The issue of test-taking motivation in low- and high-stakes tests: are students underachieving in PISA?

IF 9 1区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL

Learning and Individual Differences Pub Date : 2025-06-05 DOI:10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102722

Linda Borger , Hanna Eklöf , Stefan Johansson , Rolf Strietholt

{"title":"The issue of test-taking motivation in low- and high-stakes tests: are students underachieving in PISA?","authors":"Linda Borger , Hanna Eklöf , Stefan Johansson , Rolf Strietholt","doi":"10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102722","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>It is commonly recognized that test performance is influenced by both cognitive ability and motivational factors. To explore this phenomenon, a random sample of 15-year-old Swedish students (<em>n</em> = 5504), whose PISA 2018 results were linked to national registry data, was analyzed. Students' PISA performance was regressed on their self-reported test-taking effort in PISA, their national test scores in corresponding subject domains, and the interaction between these variables. Results reveal that test-taking effort had an independent influence on PISA scores after controlling for high-stakes test results (<em>β</em> = 0.15). More importantly, the relationship between the high-stakes national test and the low-stakes PISA was stronger at higher levels of effort (interaction coefficient; <em>β</em> = 0.05). Students who report low effort underperform in PISA by approximately one-third of a school year's learning gain, emphasizing the role of effort in obtaining an accurate assessment of ability. Implications for research and practice are discussed.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48336,"journal":{"name":"Learning and Individual Differences","volume":"122 ","pages":"Article 102722"},"PeriodicalIF":9.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning and Individual Differences","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1041608025000986","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

It is commonly recognized that test performance is influenced by both cognitive ability and motivational factors. To explore this phenomenon, a random sample of 15-year-old Swedish students (n = 5504), whose PISA 2018 results were linked to national registry data, was analyzed. Students' PISA performance was regressed on their self-reported test-taking effort in PISA, their national test scores in corresponding subject domains, and the interaction between these variables. Results reveal that test-taking effort had an independent influence on PISA scores after controlling for high-stakes test results (β = 0.15). More importantly, the relationship between the high-stakes national test and the low-stakes PISA was stronger at higher levels of effort (interaction coefficient; β = 0.05). Students who report low effort underperform in PISA by approximately one-third of a school year's learning gain, emphasizing the role of effort in obtaining an accurate assessment of ability. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

查看原文本刊更多论文

低风险和高风险测试中的考试动机问题：学生在PISA中表现不佳吗？

人们普遍认为，考试成绩受认知能力和动机因素的双重影响。为了探索这一现象，研究人员对15岁瑞典学生（n = 5504）的随机样本进行了分析，这些学生的2018年PISA成绩与国家注册数据相关联。学生的PISA成绩根据他们在PISA中自我报告的考试成绩、他们在相应学科领域的国家考试成绩以及这些变量之间的相互作用进行回归。结果显示，在控制了高风险测试结果后，参加考试的努力对PISA分数有独立的影响（β = 0.15）。更重要的是，高风险的国家测试和低风险的PISA之间的关系在更高的努力水平上更强(相互作用系数；β = 0.05)。那些努力程度低的学生在国际学生评估项目中的表现差了大约三分之一学年的学习成果，强调了努力在获得准确的能力评估中的作用。讨论了对研究和实践的启示。

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 Individual Differences PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL-

CiteScore

6.60

自引率

2.80%

发文量

期刊介绍： Learning and Individual Differences is a research journal devoted to publishing articles of individual differences as they relate to learning within an educational context. The Journal focuses on original empirical studies of high theoretical and methodological rigor that that make a substantial scientific contribution. Learning and Individual Differences publishes original research. Manuscripts should be no longer than 7500 words of primary text (not including tables, figures, references).