between motivation and the self-conceptâ (Markus and Nurius, 1986). Possible selves are thought to influence the motivation process in two ways: on one hand ...
Journal of Adolescence 1998, 21, 219–222
Brief Report
Academic achievement, motivation and possible selves ANGELIKI LEONDARI, EFI SYNGOLLITOU AND GRIGORIS KIOSSEOGLOU
Introduction An area of continuing interest in personality research is concerned with understanding how a person’s motivations are represented and how these representations influence thoughts, feelings and actions (Little, 1983). Several theorists have framed the question of motivation in terms of self-conceptions. The notion of possible selves postulated by Markus and her colleagues represent an attempt to link self-concept to behaviour. Possible selves are defined as conceptions of the self in future states. They are regarded as the cognitive manifestations of enduring aspirations and motives and “the interface between motivation and the self-concept” (Markus and Nurius, 1986). Possible selves are thought to influence the motivation process in two ways: on one hand by providing a clear goal to strive for—if they are positive—and to avoid—if they are negative. On the other, by energizing an individual to pursue the actions necessary for attaining that goal (Markus and Ruvolo, 1989). According to Markus and Ruvolo (1989), simulating a desired end-state can produce positive affect and arousal, activate plans and strategies relevant to achieving this state and facilitate selective information processing that favours the desired end-state. Furthermore, specific clear goals have been shown to be more effective than vague or general intentions to perform well (Locke et al., 1981). Realizing a desired goal depends also on whether the individual is able to keep this possible self as a dominant or central element in the working self-concept. When an elaborated positive self is active it will organize and energize the individual’s activities in pursuit of it. It will also render all other competing possible selves less accessible (Bandura, 1986; Harter, 1981). In this study, adopting a framework of “possible selves,” we sought to investigate the relationship between possible selves, academic performance (as measured by grade point average and persistence on task), motivation and self-esteem. By concentrating on the structuring aspect of possible selves, that is the concrete conceptualization of the desired end-state, we hypothesized that the more specifically elaborated the self-representations are, the greater their influence would be in structuring an individual’s activities towards achieving this goal. Reprint requests and correspondence should be addressed to Dr A. Leondari, Irinis 89, Agia Paraskevi, 15342, Athens, Greece. 0140-1971/98/020219+04/$25·00/0/ad970143 1998 The Association for Professionals in Services for Adolescents
220
A. Leondari, E. Syngollitou and G. Kiosseoglou
Methodology A booklet containing the questionnaires and instructions for responding to them was compiled for testing purposes. The booklets were given on the morning of a school day to a random sample of 289 high school students (all in their third and fourth year of high school) in the age range of 14–15 years. The schools were located in a residential neighborhood of lower and lower middle class families. The questionnaires included Rosenberg’s Self-esteem Inventory (Rosenberg, 1965), the Achievement Motivation Questionnaire (Myers, 1965) which aims directly to determine if an individual is trying to succeed in school, and the Task Persistence Questionnaire with two questions referring to time spent on preparation for school. Academic achievement was measured by grade point average (GPA), collected from the school records in the form of raw scores. We used an open-ended format to elicit possible selves, following the idea that free response methods are more successful in tapping aspects of possible selves (Ruvolo and Markus, 1992). Subjects were instructed to imagine themselves in the future either in a success or in a failure situation and write a short essay describing it.
Results The content analysis of the open-ended questions was wholly exploratory. Possible selves were coded into seven content categories. Each possible self described by a participant was coded into two of these categories (one referring to positive and one to negative future images). Inter-rater reliability, which was established on a randomly selected subset of 50 answers, was 0·80. The seven categories were as follows: (1) general, vague, stereotypical images of positive possible selves. Success due to hard work; (2) clear, specific positive possible selves. Success due to hard work; (3) general, vague, stereotypical images of positive possible selves. Success due to luck; (4) clear, specific positive possible selves. Success due to luck; (5) complete resignation. A general picture of failure, bleak, sad future, complete pessimism. Failure due to bad luck; (6) reference to failure but with some hints of optimism, supportive environment; (7) failure in specific goals (e.g. failure in University entry examination). Failure due to bad luck. When the responses to the open questions were examined, it was found that 73·81% of the subjects chose the success imagery due to personal effort (categories 1 and 2) and only the 26·19% due to luck (categories 3 and 4). Next, chi-square analyses were conducted to examine the possible differences between boys and girls in relation to the different categories of possible selves. These were insignificant in relation to positive possible selves (χ2(3)=3·63, p>0·05), but there were significant differences in relation to negative possible selves (χ2(2)=11·32, p 0·05) or negative possible selves (χ2(2)=0·15, p>0·05). To test the significance of positive possible selves on the five dependent variables (motivation, academic achievement, task persistence 1, task persistence 2 and self-esteem) a MANOVA was performed using as an independent variable the positive possible selves with four categories. The multivariate test was significant (F(15,741)=2·18, p
