Learning motivation and volitional action regulation

Here you will find the summary of my dissertation (Engeser, 2005 or 2009):

Learning statistics as part of a psychology degree was empirically investigated in terms of the assumed effect of volitional action regulation. In addition to ability-related and motivational factors, the aspects of volitional action regulation should be decisive with this activity, which is experienced by many students as aversive. Only persons who, in spite of the aversive experience of the activity, can “force” themselves to learn statistics should be successful. Based on the process model of learning motivation, the assumed effects of the volitional factors were assigned to those of the motivational factors and in a longitudinal design were empirically examined over two consecutive winter semesters at the University of Potsdam and the Technical University of Berlin (N = 273).

The assumptions regarding the ability and motivation-relevant factors of the process model of learning motivation that formed the basis of the analysis were confirmed to a large degree. The personal characteristics (ability-related characteristics, achievement motive and commitment to the psychology degree) determine to a considerable extent the aspects of the current motivation to learn statistics. The latter was recorded through the components of the expanded cognitive model of motivation and with the help of the learning intentions. Through this it is apparent that the current motivation to learn statistics is, on the whole, favourably pronounced. The aspects of the current motivation in turn influence process variables such as the learning expenditure, the emotional experience and the functional state during learning. The learning expenditure and the flow experience (as an indicator for the functional state) as well as their interaction predict the exam performance at the end of the semester (even when ability-related features are also taken into consideration). Additional analyses on the stability of the correlationsshow that the process variables learning expenditure, emotional experience, functional state and flow experience recorded in the winter semester show the same correlations with exam performance in the summer semester and the winter semester. The correlations with exam performance are admittedly somewhat weaker in the summer semester, but on the whole they are impressively stable. The correlations with the first diploma marks are also very similar, although considerably weaker and predominantly not significant.

However, although the overall picture is, on the whole, consistent with theory, some deviations from the theoretical assumptions do emerge. These are discussed in detail. For the most part these are the unconfirmed effect of the implicit achievement motive on the consequent incentives for learning statistics. Only the activity incentives are more highly marked, with a stronger implicit achievement motive. Moreover, the commitment to the psychology degree not only has direct effects on the components of the expanded cognitive model of motivation, but also directly influences the strength of the recorded reason for action (learning intention). Furthermore, the activity incentives do not influence the strength of the learning intention. The activity incentive “directly” influences the emotional experience involved in learning statistics and has an effect on learning statistics beyond the purely goal-oriented reconstructable reason for action. As a further deviation, the ability-related features are not, in line with the model, mediated over the intermediate processes. Against expectation, a strong and direct (not mediated through the process variables) effect of age on the exam performance as well as on the decision to take part in the exam is also apparent.

Contrary to the central assumption, seen as a whole the volitional factors assigned to the process model of learning motivation contribute very little to an in-depth understanding of the learning process. The theoretical assumptions cannot for the most part be confirmed. Thus the volitional factors do not, as assumed, with high instrumental reason for action and simultaneous aversive activity experience, predict process features of learning. Furthermore, the change in the emotional experience when studying statistics can only in part be explained by volitional factors. It is discussed in detail to what extent this is attributable to false theoretical assumptions or to a lack of operationalisation and evaluation. From theoretical viewpoints it is argued that the effects of volitional factors are overestimated and that these represent an “emergency regulation” that occurs only rarely. This regulation then occurs in the learning of statistics fairly rarely, even if the learning of statistics is experienced as aversive. Furthermore, it is argued that volitional abilities in all participants are sufficiently highly marked (“educational elite”) and differences are only important if the actual reason for action involved in learning statistics is not clearly (i.e. highly) marked. Moreover, in view of the complex relations in terms of coping with the demands of learning statistics, specified assignments of conducive volitional action regulation are necessary, albeit not clearly derivable from a theoretical point of view. From methodological standpoints, the principle question of whether a questionnaire instrument can appropriately capture the volitional aspects of interest is posed - for a start because the volitional abilities are accessible to the consciousness only with difficulty and, moreover, distortions serving purposes of self-esteem stand in the way of a valid measurement. An area-specific measurement of the volitional action control could have remedied this (however, whether the general abilities of volitional action control have an effect on the learning of statistics is precisely what is of interest). As a further methodological aspect, the low “power” of being able to identify interaction effects with continuous data was cited and discussed.

In addition to the process model of learning motivation, further assumptions on the effect of the implicit and explicit achievement motive were examined. In line with expectations it is apparent that the implicit achievement motive in learning statistics with an individual reference norm has a beneficial effect. The moderating effect of the social reference norm for the explicit achievement motive cannot be confirmed with the current data. Beyond the assumptions outlined, for the implicit achievement motive a beneficial effect on exam participation is apparent. For persons with a high implicit achievement motive there is a higher probability of taking part in the exam. This finding sheds a little light upon the correlation found between achievement motive and career success found in research on achievement motivation.

Theoretical works suggest that the volitional action control does not represent an independent dimension but rather one that in part depends on the concurrence of the implicit and explicit motive systems. This was indeed confirmed for the achievement motive. If the explicit and explicit achievement motives are both high, an especially positive effect on volitional action control can be found. Findings related to power motive systems show that a concurrence of the motives is not always beneficial. A functional perspective appears to be appropriate and conducive here. The work closes by asking which constellations of motives in the sense of a volitional action control are ideal. It is postulated that the knowledge about implicit preferences of a person should help in the active search for and production of appropriate situations for the individual in question, making a volitional action control more successful and this type of control less necessary.