MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411959153 · doi:10.59236/td2009vol3iss2953

Clarifying the Constructs of Motivation, Regulation of Motivation, and Volition in Models of Self-Regulated Learning

2009· article· en· W4411959153 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

VenueTransformative Dialogues Teaching and Learning Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsKwantlen Polytechnic University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVolition (linguistics)PsychologyCognitive psychologyIntrinsic motivationSelf-regulated learningSelf-determination theorySocial psychologyCognitive scienceAutonomyPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Models of self-regulated learning emphasize that students are more effective when they are motivated to become self-directed learners.However, the terms motivation, regulation of motivation, and volition are sometimes used interchangeably in the selfregulated learning literature.The purpose of this article is to explore the theoretical boundaries and overlaps between these constructs.Conceptual clarity of these important constructs is the important first step to guide future research related to the theoretical definition, measurement, development, and instruction of strategies for selfregulation.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.823
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.265 · 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