In this study, we used a longitudinal survey of two time-points to investigate the relationship between motivation instability and type of motivation level toward university learning using a cross-lagged panel model. We measured four types of motivation level based on self-determination theory. A total of 127 Japanese students from two universities participated in two longitudinal surveys; their data were used in the analysis. We investigated the relationship between motivation instability and motivation level by employing the cross-lagged panel model, and found that intrinsic regulation at Time 1 was positively related to the instability of motivation at Time 2, while identified regulation at Time 1 was negatively related to instability of motivation at Time 2. These results indicate that two processes may exist: one where instability of motivation increases depending on the level of motivation, and one where it decreases. Moreover, instability of motivation at Time 1 was positively related to the identified regulation and introjected regulation at Time 2, although the values of the path coefficients were very small. Finally, instability of motivation at Time 1 was positively related to the instability of motivation at Time 2. Based on the results of this study, we discuss the relationship between motivation level and instability in university learning.
The Implicit Association Test (IAT) measures implicit associations between attitude targets and attributes. Its structure and procedure facilitate investigation of the strength of associations between one target and attributes relative to that between the other target and the same attributes when two targets are contradictory (e.g., black/white and comfortable/uncomfortable). This structure can cause conceptual complexity about what the IAT measures, particularly when a counter category is not needed. Thus, using the Single‐Target Implicit Association Test (ST‐IAT), which allowed only one target category for pairing with attributes, this paper delineated the association measured in the conventional IAT for shyness: “self‐shy” or “others‐shy.” Seventy‐seven Japanese university students completed the self‐report shyness scale, the conventional IAT, and two ST‐IATs (i.e., self/others as target). Results showed that implicit shyness produced in the conventional IAT significantly and positively correlated with that in the self‐targeted ST‐IAT. Moreover, implicit shyness in the conventional IAT was significantly accounted for by those produced by the ST‐IAT with self as target and those calculated in the ST‐IAT with others as target in opposite directions.
is study examined whether (1) self-presentation of extraversion/introversion changes the presenter's explicit and implicit extraversion and (2) the presence of an audience informed of the presenter's personal information moderates the e ects. Sixty-two participants were randomly assigned to four conditions: 2 (trait presented: extraversion or introversion)×2 (situation: presence or absence of audience). We conducted three-way ANOVA where the timing of measurement (immediately before or a er self-presentation) served as a within-subject factor, separately for explicit and implicit extraversion as a dependent variable. roughout the analyses, only the main e ect of the timing for implicit extraversion was signi cant; self-presentation increased implicit but not explicit extraversion, irrespective of the trait presented or the situation. We discussed mechanisms underlying change in implicit extraversion and reasons for discrepancy from previous ndings, especially the possibility that measurement immediately before self-presentation may have inhibited change in explicit extraversion.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.