Kristina Stockinger , Ulrike E. Nett , Markus Dresel
{"title":"Commonalities and differences in strategies for regulating motivation and emotion in academic settings: A within-person approach","authors":"Kristina Stockinger , Ulrike E. Nett , Markus Dresel","doi":"10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.102009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Motivation and emotion form important pillars of students’ educational experiences and, while representing distinguishable constructs, are closely intertwined. Consequently, it can be assumed that their regulation may be governed by similar mechanisms as well. From a theoretical perspective, MR and ER strategy taxonomies do contain overlap, particularly among strategies involving reappraisals of personal competencies, but also unique (i.e., non-overlapping) strategies. Empirically, however, motivational regulation (MR) and emotion regulation (ER) have had little intersection in prior research and stem from rather disconnected research traditions.</div></div><div><h3>Aims</h3><div>Building on previous work on the functional interplay between students’ motivation and emotion, we examined similarities and differences in MR and ER strategies and tested the assumption that MR strategies are also used to regulate emotions, and ER strategies to regulate motivation, in study situations.</div></div><div><h3>Sample</h3><div>Participants were 1,466 university students.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>Using a within-person design, students reported on their use of various strategies for managing regulatory problems involving either low motivation or negative emotions (anxiety, boredom).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Using CFA and latent difference modeling, we found that strategy use was strongly correlated and differed little in terms of mean levels across motivational and emotional regulation problems. These correlations were even stronger, and mean differences smaller, than those found for regulatory problem distinctions within motivational and emotional problems.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The findings indicate that many designated MR and ER strategies as distinguished in current taxonomies may be relevant for managing both motivational and emotional problems and underscore the need for joint theoretical perspectives on MR and ER.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48357,"journal":{"name":"Learning and Instruction","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning and Instruction","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959475224001361","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Motivation and emotion form important pillars of students’ educational experiences and, while representing distinguishable constructs, are closely intertwined. Consequently, it can be assumed that their regulation may be governed by similar mechanisms as well. From a theoretical perspective, MR and ER strategy taxonomies do contain overlap, particularly among strategies involving reappraisals of personal competencies, but also unique (i.e., non-overlapping) strategies. Empirically, however, motivational regulation (MR) and emotion regulation (ER) have had little intersection in prior research and stem from rather disconnected research traditions.
Aims
Building on previous work on the functional interplay between students’ motivation and emotion, we examined similarities and differences in MR and ER strategies and tested the assumption that MR strategies are also used to regulate emotions, and ER strategies to regulate motivation, in study situations.
Sample
Participants were 1,466 university students.
Method
Using a within-person design, students reported on their use of various strategies for managing regulatory problems involving either low motivation or negative emotions (anxiety, boredom).
Results
Using CFA and latent difference modeling, we found that strategy use was strongly correlated and differed little in terms of mean levels across motivational and emotional regulation problems. These correlations were even stronger, and mean differences smaller, than those found for regulatory problem distinctions within motivational and emotional problems.
Conclusions
The findings indicate that many designated MR and ER strategies as distinguished in current taxonomies may be relevant for managing both motivational and emotional problems and underscore the need for joint theoretical perspectives on MR and ER.
背景动机和情感是学生教育经历的重要支柱,虽然它们是不同的概念,但却紧密相连。因此,我们可以假定,它们的调节也可能受类似机制的支配。从理论角度来看,MR 和 ER 策略分类法确实存在重叠之处,尤其是涉及个人能力重新评估的策略,但也有独特的(即不重叠的)策略。在以往研究中,动机调节(MR)和情绪调节(ER)很少有交集,而且二者的研究传统也不尽相同。方法采用人内设计,让学生报告他们在处理涉及低动机或消极情绪(焦虑、无聊)的调节问题时所使用的各种策略。结果采用CFA和潜在差异建模,我们发现策略的使用具有很强的相关性,而且在动机和情绪调节问题的平均水平方面差异很小。这些相关性甚至比动机和情绪问题中的调节问题区分发现的相关性更强,平均差异更小。结论研究结果表明,目前分类标准中的许多指定的动机调节和情绪调节策略可能与管理动机和情绪问题相关,并强调了从理论角度共同研究动机调节和情绪调节的必要性。
期刊介绍:
As an international, multi-disciplinary, peer-refereed journal, Learning and Instruction provides a platform for the publication of the most advanced scientific research in the areas of learning, development, instruction and teaching. The journal welcomes original empirical investigations. The papers may represent a variety of theoretical perspectives and different methodological approaches. They may refer to any age level, from infants to adults and to a diversity of learning and instructional settings, from laboratory experiments to field studies. The major criteria in the review and the selection process concern the significance of the contribution to the area of learning and instruction, and the rigor of the study.