State-level goal orientations as mediators of the relationship between time pressure and performance: A longitudinal study.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Goal orientations-the degree to which individuals are concerned with developing new skills, demonstrating already developed skills, and avoiding appearing foolish or incompetent-have been repeatedly shown to be important individual difference variables for performance across a range of contexts. In the current study, we identified perceptions of time pressure as a predictor of state goal orientations. Specifically, we posited that developing new skills may be conceived of as somewhat of a luxury-that is, mastery-oriented behaviors-are more likely to emerge when one is not under time pressure. On the other hand, when perceptions of time pressure increase, we expected individuals to be less willing to invest in development and instead to adopt more avoidant goals. Support for these predictions was found in a sample of undergraduate statistics students who were followed over the course of a 15-week academic semester. Specifically, perceptions of time pressure were negatively related to state mastery goal orientation and positively related to state performance-avoid goal orientation. Also, state goal orientations mediated the relationship between time pressure and performance. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of our results for motivational theory as well as how organizations can use the current results to mitigate the potentially detrimental effects of time pressure on performance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".