Motivational profiles and their relationship with responsibility, school social climate and resilience in high school students

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess the relationships among motivational profiles, their responsibility levels, the school social climate and resilience, and the differences according to gender and age of students from different secondary schools in Spain. A sample of 768 students (mean age of 13.84 years), 314 boys (46.1%) and 354 girls (53.9%) was used. The measurements taken concerned: personal and social responsibility, basic psychological need satisfaction, motivation, resilience and school social climate. Bivariate correlation, cluster and multivariate analyses were carried out. The cluster analysis was made using the Motivation toward Education Scale with its different variables (intrinsic, identified, introjected, external motivation and amotivation), revealing four profiles: low quality (1, low values in all motivational variables except in amotivation), low quantity (2, low values), high quantity (3, high values), and high quality (4, high values except in amotivation). The contrast in comparisons shows differences in resilience, personal and social responsibility, teacher climate and school climate (p < .001). The group with the highest values in resilience, basic psychological needs, responsibility and school social climate was that with a high quality profile. There were statistical differences in all variables with respect to the low quantity and low quality groups (p < .001), while the high quantity group showed statistical differences only in personal and social responsibility (p < .001). The low quality group had the lowest values among all the variables, with statistical differences with respect to all groups (p < .001). On the other hand, there were more boys than girls associated with high quantity, without differences in their age. In conclusion, high quality motivation profiles (those with high or low amotivation values and high values in autonomous and controlling motivation), also have a higher satisfaction of basic psychological needs. Moreover, these students are more resilient, show more responsibility and enhance the school/teaching social climate, while low quality and /or quantity motivation, influence negatively on these variables.

Physical Education Classes and Responsibility: The Importance of Being Responsible in Motivational and Psychosocial Variables

“…In relation to the second of the objectives, seeking to verify the relationship between the responsibility profiles and the variables under study, we highlight that our study verifies how the profile that was called “high responsibility” obtained higher values in aspects related to motivation, with subjects showing more self-determination, greater satisfaction of the three basic psychological needs and lower levels of amotivation in relation to the rest of the variables. The same can be corroborated by different studies, where they have identified a positive relationship between high levels of responsibility and the variables indicated above in Secondary Education [ 12 , 18 , 19 , 60 , 61 ] and Baccalaureate [ 62 , 63 ] students. It is noteworthy that there are several studies that have been analysed in PE classes, such as the promotion of responsibility, which supposes a more adaptive psychological profile in these stages [ 60 , 62 , 63 ].…”

“…In relation to other studies that have contemplated the analysis of profiles in students, we can indicate that the distribution follows a line of studies such as that of Gómez-López et al [ 48 ], where motivation was studied as a variable to extract the profiles. Although many studies identify four clusters when this variable is analysed [ 18 , 49 , 50 , 51 ], others that study motivation distinguish only between low and high motivation [ 52 , 53 ].…”

“…High levels of personal and social responsibility in schoolchildren can indicate prosocial behaviours, related to an improvement in psychosocial aspects [ 10 ], and in which responsibility shows itself to be a fundamental element, not only for young people who are in a situation of possible social exclusion [ 11 ], but also in contexts of a high and medium socioeconomic level [ 12 ]. In this regard, studies have demonstrated how responsibility has positive relationships with intrinsic motivation [ 13 , 14 ], causal relationships with autonomy and intrinsic motivation [ 15 , 16 ], self-concept and intrinsic motivation [ 17 ], the capacity for learning organisation [ 9 ], social climate of the school and the teaching staff [ 18 , 19 ] or a reduction in perceived violence [ 20 ].…”

“…Although there are several studies in the scientific literature that address profiling based on motivation levels [ 18 , 30 ], there are no studies that have used responsibility in order to create profiles and relate them with socially adaptive aspects, such as violence and the school social climate, while applying the SDT theory in the context of PE [ 22 ].…”

Predicting change in high school motivation profiles: the role of parenting practices

“…The six profiles are presented in decreasing order of motivational quality based on the assumption that intrinsic motivation is of greater quality than extrinsic motivation (Ryan & Deci, 2020). A "good quality" profile (high intrinsic/low extrinsic) has been identified in six studies; a "high quantity" profile (high intrinsic and extrinsic) in eight studies, a "moderately motivated" profile (moderate intrinsic and moderately high extrinsic) in three studies, a "low quantity" profile (low intrinsic and extrinsic) in six studies, a "poor quality" profile (low intrinsic/high extrinsic) in eight studies, and an "amotivated" profile (very low intrinsic and extrinsic) in one study ( Petit et al, 2022;Hayenga & Corpus, 2010;Manzano-Sánchez et al, 2021;Ratelle et al, 2007;Vansteenkiste et al, 2009;Wormington et al, 2012;Xie et al, 2022;Zhang & Lin, 2020). Table 1 details the profiles found in each study as well as the specific labels of profile.…”