» Articles » PMID: 37232637

Inquiring About Loss Aversion of Achievement Value

Overview
Date 2023 May 26
PMID 37232637
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

According to the achievement motivation theory, in achievement context, students may have to not only approach success/gain (e.g., strive to get a better grade) but also avoid failure/loss (e.g., avoid performing worse). However, these two types of achievement motivation have often been investigated separately. In contrast, loss aversion, a central argument in prospect theory, posits that avoiding losses has a greater impact on preferences than does approaching gains; suggesting that gain approach and loss avoidance should be treated as asymmetric forces that can be analyzed simultaneously to study approach to gain and avoidance to loss among students in terms of grades. The main purposes of this study were to propose an alternative measure to frame the dynamic evaluation process in the context of achievement that considers students' sensitivity to performance change, and to further investigate students' loss aversion in relation to grades through intrapersonal and interpersonal comparisons. A total of 41 and 72 college students participated in study 1 and study 2, respectively. One-way repeated measure ANOVA was conducted for the former sample while the single sample -tests and independent sample ANOVA were used for the latter. Through the implementation of this alternative measure, the results revealed that (1) college students were more sensitive to performance changes than to their current or final performance, and (2) loss aversion was dependent on the referents. Students were averse to interpersonal loss, but not to intrapersonal loss. These findings indicate the usefulness of the proposed measure for investigating the asymmetric responses between two types of achievement motivation, and the proposed measure can be used to extend and revise the explanatory boundaries of prospect theory and self-discrepancy theory.

Citing Articles

Service product family optimization design for demand-driven older adult home care.

Yu C, Zhao P Front Public Health. 2024; 12:1479586.

PMID: 39635224 PMC: 11614844. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1479586.

References
1.
Mason T, Smith K, Engwall A, Lass A, Mead M, Sorby M . Self-discrepancy theory as a transdiagnostic framework: A meta-analysis of self-discrepancy and psychopathology. Psychol Bull. 2019; 145(4):372-389. DOI: 10.1037/bul0000186. View

2.
Tian L, Yu T, Huebner E . Achievement Goal Orientations and Adolescents' Subjective Well-Being in School: The Mediating Roles of Academic Social Comparison Directions. Front Psychol. 2017; 8:37. PMC: 5281619. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00037. View

3.
Higgins E . Self-discrepancy: a theory relating self and affect. Psychol Rev. 1987; 94(3):319-40. View

4.
Harinck F, van Dijk E, van Beest I, Mersmann P . When gains loom larger than losses: reversed loss aversion for small amounts of money. Psychol Sci. 2007; 18(12):1099-105. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.02031.x. View

5.
Murayama K, Elliot A . The competition-performance relation: a meta-analytic review and test of the opposing processes model of competition and performance. Psychol Bull. 2012; 138(6):1035-70. DOI: 10.1037/a0028324. View