View in EDS

The Benefits of Combining Value for the Self and Others in Utility-Value Interventions

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: The Benefits of Combining Value for the Self and Others in Utility-Value Interventions
Language: English
Authors: Priniski, Stacy J., Rosenzweig, Emily Q., Canning, Elizabeth A., Hecht, Cameron A., Tibbetts, Yoi, Hyde, Janet S., Harackiewicz, Judith M.
Source: Grantee Submission. 2019.
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 21
Publication Date: 2019
Sponsoring Agency: National Institutes of Health (DHHS)
Institute of Education Sciences (ED)
Contract Number: 2R01GM10270305
R305B090009
R305B150003
Document Type: Reports - Research
Education Level: Higher Education
Postsecondary Education
Descriptors: Intervention, Writing Assignments, Introductory Courses, Essays, Comparative Analysis, Biology, Science Instruction, Teaching Methods, Undergraduate Students, Grade Point Average, Content Analysis, Computational Linguistics, Scores, Instructional Effectiveness
DOI: 10.1037/edu0000343
Abstract: Utility-value (UV) interventions, in which students complete writing assignments about the personal usefulness of course material, show great promise for promoting interest and performance in introductory college science courses, as well as persistence in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields. As researchers move toward scaling up this intervention, it's important to understand which features are key to its effectiveness. For example, prior studies have used different types of UV assignments (i.e., self-focused essays and other-focused letters) and different assignment structures (i.e., over time, researchers provided a variety of tasks or choices between tasks), without comparing them. It is not known whether these assignment features are incidental details or key aspects of the intervention that impact its effectiveness. In the current study, we systematically compared different UV assignments, as well as ways of combining them, in a randomized controlled trial in an introductory college biology course (N = 590). Specifically, we compared different versions of the intervention in terms of their relative effectiveness for promoting course performance and the motivational mechanisms through which they operated. The intervention was most effective when students had opportunities to write about utility for both the self and others. Grades were higher in conditions in which students were either assigned a variety of self-focused and other-focused assignments or given the choice between the two. Among students with low performance expectations, grades were higher when students were assigned a specific combination: a self-focused assignment followed by other-focused assignments. Results suggest that different versions of the intervention may work through different mechanisms. [This is the online version of an article published in "Journal of Educational Psychology" (ISSN 0022-0663). For the final published version of this article, see EJ1232814.]
Abstractor: As Provided
IES Funded: Yes
Entry Date: 2020
Accession Number: ED605486
Database: ERIC
FullText Text:
  Availability: 0
CustomLinks:
  – Url: https://eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED605486
    Name: ERIC Full Text
    Category: fullText
    Text: Full Text from ERIC
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: ED605486
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Report
PubTypeId: report
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: The Benefits of Combining Value for the Self and Others in Utility-Value Interventions
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Priniski%2C+Stacy+J%2E%22">Priniski, Stacy J.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Rosenzweig%2C+Emily+Q%2E%22">Rosenzweig, Emily Q.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Canning%2C+Elizabeth+A%2E%22">Canning, Elizabeth A.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Hecht%2C+Cameron+A%2E%22">Hecht, Cameron A.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Tibbetts%2C+Yoi%22">Tibbetts, Yoi</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Hyde%2C+Janet+S%2E%22">Hyde, Janet S.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Harackiewicz%2C+Judith+M%2E%22">Harackiewicz, Judith M.</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Grantee+Submission%22"><i>Grantee Submission</i></searchLink>. 2019.
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 21
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2019
– Name: SourceSuprt
  Label: Sponsoring Agency
  Group: SrcSuprt
  Data: National Institutes of Health (DHHS)<br />Institute of Education Sciences (ED)
– Name: NumberContract
  Label: Contract Number
  Group: NumCntrct
  Data: 2R01GM10270305<br />R305B090009<br />R305B150003
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Postsecondary+Education%22">Postsecondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Intervention%22">Intervention</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Writing+Assignments%22">Writing Assignments</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Introductory+Courses%22">Introductory Courses</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Essays%22">Essays</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Comparative+Analysis%22">Comparative Analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Biology%22">Biology</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Science+Instruction%22">Science Instruction</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teaching+Methods%22">Teaching Methods</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Undergraduate+Students%22">Undergraduate Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Grade+Point+Average%22">Grade Point Average</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Content+Analysis%22">Content Analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Computational+Linguistics%22">Computational Linguistics</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Scores%22">Scores</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Instructional+Effectiveness%22">Instructional Effectiveness</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1037/edu0000343
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Utility-value (UV) interventions, in which students complete writing assignments about the personal usefulness of course material, show great promise for promoting interest and performance in introductory college science courses, as well as persistence in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields. As researchers move toward scaling up this intervention, it's important to understand which features are key to its effectiveness. For example, prior studies have used different types of UV assignments (i.e., self-focused essays and other-focused letters) and different assignment structures (i.e., over time, researchers provided a variety of tasks or choices between tasks), without comparing them. It is not known whether these assignment features are incidental details or key aspects of the intervention that impact its effectiveness. In the current study, we systematically compared different UV assignments, as well as ways of combining them, in a randomized controlled trial in an introductory college biology course (N = 590). Specifically, we compared different versions of the intervention in terms of their relative effectiveness for promoting course performance and the motivational mechanisms through which they operated. The intervention was most effective when students had opportunities to write about utility for both the self and others. Grades were higher in conditions in which students were either assigned a variety of self-focused and other-focused assignments or given the choice between the two. Among students with low performance expectations, grades were higher when students were assigned a specific combination: a self-focused assignment followed by other-focused assignments. Results suggest that different versions of the intervention may work through different mechanisms. [This is the online version of an article published in "Journal of Educational Psychology" (ISSN 0022-0663). For the final published version of this article, see EJ1232814.]
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: CodeSource
  Label: IES Funded
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Yes
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2020
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: ED605486
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=ED605486
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1037/edu0000343
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 21
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Intervention
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Writing Assignments
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Introductory Courses
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Essays
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Comparative Analysis
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Biology
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Science Instruction
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teaching Methods
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Undergraduate Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Grade Point Average
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Content Analysis
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Computational Linguistics
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Scores
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Instructional Effectiveness
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: The Benefits of Combining Value for the Self and Others in Utility-Value Interventions
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Priniski, Stacy J.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Rosenzweig, Emily Q.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Canning, Elizabeth A.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Hecht, Cameron A.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Tibbetts, Yoi
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Hyde, Janet S.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Harackiewicz, Judith M.
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 14
              M: 03
              Type: published
              Y: 2019
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Grantee Submission
              Type: main
ResultId 1