Goal-specificity has been found to affect performance: In difficult tasks, specific goals may be detrimental for learning. Locke and Latham (1990) claimed that goal-specificity has an impact on performance via motivation. Vollmeyer and Rheinberg's (1998) cognitive-motivational process model proposed that cognitive and motivational processes interact. Therefore, we investigated if goal-specificity may change the nature of this interaction, by trying to fit different structural equations models for groups given a specific goal (SG) or a nonspecific goal (NSG). Before beginning a complex dynamic task, the SG group was given a specific goal to reach, but the NSG group only received a goal when they had to transfer their knowledge. We found that the SG group learnt less and had lower motivation during learning. Contrary to earlier claims, there was no direct effect of goal-specificity on initial motivation, but it did alter the interaction between strategies and motivation during learning. The empirical model for the SG group showed a strong effect of initial motivation on the learning process and goal-directed strategies were effective. For the NSG group motivation during the task and systematic strategies were important.

In our cognitive-motivational process model (Vollmeyer & Rheinberg, in press) we assumed that motivational factors have an impact on how people learn about a task and how well they can perform it. Many motivation theories (if not all) have such assumptions in common. Our approach emphasizes four task specific motivational factors: mastery confidence, incompetence fear, interest, and challenge. We investigated how these motivational factors influence the learning outcome through mediators. Our framework proposes that the motivational state and the strategy systematicity could mediate motivational effects on learning. Path analysis supported this assumption in two studies.