Dynamic Motivation Regulation: Stability, Predictors, and Outcomes of Motivation-Regulation Profiles among Sixth-Grade Students

• In Event: Exploring the Optimal Use of Motivation Regulation Strategies for Academic Success

Abstract

Background & Aims
Students often use multiple strategies to self-regulate their motivational states, and this regulatory process may be dynamic over time (e.g., Wolters, 2003; Schwinger et al., 2009). Earlier studies have measured and profiled students’ one-time use of motivation regulation strategies (e.g., Ilishkina et al., 2022; Schwinger et al., 2012). However, recent research suggests that some students actually change their motivation regulation profiles over time (e.g., Raufelder et al., 2022; Widlund et al., 2024). That is, while some students tend to apply consistent patterns of motivation regulation strategies, others adjust their strategy use throughout the learning process.
Despite their importance in self-regulated learning, little research has focused on examining various types of motivation regulation profiles, their stability, antecedents, or implications. This study contributes to this gap by (1) identifying latent profiles that reflect students’ motivation regulation patterns, (2) examining their stability over time, (3) assessing transitions between profiles, and (4) exploring how these profiles relate to mindsets as well as (5) to academic motivation and performance outcomes.

Method
We use data that our lab collected from 1,019 sixth-grade students in Singapore during the 2020 academic year at two time points: mid-year (T1, around July) and late in the year (T2, around November). Students’ strategic mindset (defined as a general tendency to self-prompt effective strategy use; Chen et al., 2020) was measured at T1. Motivation regulation strategies and self-reported motivation were measured at both time points. The survey instruments and examples are listed in Table 1. Academic performance was obtained through scores on a year-end, nationally-standardized exam required of all sixth-grade students in Singapore.
Latent transition analysis was conducted to examine profile stability, transitions between profiles, and their relationships with strategic mindset, motivation, and academic performance. Specifically, Wald tests were used to examine differences in motivation and performance across transition patterns, and odds ratios were used to evaluate how strategic mindset predicted transitions.

Results/Discussion
Latent transition analyses revealed four relatively stable, distinct profiles (Table 2): High, Moderate, and Low levels of motivation regulation strategy use, and a Goal-Driven profile, which primarily relied on mastery and performance goals. Most students remained in the same profile over time, with few exhibiting transitions (see Table 3 for transition probabilities). Based on Figures 1 and 2, students who remained in high profiles demonstrated higher levels of motivation and performance; students who shifted from higher to lower profiles maintained relatively high performance but showed declines in motivation; students who transitioned to high profiles only right before the exam exhibited the lowest levels of both performance and motivation. Notably, students with more of a strategic mindset were less likely to shift into profiles with lower motivation regulation (Table 4).
These findings highlight both the stability and dynamic variability of students’ motivational self-regulation. It seems important to sustain motivation regulation over time, as short-term increases in strategy use may not be sufficient to enhance motivation or academic performance. Moreover, strategic mindset appears to play a role in supporting sustained motivation regulation and preventing declines in self-regulatory behaviors.

Authors

• Yang-Hsin Fan, University of Texas at Austin

• Jing-Yi Shen, Beijing Normal University

• Patricia Chen, University of Texas at Austin