Specialized Purpose of Each Type of Student Engagement: A Meta-Analysis

IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL
Johnmarshall Reeve, Geetanjali Basarkod, Hye-Ryen Jang, Rafael Gargurevich, Hyungshim Jang, Sung Hyeon Cheon
{"title":"Specialized Purpose of Each Type of Student Engagement: A Meta-Analysis","authors":"Johnmarshall Reeve, Geetanjali Basarkod, Hye-Ryen Jang, Rafael Gargurevich, Hyungshim Jang, Sung Hyeon Cheon","doi":"10.1007/s10648-025-09989-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Students involve themselves in learning activities multidimensionally, including behaviorally, cognitively, emotionally, and agentically. This multidimensional involvement predicts important outcomes, but it is also possible that each type of engagement might have its own specialized purpose or function. To investigate this possibility, we proposed and tested the specialized purpose hypothesis, which is that each type of engagement has its own specialized function targeted toward a specific purpose, such as to boost achievement, social support, motivation, or well-being. To test this hypothesis, we conducted four meta-analyses, utilizing multilevel random effects models. Each meta-analysis tested whether type of engagement differentially predicted students’ achievement (meta-analysis #1), social support (meta-analysis #2), motivation (meta-analysis #3), or well-being (meta-analysis #4). The database included 652 effect sizes from 62 studies within 54 articles involving 32,403 P-16 student-participants (<i>M</i><sub>age</sub> = 16.8 years-old; 51.2% female). All 62 studies measured all four types of engagement so that we could compare the relative strength of association between each type of engagement and each correlate. Behavioral engagement was the strongest predictor of achievement. Agentic engagement was the strongest predictor of social support. Cognitive engagement did not show a specialized relation with any outcome. Emotional engagement was strongly associated with both motivation and well-being. These findings generally support the specialized purpose hypothesis, but they also raise important and challenging questions for future theory and research about how to better conceptualize and measure each type of engagement.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-09989-z","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Students involve themselves in learning activities multidimensionally, including behaviorally, cognitively, emotionally, and agentically. This multidimensional involvement predicts important outcomes, but it is also possible that each type of engagement might have its own specialized purpose or function. To investigate this possibility, we proposed and tested the specialized purpose hypothesis, which is that each type of engagement has its own specialized function targeted toward a specific purpose, such as to boost achievement, social support, motivation, or well-being. To test this hypothesis, we conducted four meta-analyses, utilizing multilevel random effects models. Each meta-analysis tested whether type of engagement differentially predicted students’ achievement (meta-analysis #1), social support (meta-analysis #2), motivation (meta-analysis #3), or well-being (meta-analysis #4). The database included 652 effect sizes from 62 studies within 54 articles involving 32,403 P-16 student-participants (Mage = 16.8 years-old; 51.2% female). All 62 studies measured all four types of engagement so that we could compare the relative strength of association between each type of engagement and each correlate. Behavioral engagement was the strongest predictor of achievement. Agentic engagement was the strongest predictor of social support. Cognitive engagement did not show a specialized relation with any outcome. Emotional engagement was strongly associated with both motivation and well-being. These findings generally support the specialized purpose hypothesis, but they also raise important and challenging questions for future theory and research about how to better conceptualize and measure each type of engagement.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Educational Psychology Review
Educational Psychology Review PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL-
CiteScore
15.70
自引率
3.00%
发文量
62
期刊介绍: Educational Psychology Review aims to disseminate knowledge and promote dialogue within the field of educational psychology. It serves as a platform for the publication of various types of articles, including peer-reviewed integrative reviews, special thematic issues, reflections on previous research or new research directions, interviews, and research-based advice for practitioners. The journal caters to a diverse readership, ranging from generalists in educational psychology to experts in specific areas of the discipline. The content offers a comprehensive coverage of topics and provides in-depth information to meet the needs of both specialized researchers and practitioners.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信