Poster #39 - Is Emotional Regulation Related to Response to Reading and Math Interventions? A Meta-Analytic Review

• In Event: Poster Session 06

Abstract

Socioemotional development is critical for academic achievement and overall learning. Failure and other learning difficulties influence students' perception of their performance and can have negative emotional consequences. Intervention is often the primary strategy used to improve domain-specific competencies and skills to address student failure and other classroom learning difficulties. However, the effectiveness of treatments to improve academic skills and outcomes can vary by child-level characteristics that influence individual responsiveness and are not necessarily malleable in the short term (Al Otaiba, 2002; Lam & McMaster, 2014; Powell et al., 2017; Fuchs et al., 2007). Specifically, emotional regulation is an aspect of socio-emotional development and a dimension of self-regulation, defined as the ability to manage, modify and control emotions in the school environment and under new conditions within the classroom (Eisenberg et al., 2004). The literature suggests small to moderate correlations between emotional regulation and measures of reading and math achievement (Dent, 2013; Robson et al., 2020; Kwon et al., 2018; Gumora et al., 2002). There are both empirical and public interests in understanding the influence of child-level factors that influence academic engagement and motivation, including within the context of intervention. Under the expectancy-value theory (Eccles et al., 1983; Wigfied, 1994), this framework would propose that emotional regulation processes represented by affective memories and reactions to previous achievement experiences would impact how a student values the intervention-related instruction and tasks. This meta-analytic review aims to examine the strength of the relation (correlation) between emotional regulation and individual differences in response to school-based reading and math interventions. Based on the existing literature, small to moderate correlational effect sizes are expected. Inclusionary criteria were relevant studies published after 1983, sampling from grades kindergarten through twelfth. Of the selected studies that meet inclusionary criteria, meta-analytic procedures will also be used to determine: (1) if specific variables moderated the effect sizes, (2) heterogeneity of effect sizes, and (3) if publication bias is indicated. Moderators of interest are sample, achievement, and intervention characteristics. This work is currently in preparation. To date, five reading intervention studies have been identified with 13 effect sizes. No math interventions have been identified yet. We also are awaiting responses to inquiries into unpublished manuscripts and data. Finally, the study results, discussion, and conclusion will be discussed. The results will potentially contribute to what we know about the role of emotions in failure and learning difficulties and the impacts on reading and math acquisition.

Authors

• Cynthia Ulysse Norris, Florida State Univeristy
  Presenting Author

• Sara Hart, Florida State University

• Latasha Holden