MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035134302 · doi:10.1037/h0087179

Style motivationannel des évèves du secondaire: Developpement d'un instrument de mesure et relations avec d'autres variables pédagogiques.

2002· article· fr· W2035134302 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Benoît Galand, Pierre Philippot

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement · 2002
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicMotivation and Self-Concept in Sports
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyHumanitiesStyle (visual arts)PhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents three validation studies of a questionnaire on secondary school students' motivation based on goal theory. Exploratory factor analyses and the comparison of several factorial structures through confirmatory factor analyses support the distinction between three motivational orientations: learning goals, performance goals, and work avoidance. Results did not support the hypothesis of a separation between an approach and an avoidance componant among performance goals. The questionnaire shows the expected properties for internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and external validity. Its relations with several educational variables (perceived ability, learning strategies, persistence, school goals structures, teacher-student relationships, feeling of belonging to school) demonstrate its conceptual validity. Interactions between goal orientations were found for some of those variables. Moreover, a distinction between two types of perceived ability is proposed. This distinction allows to reconciliate contradictory findings in the literature.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.095
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.182 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportementSame topicMotivation and Self-Concept in SportsFrench-language works237,207