Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Effectiveness of motivationally adaptive computer-assisted instruction on the dynamic aspects of motivation

  • Research
  • Published:
Educational Technology Research and Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of a prototype of motivationally-adaptive computer-assisted instruction (CAI). The foundation for motivational theory and design was provided by the ARCS model (an acronym formed from attention, relevance, confidence, and satisfaction). This model provides a definition of motivation, a motivational design process, and recommendations for motivational strategies. Three treatment conditions were considered: (a) motivationally adaptive CAI, (b) motivationally saturated CAI, and (c) motivationally minimized CAI. Dependent variables were effectiveness, perceived motivation (both overall motivation and each of A, R, C, & S components), efficiency, and continuing motivation. The motivationally adaptive CAI showed higher effectiveness, overall motivation, and attention than the other two CAI types. For efficiency, both motivationally adaptive CAI and motivationally minimized CAI were higher than motivationally saturated CAI. For continuing motivation, there were no significant differences among the three CAI types, but a significant correlation was found between overall motivation and continuing motivation across the three CAI types. This study supports the conclusion that CAI can be designed to be motivationally adaptive to respond to changes in learner motivation that may occur over time. It also illustrates that the ARCS model can be useful and effective in support of designing for these dynamic aspects of motivation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alschuler, A.S. (1973).Developing achievement motivation in adolescents: Education for human growth Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educationl Technology Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alschuler, A.S., Tabor, D. & McIntyre, J. (1971).Teaching achievement motivation: Theory and practice in psychological education. Middletown, CT: Education Ventures, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Astleitner, J., & Keller, J.M. (1995). A model for motivationally adaptive computer-assisted instruction.Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 27(3), 270–280.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson, R.C. (1976). Adaptive instructional systems: Some attempts to optimize the learning process. In D. Klahr (Ed.),Cognition and instruction (pp. 81–108). New York: Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bickford, N.L. (1989).The systematic application of principles of motivation to the design of printed instructional materials. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Florida State University, Florida.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. (1986). Some motivational issues in computer-based instruction.Educational Technology, 26(4), 27–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, R.E. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media.Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 445–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • del Soldato, T., & du Boulay, B. (1995). Implementation of motivational tactics in tutoring systems.Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 6(4), 337–378.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dempsey, J., Lucassen, B., Gilley, W., & Rasmussen, K. (1993). Since Malone's theory of intrinsically motivating instruction: What's the score in the gaming literature?Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 22(2), 173–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dick, W. & Carey, L. (1996).The systematic design of instruction (4th ed.). New York: Harper Collins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farmer, T. M. (1989).A refinement of the ARCS motivational design procedure using a formative evaluation methodology. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Indiana.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gagné, R. M. (1985).The conditions of learning and theory of instruction (4th ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, H.D., et al. (1989).Biology, Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hativa, N., & Lesold, A. (1991). The computer as a tutor—Can it adapt to the individual learner?Instructional Science, 20(1), 49–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holland, J.G. (1977). Variables in adaptive decisions in individual instruction.Educational Psychologist, 12(2), 146–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Houlihan, P.A., Finkelstein, M.W., & Johnson, L.A. (1992). Adaptive use of the DDx&Tx system.Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 19(4), 125–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, R.T. (1986). Computerassisted cooperative learning.Educational Technology, 26(1), 12–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, J.M. (1979). Motivation and instructional design: A theoretical perspective.Journal of Instructional Development, 2(4), 26–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, J.M. (1983). Motivational design of instruction In C.M. Reigeluth (Ed.),Instructional-design theories and models: An overview of their current status (pp. 386–434). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, J.M. (1987a). Strategies for stimulating the motivation to learn.Performance and Instruction Journal, 26(8), 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, J.M. (1987b). The systematic process of motivational design.Performance and Instruction Journal, 26(9/10), 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, J.M. (1987c). Development and use of the ARCS model of instructional design.Journal of Instructional Development, 10(3), 2–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, J.M. (1993).Motivation by design. Unpublished manuscript, Florida State University, Florida.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, J.M. (1997). Motivational design and multimedia: Beyond the novelty effect.Strategic Human Resource Development Review, 1(1), 188–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, J.M. (1999). Motivational systems. In H. Stolovitch, & E. Keeps (Eds.),Handbook of human performance technology (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc. Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, J.M., & Burkman, E. (1993). Motivation principles. In M. Fleming & W.H. Levie (Eds.),Instructional message design: Principles from the behavioral and cognitive sciences. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, J.M. & Suzuki, K. (1988). Use of the ARCS motivation model in courseware design. In D.H. Jonassen (Ed.),Instructional designs for microcomputer courseware (pp. 401–434). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, J.D., & Freitag, E.T. (1982). Training students to utilize self-motivational strategies.Educational Technology, 32(3), 44–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, J.D., & Keller, J.M. (1990). Influence of student ability, locus of control, and type of instructional control on performance and confidence.Journal of Educational Research, 83(3), 140–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S.H. & Boling, E. (1996).Motivational screen design guidelines for effective computer-mediated instruction. Proceedings of Selected Research and Development Presentations at the 1996 National Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Indianapolis, Indiana, 401–412.

  • Lepper, M.R. (1985). Microcomputers in education: Motivational and social issues.American Psychologist, 40(1), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maehr, M.L. (1976). Continuing motivation: An analysis of a seldom considered educational outcome.Review of Educational Research, 46(3), 443–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malone, T. (1981). Toward a theory of intrinsically motivation instruction.Cognitive Science, 4, 333–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malouf, D.B. (1988). The effect of instructional computer games on continuing student motivation.The Journal of Special Education, 21(4), 27–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCombs, B.L., Eschenbrenner, A.J. Jr., & O'Neill, H.F., Jr. (1973). An adaptive model for utilizing learner characteristics in computer based instructional systems.Educational Technology, 13(4), 47–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Means, T.B., Jonassen, D.H., & Dwyer, F.M. (1997). Enhancing relevance: Embedded ARCS strategies vs. purpose.Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(1), 5–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mills, S.C., & Ragan, T.J. (1994).Adapting instruction to individual learner differences: A research paradigm for computer-based instruction. Proceedings of Selected Research and Development Presentations at the 1994 National Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Nashville, Tennessee, 525–546.

  • Newby, T.J. (1991), Classroom motivation: Strategies of first-year teachers.Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(2), 195–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nwagbara, C.I. (1993).Effects of the relevance component of the ARCS model of motivational design. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Purdue University, Indiana.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osman, M. (1992).The effects of think-ahead questions and prior knowledge on learning and retention. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Florida State University, Florida.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, I.W. (1993).The effects of orienting questions and prior knowledge on learning in hypertext. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Florida State University, Florida.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P.R., & Schunk, D.H. (1996).Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications, Englewood, Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Relan, A. (1992).Motivational strategies in computerbased instruction: Some lessons from theories and models of motivation. Proceedings of Selected Research and Development Presentations at the Conventions of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, 612–624.

  • Rezabek, R.H. (1994).Utilizing intrinsic motivation in the design of instruction. Proceedings of Selected Research and Development Presentations at the National Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Nashville, Indiana, 695–704.

  • Ross, S.M., & Morrison, G.R. (1988). Adapting instruction to learner performance and background variables. In D.H. Jonassen (Ed.),Instructional designs for microcomputer courseware (pp 227–243). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Small, R.V., & Gluck, M. (1994). The relationship of motivational conditions to effective instructional attributes: A magnitude scaling approach.Educational Technology, 34(8), 33–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tennyson, R.D., & Christensen, D.L. (1988). MAIS: an intelligent learning system. In D. Jonassen, (Ed.),Instructional designs for micro computer courseware (pp. 247–274). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tennyson, R.D., & Park, S. (1984). Process learning time as an adaptive design variable in concept learning using computer-based instruction.Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 452–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuckman, B.W. (1994).Conducting educational research (4th ed.), New York: Harcourt Brace & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Visser, J., & Keller, J.M. (1990). The clinical use of motivational messages: An inquiry into the validity of the ARCS model of motivational design.Instructional Science, 19, 467–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wlodkowski, R.J. (1999).Enhancing adult motivation to learn (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Andong National University, Korea

    Sang H. Song

  2. Florida State University, Florida, USA

    John M. Keller

Authors
  1. Sang H. Song
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John M. Keller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Song, S.H., Keller, J.M. Effectiveness of motivationally adaptive computer-assisted instruction on the dynamic aspects of motivation. ETR&D 49, 5–22 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504925

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504925

Keywords

Search

Navigation