In 14 countries, a cubic effect of autonomous motivation best fit the motivation-achievement relation, explaining 10.7% of achievement variance (an 8.1% increase over the additive model)¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associationalr2·q2
Currency · newest study 2024 · checked against its sources 2026-10-23 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? For a group of 14 countries sharing the 'Cubic effect of x' family, the constrained model explained 10.7% of achievement variance, an 8.1% increase relative to the additive model. → Núñez-Regueiro 2024
Evidence¶
Núñez-Regueiro 2024¶
Núñez-Regueiro, F. (2024). Cubic Relations of Autonomous and Controlled Motivation to Achievement: A Cross-National Validation of Self-Determination Theory Using Response Surface Analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 36 (3). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09905-x
q2 · i? · associational · r2
Structural invariance testing of the 'Cubic effect of x' polynomial family across 14 TIMSS 2019 countries (including Australia, England, Finland, France, Singapore, Sweden). The constrained single-group solution "explained 10.7% of the variance in achievement" with excellent fit (CFI = 0.997, RMSEA = 0.011).
"This model explained 10.7% of the variance in achievement, or an 8.1% increase relative to the additive model (i.e., R2= .099)."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Autonomous and controlled motivation correlate positively and strongly across countries (r = .544), and each relates positively to mathematics achievement (r = .248 and r = .080) — related
- Across 37 countries, polynomial models with nonlinear or interactive effects of autonomous and controlled motivation on mathematics achievement always fit better than linear additive-only models — a broader claim this one bears on
- In 12 countries, a level-dependent incongruence polynomial with free cubic effect of control explained 7.8% of achievement variance (a 30.9% increase over the additive model) — related
- In 8 countries, a non-parallel asymmetric congruence/incongruence polynomial explained a modest 4.1% of achievement variance yet a 41% increase over the additive model — related
- The cubic RSA findings were cross-validated on replication data from TIMSS 2015 (N = 169,269) and an SDT college-student dataset (N = 270) using the Academic Motivation Scale — related
- Higher grades occur when high autonomous motivation coincides with low controlled motivation (incongruence), not congruence — related
- Academic self-concept relates most strongly to achievement, with achievement goals, achievement motivation, autonomous motivation, and effort beliefs each adding unique variance — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
group1-cubic-autonomy-effect-14-countries |
title |
In 14 countries, a cubic effect of autonomous motivation best fit the motivation-achievement relation, explaining 10.7% of achievement variance (an 8.1% increase over the additive model) |
description |
In 14 countries, a cubic effect of autonomous motivation best fit the motivation-achievement relation, explaining 10.7% of achievement variance (an 8.1% increase over the additive model) |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2024 |
source_checked |
2026-10-23 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-21 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — núñez-regueiro-2024 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.