Process vs. impact in men's and women's achievement motivation

The author presents a new taxonomy of six achievement motivation types, with the categories based on an interaction between two factors: (a) whether the individual emphasizes the process of achieving or the impact of the accomplish-ment itself; and (b) whether the person derives his standards of excellence from within himself, from some social reference, or from an impersonal task demand. The hypothesis i s proposed that females in American society have been taught to emphasize the process of their achievement strivings and males the impact of their achievement attempts. Empirical evidence i s given to support this hypo-thesis and to elucidate the six types of achievement motivation. We have come a long way in the scientific study o f achievement motivation since McClelland and his coworkers (1 953) introduced the systematic study of the achievement motive through projective testing. The idea o f measuring and perhaps manipulating something called achievement motivation fitted well with the political tenor of the 50’s and 60’s. It came to be thought of, despite disclaimers of researchers, as the achievement motive-an entity that people had more or less of, that could be used in a unidimensional way to describe people. College counselors sometimes warned students that they didn’t have enough achievement motivation to make it through college; educators worried about how to increase the achievement motivation of children. The construct was used to help explain why Jews were mobile and Italian Catholics were not (Strodtbeck, 1958); to predict why certain Indian businessmen would succeed (McClel-*This paper was presented in a symposium entitled Sex Differences in Achievemen