|
COPYRIGHT 2008 University of South Alabama
Resent research documented poor student participation in sports and physical activity at the college level, leading to health problems such as cardiovascular disease and diabetes among college students (Centers of Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 1997; Dinger & Waigandt, 1997; Douglas et al., 1997; Patrick, Covin, Fulop, Callas, & Lovato, 1997; Wiley et al., 1996). Therefore, determining ways to encourage and motivate college students to be more physically active through physical activity programs becomes an important concern. As a major construct for motivation, expectancy beliefs represent the key idea that most individuals will not choose to do a task or continue to engage in a task when they expect to fail. However, this influence of expectancy beliefs is only observed when adequate incentives (e.g., importance, interest) for behaviors are presented (Bandura, 1986; Pintrinch & Schunk, 1996). Accordingly, when investigating students' motivational processes in sports and physical activity, it is important to include both expectancy beliefs and their related incentives.
Currently, there are a variety of motivational theories that include some type of expectancy beliefs and their corresponding incentives. Among them, expectancy-value model and self-efficacy theory have been applied to explain how motivation influences achievement behaviors (e.g., choice, persistence, and performance) in sport and educational contexts (Bandura, 1986, 1997; Eccles et al., 1983). What these two theoretical perspectives have in common are beliefs about one's perceived capability and incentives to participate in certain activities. They have shown promise in explaining students' motivation and achievement. These two perspectives, however, have been examined separately in past work in sport and physical education. Eccles and Wigfield (2002) suggested that there is a need for theoretical combination in the field, particularly with respect to theories that incorporate expectancy beliefs and their related incentive constructs. Therefore, these two theories were combined in the present study in the context of a college beginning weight training class.
Expectancy-value Model of Achievement Choice
The expectancy-value model of achievement choice has been proposed by Eccles and Wigfield and their colleagues (Eccles et al., 1983; Wigfield & Eccles, 1992, 1994; Wigfield, Eccles, & Rodriguez, 1998). According to this model, students' achievement performance, the amount of effort exerted, persistence, and choice of achievement tasks are influenced by their expectancy-related beliefs and task values they attach to achievement tasks (Eccles et al., 1983).
Eccles and her colleagues (Eccles et al., 1983; Eccles & Wigfield, 1995) proposed that expectancy-related beliefs consist of both ability beliefs and expectancies for success. Ability beliefs are defined as individuals' evaluations of their competence in different achievement tasks. Expectancies for success refer to individuals' beliefs about how well they will do on an upcoming task and are closely related to their ability beliefs. Research focusing on students' expectancy-related beliefs about different tasks in sport and physical education demonstrates that this construct plays a crucial role in students' motivation and influences their achievement behaviors such as effort/persistence and performance (Cox & Whaley, 2004; Xiang, Chen, & Bruene, 2005; Xiang, McBride, & Bruene, 2004a; Xiang, McBride, & Bruene, 2006).
In the Eccles et al. model (1983), task values are defined as incentives for engaging in different activities. Attainment value (importance), intrinsic value (interest), and utility value (usefulness) comprise important aspects of task values. Importance concerns the personal importance of doing well on the task in terms of salient aspects of one's self-schema and core personal values (e.g., achievement needs and competence needs). Interest refers to the enjoyment an individual gets from performing the task or the subjective interest the individual has for the task. Some researchers consider this component similar to the construct of personal interest (Pintrinch, Ryan, & Patrick, 1998). Usefulness refers to how a task fits into an individual's current or future goals. In sport and physical education, task values might be a critical dimension affecting positive motivational behaviors. For example, Cox and Whaley (2004) reported that high school student athletes' interest and usefulness were positive indicators of their effort/persistence in basketball. Xiang and her associates (Xiang et al., 2004a; Xiang, Mcbride, & Guan, 2004b; Xiang, Mcbride, Guan, & Solmon, 2003) found that students' intention for future participation in physical education or running was positively predicted by their task values for physical education or running.
Within the expectancy-value model of achievement choice, expectancy-related beliefs and task values are assumed to be positively related to each other (Eccles et al., 1983; Eccles, Wigfield, & Shiefele, 1998). That is, individuals tend to attach more value to activities in which they do well and believe they are competent. Recent empirical research in physical education concerning the relationship between these two constructs support this postulation (Xiang et al., 2003, 2004b). When further investigating how the different components of task values are related to expectancy-related beliefs, researchers have found that the more intrinsic aspects of task values (interest and importance) relate more closely to individuals' expectancy-related beliefs in sport and physical education (Cox & Whaley, 2004; Xiang et al., 2005, 2006).
Similar to the predictive utility of these two constructs in academic domains (Eccles et al., 1983; Schunk, 1991; Stipek & Mac Iver, 1989), empirical studies indicate that individuals' expectancy-related beliefs predict their achievement performance and the amount of effort exerted, whereas task values predict both individuals' actual and anticipated task choice, and engagement in sport activities and physical education (Eccles & Harold, 1991; Cox & Whaley, 2004; Xiang et al., 2004a, 2005, 2006). For example, students' expectancy-related beliefs made significant contribution to the prediction of their one-mile running performance, while interest and importance were predictors for intention to future participate in running (Xiang et al., [2004.sup.a], 2005, 2006)
Self-efficacy Theory
Self-efficacy theory comes from social cognitive theory and includes self-efficacy and outcome expectancy as major constructs (Bandura, 1986, 1997). Bandura and other researchers have applied this theory to a variety of domains, including mental health, health behavior, athletic performance, career choices, and academic achievement. This theory proposes that an individual's achievement behavior can be explained and predicted by self-efficacy and outcome expectancy.
As a specific form of expectancy beliefs, self-efficacy refers to beliefs about one's capabilities to learn or perform behaviors at designated levels (Bandura, 1986, 1997). Generally, individuals who feel efficacious are more likely to perform better, try new behaviors, expend more effort on those behaviors, and persevere longer when they encounter challenges. To date, many studies have suggested that self-efficacy is a major determinant of activity choice, willingness to expend effort, performance and persistence in sport and physical activity (Feltz, 1984, 1988, 1992, 2005; Feltz & Mugno, 1983; McAuley, 1985, 1992; Moritz, Feltz, Fahrbach, & Mack, 2000). In particular, higher self-efficacy would lead to greater persistence and better performance than lower self-efficacy.
Outcome expectancy, defined as incentives in self-efficacy theory, refers to a person's beliefs concerning the likely outcomes of a behavior (Bandura, 1997; Rodgers & Brawley, 1991). As the importance of an outcome and the degree of its influence may have a great deal of variability among individuals, it is crucial not to presume that outcomes could always act as incentives for motivated behavior (Maddux, 1995; Poag-DuCharme, 1993; Rodgers & Brawley, 1991, 1996). As a result, Maddux and his colleagues (1986) modified self-efficacy theory by adding outcome values as a component of the theory. Rodgers and Brawley (1991) further proposed that outcome expectancy is formed by the interaction...
Read the full article for free courtesy of your local library.
|
Bookmark this article
Print this article
Link to this article
Email this article
Digg It!
Add to del.icio.us
RSS
