Abstract
The relations between students’ value orientations, decisions in conflicts between on-task and off-task actions in the classroom, and experiences of motivational interference following these conflicts were investigated. It was expected that well-being value orientation was positively linked and achievement value orientation was negatively linked to decision for off-task behavior in such conflicts and that the higher students’ well-being value orientation, the higher their motivational impairment when deciding for the on-task behavior and the lower when deciding for the off-task behavior. For achievement orientation, the relationships were predicted to be reversed. The experience of motivational interference while performing on-task behavior was, in turn, expected to be related to worse grades. Data from 817 students (mean age 13.44) from 35 classrooms were collected using self-report questionnaires and analyzed in a series of hierarchical linear models. Analyses showed the relationships as predicted. All relationships found were comparable to the relationships found for a conflict between school and leisure actions after class. Results point out that even if students resist the off-task temptation in class, the mere possibility of off-task behavior can impair motivation and achievement.
Résumé
Dans le présent ouvrage, les décisions des élèves en cas de conflits entre un comportement attentif et inattentif en classe ont été analysées en même temps que leurs sentiments durant cette interférence motivationnelle. L’hypothèse de travail était que l’orientation vers les valeurs de bien-être avait une corrélation positive tandis que celle vers les valeurs de réussite scolaire corrélait négativement avec la décision pour l’inattention en classe et que, avec une plus grande orientation vers le bien-être, l’élève se trouvait moins motivé dans la décision pour la réussite scolaire et plus motivé, s’il optait pour l’inattention et vice versa en cas d’orientation inverse. Il était supposé que cette interférence motivationnelle correspondait à des résultats scolaires inférieurs. Les données de 817 élèves (moyenne d’âge 13.44) dans 35 classes ont été collectionnées à l’aide d’un questionnaire d’autoévaluation et analysées en utilisant des modèles hiérarchiques linéaires. Ces analyses confirment les relations comme prévues. Toutes les relations étaient comparables aux relations de conflits entre le travail pour l’école et les activités de loisirs d’après-midi. Les résultats montrent que même si l’élève résiste à la tentation de l’inattention en classe, la seule possibilité du comportement inattentif peut gêner la motivation et la réussite scolaire.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
In order to highlight the parallels between the two conflicts and for easier reading, the decision to study for an exam in a conflict between studying for an exam and meeting friends after school, as well as the decision to follow the lesson in a conflict between following the lesson and reading a note from a friend in the classroom, is referred to as the decision for the learning alternative. Likewise, the decision to meet the friends in the after-school conflict, as well as the decision to read the note in the classroom conflict, is referred to as the decision for the leisure alternative.
References
Atkinson, J. W., & Birch, D. A. (1970). The dynamics of action. New York: Wiley.
Austin, J. L., & Soeda, J. M. (2008). Fixed-time teacher attention to decrease off-task behaviors of typically developing third graders. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 41, 279–283.
Baumeister, R. Y., & Heatherton, T. F. (1996). Self-regulation failure: An overview. Psychological Inquiry, 7, 1–15.
Bem, D. J. (1972). Self-perception theory. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 6, pp. 1–62). New York: Academic.
Bembenutty, H., & Karabenick, S. A. (2004). Inherent association between academic delay of gratification, future time perspective, and self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review, 16, 35–57.
Boekaerts, M. (2003). Adolescence in Dutch culture: A self-regulation perspective. In F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.), Adolescence and education, Volume III: International perspectives on adolescence and education (pp. 99–122). Greenwich: Information Age.
Boekaerts, M., de Koning, E., & Vedder, P. (2006). Goal-directed behavior and contextual factors in the classroom: An innovative approach to the study of multiple goals. Educational Psychologist, 41, 33–51.
Brophy, J. (1999). Toward a model of the value aspects of motivation in education: Developing appreciation for particular learning domains and activities. Educational Psychologist, 34, 75–85.
Bru, E. (2006). Factors associated with disruptive behavior in the classroom. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 50, 23–43.
Clare, S. K., Jenson, W. R., Kehle, T. J., & Bray, M. A. (2000). Self-modeling as a treatment for increasing on-task behavior. Psychology in the Schools, 37, 517–522.
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155–159.
Dietz, F., Hofer, M., & Fries, S. (2007). Individual values, learning routines and academic procrastination. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 893–906.
Denissen, J. J. A., Zarrett, N. R., & Eccles, J. S. (2007). I like to do it, I’m able, and I know I am: Longitudinal couplings between domain-specific achievement, self-concept, and interest. Child Development, 78, 430–447.
Derous, E., & Ryan, A. M. (2008). When earning is beneficial for learning: The relation of employment and leisure activities to academic outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73, 118–131.
Doyle, W. (2006). Ecological approaches to classroom management. In C. M. Evertson & C. S. Weinstein (Eds.), Handbook of classroom management: Research, practice, and contemporary issues (pp. 97–125). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
Emmer, E. T., & Stough, L. M. (2001). Classroom management: A critical part of educational psychology, with implications for teacher education. Educational Psychologist, 36, 103–112.
Feather, N. T. (1988). Values, valences, and course enrolment: Testing the role of personal values within an expectancy–valence framework. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 381–391.
Fries, S., & Dietz, F. (2007). Learning with temptations present: The case of motivational interference. Journal of Experimental Education, 76, 93–112.
Fries, S., Schmid, S., Dietz, F., & Hofer, M. (2005). Conflicting values and their impact on learning. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 20, 259–274.
Fries, S., Schmid, S., & Hofer, M. (2007). On the relationship between value orientation, valences, and academic achievement. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 22, 201–216.
Fries, S., Dietz, F., & Schmid, S. (2008). Motivational interference in learning: The impact of leisure alternatives on subsequent self-regulation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 119–133.
Gollwitzer, P. M. (1990). Action-phases and mind-sets. In E. T. Higgins & R. M. Sorrentino (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior (Vol. 2, pp. 53–92). New York: Guilford.
Hastings, R. P., & Bham, M. S. (2003). The relationship between student behavior patterns and teacher burnout. School Psychology International, 24, 115–127.
Helmke, A. (1986). Student attention during instruction and achievement. In S. E. Newstead, S. H. Irvine, & P. L. Dann (Eds.), Human assessment: Cognition and motivation (pp. 273–286). Dordrecht: Nijhoff.
Hijzen, D., Boekaerts, M., & Vedder, P. (2006). The relationship between the quality of cooperative learning, students’ goal preferences, and perceptions of contextual factors in the classroom. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 47, 9–21.
Hofer, M. (2007). Goal conflicts and self-regulation: A new look at pupils’ off-task behavior in the classroom. Educational Research Review, 2, 28–38.
Hofer, M., Schmid, S., Fries, S., Dietz, F., Clausen, M., & Reinders, H. (2007). Individual values, motivational conflicts, and learning for school. Learning and Instruction, 17, 17–28.
Hofer, M., Schmid, S., & Zivkovic, I. (2008). Schule-Freizeit-Konflikte, Wertorientierungen und motivationale Interferenz in der Freizeit. Eine kulturübergreifende Studie. [School–leisure conflicts, value orientations, and interference of motivation during leisure time. A cross-cultural study]. Zeitschrift für Entwicklungspsychologie und Pädagogische Psychologie, 40, 55–68.
Inglehart, R. (1997). Modernization and postmodernization: Cultural, economic and political change in 43 societies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Lens, W., Lacante, M., Vansteenkiste, M., & Herrera, D. (2005). Study persistence and academic achievement as a function of the type of competing tendencies. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 3, 275–287.
Lewin, K. (1935). A dynamic theory of personality. New York: McCraw Hill.
Meloth, M. S., & Deering, P. D. (1992). Effects of two cooperative conditions on peer-group discussions, reading comprehension, and metacognition. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 17, 175–193.
Nafpaktitis, M., Mayer, G. R., & Butterworth, T. (1985). Natural rates of teacher approval and disapproval and their relation to student behavior in intermediate school classrooms. Journal of Educational Psychology, 3, 362–367.
Randolph, J. J. (2007). Meta-analysis of the research on response cards: Effects on test achievement, quiz achievement, participation and off-task behaviour. Journal of Positive Behaviour Interventions, 9, 113–128.
Ratelle, C. F., Vallerand, R. J., Senécal, C., & Provencher, P. (2005). The relationship between school–leisure conflict and educational and mental health indexes: A motivational analysis. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 35, 1800–1823.
Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Salili, F. (1996). Learning and motivation. An Asian perspective. Psychology and Developing Societies, 8, 55–81.
Sansone, C., Weir, C., Harpster, L., & Morgan, C. (1992). Once a boring task always a boring task? Interest as a self-regulatory mechanism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 379–390.
Schmid, S., Hofer, M., Dietz, F., Reinders, H., & Fries, S. (2005). Value orientations and action conflicts in students’ everyday life: An interview study. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 20, 243–257.
Schmid, S., Fries, S., Hofer, M., Dietz, F., Reinders, H., & Clausen, M. (2007). The theory of motivational action conflicts–Empirical studies and practical consequences. In M. Prenzel (Ed.), Studies on the educational quality of schools. The final report on the DFG Priority Programme (pp. 317–331). Münster: Waxmann.
Thuen, E., & Bru, E. (2000). Learning environment, meaningfulness of schoolwork and on-task-orientation among Norwegian 9th grade students. School Psychology International, 21, 393–413.
Verplanken, B., & Holland, R. B. (2002). Motivated decision making: Effects of activation and self-centrality of values on choices and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 434–447.
Wentzel, K. R. (1989). Adolescent classroom goals, standards for performance, and academic achievement: An interactionist perspective. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 131–142.
Acknowledgments
The study presented in this paper was supported by the research grant HO 649/19-1 by the German Research Foundation.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Britta Kilian. Department of Educational Psychology, University of Mannheim, 68131 Mannheim, Germany. E-mail: bkilian@rumms.uni-mannheim.de; Web site: http://motint.uni-mannheim.de/startseite/index.html
Current themes of research:
Value orientation and motivation to learn. Action conflicts in the field of learning.
Most relevant publications in the field of Psychology of Education:
Hofer, M., Fries, S., Helmke, A., Kilian, B., Kuhnle, C., Zivkovic, I., Goellner, R., & Helmke, T. (2010). Value orientation and motivational interference in school–leisure conflicts: The case of Vietnam. Learning and Instruction. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.02.023.
Hofer, M., Möhle, T., Kuhnle, C., Kilian, B., & Schmid, S. (2008). Schule–Freizeit-Konflikte, Wertorientierungen, motivationale Interferenz und Leistungen bei Grundschülern. [School–leisure conflicts, value orientations, motivational interference, and achievement in elementary school students.] Unterrichtswissenschaft, 36 (3), 197–215.
Manfred Hofer. Department of Educational Psychology, University of Mannheim, 68131 Mannheim, Germany. E-mail: manfred.hofer@sowi.uni-mannheim.de; Web site: http://motint.uni-mannheim.de/startseite/index.html
Current themes of research:
Value orientation and motivation to learn. Adolescent development. Service learning. Parent–child interaction.
Most relevant publications in the field of Psychology of Education:
Hofer, M., Sassenberg, K., & Pikowsky, B. (1999). Discourse asymmetries in adolescent daughters’ disputes with mothers. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 22, 1001–1022.
Hofer, M., Schmid, S., Fries, S., Clausen, M., & Reinders, H. (2007). Individual values, motivational conflicts, and learning for school. Learning and Instruction, 17, 17–28.
Hofer, M., Schmid, S., Fries, S., Zivkovic, I., & Dietz, F. (2009). Value orientations and studying in school–leisure conflict: A study with samples from five countries. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 101–112.
Stefan Fries. Bielefeld University, Department of Psychology, Postfach 10 01 31, 33501 Bielefeld, Germany. E-mail: stefan.fries@uni-bielefeld.de; Web site: http://www.uni-bielefeld.de/psychologie/ae/AE12/index.html
Current themes of research:
Motivational interference and learning. Academic procrastination. Expectancy effects in media-based learning. Personal goals and goal conflicts.
Most relevant publications in the field of Psychology of Education:
Fries, S., Dietz, F., & Schmid, S. (2008). Motivational interference in learning: The impact of leisure alternatives on subsequent self-regulation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(2), 119–133.
Fries, S. & Dietz, F. (2007). Learning with temptations present: The case of motivational interference. Journal of Experimental Education, 76, 93−112.
Fries, S., Schmid, S., & Hofer, M. (2007). On the relationship between value orientation, valences, and academic achievement. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 22, 201−216.
Fries, S. Horz, H., & Haimerl, C. (2006). Pygmalion in media-based learning: Effects of quality expectancies on learning outcome. Learning and Instruction, 16, 339–349.
Fries, S., Schmid, S., Dietz, F., & Hofer, M. (2005). Conflicting values and their impact on learning. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 20, 259–274.
Claudia Kuhnle. Department of Educational Psychology, University of Mannheim, 68131 Mannheim, Germany. E-mail: ckuhnle@rumms.uni-mannheim.de; Web site: http://motint.uni-mannheim.de/startseite/index.html
Current themes of research:
Value orientation and motivation to learn. Action conflicts in the field of learning. Intuition.
Most relevant publications in the field of Psychology of Education:
Hofer, M., Fries, S., Helmke, A., Kilian, B., Kuhnle, C., Zivkovic, I., Goellner, R., & Helmke, T. (2010). Value orientation and motivational interference in school–leisure conflicts: The case of Vietnam. Learning and Instruction. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.02.023.
Hofer, M., Möhle, T., Kuhnle, C., Kilian, B., & Schmid, S. (2008). Schule–Freizeit-Konflikte, Wertorientierungen, motivationale Interferenz und Leistungen bei Grundschülern. [School–leisure conflicts, value orientations, motivational interference, and achievement in elementary school students.] Unterrichtswissenschaft, 36 (3), 197–215.
Appendix: questionnaire items (translated from German)
Appendix: questionnaire items (translated from German)
Well-being value orientation
For student P. N., it is mainly important to have fun in life and to experience a lot.
For student K. S., her/his favorite way of spending time is to be with her/his friends. They are very important to her/him.
Student S. W. loves variety and spontaneous activities.
According to student D. U., life should only consist of free time.
Achievement value orientation
For student T. A., it is mainly important to achieve something in life.
Student N. O. has clear goals that she/he consequently tries to reach.
Student S. N. struggles even through uncomfortable tasks, if her/his goal is important to her/him.
Experience of motivational interference learning (studying)
I’ll feel edgy, because there are so many nicer things in life than studying for the test.
I’ll get into a bad mood easily because I sit at my desk while the others have fun.
I’ll have the feeling that I’m missing out on something important.
Now and then I’ll interrupt studying to do something else in between.
I’ll study until everything is done, even if it takes a lot of effort. [reversed]
I’ll give up early if I don’t understand immediately how to do it.
It’ll be very hard for me to keep on studying until the end.
I’ll study superficially to be done sooner.
I’ll study really thoroughly. [reversed]
I’ll try to do everything as good as possible. [reversed]
I’ll soon be completely absorbed in studying so that I won’t think about anything else. [reversed]
While studying, I’ll be easily distracted.
I won’t be able to concentrate properly, because I’ll always have to think about what the others are doing.
Experience of motivational interference leisure (meeting friends)
I’ll have a guilty conscience.
I’ll be glad that I don’t have to struggle with studying. [reversed]
I’ll feel edgy, because I am not done with studying yet.
I’ll have the feeling that I’m missing out on something.
I won’t think about the upcoming test as soon as we are together. [reversed]
Nothing will be able to distract me from my friends. [reversed]
I won’t be able to stop thinking about the fact that I should be studying for the test.
Experience of motivational interference learning (following the lesson)
I’ll feel edgy, because there are so many nicer things in life than following the lesson.
I’ll get into a bad mood easily because I have to pay attention to what the teacher says instead of reading the note.
I’ll have the feeling that I’m missing out on something important.
I’ll do something else in between instead of following the lesson.
I’ll follow the lesson properly, even if it takes a lot of effort. [reversed]
I’ll give up early if I don’t understand immediately what the lesson is about.
It’ll be very hard for me to wait for the end of the lesson.
I’ll hope that the class will be over soon.
I’ll concentrate really thoroughly on what the teacher says. [reversed]
I’ll try to listen as good as possible. [reversed]
I’ll soon be completely absorbed in the lesson so that I won’t think about anything else. [reversed]
While following the lesson, I’ll be easily distracted.
I won’t be able to concentrate properly because I’ll always have to think about what the note might say.
Experience of motivational interference leisure (reading note)
I’ll have a guilty conscience.
I’ll be glad that I don’t have to struggle with the lesson. [reversed]
I’ll feel edgy because I’m missing the lesson.
I’ll have the feeling that I’m missing out on something.
Nothing will be able to distract me from the note. [reversed]
I won’t be able to stop thinking about the fact that I should be listening to the teacher.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kilian, B., Hofer, M., Fries, S. et al. The conflict between on-task and off-task actions in the classroom and its consequences for motivation and achievement. Eur J Psychol Educ 25, 67–85 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-009-0007-8
Received:
Revised:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-009-0007-8