Abstract
The principal aim of this research is to contrast empirically a hypothetical model developed on the basis of the fundamental assumptions of current self-regulated learning models. In line with evaluation criteria of model fit, a high rate of congruence between the hypothesized theoretical model and the empirical data was observed. Analysis of the effects between the variables of the model revealed the following relevant aspects: students' predisposition to feel responsible for the results of their academic behavior (internal attribution) is related to positive self-image (academic self-concept), both being important conditions for development of learning-oriented motivation (learning goals). All of this involves selection and use of learning strategies for deep information processing (deep learning strategies), which leads students to assume responsibility with high levels of persistence, perseverance, and tenacity so as to achieve goals defined by the motivational orientation. This persistence and effort to achieve the proposed goals has in turn a positive and significant effect on academic achievement.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures and student motivation. J. Educ. Psychol. 84: 261–271.
Anderman, E. M., and Young, A. J. (1994). Motivation and strategy use in science: Individual differences and classroom effects. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 31: 811–831.
Biggs, J. B. (1987). Student Approaches to Learning and Studying, Australian Council for Educational Research, Hawthorn, Victoria.
Biggs, J. B. (1989). Approaches to the enhancement of tertiary teaching. Higher Educ.Res. Dev. 8: 7–25.
Boekaerts, M. (1999). Self-regulatd learning: Where are today. Int. J. Educ. Res. 31: 445–458.
Boekaerts, M., and Niemivirta, M. (2000).Self-regulated learning: Finding a balance between learning goals and ego-protective goals. In: Boekaerts, M., Pintrich, P. R., and Zeidner, M. (eds.), Handbook of Self-Regulation, Academic Press, San Diego, pp. 417–450.
Boekaerts, M., Pintrich, P. R., and Zeidner, M. (2000). Handbook of Self-Regulation, Academic Press, San Diego.
Borkowski, J. G., and Muthukrishna, N. (1992). Moving metacognition into the classroom: “orking models” and effective strategy teaching. In: Pressley, M., Harris, K. R., and Guthrie, J. T. (eds.), Promoting Academic Competence and Literacy in School, San Diego, CA: Academic Press, San Diego, pp. 477–501.
Byrne, B. (2001). Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS, Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.
Covington, M. V. (2000). Goal theory, motivation, and school achievement: An integrative review. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 51: 171–200.
Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. Am. Psychol. 41: 1040– 1048.
Elliot, A. J., McGregor, H. A., and Gable, S. (1999). Achievement goals, study strategies, and exam performance: A mediational analysis. J. Educ. Psychol. 91: 549–563.
Entwistle, N. J. (1987). Understanding Classroom Learning, Hodder & Stoughton, London.
García, T., and Pintrich, P. R. (1994). Regulating motivation and cognition in the classroom: The role of self-schemas and self-regulatory strategies. In: Schunk, D. H., and Zimmerman, B. J. (eds.), Self-Regulation of Learning and Performance: Issues and Educational Applications, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 127–153.
González-Pienda, J. A., NÚñez, J. C., González-Pumariega, S., Álvarez, L., Roces, C., and García, M. (2002). A estructural equation model of parental involvement, motivational and aptitudinal characteristics, and academic achievement. J. Exp. Educ. 70: 257–287.
Graham, S., and Golan, S. (1991). Motivational influences on cognition: Task involvement, ego involvement, and depth of information processing. J. Educ. Psychol. 83: 187–194.
Hayamizu, T., and Weiner, B. (1991). A test Dweck's model of achievement goals as related to perceptions of ability. J. Exp. Educ. 59: 226–234.
Jöreskog, K. G., and Sörbom, D. (1990). SPSS LISREL 7 and PRELIS: User's Guide and Reference, SPSS Inc., Chicago.
Jöreskog, K. G., and Sörbom, D. (1996). LISREL 8: User's Reference Guide, SSI, Chicago.
Kuhl, J. (2000). A functional-design approach to motivation and self-regulation: The dynamics of personality systems and interactions. In: Boekaerts, M., Pintrich, P. R., and Zeidner, M. (eds.), Handbook of Self-Regulation, Academic Press, San Diego, pp. 111–170.
Lave, J., and Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participations, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
MacCallum, R. C., and Austin, J. T. (2000). Applications of structural equation modeling in psychological research. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 51: 201–226.
Marsh, H. W., and Balla, J. R. (1994). Goodness of fit in confirmatory analysis: The effects of sample size and model parsimony. Qual. Quant.: Int. J. Methodol. 28: 185– 217.
Marsh, H. W., and Balla, J. R., and Hau, K. T. (1996). An evaluation of incremental fitindices: A clarification of mathematical and empirical processes. In: Marcoulides, G. A., and Schumacker, R. E. (eds.), Advanced Structural Equation Modeling Techniques, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 315–353.
Marzano, R. J. (1998). Cognitive, metacognitive, and conative considerations in classroom assessment. In: Lambert, N. M., and McCombs, B. L. (eds.), How Students Learn, APA, Washington, DC, pp. 241–266.
Mayer, R. E. (1992). Guiding students' cognitive processing of scientific information in text. In: Pressley, M., Harris, K. R., and Guthrie, J. T. (eds.), Promoting Academic Competence and Literacy in School, Academic Press, San Diego, CA, pp. 243–258.
McCombs, B. L. (1998). Integrating metacognition, affect, and motivation in improving teacher education. In: Lambert, N. M., and McCombs, B. L. (eds.), How Students Learn, APA, Washington, DC, pp. 379–408.
McCombs, B. L., and Marzano, R. J. (in press). What is the role of the will component in strategic learning? In: Weinstein, C. E., and McCombs, B. L. (eds.), Strategic Learning: Skill, Will, and Self-Regulation, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
Meece, J. L. (1994). The role of motivation in self-regulated learning. In: Schunk, D. H., and Zimmerman, B. J. (eds.), Self-Regulation of Learning and Performance: Issues and Educational Applications, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 25–44.
Middleton, M. J., and Midgley, C. (1997). Avoiding the demostration of lack of ability: An underexplored aspect of goal theory. J. Educ. Psychol. 4: 710–718.
Midgley, C., and Urdan, T. (1995). Predictors of middle school students' use of selfhandicapping strategies. J. Early Adolesc. 15: 389–411.
Murphy, P. K., and Alexander, P. A. (1998). Using the learning and study strategies inventory-high school version with Singaporean females: examining psychometric properties. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 58: 493–510.
Nicholls, J. G. (1984). Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice, and performance. Psychol. Rev. 91: 328–346.
Nolen, S. B. (1988). Reasons for studying: Motivational orientation and study strategies.Cogn. Instruct. 5: 269–287.
Nolen, S. B., and Haladyna, T. M. (1990). Personal and environmental influences on students' beliefs about effective study strategies. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 15: 116–130.
NÚñez, J. C., González-Pienda, J. A., García, S., and Cabanach, R. G. (September 1994).Evaluación de la Motivación de Logro. IV Congreso de Evaluación Psicológica, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Olejnik, S., and Nist, S. L. (1992). Identifying latent variables measured by learning and study strategies inventory (LASSI). J. Exp. Educ. 60: 151–159.
Olivárez, A., and Tallent-Runnels, M. K. (1994). Psychometric properties of the learning and study strategies inventory-high school version. J. Exp. Educ. 62: 243–257.
Parris, S. G., Lipson, M. Y., and Wixson, K. (1983). Becoming a strategic reader. Contemporary Educational Psychology 8: 293–316.
Pintrich, P. R. (1994). Continuities and discontinuities: Future directions for research in Educational Psychology. Educ. Psychol. 29: 137–148.
Pintrich, P. R., and De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom performance. J. Educ. Psychol. 82: 33–40.
Pintrich, P. R., and García, T. (1991). Student goal orientation and self-regulation in the college classroom. In: Maher, M. L., and Pintrich, P. R. (eds.), Advances in Motivation and Achievement (Vol. 7), JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 371–402.
Pintrich, P. R., and Schrauben, B. (1992). Students' motivational beliefs and their cognitive engagement in classroom academic tasks. In: Schunk, D. H., and Meece, J. L. (eds.), Student Perceptions in the Classroom, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 149–183.
Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in Thinking, Oxford University Press, New York.
Romainville, M. (1994). Awareness of cognitive strategies: The relationship between university students' metacognition and their performance. Stud. Higher Educ. 19: 359– 366.
Schneider, W., and Pressley, M. (1989). Memory Development Between 2 and 20, Springer-Verlag, New York.
Schunk, D. L. (1996). Goal and self-evaluative influences during children's cognitive skill learning. Am. Educ. Res. J. 33: 359–382.
Seifert, T. L. (1995). Characteristics of ego-and task-oriented students: A comparison of two methodologies. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 65: 125–138.
Shuell, T. J. (1993). Toward an integrated theory of teaching and learning. Educ. Psychol. 28: 291–311.
Solé, I. (1993). Disponibilidad para el aprendizaje y sentido del aprendizaje [Availability for learning and the sense of learning]. In: Coll, C., Martín, E., Mauri, T., Miras, M., Onrubia, J., Solé, I., and Zabala, A. (eds.), El Constructivismo en el Aula [Constructivism in the Classroom], Graó, Barcelona, pp. 25–46.
Suárez, J. M., Cabanach, R. G., and Valle, A. (2001). Multiple-goal pursuit and its relation to cognitive, self-regulatory, and motivational strategies. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 71: 561–572.
Symons, S., Snyder, B. L., Cariglia-Bull, T., and Pressley, M. (1989). Why be optimistic about cognitive strategy instruction? In: McCormick, C. B., Miller, G. F., and Pressley, M. (eds.), Cognitive Strategy Research: From Basic Research to Educational Applications, Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 3–32.
Valle, A., Cabanach, R. G., Cuevas, L. M., and NÚñez, J. C. (1996). Metas académicas de los estudiantes universitarios y su relación con otras variables cognitivo-motivacionales.Bol. Psicol. 53: 49–68.
Valle, A., Cabanach, R. G., Cuevas, L. M., and NÚñez, J. C. (1997a). Patrones motivacionales en estudiantes universitarios: características diferenciales. Rev. Invest. Educ. 15: 125–146.
Valle, A., Cabanach, R. G., Cuevas, L. M., Rodríguez, S., Baspino, M., and NÚñez, J.C. (1997b). El C.M.A. (Cuestionario de Metas Académicas): Un instrumento para la evaluación de las metas de estudio de los estudiantes universitarios. Actas del I Congreso Luso-Español de Psicología de la Educación, Associac¸ao dos Psicólogos Portugueses (APPORT), Coimbra, Portugal.
Weinstein, C. E., and Hume, L. M. (1998). Study Strategies for Lifelong Learning, American Psychological Association, Washington, DC.
Weinstein, C. E., Schulte, A. C., and Palmer, D. R. (1987). LASSI: Learning and Study Strategies Inventory, H and H Publishing, Clearwater, FL.
Zimmerman, B. J. (1995). Self-regulation involves more than metacognition: A sociocognitive perspective. Educ. Psychol. 30: 173–187.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Valle, A., Cabanach, R.G., Núñez, J.C. et al. Cognitive, Motivational, and Volitional Dimensions of Learning: An Empirical Test of a Hypothetical Model. Research in Higher Education 44, 557–580 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025443325499
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025443325499