 0.55 (0.85) Time 2 * * ** ** ** ** ** 11. Motivation −0.07 0.18 0.05 0.09 0.16 0.35 0.47 0.76 0.38 0.52 (0.74) Time 2 M 0.29 6.50 1.08 28.01 4.87 4.17 3.74 3.63 4.06 3.61 3.51 Total SD 0.45 2.26 0.33 7.04 1.57 1.31 0.82 0.81 1.41 0.95 0.86 M – 6.45 1.15 28.58 4.73 4.13 3.76 3.63 3.78 3.51 3.42 Goal-Failure SD – 2.20 0.46 6.90 1.65 1.41 0.80 0.86 1.47 0.98 0.90 Goal- M – 6.40 1.04 27.73 5.13 4.15 3.73 3.59 4.46 3.69 3.59 Attainment SD – 2.23 0.21 7.51 1.39 1.31 0.81 0.80 1.40 0.92 0.80 M – 6.65 1.06 27.83 4.72 4.22 3.74 3.66 3.88 3.60 3.51 Control SD – 2.37 0.30 6.73 1.66 1.24 0.85 0.79 1.30 0.96 0.91 * ** N = 185; experimental condition: no failure (goal-attainment condition and control condition) = 0, failure = 1; and gender: female = 0, other = 1. p < 0.05, p < 0.01. Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure randomly assigned to experimental conditions by using a common randomization table, resulting in 41 subjects in the goal-attainment condition and 45 subjects in the goal-failure condition. Aer g ft iving their consent and confirming that they are of legal age, participants answered a first paper-pencil questionnaire. In this questionnaire, we  assessed demographics, covariates, and baseline data for ae ff ct and self-esteem. Participants then all received the high and specific goal to solve four out of v fi e matrices in the upcoming “adding-to-ten” task. Participants then tried to solve the five matrices. Participants in the goal- attainment condition received matrices that were so easy that Effect of feedback type on affect any individual with a basic skill-level in arithmetic can solve them in the given amount of time to make sure that they all attain the assigned goal. Participants in the goal-failure condition received matrices that were so difficult that it was impossible to solve them in the given amount of time to make sure that they all fail the assigned goal. We tested whether the respective task-difficulty would lead to attaining or failing the goal in pilot studies and adjusted it accordingly. Hence, goal-failure was manipulated independently from an individual’s skill-level and solely based on our experimental manipulation of task difficulty. As intended, all participants attained or failed the assigned goal corresponding to our manipulation. Aer ft that first round, participants were asked to choose between Effect of feedback type on self-esteem two alternatives of the previous task with different levels of difficulty (medium vs. high, connected with different rewards). Aer co ft mpleting that second round, we  assessed the post- measures for ae ff ct and self-esteem and the manipulation check. Finally, participants received their reward of their respective amount of chocolate chips (depending on how many matrices they had solved in the second round), were debriefed and dismissed. MATERIALS Effect of feedback type on motivation Adding-to-Ten Task In Study 2, we  used the “adding-to-ten” task which has FIGURE 1 | Effects of feedback type on affect (A), self-esteem (B), and been used in several other studies (on the effects of goal- motivation (C) in Study 1. setting on unethical behavior) before (e.g., Mazar et  al., 2008; Welsh and Ordóñez, 2014; Keith, 2018). The original with different difficulties. Dependent variables were motivation task consists of matrices with 12 numbers with two decimal (task choice) in the second round as well as aeff ct and self- places of which two numbers sum up to 10. We  used this esteem. Aeff ct and self-esteem were assessed before the first task because it allows the respondents to unambiguously round (baseline) and aer t ft he second round. evaluate if they had solved the question correctly and because it is not viewed as one reflecting math ability (Mazar et  al., 2008). In this task, participants recognize their actual Participants and Procedure We computed our required sample size with G*Power, optimal performance and are not dependent on our feedback. For this study, we  developed three different levels of difficulty. sample size is 90 (for between-subjects ANOVAs with two groups of Cohen’s f = 0.3, type-I error probability α = 0.05, and power We  varied the level of difficulty by adding more columns or more decimal places. We  conducted a preliminary study 1-β = 0.80, according to G*Power; Faul et  al., 2007). Participants were 86 volunteers (67.4% female; 61.2% employees; and 55.4% to test our matrices for difficulty. The final matrices had nine numbers with one decimal place for the very easy high school graduation or higher) who were recruited at several public places throughout the city at which the authors’ university matrices, 12 numbers with two decimal places (as in the original) for the medium difficult matrices, and 36 numbers is located. Participants were not paid for participation, but were able to win chocolate chips depending on their performance. with three decimal places for the very difficult matrices (for an example, see Figure  2). We  also measured the time Mean age was 36.70 years (SD = 15.12). All participants were Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 8 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure it took participants to solve the very easy matrices in a Motivaton (Task Choice) preliminary study. Since participants solved five very easy Motivation was measured by task choice in the second round. matrices in less than 2 min, we  set the high and specific Participants were asked to choose between two alternatives: goal at four out of five matrices in 2 min in the goal- To solve medium difficult matrices, receiving one chocolate attainment condition. The same goal applied to the very for every correctly solved matrix; or to solve very difficult difficult matrices in the goal-failure condition because matrices, receiving three chocolates for every correctly solved we  expected it to be  impossible to solve those in 2 min. matrix. Hence, the difficult matrices were connected with In the second round, participants had another 2 min to a large reward, while the medium difficult matrices were solve as many matrices as possible. connected with a small reward. We  included this payoff to have an incentive to choose the difficult matrices. Choosing the difficult matrices indicated higher motivation. Task choice was measured as choice for medium difficult matrices MEASURES (0 = medium difficulty) or choice for difficult matrices Dependent Variables (1 = high difficulty). All Scales that were originally in English were translated into German and then back-translated into English. Exact Affect Cronbach’s α for all conditions and measurement times is Ae ff ct was assessed with the same scale used in Study 1. Cronbach’s listed in Table  4. α ranged from 0.65 to 0.75. FIGURE 2 | Examples for easy (top panel), medium (middle panel), and difficult (bottom panel) matrices in the “adding-to-ten” task. Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 9 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure TABLE 4 | Cronbach’s α for goal-failure conditions and measurement times. Feedback type Time Self-Efficacy Risk-Taking Perceived mental Affect Self-Esteem arithmetic 1 0.85 0.81 0.84 0.60 0.73 Goal-Failure 2 – – – 0.72 0.77 1 0.74 0.85 0.91 0.70 0.67 Goal-Attainment 2 – – – 0.75 0.60 N = 86. Self-Esteem to repeat their assigned goal directly aer t ft he task. Seventy- State self-esteem was assessed with the same scale used in Study four participants correctly identified the assigned goal (86%). 1. Cronbach’s α was 0.70 at both times. We also asked participants if they attained or failed the assigned goal. All 86 participants correctly indicated that they attained the goal in the goal-attainment condition or failed the goal Control Variables in the goal-failure condition. Hence, manipulation of goal- We measured self-efficacy, risk-taking, and perceived mental failure was successful. arithmetic ability as control variables. Self-efficacy is, besides self-esteem, considered as one of the four core traits that constitute core self-evaluations (Bono and Judge, 2003). Hence, self-efficacy STUDY 2 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION is expected to correlate substantially with self-esteem and as a trait may aeff ct the consequences of goal-failure. Risk-taking Descriptive Statistics and Intercorrelations was measured because it may aeff ct which task participants of Study Variables choose in the second round. Mental arithmetic ability may ae ff ct Table  5 lists the means, SDs, and correlations of all study how well participants perform in the “adding-to-ten” task. er Th e variables. All study variables correlated in an expected manner. were no pre-experimental differences between the groups in Experimental condition correlated highly with motivation (task any of the control variables. choice), ae ff ct, and also with self-esteem. In preliminary analyses, we  made sure that there were no baseline differences in any Self-Efficacy of the study variables, including ae ff ct [ t(84) = 1.72, p = 0.09, and Self-efficacy was assessed with the German version of the General d = 0.37], self-esteem [t(84) = 0.09, p = 0.93, and d = 0.03], self- Self-Efficacy Short Scale (ASKU) by Beierlein et  al. (2012). The efficacy [ t(84) = 1.67, p = 0.10, and d = 0.36], risk-taking scale consists of three items, for example, “I can rely on my [t(84) = −1.12, p = 0.27, and d = 0.24], or perceived mental arithmetic own abilities in difficult situations.” Cronbach’s α was 0.81. The ability [t(84) = −0.43, p = 0.67, and d = 0.09]. Some covariates response scale ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). seemed to correlate highly with the dependent variables, for example perceived mental arithmetic ability with motivation Willingness for Risk-Taking (task choice) or self-efficacy with self-esteem. For that reason, Willingness for risk-taking was assessed with the subscale “risk- we  centered and included these covariates in our analyses. These taking” from the TCU Adolescent Social Functioning Form by variables did not change our results when included as covariates. the TCU Institute of Behavioral Research (2010), consisting of We, therefore, report results of analyses without these covariates. seven items. For example, one item was “You like taking risks.” Cronbach’s α was 0.84. The response scale ranged from 1 ( strongly Main Effects of Goal-Failure on Affect, Self- disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Esteem, and Motivation (Task Choice) We tested Hypotheses 1 and 2 using separate one-way ANCOVAs Perceived Mental Arithmetic with centered baseline measure included as a covariate and with Perceived mental arithmetic ability was assessed with the subscale the between-subjects factor goal-failure for each dependent “attitude to fast mental arithmetic” from the “Trends in variable. We  tested Hypothesis 3 using logistic regression with International Mathematics and Science Study” (TIMSS) student goal-failure (two levels: goal attained, goal failed) as the between- questionnaire by Wendt et  al. (2017), consisting of six items. subjects factor and (motivation) task choice as dependent variable For example, one item was “Usually, I  am  very good at fast since logistic regression is recommended for dichotomous mental arithmetic.” Cronbach’s α was 0.88. The response scale dependent variables (Mood, 2010). ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree). Hypothesis 1 assumed that individuals who fail their assigned high and specific goal will show a more negative aeff ct than Manipulation Checks individuals who attain their assigned high and specific goal. We used two manipulation checks to make sure that participants An ANCOVA showed a significant main effect of goal-failure had adopted the assigned high and specific goal and that the on aeff ct, F(1,83) = 5.64, p < 0.05, η = 0.06, and d = 0.37. manipulation of goal-failure was successful. We asked participants Participants who failed their goal (M = 3.49, SD = 1.18) showed Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 10 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 11 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 TABLE 5 | Descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations Study 2. S. No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1. Experimental condition – Covariates 2. Gender 0.12 – 3. Age 0.21 0.07 – 4. Self-Efficacy −0.18 0.05 0.16 (0.81) 5. Risk-Taking 0.12 0.25 −0.17 0.07 (0.84) ** * 6. Perceived 0.05 0.34 0.05 0.18 0.26 (0.88) mental arithmetic Dependent variables 7. Affect Time 1 −0.18 0.00 −0.13 0.18 0.05 0.13 (0.65) ** ** 8. Self-Esteem −0.01 0.18 0.14 0.67 0.04 0.19 0.29 (0.70) Time 1 ** ** ** ** 9. Affect Time 2 −0.31 0.04 −0.09 0.44 0.00 0.10 0.59 0.38 (0.75) * ** ** ** 10. Self-Esteem −0.22 0.13 0.10 0.58 −0.05 0.19 0.16 0.67 0.51 (0.70) Time 2 ** ** 11. Motivation (Task −0.54 0.15 −0.21 0.03 0.08 0.36 0.15 −0.02 0.08 0.04 Choice) M 0.52 0.67 36.70 3.99 2.88 2.44 3.70 4.05 3.70 3.89 0.36 Total SD 0.50 0.47 15.12 0.54 0.73 0.70 0.92 0.48 1.07 0.59 0.48 M – 0.62 39.67 3.90 2.96 2.47 3.54 4.05 3.39 3.77 0.11 Goal-Failure SD – 0.49 16.06 0.55 0.68 0.62 0.91 0.44 1.04 0.60 0.32 Goal- M – 0.73 33.44 4.09 2.79 2.41 3.88 4.06 4.05 4.02 0.63 Attainment SD – 0.45 13.48 0.52 0.78 0.79 0.91 0.52 1.02 0.54 0.49 * ** N = 86; experimental condition: no failure = 0, failure = 1; gender: female = 0, male = 1; and task choice: medium difficult = 0, difficult = 1. p < 0.05, p < 0.01. Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure a significantly more negative ae ff ct than participants who attained their goal (M = 3.94, SD = 1.24). Hence, Hypothesis 1 was supported. The effect is depicted in Figure  3A. As illustrated, aeff ct increased for participants who attained the goal, while it decreased for participants who failed the goal. Hypothesis 2 assumed that individuals who fail their assigned high and specific goal will show lower self-esteem than individuals who attain their assigned high and specific goal. An ANCOVA showed a significant main effect of goal-failure on self-esteem, F(1,83) = 7.10, p < 0.01, η = 0.08, and d = 0.42. Participants who failed their goal (M = 3.77, SD = 0.58) showed Effect of goal-failure on affect (Study 2) significantly lower self-esteem than participants who attained their goal (M = 4.02, SD = 0.61). Hence, Hypothesis 2 was supported. The effect is depicted in Figure  3B. As illustrated, self-esteem stayed at the same level for participants who attained the goal, while it decreased for participants who failed the goal. Hypothesis 3 assumed that individuals who fail their assigned high and specific goal will show lower motivation than individuals who attain their assigned high and specific goal. We  used task choice as a behavioral indicator of motivation. A logistic regression showed that goal-failure is Effect of goal-failure on self-esteem (Study 2) a significant predictor of task choice, χ (1) = 27.19, p < 0.001, OR = 13.87, d = 1.45, 95%-CI(4.5, 42.76)], with a regression coefficient of −0.26. The model explained 37.2% (Nagelkerke R ) of the variance in task choice and correctly classified 76.7% of cases. Goal-failure was associated with a decreased likelihood of choosing the more difficult task. In the goal- attainment condition, 15 participants (36.6%) chose the medium difficult task and 26 participants (63.4%) chose the highly difficult task. In the goal-failure condition, 40 participants (88.9%) chose the medium difficult task and only five participants (11.1%) chose the highly difficult task. Effect of goal-failure on motivation (task choice) (Study 2) Hence, Hypothesis 3 was supported. The results are depicted in Figure  3C. FIGURE 3 | Effects of goal-failure on affect (A), self-esteem (B), and In sum, the results of Study 2 replicate and extend the motivation task choice (C) in Study 2. findings of our previous study. Specifically, we  found support for the harmful effect of goal-failure on ae ff ct and self-esteem. research on failure with high and specific goals that are As expected, aer g ft oal-failure participants showed decreased the focus of goal-setting theory. Our research aimed at ae ff ct and self-esteem, while aer ft goal-attainment participants shedding light on this important topic by examining the showed the same or slightly higher levels of aeff ct and self- effects of failing a high and specific goal on affect, self- esteem. Furthermore, we  demonstrated that goal-failure ae ff cts esteem, and motivation; factors which may have crucial subsequent motivation in terms of task choice. Aer g ft oal- implications for organizations. failure, the majority of participants chose the easier task and We conducted two studies to test for the expected avoided the challenging task. detrimental effects of failure of a high and specific goal on affect, self-esteem, and motivation. Study 1 showed goal- failure of the assigned high and specific goal lead to a GENERAL DISCUSSION decrease in affect, self-esteem, and motivation. We replicated these effects in Study 2 and were able to show the behavioral Setting high and specific goals has long been recommended as one of the most effective motivational and leadership consequences of the decreased motivation through task choice. In sum, we  were able to show that the failure of tools. Yet, setting high performance goals naturally leads to a considerable group of individuals who will fail that a high and specific goal can trigger potentially harmful consequences for self-related factors and can hinder a person goal. Past research on goal-failure indicates that it can cause a variety of undesirable and potentially harmful effects, for from tackling new challenges. We  discuss theoretical and practical implications, limitations, and future directions of the individual as well as for organizations; however, to our knowledge, there is little to no research that combines all the findings in the following sections. Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 12 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure sensitize supervisors and employees for the potential Theoretical and Practical Implications undesirable effects when setting high and specific goals and Our findings are an important contribution to research on find ways to counteract them. goal-setting theory by combining basic assumptions of achievement goal theory with goal-setting theory. Goal-setting theory focuses on those who attain the high and specific goal and states a so-called “high performance cycle” in which Limitations and Future Research individuals are satisfied with their performance and enter an A first limitation of this research is that we  did not test the ever-increasing cycle of increased motivation and performance effects of goal-failure in an actual work-setting. Hence, we cannot (Locke and Latham, 1990, 2002). Even though cautionary be  sure about the external validity of the findings. However, remarks have always been made about potential pitfalls when Study 2 was conducted in the field, at several public places applying goal-setting (Locke and Latham, 2002), the high risk with a rather heterogeneous sample of mainly working adults. of failing that goal is widely overlooked. One theory that takes Study 2 also allowed a face-to-face setting, which increases the possibility of goal-failure into account is achievement goal psychological realism. Given the large body of converging theory. Achievement goal theory states that goals can be framed findings across experimental laboratory and field research on as performance goals or learning goals. According to achievement goal-setting, we  assume that the used experimental designs goal theory, performance goals set an external standard. should be  suited for our investigations. Still, our experimental Individuals who fail that standard perceive their skills as fixed, research should be  complemented by field studies in actual thus, failing implies that their abilities are insufficient ( Dweck work-settings, preferably by longitudinal studies that investigate and Leggett, 1988). Hence, failing of a performance goal poses long-term effects of goal-setting and goal-failure. a threat for the self. Individuals will perceive themselves as A second limitation of our research is that we  solely used incapable aer fa ft iling a performance goal, which can be damaging self-reports to measure the person’s ae ff ct and self-esteem. To for their self-image. The high and specific goals used in goal- generalize the found effects, other components of a person’s setting interventions are usually framed as performance goals, well-being should be  examined, for example an individual’s for example, to produce a certain amount of products, to sell physical well-being and somatic health. Research showed that a certain amount, or to enroll a certain number of customers. the fulfillment of one’s goals plays an important role when Combining the assumptions of both theories, one can conclude coping with stressful events (Emmons and Kaiser, 1996). If a that failure of a high and specific goal has the potential to person is repeatedly faced with obstacles blocking the attainment pose a threat for a person’s self. We  were able to confirm this of their goals, the person may be  particularly susceptible to notion and found that failing a high and specific goal indeed experiences of helplessness, which are associated with health harmed self-related factors. risks (Brunstein et  al., 1998). Future research is needed to Our results imply that when using goal-setting interventions examine the consequences of goal-failure for a person’s physical in organizations, potentially harmful long-term effects should and mental health. In addition, we  only measured participants’ be considered. Setting high and specic fi goals is a very commonly general ae ff ct rather than discrete emotions. It is possible that used motivational tool because organizations oen s ft olely focus discrete emotions, like anger, anxiety, or depression, provide on the immediate results, especially on performance. However, more information on the outcomes of the goal process than setting high and specific goals can have serious detrimental generalized aeff ct ( Plemmons and Weiss, 2013). We  suggest consequences. In recent years, several undesirable effects of that future research examines the role of discrete emotions high and specific goals have been discussed. For example, a for processes induced by goal-failure. number of studies have explored the effects of goal-setting on Another limitation of our research is that we  used a self- unethical behavior (e.g., lying and cheating). The assumption developed scale for measuring motivation in Study 1. er Th efore, is that individual’s attention focus is narrowed on attaining we have no information about the validity of our scale. However, the goal, so that moral standards are ignored (Schweitzer et  al., we  used this scale because the common validated motivation 2004; Ordóñez et al., 2009; Welsh and Ordóñez, 2014). Unethical scales usually measure a more general attitude towards work, behaviors may be  particularly likely when attaining the goal while we sought to measure motivational change toward certain is tied to monetary rewards (Jensen, 2003). Furthermore, some work tasks. In Study 2, we  included a behavioral measure of researchers argue that high and specific goals make destructive that motivational change by measuring task-choice, which is leadership more likely by increasing leaders’ stress to meet a common behavioral measure of work motivation (o Th mas deadlines (Bardes and Piccolo, 2010). and Ward, 1983; Nicholls, 1984). Thereby, we  were able to Our findings show that failure of a high and specific combine attitudinal and behavioral measures of motivation. goal can harm a person’s self and motivation. These We  suggest that these findings should be  complemented by a consequences have the potential to harm not only the field study with an actual work task. employee but also the organization’s results in the long-run. An additional limitation is that we  were not able to examine Our results also implicate that failure of a high and specific long-term effects of failure of high and specific goals. In goal can have immediate behavioral consequences and can organizations, individuals are confronted with new goals discourage employees from engaging in new challenges; constantly, even if they were not able to attain previous goals. something employees face daily in their everyday life. Consecutive failure of high and specific goals might induce a We  recommend that organizations should find ways to downward spiral of harmful consequences which, in the Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 13 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure long-run, damage the organizational outcomes, for example, consequences for not performing it, increased their perceived reduced OCB, increased absenteeism, and disengagement from self-regulatory success. Furthermore, setting goals for the challenging tasks and burnout (Seo and Ilies, 2009; Ybema activity and emotion regulation also increased self-control et  al., 2010; Shi et  al., 2013; Welsh et  al., 2020). There are few (Hennecke et  al., 2019). Hence, when failure experiences studies which have investigated the effects of setting high and harm an employee’s motivation and well-being, self-regulatory specific goals consecutively ( Welsh and Ordóñez, 2014; Keith, strategies may be used to restore those resources for subsequent 2018). For example, it was found that consecutive goal-setting tasks. Especially evocation of negative affect can increase can have detrimental effects on an individual’s goal-commitment and prolong rumination after failure experiences, which in and perceived fairness (Keith, 2018). In another study, consecutive turn can increase negative affect (Jones et  al., 2013). There performance goals increased unethical behavior by depleting are various strategies that can be used to prevent detrimental self-regulatory resources (Welsh and Ordóñez, 2014). Future effects on one’s affect. For example, an employee might use research should investigate the long-term consequences of failure attentional deployment or focus on other aspects. After the of a high and specific goal or consecutive failure. affective state is already affected, an employee might regulate Furthermore, it has to be  noted that our sample in Study their emotions by reappraisal (Boss and Sims Jr., 2008). 1 consisted mainly of female participants (93.5%). Past research Thus, we  recommend the use of self-regulatory and emotion found that in an experiment, after failure, male participants regulation strategies to replenish those resources, stay chose more difficult goals in a subsequent task than did persistent, and counteract effects after goal-failure. female participants (Levy and Baumgardner, 1991). Additionally, A final strategy for counteracting undesirable effects aer g ft oal- it was found that individuals higher in self-esteem chose failure might be  to positively aeff ct goal striving as well as goal more difficult goals. We  were able to control for confounding revision. It has been shown that high self-efficacy and confidence effects of base self-esteem and self-efficacy and both variables in the own abilities can facilitate successful goal striving (Wolf did not affect our results, which is consistent with other et  al., 2018). Furthermore, research found that individuals use research on self-esteem and goal-choice (Hollenbeck and Brief, performance-goal discrepancies to make their goal revision decisions. 1987). We  cannot be  certain that our results also apply to It was found that large discrepancies, especially over a longer male individuals; however, gender did not affect our results period of time, led to a downward revision of their goal (Donovan in Study 2 and past research suggests that unambiguous and Williams, 2003). Accordingly, experiences of success lead to feedback to insure clear failure or success on a task eliminates an upward revision of their goal. Considering the previously gender differences in future success expectancies ( Feather and mentioned methods to enable mastery and to create experiences Simon, 1973; McMahon, 1973; Lenney, 1977). Nevertheless, of success, we  assume that these methods are also suitable to future research should replicate our findings with male positively ae ff ct goal striving and goal revision and in turn have individuals to rule out possible gender differences. the potential to counteract detrimental effects aer g ft oal-failure. Lastly, future research should explore methods to counteract the found undesirable effects. Drawing from achievement goal theory, one possible method may be  goal-framing. While CONCLUSION performance goals emphasize the attainment of an externally-set standard, learning goals emphasize increasing the own Our research contributes to research and practice of goal-setting by explicitly integrating research on failure with the basic competence or mastering something new. When individuals fail a learning goal, they do not blame the failure on themselves, recommendation of goal-setting theory and achievement goal theory. We  were able to elucidate a highly possible downside since they view their skills as changeable (Dweck and Leggett, 1988; Welsh et  al., 2019). Thus, failure of a high and specific of goal-setting interventions by showing that the failure of a high and specific goal can damage self-related factors like ae ff ct, learning goal should not pose a threat for a person’s self and framing the goal as a learning goal may counteract the found self-esteem, and motivation and can also have subsequent behavioral consequences. These short-term consequences may undesirable effects. A second possible method to counteract these undesirable lead to serious long-term consequences, especially when goals are failed consecutively and the person has no resources to effects is to let employees experience success. Past research found that success on previous tasks may breed success on subsequent counteract the effects. For that reason, employers need to be sensitized for the high possibility of failing a high and specific tasks (Fan et  al., 2020). When employees attain easy goals on previous tasks, goal-commitment increases through enactive goal when using goal-setting as a motivational and leadership tool and need to take actions to counteract these undesirable mastery. As a result, employees increase their personally-set goals and are able to self-motivate for upcoming tasks. Hence, effects, for example with self-regulatory or emotion regulation strategies or by experiences of success. organizations could increase employee’s confidence and enable mastery by setting easy goals first, to create experiences of success. A third possible method for counteracting the undesirable effects is to use self-regulatory strategies to increase one’s DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT self-control to engage in aversive tasks. Research on the topic found that individuals who focused on the positive The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will consequences of an aversive activity or the negative be made available by the authors, without undue reservation. Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 14 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure of the manuscript in this form. All authors contributed to the ETHICS STATEMENT article and approved the submitted version. Study 1 involving human participants was reviewed and approved by the Ethics committee of the Technical University of Darmstadt, FUNDING Darmstadt, Germany. Study 2 followed the same guidelines. e p Th articipants provided their written informed consent to i Th s research was supported by grant from the German Research participate in the studies. Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, grant no. KE 1377/5–1). AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS JH will have first authorship of this manuscript, and will also be  serving as the corresponding author. The author listed in We thank Anabela Dubravac, Paula Lanz and Lea Strutt for the byline has agreed to the byline order and to the submission data collection. Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., and Buchner, A. (2007). G*power 3: A REFERENCES flexible statistical power analysisprogram for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav. Res. Methods 39, 175–191. doi: 10.3758/BF03193146 Bardes, M., and Piccolo, R. F. (2010). “Goal setting as an antecedent of destructive Feather, N. T., and Simon, J. G. (1973). Fear of success and causal attribution for outcome. J. Pers. 41, 525–542. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1971.tb00060.x leader behaviors” in When Leadership Goes Wrong: Destructive Leadership, Mistakes, and Ethical Failures. eds. B. Schyns and T. Hansbrough (Charlotte, Galinsky, A. D., Mussweiler, T., and Medvec, V. H. (2002). Disconnecting outcomes and evaluations: the role of negotiator focus. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 83, 1131– NC: IAP Information Age Publishing), 3–22. Beierlein, C., Kovaleva, A., Kemper, C. J., and Rammstedt, B. (2012). Ein Messinstrument 1140. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.83.5.1131 Gardner, D. G., and Pierce, J. L. (2001). Self-esteem and self-efficacy within the zur Erfassung subjektiver Kompetenzerwartung - Allgemeine Selbstwirksamkeit Kurzskal (ASKU). GESIS  - Leibniz-Institut für Sozialwissenschaen. ft organizational context: a replication. J. Manage. Sys 13, 31–48. doi: 10.1177/1059601198231004 Bongers, K. C. A., Dijksterhuis, A., and Spears, R. (2010). On the role of consciousness in goal pursuit. Soc. Cogn. 28, 262–272. doi: 10.1521/soco.2010. 28.2.262 Grieve, F. G., Whelan, J. P., Kottke, R., and Meyers, A. W. (1994). Manipulating adults' achievement goals in a sport task: effects on cognitive, aeff ctive and Bono, J. E., and Judge, T. A. (2003). Core self-evaluations: a review of the trait and its role in job satisfaction and job performance. Eur. J. Personal. 17, behavorial variables. J. Sport Behav. 17, 227–245. Halbesleben, J. R. B., and Wheeler, A. R. (2011). I owe you  one: coworker 5–18. doi: 10.1002/per.481 Boss, A. D., and Sims, H. P., Jr. (2008). Everyone fails! using emotion regulation reciprocity as a moderator of the day-level exhaustion–performance relationship. J. Organ. Behav. 32, 608–626. doi: 10.1002/job.748 and self-leadership for recovery. J. Manag. Psychol. 23, 135–150. doi: 10.1108/02683940810850781 Healy, L. C., Ntoumanis, N., Stewart, B. D., and Duda, J. L. (2015). Predicting subsequent task performance from goal motivation and goal failure. Front. Brunstein, J. C., Schultheiss, O. C., and Grässmann, R. (1998). Personal goals and emotional well-being: the moderating role of motive dispositions. J. Pers. Psychol. 6:926. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00926 Heatherton, T. F., and Polivy, J. (1991). Development and validation of a scale Soc. Psychol. 75, 494–508. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.75.2.494 Carver, C. S., and Scheier, M. F. (1990). Origins and functions of positive and for measuring state self-esteem. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 60, 895–910. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.60.6.895 negative aeff ct: a control-process view. Psychol. Rev. 97, 19–35. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.97.1.19 Henkel, J. M., and Hinsz, V. B. (2004). Success and failure in goal attainment as a mood induction procedure. Soc. Behav. Personal. Int. J. 32, 715–722. doi: Cervone, D., Jiwani, N., and Wood, R. M. (1991). Goal setting and the differential inu fl ence of self-regulatory processes on complex decision-making performance. 10.2224/sbp.2004.32.8.715 Hennecke, M., Czikmantori, T., and Brandstätter, V. (2019). Doing despite disliking: J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 61, 257–266. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.61.2.257 Cianci, A. M., Klein, H. J., and Seijts, G. H. (2010). The effect of negative self-regulatory strategies in everyday aversive activities. Eur. J. Personal. 33, 104–128. doi: 10.1002/per.2182 feedback on tension and subsequent performance: the main and interactive effects of goal content and conscientiousness. J. Appl. Psychol. 95, 618–630. Hollenbeck, J. R., and Brief, A. P. (1987). The effects of individual differences and goal origin on goal setting and performance. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. doi: 10.1037/a0019130 Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well-being: the science of happiness and a proposal Process. 40, 392–414. doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(87)90023-9 Hollenbeck, J., Williams, C., and Klein, H. (1989). An empirical examination of for a national index. Am. Psychol. 55, 34–43. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.34 Donovan, J. J., and Williams, K. J. (2003). Missing the mark: effects of theantecedents of commitment to difficult goals. J. Appl. Psychol. 74, 18–23. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.74.1.18 time and causal attributions on goal revision in response to goal- performance discrepancies. J. Appl. Psychol. 88, 379–390. doi: Houser-Marko, L., and Sheldon, K. M. (2008). Eyes on the prize or nose to the grindstone? The effects of level of goal evaluation on mood and 10.1037/0021-9010.88.3.379 Dweck, C. S., and Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation motivation. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 34, 1556–1569. doi: 10.1177/0146167208322618 and personality. Psychol. Rev. 95, 256–273. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.256 Earley, P. C., Connelly, R., and Ekegren, G. (1989). Goals, strategy development Jensen, M. C. (2003). Paying people to lie: the truth about the budgeting process. Eur. Financ. Manag. 9, 379–406. doi: 10.1111/1468-036X.00226 and task performance: some comments on the efficacy of goal setting. J. Appl. Psychol. 74, 24–33. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.74.1.24 Jones, N. P., Papadakis, A. A., Orr, C. A., and Strauman, T. J. (2013). Cognitive processes in response to goal failure: a study of ruminative thought and its Emmons, R. A., and Kaiser, H. A. (1996). “Goal orientation and emotional well-being: linking goals and ae ff ct through the self ” in Striving and Feeling: ae ff ctive consequences. J. Soc. Clin. Psychol. 32, 482–503. doi: 10.1521/jscp.2013.32.5.482 Judge, T. A., Erez, A., and Bono, J. E. (1998). The power of being positive: the Interactions among Goals, Aeff ct, and Self-Regulation . eds. L. L. Martin and A. lesser (Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum), 79–98. relation between positive self-concept and job performance. Hum. Perform. 11, 167–188. doi: 10.1207/s15327043hup1102&3_4 Fan, J., Gómez-Miñambres, J., and Smithers, S. (2020). Make it too difficult and I’ll give-up; let me succeed and I’ll excel: the interaction between assigned Judge, T. A., and Kammeyer-Mueller, J. D. (2004). “Core self-evaluations, aspirations, success, and persistence: an attributional model” in Attribution Theory in the and personal goals. Manag. Decis. Econ. 41, 964–975. doi: 10.1002/mde.3151 Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 15 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure Organizational Sciences: Theoretical and Empirical Contributions . ed. M. J. Nicholls, J. G. (1984). Achievement motivation: conceptions of ability, subjective Martinko (Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing), 111–132. experience, task choice, and performance. Psychol. Rev. 91, 328–346. doi: Judge, T. A., and Kammeyer-Mueller, J. D. (2008). “Aeff ct, satisfaction, and 10.1037/0033-295X.91.3.328 performance” in Research Companion to Emotion in Organizations. eds. N. Nichols, A. L., Whelan, J. P., and Meyers, A. W. (1991). The effects of children's M. Ashkanasy and C. L. Cooper (Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar), 136–151. goal structures and performance feedback on mood, task choice, and task Judge, T. A., Locke, E. A., and Durham, C. C. (1997). The dispositional causes persistence. Behav. Ther. 22, 491–503. doi: 10.1016/S0005-7894(05)80341-7 of job satisfaction: a core evaluations approach. Res. Organ. Behav. 19, 151– Oliver, R. L., Balakrishnan, P. V., and Barry, B. (1994). Outcome satisfaction in 188. doi: 10.5465/ambpp.2006.27169037 negotiation: a test of expectancy disconfirmation. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Kanfer, R., Frese, M., and Johnson, R. E. (2017). Motivation related to work: Process. 60, 252–275. doi: 10.1006/obhd.1994.1083 a century of progress. J. Appl. Psychol. 102, 338–355. doi: 10.1037/apl0000133 Ordóñez, L. D., Schweitzer, M. E., Galinsky, A. D., and Bazerman, M. H. (2009). Keith, N. (2018). Undesirable effects of goal setting on perceived fairness, commitment, Goals gone wild: the systematic side effects of over-prescribing goal setting. and unethical behavior. Zeitschrift für Arbeits-und Organisationspsychologie 62, Acad. Manag. Perspect. 23, 6–16. doi: 10.5465/amp.2009.37007999 1–11. doi: 10.1026/0932-4089/a000267 Plemmons, S. A., and Weiss, H. M. (2013). “Goals and ae ff ct” in New Developments Kim, A., and Clifford, M. M. (1988). Goal source, goal difficulty, and individual in Goal Setting and Task Performance. eds. E. A. Locke and G. P. Latham difference variables as predictors of responses to failure. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. (New York, NY; Sussex, UK: Routledge/Taylor and Francis Group), 117–132. 58, 28–43. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8279.1988.tb00876.x Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the Adolescent Self-Image. Princeton, NJ: Knight, D., Durham, C. C., and Locke, E. A. (2001). The relationship of team Princeton University Press. goals, incentives, and efficacy to strategic risk, tactical implementation, and Satow, L. (2017). Allgemeine Intelligenz-Test (AIT): Test-und Skalendokumentation. performance. Acad. Manag. J. 44, 326–338. doi: 10.5465/3069459 [General Intelligence Test (AIT): Test and Scale Documentation. Available at: Latham, G. P., and Locke, E. A. (1991). Self-regulation through goal setting. http://www.drsatow.de (Accessed November, 2018). Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 50, 212–247. doi: Schweitzer, M. E., Ordóñez, L., and Douma, B. (2004). Goal setting as a motivator 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90021-K of unethical behavior. Acad. Manag. J. 47, 422–432. doi: 10.2307/20159591 Latham, G. P., and Seijts, G. H. (1999). The effects of proximal and distal Scott, B. A., and Barnes, C. M. (2011). A multilevel field investigation of emotional goals on performance on a moderately complex task. J. Organ. Behav. labor, ae ff ct, work withdrawal, and gender. Acadamy. Manage. J. 54, 116–136. 20, 421–429. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199907)20:4<421::AID- doi: 10.5465/amj.2011.59215086 JOB896>3.0.CO;2-# Seo, M., and Ilies, R. (2009). The role of self-efficacy, goal, and ae ff ct in dynamic Lazarus, R. S. (1982). Thoughts on the relations between emotion and cognition. motivational self-regulation. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 109, 120–133. Am. Psychol. 37, 1019–1024. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.37.9.1019 doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.03.001 Lee, J. (2003). An analysis of organization-based self-esteem as a mediator of Shi, Y., Sears, L. E., Coberley, C. R., and Pope, J. E. (2013). The association the relationship between its antecedents and consequences. Korean. Personnel. between modifiable well-being risks and productivity: a longitudinal study Administration. J. 27, 25–50. doi: 10.1080/0958519032000106207 in pooled employer sample. J. Occup. Environ. Med. 55, 353–364. doi: 10.1097/ Lenney, E. (1977). Women's self-confidence in achievement settings. Psychol. Bull. JOM.0b013e3182851923 84, 1–13. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.84.1.1 Sonnentag, S. (2015). Dynamics of well-being. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psych. Organ. Levy, P. E., and Baumgardner, A. H. (1991). Effects of self-esteem and gender Behav. 2, 261–293. doi: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032414-111347 on goal choice. J. Organ. Behav. 12, 529–541. doi: 10.1002/job.4030120606 Stets, J. E., and Burke, P. J. (2000). Identity theory and social identity theory. Locke, E. A., Chah, D.-O., Harrison, S., and Lustgarten, N. (1989). Separating Soc. Psychol. Q. 63, 224–237. doi: 10.2307/2695870 the effects of goal specificity from goal level. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Steyer, R., Schwenkmezger, P., Notz, P., and Eid, M. (1997). Der Mehrdimensionale Process. 43, 270–287. doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(89)90053-8 Benfi dlichkeitsfragebogen. Handanweisung [The Multidimensional Mood Locke, E. A., and Latham, G. P. (1990). A Theory of Goal Setting and Task Questionnaire (MDMQ)]. Hogrefe. Performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Stryker, S., and Burke, P. J. (2000). The past, present, and future of an identity Locke, E. A., and Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of theory. Soc. Psychol. Q. 63, 284–297. doi: 10.2307/2695840 goal setting and task motivation: a 35-year odyssey. Am. Psychol. 57, 705–717. TCU Institute of Behavioral Research. (2010). TCU Adolescent Client Evaluation doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.57.9.705 of Self and Treatment (CEST) Forms. Abgerufen am  30. Juni 2019 von TCU. Locke, E. A., and Latham, G. P. (2006). New directions in goal-setting theory. Available at: https://ibr.tcu.edu/forms/adolescent-thinking-forms/ Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 15, 265–268. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8721.2006.00449.x oTh mas, E. A. C., and Ward, W. E. (1983). e Th influence of own and other Locke, E. A., Shaw, K. N., Saari, L. M., and Latham, G. P. (1981). Goal setting outcome on satisfaction and choice of task difficulty. Organ. Behav. Hum. and task performance: 1969–1980. Psychol. Bull. 90, 125–152. doi: Perform. 32, 399–416. doi: 10.1016/0030-5073(83)90157-5 10.1037/0033-2909.90.1.125 o Th mpson, L. (1995). The impact of minimum goals and aspirations on judgments Martin, L. L., Tesser, A., and McIntosh, W. D. (1993). “Wanting but not having: of successin negotiations. Group Decis. Negot. 4, 513–524. doi: 10.1007/ the effects of unattained goals on thoughts and feelings” in Century Psychology BF01409713 Series. Handbook of Mental Control. eds. D. M. Wegner and J. W. Pennebaker Van Dyne, L., and Pierce, J. L. (2004). Psychological ownership and feelings of (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.), 552–572. possession: three field studies predicting employee attitudes and organizational Mazar, N., Amir, O., and Ariely, D. (2008). The dishonesty of honest individuals: citizenship behavior. J. Organ. Behav. 25, 439–459. doi: 10.1002/job.249 a theory of self-concept maintenance. J. Mark. Res. 45, 633–644. doi: 10.1509/ Vohs, K. D., Park, J. K., and Schmeichel, B. J. (2013). Self-affirmation can jmkr.45.6.633 enable goal disengagement. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 104, 14–27. doi: 10.1037/ McMahon, I. D. (1973). Relationships between causal attributions and expectancy a0030478 of success. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 28, 108–114. doi: 10.1037/h0035474 Welsh, D. T., Baer, M. D., and Sessions, H. (2020). Hot pursuit: the aeff ctive Mitchell, T. R., and Silver, W. S. (1990). Individual and group goals when workers consequences of organization-set versus self-set goals for emotional exhaustion are interdependent: effects on task strategies and performance. J. Appl. Psychol. and citizenship behavior. J. Appl. Psychol. 105, 166–185. doi: 10.1037/apl0000429 75, 185–193. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.75.2.185 Welsh, D., Bush, J., Thiel, C., and Bonner, J. (2019). Reconceptualizing goal Moberly, N. J., and Watkins, E. R. (2010). Negative aeff ct and ruminative self- settings’ dark side: the ethical consequences of learning versus outcome focus during everyday goal pursuit. Cognit. Emot. 24, 729–739. doi: goals. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 150, 14–27. doi: 10.1016/j. 10.1080/02699930802696849 obhdp.2018.11.001 Mood, C. (2010). Logistic regression: why we  cannot do what we  think we  can Welsh, D. T., and Ordóñez, L. D. (2014). The dark side of consecutive do, and what we  can do about it. Eur. Sociol. Rev. 26, 67–82. doi: 10.1093/ high performance goals: linking goal setting, depletion, and unethical esr/jcp006 behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 123, 79–89. doi: 10.1016/j. Neale, M. A., and Bazerman, M. H. (1985). The effect of externally set goals obhdp.  2013.07.006 on reaching integrative agreements in competitive markets. J. Occup. Behav. Wendt, H., Bos, W., Goy, M., and Jusufi, D. (eds.) (2017). “TIMSS 2015” 6, 19–32. doi: 10.1002/job.4030060103 in Skalenhandbuch zur Dokumentation der Erhebungsinstrumente und Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 16 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790 Höpfner and Keith Consequences of Goal-Failure Arbeit mit den Datensätzen (Münster, DE; New York, NY: Waxmann Conflict of Interest: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the Verlag GmbH). absence of any commercial or n fi ancial relationships that could be  construed as Wilhelm, P., and Schoebi, D. (2007). Assessing mood in daily life: structural a potential conflict of interest. validity, sensitivity to change, and reliability of a short-scale to measure three basic dimensions of mood. Eur. J. Psychol. Assess. 23, 258–267. doi: Publisher’s Note: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors 10.1027/1015-5759.23.4.258 and do not necessarily represent those of their ali ffi ated organizations, or those Wolf, B. M., Herrmann, M., and Brandstätter, V. (2018). Self-efficacy vs. action of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated orientation: comparing and contrasting two determinants of goal setting and in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed goal striving. J. Res. Pers. 73, 35–45. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2017.11.001 or endorsed by the publisher. Ybema, J. F., Smulders, P. G. W., and Bongers, P. M. (2010). Antecedents and consequences of employee absenteeism: a longitudinal perspective on the role Copyright © 2021 Höpfner and Keith. This is an open-access article distributed of job satisfaction and burnout. Eur. J. Work Organ. Psy. 19, 102–124. doi: under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, 10.1080/13594320902793691 distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original Yeo, G., and Neal, A. (2004). A multilevel analysis of the relationship between author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication effort and performance: effects of ability, conscientiousness and goal orientation. in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, J. Appl. Psychol. 89, 231–247. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.89.2.231 distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 17 September 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 704790

Journal

Frontiers in Psychology – Unpaywall

Published: Sep 21, 2021

There are no references for this article.