To Flourish, Arm or Fade Away? Proactive, Defensive and Depressive Patterns of Self-Regulated Learning

  • Darko Lončarić


Numerous empirical findings relevant for self-regulation research can be related to functional self-regulation patterns (proactive and defensive) and a dysfunctional pattern (depressive absence of self-regulation efforts). The first two patterns are in accordance with numerous empirical findings coming from the fields of cognitive, social and educational psychology, including concepts such as promotion vs. prevention focus and mastery or learning mode vs. coping or well-being mode. These patterns can be supplemented with a depressive pattern indicating self-defeating cognitions and strategies, absence of motivation and self-regulatory efforts. The empirical part of this study is focused on self-regulated learning and relationships between cognitive beliefs, motivational beliefs and self-regulation strategies. Croatian upper elementary students (N  =  460; age 11–14 years) participated in this investigation. Self-reports were gathered by self-regulated learning components scale. The factor analysis of self-regulation components supported the theoretical distinction between the proactive and defensive self-regulation patterns. The results were interpreted in the context of previous research findings. Further research needs to address the question of specific self-regulation failures (the depressive pattern) in samples that include larger proportion of poorly adapted and under-achieving students.


Outcome Expectation Motivational Strategy Prevention Focus Motivational Belief Promotion Focus 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 261–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Au, R. C. P., Watkins, D., Hattie, J., & Alexander, P. (2009). Reformulating the depression model of learned hopelessness for academic outcomes. Educational Research Review, 4, 103–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. The American Psychologist, 37, 122–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  5. Baumeister, R. F., Vohs, K. D., & Tice, D. M. (2007). The strength model of self-control. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16, 396–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boekaerts, M. (1991). Subjective competence, appraisals and self-assessment. Learning and Instruction, 1(1), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boekaerts, M. (1992). The adaptable learning process: Initiating and maintaining behavioural change. Journal of Applied Psychology: An International Review, 41, 377–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boekaerts, M. (1993). Being concerned with well-being and with learning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 149–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Boekaerts, M. (1996). Coping with stress in childhood and adolescence. In M. Zeidner & N. S. Endler (Eds.), Handbook of coping: Theories, research, applications (pp. 452–484). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  10. Boekaerts, M., Pintrich, P. R., & Zeidner, M. (2005). Self-regulation: An introductory overview. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 1–9). San Diego, CA: Academic.Google Scholar
  11. Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (2003). Three human strengths. In L. G. Aspinwall & U. M. Staudinger (Eds.), A psychology of human strengths: Fundamental questions and future directions for a positive psychology (pp. 87–102). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Clonan, S. M., Chafouleas, S. M., McDougal, J. L., & Riley-Tillman, T. C. (2003). Positive psychology goes to school: Are we there yet? Psychology in the Schools, 41, 101–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Crowe, E., & Higgins, E. T. (1997). Regulatory focus and strategic inclinations: Promotion and prevention in decision-making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 69, 117–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Diener, C. I., & Dweck, C. S. (1978). An analysis of learned helplessness: Continuous changes in performance, strategy and achievement cognitions following failure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 451–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dishion, T. J., & Connell, A. (2006). Adolescents’ resilience as a self-regulatory process: Promising themes for linking intervention with developmental science. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1094, 125–138.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dweck, C. S. (2000). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Philadelphia: Psychology press.Google Scholar
  17. Eigsti, I.-M., Zayas, V., Mischel, V., Shoda, Y., Ayduk, O., Dadlani, M. B., et al. (2006). Predicting cognitive control from preschool to late adolescence and young adulthood. Psychological Science, 17, 478–484.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fung, H. L., Rice, C., & Carstensen, L. L. (2005). Reactive and proactive motivational changes across adulthood. In W. Greve, K. Rothermund, & D. Wentura (Eds.), The adaptive self: Personal continuity and intentional self-development (pp. 171–184). New York: Hogrefe/Huber Publisher.Google Scholar
  19. Garcia, T., & Pintrich, P. R. (1994). Regulating motivation and cognition in the classroom: The role of self-schemas and self-regulatory strategies. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-regulation of learning and performance: Issues and educational applications (pp. 127–153). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  20. Greenglass, E. R. (2002). Proactive coping. In E. Frydenberg (Ed.), Beyond coping: Meeting goals, vision, and challenges (pp. 37–62). London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. The American Psychologist, 52, 1280–1300.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Higgins, E. T., & Spiegel, S. (2004). Promotion and prevention strategies for self-regulation: A motivated cognition perspective. In R. F. Baumeister & K. D. Vohs (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation: Research, theory and applications (pp. 171–187). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  23. Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  24. Lončarić, D. (2008). Kognitivni in motivacijski dejavniki procesov samoregulacije pri ucenju in soocanju s solskim neuspehom [Cognitive and motivational factors in self-regulation of learning and coping with school failure]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Department of Psychology, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia.Google Scholar
  25. Marton, F., & Saljo, R. (1976a). On qualitative differences in learning: I. Outcome and process. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 4–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Marton, F., & Saljo, R. (1976b). On qualitative differences in learning: II. Outcome as a function of the learner’s conception of the task. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 115–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Netzel, D. M., & Eber, L. (2003). Shifting from reactive to proactive discipline in an urban school district: A change of focus through PBIS implementation. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 5, 71–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Niemivirta, M. (1996). Motivational-cognitive components in self-regulated learning. Paper presented in 5th Workshop on Achievement and Task Motivation, 26–29 March, Landau.Google Scholar
  29. Nota, L., Soresi, S., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2004). Self-regulation and academic achievement and resilience: A longitudinal study. International Journal of Educational Research, 41, 198–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pintrich, P. R. (1988). A process-oriented view of student and motivation. In J. Stark & L. Mets (Eds.), Improving teaching and learning through research: New Directions for institutional research (Vol. 57, pp. 65–79). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  31. Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 33–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (2002). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Merrill.Google Scholar
  33. Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). A manual for the use of the Motivational Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) (Tech. Rep. No. 91-B-004). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, School of Education.Google Scholar
  34. Skinner, E. A., Chapman, M., & Baltes, P. B. (1988). Control, means-ends, and agency beliefs: A new conceptualization and its measurement during childhood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 117–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Tait, H., Entwistle, N. J., & McCune, V. (1998). ASSIST: A reconceptualisation of the approaches to studying inventory. In C. Rust (Ed.), Improving students as learners (pp. 112–141). Oxford: Oxford Brookes University, The Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development.Google Scholar
  36. Weinstein, C. E., Zimmerman, S. A., & Palmer, D. R. (1988). Assessing learning strategies: The design and development of the LASSI. In C. E. Weinstein, P. A. Alexander, & E. T. Goetz (Eds.), Learning and study strategies: Issues in assessment, instruction, and evaluation (pp. 25–40). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  37. Wild, K. P., & Schiefele, U. (1994). Lernstrategien im studium: ergebnisse zur faktorenstruktur und reliabilität eines neuen fragebogens, [Learning strategies at the university level: Testing the factor structure and reliability of a new questionnaire]. Zeitschrift für Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie, 15, 185–200.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Teacher EducationUniversity of RijekaRijekaCroatia

Personalised recommendations