Intellectual development is positively related to intrinsic motivation and course grades for female but not male students.
We hypothesized that the intellectual development of students, i.e., their beliefs about the nature of knowledge and learning, affects their intrinsic motivation and class performance. Specifically, we hypothesized that students with low intellectual development (i.e., the naive beliefs that knowledge is simple, absolute, and certain) have low intrinsic motivation and low class performance, whereas students with high intellectual development (i.e., more sophisticated beliefs that knowledge is complex, tentative, and evolving) have high intrinsic motivation and class performance. To test this hypothesis, we administered the Learning Context Questionnaire to measure intellectual development. In addition, we administered the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory to assess our students' intrinsic motivation. Furthermore, we performed regression analyses between intellectual development with both intrinsic motivation and class performance. The results document a positive relationship among intellectual development, intrinsic motivation, and class performance for female students only. In sharp contrast, there was a negative relationship between intellectual development, intrinsic motivation, and class performance for male students. The slope comparisons documented significant differences in the slopes relating intellectual development, intrinsic motivation, and class performance between female and male students. Thus, female students with more sophisticated beliefs that knowledge is personally constructed, complex, and evolving had higher intrinsic motivation and class performance. In contrast, male students with the naive beliefs that the structure of knowledge is simple, absolute, and certain had higher levels of intrinsic motivation and class performance. The results suggest that sex influences intellectual development, which has an effect on intrinsic motivation for learning a specific topic.
Departments of Kinesiology and Physiology, East Carolina University, Greenville, North Carolina;
Ronald N
RN
Cortright
Department of Physiology, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, Michigan;
Heidi L
HL
Lujan
Department of Kinesiology, East Carolina University, Greenville, North Carolina; and.
Julie H
JH
Cox
Department of World Languages, North Pitt High School, Bethel, North Carolina.
Maria A
MA
Cortright
Department of Kinesiology, East Carolina University, Greenville, North Carolina; and.
Brandon M
BM
Langworthy
Department of Kinesiology, East Carolina University, Greenville, North Carolina; and.
Lorene M
LM
Petta
Department of Kinesiology, East Carolina University, Greenville, North Carolina; and.
Charles J
CJ
Tanner
Department of Physiology, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, Michigan; sdicarlo@med.wayne.edu.
Stephen E
SE
DiCarlo
D015331:Cohort Studies; D003479:Curriculum; D004504:Education, Medical, Undergraduate / Q000379:methods*; D004521:Educational Measurement; D004522:Educational Status; D056348:Emotional Intelligence / Q000502:physiology*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007858:Learning / Q000502:physiology; D008297:Male; D009042:Motivation; D010827:Physiology / Q000193:education*; D018794:Problem-Based Learning / Q000379:methods; D012737:Sex Factors; D018709:Statistics, Nonparametric; D013337:Students, Medical / Q000523:psychology*; D055815:Young Adult
motivation and sex; nature of knowledge