A Batak Experiment to evaluate Goal Setting Theory

The purpose of this research was to demonstrate if there were any significant differences in performance between a goal setting group who were given a target and a control group that were told to do their best, the general hypothesis states that a goal driven group should perform much better that the group who were told to do their best. The participants were first-year psychology undergraduates, (n = 99) ages between 17 years old and 55 years old mean age of 24.32 (SD = 10.13), an independent measure experimental design was used with a convenience sampling employed and randomly selected to be either in control or goal setting group. A Batak micro machine was used to assess how many random lit buttons could be hit in the space of 30 seconds. The goal setting group were given last year’s average score whilst the control group were told to do their best. The results showed no significant differences between either group though the hypothesis is rejected in this research; With the overwhelming empirical evidence demonstrated by many investigators, further research should aim to explore the different approaches to goal setting. The general hypothesis of goal setting versus do your best, is accepted.

One can define goal setting as a conscious approach to achieving the desired result (Latham, 1985; Locke & Weinberg, 1994; Vidic & Burton, 2010). Goal setting incorporates in various degree, the desire to achieve an objective whether it’s for personal gain, makes them feel good or because there is a purpose (Gaudreau & Braaten, 2016).

Get Help With Your Essay

If you need assistance with writing your essay, our professional essay writing service is here to help!
Find out more about our Essay Writing Service

It is human nature to want to do well when a challenge presents itself (Larsen & Engell, 2013), it’s an innate characteristic, however, motivations, expectations, enjoyment purpose and self-efficacy, all play a significant part in how one achieves those objectives, nevertheless, it’s important for the goal setter to understand that implementing the wrong strategy in setting a goal could be detrimental to achieving the desired goal as well as performance. Goals should be realistic but challenging but most importantly achievable (Burdina, Hiller & Metz. 2017; Locke & Latham, 1985; Weinberg, 1994; Wu, Heath & Larrick, 2008). The empirical evidence suggest that realistic goals will boost motivation and in turn increase performance, however, if the goal is too difficult and unrealistic then motivation will drop and performance failure will be inevitable, equally, if the goal is too simple then motivation will wane and effort will be reduced, thus, performance will suffer (Burdina, Hiller & Metz. 2017; Locke & Latham, 1985; Weinberg, 1994).
In a training environment, the individual’s aim is to enjoy what they are doing but also to gain ground in their development of the task in hand (Woodman, Zourbanos, Hardy, Beattie & McQuillan, 2010). Improvement is increased by repetition (Yeo & Neal, 2004). Whilst, in competition, it’s aimed at putting one’s hard work and training into a setting where spectators and peers alike judge one’s ability but also with the aim to gain recognition (Van de Pol & Kavussanu, 2011).
Van de Pol & Kavussanu, (2011); Smith, (2016) showed several dimensions to goal setting. The athletes used a series of psychological motivators such as internal/external goal setting, self-talk and attentional control (concentration), it was shown that athletes that were higher task orientated and lower ego used self-talk and goal settings in both training and competition, as well as attentional control far more than high ego/low task, focused athletes, likewise, concentration was positively related to task orientated individuals. Task orientation has been shown to be positively correlated to perceived improvements and performance, subsequently, ego orientated individuals were shown not to be correlated to improvement and performance.
Burton, Gillham, Weinberg, Yukelson & Weigand, (2013), described performance orientated athletes as (PO) or task orientated, Success Orientated as (SO) or ego orientated. With their description, the PO athletes believe in a process to improve and are motivated to get better with achieving mastery of their discipline, and it has shown that difficult task setting improves their performance, they are intrinsically motivated, (Latham, Brcic & Steinhauer, 2017; Weinberg, 1994; Wu, Heath & Larrick, 2008) as per Ede, Sullivan & Feltz, (2017); sari, (2015) have high self-efficacy. The SO athletes tend to be skilled in their speciality however they judge their ability based on winning or losing and they are more interested in the outcome than the mastery of their discipline they are highly confident and believe they can’t improve much, and tend to set moderate goals or in line with their ability, these individuals are extrinsically motivated (Latham, Brcic & Steinhauer, 2017; Weinberg, 1994; Wu, Heath & Larrick, 2008) and have high self-efficacy if all is well, but can quickly change to negative self-efficacy (Ede et al., 2017; sari, 2015).

Wack, Crosland & Miltenberger, (2014), conducted a study of participants to improve their running distance, the participants had initially shown interest in improving their running. The researchers set the weekly goals but also monitored and gave feedback on a weekly basis, the study was to set a baseline for the runners, where they would run for two weeks without any goals or feedback, the following weeks the researcher would increase their goals only if they were achieving their previous goals and give feedback. The results showed vast improvements in their running distances when feedback was recorded (Krenn, Würth & Hergovich, 2013).
Latham et al., (2017) conducted a study of goal setting, however, the objective was to set a goal without the participants being aware that this was being done, and to explore the relationship between goal setting and how the unconscious mind reacts to the stimulus, and consequently alters the participates behaviour (Seitchik & Harkins, 2014; Weinberg,1994; Wu et al., 2008). The participants were split into 3 groups and primed with either one of three photographs of power lifters lifting 400, 200, and 20 pounds, the corresponding groups after the photograph was shown, were asked to press as hard as they could on a digital weight scale, the results met their hypothesis that those participants that had been primed with the 400 pounds pressed the scale much harder than the subsequent other participants, the 200 pounds pressed less than the 400 pounds but much harder than the 20 pounds. In line with the theory of goals setting which states that a high expected goal leads to a high expected result/performance. (Burdina et al., 2017; Locke & Latham, 1985; Weinberg, 1994; Wu et al., 2008;). Based on the wealth of empirical evidence and the experiment with the Batak micro it’s prudent to say that those participants that set goals will score significantly higher than those participants that were told to ‘do your best’.

Design

An Independent measure experimental design was implemented. The independent variable (IV) had 2 levels, a control group, that were told to do their best, and a goal setting group, that were given last year’s average score. The dependent variable (DV), was the Batak score performance achieved within 30 seconds.

Participation

Ninety-nine 1^st year undergraduate psychology students participated in the experiment. Participants were recruited via convenience sampling. There were 14 (14%) males and 85 (86%) females. Ages ranged from 17 years old to 55 years old, with a mean age of 24.32 (SD = 10.13). participants were randomly assigned to their respective groups. Fifty-two participants were in the control group and 47 were in the goal setting group.

Material

The Batak Micro was employed and a white board (goal setting target was noted only for the experimental group).

A Batak tool is a square box measuring 600mm x 600mm, it has 12 visually bright LED clusters buttons arranged in an optimised hand motion formation, all controlled by an advanced microcomputer. The targets can be lit up either randomly or via specific targets, it is used in training and aiding mobility, dexterity, agility and reaction times. It has 2 digital displays: –

The first (LCD) display is an accumulator program (the counter)

The second (LCD) display is a timer measured in seconds

Procedure

Informed consent was obtained from each participant and the right to withdraw was clearly explained. The experimenter took each participant one at a time into a quiet laboratory, the participant was asked to sit down facing the Batak micro, 2 possible scenarios was employed; if the participant was assigned to the control group then they were told to do their best, if they were from the experimental group, the white board would be used, where the experimenter would advise last year’s average score achieved (44) within 30 seconds. The experimenter then asked the participant to set a realistic target, based on knowledge of the previous mean score. The score that the participant had set was then written underneath the last year score with the aim of having a visual and a recorded goal target. Once the participant was facing the Batak micro and the timer started, set for 30 seconds, 1 of the 12 lights would light up randomly and the next light would light up only once the participant had pressed the lit up button their objective was to hit as many lit up buttons as possible within 30 seconds, once finished the score was noted and compared to last year’s result. The participants were then debriefed on the nature of the study and explained which group they belonged to and the expectations of the experimenter’s hypothesis.

An independent samples t-test was used to evaluate the differences between 2 groups. The Mean score for the control group was 43.85 (SD = 5.96) and Mean score for the goal setting group was 44.23 (SD = 6.52). The t-test showed that these results were not significant, t(97) = – .31, p = .38

This pattern of results is illustrated in figure 1

Figure 1. Participants mean score on the Batak within 30 seconds    

Goal setting has been a hot topic of debate with regards to sports and exercises environment as well as organisation settings. Numerous concepts have been adapted with the aim to understand and explain how goal setting can be measured and ultimately help and improve people in sports and exercise settings. The empirical evidence is overwhelming, however, as with most sports-related academic journals, the investigations into goal settings are applied to groups of people or individuals where there is a desire or interest in that discipline, the Batak study that was conducted, related to a physical exertion for a 30-second duration. Two groups were used however, the goal setting group were given last year’s results whilst the control group were told to do their best.
One of the main reasons that the study was not able to replicate previous goal setting results, is due to not having a practice run (Yeo & Neal, 2004), and getting a feel of how one performs in that situation. Goal setting in sports or exercise environment is facilitated by practice and repetition (Yeo & Neal, 2004), this gives the individual or group an idea where they are and where they want to go. The other factor was motivation, as with most sports and exercise the purpose of participating is to enjoy and or to achieve an objective (Gaudreau & Braaten, 2016). One can argue that the goal setting group had a purpose, but as it did not have sustainability, i.e. no future benefit, hence, last year’s result was most likely discarded, on the other hand, the group that were told to do their best did not have any external goals so presumably compensated with their own internal goals (Locke & Latham, 1985; Smith, 2016; Weinberg, 1994). This may explain why results were very similar. Several possible developments could be introduced to facilitate and improve the Batak experiment. The first one would be to change the experimental design from an independent measure to a repeated measures design. The first 30-second score attempt can be the control, with no goal setting and 2 further attempts with a simple goal and a subsequent difficult goal, then one can measure the individual starting score as well as the simple and difficult goal. This most like will produce a positive result as competition would be employed which as stated by Latham et al., (2017) it’s another form of goal setting, however, due to time constraints this approach may be impractical.
The second method suggested is the approached Latham et al., (2017) undertook. The participants were unaware that they were being primed in an experiment to see if goal setting could be introduced subconsciously. They used 3 pictures of power lifters, lifting 400, 200 and 20 pounds respectively. Their results confirmed their hypothesis, that priming of perceived difficult, moderate and simple task, were proportionate to the effort employed by the participants. To transfer this methodology to the Batak experiment instead of using power lifters, the Batak experiment is about coordination and speed so the 400-pound picture can be replaced with a picture of the fastest 100 metre sprinter Usain Bolt, the 200-pound picture with an 800-metre runner and the easy 20-pound picture with a man/woman walking his/her dog. Introducing feedback to the experimental group in the original experiment could aid the study (Wack et al., 2014), however, a practice run would have to be conducted for the control group and do your best.
Goal setting only works if its task-specific and the goal is understood in line with somebody’s abilities. But also, consideration to the individual’s motivations and requirements for the challenges ahead are addressed correctly.

References    

Burdina, M., Hiller, R. S., & Metz, N. E. (2017). Goal Attainability and Performance: Evidence from Boston Marathon Qualifying Standards. Journal of Economic Psychology.

Burton, D., Gillham, A., Weinberg, R., Yukelson, D., & Weigand, ;D. (2013). Goal setting styles: Examining the role of personality factors on the goal practices of prospective Olympic athletes. Journal of Sport Behavior, 36(1), 23.

Ede, A., Sullivan, P. J., & Feltz, D. L. (2017). Self-doubt: Uncertainty as a motivating factor on effort in an exercise endurance task. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 28, 31-36.

Yeo, G. B., & Neal, A. (2004). A multilevel analysis of effort, practice, and performance: effects; of ability, conscientiousness, and goal orientation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(2), 231.

Gaudreau, P., & Braaten, A. (2016). Achievement Goals and their Underlying Goal Motivation: Does it Matter Why Sport Participants Pursue their Goals?. Psychologica Belgica, 56(3).

Krenn, B., Würth, S., & Hergovich, A. (2013). The impact of feedback on goal setting and task performance. Swiss Journal of Psychology.

Larsen, C. H., & Engell, C. (2013). The art of goal setting: A tale of doing sport psychology in professional football. Sport Science Review, 22(1-2), 49-76.

Latham, G. P., Brcic, J., & Steinhauer, A. (2017). Toward an Integration of Goal Setting Theory and the Automaticity Model. Applied Psychology, 66(1), 25-48.

Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1985). The application of goal setting to sports. Journal of sport psychology, 7(3), 205-222.

Sari, I. (2015). Does goal orientation matter for trait anxiety, self-efficacy and performance? An investigation in university athletes. Education, 136(2), 169-178.

Seitchik, A. E., & Harkins, S. G. (2014). The effects of nonconscious and conscious goals on performance. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 36(2), 99-110.

Smith, A. L. (2016). Coach Behaviors and Goal Motives as Predictors of Attainment and Well-Being in Sport. Sport and Exercise Psychology Research: From Theory to Practice, 415.

van de Pol, P. K., & Kavussanu, M. (2011). Achievement goals and motivational responses in tennis: Does the context matter?. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 12(2), 176-183.

Vidic, Z., & Burton, D. (2010). The roadmap: Examining the impact of a systematic goal-setting program for collegiate women’s tennis players. The sport psychologist, 24(4), 427-447.

Wack, S. R., Crosland, K. A., & Miltenberger, R. G. (2014). Using goal setting and feedback to increase weekly running distance. Journal of applied behavior analysis, 47(1), 181-185.

Weinberg, R. S. (1994). Goal setting and performance in sport and exercise settings: a synthesis and critique. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise.

Woodman, T., Zourbanos, N., Hardy, L., Beattie, S., & McQuillan, A. (2010). Do performance strategies moderate the relationship between personality and training behaviors? An exploratory study. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 22(2), 183-197.

Wu, G., Heath, C., & Larrick, R. (2008). A prospect theory model of goal behavior. Unpublished manuscript.