4.4 Article

Self-efficacy for motivational regulation and satisfaction with academic studies in STEM undergraduates: The mediating role of study motivation

Journal

LEARNING AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES
Volume 93, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.lindif.2021.102096

Keywords

Self-efficacy for motivational regulation; Satisfaction with academic studies; Expectancy-Value-Cost (EVC) model of motivation; Self-regulated learning; STEM undergraduates' academic success

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Self-efficacy for motivational regulation plays a significant role in academic satisfaction, particularly in terms of satisfaction with study content and coping with study-related stress, with indirect effects. However, the impact on satisfaction with study conditions is not consistent.
As a key process of self-regulated learning, effective motivational regulation is assumed to facilitate successful studying via optimized motivation. Our research aimed to test this assumption addressing the relationship between self-efficacy for motivational regulation and three dimensions of satisfaction with academic studies with respect to the potential underlying mechanisms in terms of the expectancy, value, and cost components of motivation, controlling for relevant covariates. Results of two studies with STEM undergraduates (N1 = 209; N2 = 169) consistently revealed self-efficacy for motivational regulation as a positive predictor of satisfaction with study content and satisfaction with coping with study-related stress, indicating the presence of indirect effects, which varied across the two satisfaction dimensions. Results regarding satisfaction with study conditions were, however, not consistent. Overall, our findings underline self-efficacy for motivational regulation as an important yet overlooked constituent of an effective motivational regulation process contributing to academic satisfaction in higher education.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available