Relationships between motivational regulation strategies, motivational factors, and learning behaviors outside the classroom

Abstract

Relationships between motivational regulation strategies, motivational factors, and learning behaviors outside the classroom Takatoyo Umemoto （Kyushu Women's University） and Kenshiro Tanaka （University of Yamanashi）This study examined the relationships among motivational regulation strategies, motivational factors, and learning behaviors outside the classroom. There are three subtypes of motivational regulation strategies: autonomous regulation strategies, cooperative strategies, and performance-focused strategies. Motivational factors included in the investigation were self-efficacy and task value, while behavioral and emotional engagement and study time were selected as learning behaviors outside the classroom. A self-report questionnaire was administered to 322 undergraduates from two universities. Multiple regression analysis revealed the use of autonomous regulation strategies, and that task value was positively correlated with engagement and study time. Moreover, self-efficacy positively predicted study time. In contrast, the use of performance strategies negatively predicted engagement. The use of cooperative strategies did not predict learning behaviors. These results indicate that motivation, as well as the regulation of motivation, were important for learning outside the classroom. The effects of regulation of motivation and motivation on learning outside the classroom are discussed in light of the current findings.

Self‐Regulation, Co‐Regulation, and Socially Shared Regulation of Motivation for Collaborative Activity: Comparison Between University Students and Working Adults1

“…"Intrinsic value" refers to the belief about importance, utility, and interest of a task (Pintrich & De Groot, 1990). The results of Umemoto and Tanaka (2017) showed that intrinsic value was positively associated with autonomy-regulation strategies. In contrast, intrinsic value was not associated with performance-regulation strategies.…”

“…Although motivational research has a long history, recent research has begun to examine how to regulate the motivation itself. Especially, self‐regulated learning (SRL) research has been elucidating how students can learn by themselves (Zimmerman & Schunk, 2011), and researchers have conceptualized this psychological mechanism with the term “motivational regulation” (Ito & Shinto, 2003; Umemoto & Tanaka, 2017; Wolters & Benzon, 2013). Motivational regulation means an aspect of the self‐regulation function that promotes and maintains the motivation to learn effectively and efficiently (Umemoto, 2015; Wolters, 2003).…”

“…Extrinsic motivational regulation strategies regulate motivation by external aids: attaining praise, evaluation, and rewards from others. Umemoto and Tanaka (2017) indicated that self‐efficacy was positively related to autonomy‐regulation strategies, which include enhancing interest and valuing learning. Self‐efficacy was not associated with performance‐regulation strategies, which are synonymous with extrinsic motivational regulation strategies.…”

Cluster Analysis of Failure Beliefs among Japanese Junior High School Students: Perspectives From “Failure Prevention” to “Failure Promotion”

“…We measured students' learning behaviors, based on the Behavioral Engagement Scale [8] (four items, α=.81), the metacognitive strategy scale [9] (six items, α=.72), and the Academic Help-Seeking Scale [10] (six items). Moreover, the Academic Help-Seeking Scale was comprised of two subscales: adaptive help-seeking (three items, α=.73) and dependent help-seeking (three items, α=.84).…”

Students’ motivational factors and engagement strategies in constructivist-based blended learning environments

“…Although motivational factors and engagement learning strategies have been researched in diverse learning contexts (Ryan & Deci, 2000;Bong, 2001;Seki, 2014;Umemoto & Tanaka, 2017), two areas need more attention. First, previous studies on motivational factors have focused on school, subject level, gender and attitude variables toward learning in general (Ramseier, 2001;Gedera, Williams & Wright, 2015;King, 2016).…”