Résumé
Contemporary achievement goal models (Elliot & McGregor, 2001; Elliot, Murayama, & Pekrun, 2011) have been criticized for their lack of parsimony, discriminant validity, and predictive value (Gernigon, Vallacher, Nowak, & Conroy, 2015; Roberts, 2012). As a parsimonious alternative to these models, Gernigon et al. (2015) proposed a dynamical model of approach and avoidance, according to which approach and avoidance patterns result from the interactions among a few key social-cognitive variables: competence expectancies (C), benefit for the self (Bs), and threat for the self (Ts). In this formal model, the control parameter, K, of approach (when K tends toward +1) and avoidance (when K tends toward -1) motivations results from the following equation: K= (C × Bs) – [Ts × (1 – C)]. The present study aims to test whether this model predicts intrinsic motivation in achievement contexts better than Elliot et al.'s (2011) six-goal model does. High school students (n = 130) familiarized themselves with a basketball training circuit. Then, one week later, right before carrying out the basketball circuit again, they answered the AASQ (Gernigon, Klosek, Montigny, & Teboul, 2017), which measures C, Bs, and Ts, thus enabling the calculation of K; the AGIQ-6 (Le Bars, Teboul, Pineau, & Gernigon, 2017), which measures involvement in the goals (task-approach, self-approach, other-approach, taskavoidance, self-avoidance, and other-avoidance) of Elliot et al.'s (2011) six-goal framework; and an intrinsic motivation scale (Elliot & Harackiewicz, 1996). A stepwise regression analysis revealed that the parameter K was the first predictor of intrinsic motivation (b = .40; p < .001; R2 = .27), only followed by self-approach goals (b = .36; p < .001; added R2 = .11). This finding brings support to the relevance of Gernigon et al.'s (2015) dynamical model of approach and avoidance, as compared to Elliot et al.'s (2011) six-goal model.