You are here:

Expectancy of success, attainment value, engagement, and Achievement: A moderated mediation analysis
ARTICLE

, School of Education, United Kingdom ; , Faculty of Education, United Kingdom ; , , Department of Psychology, Germany ; , Department of Education and Social Justice, United Kingdom

Learning and Instruction Volume 60, Number 1, ISSN 0959-4752 Publisher: Elsevier Ltd

Abstract

The aim of this study was to examine how expectancy of success, attainment value, and their interaction predicted behavioural engagement, and how behavioural engagement, in turn, predicted achievement. Data were collected from 586 English students aged 10–11 years in their final year of primary school. Expectancy of success was positively related to subsequent achievement directly and indirectly, mediated by behavioural engagement, over and above the variance accounted for by prior achievement and behavioural engagement. Indirect relations from expectancy of success to achievement were moderated by attainment value. Higher attainment value protected performance from low expectancy of success by increasing behavioural engagement. The compensatory role of high attainment value diminished at higher levels of expectancy of success.

Citation

Putwain, D.W., Nicholson, L.J., Pekrun, R., Becker, S. & Symes, W. (2019). Expectancy of success, attainment value, engagement, and Achievement: A moderated mediation analysis. Learning and Instruction, 60(1), 117-125. Elsevier Ltd. Retrieved August 13, 2024 from .

This record was imported from Learning and Instruction on March 15, 2019. Learning and Instruction is a publication of Elsevier.

Full text is availabe on Science Direct: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.11.005

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Acee, T.W., Weinstein, C.E., Hoang, T.V., & Flaggs, D.A. (2018). Value reappraisal as a conceptual model for task-value interventions. The Journal of Experimental Education, 86, pp. 69-85.
  2. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  3. Appleton, J.J., Christenson, S.L., Kim, D., & Reschly, A.L. (2006). Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: Validation of the student engagement instrument. Journal of School Psychology, 44, pp. 427-445.
  4. Archambault, I., Eccles, J.S., & Vida, M.N. (2010). Ability self-concepts and subjective value in literacy: Joint trajectories from grades 1 through 12. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, pp. 804-816.
  5. Atkinson, J.W. (1957). Motivational determinants of risk-taking behavior. Psychological Review, 64, pp. 359-372.
  6. Barkatsas, A.T., Kasimatis, K., & Gialamas, V. (2009). Learning secondary mathematics with technology: Exploring the complex interrelationship between students' attitudes, engagement, gender and achievement. Computers & Education, 52(3), pp. 562-570.
  7. Chen, F.F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indices to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 14, pp. 464-504.
  8. Cheung, G.W., & Rensvold, R.B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, pp. 233-255.
  9. Chouinard, R., Karsenti, T., & Roy, N. (2007). Relations among competence beliefs, utility value, achievement goals, and effort in mathematics. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, pp. 501-517.
  10. Cole, J.S., Bergin, D.A., & Whittaker, T.A. (2008). Predicting student achievement for low stakes tests with effort and task value. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, pp. 609-624.
  11. Dawson, J.F. (2014). Moderation in management research: What, when, why and how. Journal of Business and Psychology, 29, pp. 1-19.
  12. Department for Education (2014). Performance descriptors for use in key stage 1 and 2 statutory teacher assessment for 2015/2016. London: HMSO.
  13. Department for Education (2014). National curriculum and assessment from september 2014: Information for schools. London: HMSO.
  14. Department for Education (2016). Schools, pupils and their characteristics: January 2016. London: HMSO.
  15. Dotterer, A.M., & Lowe, K. (2011). Classroom context, school engagement, and academic achievement in early adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 40(12), pp. 1649-1660.
  16. Eccles, J.S. (2005). Subjective task value and the Eccles et al. model of achievement-related choices. Handbook of competence and motivation, pp. 105-121. London: Guildford Press.
  17. Eccles, J.S., O'Neill, S.A., & Wigfield, A. (2005). Ability self-perceptions and subjective task-values in adolescents and children. What do children need to flourish? Conceptualizing and measuring indicators of positive development, pp. 239-247. NY, New York: Springer.
  18. Eccles, J.S., Vida, M.N., & Barber, B. (2004). The relation of early adolescents' college plans and both academic ability and task-value beliefs to subsequent college enrollment. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 24, pp. 63-77.
  19. Fan, W. (2011). Social influences, school motivation and gender differences:an application of the expectancy-value theory. Educational Psychology, 31, pp. 157-175.
  20. Fan, W., & Williams, C.M. (2010). The effects of parental involvement on students' academic self‐efficacy, engagement and intrinsic motivation. Educational Psychology, 30, pp. 53-74.
  21. Fan, W., & Wolters, C.A. (2014). School motivation and high school dropout: The mediating role of educational expectations. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, pp. 22-39.
  22. Feather, N.T. (1959). Subjective probability and decision under uncertainty. Psychological Review, 66, pp. 150-164.
  23. Federici, R.A., & Skaalvick, E.M. (2014). Students' perception of instrumental support and effort in mathematics: The mediating role of subjective task value. Social Psychology of Education, 17, pp. 527-540.
  24. Finn, J.D., & Zimmer, K.S. (2012). Student engagement: What is it? Why does it matter?. Research on student engagement, pp. 97-132.
  25. Fredricks, J.A., Blumenfeld, P.C., & Paris, A.H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, pp. 59-109.
  26. Gerhard, C., Büchner, R.D., Klein, A.G., & Schermelleh-Engel, K. (2017). A fit index to assess model fit and detect omitted terms in nonlinear SEM. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 24, pp. 414-427.
  27. Graham, J.W. (2012). Missing data: Analysis and design. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
  28. Greene, B.A., DeBacker, T.K., Ravindran, B., & Krows, A.J. (1999). Goals, values, and beliefs as predictors of achievement and effort in high school mathematics classes. Sex Roles, 40, pp. 421-458.
  29. Guo, J., Marsh, H.W., Parker, P.D., Morin, A.J.S., & Yeung, A.S. (2015). Expectancy-value in mathematics, gender and socioeconomic background as predictors of achievement and aspirations: A multi-cohort study. Learning and Individual Differences, 37, pp. 161-168.
  30. Guo, J., Nagengast, B., Marsh, H.W., Kelava, A., Gaspard, H., & Brandt, H. (2016). Probing the unique contributions of self-concept, task values, and their interactions using multiple value facets and multiple academic outcomes. AERA Open, 2, pp. 1-20.
  31. Guo, J., Parker, P.D., Marsh, H.W., & Morin, A.J.S. (2015). Achievement, motivation, and educational choices: A longitudinal study of expectancy and value using a multiplicative perspective. Developmental Psychology, 51, pp. 1163-1176.
  32. Harlen, W. (2004). A systematic review of the evidence of reliability and validity of assessment by teachers used for summative purposes. Research evidence in education library London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education.
  33. Hayes, A.F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis. New York: The Guildford Press.
  34. Heene, M., Hilbert, S., Draxler, C., Ziegler, M., & Bühner, M. (2011). Masking misfit in confirmatory factor analysis by increasing unique variances: A cautionary note on the usefulness of cutoff values of fit indices. Psychological Methods, 16, pp. 319-336.
  35. He, Q., Hayes, M., & Wiliam, D. (2010). Classification accuracy in results from key stage 2 national curriculum tests. Coventry: HMSO.
  36. Heyder, A., Kessels, U., & Steinmayr, R. (2017). Explaining academic‐track boys' underachievement in language grades: Not a lack of aptitude but students' motivational beliefs and parents' perceptions?. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, pp. 205-223.
  37. Hox, J.J., Maas, C.J.M., & Brinkhuis, M.J.S. (2010). The effect of estimation method and sample size in multilevel structural equation modelling. Statistica Neerlandica, 64, pp. 157-170.
  38. Hoy, W.K., Tarter, C.J., & Hoy, A.W. (2006). Academic optimism of schools: A force for student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 43, pp. 425-446.
  39. Hu, L., & Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, pp. 1-55.
  40. Hughes, J., & Kwok, O.M. (2007). Influence of student-teacher and parent-teacher relationships on lower achieving readers' engagement and achievement in the primary grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(1), pp. 39-51.
  41. James, C. (2014). Trends in the governance and governing of schools in England. Local Government Studies, 40, pp. 893-909.
  42. Jöreskog, K.G., & Yang, F. (1996). Nonlinear structural equation models: The Kenny-Judd model with interaction effects. Advanced structural equation modeling: Issues and techniques, pp. 57-88. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  43. Klein, A., & Moosbrugger, H. (2000). Maximum likelihood estimation of latent interaction effects with the LMS method. Psychometrika, 65, pp. 457-474.
  44. Kosovich, K.J., Hulleman, C.S., Barron, K.E., & Getty, S. (2014). A practical measureof student motivation: Establishing validity evidence for the expectancy-value-cost scale in middle school. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 35, pp. 790-816.
  45. Lance, C.E., Butts, M.M., & Michels, L.C. (2006). The sources of four commonly reported cutoff criteria what did they really say?. Organizational Research Methods, 9, pp. 202-220.
  46. Landis, R.S., & Dunlap, W.P. (2000). Moderated multiple regression tests are criterion specific. Organizational Research Methods, 3, pp. 254-266.
  47. Lauerman, F., Eccles, J.S., & Pekrun, R. (2017). Why do children worry about their academic achievement? An expectancy-value perspective on elementary students’ worries about their mathematics and reading performance. ZDM Mathematics Education, 49, pp. 339-354.
  48. Liem, A.D., Lau, S., & Nie, Y. (2008). The role of self-efficacy, task value, and achievement goals in predicting learning strategies, task disengagement, peer relationship, and achievement outcome. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, pp. 486-512.
  49. Marsh, H.W. (1990). The self description questionnaire (SDQ) II: A theoretical and empirical basis for the measurement of multiple dimensions of adolescent self-concept. A test manual and research monograph. Macarthur, New South Wales: University of Western Australia.
  50. Marsh, H.W. (2006). Self-concept theory, measurement and research into practice: The role of self-concept in educational psychology. Leicester: British Psychological Society.
  51. Marsh, H.W., & Martin, A.J. (2011). Academic self-concept and academic achievement: Relations and causal ordering. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(1), pp. 59-77.
  52. Marsh, H.W., Wen, Z., & Hau, K. (2004). Structural equation models of latent interactions: Evaluation of alternative estimation strategies and indicator construction. Psychological Methods, 9, pp. 275-300.
  53. Martin, A., Marsh, H.W., & Debus, R. (2001). Self-handicapping and defensive pessimism: Exploring a model of predictors and outcomes from a self-protection perspective. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, pp. 87-102.
  54. Meece, J.L., Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J.S. (1990). Predictors of math anxiety and its consequences for young adolescents' course enrolment intentions and performances in mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, pp. 60-70.
  55. Muthén, L.K., & Muthén, B.O. (2017). Mplus user's guide. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
  56. Nagengast, B., Marsh, H.W., Scalas, L.F., Xu, M.K., Hau, K.T., & Trautwein, U. (2011). Who took the “×” out of expectancy-value theory? A psychological mystery, a substantive-methodological synergy, and a cross-national generalization. Psychological Science, 22, pp. 1058-1066.
  57. Oyserman, D., & James, L. (2009). Possible selves: From content to process. Handbook of imagination and mental simulation, pp. 373-394. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
  58. Patrick, H., Ryan, A.M., & Kaplan, A. (2007). Early adolescents' perceptions of the classroom social environment, motivational beliefs, and engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, pp. 83-98.
  59. Pekrun, R. (1988). Emotion, Motivation und Persönlichkeit [Emotion, Motivation, and Personality]. Weinheim: Psychologie Verlags Union.
  60. Pekrun, R. (1993). Facets of students' academic motivation: A longitudinal expectancy-value approach. Advances in motivation and achievement, Vol. 8, pp. 139-189. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
  61. Perryman, J. (2006). Panoptic performativity and school inspection regimes: Disciplinary mechanisms and life under special measures. Journal of Education Policy, 21, pp. 147-161.
  62. Pinxten, M., Marsh, H.W., De Fraine, B., Noortgate, W.V.D., & Dame, J.V. (2014). Enjoying mathematics or feeling competent in mathematics? Reciprocal effects on mathematics achievement and perceived math effort expenditure. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, pp. 152-174.
  63. Plante, I., O'Keefe, P.A., & Théorêt, M. (2013). The relation between achievement goal and expectancy-value theories in predicting achievement-related outcomes: A test of four theoretical conceptions. Motivation and Emotion, 37(1), pp. 65-78.
  64. Reyes, M.R., Brackett, M.A., Rivers, S.E., White, M., & Salovey, P. (2012). Classroom emotional climate, student engagement, and academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(3), pp. 700-712.
  65. Schunk, D.H., & DiBenedetto, M.K. (2016). Self-efficacy theory in education. Handbook of motivation at school, pp. 35-54. Oxon: Routledge.
  66. Skinner, E.A., & Chi, U. (2012). Intrinsic motivation and engagement as “active ingredients” in garden-based education: Examining models and measures derived from self-determination theory. The Journal of Environmental Education, 43(1), p. 16‒36.
  67. Skinner, E.A., Furrer, C., Marchand, G., & Kinderman, T. (2008). Engagement and disaffection in the classroom: Part of a larger motivational dynamic?. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(4), p. 765‒781.
  68. Skinner, E.A., Kindermann, T.A., & Furrer, C.J. (2009). A motivational perspective on engagement and disaffection: Conceptualization and assessment of children's behavioral and emotional participation in academic activities in the classroom. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69(3), pp. 493-525.
  69. Steinmayr, R., & Spinath, B. (2009). The importance of motivation as a predictor of school achievement. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, pp. 80-90.
  70. Steinmetz, H., Davidov, E., & Schmidt, P. (2011). Three approaches to estimate latent interaction effects: Intention and perceived behavioral control in the Theory of Planned Behavior. Methodological Innovations Online, 6, pp. 95-110.
  71. Taskinen, P.H., Schütte, K., & Prenzel, M. (2013). Adolescents' motivation to select an academic science-related career: The role of school factors, individual interest, and science self-concept. Educational Research and Evaluation, 19, pp. 717-733.
  72. Trautwein, U., Marsh, H.W., Nagengast, B., Lüdtke, O., Nagy, G., & Jonkmann, K. (2012). Probing for the multiplicative term in modern expectancy–value theory: A latent interaction modeling study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, pp. 763-777.
  73. Vroom, V.H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York, NY: Wiley.
  74. Wang, M., & Eccles, J.S. (2012). Social support matters: Longitudinal effects of social support on three dimensions of school engagement from middle to high school. Child Development, 83, pp. 877-895.
  75. Wang, M.-T., & Eccles, J.S. (2013). School context, achievement motivation, and academic engagement: A longitudinal study of school engagement using a multidimensional perspective. Learning and Instruction, 28, pp. 12-23.
  76. Wang, M.-T., & Holcombe, R. (2010). Adolescents' perceptions of school environment, engagement, and academic achievement in middle school. American Educational Research Journal, 47, pp. 633-662.
  77. Watkins, M.W., Lei, P.W., & Canivez, G.L. (2007). Psychometric intelligence and achievement: A cross-lagged panel analysis. Intelligence, 35, pp. 59-68.
  78. Watt, H.M. (2006). The role of motivation in gendered educational and occupational trajectories related to maths. Educational Research and Evaluation, 12(4), pp. 305-322.
  79. Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J.S. (2000). Academic self-efficacy -value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), pp. 68-81.
  80. Wigfield, A., Tonks, S., & Klauda, S.L. (2016). Expectancy-value theory. Handbook of motivation at school, pp. 55-74. Oxon: Routledge.
  81. Wise, S.L., & DeMars, C.E. (2005). Low examinee effort in low-stakes assessment.: Problems and Potential solutions. Educational Assessment, 10, pp. 1-17.
  82. Xiang, P., McBride, R., Guan, J., & Solmon, M. (2003). Children's motivation in elementary physical education: An expectancy-value model of achievement choice. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 74, pp. 25-35.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References