C
Psychology in the Schools, Vol. 54(7), 2017
View this article online at wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/pits
2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
DOI: 10.1002/pits.22024
RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN PSYCHOLOGICAL WELLBEING OF THAI COLLEGE
STUDENTS, GOAL ORIENTATIONS, AND GENDER
JOHN J. SOSIK
The Pennsylvania State University
JAE UK CHUN
Korea University
RAVINDER KOUL
The Pennsylvania State University
This paper examined the direct and interaction effects of students’ learning and performanceavoidance goal orientations on their psychological wellbeing and a moderating role of students’
gender in these relationships. Using 564 self-reports of freshman college students in a Thai university, we found students’ psychological wellbeing to be positively related to their learning goal
orientation and negatively related to their performance-avoidance goal orientation. Additionally,
the negative relationship between students’ performance-avoidance goal orientation and psychological wellbeing was stronger for men than women. Lastly, differences in students’ psychological
wellbeing between men and women became more pronounced with increases in learning goal orientation for students with low levels of performance-avoidance goal orientation, but not for students
with high levels of performance-avoidance goal orientation. These findings were obtained after
C 2017 Wiley Periodicals,
controlling for students’ grade point average and academic program. Inc.
Over the last decade, interest in students’ wellbeing has grown due to increased rates of
suicide, depression, anxiety, bullying, and aggressive behavior in schools (Gruttadaro & Crudo,
2012). One aspect of wellbeing that can be influenced by the climate and nature of learning in
schools is psychological wellbeing (PWB), the degree to which one possesses personal meaning
and self-realization and lives in accordance with one’s true self (Ryff, 1989). PWB, also referred
to as eudaimonic wellbeing, represents one of two aspects of wellbeing (Ryan & Deci, 2001). The
second component is subjective wellbeing (SWB) or hedonistic wellbeing which is one’s degree
of happiness, manifested in greater positive affect, less negative affect, and greater life satisfaction
(Ryan & Deci, 2001). Factor analytic studies (e.g., Linley, Maltby, Wood, Osborne, & Hurling,
2009) have shown PWB and SWB to be highly related but distinct constructs.
PWB is associated with the successful achievement of personal goals of development (e.g.,
knowledge, skill, and ability acquisition and mastery) and overcoming challenges in life (Ryff,
1989). In school contexts, students’ achievement goals involving learning have been identified as
important personal influences on PWB as they often reflect the kind of self-conceptions students
hold as prescribed by social norms, culture, and teachers (Czopp, Lasane, Sweigard, Bradshaw, &
Hammer, 1998). To assess teaching effectiveness, educational and positive psychology researchers
are now encouraging schools to focus on students’ self-concept, achievement goals, PWB, and
character strengths (Farrington et al., 2012). This recent trend assumes that students’ “character
is built not through lectures or direct instruction from teachers but through the experience of
persevering as students confront challenging academic work” (Tough, 2016, p. 66). Many schools
communicate strong expectations that academic diligence, perseverance, and effort are admired
The authors wish to thank Kaushik Krishnaswamy Kumar and three anonymous reviewers for their helpful
comments on earlier versions of this manuscript.
Correspondence to: John J. Sosik, School of Graduate and Professional Studies, The Pennsylvania State University, Malvern, PA 19355. E-mail: jjs20@psu.edu
703
704
Sosik et al.
as acceptable student values that define the school’s culture and/or reflect national interests and
values. Students are expected to express these interests and values in their behavior so that their
self-concept is consistent with these cultural expectations (Tough, 2016). Students are rewarded by
teachers for strong academic effort, but must also conform to expectations of society and their peers
to fit in by exhibiting average effort, as long as they are not seen as “being dumb” (Grabill et al.,
2005).
Relevant to notions of academic performance, achievement goals can be classified as two types:
(1) learning goal orientation that values self-improvement and intrinsic motivation by striving to
master new knowledge, skills and abilities, and (2) performance-avoidance orientation that values
avoiding evaluations of incompetence when compared to others (Dweck, 2006). Such orientations
have been theorized to enhance wellbeing only when one’s goals are in accord with the interests
and values of the self-concept (Sheldon & Elliot, 1999). Self-concept is a primary source of selfconcordance because it represents beliefs about oneself in private and public settings (Sheldon &
Elliot, 1999). As such, students endowed with a high learning goal orientation are likely to possess
a self-concept in which academic progress and task involvement are highly salient and strive to
attain goals of self-improvement and intrinsic interest. In contrast, students with a high-performance
avoidance orientation are likely to possess a self-concept in which ego-comparative desires to avoid
evaluations of incompetence and ego-driven managing of positive impressions for others are highly
salient (Payne, Youngcourt, & Beaubien, 2007).
The self-conceptions students form stemming from their achievement goal orientation are
not only culturally determined, but are also influenced by gender. Culture provides students with
society’s expectations for what to value, the identity images to portray, and how to behave (Hofstede
& Hofstede, 2005). This study’s Thai cultural context provides norms of collectivism (loyalty to
the group), femininity (caring for others), and reinforcing of traditions (Hofstede & Hofstede,
2005). Traditionally, men tend to portray images of autonomy and competence, whereas women
tend to portray images showing concern for group harmony and personal growth of self and others
(Czopp et al., 1998). However, prior research has not adequately presented and tested theoretical
explanations of the relationships between achievement goals and PWB in terms of self-concordance
theory (Sheldon & Elliot, 1999) and cultural and gender norms. Self-concordance may be particularly
relevant in school contexts where conforming to social expectations yet attempting to be selfexpressive are common but may differ by gender. Nor has prior research examined interactive goal
patterns, above and beyond main effects, where students’ achievement goal orientations reflecting
self-conceptions interact with students’ gender to influence their PWB. Accordingly, this study
attempted to fill these gaps in the literature by examining PWB with a focus on two different
self-conceptions students possess with their achievement goal orientation (self-improvement vs. ego
enhancement) and the moderating role of students’ gender. This study contributes to the literature
by demonstrating how students’ goal orientations interact with gender to influence their PWB,
which is often challenged by social, economic, and cultural expectations. It also examines PWB
as a performance measure beyond grade point average (GPA) as called for by prior educational
researchers (e.g., Farrington et al., 2012).
T HEORETICAL BACKGROUND
AND
H YPOTHESES
Sheldon and Elliot’s (1999) self-concordance model provides the general theoretical framework
for this study. According to this model, when individuals pursue and achieve goals that are consistent
with their enduring interests and values that align with contextual norms, they experience autonomy,
competence, and relatedness associated with increased wellbeing. In line with this model, Brunstein,
Schultheiss, and Grassmann (1998) pointed out that “what particular type of goal a person adopts
Psychology in the Schools
DOI: 10.1002/pits
Psychological Wellbeing of Thai College Students
705
from a class of functionally equivalent goals (e.g., achievement-oriented goals) . . . depends on the
person’s self-concept and self-related wishes as well as the affordances and demands inherent in his
or her social environment” (p. 495), such as the current study’s Thai cultural context.
This line of research suggests that students are motivated to possess a self-conception that
is consistent with their desired goal (e.g., learning or performance-avoidance goal orientations).
However, students select goals that may or may not reflect their true interests or values stemming
from their authentic self. When students select goals that are in accord with their authentic self
and cultural norms, such concordance may activate a self-referent, intrinsic motivation, and task
involvement, thus enhancing PWB (Sheldon & Elliot, 1999). In contrast, students may choose goals
dictated by others (e.g., teachers, other students, cultural norms) that are not in accord with their
authentic self. Such dissonance may activate an external referent, extrinsic motivation, and egocomparative desires, thus decreasing PWB (Sheldon & Elliot, 1999). This dissonance occurs as the
self-concordance standard is not met, resulting in diminished PWB (Keyes & Ryff, 2000).
Building upon this theoretical framework, we examined the role learning goal orientation,
performance-avoidance goal orientation, and gender play in influencing students’ PWB, while
controlling for their academic program and previous semester GPA. PWB represents self-assessments
of positive psychological functioning on six highly correlated elements: (1) sense of self-acceptance
of one’s self and past life, (2) positive relations with others through love and friendship, (3) autonomy
in self-determination, independence, and self-regulation, (4) environmental mastery in choosing or
creating situations that embed the self and others, (5) sense of a strong purpose-in-life that provides
clear comprehension of one’s personal meaning, sense of direction, and major life goals, and
(6) personal growth in knowledge, skills, abilities, and morality necessary to become a self-actualized
individual (Ryff, 1989).
Several literature reviews and meta-analyses (Elliot & Murayama, 2008; Payne et al., 2007;
Ryan & Deci, 2001; Ryff, 2013) suggest that learning goal orientation, performance-avoidance goal
orientation, and gender are antecedents of PWB. Learning goal orientation reflects a growth mindset
predisposition that assumes that ability can be developed through an inward focus on understanding,
mastering of tasks, and valuing self-improvement, whereas performance-avoidance goal orientation
reflects a fixed mindset predisposition that assumes that ability is set and not changeable so one
must satisfy ego-driven desires aimed at not appearing stupid or inferior in comparison with others
(Dweck, 2006). Learning goal orientation was chosen because it reflects self-conceptions of task
involvement and self-improvement that can validate the self-enhancement standard that one is becoming better through temporal comparisons of the self. Performance-avoidance goal orientation
was chosen because it reflects self-conceptions of ego involvement in tasks and ego-comparative
desires that can challenge the self-consistency standard through inauthentic choices of goals dictated by others that do not reflect the values and interests of the self well (Sheldon & Elliot,
1999).
Theorists have also presented alternative formulations of goal orientations as trichotomous
(learning, performance-avoidance, and performance-approach), 2 × 2 models (learning approach,
learning avoidance, performance approach, and performance avoidance), and 2 × 3 models (task
approach, task avoidance, self-approach, self-avoidance, other approach, and other avoidance) (cf.
Payne et al., 2007). We choose Dweck’s (2006) dichotomous account of learning versus performanceavoidance goal orientations because they are parsimonious representations of task-involved versus
ego-involved self-conceptions identified as most relevant in school contexts (Kaplan & Maehr,
1999). Prior research suggests that the effects of these two achievement goal orientations on PWB
are likely to be contingent on personal attributes such as student gender (Perez, 2012), contextual
characteristics such as academic program (Ryff, 2013), and knowledge of performance results as
reflected in GPA (Wigtil & Henriques, 2015), which we controlled for in this study.
Psychology in the Schools
DOI: 10.1002/pits
706
Sosik et al.
Main Effects of Achievement Goal Orientations on PWB
Students who possess self-conceptions of self-improvement as to conform to school and cultural
norms and expectations can do so by engaging in behaviors that are motivated by a learning goal
orientation. In their quest to acquire new skills and improve their competence, students seek feedback
to evaluate and improve their performance. They act upon this feedback to improve their skills and
gain new knowledge. They view feedback on their mistakes as opportunities to learn from others,
and not as threats to their ego based on inferior performance compared to others (Dweck, 2006).
Such attitudes and behaviors reflect a growth mindset (Dweck, 2006) that can enhance several
elements of PWB. Mastery of new skills and acquisition of knowledge in school may provide
students with evidence of personal growth, and confirmation that they are successfully mastering
and adapting to their school environment. The progress students make while learning may also serve
as proof of their self-determination and autonomy, and provide them with an educational purpose
in life. Given research demonstrating positive associations between perceived improvement and
personal growth and self-acceptance (Keyes & Ryff, 2000), positive validation of self-improvement
is likely to be satisfying and therefore promote student PWB.
Prior empirical research supports the proposed positive relationship between learning goal
orientation and PWB. Kaplan and Maehr (1999) found that students with goals focused on learning
tasks reported higher levels of PWB than those with ego-involved goals focused on maintaining an
image of competence. Turashvili and Japaridze (2012) found a positive relationship between student
task-oriented (learning) coping strategies and PWB. Tuominen-Soini, Salmela-Aro, and Niemivirta
(2008) reported positive relationships between students’ self-improvement and growth goals and
SWB. Student achievement aspirations and positive attitudes toward learning have been linked with
increased SWB (Gilman & Huebner, 2006). Taken together, these arguments and empirical results
suggest:
Hypothesis 1:
Students’ learning goal orientation is positively associated with their PWB.
Students who have a performance-avoidance goal orientation may pursue goals and display
behaviors meant to project an image of intelligence to conform to school and cultural norms and
expectations. Such an orientation describes individuals who strive to avoid looking incompetent
or less able than their peers by cultivating an appearance of effortless achievement (Payne et al.,
2007). Students with this orientation evade developmental feedback regarding their performance
because they view such feedback and the mistakes they make as validation of their inferiority to
others and as threats to their ego (Dweck, 2006). To avoid the disapproval of (in)competence and
negative judgments about it, such students worry about their traits, knowledge, skills, and abilities
and how inadequate they might be. Rather than working hard to address their developmental needs,
they think of ways to appear competent to their teachers and fellow students. However, the feigning
of inauthentic images to satisfy external demands introjected by others is likely to reduce selfconcordance and associated wellbeing (Sheldon & Elliot, 1999).
Such attitudes and behaviors reflect a fixed mindset (Dweck, 2006) that can diminish several
elements of PWB. Social anxiety arises when individuals feel pressured to make feigned impressions
of competence, satisfy ego-comparative desires, and believe that they will not be able to do so (Payne
et al., 2007). When students believe that their abilities are fixed, their imperfections may become
more salient aspects of their self-concept (Sheldon & Elliot, 1999), thereby detracting from their
capacity to feel good about themselves and accept themselves as they are. Avoiding situations
where feedback is provided and social interaction is required may add to student stress and anxiety,
thereby reducing motivation to engage in positive relationships with others. The choice of goals
that do not represent their true values and interests, but those imposed by external social or peer
Psychology in the Schools
DOI: 10.1002/pits
Psychological Wellbeing of Thai College Students
707
pressure, is likely to diminish students’ sense of self-determination and autonomy as well as personal
growth. Given research demonstrating negative associations between perceived decline/inferiority
and personal growth and self-acceptance (Keyes & Ryff, 2000), such negations to self-perceptions
of competence are likely to be dissatisfying and anxiety-provoking threats to the ego, and therefore
diminish student PWB.
Prior empirical research supports the proposed negative relationship between performance
avoidance goal orientation and PWB. Kaplan and Maehr (1999) found that students with goals
focused on ego protection/enhancement reported lower levels of PWB than those with goals focused
on task-oriented learning of new skills. Mackinnon and Sherry (2012) found that first-year university
students who avoided academic goals due to perfectionistic concerns to be associated with low
levels of SWB. Tuominen-Soini, Salmela-Aro, and Niemivirta (2008) reported positive relationships
between students’ tendencies to avoid feedback and social adjustment problems and stress. Turashvili
and Japaridze (2012) found a positive relationship between students’ avoidance coping strategies
and depression. Thus:
Hypothesis 2:
Students’ performance-avoidance orientation is negatively associated with their
PWB.
Interaction Effect of Achievement Goal Orientations and Gender on PWB
The relationship between performance-avoidance goal orientation and PWB may depend on
students’ gender. College men tend to be extrinsically motivated by real and apparent academic
success, independence, and being perceived as “cool and hyper-masculine” (Grabill et al., 2005).
Pursuing such appearances may be motivated by self-conceptions of being academically competent.
Prior educational studies have shown men to possess higher levels of ego-oriented academic motivation (Anderson & Dixon, 2009) and performance-avoidance goal orientation (D’Lima, Winsler, &
Kitsantas, 2014) than women. Moreover, of the six elements of PWB, autonomy may be most consistent with masculine self-conceptions of independence and success associated with performance-goal
orientations (Dweck, 2006). Prior studies on PWB have shown men to possess higher levels of autonomy than women (e.g., Perez, 2012; Ryff, 2013). In contrast, college women tend to be intrinsically
motivated by learning/mastery/task goals and more concerned with the development of self and
others than men (Anderson & Dixon, 2009; D’Lima et al., 2014; Grabill et al., 2005). These goals
are consistent with feminine values of improving quality of life and enjoying one’s role in it that
characterize the culture of Thailand (Hofstede & Hofstede, 2005). Performance-avoidance goal
orientation involves extrinsically motivated feigning images of competence (a motive at odds with
Thai cultural values) and its associated self-discord, whereas learning goal orientation involves intrinsically motivated pursuits of self-improvement while not standing out from the crowd (a motive
consistent with Thai cultural values) and its associated self-concordance and wellbeing (Sheldon &
Elliot, 1999). As such, performance-avoidance goal orientation is expected to diminish PWB to a
greater extent for men than women.
The level of students’ learning goal orientation may influence the extent to which PWB differences between students possessing high and low levels of performance-avoidance goal orientation
will be larger for men than women. Learning and performance goal orientations are orthogonal;
students can possess high (low) levels of both orientations (Elliot & Murayama, 2008). As such,
learning goal orientation may provide greater salience of self-conceptions of self-improvement and
task involvement for students who possess lower levels of performance-avoidance goal orientation.
By emphasizing self-conceptions of personal growth and purpose in performing educational tasks,
increased learning goal orientation may turn student attention away from fixed mindset attitudes of
helplessness in their academic abilities (Dweck, 2006). Such self-conceptions of improvement may
Psychology in the Schools
DOI: 10.1002/pits
708
Sosik et al.
validate the standard of self-enhancement and make less salient any self-conceptions of perceived
decline/inferiority associated with performance-avoidance goal orientation that fail to meet both
the standards of self-enhancement and self-consistency. Students with a high level of learning goal
orientation are less likely to experience ego-involvement concerning their view of success and the
anxiety that comes with it (Payne et al., 2007), which are potential hindrances to self-conceptions
of personal growth, purpose in life, autonomy, and environmental mastery that reflect PWB.
In contrast, students, especially men, possessing lower levels of learning goal orientation may
be less task involved, and more ego involved in choosing to define success and differentiating the self
from others through social comparisons and competition (Anderson & Dixon, 2009), despite this
view being in discord with Thai cultural values of harmony and concern for others (Lerdpornkulrat,
Koul, & Sujivorakul, 2012). Moreover, self-conceptions of perceived decline/inferiority associated
with performance-avoidance goal orientation may exert a “double dose” negative effect on PWB due
to failure to meet the self-enhancement and self-consistency standards that the self uses to examine
its condition (Keyes & Ryff, 2000). These self-conceptions may come from unfavorable social comparisons with other students and exacerbate perceived differences in academic performance ability
with them. Self-differentiation individuates students from their peers (Schmidt, 2005). Students’
self-conceptions of individuation may promote competition rather than cooperation, and anxiety
from being seen as different from one’s peers in the collectivistic Thai culture that values conformity
to group norms and interpersonal harmony. Such self-conceptions may enhance the negative relationship between students’ performance-avoidance goal orientation and PWB, especially for male
students who value independence and autonomy more than female students. Thus, we explored for
a three-way interaction among learning and performance-avoidance goal orientations, and students’
gender:
Research Question 1: (a) Will PWB differences between students possessing low and high levels of
performance-avoidance goal orientation be smaller for women than men? (b) Will the magnitude of
these differences be greater for students possessing a higher level of learning goal orientation?
M ETHOD
Sample and Procedure
Participants in our all-volunteer sample were enrolled as freshman-year undergraduate degree
students in six different fields of study at a university located north of Bangkok, Thailand. Five
hundred and seventy-five students were invited to participate, and more than 98% of the responses to
the survey were complete and included in our analysis. The final sample consisted of 564 students,
40.6% males and 59.4% females. Participants’ age ranged from 17 to 19. Engineering students
(35.1%) were studying civil, electrical, or mechanical engineering. Fine arts students (17.9%) were
studying visual and performing arts and computer graphics. Education students (17.6%) were pursuing education degrees with concentrations in language, math, computer, production engineering,
or electrical engineering. Economics students (15.4%) were studying functioning of markets, firms,
and financial organizations for employment in business, nonprofit, finance, and government organizations. Nursing students (14.0%) were pursuing a degree with professional qualifications for
employment within the health-care sector.
Participants completed a paper-and-pencil survey that assessed gender, PWB, learning goal
orientation, performance-avoidance goal orientation, and academic program. Participants were informed that responses to the survey would be confidential and anonymous, and that their survey
Psychology in the Schools
DOI: 10.1002/pits
Psychological Wellbeing of Thai College Students
709
completion represented assumed consent. All surveys were distributed and returned in blank envelopes. It was at the discretion of the prospective participant to complete the survey or place a
blank or partially completed survey into the provided envelope. All survey items were written in
Thai. Following Brislin’s (1980) translation-back-translation procedure, two bilinguals in English
and Thai conducted two-way translations of the survey items. Participants were debriefed following
data analysis.
Measures
We used variables determined at different points in time to tap into the process inherent in the
hypotheses and reduce the concern for common source bias (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, & Podsakoff,
2012). Specifically, students’ biological gender was fixed at birth, GPA determined at the end of
the first semester of the students’ freshman year from school records, and the remaining variables
assessed 5 months later at the end of the second semester of the students’ freshman year. Unless
otherwise indicated, every survey item was measured on a five-point response scale ranging from 1
(strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
Gender. Students’ biological gender (sex) was coded as 0 for men and 1 for women.
Goal Orientation. The Thai language goal orientation measures used in this study were based
on a Finnish to English translation of an instrument that was developed and validated by Niemivirta
(1998). The scales used in this study were tested and validated in prior studies conducted in Thailand
(e.g., Koul, Clariana, Jitgarun, & Songsriwittaya, 2009; Lerdpornkulrat et al., 2012). Learning goal
orientation was measured with five items (α = .83; sample item: “I study in order to learn and to
understand new ideas”), and performance-avoidance goal orientation was measured with four items
(α = .85; sample item: “In class, the fear of looking ignorant always motivates me”).
Psychological Wellbeing. We used a reduced 41-item adaptation of Ryff’s (1989) 42-item
version of the Scales of PWB translated into Thai to assess students’ PWB. Reviews of this scale
highlight its construct validity and wide use in both Western and Eastern contexts (cf. Ryan & Deci,
2001; Ryff, 2013) including Thailand (e.g., Hengudomsub, Koedbangkham, & Kangchai, 2007;
Lohapan & Ussahawanitchakit, 2016). We pretested the Thai version of the PWB scale with a group
of nearly 100 students for a content adequacy assessment that provided support for construct validity
as it allows the deletion of items that may be conceptually inconsistent. The item reading “In general,
I feel I am in charge of the situation in which I live” was dropped because it caused interpretation
issues for students during pretest screenings of the survey items for understanding accuracy. The
remaining 41 items were collapsed into six parcels representing their theoretical dimension of PWB
(Ryff, 1989; Ryff & Keyes, 1995): self-acceptance (seven items; sample item: “When I look at the
story of my life, I am pleased with how things have turned out”), positive relations with others (seven
items; sample item: “People would describe me as a giving person, willing to share my time with
others”), autonomy (seven items; sample item: “I judge myself by what I think is important, not by
the values of what others think is important”), environmental mastery (six items; sample item: “I am
quite good at managing the many responsibilities of my daily life”), purpose in life (seven items;
sample item: “I have a sense of direction and purpose in life”), and personal growth (seven items;
sample item: “I have the sense that I have developed a lot as a person over time”). The combining
of these subscales into one composite scale was consistent with results of Linley et al.’s (2009)
examination of the factor structure of PWB measures. Cronbach’s alpha for this scale was .90.
Control Variables. Because context can influence PWB (Ryff, 2013), academic program type
was included as a control variable to partial out its effect on PWB. Given that knowledge of results of
Psychology in the Schools
DOI: 10.1002/pits
710
Sosik et al.
Table 1
Results of Measurement Model Comparisons
Model
Three-factor model (PWB / LGO / PAO)
Two-factor model I (PWB and LGO / PAO)
Two-factor model II (PWB and PAO / LGO)
Two-factor model III (PWB / LGO and PAO)
One-factor model
χ 2 (df)
CFI
TLI
RMSEA
࢞χ 2 (࢞df)
380.09 (87)
1,061.73 (89)
943.67 (89)
1,499.52 (89)
1,656.57 (90)
.93
.76
.79
.65
.61
.92
.72
.75
.59
.53
.07
.14
.13
.17
.18
−
**
681.64 (2)
**
563.58 (2)
**
1,194.43 (2)
**
1,276.48 (3)
Note. Chi-square difference for each model reflects its deviation from the three-factor model. PWB = students’ psychological
wellbeing; LGO = learning goal orientation; PAO = performance-avoidance goal orientation; CFI = comparative fit index;
TLI = Tucker-Lewis index; RMSEA = root mean squared error of approximation.
** p < .01.
academic performance may be associated with students’ PWB (e.g., Turashvili & Japaridze, 2012),
GPA at the end of the first semester of their freshman year was obtained from school records and
used as an additional control variable. We did not control for academic year because this variable
was constant (freshman year) nor student age because the host university did not provide age data
for each student.
R ESULTS
Preliminary Analyses
Confirmatory Factor Analyses. A series of confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) were conducted to address the issues of common method variance and discriminant validity of the study
measures. We first examined the fit indices of the three-factor model (PWB, learning goal orientation, and performance-avoidance goal orientation) where the items or parcels of items were set to
load on their respective factors. Model fit of this three-factor model was adequate (χ 2 = 380.09,
df = 87, CFI = .93, TLI = .92, RMSEA = .07), and all factor loadings were significant, ranging from
.57 to .83 for PWB, .67 to .75 for learning goal orientation, and .69 to .83 for performance-avoidance
goal orientation (Hu & Bentler, 1999). As presented in Table 1, a series of chi-square difference tests
revealed that the three-factor model fit the data significantly better than other alternative models.
Taken together, these results provide evidence of the construct validity of the study measures and
minimize concern for common method bias.
Descriptive Statistics. Means, standard deviations, reliabilities, and correlations of the study
variables are presented in Table 2. A review of the correlations indicates that students’ PWB was
positively related to their learning goal orientation (r = .45, p < .01) and negatively related to
their performance-avoidance goal orientation (r = −.52, p < .01), providing initial support for
Hypotheses 1 and 2. Results also indicated that students’ GPA was positively related to their
learning goal orientation (r = .13, p < .01) and PWB (r = .24, p < .01), and negatively related to
their performance-avoidance goal orientation (r = −.15, p < .01). Women reported significantly
higher levels of PWB (r = .25, p < .01) and significantly lower levels of performance-avoidance
goal orientation (r = −.25, p < .01) than men.
Hypothesis Tests
We tested our hypotheses with hierarchical regression analysis using one-tailed tests. Before
conducting the analysis, we mean centered all continuous variables used as a component of the
Psychology in the Schools
DOI: 10.1002/pits
Psychological Wellbeing of Thai College Students
711
Table 2
Means, Standard Deviations, Intercorrelations, and Alphas of Variables
Variables
M
SD
1
2
1. GPA
3.00 .58 −
**
2. Engineering dummy
.35 .48 −.45
**
3. Fine arts dummy
.18 .38 .21
**
4. Education dummy
.18 .38 .53
*
5. Economics dummy
.15 .36 .09
**
6. Gender
.59 .49 .19
**
7. Learning goal orientation
4.04 .62 .13
**
8. Performance-avoidance goal orientation 2.88 .95 −.15
**
9. Psychological wellbeing
140.80 16.73 .24
−
**
−.34
**
−.34
**
−.32
**
.19
*
−.08
.07
**
−.24
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
−
**
−.22
−
**
**
−.20 −.20
−
*
.01
.10
.04
−
**
**
−.06
.24 −.11
.08 (.83)
**
**
**
.15 −.17
.01 −.25 −.05 (.85)
*
**
**
**
**
−.09
.27 −.03
.25
.45 −.52 (.90)
Note. N = 564 students. Values in parentheses along the diagonal are Cronbach’s alphas. Academic programs coded as a
series of dummy variables: engineering, fine arts, education, and economics, with nursing as the comparison group. Gender
was coded 0 = men, 1 = women. GPA = grade point average from prior semester.
* p < .05; ** p < .01.
Table 3
Results of Hierarchical Regression Analysis
Outcome: PWB
Predictors
Constant
GPA
Engineering dummy
Fine arts dummy
Education dummy
Economics dummy
LGO
PAO
Gender
LGO × PAO
LGO × gender
PAO × gender
LGO × PAO × gender
࢞R2
Model 1
Model 2
**
149.76 (1.85)
**
6.11 (1.55)
**
−12.15 (2.07)
**
−13.65 (2.55)
−3.26 (2.86)
**
−10.84 (2.54)
.15
**
Model 3
**
146.30 (1.85)
*
2.91 (1.23)
**
−8.19 (1.73)
**
−6.11 (2.08)
−3.51 (2.28)
**
−5.21 (2.03)
**
11.61 (1.22)
**
−9.83 (.85)
.51 (1.16)
.39 (.90)
−1.81 (1.67)
**
3.11 (1.12)
.35
**
**
146.10 (1.85)
*
2.86 (1.23)
**
−8.03 (1.73)
**
−5.86 (2.08)
−3.24 (2.28)
**
−5.25 (2.02)
**
11.66 (1.21)
**
−9.45 (.87)
.64 (1.16)
−1.14 (1.18)
−1.43 (1.67)
2.20 (1.20)
*
3.59 (1.80)
*
.01
Note. N = 564 students. Unstandardized estimates with standard errors in parentheses are reported. PWB = students’
psychological wellbeing; GPA = grade point average from prior semester; LGO = learning goal orientation; PAO =
performance avoidance goal orientation. Academic programs coded as a series of dummy variables: engineering, fine arts,
education, and economics, with nursing as the comparison group. Gender was coded 0 = men, 1 = women.
* p < .05; ** p < .01.
interaction terms to make the results more interpretable (Cohen, Cohen, West, & Aiken, 2003).
Table 3 presents the regression results of the direct and interaction effects of students’ learning goal
orientation, performance-avoidance goal orientation, and gender on their PWB. Regression model
1 in Table 3 indicates the effects of the control variables, students’ gender and academic program
represented as dummy variables, on students’ PWB, adding unique variance (R2 = .15, ࢞R2 = .15, p
Psychology in the Schools
DOI: 10.1002/pits
712
Sosik et al.
165
160
Psychological Wellbeing
155
150
145
Men
140
Women
135
130
125
120
Low PAO
High PAO
FIGURE 1. Moderating effect of gender on the relationship between performance avoidance goal orientation and psychological
wellbeing. PAO = performance-avoidance goal orientation.
< .01). Regression model 2 in Table 3 indicates the direct and two-way interaction effects of students’
learning goal orientation, performance-avoidance orientation, and gender on students’ PWB after
controlling for students’ gender and academic program represented as dummy variables, adding
unique variance (R2 = .50, ࢞R2 = .35, p < .01). Regression model 3 in Table 3 indicates the direct,
two-way, and three-way interaction effects of students’ learning goal orientation, performanceavoidance orientation, and gender on students’ PWB after controlling for students’ gender and
academic program represented as dummy variables, adding unique variance (R2 = .51, ࢞R2 = .01,
p < .05).
As regression model 3 in Table 3 shows, students’ learning goal orientation was positively
related to their PWB (b = 11.66, p < .01) after controlling for students’ GPA and academic program
and all two-way and three-way interactions, thus supporting Hypothesis 1. Regression model 3 in
Table 3 also shows that students’ performance-avoidance goal orientation was negatively related to
their PWB (b = −9.45, p < .01) after controlling for students’ GPA and academic program and all
two-way and three-way interactions, thus supporting Hypothesis 2.
Regarding Research Question 1a, we examined whether PWB differences between students
possessing low and high levels of performance-avoidance goal orientation would be greater for men
than women. Regression model 2 in Table 3 shows that the interaction of students’ performanceavoidance orientation and gender on their PWB was positive and significant (b = 3.11, p < .01).
To probe the interaction patterns, we plotted two simple slopes at one standard deviation above and
below the mean values of performance-avoidance goal orientation for men and women. As shown
in Figure 1, the difference in PWB for students possessing low and high levels of performanceavoidance goal orientation was more pronounced for men than for women as evidenced by the
steeper slope.
Regarding Research Question 1b, we examined whether the magnitude of these differences
would be greater for students possessing a higher level of learning goal orientation. Specifically, we
examined whether the positive relationship between students’ learning goal orientations and their
PWB would be more pronounced for men than women with lower levels of performance-avoidance
goal orientation but not for students with higher levels of performance-avoidance goal orientation.
Regression model 3 in Table 3 shows that the interaction of students’ learning goal orientation,
performance-avoidance orientation, and gender on their PWB was positive and significant (b =
3.59, p < .05).
Psychology in the Schools
DOI: 10.1002/pits
Psychological Wellbeing of Thai College Students
713
165
160
Psychological Wellbeing
155
150
(1) High PAO, Women
145
(2) High PAO, Men
140
(3) Low PAO, Women
135
(4) Low PAO, Men
130
125
120
Low LGO
High LGO
FIGURE 2. Moderating effect of performance avoidance goal orientation and gender on the relationship between learning goal
orientation and psychological wellbeing. LGO = learning goal orientation; PAO = performance-avoidance goal orientation.
To probe the interaction patterns, we plotted four simple slopes at one standard deviation above
and below the mean values of learning and performance-avoidance goal orientations for men and
women. As shown in Figure 2, the linear relationship between students’ learning goal orientation and
PWB was plotted for women with a high level of performance-avoidance goal orientation (Slope 1),
men with a high level of performance-avoidance goal orientation (Slope 2), women with a low level
of performance-avoidance goal orientation (Slope 3), and men with a low level of performanceavoidance goal orientation (Slope 4). Figure 2 shows the positive relationship between students’
learning goal orientation and PWB was more pronounced for men with lower levels of performanceavoidance goal orientation (Slope 4) than for women with lower levels of performance-avoidance
goal orientation (Slope 3); slope difference test t = −2.15, p < .05 (Dawson, 2014). No other pairs
of slopes were significantly different from each other.
D ISCUSSION
Establishing contexts that positively shape students’ learning mindsets to promote academic
performance, development, and PWB have been goals of researchers and educators for the past 25
years (Dweck, 2006; Ryff, 2013; Tough, 2016). By pursuing learning and/or performance-oriented
achievement goals, students choose the way they define success in the classroom to establish and
maintain their social status among peers and to validate their self-conceptions (Sheldon & Elliot,
1999). Despite such research and application objectives, little attention has been given to how PWB
may be influenced by the direct and interaction effects of the achievement goals that college men
and women pursue to create a desired self-conception in their interactions with teachers and fellow
students (Payne et al., 2007).
To begin to address this issue systematically, we replicated prior research demonstrating a positive relationship between students’ learning goal orientation and PWB, and a negative relationship
between their performance-avoidance goal orientation and PWB. Our findings confirm the superiority of task-involved goals over ego-involved goals, and extend previous research conducted in
the United States and Finland (e.g., Kaplan & Maehr, 1999; Tuominen-Soini et al., 2008) to Asian
contexts (i.e., Thailand). The Thai culture places great importance on the feminine value of liking
Psychology in the Schools
DOI: 10.1002/pits
714
Sosik et al.
what one is doing (e.g., learning from tasks) as opposed to the masculine value of wanting to be
perceived as being the best (e.g., satisfying the ego) compared to the U.S. culture that is far more
masculine, favoring competitiveness and assertiveness (Hofstede & Hofstede, 2005). Consistent with
this cultural profile, results shown in Table 2 indicate that men were associated with higher levels of
performance-avoidance goal orientation satisfying ego-comparative desires to avoid perceptions of
incompetence than women. However, this masculine goal avoidance tendency comes at the expense
of men’s self-ratings of their PWB. Taken together, these results extend the wellbeing literature that
has primarily assessed affect-based forms of SWB as an outcome of achievement goal orientation
to PWB in the Thai culture.
Beyond replicating prior research and extending it to the Thai culture, a major aim of this
study was to extend the achievement goal orientation and wellbeing literatures by demonstrating the
moderating role of student gender on the interaction between students’ learning and performanceavoidance goal orientations. The data indicated that the negative relationship between students’
performance-avoidance goal orientation and PWB was stronger for men than women. Gender differences have been associated with the kind of learning orientations that students possess (e.g., Czopp
et al., 1998; Dweck, 2006). Past research, however, has been inconclusive regarding how pursuing
different goal orientations might relate to variation in PWB depending upon gender. This study
supports the notion that pursuit of performance-avoidance goals in the classroom, while striving to
maintain a masculine image of being competent and “cool” (Czopp et al., 1998), may be detrimental
to men’s PWB. The effort required to project such an inauthentic self-image can be psychologically
draining and diminish wellbeing (Sheldon & Elliot, 1999). Furthermore, such a self-image is not
consistent with the feminine Thai cultural values of being less competitive and aggressive (Hofstede
& Hofstede, 2005) and makes salient a self-image that fails to meet the self-regulatory standards of
self-enhancement and self-consistency (Keyes & Ryff, 2000). Because feigning images of competence and competiveness can evoke social anxiety (Payne et al., 2007) and be inconsistent with the
PWB elements of positive relationships with others and self-acceptance (Ryff, 2013), the cost of
engaging in self-enhancement looms large for men who pursue performance-avoidance goals.
This study also elucidated how learning and performance-avoidance orientations interact with
students’ gender to influence PWB. In exploring these interactive goal patterns with gender, above
and beyond their main effects, we found that gender differences in students’ PWB became more
pronounced with increases in learning goal orientation for students with lower levels of performanceavoidance goal orientation, but not for students with higher levels of performance-avoidance goal
orientation. An inspection of Figure 2 indicates the relationship between students’ learning goal
orientation and PWB increased at a higher rate for men compared to women possessing a low
level of performance-avoidance goal orientation (Slope 4 vs. Slope 3). This interaction effect did not
emerge for men and women possessing a high level of performance-avoidance goal orientation (Slope
1 vs. Slope 2). The three-way interaction depicted in Figure 2 and indicated in Table 3 suggests that
high levels of performance-avoidance goal orientation can be quite detrimental to PWB as it seems
to limit the beneficial effects of learning goal orientation on PWB, especially for men who employ
such avoidance coping strategies. Such findings are not surprising, as they converge with prior
research (Peterson & Seligman, 2004; Ryan & Deci, 2001), which suggests that the pursuit of goals
not integrated into the self is not only stressful and detrimental to positive affect, life satisfaction,
and happiness, but also fails to meet standards of self-enhancement and self-consistency (Keyes &
Ryff, 2000; Sheldon & Elliot, 1999). Such pursuit of goals lacking self-concordance also detracts
from learning strategies that support of personal growth and environmental mastery, two elements
of PWB that may be essential in educational contexts (Dweck, 2006).
One practical implication of these results is that pursuing ego-involved image enhancement
goals through a performance-avoidance goal orientation may constitute a significant detriment
Psychology in the Schools
DOI: 10.1002/pits
Psychological Wellbeing of Thai College Students
715
to students’ cognitive assessments of their optimal psychological functioning and meeting the
challenges of everyday life, especially for men (Grabill et al., 2005). This implication is not only
relevant in more feminine cultures such as Thailand, but also in more masculine cultures such as
the United States and Germany where societies are driven by competition, achievement, and success
(Hofstede & Hofstede, 2005). We encourage schools to develop interventions that advocate growth
mindsets focused on learning goal orientation, and warn against the dangers of fixed mindsets focused
on performance-avoidance goal orientation and its negative relationship with PWB. Second, results
demonstrating the interactive goal patterns with students’ gender suggest the need for university
administrators to consider policies that appreciate the diversity of learning styles and preferences for
task versus ego involvement in demonstrating competence set within cultural norms and expectations
(Grabill et al., 2005). Wellbeing profiles of those students potentially at risk of succumbing to
perceived incompetence could be evaluated, so that personalized action plans can then be designed
to help move them toward self-improvement and mastery goals, and enhance their sense of wellbeing.
Several study limitations should be noted. First, data were collected from university students
in Thailand. Although collecting data on PWB in a collectivistic and feminine culture like Thailand
is novel, it may have limited considerations of PWB to the more socially acceptable elements of
PWB such as maintaining positive relations with others and achieving personal growth by meeting obligations within the community (Lerdpornkulrat et al., 2012). Future cross-cultural research
should examine PWB and the achievement goal orientations used in the current study in both individualistic and collectivistic societies, and in more masculine societies. Moreover, freshman college
students may not have the requisite life experiences to best assess all elements of PWB, so longitudinal data collection from older adult professionals and across a range of industrial domains is
needed.
Second, data were collected at one point in time, which precludes causal conclusions from
being drawn and raises the potential for common method bias (Podsakoff et al., 2012). Although
results of our CFA allayed such concerns and achievement goal orientations are trait-like constructs
typically determined at earlier points in the lifespan (Elliot & Murayama, 2008), the potential exists
for inflated relationships between these independent variables and PWB. Future research might use
multisource ratings of student achievement goal orientation collected from teachers and students to
avoid this potential issue.
A third limitation concerns our contrast between learning and performance-avoidance goal
orientations. We choose performance-avoidance goal orientation to operationalize the ego-involved
self-conception because it best reflects motives to look better than one is concerning one’s abilities
(Payne et al., 2007). Future research might consider performance-approach goal motivation, aimed
at projecting an image of proving one’s competence to gain favorable judgments about it, to provide a
more positive learning mindset for students. A related fourth limitation concerns our measurement of
self-perceptions of achievement goal orientations rather than actual self-presentations of behaviors
as perceived by observers such as teachers and other students. Collection of ratings from independent
observer sources can be compared with self-ratings to assess level of agreement in future research.
In conclusion, this study replicated results showing direct or main effects of two typical types
of achievement goal orientations on students’ PWB reflecting self-conceptions about how their view
of academic success either enhances or attenuates PWB. It also extended the achievement goal
orientation and wellbeing literatures by demonstrating the moderating role of students’ gender on
the interaction between their learning and performance-avoidance goal orientations, in response to
calls for the examination of interactive goal patterns and demographics characteristics (e.g., Payne
et al., 2007). These contributions are important practically as well because educators are responsible
for the development of students’ knowledge, skills, and abilities and wellbeing, thereby making it
Psychology in the Schools
DOI: 10.1002/pits
716
Sosik et al.
necessary to create curricula that consider students’ mindsets toward learning and learning goals
associated with their gender.
R EFERENCES
Anderson, D. M., & Dixon, A. W. (2009). Winning isn’t everything: Goal orientation and gender differences in university
leisure-skills classes. Recreational Sports Journal, 33, 54–64.
Brislin, R. W. (1980). Translation and content analysis of oral and written material. In H. C. Triandis & J. W. Berry (Eds.),
Handbook of cross-cultural psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 389–444). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Brunstein, J. C., Schultheiss, O. C., & Grassmann, R. (1998). Personal goals and emotional well-being: The moderating role
of motive dispositions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 494–508.
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral
sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erblaum.
Czopp, A. M., Lasane, T. P., Sweigard, P. N., Bradshaw, S. D., & Hammer, E. D. (1998). Masculine styles of self-presentation
in the classroom: Perceptions of Joe Cool. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 13, 281–294.
Dawson, J. F. (2014). Moderation in management research: What, why, when, and how. Journal of Business and Psychology,
29, 1–19.
D’Lima, G. M., Winsler, A., & Kitsantas, A. (2014). Ethnic and gender differences in first-year college students’ goal
orientation, self-efficacy, and extrinsic and intrinsic motivation. Journal of Educational Research, 107(5), 341–356.
Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York: Random House.
Elliot, A. J., & Murayama, K. (2008). On the measurement of achievement goals: Critique, illustration, and application.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 613–628.
Farrington, C. A., Roderick, M., Allensworth, E., Nagaoka, J., Keyes, T. S., Johnson, D. W., & Beechum, N. O. (2012).
Teaching adolescents to become learners: The role of noncognitive factors in shaping school performance: A critical
literature review. Chicago: University of Chicago Consortium on Chicago School Research.
Gilman, R., & Huebner, E. S. (2006). Characteristics of adolescents who report very high life satisfaction. Journal of Youth
and Adolescence, 35(3), 311–319.
Grabill, K., Lasane, T. P., Povitsky, W. T., Saxe, P., Mungro, G. B., Phelps, L. M., & Straub, J. (2005). Gender and study
behavior: How social perception, social norm adherence, and structured academic behavior are predicted by gender.
North American Journal of Psychology, 7, 7–24.
Gruttadaro, D., & Crudo, D. (2012). College students speak: A survey report on mental health. Arlington, VA: National
Alliance on Mental Health.
Hengudomsub, P., Koedbangkham, J., & Kangchai, W. (2007). Physical health and psychological well-being in Thai older
adults: Social comparison as a mediator. Journal of Science, Technology, and Humanities, 5(1–2), 43–55.
Hofstede, G., & Hofstede, G. J. (2005). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus
new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.
Kaplan, A., & Maehr, M. L. (1999). Achievement goals and student wellbeing. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24,
330–358.
Keyes, C. L. M., & Ryff, C. D. (2000). Subjective change and mental health: A self-concept theory. Social Psychology
Quarterly, 63(3), 264–279.
Koul, R., Clariana, R. B., Jitgarun, K., & Songsriwittaya, A. (2009). The influence of achievement goal orientation on
plagiarism. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 506–512.
Lerdpornkulrat, T., Koul, R., & Sujivorakul, C. (2012). Influence of ability beliefs and motivational orientation on the
self-efficacy of high school science students in Thailand. Australian Journal of Education, 56(2), 163–181.
Linley, P. A., Maltby, J., Wood, A. M., Osborne, G., & Hurling, R. (2009). Measuring happiness: The higher order factor
structure of subjective and psychological well-being measures. Personality and Individual Differences, 47(8), 878–884.
Lohapan, N., & Ussahawanitchakit, P. (2016). Psychological well-being and job success: An empirical research of tax auditors
in Thailand. Business and Management Review, 7(5), 95–104.
Mackinnon, S. P., & Sherry, S. B. (2012). Perfectionistic self-presentation mediates the relationship between perfectionistic
concerns and subjective wellbeing: A three-wave longitudinal study. Personality and Individual Differences, 53, 22–28.
Niemivirta, M. (1998). Individual differences in motivational and cognitive factors affecting self-regulated learning—A
pattern-oriented approach. In P. Nenninger, R. S. Jäger, A. Frey, & M. Woznitza (Eds.), Advances in motivation (pp.
23–42). Landau, DE: Verlad Empirische Pädagogik.
Payne, S. C., Youngcourt, S. S., & Beaubien, J. M. (2007). A meta-analytic examination of the goal orientation nomological
net. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(1), 128–150.
Psychology in the Schools
DOI: 10.1002/pits
Psychological Wellbeing of Thai College Students
717
Perez, J. A. (2012). Gender difference in psychological well-being among Filipino college student samples. International
Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 2(13), 84–93.
Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classification. New York:
Oxford/American Psychological Association.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and
recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 539–569.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic
well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 141–166.
Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of Psychological well-being. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 57(6), 1069–1081.
Ryff, C. D. (2013). Psychological well-being revisited: Advances in the science and practice of eudaimonia. Psychotherapy
and Psychosomatics, 83, 10–28.
Ryff, C. D., & Keyes, C. L. M. (1995). The structure of psychological wellbeing revisited. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 69(4), 719–727.
Schmidt, M. A. (2005). Individuation: Finding oneself in analysis-taking risks and making sacrifices. Journal of Analytical
Psychology, 50(5), 595–616.
Sheldon, K. M., & Elliot, A. J. (1999). Goal striving, need satisfaction, and longitudinal well-being: The self-concordance
model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(3), 482–497.
Tough, P. (2016). How kids really succeed. Atlantic, 317(5), 56–66.
Tuominen-Soini, H., Salmela-Aro, K., & Niemivirta, M. (2008). Achievement goal orientations and subjective wellbeing: A
person-centered analysis. Learning and Instruction, 18, 251–266.
Turashvili, T., & Japaridze, M. (2012). Psychological wellbeing and its relation to academic performance of students in a
Georgian context. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 49, 73–80.
Wigtil, C. J., & Henriques, G. R. (2015). The relationship between intelligence and psychological well-being in incoming
college students. Psychological Wellbeing, 5(4), 1–19.
Psychology in the Schools
DOI: 10.1002/pits