Controlled motivation showed no negative effects on the desirable outcomes measured, and no profile differences emerged in academic self-concept or teacher-reported engagement¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · associational r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Post hoc tests found no significant differences between any groups in academic self-concept, and univariate ANOVA found no significant effect of cluster membership on teacher-reported engagement. → Ana Rothes 2017 q2 i? The good-quality group did not distinguish itself positively from the high-quantity group in any outcome variable except self-efficacy, so controlled regulation's role seemed neutral. → Ana Rothes 2017 (2)

Evidence¶

Ana Rothes 2017¶

Ana Rothes, Marina S. Lemos, and Teresa Gonçalves. (2017). Motivational Profiles of Adult Learners. Adult Education Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741713616669588

q2 · i? · associational · r2

Follow-up analyses in the MANCOVA on 188 participants; teacher-reported engagement was collected only from 124 participants in short and long vocational courses because large higher-education classes prevented teacher ratings. No significant cluster effects on either variable.

"Also, post hoc tests did not reveal significant differences between any of the groups in academic self-con- cept. Univariate ANOVA also did not reveal any significant effects of cluster member- ship on teacher-reported engagement."

Ana Rothes 2017 (2)¶

Ana Rothes, Marina S. Lemos, and Teresa Gonçalves. (2017). Motivational Profiles of Adult Learners. Adult Education Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741713616669588

q2 · i? · associational · r2

The authors' interpretation of the pairwise comparisons: the good-quality group beat the high-quantity group only in self-efficacy, so controlled motivation combined with autonomous motivation was not harmful for the desirable outcomes measured. Equiv

"the role of controlled regulation, on the other hand, seems more neutral, as with the exception of self-efficacy, the good-quality group did not distinguish itself positively from the high-quantity group in any of the outcome variables."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Adult learners' motivational profiles differ significantly in self-efficacy, learning strategies and behavioral engagement: the good-quality motivation group scores higher on all three, the high-quantity group on strategies and engagement only — reports the opposite
• Adult learners below secondary education show higher controlled regulation and lower academic self-concept and learning strategies than those above it — reports the opposite
• Adult learners' motivation clusters into four profiles combining autonomous and controlled regulation, replicating the structure expected from SDT research with younger students — related
• Students with good-quality or moderately positive profiles self-assessed more accurately after studying video modeling examples than students with poor-quality or moderately negative profiles — related
• Autonomous regulation correlates positively with self-efficacy, learning strategies, and behavioral engagement, while controlled regulation shows no significant linear relations with these outcomes — related