Motivating motivation regulation research – an evidence and gap map approach
Creators: name: Trautner, Maike
Publisher: name: Open Science Framework
Year: 2022
Subjects: subject: Other Psychology
subject: School Psychology
subject: Social and Behavioral Sciences
subject: Psychology
subject: FOS: Psychology
subject: motivational regulation
subject: self-regulated learning

description: Motivation regulation as students' active thoughts and behaviors to enhance or maintain their motivation to study (Wolters, 2003) is an important aspect of self-regulated and life-long learning (e.g. Pintrich, 2004). Therefore, it has received increasing attention over the past few years as can be seen in increasing publication numbers indexed in PsycINFO and Web of Science since Wolters' (1998) seminal publication (Figure 1, Attachment 1). With it came an increase in publications using different terms for and definitions of the construct, operationalizations, outcomes, and research designs, as well as samples and contexts examined (e.g. primary school or university students). Despite these large numbers, there is no systematic synthesis on this research to date identifying what we already know about motivational regulation, what the sources of this knowledge are, and which parts remain systematically understudied. Therefore, it is uncertain to which degree current findings on motivation regulation are specific to samples, contexts, and methods of assessments. A better understanding and overview of what we know about learners' motivational self-regulation is important to neither under- nor overinterpret existing evidence, as wells as for the development of future research programs and to strategically allocate time, attention and funds to the gaps. Furthermore, it enhances the accessibility of knowledge for practitioners. The aims of the current study are therefore first to examine how motivation regulation is defined and which theories support respective research. Second, it seeks to provide a systematic overview over the current state of evidence of relations between motivation regulation in learning contexts and outcomes, antecedents, and correlates examined to date. Third, we seek to identify how many studies reported associations or effects of contextual factors on motivation regulation, such as general vs. subject specific assessments of motivation regulation, or analog vs. digital learning contexts. Fourth, we will determine on which study designs (e.g. cross-sectional, longitudinal, experimental or intervention studies) and operationalizations of motivation regulation (e.g., self-report questionnaires, interviews, observations) these findings are based. Based on this data, an evidene and gap map (Miake-Lye et al., 2016; Saran &amp; White, 2018; Snilstveit et al., 2016) displaying a) how many studies examined which variables in relation with motivation regulation, b) in which samples (from primary school to adult education), c) with which study designs. Additionally, the number of studies providing evidence for positive, negative or no relations will be provided. Besides, potentially differing definitions of motivation regulation used in these studies will be compared in a quantitative content analysis with inductive categories (Mayring, 2008). In doing so, research gaps will be identified so both researchers accustomed and new to the field can obtain a quick overview of the current state of motivation regulation research and base their own subsequent research more thoroughly and systematically upon it. This will support a rapid and strategic expansion of knowledge on the effects of motivation regulation. Finally, we will examine areas in which research syntheses in the form of meta-analyses as quantitative syntheses of reported effects are possible depending on the numbers and state of primary studies available. References Mayring, A. (2008). Qualitative Evaluation in sieben Schritten [Qualitative Evaluation in Seven Steps]. In: U. Kuckartz, T. Dresing, S. Rädiker, &amp; C. Stefer (Eds). Qualitative Evaluation. Der Einstieg in die Praxis (pp. 15-57). Springer. Miake-Lye, I. M., Hempel, S., Shanman, R., &amp; Shekelle, P. G. (2016). What is an evidence map? A systematic review of published evidence maps and their definitions, methods, and products. Systematic Reviews, 5, 28. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0204-x Pintrich, P. R. (2004). A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self-regulated learning in college students. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 385–407. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-004-0006-x Saran, A., &amp; White, H. (2018). Evidence and gap maps: A comparison of different approaches. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 14(1), 1–38. https://doi.org/10.4073/cmdp.2018.2 Snilstveit, B., Vojtkova, M., Bhavsar, A., Stevenson, J., &amp; Gaarder, M. (2016). Evidence &amp; Gap Maps: A tool for promoting evidence informed policy and strategic research agendas. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 79, 120–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.05.015 Wolters, C. A. (1998). Self-regulated learning and college students' regulation of motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(2), 224–235. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.90.2.224 Wolters, C. A. (2003). Regulation of motivation: Evaluating an underemphasized aspect of self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(4), 189–205. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3804_1