Learning Motivation Scale
Here in this post, we are sharing the “Learning Motivation Scale”. You can read psychometric and Author information. We have thousands of Scales and questionnaires in our collection (See Scales and Questionnaires). You can demand us any scale and questionnaires related to psychology through our community, and we will provide you with a short time. Keep visiting Psychology Roots.
About Learning Motivation Scale
Learning Motivation Scale – Undergraduates (LMS-U)] (Zenorini & Santos, 2008), built upon the Achievement Goals Theory. Initially, Zenorini and Santos (2008) built the scale with 50 items. The final version of the scale comprehends 28 items: twelve in the learning goal sub-scale (five items refer to the desire and interest in knowledge increase, in learning new subjects, three are related to challenging and four to persistence), seven in the performance-approach goal (refer to the search for increased worth through social recognition and superiority demonstration) and nine in the performance-avoidance goal (referring to the avoidance of an action which may bring negative consequences).
These three factors explained 36.11% of the variance, the factor charges are satisfactory (variation from 0.45 to 0.71) and the internal consistency, measured by the Cronbach’s alpha, proved to be quite high, with indexes of 0.80, 0.76 and 0.74. The several items are classified in a Likert scale with the following agreement level: 1 (agree); 2 (can’t tell); and 3 (disagree). Starting from that scale, the authors have developed a new version to be applied to college students, having, to that effect, made adjustments as to the type of language used, like, for example, replacing terms like “school tasks” by “academic tasks”.
In this last version, a grouping of items in the same three factors has been observed in the factor analysis with a total variation of 39.41%. It was observed that the item grouping by factors was similar to the previous research with students from secondary education (Zenorini & Santos, 2008) and with relatively classic researches (Elliot and Church, 1997; Elliot & Harackiewicz, 1996 and Midgley et al., 1998). Regarding internal consistency, it resulted in a higher index for the performance-avoidance goal (0.83) and in a lower index for the learning goal (0.72). The authors suggest, thus, the conduction of other studies to research whether to maintain or not, this trend (Santos, Alcará & Zenorini, 2013).