바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

ACOMS+ 및 학술지 리포지터리 설명회

  • 한국과학기술정보연구원(KISTI) 서울분원 대회의실(별관 3층)
  • 2024년 07월 03일(수) 13:30
사전등록 바로가기
 

logo

  • P-ISSN1229-0653
  • KCI

ISSN : 1229-0653

논문 상세

다음
논문 투고

Vol.26 No.2

Citation Share

성취-흥미 목표점화를 통한 자발적 과제선택의 무의식적 조절

Unconscious Control of Voluntary Task Choice Through Achievement-Goal VS. Fun-Goal Priming

한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격 / Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology, (P)1229-0653;
2012, v.26 no.2, pp.1-14
https://doi.org/10.21193/kjspp.2012.26.2.001
신홍임 (연세대학교)
김민식 (연세대학교)
신홍임, & 김민식. (2012). 성취-흥미 목표점화를 통한 자발적 과제선택의 무의식적 조절. 한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격, 26(2), 1-14, https://doi.org/10.21193/kjspp.2012.26.2.001

초록

자발적 과제전환 패러다임은 다양한 과제수행의 상황에서 참가자의 자유로운 과제선택행동을 분석하는데 유용한 방법이다. 본 연구에서는 자발적 과제전환 패러다임을 토대로 목표의 무의식적인 활성화가 한 개인이 일상적으로 추구하는 동기와의 상호작용속에서 과제들간의 전환손실과 과제선택행동에 어떤 영향을 주는지를 분석하고자 하였다. 이를 위해 실험에서는 참가자에게 그림과제를 통해 성취목표 또는 흥미목표를 점화한 후, 난이도가 다른 과제를 자발적으로 선택하며 수행하도록 했다. 그 결과, 성취목표점화조건에서 흥미목표점화조건보다 오답율의 전환손실이 더 적게 나타났으며, 일상적으로 성취목표를 추구하는 경향이 높은 참가자들에게 성취목표가 점화되었을 때, 쉬운 과제로의 편향이 나타났다. 이 결과는 과제전환의 상황에서 외부환경의 목표점화를 통해 의식적인 과제선택행동에 무의식적으로 영향을 줄 수 있는 가능성과 과제전환손실과 과제선택행동의 개인차변인으로서 목표 및 동기의 중요성을 시사하고 있다. 논의에서는 과제선택행동과 인지적 조절과정에 무의식적으로 영향을 줄 수 있는 변인들에 대한 후속연구의 방향을 다루었다.

keywords
goal priming, task choice, switch costs, cognitive control, achievement goal, fun goal, 목표점화, 과제선택, 과제전환손실, 인지적 조절, 성취목표, 흥미목표

Abstract

The voluntary task switching paradigm is a helpful method to explore task choice behaviors. Using a voluntary task switching paradigm, we examined whether the unconscious pursuit of goals has an impact on switch costs and task choice behavior. At the beginning of the experimental session, participants were randomly assigned to an achievement goal or a fun goal priming condition. The priming manipulation was carried out through a picture-search task. After that, number tasks were presented, and the participants had to choose voluntarily just one of the two numbers, which were always simultaneously presented in Korean (easy task) and in German (difficult task), to judge the magnitude (relative to 5). The results showed that switch costs in error rates were higher in the fun goal priming than in the achievement goal priming. More importantly, the easy task was more often preferred in the achievement goal priming condition than in the fun goal priming condition, while this task choice bias increased among people with chronically high-achievement motivation. Implications of the outcomes for cognitive flexibility in task switching are discussed.

keywords
goal priming, task choice, switch costs, cognitive control, achievement goal, fun goal, 목표점화, 과제선택, 과제전환손실, 인지적 조절, 성취목표, 흥미목표

참고문헌

1.

김성일, 윤미선, 소연희 (2008). 한국 학생의 학업에 대한 흥미: 실태, 진단 및 처방. 한국심리학회지: 사회문제, 14, 187-221.

2.

김유진 (2011). 성취목표지향 프로파일에 따른 자기조절학습과 학업성취의 차이분석. 교육연구논총, 32, 1-22.

3.

신홍임, 김민식(2011). 자발적 과제전환의 이득효과. 한국심리학회지: 인지및생물, 23, 339-354.

4.

탁수연, 박영신, 김의철 (2006). 대학생의 학업성취와 관련 변인의 관계 분석: 부모자녀관계, 자기효능감, 성취동기, 공부시간을 중심으로. 아동교육, 16, 143-154.

5.

한성열 (2008). 한국문화의 맥락에서 본 교육의식: 한국사회에서 교육적 성취에 대한 심리학적 분석. 한국심리학회지: 사회문제, 14, 33-46.

6.

한재현, 김민식(2010). Invulnerable negative compatibility effect for direction of colored double-headed arrows. 인지과학, 21, 535-557.

7.

Altmann, E. M. (2004). The preparation effect in task switching: Carryover of SOA. Memory & Cognition, 32, 153-163.

8.

Ames, C., & Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Students’ learning strategies and motivation processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 260-267.

9.

Arrington, C. M., & Logan, G. D. (2004). The cost of a voluntary task switch. Psychological Science, 15, 610-615.

10.

Arrington, C. M., Weaver, S. M., & Pauker, R. L. (2010). Stimulus-based priming of task choice during voluntary task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 36, 1060-1067.

11.

Bargh, J. A., Chen, M., & Burrows, L. (1996). Automacity of social behavior: Direct effects of trait construct and stereotype priming on action. Journal of personality and Social Psychology, 71, 230-244.

12.

Bargh, J. A., Gollwitzer, P. M., Lee-Chai, A., Barndollar, K., & Tröschel, R. (2001). The automated will: Nonconscious activation and pursuit of behavioral goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 1014-1027.

13.

Custers, R., & Aarts, H. (2010). The unconscious will: How the pursuit of goals operates outside of conscious awareness. Science, 329, 47-50.

14.

Custers, R., Maas, M., Wildenbeest, M., & Aarts, H. (2008). Nonconscious goal pursuit and the surmounting of social and physical obstacles. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 1013-1022.

15.

Dijksterhuis, A., & Aarts, H. (2010). Goals, attention, and (un)consciousness. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 467-490.

16.

Egner, T. & Hirsch, J. (2005). Cognitive control mechanisms resolve conflict through cortical amplification of task-relevant information. Nature Neuroscience, 8, 1784-1790.

17.

Epstein, J. A., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (1992). Winning is not enough: The effects of competition and achievement orientation on intrinsic interest. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 128-139.

18.

Gollwitzer, P. M., Sheeran, P., Trötschel, R., & Webb, T. L. (2011). Self-regulation of priming effects on behavior. Psychological Science, 22, 901-907.

19.

Hart, W., & Ablarracín, D. (2009). The effects of chronic motivation and achievement primes on the activation of achievement and fun goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 1129-1141.

20.

Harackiewicz, J. M., & Elliot, A. J. (1993). Achievement goals and intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 904-915.

21.

Hidi, S. (1990). Interest and its contribution as a mental resource for learning. Review of Educational Research, 60(4), 549-571.

22.

Howell, A. J., & Buro, K. (2009). Implicit beliefs, achievement goals, and procrastination: A mediational analysis. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 151-154.

23.

Hughes, G., Velmans, M., & De Fockert, J. D. (2009). Unconscious priming of a no-go response. Psychophysiology, 46, 1258-1269.

24.

Kiesel, A., Steinhauser, M., Wendt, M., Falkenstein, M., Jost, K., Philipp, A. M., & Koch, I. (2010). Control and interference in task switching – a review. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 849-874.

25.

Kim, S.-Y., Kim, M.-S., & Chun, M. M.. (2005). Concurrent working memory load can reduce distraction. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102, 16524-16529.

26.

Koch, I., Gade, M., Schuh, S., & Philipp, A. M. (2010). The role of inhibition in task switching: A review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 1-14.

27.

Liefooghe, B., Demanet, J., & Vandierendonck, A. (2010). Persisting activation in voluntary task switching: It all depends on the instructions. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 381-386.

28.

Mayr, U., & Bell, T. (2006). On how to be unpredictable: Evidence from the voluntary task-switching paradigm. Psychological Science, 17, 774-780.

29.

Mayr, U., & Kliegel, R. (2003). Differential effects of cue changes and task changes on task-set selection costs. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 362-372.

30.

Matsumoto, K., & Tanaka, K. (2004). Conflict and Cognitive Control. Science, 303, 969-970.

31.

McClelland, D. C. (1985). Human Motivation. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman.

32.

Phan, H. P. (2010). Empirical model and analysis of mastery and performance-approach goals: a developmental approach. Educational Psychology, 30(5), 547-564.

33.

Philipp, A. M., Gade, M., & Koch, I. (2007). Inhibitory processes in language switching? Evidence from switching language-defined response sets. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19, 395-416.

34.

Reuss, H., Kiesel, A., Kunde, W., & Hommel, B. (2011). Unconscious activation of task sets. Consciousness and Cognition, 20, 556-567.

35.

Roskes, M., Sligte, D., Shalvi, S., & De Dreu, C. K. W. (2011). The right side? Under time pressure, approach motivation leads to right-oriented bias. Psychological Science, 22(11), 1403-1407.

36.

Sassenberg, K., & Moscowitz, G. B. (2005). Don’t stereotype, think different! Overcoming automatic stereotype activation by mindset priming. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 506-514.

37.

Scharlau, I., & Ansorge, U. (2003). Direct parameter specification of an attention shift: Evidence from perceptual latency priming. Vision Research, 43, 1351-1363.

38.

Schneider, W., Eschmann, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-Prime user’s guide. Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools, Inc.

39.

Shah, J. (2003). Automatic for the people: How representations of significant others implicitly affect goal pursuit. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 661-681

40.

Sharot, T., Velasquez, C. M., & Dolan, R. J. (2011). Do decisions shape preference? Evidence from blind choice. Psychological Science, 21, 1231-1235.

41.

Wentzel, K. R. (1989). Adolescent classroom goals, standards for performance, and academic achievement: An interactionist perspective. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 131-142.

한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격

논문 투고 OA 정책