Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Think, feel, act: motivational and emotional influences on military students’ online academic success

  • Published:
Journal of Computing in Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study employed a social-cognitive view of self-regulated learning to examine how several personal factors relate to academic success in an online course. Service academy undergraduates (N = 481) completed a survey that assessed their motivational beliefs (self-efficacy and task value); negative achievement emotions (boredom and frustration); and several outcomes that included their use of self-regulated learning strategies (elaboration and metacognition), course satisfaction, and continuing motivation to enroll in future online courses. Results from several multiple regressions revealed that task value beliefs were the strongest and most consistent positive predictors of elaboration, metacognition, satisfaction, and continuing motivation; whereas self-efficacy beliefs were moderately strong positive predictors of satisfaction and continuing motivation only. On the other hand, students’ boredom and frustration were statistically significant predictors of metacognition, with boredom emerging as a negative predictor and frustration unexpectedly emerging as a positive predictor. Furthermore, both boredom and frustration were negatively related to satisfaction and continuing motivation. Taken together, results from this study provide some insight into the complex relations between students’ thoughts, feelings, and actions in an online course. Theoretical and empirical implications are discussed, as are study limitations and future directions.

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

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abrami, P. C., & Bernard, R. M. (2006). Research on distance education: In defense of field experiments. Distance Education, 24, 5–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, P., Graham, S., & Harris, K. (1998). A perspective on strategy research: Progress and prospects. Educational Psychology Review, 10, 129–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arbuckle, J. L. (2006). Amos 7.0 user’s guide. Chicago, IL: SPSS, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Artino, A. R. (2007). Online military training: Using a social cognitive view of motivation and self-regulation to understand students’ satisfaction, perceived learning, and choice. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 8, 191–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Artino, A. R. (2008). Motivational beliefs and perceptions of instructional quality: Predicting satisfaction with online training. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24, 260–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Artino, A. R., & McCoach, D. B. (2008). Development and initial validation of the online learning value and efficacy scale. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 38, 279–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Artino, A. R., & Stephens, J. M. (2006). Learning online: Motivated to self-regulation? Academic Exchange Quarterly, 10(4), 176–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Azevedo, R. (2005). Using hypermedia as a metacognitive tool for enhancing student learning? The role of self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 40, 199–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. In F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.), Adolescence and education, Vol. 4: Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (pp. 307–337). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A., & Schunk, D. H. (1981). Cultivating competence, self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest through proximal self-motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 586–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Lou, Y., Borokhovski, E., Wade, A., Wozney, L., et al. (2004). How does distance education compare with classroom instruction? A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Review of Educational Research, 74, 379–439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boekaerts, M., & Cascallar, E. (2006). How far have we moved toward the integration of theory and practice in self-regulation? Educational Psychology Review, 18, 199–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiu, C., Sun, S., Sun, P., & Ju, T. L. (2007). An empirical analysis of the antecedents of web-based learning continuance. Computers & Education, 49, 1224–1245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chyung, S. Y. (2001). Systematic and systemic approaches to reducing attrition rates in online higher education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 15(3), 36–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dabbagh, N., & Kitsantas, A. (2004). Supporting self-regulation in student-centered web-based learning environments. International Journal on E-Learning, 3(1), 40–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eccles, J., & Wigfield, A. (1995). In the mind of the actor: The structure of adolescents’ achievement task values and expectancy-related beliefs. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 215–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 109–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flavell, J. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906–911.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gable, R. K., & Wolfe, M. B. (1993). Instrument development in the affective domain: Measuring attitudes and values in corporate and school settings. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goetz, T., Pekrun, R., Hall, N., & Haag, L. (2006). Academic emotions from a social-cognitive perspective: Antecedents and domain specificity of students’ affect in the context of Latin instruction. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 289–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gunawardena, C. N., & McIsaac, M. S. (2004). Distance education. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (2nd ed., pp. 355–396). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hadwin, A. F., Nesbit, J. C., Jamieson-Noel, D., Code, J., & Winne, P. H. (2007). Examining trace data to explore self-regulated learning. Metacognition and Learning, 2, 107–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, R. J. (1997). Effects of three types of elaboration on learning concepts from text. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 22, 299–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartley, K., & Bendixen, L. D. (2001). Educational research in the Internet age: Examining the role of individual characteristics. Educational Researcher, 30(9), 22–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsu, J. T. (1997). Value, expectancy, metacognition, resourced management, and academic achievement: A structural model of self-regulated learning in a distance education context. Dissertation Abstracts International, 59(5), 1458. (UMI No. 9835152).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joo, Y., Bong, M., & Choi, H. (2000). Self-efficacy for self-regulated learning, academic self-efficacy, and Internet self-efficacy in Web-based instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(2), 5–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Judd, C. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1981). Estimating the effects of social interventions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinzie, M. B., & Sullivan, H. J. (1989). Continuing motivation, learner control, and CAI. Educational Technology Research and Development, 37(2), 5–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, J. D., Erchul, J. A., & Pridemore, D. R. (1994). Effects of individual versus cooperative learning and type of reward on performance and continuing motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19, 23–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lane, A. M., Whyte, G. P., Terry, P. C., & Nevill, A. M. (2005). Mood, self-set goals and examination performance: The moderating effect of depressed mood. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 143–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larreamendy-Joerns, J., & Leinhardt, G. (2006). Going the distance with online education. Review of Educational Research, 76, 567–605.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, C. (2002). The impact of self-efficacy and task value on satisfaction and performance in a web-based course. Dissertation Abstracts International, 63(05), 1798. (UMI No. 3054599).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Larking, K. C. (1984). Relation of self-efficacy expectations to academic achievement and persistence. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 31, 356–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2002). Achievement goal theory and affect: An asymmetrical bidirectional model. Educational Psychologist, 37, 69–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2004). Role of affect in cognitive processing in academic contexts. In D. Y. Dai & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Motivation, emotion, and cognition: Integrative perspectives on intellectual functioning and development (pp. 57–87). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, R., & Dembo, M. (2004). The relationship between self-regulation and online learning in a blended learning context. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 5(2), 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ma, X. (1999). A meta-analysis of the relationship between anxiety toward mathematics and achievement in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30, 520–540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Miltiadou, M., & Savenye, W. C. (2003). Applying social cognitive constructs of motivation to enhance student success in online distance education. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education Journal, 11(1), 78–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research, 66, 543–578.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pekrun, R. (2006). The control-value theory of achievement emotions: Assumptions, corollaries, and implications for educational research and practice. Educational Psychology Review, 18, 315–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., & Perry, R. P. (2005). Achievement emotions questionnaire (AEQ): User’s manual. Munich, Germany: University of Munich, Department of Psychology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Titz, W., & Perry, R. P. (2002). Academic emotions in students’ self-regulated learning and achievement: A program of qualitative and quantitative research. Educational Psychologist, 37, 99–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pekrun, R., Hall, N. C., & Perry, R. P. (2008). Boredom in academic settings: Control-value antecedents and performance consequences of a neglected emotion. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, NY.

  • Persons, D. (2004). Navy e-Learning migrates to Navy Knowledge Online. Retrieved April 20, 2009, from http://www.news.navy.mil/search/display.asp?story_id=15816.

  • Pintrich, P. R. (1999). The role of motivation in promoting and sustaining self-regulated learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 31, 459–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning component of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 33–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1993). Reliability and predictive validity of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 801–813.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robbins, S. B., Lauver, K., Le, H., Davis, D., Langley, R., & Carlstrom, K. (2004). Do psychosocial and study skill factors predict college outcomes? A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 261–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roca, J. C., Chiu, C., & Martinez, F. J. (2006). Understanding e-learning continuance intention: An extension of the technology acceptance model. Human-Computer Studies, 64, 683–696.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salomon, G. (1984). Television is “easy” and print is “tough”: The differential investment of mental effort in learning as a function of perceptions and attributions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 647–658.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D. H. (2005). Self-regulated learning: The educational legacy of Paul R. Pintrich. Educational Psychologist, 40, 85–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D. H., Pintrich, P. R., & Meece, J. L. (2008). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (Eds.). (2008). Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tallent-Runnels, M. K., Thomas, J. A., Lan, W. Y., Cooper, S., Ahern, T. C., Shaw, S. M., et al. (2006). Teaching courses online: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 76, 93–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thorndike, R. M. (2005). Measurement and evaluation in psychology and education (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • United States Naval Academy (2007). Class of 2011 profile [Fact sheet]. Retrieved January 18, 2008, from http://www.usna.edu/Admissions/documents/Classof2011Profile.pdf.

  • Wang, M. C., Haertel, G. D., & Walberg, H. J. (1990). What influences learning? A content analysis of review literature. Journal of Educational Research, 84, 30–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, A. Y., & Newlin, M. H. (2002). Predictors of web-student performance: The role of self-efficacy and reasons for taking an on-line class. Computers in Human Behavior, 18, 151–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whipp, J. L., & Chiarelli, S. (2004). Self-regulation in a web-based course: A case study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(4), 5–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, R. E., & Bandura, A. (1989). Social cognitive theory of organizational management. Academy of Management Review, 14, 361–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wosnitza, M., & Volet, S. (2005). Origin, direction and impact of emotions in social online learning. Learning and Instruction, 15, 449–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zembylas, M., Theodorou, M., & Pavlakis, A. (2008). The role of emotions in the experience of online learning: Challenges and opportunities. Educational Media International, 45, 107–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, Y., Lei, J., Yan, B., Lai, C., & Tan, H. S. (2005). What makes the difference? A practical analysis of research on the effectiveness of distance education. Teachers College Record, 107, 1836–1884.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. J. (2000a). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). San Diego, CA: Academic.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. J. (2000b). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 82–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. J. (2008a). Goal setting: A key proactive source of academic self-regulation. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 267–296). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. J. (2008b). Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historical background, methodological developments, and future prospects. American Educational Research Journal, 45, 166–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student differences in self-regulated learning: Relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 51–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. J., & Tsikalas, K. E. (2005). Can computer-based learning environments (CBLEs) be used as self-regulatory tools to enhance learning? Educational Psychologist, 40, 267–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zusho, A., Pintrich, P. R., & Coppola, B. (2003). Skill and will: The role of motivation and cognition in the learning of college chemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 1081–1094.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. US Navy, Department of Preventive Medicine & Biometrics, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, 4301 Jones Bridge Road, Bethesda, MD, 20814-4712, USA

    Anthony R. Artino

Authors
  1. Anthony R. Artino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anthony R. Artino.

Additional information

An earlier version of this manuscript was presented at the 2008 annual meeting of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology in Orlando, FL and was published in the conference proceedings.

The author is a military service member. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Navy, Department of Defense, nor the US Government.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Artino, A.R. Think, feel, act: motivational and emotional influences on military students’ online academic success. J Comput High Educ 21, 146–166 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-009-9020-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-009-9020-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation