Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science 2008, Vol. 40, No. 4, 189 –199
Copyright 2008 by the Canadian Psychological Association 0008-400X/08/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0012858
Academic Motivation in University: The Role of Basic Psychological Needs and Identity Formation Cathy Faye and Donald Sharpe University of Regina This study was an investigation of the relationship between psychological need fulfillment, psychosocial development, and academic motivation in university students. Two models were tested. The 1st model, derived from developmental theories, proposed that basic psychological needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness would predict identity and intimacy achievement, which would, in turn, predict academic intrinsic motivation. A 2nd model, based on self-determination theory, proposed that identity and intimacy would predict academic motivation and that this relationship would be mediated by basic psychological needs. Results from path analyses supported the model derived from self-determination theory over the model derived from developmental theories. Competence and identity were found to be the 2 constructs most strongly associated with academic motivation. These findings support the view that identity formation plays a critical role in facilitating academic motivation in university. Keywords: self-determination, intrinsic motivation, psychological needs, psychosocial development
and Ryan (1985, 2000b) differentiated extrinsically motivated behaviour or behaviour as a means to a desirable end from intrinsically motivated behaviour or behaviour performed for internal pleasure and satisfaction (see Vallerand, 1997). Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation have been differentiated further to represent the multidimensional nature of motivation (Deci & Ryan, 2000b; Vallerand, 1997). Four types of extrinsic motivation have been identified: external regulation, introjection, identification, and integration. As one moves from external regulation toward integration, behaviours become less contingent on external controls. Proponents of self-determination theory have also proposed three types of intrinsic motivation: intrinsic motivation to know, intrinsic motivation toward accomplishment, and intrinsic motivation toward stimulation. An additional type of motivation, amotivation, refers to a general lack of motivation and direction.
Participation in postsecondary education has become the rule rather than the exception in North America. Over the past 35 years, undergraduate enrolment in colleges and universities has doubled amongst men and almost tripled amongst women (National Center for Education Statistics, 2005). It is therefore not surprising that substantial research attention has been directed at understanding the psychological nature of the undergraduate experience (Lefkowitz, 2005; Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991). Why some students of equivalent intelligence and aptitude achieve at university and others do not has been attributed in part to differences in academic motivation. Many university professors can attest to the frustration of having bright students who fail to apply themselves to their studies. At the same time, many young students pass through university convinced that they have not performed to their academic potential. In the present study, we contribute to a growing literature investigating these issues by examining academic motivation within the context of two prominent theories from psychology: self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2000b) and psychosocial stage theory (Erikson, 1968).
Basic Psychological Needs Self-determination theory is developmental in the sense that particular goals, values, and behaviours come to be integrated and organised within the self (Ryan, 1993; Ryan & Deci, 2003). Environmental factors can affect the integration and organisation of the self through the working of three basic psychological needs (Deci & Ryan, 2000b; Vallerand, 2000). Autonomy refers to feelings of choice and agency. Individuals need to feel that they may choose and implement their own actions. Competence refers to feelings of effectiveness. Individuals need to feel that they have some control over outcomes and that they have the ability to exert some impact on their environment. Relatedness refers to the experience of healthy social connexion and satisfying social relationships. Individuals need to feel that they are engaged in meaningful interactions with important others. Environments that foster the fulfillment of autonomy, competence, and relatedness needs produce self-determined behaviours or intrinsic motivation, whereas environments that thwart these needs result in non–self-determined behaviours or extrinsic motivation.
Self-Determination Theory Although academic motivation has been examined from a multitude of theoretical perspectives (e.g., Bandura, 1990; Weiner, 2001; Wigfield & Eccles, 2000), much of the recent research has been guided by self-determination theory. Self-determination theory is a comprehensive framework that addresses global, contextual, and domain-specific motivation. Within this framework, Deci
Cathy Faye and Donald Sharpe, Department of Psychology, University of Regina. Cathy Faye is now at the Department of Psychology, York Univeristy. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Cathy Faye, Department of Psychology, York University, 4700 Keele Street, Toronto, Ontario M3J 1P3. E-mail:
[email protected] 189
FAYE AND SHARPE
190 Psychosocial Stage Theory
A substantial amount of research exists pertaining to academic motivation from a self-determination perspective. Better school performance is associated with intrinsic motivation (Grolnick, Gurland, Jacob, & Decourcey, 2002) and greater need satisfaction (Levesque, Stanek, Zuehlke, & Ryan, 2004). There is a decline in intrinsic motivation through the elementary and into the high school years (Lepper, Corpus, & Iyengar, 2005), but evidence for increased intrinsic motivation in the college and university years (Sheldon, 2004). These changes have been documented in both cross-sectional and longitudinal studies (Gottfried, Fleming, & Gottfried, 2001; Gottfried, Marcoulides, Gottfried, Oliver, & Guerin, 2007), suggesting that academic motivation is indeed a developmentally sensitive construct. Although much of the research pertaining to academic motivation has centered on college and university populations, this work has seldom addressed the significance of this time frame in terms of individual psychological development. Erikson’s (1968) theory of psychosocial development has much to contribute to our understanding of academic motivation during the postsecondary years. Erikson proposed that personality develops in eight predetermined stages over the course of the life span. At each stage, the individual experiences a crisis that must be resolved before he or she can move forward to the next stage. These crises can be resolved in ways that either promote or hinder optimal development. For example, at the first stage, an infant might develop a healthy sense of trust or, conversely, might come to mistrust others. The ways in which these crises are resolved is highly contingent on the nature of the individual’s social environment. Although each stage contributes significantly to personality development, Erikson (1968) believed that adolescence and young adulthood were particularly important transitional periods. The identity crisis that occurs during adolescence is characterised by an exploration of the self. Individuals begin to think about who they are and who they want to be in the future. This crisis may lead to the establishment of a stable and unified sense of self, or it may result in a lack of purpose or direction, something Erikson termed role confusion. Once identity integration is well underway, the individual begins to resolve the intimacy crisis, which is characterised by a search for connexion with others and the formation of significant relationships. Such connexions may be successfully sought out and established. Conversely, they may be avoided, resulting in sense of isolation. Adult psychological well-being is contingent on the resolution of both of these crises (Erikson, 1968). Although Erikson viewed the identity crisis as beginning in adolescence, Arnett (2000) has suggested that because of demographic and sociocultural changes in Western society, both the identity and the intimacy crises have been postponed until the late teens and early 20s. Arnett referred to this time period as emerging adulthood.
Psychosocial Development in Higher Education A small but growing body of research has suggested that psychosocial development is related to optimal functioning in higher education. Identity development has been tied to grade point average (Cross & Allen, 1970), satisfaction with college (Waterman & Waterman, 1970), perceptions of preparedness for college
(Boyd, Hunt, Kandell, & Lucas, 2003), and academic performance (Berzonsky & Kuk, 2005; Lounsbury, Huffstetler, Leong, & Gibson, 2005). Waterman (2004) summarised a number of studies reporting a positive relationship between identity achievement and intrinsic motivation. There has been far less research pertaining to the relationship between intimacy and academic motivation. Vera and Betz (1992) found romantic relationship success predicted academic performance in higher education students. More recently, Paul, Poole, and Jakubowyc (1998) determined that students less advanced in their intimacy development at the end of their first semester of college experienced greater psychological distress. In a sample of early high school students, Shahar, Henrich, Blatt, Ryan, and Little (2003) found that relatedness as a measure of intimacy predicted maladaptive functioning mediated by intrinsic motivation. Such findings suggest that intimacy may affect academic motivation because of the role it plays in mitigating or exacerbating psychological distress. Chickering and Reisser (1993) have developed a theory that sheds light on the potential interrelationships between identity and intimacy status, basic needs, and academic motivation. Drawing on the work of Erikson (1968), Chickering and Reisser suggested that the transitional and novel nature of the postsecondary experience has the potential to evoke feelings of autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Students are often leaving home for the first time, testing out new skills in a novel environment, and forming new intimate relationships. With the establishment of these strengths comes the development of mature, lasting relationships and the establishment of personal identity. Finally, when students begin to form a clear self-concept and an enduring connexion with others, they begin to cultivate a sense of purpose, and they readily engage in activities that are meaningful and rewarding. Chickering and Reisser’s theory therefore suggests that the fulfillment of autonomy, competence, and relatedness needs fosters a healthy sense of self and a secure connexion with others, which in turn fosters feelings of intrinsic motivation. Although Chickering and Reisser’s framework and the psychosocial crises outlined by Erikson (1968) that inspired them imply a sequence from basic psychological needs to identity and intimacy achievement to academic motivation, there is another possible sequence of events. Self-determination theorists have suggested that how an individual perceives an environment may be just as important as the environment itself (Deci & Ryan, 1985). For example, a situation may be seen as informational or controlling, depending on the individual’s general orientation. In addition, the orientation of the individual to the situation may contribute to the types of situations that an individual seeks out. It may therefore be the case that those students who have a strong sense of self and a secure attachment to others perceive their environments as more supportive of their needs. In the same way that the social environment has been shown to affect intrinsic motivation through need fulfillment (Guay, Boggiano, & Vallerand, 2001; Harackiewicz & Larson, 1986; Vallerand, Fortier, & Guay, 1997; Vallerand & Reid, 1988), identity and intimacy status may affect intrinsic motivation by affecting perceptions of need fulfillment. There is also another reason to expect that psychosocial development might predict need fulfillment, rather than vice versa. One of the key tenets of self-determination theory is that optimal functioning involves choosing activities and goals that are congruent with the self (Sheldon & Elliot, 1999). According to Sheldon
ACADEMIC MOTIVATION
and Elliot (1999), the self is the “integrated center of agentic activity” and it has the capacity to “maximize organismic need satisfaction” (p. 483). To experience need fulfillment, one must first choose goals that are congruent with the values and orientations of the self; that is, one must choose self-concordant goals and activities. This self-concordance approach, along with similar ideas such as being authentic (Sheldon, Ryan, Rawsthorne, & Ilardi, 1997), suggests that individuals must have some sense of who they are and what they value to choose goals that are selfcongruent and that therefore satisfy basic needs. In other words, psychosocial development may be predictive of need fulfillment, which would in turn predict intrinsic motivation.
The Present Study In the present study, we sought to examine the interrelationships amongst basic psychological needs, intrinsic motivation, and psychosocial development. A number of studies have demonstrated relationships between (a) basic needs and intrinsic motivation (Boggiano & Ruble, 1979; Reeve & Deci, 1996; Ryan, Stiller, & Lynch, 1994); (b) psychosocial development and intrinsic motivation (see Waterman, 2004); and (c) psychosocial development and basic psychological needs (Deci & Ryan, 1985). Few studies, however, have examined the interaction of these three concepts. We therefore sought to test two models. The first model proposed a sequence in which basic psychological need fulfillment facilitates psychosocial development, which in turn leads to intrinsic motivation. Specifically, perceptions of autonomy and competence served as precursors to identity resolution; perceptions of relatedness needs served as a precursor to intimacy resolution; and identity and intimacy resolution served as precursors to intrinsic
autonomy
competence
identity
relatedness
intimacy
191
motivation (see Figure 1). The second model included the same concepts as the first model, but identity and intimacy served as predictors of intrinsic motivation, and perceptions of autonomy, competence, and relatedness served as mediators of this relationship (again, see Figure 1). The present study is a test and comparison of these two models.
Method Participants Three hundred sixty-two participants (74.9% female) were recruited from a psychology participant pool at a mid-sized Canadian university. Participants received bonus course credit for their involvement in the research. Participants ranged in age from 18 to 25 years (M ⫽ 19 years), were predominantly White, and came from predominately middle-class backgrounds. All students regardless of age and gender were eligible for participation, but the data from a small number of participants were discarded because participants fell outside Arnett’s (2000) cut-offs for emerging adulthood of younger than 18 years of age or older than 25 years of age or because participants failed to complete a substantial portion of the questionnaire package. For the small number of missing responses from participants who completed the questionnaire package, we replaced missing responses using expectation maximisation in SPSS Version 12.0 Missing Value Analysis.
Materials Identity and intimacy. The Erikson Psychosocial Stage Inventory (EPSI; Rosenthal, Gurney, & Moore, 1981) consists of six
identity
autonomy
intimacy
competence
motivation
relatedness
motivation Figure 1.
Hypothesised Models 1 and 2.
192
FAYE AND SHARPE
subscales corresponding to the first six stages of Erikson’s theory of psychosocial development. For the purposes of the present study, only the Identity and Intimacy subscales were administered. These two subscales have been used in a number of previous studies (e.g., DuCharme, Koverola, & Battle, 1997; O. Reis & Youniss, 2004) and reflect a conceptualization of identity achievement and intimacy resolution along two continuums (see Lounsbury et al., 2005). Each subscale consists of 12 items. Half of the items reflect healthy resolution of a specific crisis, and the others reflect unhealthy resolution. Responses are made on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 ⫽ almost always true to 5 ⫽ hardly ever true. A sample item from the Identity subscale is “I’ve got a clear idea of what I want to be.” A sample item from the Intimacy subscale is “I’m ready to get involved with a special person.” Appropriate items were reversed coded (see Rosenthal et al., 1981). For both subscales, a higher score reflects healthy stage resolution. Rosenthal et al. (1981) reported psychometric data for the EPSI. Alpha coefficients as reliability values were declared adequate for all subscales. A modest correlation between the Identity and Intimacy subscales was also indicated. Validity for the EPSI subscales was demonstrated by correlations with other measures of psychosocial maturity. Consistent with Erikson’s (1968) theory, for example, older participants were found to have higher scores on the EPSI, suggesting resolution of the crises. In the present study, Cronbach’s alpha was .82 for the Identity subscale and .75 for the Intimacy subscale. Basic need satisfaction. The Basic Need Satisfaction in Life Scale (BNS) was administered as a measure of need fulfillment. This scale was created by Deci and Ryan (2000a) by adapting a measure used by Ilardi, Leone, Kasser, and Ryan (1993). The BNS consists of 21 items: Eight items measure relatedness, 7 items measure autonomy, and 6 items measure competence. The scale uses a Likert response format ranging from 1 ⫽ not at all true to 7 ⫽ very true. For all three subscales, a higher score reflects need fulfillment. Appropriate items were reverse coded (see Deci & Ryan, 2000a). Sample reverse-coded items from the scale include “I feel pressured in my life” (autonomy), “Often, I do not feel very competent” (competence), and “There are not many people that I am close to” (relatedness). In a recent study, Gagne (2003) found relationships between the subscales of the BNS, autonomy support by parents, and engagement in prosocial behaviour. In the present study, Cronbach’s alpha was .67 for the Autonomy subscale, .66 for the Competence subscale, and .81 for the Relatedness subscale. Gagne (2003) reported reliability values comparable to what we found in the present study: ␣ ⫽ .69 for the Autonomy subscale, ␣ ⫽ .71 for the Competence subscale, and ␣ ⫽ .86 for the Relatedness subscale. Academic motivation. We used the college version of the Academic Motivation Scale (AMS; Vallerand et al., 1992) to assess three types of intrinsic motivation (to know, toward accomplishment, and to experience stimulation), three types of extrinsic motivation (identified, introjected, and external regulation), and amotivation. The scale consists of 28 items, each reflecting a possible reason for attending college. Each of seven subscales consists of 4 items. A sample item measuring intrinsic motivation (to know) is “because my studies allow me to continue to learn about many things that interest me.” An item measuring extrinsic motivation (external regulation) is “in order to have a better salary later on.” The AMS has been used as a measure of motivation in
numerous studies with different age groups and across a variety of geographic settings (e.g., Otis, Grouzet, & Pelletier, 2005). Respondents were asked to indicate on a scale ranging from 1 to 7 whether each AMS item does not correspond at all or corresponds exactly to their attributions. To accommodate the participants in the present study, the word university was substituted for the word college. Vallerand et al. (1992, 1993) reported strong test–retest correlations and adequate construct validity. For the present study, Cronbach’s alpha for each subscale was as follows: to know, .88; toward accomplishment, .86; toward stimulation, .84; identified, .71; introjection, .84; external regulation, .87; and amotivation, .87.
Procedure Participants were tested in groups of no more than 20. Once signed consent was obtained, participants were asked to complete a questionnaire package containing the measures. On completion of the questionnaire package, each participant was provided with a written debriefing.
Results We conducted path analysis of the covariance matrix using AMOS 5.0 (Arbuckle, 2003) with maximum likelihood estimation. An alternative analysis was structural equation modeling with item parcels serving as measured variables (see Coffman & MacCallum, 2005). Item parcels are combinations of scale items assigned to parcels either on the basis of a prior meaning (i.e., subscales) or randomly. Given that we had only one measure of each construct and given that the results from path analysis and structural equation modeling were comparable, we report here the results from the path analyses. The Identity and Intimacy subscales of the EPSI served as measures of identity and intimacy, and the Autonomy, Competence, and Relatedness subscales of the BNS served as measures of autonomy, competence, and relatedness. The seven subscales of the AMS have been treated differently by researchers depending on the purpose of their study. Some researchers have used some or all of the subscales of the AMS as measures of academic motivation (e.g., Standage, Duda, & Ntoumanis, 2003) to retain the distinctions between the subscales. Other researchers have combined intrinsically motivated items or extrinsically motivated items to create separate measures of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation (e.g., Miquelon, Vallerand, Grouzet, & Cardinal, 2005). Given that the subscales of the AMS were constructed to reflect a hierarchy from most intrinsic to most extrinsic and given the substantial correlations between the subscales and also between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, we adopted the approach offered by Guay and Vallerand (1997; see Vallerand, 1997). The first six items of the AMS were summed on the basis of the formula reported by Guay and Vallerand (1997). As recommended by Guay and Vallerand, we excluded the introjected regulation item to equate the number of intrinsic and extrinsic items. Indexes with and without introjected regulation were highly correlated in our sample (r ⫽ .98), and both indexes led to the same results. The same procedure was repeated for the next six items of the AMS and so on until four scores were created. These four scores were then summed and averaged such that the more positive the value, the more intrinsic
ACADEMIC MOTIVATION
the motivation. Means, standard deviations, and correlations amongst the EPSI subscales, the BNS subscales, and the AMS are reported in Table 1. The only correlation that was not statistically significant ( p ⬍ .01) was between intimacy and academic motivation. There were no statistically significant differences ( p ⬍ .05) by gender on any of the measures. Model 1. We conducted path analyses for the two hypothesised models. Turning first to Model 1, the overall chi-square statistic was statistically significant, 2(6, N ⫽ 362) ⫽ 50.25, p ⬍ .001, suggesting the model did not fit the data well. This outcome is not surprising given the sample size (see Byrne, 2001; Kline, 2005). The normed chi-square or 2/df ratio was 8.37. Kline (2005) noted that there is no clear cut-off for what constitutes good fit for the normed chi-square, and it too is influenced by sample size like the chi-square statistic. Other fit indices less influenced by sample size have been proposed. Two incremental fit indexes are the normed fit index (NFI) and the comparative fit index (CFI); a NFI of .928 and a CFI of .935 both exceeded a liberal cut-off value of .90 (Byrne, 2001) but not a more conservative cut-off of .95 (Hu & Bentler, 1999). We also evaluated two measures of absolute fit. The goodness-of-fit index (GFI) is equal to the proportion of variability in the variance– covariance matrix explained by the model; the GFI value of .958 was greater than .90, indicative of a reasonable fit of the model to the data (Kline, 2005). The rootmean-square error of approximation (RMSEA) is a measure of fit that is sensitive to the number of estimated parameters in the model; the RMSEA of .14 was greater than .08, indicative of a good fit (Byrne, 2001). Nonetheless, the model fit the data well on most indices not tied to sample size (NFI, CFI and GFI), but not on all (RMSEA). Model trimming involves removing paths that are statistically nonsignificant. Removing paths inflates the overall chi-square value but results in a more parsimonious model (Kline, 2005). There was a statistically nonsignificant path ( p ⬍ .06) between intimacy and academic motivation. A trimmed Model 1 with the path between intimacy and academic motivation removed would produce 2(7, N ⫽ 362) ⫽ 53.73, p ⬍ .001. The difference between the trimmed and nontrimmed models was not statistically 2 significant, D (1) ⫽ 3.49, p ⬍ .06, implying equivalent fit between the two models. However, given that both the path coefficient and the difference between the trimmed and nontrimmed models approached the conventional .05 level of statistical significance and given that the chi-square difference test is sensitive to sample size, we retained Model 1 unchanged. Figure 2 presents the standardised path coefficients for Model 1. Autonomy ( ⫽ 0.25) and competence ( ⫽ 0.37) were both Table 1 Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations for Identity and Intimacy, Basic Needs, and Academic Motivation Measures Subscale 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. ⴱ
Identity Intimacy Autonomy Competence Relatedness Motivation
p ⬍ .01.
M (SD)
1
2
3
4
5
6
43.97 (7.18) 46.24 (6.50) 36.02 (5.73) 30.23 (5.11) 45.68 (6.57) 3.79 (2.96)
— .49ⴱ .50ⴱ .51ⴱ .34ⴱ .22ⴱ
— .37ⴱ .24ⴱ .47ⴱ .03
— .57ⴱ .59ⴱ .23ⴱ
— .52ⴱ .39ⴱ
— .14ⴱ
—
autonomy
193
competence
.25* .37*
relatedness
.47*
identity
intimacy
.27*
-.11
motivation
Figure 2. Model 1: Basic needs predicting academic motivation mediated by identity and intimacy. ⴱp ⬍ .001.
statistically significant predictors of identity ( p ⬍ .001), and relatedness was a statistically significant predictor of intimacy ( ⫽ 0.47). Identity was a statistically significant predictor of academic motivation ( ⫽ 0.27). Intimacy predicted extrinsic but not intrinsic motivation ( ⫽ ⫺0.11), but this value failed to attain statistical significance ( p ⬍ .06). Approximately 21.8% of the variance in intimacy was explained by relatedness and 30.6% of the variance in identity was explained by autonomy and competence. Approximately 5.9% of the variance in academic motivation was explained by identity and intimacy. To assess the statistical significance of indirect effects in Model 1 in AMOS 5.0, we followed Shrout and Bolger’s (2002) recommendation to create 1,000 bootstrap samples from our data by random sampling with replacement. When we evaluated identity as a mediator between autonomy and academic motivation, the standardised indirect effect was  ⫽ 0.07 (i.e., 0.25 ⫻ 0.27) and was statistically significant ( p ⬍ .002). When we evaluated identity as a mediator between competence and academic motivation, the standardised indirect effect was  ⫽ 0.10 (i.e., 0.37 ⫻ 0.27) and was statistically significant ( p ⬍ .002). Finally, when we evaluated intimacy as a mediator between relatedness and academic motivation, the standardised indirect effect was  ⫽ ⫺0.05 (i.e., 0.47 ⫻ ⫺0.11) and was not statistically significant ( p ⬍ .08). To determine whether identity fully mediated the relationship between autonomy, competence, and academic motivation, we added direct paths from autonomy and competence to academic motivation and reanalyzed the model. The direct path between competence and academic motivation was statistically significant ( ⫽ 0.36, p ⬍ .001), but the direct path between autonomy and academic motivation was not ( ⫽ 0.025, p ⬍ .68). Thus, identity fully mediated the relationship between autonomy and academic motivation, and identity partially mediated the relationship between competence and academic motivation.
FAYE AND SHARPE
194
Model 2. Turning next to Model 2, the overall chi-square statistic was statistically significant, 2(5, N ⫽ 362) ⫽ 28.35, p ⬍ .001, and the 2/df ratio was 5.67. The NFI was .960 and the CFI was .966, exceeding the conservative values for goodness of fit proposed by Hu and Bentler (1999). The GFI was .975, exceeding the cut-off value recommended by Kline (2005) for this index. To the contrary, the RMSEA was .11, exceeding the cut-off of .08 for reasonable fit. On the basis of a search for a more parsimonious model, we removed a statistically nonsignificant path between autonomy and academic motivation ( p ⬍ .34) and reanalyzed the model. The revised model did not differ substantially from the 2 original model, D (1) ⫽ 0.86, p ⬍ .35. However, we retained a second statistically nonsignificant path between relatedness and academic motivation because this path approached statistical significance ( p ⬍ .13). The revised model produced the following fit statistics: 2(6, N ⫽ 362) ⫽ 29.20, p ⬍ .001, 2/df ratio ⫽ 4.87, GFI ⫽ .974, NFI ⫽ .958, CFI ⫽ .966, RMSEA ⫽ .10. Figure 3 presents the path coefficients associated with the revised Model 2. Identity was a statistically significant predictor ( p ⬍ .001) of both autonomy ( ⫽ 0.44) and competence ( ⫽ 0.46). Intimacy was a statistically significant predictor of relatedness ( ⫽ 0.41). Competence was a statistically significant predictor of academic motivation ( ⫽ 0.42). Relatedness was a statistically nonsignificant predictor of academic motivation ( ⫽ ⫺0.08, p ⬍ .13). Approximately 17.0% of the variance in relatedness was explained by intimacy, and 19.2% of the variance in autonomy and 20.7% of the variance in competence was explained by identity. Approximately 15.1% of the variance in academic motivation was explained by competence and relatedness. To assess the statistical significance of indirect effects, we again followed Shrout and Bolger’s (2002) procedure. Autonomy could not be evaluated as a mediator because the path between autonomy and academic motivation had been deleted. When competence served as a mediator between identity and academic motivation,
identity
.44*
intimacy
.46*
the standardised indirect effect was  ⫽ 0.19 (i.e., 0.46 ⫻ 0.42) and was statistically significant ( p ⬍ .002). When we evaluated relatedness as a mediator between intimacy and academic motivation (although the path between relatedness and academic motivation was statistically nonsignificant), the standardised indirect effect was  ⫽ ⫺0.03 (i.e., 0.41 ⫻ ⫺0.08) and was statistically nonsignificant ( p ⬍ .19). To determine whether competence fully mediated the relationship between identity and academic motivation, we added a direct path from identity to academic motivation and reanalyzed the model. The direct path between identity and academic motivation was not statistically significant ( ⫽ 0.04, p ⬍ .42). Thus, competence fully mediated the relationship between identity and academic motivation. Model comparison. One method for comparing models is evaluating the measures of fit described previously. For the chisquare statistic, the normed chi-square, GFI, CFI, and RMSEA, Model 2 produced values reflecting better fit compared with Model 1. The NFI values were the same for the two models. However, we judged both models to have adequate fit to the data. A second way of comparing models that have the same number of variables but are not nested or hierarchically related is by evaluating predictive fit indices (Kline, 2005). Two such indices are the Akaike Information Criterion and the Expected Cross-Validation Index; the model with the lowest value on each of these statistics is judged to be the better model (Grace, 2006). In regards to the present models, Model 2 had a lower Akaike Information Criterion value than did Model 1 (59.20 vs. 80.25), and Model 2 had a lower Expected Cross-Validation Index value than did Model 1 (.164 vs. .222). Sex of participant. We evaluated sex of participant as a potential moderator through the multiple group analysis procedure in AMOS 5.0 (see Arbuckle, 2003). We created separate male and female data sets and evaluated standardised path coefficients to determine their invariance across gender for Model 1 and for Model 2. Differences between nested models were not statistically significant for Model 1, 2(5, N ⫽ 362) ⫽ 5.85, p ⬍ .32, or for Model 2, 2(5, N ⫽ 362) ⫽ 6.74, p ⬍ .24. This implies the standardised path coefficients did not differ for women and men and that the models are applicable to both sexes.
Discussion
.41*
Tests of the Models
autonomy
competence
relatedness
.42*
-.08
motivation
Figure 3. Model 2: Identity and intimacy predicting academic motivation mediated by basic needs. ⴱp ⬍ .001.
In the present study, we sought to examine the relationships amongst basic psychological needs, psychosocial development, and academic motivation in university students. This was done by comparing two models, Model 1 inspired by Erikson (1968) and Chickering and Reisser (1993) and Model 2 inspired by selfdetermination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2000b). Although both models provided a reasonable fit to the data, Model 2 was a better fit than Model 1. Furthermore, Model 2 explained nearly three times the variance in academic motivation compared with Model 1 (15.1% vs. 5.9%), although this can be attributed to the correlation between competence and academic motivation. Most telling, Model 2 was judged the best model on the basis of two predictive fit indices. Our comparisons of the two models therefore indicate that stronger identity formation leads to increased perceptions of
ACADEMIC MOTIVATION
autonomy and competence, and feelings of competence then foster intrinsic motivation. This finding of course raises the question as to why a healthy sense of self leads to basic need fulfillment. Harter’s (1978) theoretical model of effectance motivation may shed some light on how identity formation affects need fulfillment and intrinsic motivation. Drawing on White’s (1959) work, Harter (1978) suggested that an individual’s reinforcement history affects competence, which in turn affects effectance motivation, a concept very akin to intrinsic motivation. When children are encouraged in their mastery attempts, they develop their own self-reward system and their own future mastery goals. Meeting these goals leads to feelings of competence and increased effectance motivation. When children are not encouraged to pursue independent mastery attempts, they come to rely on others for rewards, approval, and direction in terms of goal setting. They then develop an external perception of control, lower perceived competence, and decreased effectance motivation. Although Harter’s discussion centered on childhood, she noted that it might be useful to think of the adolescent as “recycling through these postulated processes again for a ‘developmental retread’” (p. 54). If identity formation is indeed the time when individuals “have to come to grips with crises of earlier years” (Erikson, 1968, p. 128), then an individual’s identity formation will be intricately tied to his or her past reinforcement history and will therefore affect feelings of competence and intrinsic motivation. Harter’s (1978) theoretical framework and her research with children also suggest that one’s developmental stage may affect competence and motivation because it affects the way in which individuals perceive evaluative situations and, more specifically, the ways in which they perceive feedback. She found that children’s responses to feedback on tasks differed depending on their developmental stage. Specifically, the relative importance of selfevaluations versus the evaluations of others differed with age. These findings suggest that psychological development may affect perceptions of need satisfaction in part because it affects perceptions of feedback situations. Many authors have indeed suggested that an individual’s sense of self will affect the way in which they perceive their environment. Wigfield and Eccles (2001) have argued that an individual’s self-schemata affects expectations for success. Renninger and Hidi (2001) similarly suggested that the experience of intrinsic motivation is affected by “both what the student brings to and what he or she understands the environment to afford” (p. 175). There are, however, alternative explanations. Individuals with a more clearly defined self-concept may be more adept at identifying and seeking out situations that allow them to feel autonomous, competent, and socially connected, which would in turn lead to greater need satisfaction. It is unclear whether it is differences in perceptions of the environment or differences in the environments that individuals seek out that affects need fulfillment. In the present study, we measured only need fulfillment. Future research addressing potential differences in the ways in which individuals actively seek out need-fulfilling situations would add much to our understanding of the ways in which identity formation enhances perceptions of need fulfillment. It must be noted that our two models were tested in a crosssectional research design, and causality therefore cannot be inferred. In all likelihood, the relationship between need fulfillment and psychosocial development may be circular; need fulfillment
195
during earlier stages of development may foster successful resolution of the identity and intimacy crises, which may, in turn, foster future perceptions of need fulfillment. In that sense, it is likely that both of our models have some validity. We did not, however, contemplate testing a nonrecursive (bidirectional) path analysis model. As Steiner (2005) has noted, a nonrecursive model may be a “more accurate reflection of the way things work in the real world, [but] the analytic problems they produce are horrendous” (p. 117). Most important, we believe that a true longitudinal study over a number of years would be necessary to decipher directionality in terms of need fulfillment and psychosocial development with certainty. One would anticipate, however, that the relationship between these constructs is indeed a symbiotic one.
Competence and Autonomy In the present study, competence was associated with academic motivation in both Models 1 and 2. In Model 1, competence was associated with academic motivation, and this relationship was partially mediated by identity formation. In Model 2, competence fully mediated the relationship between identity and academic motivation. Many cognitive theories of motivation emphasise above all else the importance of constructs such as competence. Feelings of competence promote a strong self-concept and therefore render the experience of intrinsic motivation possible. By fostering competence in the university classroom, educators not only foster intrinsic motivation, they also promote the establishment of a strong and positive sense of self. The central role that competence played in our models mirrors the importance placed on this variable in other models of motivation (Harter, 1978; White, 1959). Although autonomy was associated with academic motivation through identity in Model 1, autonomy was not associated with academic motivation in Model 2. Although the latter finding regarding autonomy is not consistent with our proposed model, it is consistent with other studies that have found weak or nonexistent relationships between autonomy and motivation (e.g., Standage et al., 2003). To the extent that autonomy reflects self-governance, self-determination, and self-direction (Deci & Ryan, 2000a), students enrolled in first-year classes may perceive little autonomy in their educational pursuits. Few choices in regards to electives, overcrowded lecture halls, multiple-choice exams, and little contact with professors typify the educational experiences of many first-year students. First-year university classes are neither autonomous nor self-organised and are thus unlikely to either satisfy or invoke autonomy needs. Less flexibility with regards to course selection, requirements to attend lectures to do well in courses, and formal examinations without personal feedback were all reasons suggested by Levesque et al. (2004) for lesser autonomy in their sample of American undergraduate students when compared with German undergraduate students. It may also be the case that autonomy needs are simply not that important for emerging adults in regards to academic motivation. According to stage– environment fit theory, different needs may be more important at different stages of development (Eccles & Midgley, 1990). For postsecondary students, autonomy seems less important for the experience of intrinsic motivation toward academics. Longitudinal research addressing the relative importance of different needs
196
FAYE AND SHARPE
across different developmental stages would help to evaluate the validity of this perspective.
Identity Along with feelings of competence, a strong sense of identity was salient in both Models 1 and 2. In Model 1, a sense of identity leads to intrinsic motivation in part because it provides university students with a solid base on which to build an enduring sense of self. This makes intuitive sense: Intrinsic motivation is largely a process whereby individuals come to value an activity by making it a more central part of the self (Vallerand, 1997). The activity is not simply an obligation, nor is it simply a means to an end. Thus, if university students have no sense of what is generally important to them, if they have no sense of continuity in their intrapersonal life, in short, if they have an ambiguous sense of themselves and where they stand in the world, it will be difficult for them to integrate their academic life into their sense of selfhood. In Model 2, a strong sense of self affects intrinsic academic motivation because a strong sense of self affects feelings of competence and to a lesser extent autonomy. Individuals who are moving toward successful resolution of the identity crisis will tend to feel that they have the ability to effect change in their environment and that they have some control over outcomes. In turn, these feelings of competence foster intrinsic over extrinsic academic motivation.
Relatedness and Intimacy Past research has indicated that basic psychological needs are associated with intrinsic motivation in a multitude of domains (see Deci & Ryan, 2000b). However, when it comes to academic motivation, some needs may play a more central role than others. Although both competence and autonomy needs were associated with intrinsic academic motivation in Models 1 and 2, relatedness was not. In the same vein, although identity was associated with academic motivation in Models 1 and 2, intimacy played no role. The negative path between intimacy and academic motivation in Model 1 and the negative path between relatedness and academic motivation in Model 2 may be statistical artefacts. Intimacy and relatedness may be serving as suppressor variables, strengthening the relationships between identity, competence, and academic motivation. The findings regarding relatedness and intimacy may also have been influenced by the predominance of women in the present sample. Many authors have reported a female advantage in various measures of social connectedness (e.g., Hook, Gerstein, Detterich, & Gridley, 2003; Montgomery, 2005; H. T. Reis, 1998). However, we did not detect such differences in our measures, and path coefficients did not differ for women and men. Furthermore, with a predominately female sample, one would anticipate relatedness and intimacy to play greater, not lesser, roles in our models. Feelings of social connexion appear to have little bearing on university students’ motivational orientation. Other studies have similarly failed to demonstrate any significant role for interpersonal constructs in the academic domain. Relatedness was not found to be associated with academic motivation in Shahar et al. (2003) and failed to predict goal construction in a preparatory academic programme (Shahar, Kalnitzki, Shulman, & Blatt, 2006). Intimacy also failed to predict exploratory interest in university students (Reich & Siegel, 2002). These findings, combined with
the results of the present study, suggest that although intrapersonal need fulfillment carries over into the academic domain, interpersonal need fulfillment does not. It may be that intimacy development and perceptions of relatedness influence motivation only in those contexts that are interpersonal in nature. Indeed, Deci and Ryan (2000b) have noted that there may be “situations in which relatedness is less central to intrinsic motivation than autonomy and competence” (p. 235). Choosing one’s career path, for example, is one area in which autonomy and competence have been shown to be influential, but relatedness has been dismissed as irrelevant (Guay, Senecal, Gauthier, & Fernet, 2003). Research clarifying the precise role of relatedness in the experience of intrinsic motivation across domains would further our understanding of how, when, or if social connexions come to affect motivational orientation.
Implications Recently, Grolnick et al. (2002) posed a question of interest to most researchers studying intrinsic motivation: “How is it that some individuals are self-determined and others are not for the very same activity?” (p. 148). The present study suggests that in the academic domain, an environment that allows students to make their own choices, express their opinions, and be an integral part of classroom decisions is one that will foster both healthy psychological development and academic intrinsic motivation. Perhaps even more important than an autonomy-supportive environment is a competence-supportive environment. Intrinsic motivation, and thus performance, is enhanced in those environments in which students feel challenged, yet have the opportunity to accomplish goals. Achieving this balance may be one of the most difficult tasks for educators faced with classrooms that are becoming increasingly diverse academically. Findings from the present study suggest, however, that resources aimed at improving the university academic environment would be resources well spent. Previous research pertaining to need fulfillment and motivation has been centered on the notion that the contextual supports in the academic environment affect perceptions of autonomy, competence, and relatedness, and such perceptions then lead to the experience of intrinsic motivation. Sheldon, Elliot, Kim, and Kasser (2001) ranked autonomy, competence, and relatedness (along with self-esteem) as the most important of 10 needs. The present study suggests, however, that for emerging adults, some needs may be more important than others. It seems plausible that the importance of particular needs may vary as a function of psychosocial development, such that competence may be of primary importance during emerging adulthood, whereas relatedness may become more salient at later stages of development. This explanation is in line with stage– environment fit theories (Eccles & Midgley, 1990), and it suggests that educators have much to gain from a developmental understanding of their students. By gauging students’ developmental progress, educators may gain greater insight into the relative importance of particular psychological needs and may therefore also gain a better understanding of how to foster feelings of intrinsic motivation in the classroom.
Strengths and Limitations One strength of the present study is that we followed the call of Kline (2005) and others not to evaluate a single model but to test
ACADEMIC MOTIVATION
explicitly alternative models in path analysis. The second model, however, was trimmed on the basis of empirical rather than theoretical specifications (see Kline, 2005), and therefore it should be replicated in an independent sample. Second, we attempted to unite two conceptually related literatures: the intrinsic motivation and self-determination literature and the literature on psychosocial stage theory. Many authors have recognised the importance of developmental stages in the experience of motivation; however, the majority of this literature is focused on the primary and secondary school years (Gottfried, 1990; Harter, 1978; Spinath & Spinath, 2005; Wigfield, 1994). The findings of the present study suggest that psychological development continues to be of central importance to intrinsic motivation in the postsecondary years. The current literature on motivation includes many rich and informative theoretical models that could incorporate the relationships between developmental stages and motivation during emerging adulthood, and our findings suggest that this would indeed be a fruitful enterprise. A third and related strength of the present work is that we evaluated identity in participants situated in emerging adulthood when identity concerns are central. Other tests of identity-related constructs with regard to self-determination theory have been done with high school and early adolescent samples (e.g., Shahar et al., 2003). Finally, given that we were evaluating individuals in emerging adulthood, we felt it important to include relatedness and intimacy constructs in our models. Although interpersonal constructs were not found to be associated with academic motivation, their inclusion in the present study provided an opportunity to investigate their role in academic motivation. The present study is, however, limited in some respects, and further research in this area is required. First and foremost, the cross-sectional nature of the present study renders it difficult to make any definitive statements regarding the relationships between needs, identity formation during emerging adulthood, and intrinsic motivation. Longitudinal research in this area will be necessary to sort out questions of directionality. Second, our participants were predominantly Caucasian women from a middleclass background. Replication amongst more culturally diverse student populations is necessary before broad generalizations can be made. Third, all our measures were self-report. Future research should include behavioural measures as well as measures of academic performance (e.g., grade point average). Finally, the AMS provides information regarding several different types of motivation. We did not maintain these distinctions in the present study but followed the practise of other researchers and collapsed these categories to construct a combined motivation score. In the same vein, the EPSI reflects one conception of identity and intimacy. Erikson’s (1968) identity construct has been differentiated into identity statuses by Marcia (1966) and more recently into identity processing styles by Berzonsky (1989). A small but growing body of research indeed suggests that these different identity styles are related to educational constructs such as motivation (Soenens, Berzonsky, Vansteenkiste, Beyers, & Goossens, 2005) and academic success (Berzonsky & Kuk, 2005; Boyd et al., 2003). Further research examining distinct patterns of psychosocial development, need fulfillment, and the different types of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation would lead to a more comprehensive and precise understanding of the relationships between these constructs.
197
Re´sume´ La pre´sente e´tude se penche sur la relation entre la satisfaction des besoins psychologiques, le de´veloppement psychosocial et la motivation pour les e´tudes chez des e´tudiants universitaires. Deux mode`les ont e´te´ teste´s. Le premier mode`le, qui vient des the´ories du de´veloppement, avance que les besoins psychologiques fondamentaux que sont l’autonomie, la compe´tence et les liens avec les autres permettent de pre´dire l’identite´ et le degre´ d’intimite´ atteint, lesquels ont re´ciproquement une incidence sur la motivation intrinse`que pour les e´tudes. Le deuxie`me mode`le, qui s’appuie sur la the´orie de l’autode´termination, propose que l’identite´ et l’intimite´ pre´disent la motivation pour les e´tudes, qui a un effet sur les besoins psychologiques fondamentaux. Les re´sultats obtenus aux analyses causales appuient le mode`le inspire´ de la the´orie de l’autode´termination, plutoˆt que le mode`le issu des the´ories du de´veloppement. On a constate´ que la compe´tence et l’identite´ sont les deux construits qui ont la corre´lation la plus forte avec la motivation pour les e´tudes. Ces conclusions soutiennent le point de vue selon lequel les construits du de´veloppement psychologique jouent un roˆle primordial dans l’ame´lioration de la motivation pour les e´tudes a` l’universite´. Mots-cle´s : autode´termination, motivation intrinse`que, besoins psychologiques, de´veloppement psychosocial
References Arbuckle, J. L. (2003). Amos 5.0 update to the Amos user’s guide. Chicago: Small Waters Corporation. Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55, 469 – 480. Bandura, A. (1990). Self-regulation of motivation through anticipatory and self-reactive mechanisms. In R. Dienstbier (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (Vol. 38, pp. 69 –164). Lincoln: University of Nebraska. Berzonsky, M. D. (1989). Identity style: Conceptualization and measurement. Journal of Adolescent Research, 4, 268 –282. Berzonsky, M. D., & Kuk, L. S. (2005). Identity style, psychosocial maturity and academic performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 235–247. Boggiano, A. K., & Ruble, D. N. (1979). Competence and the overjustification effect: A developmental study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1462–1468. Boyd, V. S., Hunt, P. F., Kandell, J. J., & Lucas, M. S. (2003). Relationship between identity processing style and academic success in undergraduate students. Journal of College Student Development, 44, 155–167. Byrne, B. (2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Chickering, A. W., & Reisser, L. (1993). Education and identity (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Coffman, D. L., & MacCallum, R. C. (2005). Using parcels to convert path analysis models into latent variable models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 40, 235–259. Cross, H. J., & Allen, J. G. (1970). Ego identity status, adjustment, and academic achievement. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 34, 288. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and selfdetermination in human behavior. New York: Plenum Press. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000a). Self-determination theory: Questionnaires. Retrieved March 5, 2005, from http://www.psych.rochester.edu/ SDT/measures/needs.html Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000b). The “what” and “why” of goal
198
FAYE AND SHARPE
pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268. DuCharme, J., Koverola, C., & Battle, P. (1997). Intimacy development: The influence of abuse and gender. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 12, 590 –599. Eccles, J. S., & Midgley, C. (1990). Changes in academic motivation and self-perception during early adolescence. In R. Montemayor, G. R. Adams, & T. P. Gullotta (Eds.), From childhood to adolescence: A transitional period? (pp. 134 –155). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Erikson, E. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. New York: Norton. Gagne, M. (2003). The role of autonomy support and autonomy orientation in prosocial behavior engagement. Motivation and Emotion, 27, 199 – 223. Gottfried, A. E. (1990). Academic intrinsic motivation in young elementary school children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 525–538. Gottfried, A. E., Fleming, J. S., & Gottfried, A. W. (2001). Continuity of academic intrinsic motivation from childhood through late adolescence: A longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 3–13. Gottfried, A. E., Marcoulides, G. A., Gottfried, A. W., Oliver, P. H., & Guerin, D. W. (2007). Multivariate latent change modeling of developmental decline in academic intrinsic math motivation and achievement: Childhood through adolescence. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 31, 317–327. Grace, J. B. (2006). Structural equation modeling and natural systems. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Grolnick, W. S., Gurland, S. T., Jacob, K. F., & Decourcey, W. (2002). The development of self-determination in middle childhood and adolescence. In A. Wigfield & J. S. Eccles (Eds.), Developmental of achievement motivation (pp. 147–171). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Guay, F., Boggiano, A. K., & Vallerand, R. J. (2001). Autonomy support, intrinsic motivation, and perceived competence: Conceptual and empirical linkages. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 643– 650. Guay, F., Senecal, C., Gauthier, L., & Fernet, C. (2003). Predicting career indecision: A self-determination theory perspective. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 50, 165–177. Guay, F., & Vallerand, R. J. (1997). Social context, student’s motivation, and academic achievement: Toward a process model. Social Psychology of Education, 1, 211–233. Harackiewicz, J. M., & Larson, J. R. (1986). Managing motivation: The impact of supervisor feedback on subordinate task interest. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 547–556. Harter, S. (1978). Effectance motivation reconsidered: Toward a developmental model. Human Development, 21, 34 – 64. Hook, M. K., Gerstein, L. H., Detterich, L., & Gridley, B. (2003). How close are we? Measuring intimacy and examining gender differences. Journal of Counseling and Development, 81, 462– 472. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55. Ilardi, B. C., Leone, D., Kasser, T., & Ryan, R. M. (1993). Employee and supervisor ratings of motivation: Main effects and discrepancies associated with job satisfaction and adjustment in a factory setting. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 1789 –1805. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press. Lefkowitz, E. S. (2005). “Things have gotten better”: Developmental changes among emerging adults after the transition to university. Journal of Adolescent Research, 20, 40 – 63. Lepper, M. R., Corpus, J. H., & Iyengar, S. S. (2005). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations in the classroom: Age differences and academic correlates. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 184 –196. Levesque, C., Stanek, L. R., Zuehlke, A. N., & Ryan, R. M. (2004). Autonomy and competence in German and American university stu-
dents: A comparative study based on self-determination theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 68 – 84. Lounsbury, J. W., Huffstetler, B. C., Leong, F. T., & Gibson, L. W. (2005). Sense of identity and collegiate academic achievement. Journal of College Student Development, 46, 501–514. Marcia, J. E. (1966). Development and validation of ego identity status. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 3, 551–558. Miquelon, P., Vallerand, R. J., Grouzet, F. M. E., & Cardinal, G. (2005). Perfectionism, academic motivation and psychological adjustment: An integrative model. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 913– 924. Montgomery, M. J. (2005). Psychosocial intimacy and identity: From early adolescence to emerging adulthood. Journal of Adolescent Research, 20, 346 –374. National Center for Education Statistics. (2005). Participation in education: Undergraduate education. Retrieved July 29, 2005, from http:// nces.Ed.gov/programs/coe/2005/section1/index.asp Otis, N., Grouzet, F. M. E., & Pelletier, L. G. (2005). Latent motivational change in an academic setting: A 3-year longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 170 –183. Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1991). How college affects students. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Paul, E. L., Poole, A., & Jakubowyc, N. (1998). Intimacy development and romantic status: Implications for adjustment to the college transition. Journal of College Student Development, 39, 75– 86. Reeve, J., & Deci, E. L. (1996). Elements within the competitive situation that affect intrinsic motivation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 24 –33. Reich, W. A., & Siegel, H. I. (2002). Attachment, ego-identity development and exploratory interest in university students. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 5, 125–134. Reis, H. T. (1998). Gender differences in intimacy and related behaviors: Context and process. In K. Dindia & D. J. Canary (Eds.), Sex differences and similarities in communication: Critical essays and empirical investigations of sex and gender in interaction (pp. 203–231). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Reis, O., & Youniss, J. (2004). Patterns in identity change and development in relationships with mothers and friends. Journal of Adolescent Research, 19, 31– 44. Renninger, K. A., & Hidi, S. (2001). Student interest and achievement: Developmental issues raised by a case study. In A. Wigfield & J. S. Eccles (Eds.), Development of achievement motivation (pp. 173–195). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Rosenthal, D. A., Gurney, R. M., & Moore, S. M. (1981). From trust to intimacy: A new inventory for examining Erikson’s stages of psychosocial development. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 10, 525–537. Ryan, R. M. (1993). Agency and organization: Intrinsic motivation, autonomy, and the self in psychological development. In G. Carlo & C. P. Edwards (Eds.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (Vol. 40, pp. 1–56). Lincoln: University of Nebraska. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2003). On assimilating identities to the self: A self-determination theory perspective on internalization and integrity within cultures. In M. R. Leary & J. P. Tangney (Eds.), Handbook of self and identity (pp. 253–272). New York: Guilford Press. Ryan, R. M., Stiller, J., & Lynch, J. H. (1994). Representations of relationships to teachers, parents, and friends as predictors of academic motivation and self-esteem. Journal of Early Adolescence, 14, 226 –249. Shahar, G., Henrich, C. C., Blatt, S. J., Ryan, R., & Little, T. D. (2003). Interpersonal relatedness, self-definition, and their motivational orientation during adolescence: A theoretical and empirical integration. Developmental Psychology, 39, 470 – 483. Shahar, G., Kalnitzki, E., Shulman, S., & Blatt, S. J. (2006). Personality, motivation, and the construction of goals during the transition to adulthood. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 53– 63.
ACADEMIC MOTIVATION Sheldon, K. M. (2004). Positive value change during college: Normative trends and individual differences. Journal of Research in Personality, 39, 209 –223. Sheldon, K. M., & Elliot, A. J. (1999). Goal striving, need satisfaction, and longitudinal well-being: The self-concordance model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 482– 497. Sheldon, K. M., Elliot, A. J., Kim, Y., & Kasser, T. (2001). What is satisfying about satisfying events? Testing 10 candidate psychological needs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 325–339. Sheldon, K. M., Ryan, R. M., Rawsthorne, L. J., & Ilardi, B. (1997). Trait self and true self: Cross-role variation in the Big-Five personality traits and its relations with psychological authenticity and subjective wellbeing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1380 –1393. Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7, 422– 445. Soenens, B., Berzonsky, M. D., Vansteenkiste, M., Beyers, W., & Goossens, L. (2005). Identity styles and causality orientations: In search of the motivational underpinnings of the identity exploration process. European Journal of Personality, 19, 427– 442. Spinath, B., & Spinath, F. M. (2005). Longitudinal analysis of the link between learning motivation and competence beliefs among elementary school children. Learning and Instruction, 15, 87–102. Standage, M., Duda, J. L., & Ntoumanis, N. (2003). A model of contextual motivation in physical education: Using constructs from selfdetermination and achievement goal theories to predict physical activity intentions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 97–110. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (version 12.0, for Windows) [Computer Software]. (2003). Chicage: SPSS. Steiner, D. L. (2005). Finding our way: An introduction to path analysis. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 50, 115–122. Vallerand, R. J. (1997). Toward a hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 29, 271–360. Vallerand, R. J. (2000). Deci and Ryan’s self-determination theory: A view from the hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 312–318. Vallerand, R. J., Fortier, M. S., & Guay, F. (1997). Self-determination and persistence in a real-life setting: Toward a motivational model of highschool dropout. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1161–1176.
199
Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., Blais, M. R., Briere, N. M., Senecal, C., & Vallieres, E. F. (1992). The Academic Motivation Scale: A measure of intrinsic, extrinsic, and amotivation in education. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52, 1003–1019. Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., Blais, M. R., Briere, N. M., Senecal, C., & Vallieres, E. F. (1993). On the assessment of intrinsic, extrinsic, and amotivation in education: Evidence on the concurrent and construct validity of the Academic Motivation Scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 159 –172. Vallerand, R. J., & Reid, G. (1988). On the relative effects of positive and negative verbal feedback on males’ and females’ intrinsic motivation. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 20, 239 –250. Vera, E. M., & Betz, N. E. (1992). Relationships of self-regard and affective self-disclosure to relationship satisfaction in college students. Journal of College Student Development, 33, 422– 429. Waterman, A. S. (2004). Finding someone to be: Studies on the role of intrinsic motivation in identity formation. Identity, 4, 209 –228. Waterman, A. S., & Waterman, C. K. (1970). The relationship between ego identity status and satisfaction with college. Journal of Educational Research, 64, 165–168. Weiner, B. (2001). Intrapersonal and interpersonal theories of motivation from an attribution perspective. In F. Salili, C. Chiu, & Y. Hong (Eds.), Student motivation: The culture and context of learning (pp. 17–30). New York: Plenum Press. White, R. W. (1959). Motivation reconsidered: The concept of competence. Psychological Review, 66, 297–333. Wigfield, A. (1994). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation: A developmental perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 6, 49 – 78. Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68 – 81. Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2001). The development of competence beliefs, expectancies for success, and achievement values from childhood through adolescence. In A. Wigfield & J. S. Eccles (Eds.), Development of achievement motivation (pp. 91–120). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Received February 14, 2007 Revision received February 14, 2007 Accepted April 23, 2008 䡲
