| Title |
Motivational Spiral Models (MSM): common and distinct motivations in context
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
SpringerPlus, October 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2193-1801-2-565 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Laurel J Fisher |
| Abstract |
Motivational Spiral Models (MSM) show links over time among self concepts, feelings, strategies, skills and participation in everyday activities. In theory, MSM have many common features, with distinct features in particular contexts. This project examined children's motivation to participate in literacy (MSM-L), social (MSM-S) and physical activities (MSM-P). The participants in Study 1 (N = 32) were 9 to 11 years old, and in Study 2 (N = 73) were 4 to 12 year old children. Locations were close to the Australian national average in socio-economic indicators, and initial screening showed these were representative samples. Analyses used variable-oriented correlational models as well as person-oriented clusters that suggest the standard and alternative motivational pathways. The results of Study 1 suggested bi-directional links between children's self concepts and participation in activities. Study 2 identified the common features as: openness and stability over time; and self concepts that motivate and justify participation in activities. Distinct features of MSM-L show the few negative feelings that may limit reading. In MSM-S, self concepts support the positive feelings, and in MSM-P, positive feelings support the task strategies. In conclusion, findings support MSM theory with common features based on self concepts and distinct features of developing motivations in particular contexts. MSM provide a sound base for future research in the contexts of everyday activities for children. In addition, there are practical applications of the findings to prevention, monitoring and intervention programmes. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 19 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 26% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 11% |
| Researcher | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 5 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 5 | 26% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 21% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 11% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 5 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 November 2013.
All research outputs
#15,284,663
of 22,729,647 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#932
of 1,853 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,453
of 211,943 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#54
of 105 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,729,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,853 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 211,943 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 105 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.