Extracurricular Activities—Extra Beneficial: The Role of Motivation for Extracurricular Activities on Outcomes in High‐School Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: There is growing interest in the developmental consequences of extracurricular activities. While past research has mostly focused on the direct effect of extracurricular activities on outcomes (Farb and Matjasko 2012; Marsh and Kleitman 2002), the current study used a Self-Determination Theory (SDT) framework to test a serial mediation model in which self-determined motivation for extracurricular activities was positively associated with indicators of students' functioning through the mediating role of self-determined school motivation and psychological need satisfaction in school. Moreover, the current study aimed at testing SDT's claim that psychological need satisfaction is universally applicable across contexts and cultures. METHOD: = 1.77) from China (n = 267), USA (n = 281), Canada (n = 195), and France (n = 143) completed a questionnaire assessing motivation for extracurricular activity and school-related variables including motivation, need satisfaction, mood, stress, perceptions of overscheduling, and intentions to dropout. Teacher reports of students' motivation, self-efficacy, optimism, and missed school days were collected for a subsample of Canadian, American, and French students (n = 219). RESULTS: Findings of a cross-sectional mediation model revealed that across cultures, self-determined motivation for extracurricular activities was positively associated with indicators of academic functioning for student and teacher-rated outcomes through the mediating effects of self-determined academic motivation and psychological need satisfaction in school. CONCLUSION: These findings underscore the importance of students' perceptions of motivation and psychological need satisfaction in demonstrating how extracurricular activities may be positively related to school functioning across cultures.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".