青少年动机研究中的师生关系是什么?概念化、测量和分析的系统回顾

IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL
Emma C. Burns, Penny Van Bergen
{"title":"青少年动机研究中的师生关系是什么?概念化、测量和分析的系统回顾","authors":"Emma C. Burns, Penny Van Bergen","doi":"10.1007/s10648-025-09998-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Positive teacher–student relationships are critical for motivation in secondary school yet are conceptualized and measured inconsistently in motivation research. Motivation studies that draw on relational theories typically treat teacher–student relationships as a multidimensional construct, comprising positive (e.g., closeness) and negative (e.g., conflict) dimensions. In contrast, studies drawing on motivation theories typically use unidimensional relationship measures (e.g., only closeness). Studies also differ in their measures of teacher–student relationships and in whether they study dyads (“my teacher to me”) or broader groups (“teachers to me”; “my teacher to us”), and it is unclear which approaches are most common in current adolescent motivation research and how they have shaped current understandings of relationships in the field. Given this confusion, the aim of our systematic review was to map how teacher–student relationships have been conceptualized, measured, and analyzed in adolescent motivation research published between 2010 and 2023. Using PRISMA guidelines, 237 studies and 222 unique relationship measures were identified. The findings showed that teacher–student relationships and teacher support were used interchangeably across studies, both in terms of terminology and measurement. Most studies also examined teacher–student relationships using unidimensional measures, rather than multidimensional, with dyadic and non-dyadic relationships both common. Finally, there was no clear pattern of conceptualization or measurement for specific motivation constructs. These findings raise concerns regarding alignment between theorizing and measurement of teacher–student relationships in motivation research. We offer a path forward for identifying and appropriately using existing measures of teacher–student relationships vs support, as well as highlight the need for the development of measures which critically engage with conceptual concerns regarding teacher–student relationships and which reflect an integrated understanding of core relationship components (e.g., dyadic, multidimensional) identified across relational and motivation theories.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"8 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What Are Teacher–Student Relationships in Adolescent Motivation Research? A Systematic Review of Conceptualizations, Measurement, and Analysis\",\"authors\":\"Emma C. Burns, Penny Van Bergen\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10648-025-09998-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Positive teacher–student relationships are critical for motivation in secondary school yet are conceptualized and measured inconsistently in motivation research. Motivation studies that draw on relational theories typically treat teacher–student relationships as a multidimensional construct, comprising positive (e.g., closeness) and negative (e.g., conflict) dimensions. In contrast, studies drawing on motivation theories typically use unidimensional relationship measures (e.g., only closeness). Studies also differ in their measures of teacher–student relationships and in whether they study dyads (“my teacher to me”) or broader groups (“teachers to me”; “my teacher to us”), and it is unclear which approaches are most common in current adolescent motivation research and how they have shaped current understandings of relationships in the field. Given this confusion, the aim of our systematic review was to map how teacher–student relationships have been conceptualized, measured, and analyzed in adolescent motivation research published between 2010 and 2023. Using PRISMA guidelines, 237 studies and 222 unique relationship measures were identified. The findings showed that teacher–student relationships and teacher support were used interchangeably across studies, both in terms of terminology and measurement. Most studies also examined teacher–student relationships using unidimensional measures, rather than multidimensional, with dyadic and non-dyadic relationships both common. Finally, there was no clear pattern of conceptualization or measurement for specific motivation constructs. These findings raise concerns regarding alignment between theorizing and measurement of teacher–student relationships in motivation research. We offer a path forward for identifying and appropriately using existing measures of teacher–student relationships vs support, as well as highlight the need for the development of measures which critically engage with conceptual concerns regarding teacher–student relationships and which reflect an integrated understanding of core relationship components (e.g., dyadic, multidimensional) identified across relational and motivation theories.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48344,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Educational Psychology Review\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":10.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-10\",\"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/s10648-025-09998-y\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-09998-y","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

摘要

积极的师生关系对中学学生的学习动机至关重要,但在动机研究中,师生关系的概念和测量并不一致。基于关系理论的动机研究通常将师生关系视为一个多维结构,包括积极(如亲密)和消极(如冲突)两个维度。相比之下,基于动机理论的研究通常使用一维关系测量(例如,仅使用亲密关系)。这些研究对师生关系的衡量也有所不同,研究对象是双组(“我的老师对我”)还是更广泛的群体(“我的老师对我”;“我的老师”),目前还不清楚哪些方法在当前的青少年动机研究中最常见,以及它们如何塑造了当前对该领域关系的理解。鉴于这种困惑,我们系统回顾的目的是绘制出在2010年至2023年间发表的青少年动机研究中,师生关系是如何被概念化、测量和分析的。使用PRISMA指南,确定了237项研究和222个独特的关系测量。研究结果表明,师生关系和教师支持在研究中是互换使用的,无论是在术语方面还是在测量方面。大多数研究还使用一维的方法而不是多维的方法来检验师生关系,其中二元关系和非二元关系都很常见。最后,对于特定动机构念,没有明确的概念化或测量模式。这些发现引起了人们对动机研究中师生关系理论与测量的一致性的关注。我们为识别和适当使用师生关系与支持的现有测量方法提供了一条前进的道路,并强调了开发测量方法的必要性,这些测量方法批判性地涉及有关师生关系的概念问题,并反映了对跨关系和动机理论确定的核心关系组成部分(例如,二元,多维)的综合理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
What Are Teacher–Student Relationships in Adolescent Motivation Research? A Systematic Review of Conceptualizations, Measurement, and Analysis

Positive teacher–student relationships are critical for motivation in secondary school yet are conceptualized and measured inconsistently in motivation research. Motivation studies that draw on relational theories typically treat teacher–student relationships as a multidimensional construct, comprising positive (e.g., closeness) and negative (e.g., conflict) dimensions. In contrast, studies drawing on motivation theories typically use unidimensional relationship measures (e.g., only closeness). Studies also differ in their measures of teacher–student relationships and in whether they study dyads (“my teacher to me”) or broader groups (“teachers to me”; “my teacher to us”), and it is unclear which approaches are most common in current adolescent motivation research and how they have shaped current understandings of relationships in the field. Given this confusion, the aim of our systematic review was to map how teacher–student relationships have been conceptualized, measured, and analyzed in adolescent motivation research published between 2010 and 2023. Using PRISMA guidelines, 237 studies and 222 unique relationship measures were identified. The findings showed that teacher–student relationships and teacher support were used interchangeably across studies, both in terms of terminology and measurement. Most studies also examined teacher–student relationships using unidimensional measures, rather than multidimensional, with dyadic and non-dyadic relationships both common. Finally, there was no clear pattern of conceptualization or measurement for specific motivation constructs. These findings raise concerns regarding alignment between theorizing and measurement of teacher–student relationships in motivation research. We offer a path forward for identifying and appropriately using existing measures of teacher–student relationships vs support, as well as highlight the need for the development of measures which critically engage with conceptual concerns regarding teacher–student relationships and which reflect an integrated understanding of core relationship components (e.g., dyadic, multidimensional) identified across relational and motivation theories.

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
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