Measuring Promotion and Prevention Orientations of Secondary School Students

Abstract

The General Regulatory Focus Measure has been used extensively in psychological research to gauge promotion and prevention orientations. Findings of this research show that for New Zealand secondary school students, the General Regulatory Focus Measure does not measure promotion and prevention as theoretically independent constructs.

Keywords

motivation promotion prevention developmental differences secondary school students

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Arbuckle

J. L.

(1996). Full information in the presence of incomplete data. In Marcoulides

G. A.

Schumacker

R. E.

(Eds.), Advanced structural equation modeling: Issues and techniques (pp. 243–277). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Asparouhov

Muthén

B. O.

(2009). Exploratory structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 16, 397–438. doi:10.1080/10705510903008204

Bentler

P. M.

(1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246. doi:10.1037//0033-2909.107.2.238

Bollen

K. A.

(2000). Modeling strategies: In search of the Holy Grail. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 7, 74–81. doi:10.1207/S15328007SEM0701_03

Clark

L. A.

Watson

(1995). Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development. Psychological Assessment, 7, 309–319. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.7.3.309

Fan

Wang

(1998). Effects of potential confounding factors on fit indices and parameter estimates on true and misspecified SEM models. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 58, 701–735. doi:10.1177/0013164498058005001

Gignac

G. E.

Watkins

M. W.

(2013). Bifactor modeling and the estimation of model-based reliability in the WAIS-IV. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 48, 639–662. doi:10.1080/00273171.2013.804398

Gorman

C. A.

Meriac

J. P.

Overstreet

B. L.

Apodaca

McIntyre

A. L.

Park

Godbey

J. N.

(2012). A meta-analysis of the regulatory focus nomological network: Work-related antecedents and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80, 160–172. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2011.07.005

Hancock

G. R.

Mueller

R. O.

(2001). Rethinking construct reliability within latent variable systems. In Cudeck

du Toit

Sörbom

(Eds.), Structural equation modeling: Present and future—A Festschrift in honor of Karl Jöreskog (pp. 195–216). Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.

10.

Haws

K. L.

Dholakia

U. M.

Bearden

W. O.

(2010). An assessment of chronic regulatory focus measures. Journal of Marketing Research, 47, 967–982. doi:10.1509/jmkr.47.5.967

11.

Higgins

E. T.

(1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review, 94, 319–340. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.94.3.319

12.

Higgins

E. T.

(1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52, 1280–1300. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.52.12.1280

13.

Higgins

E. T.

(2000). Making a good decision: Value from fit. American Psychologist, 55, 1217–1230. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.55.11.1217

14.

Higgins

E. T.

(2012a). Accessibility theory. In Van Lange

P. A. M.

Kruglanski

A. W.

Higgins

E. T.

(Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (pp. 75–96). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

15.

Higgins

E. T.

(2012b). Beyond pleasure and pain: How motivation works. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

16.

Higgins

E. T.

(2012c). Regulatory focus theory. In Van Lange

P. A. M.

Kruglanski

A. W.

Higgins

E. T.

(Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (pp. 483–504). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

17.

Higgins

E. T.

Friedman

R. S.

Harlow

R. E.

Idson

L. C.

Ayduk

O. N.

Taylor

(2001). Achievement orientations from subjective histories of success: Promotion pride versus prevention pride. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31(1), 3–23. doi:10.1002/ejsp.27

18.

Hodis

F. A.

Meyer

L. H.

McClure

Weir

K. F.

Walkey

F. H.

(2011). A longitudinal investigation of motivation and secondary school achievement using growth mixture modeling. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 312–323. doi:10.1037/a0022547

19.

L.-T.

Bentler

P. M.

(1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1–55. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118

20.

Lockwood

Jordan

C. H.

Kunda

(2002). Motivation by positive or negative role models: Regulatory focus determines who will best inspire us. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 854–864. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.83.4.854

21.

Marsh

H. W.

Liem

G. A. D.

Martin

A. J.

Morin

A. J. S.

Nagengast

(2011). Methodological measurement fruitfulness of exploratory structural equation model: New approaches to issues in motivation and engagement. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 29, 322–346. doi:10.1177/0734282911406657

22.

Marsh

H. W.

Morin

A. J. S.

Parker

P. D.

Kaur

(2014). Exploratory structural equation modelling: An integration of the best features of exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 10, 85–110. doi:10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032813-153700

23.

Marsh

H. W.

Muthen

Asparouhov

Ludtke

Robitzsch

Morin

A. J. S.

Trautwein

(2009). Exploratory structural equation modeling, integrating CFA and EFA: Applications to students’ evaluations of university teaching. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 16, 439–476. doi:10.1080/10705510903008220

24.

McClure

Meyer

L. H.

Garisch

Fischer

Weir

K. F.

Walkey

F. H.

(2011). Students’ attributions for their best and worst marks: Do they relate to achievement? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(2), 71–81. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.11.001

25.

Meyer

L. H.

McClure

Walkey

Weir

McKenzie

(2009). Secondary student motivation orientations and standards-based achievement outcomes. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 273–293. doi:10.1348/000709908X354591

26.

Morin

A. J. S.

Marsh

H. W.

Nagengast

(2013). Exploratory structural equation modeling. In Hancock

G. R.

Mueller

R. O.

(Eds.), Structural equation modeling: A second course (2nd ed., pp. 395–436). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

27.

Muthén

L. K.

Muthén

B. O.

(2010). Mplus user’s guide (6th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.

28.

Reise

S. P.

(2012). The rediscovery of bifactor measurement models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 47, 667–696. doi:10.1080/00273171.2012.715555

29.

Righetti

Finkenauer

Rusbult

(2011). The benefits of interpersonal regulatory fit for individual goal pursuit. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 720–736. doi:10.1037/a0023592

30.

Steiger

J. H.

(1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 173–180. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr2502_4

31.

Summerville

Roese

N. J.

(2008). Self-report measures of individual differences in regulatory focus: A cautionary note. Journal of Research in Personality, 42, 247–254. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2007.05.005

32.

Tucker

L. R.

Lewis

(1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 38, 1–10. doi:10.1007/BF02291170

33.

Walkey

F. H.

McClure

Meyer

L. H.

Weir

K. F.

(2013). Low expectations equal no expectations: Aspirations, motivation, and achievement in secondary school. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 38, 306–315. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2013.06.004

34.

Widaman

K. F.

Little

T. D.

Preacher

K. J.

Sawalani

G. M.

(2011). On creating and using short forms of scales in secondary research. In Trzesniewski

K. H.

Donnellan

M. B.

Lucas

R. E.

(Eds.), Secondary data analysis: An introduction for psychologists (pp. 39–61). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.