 4. Achievement Goal Complexes  115
tion, satisfaction), (meta)cognitive (e.g., self- 
regulated learning, interest), and behavioral 
(e.g., persistence) responses to achievement 
activities. However, the controlled mastery- 
approach goal complex shows, in most cases, 
no predictive utility  (63% of the correlations 
are null). As an illustration, the controlled 
mastery-  approach goal complex is never or 
seldom correlated with positive emotion, 
self- regulated learning, or persistence.
Second, the autonomous performance- 
approach goal complex is mainly beneficial  
in terms of achievement (61% of the cor -
relations are beneficial). The autonomous 
performance-  approach goal complex shows 
rather moderate positive correlations with 
the same beneficial affective (e.g., positive 
emotion, satisfaction), (meta)cognitive (e.g., 
self- regulated learning, interest), and behav -
ioral (e.g., persistence) responses to achieve -
ment activities as the autonomous mastery- 
approach goal complex. However, these 
correlations are not necessarily as robust as 
those involving the autonomous mastery- 
approach goal complex (e.g., null effects were 
reported with positive emotion, satisfaction, 
self- regulated learning). However, the con -
trolled performance-  approach goal complex 
shows, in most cases, no predictive utility  
(60% of the correlations are null). Taken to -
gether, the empirical research therefore indi -
cates that individuals pursuing autonomous 
mastery- or performance-  approach goal 
complexes may reap the epistemic benefits of 
the goal and the reason constructs, with the 
autonomous mastery-  approach goal com -
plex being particularly adaptive. However, 
both mastery- and performance-  approach 
goals enacted through controlled regulation 
no longer seem beneficial.
Third, the autonomous avoidance-  based 
goal complexes are predominantly beneficial 
in terms of achievement-  relevant outcomes 
(88% of the correlations are beneficial for 
mastery goals, and 92% are beneficial for 
performance goals). Controlled avoidance- 
based goal complexes show little, if any, 
predictive utility (85% of the correlations 
are null for mastery goals, and 77% are null 
for performance). However, these correla -
tions were collected from studies in which 
it was not possible to disentangle the effects 
of approach- based and avoidance- based 
achievement goal complexes.4 That is, be -cause we are examining zero-order correla -
tions, the influence of a goal complex might 
be confounded with the influence of its goal 
component, its reason component, another 
goal to which it is correlated, and/or another 
reason to which it is correlated. Moreover, 
participants may have trouble recognizing 
seemingly ambiguous, convoluted, or even 
antithetical achievement goal complexes, 
such as the autonomous performance- 
avoidance goal complex (i.e., the goal not 
to be outperformed by others because one 
find this a highly stimulating and challeng -
ing goal). Finally, it is possible that maladap -
tive avoidance-  based achievement goals en -
dorsed with a sense of volition, willingness, 
and congruence may produce beneficial 
achievement-  relevant outcomes, at least in 
some instances. Future research is needed to 
test this provocative possibility.
Summary and Conclusion
An achievement goal complex is conceptual -
ized as the combination of an achievement 
goal and an energizing reason. Although 
countless theoretical frameworks could 
be used to operationalize reasons behind 
goals (e.g., achievement motives, social 
values), SDT has, to date, spurred consid -
erable interest among researchers. Within 
this framework, autonomous achievement 
goal complexes (pursuing an achievement 
goal because it is stimulating and valued) 
are differentiated from controlled achieve -
ment goal complexes (pursuing an achieve -
ment goal because it enables one to bolster 
one’s ego or to obtain a reward). In contrast 
to the extant research, Sommet and Elliot 
(2017) showed that focal reasons, focal 
achievement goals, and achievement goal 
complexes all made independent  contribu -
tions to achievement-  relevant outcomes. In 
other words, none of the three motivational 
constructs seems reducible to any of the oth -
ers. A systematic examination of the litera -
ture reveals that autonomous mastery- and 
performance-  approach goal complexes are 
both beneficial in terms of achievement- 
relevant outcomes, whereas controlled mas -
tery- and performance-  approach goal com -
plexes are not. It is premature to draw any 
conclusions regarding the influence of au -