Most motivational and self-regulation measures did not differ by competitive preference, though overall interest in educational psychology declined over the semester¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · associational r1 · q3 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2025 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 2 of 2 entries) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Self-efficacy, metacognitive self-regulation and performance avoidance showed no significant group, time, or interaction effects; mastery approach and mastery avoidance showed no group or interaction effects but did change over time (mastery approach decreased, mastery avoidance increased), and performance approach was the one measure that differed by competitiveness group (higher in highly competitive students, with a group-by-time interaction). → Daniell DiFrancesca 2025 q3 i2 Educational psychology interest showed a significant time effect independent of competitiveness group. → Daniell DiFrancesca 2025 (2)

Evidence¶

Daniell DiFrancesca 2025¶

Daniell DiFrancesca, Dan Spencer. (2025). The effects of competitive classroom activities on undergraduates with varied levels of competitive preference. Instructional Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-025-09741-8

q3 · i? · associational · r1

A 2x2 mixed ANOVA on self-efficacy (n = 73) found no significant effects, and the text reports none for metacognitive self-regulation or performance avoidance. Mastery approach (decrease, η2 = 0.15) and mastery avoidance (increase, η2 = 0.055) showed significant time effects only, with no group or interaction effects. Performance approach showed time (η2 = 0.085), interaction (η2 = 0.085) and group (η2 = 0.45) effects: highly competitive students scored higher at both time points and declined over the semester.

"Educational psychology self-efficacy A 2 (Competitiveness Group) X 2 (Time) mixed ANOV A revealed no significant effects of time, F(1,71) = 2.63, p =.11, group, F(1, 71) = 1.59, p =.21, or interaction between time and group, F(1, 71) = 1.25, p =.27."

Daniell DiFrancesca 2025 (2)¶

Daniell DiFrancesca, Dan Spencer. (2025). The effects of competitive classroom activities on undergraduates with varied levels of competitive preference. Instructional Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-025-09741-8

q3 · i2 · associational · r1

A 2x2 mixed ANOVA on educational psychology interest (η2 = 0.084 time effect) showed interest declining from pre (M = 15.82) to post (M = 14.88) with no group or interaction effects.

"However, there was an overall signifi cant effect of time, F(1, 71) = 6.52, p =.013, η2 = 0.084, with students decreasing in their reported interest from pre-test to post-test."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Achievement Goal Orientation — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes

Related Claims¶

• Students across competitive-preference levels reported enjoying the Kahoot activities consistently throughout the semester, with no detectable wear-out effect — related
• Kahoot performance over a semester did not differ between high- and low-competitive undergraduates, though scores varied across time points — related
• Metacognitive monitoring bias during competitive Kahoots did not differ by competitive preference, though bias shifted across time — related
• Error framing is expected to induce differential mastery and performance-avoid orientations, shaping self-efficacy and intrinsic motivation — related
• For effective self-regulators, mastery goals have a large positive and performance-avoidance goals a small negative effect on metacognition — related