How Motivational Regulation Shapes and Is Shaped by Motivational Beliefs Over Time: Time-Lagged Network Analysis

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

Abstract

Purpose/Background
Despite growing interest in the promising role of motivational regulation in student learning (Fong et al., 2024), the dynamic relationship between motivation and motivational regulation remains underexplored. While using motivational regulation strategies is expected to strengthen students’ motivational beliefs (Wolters, 2003), students often struggle to regulate their motivation in the face of authentic motivational challenges (Kim & Yu, 2024). Recent work emphasizes the need for students to monitor their motivational beliefs and select strategies that are responsive to specific motivational challenges present in a given context (Engelschalk et al., 2016; Miele & Scholer, 2018). However, researchers have focused on static snapshots of beliefs and strategies, leaving questions about how these are interrelated over time. We thus examined: (1) how students’ motivational beliefs shaped their planned use of motivational regulation strategies in the following week, and (2) how those planned strategies predicted subsequent changes in motivational beliefs.
Method
Participants were 836 undergraduates (women = 384) enrolled in an introductory chemistry course at a Midwestern university in the US. Weekly throughout the semester, students reported their current motivational beliefs for the course (competence, value, interest, task effort cost, outside effort cost, loss of valued alternatives cost, emotional cost). They were also given a list of strategies (Schwinger et al., 2009; Wolters & Benzon, 2013) and asked to indicate how likely they were to use each of the eight strategies in the upcoming week. Using data collected across 13 weeks, we conducted temporal network analyses to examine how motivational regulation and motivational beliefs unfold over time (Figure 1).
Results/Significance
Interestingly, students tended to plan to use strategies that amplified the motivational beliefs they already held strongly rather than overcoming motivational deficits. When students reported high value in one week, they were more likely to plan strategies that aligned with those beliefs, such as enhancement of value or mastery self-talk. However, cost perceptions appeared to shape strategy choices in unique ways. Students who reported experiencing outside effort cost or loss of valued alternatives cost were less likely to plan performance-approach self-talk in the following week. Students may struggle to focus on course grades when they feel like their coursework interferes with other commitments or alternatives.
Furthermore, planned use of strategies predicted motivational beliefs the following week, though not always in straightforward ways. Some motivational regulation strategies led to expected outcomes (e.g., use of enhancement of value predicting higher perceived value in the following week), while others showed more complex patterns. For instance, planning to use proximal goal setting predicted decreased task effort cost and outside effort cost in the following week, whereas enhancement of personal significance predicted increases in these cost perceptions. These mixed patterns reflect the complexity of motivational regulation, where the effectiveness of a strategy may vary depending on individual and situational differences. Overall, this work advances our understanding of students’ optimal use of motivational regulation strategies by demonstrating how their planning is guided by existing motivational beliefs, and how the planned use of strategies leads to shifts in motivational beliefs.

Authors

• Yeo-eun Kim, Sungkyunkwan University

• Patrick N. Beymer, University of Cincinnati

• Emily Quinn Rosenzweig, Teachers College, Columbia University