No abstract

The present research complements extant variable-centered research that focused on the dimensions of autonomous and controlled motivation through adoption of a person-centered approach for identifying motivational profiles. Both in high school students (Study 1) and college students (Study 2), a cluster analysis revealed 4 motivational profiles: a good quality motivation group (i.e., high autonomous, low controlled); a poor quality motivation group (i.e., low autonomous, high controlled); a low quantity motivation group (i.e., low autonomous, low controlled); and a high quantity motivation group (i.e., high autonomous, high controlled). To compare the 4 groups, the authors derived predictions from qualitative and quantitative perspectives on motivation. Findings generally favored the qualitative perspective; compared with the other groups, the good quality motivation group displayed the most optimal learning pattern and scored highest on perceived need-supportive teaching. Theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed.Keywords: motivational profiles, autonomous motivation, controlled motivation, self-determination theory, quality of motivation Most motivation psychologists, teachers, and parents would agree that students' study behavior is multidetermined. Multiple reasons might drive study behavior, such as a spontaneous interest in the learning material, a desire to prove oneself by getting high grades, external expectations, or future professional goals. Nevertheless, some motives might be more dominant for some students, whereas different motives might be of greater importance to others. Also, some students might combine some motives in a relatively unique manner, so that they, for instance, study both because they need to meet external demands and because they find learning enjoyable as such. Thus, different groups or types of students might exist that are characterized by different motivational profiles.To identify motivational profiles, one must adopt a personcentered approach (Magnusson, 1998). Such an approach complements the dimensional or variable-centered approach that is typically used in motivational research (but see Csizér & Dörnyei, 2005;Pintrich, 2000; Ratelle, Guay, Vallerand, Larose, & Senécal, in press;Wang & Biddle, 2001). Whereas the primary aim in person-centered analyses (e.g., cluster analysis; Gore, 2000) is to categorize individuals into groups whose members have similar motivational profiles, the focus of the variable-centered approach is on the effects of motivational dimensions on students' learning and performance. The two approaches are likely to yield complementary information (Fortunato & Goldblatt, 2006), but little prior attention has been devoted to the person-centered approach by motivational researchers. Our aims in the present research were (a) to map out the motivational profiles of students on the basis of their scores for autonomous and controlled study motivation, as distinguished within self-determination theory (SDT; Vansteenkiste, Lens, & De...

Parental monitoring, assessed as (perceived) parental knowledge of the child's behavior, has been established as a consistent predictor of problem behavior. However, recent research indicates that parental knowledge has more to do with adolescents' self-disclosure than with parents' active monitoring. Although these findings may suggest that parents exert little influence on adolescents' problem behavior, the authors argue that this conclusion is premature, because self-disclosure may in itself be influenced by parents' rearing style. This study (a) examined relations between parenting dimensions and self-disclosure and (b) compared 3 models describing the relations among parenting, self-disclosure, perceived parental knowledge, and problem behavior. Results in a sample of 10th- to 12th-grade students, their parents, and their peers demonstrated that high responsiveness, high behavioral control, and low psychological control are independent predictors of self-disclosure. In addition, structural equation modeling analyses demonstrated that parenting is both indirectly (through self-disclosure) and directly associated with perceived parental knowledge but is not directly related to problem behavior or affiliation with peers engaging in problem behavior.

A model of identity formation comprising four structural dimensions (Commitment Making, Identification with Commitment, Exploration in Depth, and Exploration in Breadth) was developed through confirmatory factor analysis. In a sample of 565 emerging adults, this model provided a better fit than did alternative two‐ and three‐dimensional models, thereby validating the unpacking of both exploration and commitment. Regression analyses indicated that Commitment Making was significantly related to family context in accordance with hypotheses. Identification with Commitment and both exploration dimensions were significantly related to adjustment and family context, again in accordance with hypotheses. Identification with Commitment was positively related to positive adjustment indicators and negatively to depressive symptoms, whereas Exploration in Breadth was positively related to depressive symptoms and substance use. Exploration in Depth, on the other hand, was positively related to academic adjustment and negatively to substance use. Implications and suggestions for future research are discussed.

In current research on parenting, 2 ways of conceptualizing perceived parental autonomy support can be distinguished. Parental autonomy support can be defined in terms of promotion of independence (PI) or in terms of promotion of volitional functioning (PVF). This study aimed to establish the empirical distinctiveness of both conceptualizations and to examine their relative contribution to the prediction of adolescents' adjustment. The authors conducted 3 studies, 2 which sampled late adolescents (N ϭ 396, mean age ϭ 18.70 years, 79% female; and N ϭ 495, mean age ϭ 19.30 years, 74% female, respectively) and 1 which sampled middle adolescents (N ϭ 153, mean age ϭ 15.12 years, 70% female). Factor analyses pointed to the distinction between perceived PVF and PI. Structural equation modeling (SEM) indicated that whereas perceived PVF uniquely predicted adjustment ( ps Ͻ .01), perceived PI did not ( ps Ͼ .05). SEM also demonstrated that adolescents' self-determined functioning significantly mediates the relationship between perceived parental PVF and adjustment ( ps Ͻ .001). Results are discussed in terms of the type of autonomy that parents might want to facilitate among their adolescents to foster well-being.