Testing the CONIC model: The interplay of conscientiousness and interest in predicting academic effort

IF 4.7 1区教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

Learning and Instruction Pub Date : 2024-11-12 DOI:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.102050

Laura Kehle, Detlef Urhahne

{"title":"Testing the CONIC model: The interplay of conscientiousness and interest in predicting academic effort","authors":"Laura Kehle, Detlef Urhahne","doi":"10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.102050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>This report comprises two studies that more closely examined the Conscientiousness × Interest Compensation (CONIC) model by Trautwein, Nagengast, Roberts, and Lüdtke (2019) under laboratory conditions. The model specifies individual and compensatory effects of conscientiousness and individual interest on academic effort.</div></div><div><h3>Aims</h3><div>This research piece examines the assumed relationships between the three core variables of the CONIC model.</div></div><div><h3>Samples</h3><div>The first study was conducted with 152 university students and the second study included 120 university students randomly distributed across two experimental conditions and one control condition.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>In an initial modeling study, we investigated the model assumptions in two different learning contexts and tested them using structural equation modeling (SEM). In a subsequent experimental study, we manipulated the predictor variables of academic effort to either promote conscientious or interest-based learning. The group differences were examined using multigroup SEM.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>In the modeling study, interest was always and conscientiousness at least partially a positive and significant predictor of academic effort. A compensatory effect of interest and conscientiousness could not be found. In the experimental study, promoting conscientious learning resulted in interest showing up as a stronger predictor of academic effort. However, promoting interest-based learning crystallized conscientiousness as the stronger predictor of academic effort. Moreover, the compensatory effect of the two personality traits was significantly stronger in the groups where conscientiousness or interest-based learning was promoted than in the control group.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Results provide support for the CONIC model and particularly highlight the compensatory effects of conscientiousness and interest at the model's heart.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48357,"journal":{"name":"Learning and Instruction","volume":"95 ","pages":"Article 102050"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning and Instruction","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959475224001774","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

This report comprises two studies that more closely examined the Conscientiousness × Interest Compensation (CONIC) model by Trautwein, Nagengast, Roberts, and Lüdtke (2019) under laboratory conditions. The model specifies individual and compensatory effects of conscientiousness and individual interest on academic effort.

Aims

This research piece examines the assumed relationships between the three core variables of the CONIC model.

Samples

The first study was conducted with 152 university students and the second study included 120 university students randomly distributed across two experimental conditions and one control condition.

Methods

In an initial modeling study, we investigated the model assumptions in two different learning contexts and tested them using structural equation modeling (SEM). In a subsequent experimental study, we manipulated the predictor variables of academic effort to either promote conscientious or interest-based learning. The group differences were examined using multigroup SEM.

Results

In the modeling study, interest was always and conscientiousness at least partially a positive and significant predictor of academic effort. A compensatory effect of interest and conscientiousness could not be found. In the experimental study, promoting conscientious learning resulted in interest showing up as a stronger predictor of academic effort. However, promoting interest-based learning crystallized conscientiousness as the stronger predictor of academic effort. Moreover, the compensatory effect of the two personality traits was significantly stronger in the groups where conscientiousness or interest-based learning was promoted than in the control group.

Conclusions

Results provide support for the CONIC model and particularly highlight the compensatory effects of conscientiousness and interest at the model's heart.

查看原文本刊更多论文

测试 CONIC 模型：自觉性和兴趣在预测学习努力方面的相互作用

背景本报告由两项研究组成，这两项研究在实验室条件下对特劳特魏因、纳根加斯特、罗伯茨和吕德克（2019年）提出的自觉性×兴趣补偿（CONIC）模型进行了更深入的研究。该模型规定了自觉性和个人兴趣对学业努力的个体效应和补偿效应。AimsThis research piece examines the assumed relationships between the three core variables of the CONIC model.SamplesThe first study was conducted with 152 university students and the second study included 120 university students randomly distributed across two experimental conditions and one control conditions.Methods在最初的建模研究中，我们调查了两种不同学习情境下的模型假设，并使用结构方程建模（SEM）对其进行了检验。在随后的实验研究中，我们操纵了学业努力的预测变量，以促进自觉学习或基于兴趣的学习。结果在建模研究中，兴趣始终是学业努力的正向显著预测因素，而自觉性至少部分地是学业努力的正向显著预测因素。没有发现兴趣和自觉性的补偿效应。在实验研究中，促进自觉学习的结果是，兴趣对学业努力有更强的预测作用。然而，促进以兴趣为基础的学习使自觉性成为学业努力的更强预测因子。此外，在促进自觉学习或基于兴趣的学习的组别中，这两种人格特质的补偿效应明显强于对照组。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Learning and Instruction Multiple-

CiteScore

11.30

自引率

4.80%

发文量

109

期刊介绍： As an international, multi-disciplinary, peer-refereed journal, Learning and Instruction provides a platform for the publication of the most advanced scientific research in the areas of learning, development, instruction and teaching. The journal welcomes original empirical investigations. The papers may represent a variety of theoretical perspectives and different methodological approaches. They may refer to any age level, from infants to adults and to a diversity of learning and instructional settings, from laboratory experiments to field studies. The major criteria in the review and the selection process concern the significance of the contribution to the area of learning and instruction, and the rigor of the study.