Cross-Cultural Differences in Endorsement of Motivation Profiles Across Western and Non-Western Samples

• In Event: 63.027 - Understanding the Role of Culture and Context in Learning and Motivation Using Cross-National Data

Abstract

Objectives and theoretical framework
Cultural differences in endorsement of school motivation profiles are investigated among secondary school students from eight culturally diverse groups. The selected groups come from societies that vary largely in the extent to which they are collectivist or individualist, masculine or feminine, Western or non-Western, and religion(s) they are adhered to. These characteristics converge with the educational practice in schools. For instance, teachers in individualist societies might promote competition to enhance students’ motivation and achievement (King, McInerney, & Watkins, 2012), whereas teachers in collectivist societies might endorse the importance of group learning (Chang & Wong, 2008).

Personal Investment Theory (PIT) (Maehr, 1984) is used to further our understanding of cross-cultural differences in motivation. The PIT uses a more elaborative framework than other motivational theories, including social solidarity and extrinsic goals alongside mastery (or task) and performance (or ego) goals. Generally, students from various cultures seem to endorse the same educational goals and values. Nevertheless, the meaning of motivational constructs might have a different connotation in Western and non-Western cultures, e.g. whether striving for competition is a negative or positive trait.

Using a person-centered approach, motivation profiles are identified across the samples. Research questions include: How many latent clusters represent secondary school students’ motivation profiles? To what extent are certain ethnic groups over- or underrepresented in these clusters?

Methods
Data were drawn from discrete studies that used the Inventory of School Motivation (Ali & McInerney, 2004) (more information can be requested from the author), including Chinese (Hong Kong), Chinese and Malay (Singapore), Filipino (the Philippines), indigenous Aboriginal and Anglo-Australian (Australia), Western (the Netherlands), and Middle-Eastern Qatari (Qatar) students, 11,657 in total (49% boys; average age 15 years). The 32 items (using a 5-point Likert scale) measure students’ mastery (first order factors: task and effort), performance (competition and social power), social (affiliation and social concern), and extrinsic (praise and token) motivation. The factor structure has been confirmed in all datasets. Latent Gold software was used to conduct the LCA. Model fit was based on statistical criteria, model parsimony, and model interpretability.

Results
The 6-cluster solution fitted the data best, including clusters with consistent response patterns, as well as a more mixed patterns. Some notable findings include that Filipino and Qatari students, and to some extent Indigenous Australian students, were overrepresented in the extremely high motivation cluster, whereas Dutch students were overrepresented in the extremely low motivation clusters. Non-indigenous Australian, Chinese (Singapore) and Malay (Singapore) students were overrepresented in a cluster with high scores on mastery/social and moderate scores on performance/extrinsic motivation, confirming the relevance of social motivation among non-Western samples.

Significance of the study
This exceptional dataset is the result of international collaboration of scholars that put their previously collected data at our disposal to conduct cross-cultural comparisons. Each selected society holds different combinations of characteristics, which enhanced our understanding of the impact of different societal contexts on endorsement of motivation profiles. Next steps include an investigation which motivation profiles are more adaptive across the various ethnic groups.

Authors

• Hanke Korpershoek, University of Groningen

• Ronnel Bornasal King, The Education University of Hong Kong

• Dennis M. McInerney, The Education University of Hong Kong

• Fraide A. Ganotice, The Hong Kong Institute of Education