Motivation and Engagement Across the Academic Life Span

By Andrew J. Martin. 2009

306 citations recorded by the source corpus.

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

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/60e7e6ced264cd61d47c463970424fad8def8ee2

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. Andrew J. Martin
2. Alexandre J. S. Morin
3. Herbert W. Marsh
4. Paul Ginns
5. Brad A Papworth
6. Benjamin Nagengast
7. G. Liem
8. Rebecca J. Collie

In Safety Research

1. G. Liem
2. Andrew J. Martin
3. Paul Ginns
4. Brad A Papworth
5. Herbert W. Marsh
6. S. Colmar
7. Jennifer Fredricks
8. Alexandre J. S. Morin

In Social Psychology

1. Andrew J. Martin
2. Herbert W. Marsh
3. Alexandre J. S. Morin
4. Paul Ginns
5. Brad A Papworth
6. G. Liem
7. Rebecca J. Collie
8. S. Colmar

Citations in the corpus

• Adaptability: How students’ responses to uncertainty and novelty predict their academic and non-academic outcomes. (2013, background): “Means and standard deviations are consistent with prior research (Martin, 2009; Martin & Marsh, 2008).”
• Academic buoyancy and academic resilience: Exploring ‘everyday’ and ‘classic’ resilience in the face of academic adversity (2013, background): “These are referred to as ‘maladaptive’ motivation and engagement factors (Martin, 2007, 2009).”
• Profiles of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations in Elementary School: A Longitudinal Analysis (2014, result): “This stands in contrast with the relatively anonymous high school environment where students cycle through a half-dozen classrooms each day and academic disengagement is commonplace (Martin, 2009; Otis et al., 2005; Willms, 2003).”
• Young people’s academic buoyancy and adaptability: a cross-cultural comparison of China with North America and the United Kingdom (2017, methodology): “Similarly, the motivation and engagement constructs in our study have been examined within school subjects (e.g. Green et al., 2007) and also in school generally (e.g. Martin, 2007, 2009).”
• Motivation and engagement: Same or different? Does it matter? (2017, methodology): “Accordingly, students holding high taskrelated expectations (or, self-efficacy) and who also value the task are more motivated to carry out that task and achieve at a higher level (Martin, 2007, 2009; Wigfield & Eccles, 2000).”
• Student Engagement and Marketing Classes (2011, background): “Consequently, marketing educators interested in positively affecting student engagement should consider targeting the identified underlying goal hierarchy because of its relationship to student engagement behaviors and underlying motivations (Hofer et al., 2010; Job & Brandstatter, 2009; Martin, 200”
• Motivation-Achievement Cycles in Learning: a Literature Review and Research Agenda (2021, background): “In most countries, motivation for school clearly declines throughout school time (Martin, 2009; OECD, 2016; Scherrer & Preckel, 2019) with individual heterogeneity in changes depending on specific motivation constructs across academic domains (Gaspard et al., 2020; * TuongVan Vu…”
• Should Students Have a Gap Year? Motivation and Performance Factors Relevant to Time Out after Completing School. (2010, methodology): “Motivation is assessed in the present study using the Motivation and Engagement Scale–High School (MES-HS; Martin, 2009c).”
• The Measurement of Student Engagement: A Comparative Analysis of Various Methods and Student Self-report Instruments (2012, methodology): “Martin ( 2008, 2009a, 2009b ) used confi rmatory factor analyses on 44 items of the Motivation and Engagement Survey with large samples of Australian middle and high school students.”
• A multidimensional analysis of changes in mathematics motivation and engagement during high school (2013, background): “There is extensive research supporting the factor structure and validity of the MES-HS within mathematics (Green, Matin, & Marsh, 2007; Plenty & Heubeck, 2011), as well as across gender and high school year-levels (Martin, 2004, 2007b, 2009).”
• Short-Term Exposure to Nature and Benefits for Students’ Cognitive Performance: a Review (2021, background): “It should be taken into account, however, that academic performance is based not only on sustained attention and other cognitive mechanisms but also on motivation and engagement (Martin, 2009).”
• Adaptability, engagement and academic achievement at university (2017, background): “…across different participant subgroups, adequate reliability and appropriate correlations with other academic outcomes (e.g. positive behavioural engagement associated with greater achievement; negative behavioural engagement associated with lower academic valuing; e.g. Martin, 2007a, 2009).”