Examining the Associations Between Math-Specific Regulatory Focus and Classroom Participation

• In Event: Broadening the Terrain: Examining Novel Motivational Processes in STEM Contexts

Abstract

Objectives
It is important to explore individual differences in active classroom participation because participation fosters students’ critical thinking and sense of belonging. Three studies employed a regulatory focus framework to examine whether prevention-focused students have higher confidence thresholds (i.e., require more confidence in their knowledge) when it comes to answering questions and thus are less likely to participate in classroom discussion than promotion-focused students.

Theoretical Framework
A motivational factor that may help to explain why some students are more comfortable participating in math classes than others is regulatory focus (Higgins, 1997), which distinguishes between people with a prevention focus (who vigilantly pursue goals in order to ensure safety) versus those with a promotion focus (who eagerly pursue goals in order to maximize growth). With respect to participating in class, a prevention-focused student might hesitate to answer instructor-posed questions because the possibility of responding incorrectly represents a loss that outweighs whatever can be gained by answering correctly. That is, prevention-focused students might have higher confidence thresholds than promotion-focused students for answering questions in classroom contexts.

Methods
Study 1 recruited middle schoolers (via their parents) to participate online (final N = 150), and Studies 2 and 3 were run in a university lab with undergraduates (final Ns = 171, 124). For the 56 students who participated in both Studies 2 and 3, the temporal stability of their responses was examined. All three studies included similar measures of motivation and participation in math classes, including a math-specific regulatory focus scale, two measures of participation confidence thresholds (a slider measure in all studies and a Likert-type measure in Studies 2 and 3), and two items assessing self-reported participation behaviors. Similar measures corresponding to other domains were also assessed (for comparison) but are not discussed.
In Study 3, prior to measuring these constructs, we attempted to manipulate students’ regulatory focus orientations, but this manipulation did not significantly affect any variables described above. Therefore, we collapsed across experimental conditions below.

Results
In Studies 1-3, regulatory focus was significantly or marginally associated with both participation frequency items (see Table 2.1). Specifically, the more predominately prevention-focused participants were, the less likely they were to voluntarily answer the instructor’s questions. Regulatory focus was significantly correlated with the Likert-type measure of confidence thresholds in Studies 2 and 3, but not with the slider measure in any study. In Studies 2 and 3 (but not Study 1), confidence threshold measures were associated with both participation frequency items. For those who participated in Studies 2 and 3, we found high levels of stability in their motivation, confidence, and behavior across time.

Significance
Taken together, these studies suggest that students’ math-specific regulatory focus is associated with classroom participation behavior. Thus, regulatory focus may be one factor explaining why some students are more willing to participate in their math classes than others. One implication is that if educators can help prevention-focused students perceive incorrect answers as less threatening, these students may participate more frequently and experience a greater sense of belonging.

Authors

• Meghan Coughlan, Boston College

• David B. Miele, Boston College

• Marina Vasilyeva, Boston College