MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Dynamic Processes of Influence Between Contextual and Situational Motivation: A Test of the Hierarchical Model in a Science Education Setting

2010· article· en· W2120950211 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Social Psychology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMotivation and Self-Concept in Sports
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSituational ethicsPsychologyTest (biology)Social psychologyStructural equation modelingMultilevel modelContextual designComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of the present research was to identify some of the psychological processes through which changes in contextual motivation toward science courses can occur. In line with the hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation ( Vallerand, 1997 ), it is proposed that much of the changes in contextual motivation toward science are induced by repeated changes in situational motivation toward science‐related activities. Furthermore, situational motivation itself is determined by one's contextual motivation. Finally, contextual science motivation should predict intentions of taking future science classes and pursuing a science career. Participants were high school students engaged in science courses. A longitudinal design with 5 measurement time points was used. Overall, the results of structural equation modeling analyses supported the hypotheses.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.291
Threshold uncertainty score0.523

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.331 · 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