奋斗是相对的:学业自我概念与学生心理健康的比较加工视角

Collabra Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1525/collabra.88330
Thomas Meyer, Pascal Schlechter, Lisa Schlichting, Nexhmedin Morina
{"title":"奋斗是相对的:学业自我概念与学生心理健康的比较加工视角","authors":"Thomas Meyer, Pascal Schlechter, Lisa Schlichting, Nexhmedin Morina","doi":"10.1525/collabra.88330","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Academic self-concept (ASC) is a prominent predictor of educational achievement and student mental health. Although it is widely accepted that ASC is fundamentally comparative, little is known about different comparison types driving students’ ASC construal and its impact on mental health. Therefore, we examined whether self-evaluations relative to criteria-based, social, temporal, dimensional, and counterfactual comparison standards represent independent factors that contribute to general ASC. Next, we assessed the association of general ASC and its comparison-based facets with achievement emotions and psychopathology. University students (N=348) completed an online survey of general ASC as well as subordinate comparison-based ASC facets, positive and negative achievement emotions, psychological distress, and symptoms of student burnout. We further assessed comparison frequency, student task values, and achievement levels. Factor analysis indicated that criteria-based, social, temporal, dimensional, and counterfactual standards reflect mainly distinct yet correlated comparison domains. General ASC construal was most strongly based on the criteria-based and social facets. Favourable general ASC predicted lower learning-related anxiety, psychological distress, and student burnout. Largely similar correlations emerged for all comparison-based ASC facets, whereby the criteria-based and social facets were particularly strong predictors of learning-related anxiety. Our findings support the view that ASC construal relies on comparisons with multiple standards. Criteria-based and social comparisons were particularly dominant and may be the main drivers of learning-related anxiety. Carefully designed follow-up studies with longitudinal designs and interventions are warranted.","PeriodicalId":93422,"journal":{"name":"Collabra","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Struggle Is Relative: A Comparative Processing Perspective on Academic Self-Concept and Student Mental Health\",\"authors\":\"Thomas Meyer, Pascal Schlechter, Lisa Schlichting, Nexhmedin Morina\",\"doi\":\"10.1525/collabra.88330\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Academic self-concept (ASC) is a prominent predictor of educational achievement and student mental health. Although it is widely accepted that ASC is fundamentally comparative, little is known about different comparison types driving students’ ASC construal and its impact on mental health. Therefore, we examined whether self-evaluations relative to criteria-based, social, temporal, dimensional, and counterfactual comparison standards represent independent factors that contribute to general ASC. Next, we assessed the association of general ASC and its comparison-based facets with achievement emotions and psychopathology. University students (N=348) completed an online survey of general ASC as well as subordinate comparison-based ASC facets, positive and negative achievement emotions, psychological distress, and symptoms of student burnout. We further assessed comparison frequency, student task values, and achievement levels. Factor analysis indicated that criteria-based, social, temporal, dimensional, and counterfactual standards reflect mainly distinct yet correlated comparison domains. General ASC construal was most strongly based on the criteria-based and social facets. Favourable general ASC predicted lower learning-related anxiety, psychological distress, and student burnout. Largely similar correlations emerged for all comparison-based ASC facets, whereby the criteria-based and social facets were particularly strong predictors of learning-related anxiety. Our findings support the view that ASC construal relies on comparisons with multiple standards. Criteria-based and social comparisons were particularly dominant and may be the main drivers of learning-related anxiety. Carefully designed follow-up studies with longitudinal designs and interventions are warranted.\",\"PeriodicalId\":93422,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Collabra\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Collabra\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.88330\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Collabra","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.88330","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

学业自我概念(ASC)是学业成就和学生心理健康的显著预测因子。虽然人们普遍认为ASC具有基本的可比性,但不同的比较类型对学生ASC解释的驱动作用及其对心理健康的影响却知之甚少。因此,我们研究了与基于标准的、社会的、时间的、维度的和反事实的比较标准相关的自我评价是否代表了导致一般ASC的独立因素。接下来,我们评估了一般ASC及其基于比较的方面与成就情绪和精神病理的关联。大学生(N=348)完成了基于下属比较的大学生自我认知行为、积极和消极成就情绪、心理困扰和学生倦怠症状的在线调查。我们进一步评估了比较频率、学生任务值和成就水平。因子分析表明,基于标准的标准、社会标准、时间标准、维度标准和反事实标准主要反映了不同但相关的比较领域。一般ASC解释最强烈地基于标准和社会方面。良好的一般ASC预测较低的学习相关焦虑、心理困扰和学生倦怠。在所有基于比较的ASC方面都出现了很大程度上相似的相关性,其中基于标准和社会方面是学习相关焦虑的特别强的预测因子。我们的研究结果支持了ASC解释依赖于与多个标准的比较的观点。基于标准和社会比较尤其占主导地位,可能是学习相关焦虑的主要驱动因素。精心设计的纵向设计和干预的后续研究是必要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Struggle Is Relative: A Comparative Processing Perspective on Academic Self-Concept and Student Mental Health
Academic self-concept (ASC) is a prominent predictor of educational achievement and student mental health. Although it is widely accepted that ASC is fundamentally comparative, little is known about different comparison types driving students’ ASC construal and its impact on mental health. Therefore, we examined whether self-evaluations relative to criteria-based, social, temporal, dimensional, and counterfactual comparison standards represent independent factors that contribute to general ASC. Next, we assessed the association of general ASC and its comparison-based facets with achievement emotions and psychopathology. University students (N=348) completed an online survey of general ASC as well as subordinate comparison-based ASC facets, positive and negative achievement emotions, psychological distress, and symptoms of student burnout. We further assessed comparison frequency, student task values, and achievement levels. Factor analysis indicated that criteria-based, social, temporal, dimensional, and counterfactual standards reflect mainly distinct yet correlated comparison domains. General ASC construal was most strongly based on the criteria-based and social facets. Favourable general ASC predicted lower learning-related anxiety, psychological distress, and student burnout. Largely similar correlations emerged for all comparison-based ASC facets, whereby the criteria-based and social facets were particularly strong predictors of learning-related anxiety. Our findings support the view that ASC construal relies on comparisons with multiple standards. Criteria-based and social comparisons were particularly dominant and may be the main drivers of learning-related anxiety. Carefully designed follow-up studies with longitudinal designs and interventions are warranted.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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