2021.04.05

The Comparable Body. Analogy and Metaphor in Ancient Mesopotamian, Egyptian, and Greco-Roman Medicine. Edited by JOHN Z. WEE. Leiden, NL: Brill, 2017. pp. xix+437. Hardback, 138 € / 159 $. ISBN: 978-90-04-35676-4. Reviewed by Alessandro Buccheri, Harvard University (abuccheri@chs.harvard.edu)

The volume under review stems from a symposium on "The Body in Ancient Medicine" held in Chicago in May 2014. The exchanges between the participants reoriented the focus of the volume towards the issue of the metaphorical and/or analogical understandings of the body in ancient medical traditions (1). Authors were invited to work closely on a case study in their area of expertise, "with interdisciplinarity serving to illuminate typologies of issues and strategies for encountering common problems" (1)a challenge successfully met. Given the variety of topics addressed, I will give a brief summary of the volume's content before highlighting the shared issues that could be of interest to scholars of Greco-Roman antiquity.

The volume editor's Introduction dodges the perilous exercise of defining "metaphor" and opts for an informative summary of the contributions' contents, bringing out shared themes and problems.

Methodology comes to the fore in Chapter 1, "Analogy and Metaphor in Ancient Medicine and the Ancient Egyptian Conceptualisation of Heat in the Body", by R. Nyord. The author addresses the legitimacy of cognitive metaphor theory as a framework for the study of ancient Egyptian medicine; he then moves to the exploration of the metaphorical conceptualizations of "heat" as a pathogenic agent in Egyptian medical papyri, thus opening a window onto disease etiology, a dimension often left implicit by Egyptian texts.

In Chapter 2, "From Head to Toe: Listing the Body in Cuneiform Texts", Erica Couto Ferreira focuses on the head-to-toe ordering of the body parts in Mesopotamian cuneiform texts. Already found in the old Babylonian lexical lists known as UGU-MU, the a capite ad calcem ordering is shown to operate as a cognitive framework providing structure to mythical narratives, anatomical descriptions and healing rituals.

The following chapter, "The Stuff of Causation: Etiological Metaphor and Pathogenic Channeling in Babylonian Medicine", by J. C. Johnson, explores the metaphors and etiological models current in two Babylonian medical traditions: the āšipūtu (diagnostic medicine) and the asûtu (recipe-driven medicine). Johnson shows how those traditions' divergent etiological models are instantiated by different sets of metaphors; he discusses a difficult term for a form of fever (U 4 .DA SÁ.SÁ, "struggling with fever") and its metaphorical underpinnings; finally, he scrutinizes the interaction between the etiological models, the understanding of fever and the textual ordering of medical compendia.

After Egypt and Mesopotamia, Chapters 4 and 5 focus on ancient Greece. L. Dean-Jones' contribution, "Aristotle's Heart and the Heartless Man", analyzes Aristotle's description of the anatomy of the heart in the History of Animals in connection with his mention of the theories of Polybus and Syennesis, two earlier physicians whose accounts of the vascular system famously (and puzzlingly) did not reference the cardiac muscle. Dean-Jones argues that Polybus and Syennesis actually understood the heart as a sort of "crossing" (or "knot") of the vessels under the breast, and that the correct appreciation of their theory helps us to make sense of a difficult passage in Aristotle's own description of it (History of Animals, III, 3, 513a27-b11).

In Chapter 5, "Earthquake and Epilepsy: The Body Geologic in the Hippocratic Treatise On the Sacred Disease", the editor of the book, J. Z. Wee, brings together under the label of "body geologic" two kinds of evidence: Greek and Latin texts (Aristotle and Seneca) explaining the origins of earthquakes by means of analogies with the physiological processes of the body; and treatises describing epilepsy in geologic terms. Here, the Hippocratic treatise On the Sacred Disease attracts most of the attention, and Wee offers a fresh reading of the functions this text attributes to the bodily hollows.

Next, in Chapter 6, "The Lineage of 'Bloodlines': Synecdoche, Metonymy, Medicine, and More", P. T. Keyser argues that the metonymy "blood is life" and the metaphor "blood carries heredity" are not universal: rather, their presence within a given culture may underpin elitist, essentialist or racist discourses.

Chapter 7, "Eye Metaphors, Analogies and Similes within Mesopotamian Magico-Medical Texts", by S. V. Panyatov, once again addresses Mesopotamian medicine. Panyatov brings into focus the performative role of metaphors (or analogies, or similes), stating that they would help healers to relate to their patients, address their fears and make them visualize their condition, thus helping the healing process.

The communicative aspect of metaphors is also the subject of Chapter 8, "The Experience and Description of Pain in Aelius Aristides' Hieroi Logoi", by J. Dowie, who takes issue with the surprising absence of metaphors in Aelius Aristides' Sacred Discourses (2 nd century CE). This six-book "memoir" relates in great detail Aristides' long-term illness, but refrains from vividly expressing pain through figurative language. As Dowie shows, Aristides describes his condition both from the internal point of view of the suffering patient and from the external perspective of the doctor. In his double position, Aristides appears to share in the skepticism aired by his contemporary Galen: doctors should not make much of the misleadingand often metaphoricalnarratives of their patients' pain.

In Chapter 9, "Concepts of the Female Body in Mesopotamian Gynecological Texts", U. Steinert offers a compelling review of the literature on metaphors in culture and sciences, then moves to a thorough exploration of the imagery used to conceptualize female genitalia and the physiology of reproduction in a variety of cuneiform sources. Throughout the chapter, Steinert demonstrates how metaphors operate at different levels of the Sumerian and Akkadian languages, from script to lexicon, but also shape artifacts (such as stamp seals) and mythical narratives. Steinert concludes with a balanced assessment of the universal and the culturally-situated aspects of the metaphorical models she analyzes.

With the last two chapters, we move back to Ancient Greece. B. Holmes, in Chapter 10, "Pure Life: The Limits of the Vegetal Analogy in the Hippocratics and Galen", analyzes plant analogies in the context of the embryological expositions in the Hippocratic treatise On The Nature of the Child and in Galen's writings, where they are often used as an observable equivalent to the inaccessible processes within the body. Holmes explores the multifarious heuristic and argumentative functions those analogies play within the texts, and raises the question as to whether they imply an ontological commitment: do fetuses live a vegetal form of life? Holmes paints a nuanced picture. The analogical stance of the Hippocratic De natura pueri might also leave room for the appreciation of vegetal life as embodying a minimal degree of agency, somehow similar to that of the later stages of the fetal life. Conversely, Galen considers plants as embodying life in its purest and most essential form (that of the nutritive faculty), which is also that of the early stages of embryonic development; he however also insists that embryonic life just resembles ("is managed as") the vegetal one, and has to recognize that, for all its purity, vegetal life poses some puzzles of its own. Chapter 11, "Animal, Vegetable, Metaphor: Plotinus's Liver and the Roots of Biological Identity", by C. A. Roby, explores metonymic and metaphoric cognitive operations in Plotinus' discussions of the bodily identity and of the soul/body dichotomy, in dialogue with Galen's theses and with his use of botanical analogies. Roby starts with a useful survey of the literature on the cognitive procedures implied in metaphorical and metonymic comprehension. She then analyzes the different ways in which Plotinus constructs his complex view of the unity of the individual soul (via a series of metonymies), and about its relationship to the soul of the All and to the body (mainly thanks to metaphors). The vegetal world is one important source of such metaphors, which brings Roby to a discussion of the ontological status of vegetal life in Plotinus: this nicely dovetails with Holmes' analyses in the preceding chapter.

The volume is introduced by a list of abbreviations, transliteration notes and a helpful periodization of ancient Mesopotamia; it is closed by an Index Locorum and a General Index.

As the above summaries suggest, The Comparable Body successfully covers a wide network of issues, and reading through it requires considerable effort. Many readers (this reviewer included) have to familiarize themselves with the close discussion of materials from cultural areas that might lay outside their areas of expertise; some chapters might have benefitted from being shorter and more focused. Be that as it may, this book is a rewarding one. Scholars interested in metaphor and analogy in the context of ancient sciences will find a wealth of data, along with perceptive discussions of the main areas of debate. These include: the legitimacy of introducing the metaphoric/literal divide, external to the second-order concepts used by most ancient writers to evaluate their procedures (Chapter 1); the question of the ontological commitments implicit in metaphorical statements and in the use of analogies (Chapters 1 and 10); the problem of distinguishing between the grammaticalization of lexical elements and active cognitive metaphors (Chapter 3); the pragmatics of metaphors in the doctor-patient relationship (Chapters 7 and 8); the cognitive operation of metaphorical models across different levels of the written text and across cultural forms (Chapters 3, 9); the cognitive processes involved in understanding metaphors and metonyms (Chapter 11).

Moreover, many contributions analyze how ancient interpretersthe authors of compendia and commentariesdealt with the issue of interpreting (what we consider as) metaphors: this opens up an interesting perspective on how the ancient literate milieus have dealt with the very same phenomena analyzed in this book. Lastly, the question of the universality as opposed to the culturally situated nature of bodily metaphors not only receives sustained theoretical attention (see mainly Chapters 1, 3 and 9), but is also substantiated by the wealth of examples showing both the cross-cultural recurrence and the local variations of some metaphorical patterns, such as those recruiting botanical phenomena (Chapters 7,8,10,11), landscape features (Chapters 3, 5, 9) or social interactions (Chapters 3,7,11).

In conclusion, The Comparable Body is an important book, which maps a burgeoning area of research, offers insightful theoretical comments and fulfills the goal of letting in-depth casestudies bring into focus related issues which would have gone unnoticed otherwise.


Keywords: Achievement goals, Achievement, Social class, First-generation, College

Who benefits from mastery-approach and performance-approach goals in college? Students' social class as a moderator of the link between goals and grade Céline Darnon, Mickaël Jury, Cristina Aelenei

In achievement goal literature, approach forms of motivation are usually seen as relevant and positive motivations for achieving performance, especially in the college context [START_REF] Darnon | Achievement goal promotion at University: Social desirability and social utility of mastery and performance goals[END_REF][START_REF] Van Yperen | A meta-analysis of self-reported achievement goals and nonself-report performance across three achievement domains (work, sports, and education)[END_REF]. Indeed, trying to understand and learn (i.e., mastery-approach goals) and trying to outperform others (i.e., performance-approach goals) have both been documented as positive predictors of academic success [START_REF] Harackiewicz | Predictors and consequences of achievement goals in the college classroom: maintaining interest and making the grade[END_REF][START_REF] Senko | Achievement goal theory at the crossroads: old controversies, current challenges, and new directions[END_REF]. However, as evidenced in this debate, empirical data do not always support this claim. Meanwhile, several authors in the area have called for more research considering demographic variables, including social class 1 , in order to understand better which goals predict academic success, when, and why [START_REF] Darnon | Achievement goals in educational contexts. A social psychology perspective[END_REF][START_REF] Huang | Discriminant and criterion-related validity of achievement goals in predicting academic achievement: a meta-analysis[END_REF][START_REF] Darnon | Toward a clarification of the effects of achievement goals[END_REF]. The present paper examines social class as a moderator of the link between both mastery-approach and performance-approach goals and academic performance in the college context.

Achievement goals and academic grades

Since its origin in the 1980s [START_REF] Dweck | Motivational processes affecting learning[END_REF]; [START_REF] Elliott | Goals: an approach to motivation and achievement[END_REF][START_REF] Nicholls | Achievement motivation: conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice, and performance[END_REF], achievement goal theory has been the subject of abundant research to examine the consequences of goal pursuit in the classroom. According to this research, in an achievement task, students can pursue either mastery goals (i.e., desire to learn, to improve one's knowledge and ability) or performance goals (i.e., drive to demonstrate superior performance relative to others). In the 1990s, research further documented that mastery and performance goals could be either approach or avoidance oriented [START_REF] Elliot | A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation[END_REF][START_REF] Elliot | A 2 × 2 achievement goal framework[END_REF]Elliot et al. 1999). In particular, performance-approach goal individuals are oriented toward the demonstration of superior ability, whereas performanceavoidance-oriented individuals want to avoid performing more poorly than others. Moreover, mastery-approach goals are oriented toward the search for self-improvement and learning, whereas mastery-avoidance goals are associated with the fear of not performing as well as one did in the past. Research has shown that avoidant forms of goals are generally related to poor achievement outcomes [START_REF] Elliot | A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation[END_REF][START_REF] Elliot | A 2 × 2 achievement goal framework[END_REF][START_REF] Linnenbrink-Garcia | When are achievement goal orientation beneficial for academic achievement? A closer look at main effects and moderating factors[END_REF]). On the contrary, both approach forms of goals have been shown to be positively associated with academic performance, particularly for college students. Indeed, although mastery-approach goals and performance-approach goals are related to different patterns of outcomes (e.g., cooperative behaviors, deep studying, and high efforts for mastery goals; competitive behaviors, surface processing, and cheating for performance goals; [START_REF] Anderman | Achievement goals and academic cheating[END_REF]Elliot and McGregor 1999;see Senko et al. 2011, for a review), recent meta-analyses found that both were positively related to academic grades [START_REF] Huang | Discriminant and criterion-related validity of achievement goals in predicting academic achievement: a meta-analysis[END_REF][START_REF] Hulleman | A meta-analytic review of achievement goal measures: different labels for the same constructs or different constructs with similar labels[END_REF][START_REF] Van Yperen | A meta-analysis of self-reported achievement goals and nonself-report performance across three achievement domains (work, sports, and education)[END_REF]. Interestingly, these meta-analyses also highlighted that these links exist but were quite small, suggesting the existence of potential moderators. In the present paper, we argue that, in a higher education context, social class may moderate the effect of both types of goals on academic grades.

Lower-class and upper-class students in college

Social class influences many life outcomes (for reviews, see [START_REF] Fiske | Facing social class: how societal rank influences interaction[END_REF][START_REF] Goudeau | Studying, measuring and manipulating social class in social psychology: economic, symbolic and cultural approaches[END_REF][START_REF] Kraus | Social class as culture: the convergence of resources and rank in the social realm[END_REF][START_REF] Kraus | Social class, solipsism, and contextualism: how the rich are different from the poor[END_REF]. In particular, an important line of research has documented that, in the context of higher education, lower-class students experience many more difficulties than their upperclass counterparts (for reviews, see Jury et al. 2017;[START_REF] Stephens | Social class culture cycles: how three gateway contexts shape selves and fuel inequality[END_REF]. More specifically, behaviors, vocabulary, and habits that are valued in the higher education context are more in line with those developed in families that belong to dominant classes than with values developed in unprivileged classes [START_REF] Bourdieu | Reproduction in education, society and culture[END_REF]). Consequently, lower-class students develop a sense of "incompatibility" within the college context [START_REF] Jetten | When is individual mobility costly? The role of economic and social identity factors[END_REF][START_REF] Johnson | Middle class and marginal? Socioeconomic status, stigma, and self-regulation at an elite university[END_REF][START_REF] Ostrove | Social class and belonging: implications for college adjustment[END_REF]. When attending college, lower-class students feel less socially integrated [START_REF] Rubin | Social class differences in social integration among students in higher education: a meta-analysis and recommendations for future research[END_REF], have a lower sense of belonging [START_REF] Ostrove | Social class and belonging: implications for college adjustment[END_REF], are less engaged [START_REF] Stebleton | Breaking down barriers: academic obstacles of first-generation students at research universities[END_REF], face more obstacles [START_REF] Stebleton | First-generation students' sense of belonging, mental health, and use of counseling services at public research universities[END_REF], and have more intentions to quit [START_REF] Johnson | Middle class and marginal? Socioeconomic status, stigma, and self-regulation at an elite university[END_REF][START_REF] Langhout | Classism in the university setting: examining student antecedents and outcomes[END_REF] as well as lower academic performances (OECD 2014;[START_REF] Sirin | Socioeconomic status and academic achievement: a meta-analytic review of research[END_REF] than their upper-class counterparts. More recently, Stephens and colleagues (Stephens et al. 2012a, b) demonstrated that lower-class students experience a mismatch between the values they have developed as members of low-status groups and those promoted in college culture. This mismatch further impairs their academic grades. In addition, lower-class students are the targets of a negative stereotype concerning their abilities [START_REF] Croizet | Extending the concept of stereotype threat to social class: the intellectual underperformance of students from low socioeconomic backgrounds[END_REF][START_REF] Régner | Effects of socioeconomic status (SES) information on cognitive ability inferences: when low-SES students make use of a self-threatening stereotype[END_REF][START_REF] Spencer | Social class is dead. Long live social class! Stereotype threat among low socioeconomic status individuals[END_REF]. Thus, in academic contexts, lower-class students are likely to experience a stereotype threat [START_REF] Croizet | Extending the concept of stereotype threat to social class: the intellectual underperformance of students from low socioeconomic backgrounds[END_REF][START_REF] Croizet | Stereotype threat, social class, gender, and academic under-achievement: when our reputation catches up to us and takes over[END_REF][START_REF] Harrison | The consequences of stereotype threat on the academic performance of White and non-White lower income college students[END_REF][START_REF] Spencer | Social class is dead. Long live social class! Stereotype threat among low socioeconomic status individuals[END_REF]. For all these reasons, lower-class students also have a lower self-esteem [START_REF] Twenge | Self-esteem and socioeconomic status: a meta-analytic review[END_REF], lower self-efficacy [START_REF] Gecas | The social psychology of self-efficacy[END_REF][START_REF] Ramos-Sánchez | Self-efficacy of first-generation and non-first-generation college students: the relationship with academic performance and college adjustment[END_REF], lower self-assessed intelligence [START_REF] Ivcevic | The can and cannot do attitude: how self-estimates of ability vary across ethnic and socioeconomic groups[END_REF][START_REF] Kudrna | The influence of social class salience on self-assessed intelligence[END_REF], and lower expectancies of success [START_REF] Johnson | Middle class and marginal? Socioeconomic status, stigma, and self-regulation at an elite university[END_REF][START_REF] Langhout | Classism in the university setting: examining student antecedents and outcomes[END_REF]) than upperclass students.

Social class as a moderator of the goals-performance links Interestingly, in the achievement goal field, the uncertainty regarding one's success has often been argued to moderate both the performance-approach goals-grade link and the mastery-approach goals-grade link. In particular, it has been shown that mastery goals favor performance when participants were exposed to failures [START_REF] Covington | Task-oriented versus competitive learning structures: motivational and performance consequences[END_REF], on de-manding tasks [START_REF] Graham | Motivational influences on cognition: task involvement, ego involvement, and depth of information processing[END_REF] and on difficult exams (e.g., Elliot and McGregor 1999;[START_REF] Grant | Clarifying achievement goals and their impact[END_REF]. Mastery goal benefits are also more often documented when the assigned goal is difficult [START_REF] Jagacinski | The impact of situational and dispositional achievement goals on performance[END_REF]) rather than easy to reach (see also Utman's meta-analysis, 1997). Likewise, it seems that performance goals positively impact achievement on simple or well-learnt tasks (Steele- [START_REF] Steele-Johnson | Goal orientation and task demand effects on motivation, affect, and performance[END_REF], but no longer do so when the task is more difficult [START_REF] Grant | Clarifying achievement goals and their impact[END_REF] or-although still subject to controversy (e.g., [START_REF] Harackiewicz | Predictors and consequences of achievement goals in the college classroom: maintaining interest and making the grade[END_REF])-when students perceive their ability as low [START_REF] Elliott | Goals: an approach to motivation and achievement[END_REF][START_REF] Jagacinski | The impact of situational and dispositional achievement goals on performance[END_REF][START_REF] Nicholls | Achievement motivation: conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice, and performance[END_REF][START_REF] Smiley | Individual differences in achievement goals among young children[END_REF]). In the same vein, some authors [START_REF] Darnon | Achievement goals in social interactions: Learning with mastery vs. performance goals[END_REF]) have shown that the advantage of mastery goals over performance-approach goals on learning only appeared when a co-actor made participants doubt the validity of their own answers. Thus, the extent to which a person doubts his or her ability to succeed seems to moderate both the performance-approach goals-grade link and the mastery-approach goals-grade link, but in the opposite direction.

It has sometimes been argued in the field (e.g., [START_REF] Nicholls | The competitive ethos and democratic education[END_REF]) that an education centered on mastery goals should favor all students rather than just privileged groups. In line with this idea, some sparse research suggests that low-status individuals benefit from mastery-approach goals whereas highstatus individuals benefit from performance-approach goals. For example, women, more than men, suffer from the effects of performance-approach goals [START_REF] Jagacinski | Challenge seeking: the relationship of achievement goals to choice of task difficulty level in ego-involving and neutral conditions[END_REF]; see also [START_REF] Midgley | Performance-approach goals: good for what, for whom, under what circumstances, and at what cost[END_REF], for a discussion of this point) and benefit from mastery goal inductions [START_REF] Patrick | The differential impact of extrinsic and mastery goal orientations on males' and females' self-regulated learning[END_REF]). Mastery-approach goals, but not performance-approach goals, have also been shown to reduce women's social identity threat [START_REF] Stout | Mastering one's destiny: mastery goals promote challenge and success despite social identity threat[END_REF]. More recently, in the college context, [START_REF] Smeding | Reducing the socioeconomic status achievement gap at university by promoting mastery-oriented assessment[END_REF] tested social class as a moderator of the effect of different goal-based forms of assessment. Assessment was either presented as a tool for education (mastery oriented) or as a tool for selection (performance oriented). This research indicated that lower-class students are those who perform better after mastery-based forms of assessments than after performance-based goals assessments (see [START_REF] Souchal | Assessing does not mean threatening: Assessment as a key determinant of girls' and boys' performance in a science class[END_REF], for a similar pattern on girls' performance on a scientific task) and those whose self-set mastery goals were the most strongly related to exam grade.

Overview and hypotheses

The present study measures mastery-approach and performance-approach goals at the beginning of the semester and tests them as predictors of the final grade obtained at the end of the class (three months later). As in most research in the area, students' social class is measured by generational status [START_REF] Harackiewicz | Closing the social class achievement gap for first-generation students in undergraduate biology[END_REF]Jury et al. 2015;Stephens et al. 2012a). Generational status should moderate both the effect of mastery-approach goals and the effect of performance-approach goals on final grade but in the reverse direction: The positive link between performance-approach goals and exam grade should be stronger for continuing-generation students (i.e., upper-class students) than for firstgeneration students (i.e., lower-class students), whereas the positive link between mastery-approach goals and academic performance should be stronger for first-generation students than for continuinggeneration students.

Method

Participants and procedure Participants were 103 undergraduate psychology students who volunteered to participate in the context of their methodology class. Because of two missing data on the covariate and one missing data on the social class measure, our final sample was composed of 100 participants, 90 women and 10 men, with a mean age of 18.9 years (SD = 1.52). Participants responded to the achievement goal scale and the demographic questions during one of their introductory level methodology lectures that took place at the beginning of the fall semester. At the end of the semester, three months later, the grade obtained for this methodology class was recorded2 .

Measures

Achievement goals. The performance and mastery goal items were extracted from [START_REF] Elliot | A 2 × 2 achievement goal framework[END_REF] Achievement Goal Questionnaire (see [START_REF] Darnon | Buts d'accomplissement, stratégies d'étude, et motivation intrinsèque : présentation d'un domaine de recherche et validation française de l'échelle d'Elliot et McGregor[END_REF] for the French version). Participants were asked to report the extent to which they endorsed mastery-approach goals (α = .86, M = 5.62, SD = 1.17) and performance-approach goals (α = .86, M = 3.68, SD = 1.59) in the methodology class. Both measures contained three items, and participants' answers ranged from 1 "not at all true of me" to 7 "very true of me" (e.g., "It is important for me to do better than other students" for performance-approach goals; "I want to learn as much as possible from this class" for mastery-approach goals). Social class. Participants reported their mothers' and fathers' highest degrees. If the highest degree reached by a participant's parents was lower than the baccalauréat (i.e., the French high-school exit exam), the participant was coded as first-generation students. If at least one of the student's parents had earned the baccalauréat or a higher degree, the student was categorized as a continuinggeneration student (see Jury et al. 2015, for a similar classification). Based on this classification, 45 students were coded as first-generation students and 55 as continuing-generation students.

Final grade. The final grade was the grade obtained in this specific introductory level method-ology class and corresponded to the mean of two exams students took at the end of the semester, three months later. First, they had to work on a methodological project (7 pages maximum) and present this project orally. This part counted for 20% of the final grade. Second, they had to take a test containing (minimum) to 20 (maximum; current range 4.18 to 18.75, M = 12.17, SD = 3.38).

Initial academic abilities.

As participants were at the beginning of their studies, we asked them to report the grade they obtained on the high-school exit exam (baccalauréat), which could range from 10 (passing level) to 20 (M = 11.69, SD = 1.41; current range from 10 to 16). Intercorrelations among variables are presented in Table 1.

Results

Regression analyses were conducted to test whether mastery-and performance-approach goals interacted with generational status to predict final grade. These regression analyses included three predictors-generational status (coded -0.5, first-generation students; + 0.5, continuing-generation students), performance-approach goals (mean centered), and mastery-approach goals (mean centered)-as well as all possible interactions among these three terms. To control for initial abilities, the baccalaureate grade (mean centered) was entered as a covariate. As the covariate was not correlated to any of the predictors, the interaction between the covariate and the predictors was not entered in the analyses [START_REF] Yzerbyt | Adjusting researchers' approach to adjustment: on the use of covariates when testing interactions[END_REF]).

None of the main effects was significant: β = .11, F(1, 91) < 1 for performance-approach goals; β = .14, F(1, 91) = 1.46, p = .23 for mastery-approach goals; and β = -.05, F(1, 91) < 1 for social class, except for the main effect of the covariate, β = .31, F(1, 91) = 10.23, p < .003, η p 2 = .10, 95% CI [.28, 1.21].

More importantly, as expected, performance-approach goals interacted with social class: β = .23, F(1, 91) = 4.47, p < .04, η p 2 = .05, 95% CI [.06, 1.93]. This interaction is depicted in Fig. 1. Simple slope analyses revealed that performance-approach goals positively predicted academic grade for continuing-generation students, β = .34, F(1, 91) = 4.75, p < .04, η p 2 = .08, 95% CI [.06, 1.38], but not for first-generation students, β = -.13, F(1, 91) < 1. The interaction between mastery-approach goals and social class was marginal and in the reverse direction, β = -.22, F(1, 91) = 3.71, p < .06, η p 2 = .04, 95% CI [-2.59, .04]. This interaction is depicted in Fig. 2. Simple slope analyses revealed that masteryapproach goals positively predicted academic grade for first-generation students, β = .36, F(1, 91) = 4.01, p < .05, 95% CI [.01, 2.07], but not for continuing-generation students, β = -.08, F(1, 91) < 1. No other interaction was significant, all F(1, 91) < 1.

Discussion

The purpose of the present paper was to test social class as a moderator of the link between both mastery-approach goals and grade and performance-approach goals and grade. As developed above, in the higher education context, notably because of an experienced mismatch and of a negative stereotype, lower-class students are led to doubt their ability to succeed more than upper-class students [START_REF] Croizet | Extending the concept of stereotype threat to social class: the intellectual underperformance of students from low socioeconomic backgrounds[END_REF][START_REF] Gecas | The social psychology of self-efficacy[END_REF][START_REF] Ivcevic | The can and cannot do attitude: how self-estimates of ability vary across ethnic and socioeconomic groups[END_REF]Stephens et al. 2012a). As mastery goals have been shown to positively predict achievement on difficult and challenging tasks or when students experience threat, failures, and conflicts, we argued that lower-class (i.e., first generation) students, but not upper-class (i.e., continuing generation) students, should benefit from a high endorsement of mastery goals. Moreover, as performance-approach goals have been shown to predict grade mostly in low-uncertainty situations, we predicted that performance-approach goals would be more positively related to grade for upper-class students than for lower-class students.

Results obtained in the present study bring initial support to these hypotheses. Indeed, the effect of performance-approach goals on final grade was moderated by social class. The positive link between performance-approach goals and final grade is only observed for continuing-generation students. The effect of mastery-approach goals on final grade was also (although marginally) moderated by social class. Mastery-approach goals were indeed positively associated to final grade for first-generation but not for continuing-generation students. In line with recent research in the area, the present results support the idea that not all approach goals are beneficial for all students. In particular, as observed several times in the literature, if performance-approach goals are positively related to grade [START_REF] Harackiewicz | Revision of achievement goal theory: necessary and illuminating[END_REF][START_REF] Hulleman | A meta-analytic review of achievement goal measures: different labels for the same constructs or different constructs with similar labels[END_REF][START_REF] Senko | Achievement goal theory at the crossroads: old controversies, current challenges, and new directions[END_REF][START_REF] Van Yperen | A meta-analysis of self-reported achievement goals and nonself-report performance across three achievement domains (work, sports, and education)[END_REF], it seems to be the case only for upper-class students-namely, the population that is the most often examined in the literature. Indeed, upper-class students usually largely outnumber lower-class students in the college context [START_REF] Hearn | Socioeconomic diversity in selective private colleges: an organizational analysis[END_REF]OECD 2014). This positive association no longer exists for lower-class students. In the same vein, the general low association observed between masteryapproach goals and grade in the literature may be due to the fact that the sample examined in the previous research was mainly composed of upper-class students enrolled in universities. The present results suggest that mastery goals could be much more useful for lower-class students.

Interestingly, authors in the area have recently started to argue that goals should not be examined in a social vacuum and that more attention should be devoted to the social belonging of students [START_REF] Berger | School socio-economic status and student socio-academic achievement goals in upper secondary contexts[END_REF][START_REF] Darnon | Achievement goals in educational contexts. A social psychology perspective[END_REF][START_REF] Huang | Discriminant and criterion-related validity of achievement goals in predicting academic achievement: a meta-analysis[END_REF]Jury et al. 2015). The present study confirms that taking into account students' social class can help understand important inconsistencies or weak effect sizes observed in previous research [START_REF] Hulleman | A meta-analytic review of achievement goal measures: different labels for the same constructs or different constructs with similar labels[END_REF][START_REF] Van Yperen | A meta-analysis of self-reported achievement goals and nonself-report performance across three achievement domains (work, sports, and education)[END_REF]. The present results are consistent with recent research showing that the effects of performance goal-or mastery goaloriented contexts depend on social class [START_REF] Smeding | Reducing the socioeconomic status achievement gap at university by promoting mastery-oriented assessment[END_REF] by showing that similar moderation can also be observed with self-set goals and while controlling for initial academic ability. Thus, taken together, these studies suggest that a strong focus on mastery versus performance goals, regardless of the origin of this focus (contextual incentive in previous studies, personal self-set goals in the present study), can affect the experience of lower-and upper-class students differently in the context of higher education. Some limitations should be noted. In particular, in the present data, both goals and social class are invoked variables. Therefore, causality cannot be established. Although situationally induced goals usually raise similar results as self-set goals [START_REF] Linnenbrink-Garcia | When are achievement goal orientation beneficial for academic achievement? A closer look at main effects and moderating factors[END_REF][START_REF] Van Yperen | A meta-analysis of self-reported achievement goals and nonself-report performance across three achievement domains (work, sports, and education)[END_REF], 2015), replicating the present results with manipulated goals would nicely complement the present findings. The low sample size is another important limitation of the present research. In addition, social class was measured through generational status. Although this is very common in the literature, such a measure prevents from examining middle social class students, who may be particularly concerned with upward mobility. Future research should examine this issue and should also measure avoidance goals in addition to approach goals. Indeed, lower-class students are likely to endorse performanceavoidance goals (Jury et al. 2015;Jury et al. 2015). Performance-avoidance goals have been shown to negatively predict academic performance (e.g., [START_REF] Elliot | A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation[END_REF]). Thus, it seems reasonable to assume that they may mediate the relationship between social class and poor academic performance. Moreover, in the present paper, it is argued that the reason why social class moderates the effects of goals is that social class affected the perception students have of their own chances to succeed within the university system. However, this perception was not measured in the present study, keeping open the question of what psychological processes mediate the findings. A concurrent explanation of the moderation of the mastery-approach goals-performance link could be the social value attached to mastery-approach goals among lower-and upper-class students. Indeed, recent research has documented that the more the goals are perceived as socially useful to succeed within the college context, the more they predict academic achievement [START_REF] Dompnier | Faking the desire to learn: A clarification of the link between mastery goals and academic achievement[END_REF][START_REF] Dompnier | When performance-approach goals predict academic achieve-ment and when they do not: A social value approach[END_REF][START_REF] Dompnier | Improving low achievers' academic performance at university by changing the social value of mastery goals[END_REF]. The same line of research has also shown that the higher the goals are perceived as socially desirable, the lower these goals predict academic performances. One could argue that mastery goals are more socially useful for lower-class students than for upper-class students and more socially desirable for upper-class students than for lower-class students. Indeed, because of poorer initial acquaintance with the system, succeeding in college is more challenging for lower-class than for upperclass students. Thus, as they cannot rely upon other resources (e.g., parental support), learning (i.e., mastery goals) may be perceived as the only useful way to reach academic success. This would imply that lower-class students endorse mastery goals for "true" reasons-namely, because they think these goals are required to succeed within the college context. Upper-class students may have other reasons to endorse mastery-approach goals. Indeed, mastery goals are particularly high in social desirability [START_REF] Darnon | Achievement goal promotion at University: Social desirability and social utility of mastery and performance goals[END_REF]). As upper-class students are usually more aware of college expectations [START_REF] Collier | Is that paper really due today?": differences in first-generation and traditional college students' understandings of faculty expectations[END_REF], they may report goals for social desirability purposes. This could explain the low association between mastery-approach goals and performance for upper-class students. In other words, mastery-approach goals may be strongly associated with the performance of lower-class students because lower-class students endorse these goals for "true" reasons (i.e., because they believe in their social utility), more so than upper-class students who might endorse these goals for self-presentation purposes (i.e., because they know these goals are high in social desirability). Future research should test this possibility.

Interestingly, some authors have noted that, because of the selection function fulfilled by the university system in Western countries, performance-approach goals are particularly strongly promoted in higher education contexts [START_REF] Alon | The evolution of class inequality in higher education: competition, exclusion, and adaptation[END_REF][START_REF] Dompnier | Achievement goals and social judgment: The performance-approach goals paradox[END_REF][START_REF] Dornbusch | The social structure of schooling[END_REF]Jury et al. 2017). Besides, in the competitive context of higher education, performance-approach goals are often positively related to academic achievement (e.g., [START_REF] Harackiewicz | Revision of achievement goal theory: necessary and illuminating[END_REF]. However, the present findings suggest that they are not beneficial for all students. Based on the present results and in line with previous research [START_REF] Smeding | Reducing the socioeconomic status achievement gap at university by promoting mastery-oriented assessment[END_REF], we believe that the strong promotion of performance-approach goals in higher education could probably explain why higher education fails to reduce the social class achievement gap. Indeed, by promoting goals that mostly serve upper-class students, the higher education environment contributes to acting in favor of upper-class students, leaving behind students who precisely deserve more attention-namely, students who would benefit the most from more mastery-oriented practices.

A student's social class refers to his or her family's rank in the society. In the social class literature, various measures such as income, parental level of education, or occupation have been used to identify one's social class. In the present paper, we will specifically focus on students' parental level of education.

This research was part of a large study. Only the measures that are relevant for the present hypothesis are discussed here