MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389097334 · doi:10.55016/ojs/ajer.v68i3.72509

Affect, Motivation, and Engagement in the Context of Mathematics Education: Testing a Dynamic Model of Their Interactive Relationships

2022· article· en· W4389097334 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shanshan Hu, Xin Ma

Bibliographic record

VenueAlberta Journal of Educational Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducation, Achievement, and Giftedness
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural equation modelingAffect (linguistics)PsychologyMediationContext (archaeology)CognitionHumanitiesSocial psychologySociologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present analysis aimed to test the dynamic (interactive) model of affect, motivation, and engagement (Linnenbrink, 2007) in mathematics education with a nationally representative sample. Self-efficacy, self-concept, and mathematics anxiety were indicators of pleasant and unpleasant affect. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation were indicators of mastery and performance approach. Educational persistence and cognitive activation were indicators of behavioral and cognitive engagement. The 2012 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) supplied a sample of 4,978 students from the United States for structural equation modeling. The results indicated that the PISA data overall supported the dynamic model. Specifically, the PISA data completely supported the specification of the relationship between motivation and affect, largely supported the specification of the relationship between affect and engagement, but failed to support the specification of the relationship between motivation and engagement. The PISA data largely supported the specification of the mediation effects of affect on the relationship between motivation and engagement. Keywords: affect; motivation; engagement; mathematics; structural equation modeling La présente analyse visait à tester le modèle dynamique (interactif) de l'affect, de la motivation et de l'engagement (Linnenbrink, 2007) dans l'enseignement des mathématiques avec un échantillon représentatif au niveau national. L'auto-efficacité, le concept de soi et l'anxiété liée aux mathématiques étaient des indicateurs de l'affect agréable et désagréable. La motivation intrinsèque et extrinsèque était des indicateurs de l'approche de la maîtrise et de la performance. La persistance éducative et l'activation cognitive étaient des indicateurs de l'engagement comportemental et cognitif. Le Programme international pour le suivi des acquis des élèves (PISA) de 2012 a fourni un échantillon de 4 978 élèves des États-Unis pour la modélisation des équations structurelles. Les résultats indiquent que les données PISA soutiennent globalement le modèle dynamique. Plus précisément, les données PISA ont complètement soutenu la spécification de la relation entre la motivation et l'affect, ont largement soutenu la spécification de la relation entre l'affect et l'engagement, mais n'ont pas soutenu la spécification de la relation entre la motivation et l'engagement. Les données PISA ont largement soutenu la spécification des effets de médiation de l'affect sur la relation entre la motivation et l'engagement. Mots clés : affect ; motivation ; engagement ; mathématiques ; modélisation par équations structurelles.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient 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 score0.158
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.232
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlberta Journal of Educational ResearchSame topicEducation, Achievement, and GiftednessFrench-language works237,207