Probing the Unique Contributions of Self-Concept, Task Values, and Their Interactions Using Multiple Value Facets and Multiple Academic Outcomes

AERA Open

Volumn 2, Issue 1, 2016, Pages

  Guo, Jiesi ^a   Nagengast, Benjamin ^b   Marsh, Herbert W ^a,c,d   Kelava, Augustin ^b   Gaspard, Hanna ^b   Brandt, Holger ^b   Cambria, Jenna ^b   Flunger, Barbara ^b   Dicke, Anna Lena ^e   Häfner, Isabelle ^b   Brisson, Brigitte ^b   Trautwein, Ulrich ^b  

^a AUSTRALIAN CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TÜBINGEN   (Germany)

^c KING SAUD UNIVERSITY   (Saudi Arabia)

^d UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^e UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

achievement; effort; engagement; expectancy value theory; latent interaction; mathematics; self concept

Indexed keywords

EID: 85008619878     PISSN: None     EISSN: 23328584     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/2332858415626884     Document Type: Article

References (85)

1. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
2. Atkinson, J. W. (1957). Motivational determinants of risk-taking behavior. Psychological Review, 64, 359-372.
3. Atkinson, J. W., & Feather, N. T. (1966). A theory of achievement motivation. New York, NY: Wiley.
4. Barron, K. E., & Hulleman, C. S. (2015). The expectancy-value-cost model of motivation. In J. D. Wright (Ed.), International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
5. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York, NY: Wiley.
6. Bollen, K. A. (1996). An alternative two stage least squares (2SLS) estimator for latent variable equations. Psychometrika, 61, 109-121.
7. Chen, F. F., West, S., & Sousa, K. (2006). A comparison of bifac-tor and second-order models of quality of life. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 41(2), 189-225. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr4102_5
8. Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
9. 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(4), 609-624. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2007.10.002
10. Conley, A. M. (2012). Patterns of motivation beliefs: Combining achievement goal and expectancy-value perspectives. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 32-47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0026042
11. Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1995). Domains and facets: hierar-chical personality assessment using the revised NEO personality inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 64(1), 21-50. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa6401_2
12. Durik, A. M., Vida, M., & Eccles, J. S. (2006). Task values and ability beliefs as predictors of high school literacy choices: A developmental analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(2), 382-393. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.98.2.382
13. Eccles, J. S. (2009). Who am I and what am I going to do with my life? Personal and collective identities as moti-vators of action. Educational Psychologist, 44(2), 78-89. doi:10.1080/00461520902832368
14. Eccles, J. S. (2011). Gendered educational and occupational choices: Applying the Eccles et al. model of achievement-related choices. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 35(3), 195-201. doi:10.1177/0165025411398185
15. Eccles, J. S., Adler, T. F., Futterman, R., Goff, S. B., Kaczala, C. M., Meece, L. J., & Midgley, C. (1983). Expectancies, values, and academic behaviors. In J. T. Spence (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motivation: Psychological and sociological approaches (pp. 75-146). San Francisco, CA: Freeman.
16. Eccles, J. S., Barber, B., & Jozefowicz, D. (1999). Linking gender to educational, occupational, and recreational choices: Applying the Eccles et al. model of achievement-related choices. In Sexism and stereotypes in modern society: The gender science of Janet Taylor Spence (pp. 153-192). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/10277-007
17. 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. Journal of Early Adolescence, 24(1), 63-77. doi:10.1177/0272431603260919
18. Eccles, J., & Wang, M.-T. (2012). Part I commentary: So what is student engagement anyway? In S. L. Christenson, A. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 133-145). Boston, MA: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_6
19. Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53(1), 109-132.
20. Enders, C. (2010). Applied missing data analysis. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
21. Feather, N. T. (1982). Expectancy–value approaches: Present sta-tus and future directions. In N. T. Feather (Ed.), Expectations and actions: Expectancy–value models in psychology (pp. 395-420). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
22. Flake, J. K., Barron, K. E., Hulleman, C., McCoach, D. B., & Welsh, M. E. (2015). Measuring cost: The forgotten compo-nent of expectancy-value theory. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 41, 232-244. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2015.03.002
23. Furrer, C., Skinner, E., Marchand, G., & Kindermann, T. A. (2006, March). Engagement vs. disaffection as central constructs in the dynamics of motivational development. Paper presented at the Society for Research on Adolescence, San Francisco, CA.
24. Gaspard, H., Dicke, A., Flunger, B., Schreier, B., Häfner, I., Trautwein, U., & Nagengast, B. (2015). More value through greater differentiation: Gender differences in value beliefs about math. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(3), 663-677. doi:10.1037/edu0000003
25. Givvin, K. B., Stipek, D. J., Salmon, J. M., & MacGyvers, V. L. (2001). In the eyes of the beholder: students’ and teachers’ judgments of students’ motivation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(3), 321-331. doi:10.1016/S0742-051X(00)00060-3
26. Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers for the Big-Five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4(1), 26-42. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.4.1.26
27. Goldberg, L. R. (1999). A broad-bandwidth, public domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. Personality Psychology in Europe, 7, 7-28.
28. Guo, J., Marsh, H. W., Morin, A. J. S., Parker, P. D., & Kaur, G. (2015). Directionality of the associations of high school expec-tancy-value, aspirations, and attainment: A longitudinal study. American Educational Research Journal, 52(2), 371-402. doi:10.3102/0002831214565786
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, 161-168. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2015.01.008
30. 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(8), 1163-1176. doi:10.1037/a0039440
31. Gustafsson, J.-E., & Balke, G. (1993). General and specific abilities as predictors of school achievement. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 28(4), 407-434. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr2804_2
32. Hu, L., & Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.
33. Holzinger, K. J., & Swineford, F. (1937). The bi-factor method. Psychometrika, 2, 41-54.
34. Hulleman, C. S., Durik, A. M., Schweigert, S. B., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2008). Task values, achievement goals, and interest: An integrative analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(2), 398-416. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.100.2.398
35. Hulleman, C. S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2009). Promoting interest and performance in high school science classes. Science, 326(5958), 1410-1412. doi:10.1126/science.1177067
36. Jacobs, J. E., Lanza, S., Osgood, D. W., Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Changes in children’s self-competence and values: Gender and domain differences across grades one through twelve. Child Development, 73(2), 509-527. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00421
37. Jöreskog, K. G., & Yang, F. (1996). Nonlinear structural equation models: The Kenny–Judd model with interaction effects. In G. A. Marcoulides & R. E. Schumacker (Eds.), Advanced structural equation modeling: Issues and techniques (pp. 57-87). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
38. Kelava, A., & Nagengast, B. (2012). A Bayesian model for the estimation of latent interaction and quadratic effects when latent variables are non-normally distributed. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 47(5), 717-742. doi:10.1080/0027317 1.2012.715560
39. Kelava, A., Nagengast, B., & Brandt, H. (2014). A nonlinear structural equation mixture modeling approach for nonnor-mally distributed latent predictor variables. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 21(3), 1-14. doi:10.108 0/10705511.2014.915379
40. Kelava, A., Werner, C. S., Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., Zapf, D., Ma, Y., … West, S. G. (2011). Advanced non-linear latent variable modeling: Distribution analytic LMS and QML estimators of interaction and quadratic effects. Structural Equation Modeling, 18(3), 465-491. doi:10.1080/10705511.20 11.582408
41. Kenny, D., & Judd, C. M. (1984). Estimating the nonlinear and interactive effects of latent variables. Psychological Bulletin, 96, 201-210.
42. Klein, A., & Moosbrugger, H. (2000). Maximum likelihood estimation of latent interaction effects with the LMS method. Psychometrika, 65(4), 457-474. Retrieved from http://link. springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02296338
43. Lee, W., & Reeve, J. (2012). Teachers’ estimates of their students’ motivation and engagement: Being in synch with students. Educational Psychology, 32(6), 727-747. doi:10.1080/014434 10.2012.732385
44. Luttrell, V. R., Callen, B. W., Allen, C. S., Wood, M. D., Deeds, D. G., & Richard, D. C. S. (2010). The Mathematics Value Inventory for general education students: Development and ini-tial validation. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 70(1), 142-160. doi:10.1177/0013164409344526
45. Marsh, H. W. (1986). Verbal and math self-concepts: An inter-nal/external frame of reference model. American Educational Research Journal, 23(1), 129-149.
46. Marsh, H. W. (2007). Self-concept theory, measurement and research into practice: The role of self-concept in educational psychology. Leicester, UK: British Psychological Society.
47. Marsh, H. W., Lüdtke, O., Nagengast, B., Trautwein, U., Abduljabbar, A. S., Abdelfattah, F., & Jansen, M. (2015). Dimensional comparison theory: Paradoxical relations between self-beliefs and achievements in multiple domains. Learning and Instruction, 35, 16-32. doi:10.1016/j.learnin-struc.2014.08.005
48. Marsh, H. W., Trautwein, U., Lüdtke, O., Köller, O., & Baumert, J. (2005). Academic self-concept, interest, grades, and stan-dardized test scores: Reciprocal effects models of causal ordering. Child Development, 76(2), 397-416. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2005.00853.x
49. Marsh, H. W., Wen, Z., & Hau, K. T. (2004). Structural equation models of latent interactions: evaluation of alternative estimation strategies and indicator construction. Psychological Methods, 9(3), 275-300. doi:10.1037/1082-989x.9.3.275
50. Morin, A. J. S., Arens, A. K., & Marsh, H. W. (2015). A bifac-tor exploratory structural equation modeling framework for the identification of distinct sources of construct-relevant psycho-metric multidimensionality. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal. Advance online publication. doi:10.1080/10705511.2014.961800
51. Mulaik, S. A., & Quartetti, D. A. (1997). First order or higher order general factor? Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 4(3), 193-211. doi:10.1080/10705519709540071
52. Musu-Gillette, L. E., Wigfield, A., Harring, J. R., & Eccles, J. S. (2015). Trajectories of change in students’ self-concepts of ability and values in math and college major choice. Educational Research and Evaluation, 21(4), 343-370. doi:10.1080/1380361 1.2015.1057161
53. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. (1998-2014). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
54. Myers, R. M., Montgomery, D. C., & Anderson-Cook, C. M. (2009). Response surface methodology (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
55. Nagengast, B., Marsh, H. W., Scalas, L. F., Xu, M. K., Hau, K.-T., & Trautwein, U. (2011). Who took the “x” out of expectancy-value theory? A psychological mystery, a substantive-methodological synergy, and a cross-national generalization. Psychological Science, 22(8), 1058-1066. doi:10.1177/0956797611415540
56. Nagengast, B., Trautwein, U., Kelava, A., & Lüdtke, O. (2013). Synergistic effects of expectancy and value on homework engagement: The case for a within-person perspective. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 48(3), 428-460. doi:10.1080/00273171.2013.775060
57. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2003). Student engagement at school: A sense of belonging and participation. Paris, France: Author.
58. Pek, J., Losardo, D., & Bauer, D. J. (2011). Confidence intervals for a semiparametric approach to modeling nonlinear relations among latent variables. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 18(4), 537-553. doi:10.1080/107055 11.2011.607072
59. Perez, T., Cromley, J. G., & Kaplan, A. (2014). The role of iden-tity development, values, and costs in college STEM reten-tion. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(1), 315-329. doi:10.1037/a0034027
60. R Core Team. (2013). R: A language and environment for statistical computing [Computer software manual]. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from http://www.R-project.org/
61. Reise, S. P. (2012). Invited paper: The rediscovery of bifactor measurement models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 47(5), 667-696. doi:10.1080/00273171.2012.715555
62. Schönbrodt, F. D. (2015). RSA: An R package for response surface analyses. Retrieved from http://cran.r-project.org/web/pack-ages/RSA
63. Schumacker, R. E., & Marcoulides, G, A. (1998). Interaction and nonlinear effects in structural equation modeling. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
64. Schunk, D. H., & Pajares, F. (2005). Competence perceptions and academic functioning. In A. J. Elliot & C. S. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 85-104). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
65. Schwanzer, A. D., Trautwein, U., Lüdtke, O., & Sydow, H. (2005). Entwicklung eines Instruments zur Erfassung des Selbstkonzepts junger Erwachsener [Development of a ques-tionnaire on young adults’ self-concept]. Diagnostica, 51, 183-194. doi:10.1026/0012-1924.51.4.183
66. Simpkins, S. D., Davis-Kean, P. E., & Eccles, J. S. (2006). Math and science motivation: A longitudinal examination of the links between choices and beliefs. Developmental Psychology, 42(1), 70-83. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.42.1.70
67. Simpkins, S. D., Fredricks, J. A., & Eccles, J. S. (2012). Charting the Eccles’ expectancy-value model from mothers’ beliefs in childhood to youths’ activities in adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 48(4), 1019-1032. doi:10.1037/a0027468
68. Skinner, E. A., Kindermann, T. A., & Furrer, C. J. (2008). 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), 493-525. doi:10.1177/0013164408323233
69. Skinner, E. A., Zimmer-Gembeck, M. J., & Connell, J. P. (1998). Individual differences and the development of perceived control. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 6(2/3), 1-220. doi:10.2307/1166220
70. 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(3), 763-777. doi:10.1037/a0027470
71. Trautwein, U., & Lüdtke, O. (2009). Predicting homework motivation and homework effort in six school subjects: The role of person and family characteristics, classroom factors, and school track. Learning and Instruction, 19(3), 243-258. doi:10.1016/j. learninstruc.2008.05.001
72. Trautwein, U., Nagengast, B., Marsh, H. W., Gaspard, H., Dicke, A. L., Lüdtke, O., & Jonkmann, K. (2013). Expectancy-value theory revisited: From expectancy-value theory to expectancy-valueS theory? In D. M. McInerney, H. W. Marsh, R. G. Craven, & F. Guay (Eds.), Theory driving research: New wave perspectives on self-processes and human development (pp. 233-249). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
73. Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York, NY: Wiley.
74. Wang, M. T. (2012). Educational and career interests in math: A longitudinal examination of the links between classroom environment, motivational beliefs, and interests. Developmental Psychology, 48, 1643-1657. http://dx.doi. org/10.1037/a0027247
75. Wang, M.-T., & Degol, J. (2014). Staying engaged: Knowledge and research needs in student engagement. Child Development Perspectives, 8(3), 137-143. doi:10.1111/cdep.12073
76. 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, 12-23. doi:10.1016/j.learnin-struc.2013.04.00
77. Wang, M.-T., Eccles, J. S., & Kenny, S. (2013). Not lack of ability but more choice: individual and gender differences in choice of careers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Psychological Science, 24(5), 770-775. doi:10.1177/0956797612458937
78. Wang, M.-T., Willett, J. B., & Eccles, J. S. (2011). The assessment of school engagement: examining dimensionality and measurement invariance by gender and race/ethnicity. Journal of School Psychology, 49(4), 465-480. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2011.04.001
79. Watt, H. M. G., Eccles, J. S., & Durik, A. M. (2006). The leaky mathematics pipeline for girls: A motivational analysis of high school enrolments in Australia and the USA. Equal Opportunities International, 25(8), 642-659. doi:10.1108/02610150610719119
80. Watt, H. M. G., Shapka, J. D., Morris, Z. A, Durik, A. M., Keating, D. P., & Eccles, J. S. (2012). Gendered motivational processes affecting high school mathematics participa-tion, educational aspirations, and career plans: A comparison of samples from Australia, Canada, and the United States. Developmental Psychology, 48(6), 1594-1611. doi:10.1037/a0027838
81. Wigfield, A., & Cambria, J. (2010). Students’ achievement values, goal orientations, and interest: Definitions, development, and relations to achievement outcomes. Developmental Review, 30(1), 1-35. doi:10.1016/j.dr.2009.12.001
82. Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (1992). The development of achievement task values: A theoretical analysis. Developmental Review, 12(3), 265-310. doi:10.1016/0273-2297(92)90011-P
83. Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 68-81. doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1015
84. Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2002). 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). Retrieved from http://www.rcgd.isr.umich.edu/garp/articles/eccles02o.pdf
85. Wigfield, A., Tonks, S., & Klauda, S. T. (2009). Expectancy-value theory. In K. R. W. Wentzel & A. (Ed.), Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 55-75). New York, NY: Routledge.