Part II Commentary: Motivation and Engagement: Conceptual, Operational, and Empirical Clarity

By Andrew J. Martin. 2012

129 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Safety Research, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5a1682e12d28c8f21304d17c1a286a411bc34b1d

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

1. Paul Ginns
2. Brad A Papworth
3. J. Bobis
4. Rebecca J. Collie
5. Andrew J. Martin
6. Judy Anderson
7. J. Way
8. Lars-Erik Malmberg

In Safety Research

1. Paul Ginns
2. Brad A Papworth
3. Rebecca J. Collie
4. Jenefer Philp
5. Susan Duchesne
6. Judy Anderson
7. J. Way
8. J. Bobis

In Social Psychology

1. Paul Ginns
2. Brad A Papworth
3. Rebecca J. Collie
4. Judy Anderson
5. J. Way
6. J. Bobis
7. Lars-Erik Malmberg
8. Andrew J. Martin

Citations in the corpus

• Real-time motivation and engagement during a month at school: Every moment of every day for every student matters (2015, methodology): “…MES-HS is an 11-factor instrument that assesses motivation in terms of adaptive motivation, adaptive engagement, maladaptive motivation, and maladaptive engagement (for reliability and validity, see Green, Martin, & Marsh, 2007; Liem & Martin, 2012; Plenty & Heubeck, 2011, 2013; Nagabhushan, 2013).”
• Teacher Support and Engagement in Math and Science: Evidence from the High School Longitudinal Study (2016, background): “It is certainly the case that research tends to focus on one construct or the other, and rarely both. as an antecedent, but also, exposure to engaging contexts and tasks may influence motivation in a reciprocal fashion (Martin, 2012).”
• Exploring the Ups and Downs of Mathematics Engagement in the Middle Years of School (2015, background): “…in mind, the first set of engagement factors derives from a recent multidimensional motivation and engagement framework (Bobis et al., 2011; Liem & Martin, 2012; Martin, 2007, 2009) that suggests a number of cognitive and behavioral factors in the form of adaptive engagement (planning, task…”
• Exploring Engagement in Tasks in the Language Classroom (2016, background): “Indeed, it is described by some as the visible manifestation or “descriptor” of motivation (Ainley, 2012; Cleary & Zimmerman, 2012; Martin, 2012; Reeve, 2012; Schunk & Miller, 2002) and by others as the precursor of motivation (Pekrun & Linnenbrink-Garcia, 2012).”
• Using expectancy-value theory to explore aspects of motivation and engagement in inquiry-based learning in primary mathematics (2017, unknown): “Because motivation underpins engagement (Martin 2012), it is important to study motivation to identify these influences.”
• Robotics to promote elementary education pre-service teachers' STEM engagement, learning, and teaching (2015, methodology): “As motivation is the basis of engagement (Martin, 2012), thus, robotics can be used a a tool to engage teachers in integrative learning and teaching of STEM.”
• School alienation – Theoretical approaches and educational research (2018, background): “However, as Martin (2013) argues, it remains unclear whether disengagement is primarily the opposite of engagement or, instead, a separate concept.”
• New Conceptual Frameworks for Student Engagement Research, Policy, and Practice (2013, background): “The third is that engagement is theoretically distinct from students’ motivations (Finn & Zimmer, 2012; Martin, 2012).”
• Motivation and engagement: Same or different? Does it matter? (2017, background): “Inappropriately or erroneously conflating (or differentiating) motivation and engagement can perpetuate theoretical ambiguity, raise validity challenges for measurement and research, and lay an inadequate foundation for educational intervention (Martin, 2012; Reschly &Christenson, 2012).”