MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052352885 · doi:10.1177/0143034311426943

Motivational style and actual and perceived academic performance of secondary school students in Hong Kong

2011· article· en· W2052352885 on OpenAlexaff
Cindy H. P. Sit, O. Randall Braman, John Kerr, Koenraad J. Lindner

Bibliographic record

VenueSchool Psychology International · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducation, Achievement, and Giftedness
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConformistPsychologyCollectivismStyle (visual arts)Academic achievementDiligenceDevelopmental psychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined the relationship between motivational style and academic achievement among 2,220 secondary school males and females in Hong Kong. Respondents were classified into high, average, or low academic performance (AAP) groups based on a single average for academic subjects obtained from their schools. Respondents were also classified into top, middle, or bottom groups based on their perceived academic performance (PAP). Results indicated that only 42% of the students perceived their academic performance correctly. Compared to their lower AAP counterparts, high scoring AAP males were significantly more serious, conformist, and arousal-avoidant. The high scoring AAP female group was found to be more self-oriented than the other female groups. The top PAP male group was also found to be more serious, conformist, arousal-avoidant, and optimistic than the other PAP male groups. The top PAP female group was more self-oriented and optimistic than the other two PAP groups. The present findings suggest that the traditional Chinese cultural values of collectivism, diligence, and education are major influences on shaping the motivational style of Hong Kong Chinese high school students. The implications of the results for school psychologists and teachers are also discussed.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations13
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSchool Psychology InternationalSame topicEducation, Achievement, and GiftednessFrench-language works237,207