See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/51274442

A Questionnaire Measure of Achievement Motivation

Article  in  Journal of Applied Psychology · August 1970

DOI: 10.1037/h0029675 · Source: PubMed

CITATIONS READS

243 79,493

1 author:

Hubert J M Hermans
Radboud University
174 PUBLICATIONS   9,519 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Fields of tension and democracy in the self View project

Cultural Psychology/Dialogical Self Theory View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Hubert J M Hermans on 26 June 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Journal of Applied Psychology
1970, Vol 54, No. 4, 353-363

A QUESTIONNAIRE MEASURE OF
ACHIEVEMENT MOTIVATION
HUBERT J M. HERMANS '
University of Kijntegen, The Netherlands

Three studies were conducted to investigate the possibilit> of constructing a

new questionnaire to measure the achievement motive Study I stated with an
initial item pool whose content ranged over 10 aspects thought to be char-
acteristic of an individual who is highly motivated to achieve. Items embodying
all except one aspect were included in the scale resulting from an item analysis,
Study II investigated correlations between n Ach and performance in a
neutral and an achievement-oriented condition Only in the latter were sig-
nificant correlations found. In Study III, two educational programs were
compared with regard to their motivational implications In an unstructured
program, a high correlation was found between n Ach and performance, while
there was no significant correlation in a structured program. The importance
of a theoretical approach stressing relevant situational cues was discussed

During the past 20 yr., there have been a
great many studies in the area of achievement
motivation. These vary from psychometric
investigations to theoretical discussions. One
of the most difficult problems in this area
is that of measurement. Projective techniques
have been the principal devices used to
quantify the strength of the achievement mo-
tive. The most commonly used projective
measures are McClelland's Thematic Ap-
perception Test (TAT; McClelland, Atkin-
son, Clark, & Lowell, 1953), the French Test
of Insight (FTI; French, 1958a) and the
Iowa Picture Interpretation Test (IPIT;
Johnston, 1957). Sometimes, the TAT is
taken together with the Test Anxiety Ques-
tionnaire (TAQ; Mandler & Sarason, 1952)
as a combined measure of achievement mo-
tivation (Feather, 1961).
With regard to the projective n Ach mea-
sures, several critical problems arise. Klinger
(1966) pointed to their lack of internal con-
sistency, lack of test-retest reliability, their
deficient validity against performance criteria,
and the low intercorrelations among several
I
T h e author wishes to thank F. J. Th. Rutten,
A. H. Boon van Ostade, G. Brenninkmeijer, and
Lewis R. Goldberg for their valuable advice during
the preparation of this dissertation study Concerning
the translation and condensation of this study, the
author is indebted to Paul Slovic for his sugges-
tions and critical remarks
Requests for reprints should be sent to the author,
Erasmuslaan 16, University of Nijmegen, The
Netherlands.
353
projective n Ach measures. Carney (1966)
showed that the TAT was more sensitive to
irrelevant situational cues than a question-
naire measure for n Ach. McClelland et al.
(1953) found that the TAT was not in-
dependent of text anxiety (TAQ), a finding
which casts doubt upon its discriminant
validity.
Questionnaire measures of n Ach have also
proven unsatisfactory. The most frequently
used questionnaire is the achievement scale of
the Edwards' Personal Preference Schedule
(EPPS). Others are two scales of the Cali-
fornia Personality Inventory (CPI), the
Achievement via Conformance scale (Ac),
and the Achievement via Independence scale
(Ai; Gough, 1953). Thus far the validity of
these questionnaires against external criteria
has not been convincing (Weinstein, 1968;
Hermans, 1967).
The need for a new measure for n Ach still
exists. The present study tries to use empirical
and theoretical knowledge about n Ach to in-
vestigate the possibility of developing a new
questionnaire for this motive. In this study,
particular emphasis was placed upon the
quality of the initial item pool of achieve-
ment-related questions from which a question-
naire measure of achievement motivation
could be developed and validated. The im-
portance of the initial item pool was stressed
by Loevinger (1957) when she discussed the
term substantive validity. Recently, Hase and
354 HUBERT J. M. HERMANS
Goldberg (1967) suggested that differences
between personality inventories probably
stem more from differences in their initial
item pools than from differences in the
strategy utilized to construct them. Therefore,
the present investigation placed great em-
phasis upon the selection of items prior to
the development of a scale.
Aspects of n Ach
It is necessary to construct a pool of items
that is as heterogenous as the theoretical
construct of achievement motivation itself. In
order to include in the item pool the various
aspects or characteristics of the trait, the
following classification of the literature was
made:
Aspiration level. Isaacson (1964) found
that students with high n Ach as measured
by the TAT preferred courses of intermediate
difficulty, while low n Ach 5s chose either
the easy or the very difficult ones. A study by
Atkinson and Litwin (1960) in which the
FTI was used showed the same curvilinear
relationship between n Ach and preferred
distance in a ring-toss game.
Risk-taking behavior. The difference be-
tween aspiration level and risk-taking be-
havior has to do with the nature of the task.
In the former, the performance is dependent
primarily on the skill of the individual; in
the latter it is dependent primarily on chance
factors. Littig (1963) found that high n
Ach 5s (TAT) preferred lower risks than did
low n Ach 5s in a poker game. Van der Meer
(1966), using a game where outcomes could
only be determined by chance factors, came
to the same conclusions as Littig (1963).
Upward mobility. Littig and Yeracaris
(1965) distinguished sons of fathers with
blue-collar and white-collar occupations. Per-
sons of blue-collar origin who achieved white-
collar status were found to have a higher
n Ach than those who remained in the blue-
collar occupational stratum.
Persistence. Feather (1961) found that
there is a relationship between n Ach (TAT/
TAQ) and persistence depending on the per-
ceived difficulty of the task. When the prob-
ability of success approximated .50, high n
Ach 5s persisted longer than low n Ach 5s,
while at the extreme probabilities the low n
Ach 5s persisted longer.
Task tension. There are indications that n
Ach is related to the recall and resumption
of incompleted tasks. Atkinson (1953) found
5s classified as high n Ach recall more in-
completed tasks than 5s low in n Ach when
the conditions were ego involving. Weiner
(1965) interrupted 5s while working at
several tasks. After failure experience, high
n Ach 5s (TAT) tended to resume the in-
terrupted tasks while 5s with low n Ach
tended to resume the tasks following success
experience.
Time perception. A study by Knapp and
Garbutt (1958) showed that 5s with high n
Ach (TAT) have a time perception that is
more dynamic, while perceptions of low n
Ach 5s are more static. High n Ach 5s per-
ceive time as "a dashing waterfall," "a
galloping horseman," "a bird in flight" (etc.)
while 5s low in n Ach prefer descriptions as
"a quiet motionless ocean," " a vast expanse
of sky."
Time perspective. There is also evidence
that high n Ach 5s (TAT) are more future
oriented than low n Ach 5s. Gotzl (see Heck-
hausen, 1967) showed that high n Ach 5s
(TAT) had better memory for tasks that
were to be reported later as compared with
closer in time, in contrast with failure-mo-
tivated 5s.
Partner choice. French (1956) had 5s
choose between a partner who was perceived
as competent but unsympathetic and another
one who was perceived as incompetent but
sympathetic. High n Ach 5s (FTI) chose
the competent but unsympathetic one more
often than did low n Ach 5s.
Recognition behavior. Kagan and Moss
(1962) stressed the difficulty of differentiat-
ing between achievement behavior performed
for its own sake and achievement behavior
performed in order to gain recognition. They
concluded that the similarity in the pattern of
correlations for both types of behaviors is
more striking than the difference. This sug-
gests that high n Ach 5s show more striving
for recognition than low n Ach 5s.
Several studies indicate that high n Ach
Ss work harder and perform more com-
petently in schoolwork as well as in standard
 MEASURE OF ACHIEVEMENT MOTIVATION
performance tasks given in the psychological
laboratory.
Achievement behavior. In a recent sum-
mary of literature of achievement motivation,
Klinger (1966) found that significant rela-
tionships between n Ach (TAT, FTI, IPIT)
and several performance tasks were found in
about 50% of the studies.
Questionnaire n Ach
Considering the outcomes of the various
investigations, it is important to take into
account the particular kind of measure that is
used to assess the achievement motive. In
general, low correlations have been found
between self-report and projective measures.
Shaw (1961) found correlations which varied
from —.03 to .51 for men, and from —.23
to .14 for women (TAT, FTI, EPPS).
Even within the projective measures, no
common trait seems to be measured. Hofman
(1965) reports a correlation of .17 between
TAT and FTI. Weinstein (1968) even found
a striking lack of relationship between several
self-report measures of n Ach including the
EPPS; CPI, Ac; and CPI, Ai
In validation studies, projective measures
of n Ach have most often been compared
with the achievement scale of the EPPS.
Hermans (1967) summarized six studies: in
one case both the EPPS and a projective
technique showed positive correlations with a
performance criterion, in another case both
had no relationship with the criterion, and in
four cases the projective measures proved to
be more valid than the EPPS. This result
raises doubt about the validity of the achieve-
ment scale of the EPPS.
A notable characteristic of EPPS is the
attempt to match the items for social desir-
ability (SD). However, Heilbrun and Good-
stein (1959) distinguish between SD (the
perceived desirability of a given trait in
others) and personal desirability (the per-
ceived desirability of a given trait in oneself).
Their study proved that the personal desir-
ability was determining the answers, ,even
when the influence of SD was held constant.
It is possible that the SD matching had a
detrimental influence on the validity of EPPS.
Heilbrun and Goodstein (1961) compared the
standard achievement scale of EPPS with
355
the same scale where the items were matched
for SD per individual. The standard scale
showed a correlation with GPA while the indi-
vidual scale did not. Also, Scott (1963)
found that the forced-choice technique had a
negative effect on EPPS validity. These find-
ings led to the use of single items without any
form of SD matching in the present research.
STUDY I
The purpose of Study I was to see if a
scale for the achievement motive could be
developed with sufficient substantive validity,
internal consistency, and discriminant va-
lidity. Therefore, a number of achievement
items were drafted with an empirical descrip-
tion of the achievement-motivated individual
in mind.
Method
A questionnaire with 92 multiple-choice items
concerning n Ach and debilitating anxiety was pre-
sented to Ss The term "debilitating anxiety" was
used in the sense of Alpert and Haber (I960).
However, other items were used of the same type
as the achievement items and were drafted by the
author They were included to investigate the dis-
criminant validity of the achievement scale The
two types of items were mixed in random order.
Strategy In the construction of the scales, a
combination of an intuitive and internal strategy
was followed (Hase & Goldberg, 1967) The intui-
tive strategv was needed because items were drafted
with the empirical description of the achievement
motive in mind. The internal strategy evaluated the
internal consistency of the items and discriminant
validity of the resultant scales.
Empirical guidelines. The following empiiical de-
scription, based on the 10 aspects of the achieve-
ment motive, was used as a guide to writing items
(a) The achievement-motivated individual has a
high-aspiration level in so far that it docs not
reach beyond his capacities, (b) He prefers high
probabilities when the outcome of an action is
highly determined by external factors such as
chance; (c) He has a strong striving for upward
mobility ; (d) He persists for a long time when
confronted with a task of intermediate difficulty;
(e) When interrupted while working at a task he
wants to accomplish, he has a strong tendency
to resume the task; (/) He has a dynamic time per-
ception and feels things are happening quickly,
(g) His time perspective is ver> much future
oriented; (h) His choice of a task partner is
primarily directed by the competence of the other;
(*') He seeks recognition by performing well in his
work; and (;) He likes to perform well
The items for the achievement motive were
written in a way that all 10 of these aspects of the
356 HUBERT J. M. HERMANS

TABLE 1
ACHIEVEMENT MOTIVE CLUSTER or ITEM ANALYSIS

Correlation Correlation
Sequence with with
no in Item achievement anxiety Aspect
questionnaire cluster cluster

63 Working 'S something: .57 .12 AB

I would rather not do.
I don't like doing very much.
I would rather do now and then.
I like doing.
I like doing very much.
52 At school they thought I was .56 .11 AB
very diligent.
diligent
not always so diligent.
rather easy-going.
very easy-going.
16 Other people think I: 55 .32 AB
work very hard.
work hard.
work pretty hard
don't work very hard
don't work hard.
71 To prepare yourself a long time for an important task: .52 .19 TS
really is senseless
often is rather rash.
can often be useful.
testifies to a sense of reality.
is necessary to succeed.
26 When I am working, the demands I make upon my-
self are. 49 -04 AL
very high.
high.
pretty high.
not so high.
low
very low.
89 When the teacher gave lessons at school: .48 -.02 TT
I usually set my heart on doing my best and mak-
ing a favorable impression.
I usually paid great attention to the things being
my thoughts often strayed to other things
I was more interested in things that had nothing
to do with school.
58 I usually do: .47 - 14 AL
much more than I resolved to do.
a bit more than I resolved to do.
a little less than I resolved to do.
much less than I resolved to do
46 If I have not attained my goal and have not done a
task well then: .46 -.14 TT
I continue to do my best to attain the goal.
I exert myself once again to attain the goal.
I find it difficult to not lose heart
I'm inclined to give up.
I usually give up.
 MEASURE OF ACHIEVEMENT MOTIVATION 357

Table 1—(Continued)

Sequence Correlation Correlation

no. in Item with with
achievement anxiety Aspect
questionnaire
cluster cluster
39 At high school I thought perseverance was: .46 -.02 P
very unimportant.
rather unimportant.
important.
very important.
60 To begin with homework was. .46 .05 IT
a very great effort.
a great effort.
a rather great effort
not much effort
very little effort.
69 When I was still in high school the standards I set
myself with regard to my studies were: .46 09 AL
very high.
average.
low.
very low.
34 If I was called from my homen ork to watch tele-
vision or listen to the radio, then aften\ ard • .46 07 TT
I always went straight back to work
I would only take a short pause and then go back
to work. -
I would always wait a little before starting again.
I would find it very difficult to begin again
92 Work that requires great responsibility: .43 -06 AL
I would like to do very much
I would only do if I was paid well
I don't think I would be capable of doing.
is completely unattractive to me
14 I would find a life in which one wouldn't have to
to work at all: .41 09 AB
ideal.
very pleasant.
pleasant.
unpleasant.
very unpleasant
41 When I was in high school I thought that to attain
a high position in society was: .39 -.01 UM
unimportant.
of little importance.
not so important.
rather important.
very important.
77 When doing something difficult: .38 -.26 P
I give it up very quickly.
I give it up quickly.
I give it up rather quickly.
I don't give up too soon
I usually see it through.
73 In general I am: .37 - 13 TS
very strongly future-oriented.
strongly future-oriented.
not so strongly future-oriented.
not at all future-oriented.

'*
&
J 358 HUBERT J. M. HERMANS

Table 1—(Continued)

Correlation Correlation
' Sequence with with
no. in Item achievement anxiety Aspect
questionnaire cluster cluster

61 At school I found classmates who studied very hard. .37 -08 PC

very nice
nice.
just as nice as others who didn't work as hard.
not nice.
not nice at all.
64 At school I admired persons who had reached a very
high position in life: .37 .14 UM
very much.
much.
little.
not at all.
75 For life's extra pleasures: 36 .39 TP
I usually have no time.
I often have no time
I sometimes have too little time.
I usually have enough time
I always have time.
9 I usually am. 36 .08 TP
very busy.
busy.
not so busy.
not busy.
not busy at all.
90 I can work at something without getting tired for: .35 - 17 P
a very long time.
a long time
not too long a time
only a short time.
only a very short time.
36 Good relations with my teachers at high school .35 .07 PC
were appreciated very much
were appreciated.
were thought not to be so important.
were thought exaggerated in value
were thought completely unimportant
88 Boys succeed their father as manager of the
business because .34 03 UM
the} want to enlarge and evtend the business
they are lucky their father is manager.
they can put their new views into practice
this is the easiest way to earn a lot of money.
47 When I was in high school I was- 34 .03 KB
extremely ambitious.
very ambitious
not so ambitious.
a little ambitious
hardlj ambitious at all
76 Organizing something: .34 -.12 TS
I like doing very much.
I like doing.
I don't like doing very much
I don't like doing at all.
 MEASURE OF ACHIEVEMENT MOTIVATION 359

Table \—(Continued)

Sequence Correlation Correlation

with with
no. in Item Aspect
achievement anxiety
questionnaire cluster cluster

19 When I begin something I . 33 - 17

never carry it to a successful conclusion
seldom carry it to a successful conclusion.
sometimes carry it to a successful conclusion.
usually carry it to a successful conclusion.
always carry it to a successful conclusion
54 I very often am bored. .31 -.35 TP
I often am bored.
I sometimes am bored
I hardly ever am bored.
I never am bored.
81 Shopping is something: .30 - 09 All
I like very much
Hike
I don't like.
I hate.

Note.—AL = aspiration level. RT •= risk-takiiiE behavior, UM « upward mobility. P = perii-tcncc. TT = task tension,
TP = time perception, TS = time perspective, PC *= partner choice, Rii = recognition behavior, and AB <= achievement
behavior.

empirical description were represented in the initial Results

item pool. There were several items for each aspect
Cluster analysis. The items were treated by the
iterative cluster analysis (Boon van Ostade, 1967).
This analysis has the following characteristics (a)
Each item pool (in our case achievement and
anxiety items) is analyzed as a separate unit; (b)
All items of one item pool are correlated with the
total score of all the other ones within that pool;
(c) The item with the highest correlation with that
total score is correlated with all other items; (d)
The highest correlating item (above a certain value)
is combined with the first item in a total score;
(<•) Again, all the remaining items are correlated
with the total score obtained in this way; (/) The
item with the highest correlation (above the chosen
value) is combined with the two preceding items
to a new total score; (g) This process is continued
until no more items correlate with the total score
above the chosen value. The resultant total score
is called a cluster; (h) The whole process is now re-
peated with the remaining items of the same item
pool. This was done five times altogether in the
present investigation; (/) These iterative steps are
also applied to the other item pool(s); and (;)
Correlations of all items of all item pools are calcu-
lated with all clusters.
The value which decided whether an item w.as in-
cluded in the total score was ^ .20 in this study.
Subjects. The 5s were 125 freshmen males from
the University of Nijmegen. Twenty-five 5s were
students in psychology, 25 in law, 25 in mathematics,
25 in chemistry, and 25 in biology. They were
tested while participating in an introductory course.
In the case of the achievement motive the
first extraction of the cluster analysis gave a
cluster including 29 items with a reliability
of .82 (K-R 20). The four other extractions
gave very unreliable clusters each having a
maximum of four items. The analysis of the
debilitating anxiety items gave only one cluster
of 35 items with a reliability of .86. The cor-
relation between the achievement and anxiety
cluster was .00. The items building the
achievement cluster, their correlations with
the two main clusters, and their relation to
the various aspects of achievement motivation
are given in Table 1. As shown in this table
many items were found to have satisfactory
discriminant validity towards debilitating
anxiety and satisfactory representativeness
concerning the theoretical description of the
achievement-motivated individual. AH aspects
except risk-taking behavior (RT) are rep-
resented by one or more items in the achieve-
ment cluster.
STUDY II
While one of the purposes of Study I was
to investigate discriminant validity of the
achievement scale, Study II tried to prove
 360 HUBERT J. M. HERMANS
TABLE 2
RELIABILITY- (K-R 20) AND NUMBER OF ITEMS OF
THE ACHIEVEMENT SCALES, CALCULATED ON 5 S
IN THE NEUTRAL AND ACHIEVEMENT-
ORIENTED CONDITIONS
Achievement-
Neutral oriented
Measure
condition condition
K-R (20) 85 .88
No. of items 27 35
the convergent validity of this scale against
performance criteria. In studying this prob-
lem, the conditions existing during the mea-
surement of the trait and the performance
itself cannot be neglected. Klinger (1966)
I summarized the experimental conditions of
several studies and showed that the prob-
ability of finding a significant correlation be-
I tween n Ach and performance is greatest
when motivation is measured in a neutral
condition and performance is assessed in an
achievement-oriented condition. From a
theoretical point of view, this can be under-
stood from the model M = m X e (Atkinson
& Reitman, 1958) where m = motive, latent
disposition to strive for a particular goal-
state, e = expectancy that performance of
some act is instrumental to attainment of
the goal of that motive, and M = motivation,
aroused state of the person when the motive
has been engaged by the appropriate ex-
pectancy. This model suggests that high n
Ach 5s perform higher than low n Ach Ss in
situations which engage the expectancy to
excel.
Method
Experimental conditions. Two experimental con-
ditions were used. In the neutral condition, E only
asked for cooperation and gave the necessary in-
struction to perform a task (Pursuit-Roter). In the
achievement-oriented condition, the following re-
marks were made by E in addition to the instruc-
tions:
This is a test that indicates to what extent a
person is able to improve his achievements in
difficult tasks. The test says something about
your learning process in difficult situations.
Subjects. The Ss in the neutral condition were 32
male sophomores in psychology. About 2 wk. after
PMT (Dutch abbreviation for Prestatie Motivatie
Test) and TAT were presented, 5s were called again
and given the Pursuit-Rotor. The 5s in the
achievement-oriented condition were 35 male soph-
omores. The time span between the motivation
measuring and the presentation of the Pursuit Rotor
varied from 2 to S wk.
Motivation and performance measures. Two mea-
sures of n Ach were used in this study. The question-
naire measure was the P M T . P M T scores were
computed by unweighted summation of the answers
falling above the median value in the cluster of
items. To check the quality of the achievement
scales, two additional cluster analyses were per-
formed separately on the 5s of the neutral and
the achievement-oriented conditions. The scales of
these cluster analyses were comparable with the
achievement scale in Study I with regard to the
representativeness of the items, reliability of the
scales, and number of items included in the scales.
The reliability coefficients (K-R 20) and the num-
ber of included items are presented in Table 2.
To compare P M T with a projective technique,
McCIelland's TAT was also given to 5s The pictures
used were numbers 2, 101, 102, 28, 83, and 103.
The stories were analyzed according to the recom-
mendations of Atkinson (19S8). They were given
code numbers and submitted to two graduate stu-
dents in psychology who were unaware of the
criteria with which the scores were to be cor-
related. Their interrater reliability was .84. PMT
and TAT were administered under neutral con-
ditions
The Pursuit-Rotor (Eysenck, 1956) was given to
5s as the performance task It consisted of two
trials, each of 5 min. The interval was 10 min. In
that time, 5s performed another task not relevant
for this study If the 5 succeeded in fixing the
target for 0.1 sec, a hit was registered (not visible
to 5) The disc made 81 rotations per min Per-
formance measures were the number of hits in the
TABLE 3
CORRELATIONS (SPEARMAN) BETWEEN PMT, TAT,
AND N0MBER OF HLTS ON THE PURSUIT-ROTOR
TASK UNDER NEUTRAL AND ACHIEVEMENT-
ORIENTED CONDITIONS
Test Trial 1 Trial 2
Neutral condition
PMT (» = 32) .08 11
TAT (» = 31«) .03 .10
Achievement-oriented condition
PMT (» = 35) 32* .41*
TAT (» = 30*) -.08 -.11
Note.—PMT = Prestatie Mouvatie Ten. TAT Themat'C
Apperception Test.
• TAT measures were not available on all .9s.
*i> < .05 (one-tailed test).
 MEASURE OF ACHIEVEMENT MOTIVATION
first and in the second trial. The Pursuit-Rotor
w:is chosen as a task because it was an achievement
activity requiring a mode of behavior that was
quite different from those of the PMT and TAT.
This was seen as a prerequisite to investigating the
convergent validity of the PMT.
Results
The results of the correlations between
PMT, TAT, and performance measures are
given in Table 3. The correlations used were
Spearman rank-order correlations.
Table 3 shows that 5s with high n Ach
according to the questionnaire (PMT) do not
have a higher performance than low n Ach
5s in the neutral condition. However, in the
achievement-oriented condition, 5s with high
n Ach had a higher performance than Ss
with a low n Ach. This is not the case for
TAT n Ach. The TAT shows a lack of rela-
tionship in both experimental conditions. The
Spearman correlation between PMT and TAT
was .20 for the Ss in the neutral condition,
and .13 in the achievement-oriented condition.
STUDY III
While the first two studies were being
carried out, some changes occurred in the
psychology course of the University of
Nijmegen. Some students studied in a rela-
tively unstructured program (U) and others
participated in a relatively structured pro-
gram (S). The results of the laboratory in-
vestigations of Study II stressed the im-
portance of situational cues analyzing the
relationship n Ach (PMT) and performance.
TABLE 4
CORRELATIONS (SPEARMAN) BETWEEN PMT, TAT,
APTITUDE, NUMBER OF EXAMINATIONS, AND
GRADES IN THE UNSTRUCTURED PROGRAM
Item 1 2 3 4 5
Xo. of exams (1) 34 35 30 35
Grades (2) .38* 34 29 34
PMT (3) .57" .34* 32 38
TAT (4) -.20 -.27 .20 32
Aptitude (5) 16 -.14 .24 -.52
Note.—The entries above the diagonal indicate the number
of pairs over which the corresponding correlation* are com-
puted. PMT = Prestatie Motivatie Test, TAT = Thematic
Apperception Test.
* p < .05 (one-tailed test).
**p < .01 (one-tailed test).
361
TABLE 5
CORRELATIONS (SPEARMAN) BETWEEN 1>MT, TAT,
APTITUDE, AND GRADES IN THE
STRUCTURED PROGRAM
Item 1 2 3 4
Grades (1) 78 72 76
PMT (2) .11 75 7y
TAT (3) .14 13 73
Aptitude (4) .26* -.07 17
Note.—The entries above the diagonal indicate the number of
pairs over which these correlations are computed. PMT -=Pre-
•.tatie Motivaue Test, TAT = TJicmauc Apperception l e s t .
* p < .05 (one-tailed test).
Because the extent to which a program was
structured seemed a potentially relevant
situational cue, Study III was initiated to
investigate the impact of this variable on the
relationship between n Ach and performance.
Method
Measures. Again PMT and TAT were used to
measure n Ach in the same manner described in
Study II.
Moreover, an aptitude test was given consisting
of five subtests Of the five tests, three were
verbal and two were numerical This test has been
used by a large Dutch company for personnel
selection among persons having a hiph level of
intelligence
Performance measures were the number of exami-
nations completed in the first 2 yr of the study
(for Program U ) , the sum of grades received for
six parts of the preliminary examination (for Pro-
gram S)
Programs. In Program TJ, the student was to a
great extent free to make his own decisions con-
cerning the number of examinations he took within
a given time period. Also he could submit a pro-
posal to his professor regarding the dates of the
examinations. For most examinations, he could
choose a sequence according to his own planning.
In Program S, a fixed number of examinations had
to be completed within a certain time period Also,
the sequence of the examinations was determined by
the program, not by the student. In fact, the group
under study had to take the six parts of the pre-
liminary examination within 2-3 wk.
Subjects. The 5s in Program U were 38 male
sophomores in psychology1. They were the same Ss
as those in Study II (neutral condition). Tests were
given at the end of the second year of study.
The 5s in Program S were 80 students who took
the preliminary examination at the end of the first
year of study. The tests were given 4 mo after this
examination. The 5s of Study II (achievement-
oriented condition) can be considered as a random
sample from this group of 80 students
362 HUBERT J. M. HERMANS

Results Study III points in the same direction as

The correlations between PMT, TAT, Study II. Only in the unstructured program
did high n Ach 5s (PMT) do better than
aptitude, and the criteria in Program U are
low n Ach 5s. This finding gives special sig-
shown in Table 4. From this table, it is
nificance to McClelland's (1964) remark that
evident that n Ach as measured by PMT
high n Ach 5s are characterized by a need
gives a high correlation with the number of
for personal responsibility. To the extent a
examinations completed and a lower but still
study program is more structured, it seems
significant correlation with grades. Aptitude to have less strength to actualize high n Ach
and TAT do not show significant correlations in high performance. In the present study, it
with both criteria. was notable that aptitude correlated with
Table 5 in which the correlations in Pro- grades only in Program S.
grams S are presented, gives a different
An analysis of the relation between Study
picture. Neither PMT nor TAT shows a cor-
II and Study III reveals that 5s of the
relation with grades. Aptitude has here a
neutral condition in Study II were those who
significant (p < .05) correlation with the
participated in Program U while 5s of the
criterion. achievement-oriented condition participated
DISCUSSION
in Program S: A possible confounding of
results from these two studies cannot be ex-
In general, the results of the three studies cluded completely. However, an interpreta-
suggest that it is possible to construct a tion of the results on the basis of comparable
questionnaire to measure the achievement investigations and insightful theory seems
motive. Because there is a considerable variety more reasonable.
of (uncorrelated) measures for n Ach, all of A factor that seems of utmost importance
which pretend to measure the achievement in the construction of a questionnaire for
motive, it is perhaps better to speak about
the achievement motive is the quality of
an achievement motive. Although we con-
the initial item pool. The achievement mo-
structed a theoretical description on the basis
of studies which used projective measures, tive is likely a relevant variable for some
our resultant scale does not correlate sub- kinds of performance. It subsumes a number
stantially with the TAT. The suspicion, how- of different behavioral aspects under one con-
ever, that we are only dealing with method struct. This imposes heavy requirements on
variance must be rejected: the correlation the representativeness and the substantial
between achievement motive and debilitating validity of the initial item pools of this trait.
anxiety, measured by the same method, is Here also the theory M = m X e can function
lower than the correlations between the as a guide for specifying relevant aspects.
achievement scale and relevant performance Although Studies II and III contained
criteria. This became evident both in a several situations in which performance could
laboratory and a field study. be considered potentially related to the
It is important to speak about relevant achievement motive, the TAT did not shon
performance criteria. Apparently not all per- any significant correlation with the criterion.
formance criteria correlate with n Ach. In This fact is consistent with the analysis of
Study II, 5s with high n Ach (PMT) did Klinger (1966) who concluded that pro-
not work harder than low n Ach 5s in the jective n Ach measures have little validity for
neutral condition, but they did in the achieve- 5s of college or adult age.
ment-oriented condition. In the latter con-
dition, 5s had the opportunity to excel. This REFERENCES
outcome confirms the results of French ALPERT, R., & HABER, R. N . Anxiety in academic
(1958b) and stresses the importance of the achievement situations. Journal of Abnormal and
theoretical model M = m X e (Atkinson & Social Psychology, 1960, 61, 2O7-21S.
Reitman, 1958) as a guide in validation ATKINSON, J. W. The achievement motive and
recall of interrupted and completed task. Journal
studies. of Experimental Psychology, 19S3, 46, 381-390
 MEASURE OF ACHIEVEMENT MOTIVATION
ATKINSON, J. W. ( E d ) Motives in fantasy, action
and society Princeton: Van Nostrand, 1958
ATKINSON, J W., & LITWIN, G H Achievement
motive and test anxiety conceived as motive to
approach success and motive to avoid failure.
Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology,
1960, 60, 52-63.
ATKINSON, J. W., & REITMAN, W Performance as a
function of motive strength and expectancy of
goal attainment. In J. W. Atkinson (Ed.), Mo-
tives in fantasy, action and society. Princeton
Van Nostrand, 1958. Pp 278-287.
BOON VAN OSTADE, A H. Een methode voor de
toetsing, constructie en cxploratie van opera-
tionaliseringen voor eigenschappen in de sociale
wetenschappen. Unpublished research report, Uni-
versity of Nijmegen, 1967.
CARNEY, R. The effect of situational variables on
the measurement of achievement motivation
Journal of Educational and Psychological Measure-
ment, 1966, 26, 675-690.
EYSENCK, H J. Warm-up in pursuit-rotor learning
as a function of the extinction of conditioned in-
hibition. Ada Psychologica, 1956, 12, 349-370.
FEATHER, N. T. The relationship of persistence at a
task to expectation of success and achievement
related motives Journal of Abnormal and Social
Psychology, 1961, 63, 552-561
FRENCH, E. G. Motivation as a variable in work-
partner selection. Journal of Abnormal and
Social Psychology, 1956, 53, 96-99.
FRENCH, E G. Development of a measure of complex
motivation. In J. W. Atkinson (Ed.), Motives
in fantasy, action and society. Princeton- Van
Nostrand, 19S8, P p 242-248. (a)
FRENCH, E G Some characteristics of achievement
motivation. In J W. Atkinson ( E d ) , Motives
in fantasy, action and society. Princeton: Van
Nostrand, 1958, Pp. 270-277. (b)
GOUGH, H. G. The construction of a personality
scale to predict scholastic achievement Journal
of Applied Psychology, 1953, 37, 361-367.
HASE, H D., & GOLDBERG, L. R Comparative validity
of different strategies of constructing personality
inventory scales Psychological Bulletin, 1967, 67, VAN DER MEER, H C Besluitvorming II. Dc relatie
213-248
HECKHAUSE.V, H The anatomy of achievement mo-
tivation. New York: Academic Press, 1967.
HEILBRUN, A. B , & GOODSTEIN, L. D. Relation-
ships between personal and social desirability sets
and performance on the Edwards' Personal Pref-
erence Schedule Journal of Applied Psychology, WEINSTEIN, M S Achievement motivation and risk
1959, 43, 302-305.
HEILBRUN, A. B., & GOODSTEIN, L D. Social desir-
ability response set: Error or predictor variable.
Journal of Psychology, 1961, 51, 321-329.
View publication stats
363
HERMANS, H Motivatic en prestatic Amsterdam
Swets en ZcithnRer, 1967.
HOFMAN, L A stud> of achievement motivation.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State
University, 1965
ISAACSON, R L Relations between n achievement,
test anxiety, and curricular choices Journal of
Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1964, 68, 447-
452.
JOHNSTON, R. A. A Methodological analysis of
several revised forms of the Iowa Picture Inter-
pretation Test Journal of Personality, 1957, 25,
283-293.
KAGAN, J., & Moss, H Birth to maturity New
York. \Vile>, 1962
KLIN'CER, E. Fantasy need achievement as a mo-
tivational construct Psychological Bulletin, 1966,
66, 291-308
KNAPP, R H., & GARBUTT, J. T. Time imagery and
the achievement motive Journal of Personality,
1958, 26, 426-434.
LITTIG, L W Effects of motivation on probability
preferences Journal of Personality, 1963, 31, 417-
427.
LITTIG, L VV, & YERACARIS, C. A Achievement mo-
tivation and intergenerational occupational mo-
bility. Journal of Personality and Social Psy-
chology. 1965, 1, 386-389.
r<
LOEVINGER, J. Objective tests as instruments of psy-
chological theory. Psychological Reports, 1957, 3,
635-694.
MANDLER, G., & SARASON, S B. A study of anxiety
and learning Journal of Abnormal and Social
Psychology, 1952, 47, 166-173.
MCCLELLAND, D. C , ATKINSON, J \V , CLARK, R A.,
& LOWELL, E L The achievement motive New
York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1953.
Scorr, W. A Social desirability and individual con-
ceptions of the desirable Journal of Abnormal and
Social Psychology, 1963, 67, 574-585.
I
SHAW, M. C. Need achievement scales as predictors
of academic success Journal of Educational Psy-
chology, 1961, 52, 282-285
tussen nsicobereidheid, prestatie-motivatie en
tijdbelevcn Nederlands Tijdschrijl voor de Psy-
chologic, 1966, 21, 719-731
WtiNER, B Need achievement and the resumption
of incompleted tasks Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 1965, 1, 165-168
preference Oregon Research Institute Research
Bulletin, 1968, 8(6).
(Received July 28, 1969)