The purpose of the present study was to test the specificity hypothesis in the area of education. This hypothesis is derived from Vallerand’shierarchical model of motivation and argues that situational motivation towards a specific activity should be mainly influenced by contextual motivation towards this activity, and not so much by contextual motivation towards a non-related activity. Furthermore, comparative differences in self-determination between physical education (PE) and classroombased education were examined. Participants were 102 British pupils aged between 12 and 14 years who reported their contextual motivation towards PE and classroom-based education. A month later, these pupils also reported their situationalmotivation toward a PE lesson and a science lesson (physics). Results from regression analyses offered full support to the specificity hypothesis. Furthermore, comparisons of self-determination levels showed that pupils were more self-determined in PE than in the classroom at both the contextual and situational levels. The specificity effect indicates that motivation at school is a multidimensional construct and, therefore, interventions to promote motivation should target each aspect of schooling independently.
Biddle, S.J.H. (2001) ‘Enhancing Motivation in Physical Education’, in G.C. Roberts (ed.) Advances in Motivation in Sport and Exercise, 2nd edn, pp. 101–127. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
2.
Black, A.E. and Deci, E.L. (2000) ‘The Effects of Instructors’ Autonomy Support and Students’Autonomous Motivation on Learning Organic Chemistry: A Self-Determination Perspective’, Science Education84: 740–756.
3.
British Psychological Society (1997) Code of Conduct, Ethical Principles and Guidelines. Leicester: British Psychological Society.
4.
Brunel, P.C. , Chantal, Y., Guay, F. and Vallerand, R.J. (2000) ‘Where Does the Situational Motivation Come From? A Test of the Top–DownEffect in Natural Conditions’, Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology22: S23-S23.
5.
Cavill, N. , Biddle, S.J.H. and Sallis, J. F. (2001) ‘Health Enhancing Physical Activity for Young People: Statement of the United Kingdom Expert Consensus Conference’, Pediatric Exercise Science13: 12–25.
6.
Chantal, Y., Guay, F. and Vallerand, R.J. (1996) ‘A Structural Analysis of the Motivational Consequences: A Test of the Specificity Hypothesis’, unpublished manuscript, UniversitÈ du QuÈbec ‡ MontrÈal.
7.
Chen, A. (2001) ‘A Theoretical Conceptualization for Motivation Research in Physical Education: An Integrated Perspective’, Quest53: 35–58.
8.
Coakley, J. and White, A. (1992) ‘Making Decisions: Gender and Sport Participation among British Adolescents’, Sociology of Sport Journal9: 20–35.
9.
Covington, M.V. (1992) Making the Grade: A Self-Worth Perspective on Motivation and School Reform. New York: Cambridge University Press.
10.
Cronbach, L.J. (1951) ‘Coefficient Alpha and the Internal Structure of Tests’, Psychometrika16: 297–334.
11.
Davis, C. (2001) ‘Students Put Off the Sciences at School’, The Times Higher Education Supplement. Retrieved from http://www.thes.co.uk
12.
Deci, E.L. and Ryan, R.M. (1985) Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior. New York: Plenum.
13.
Deci, E.L. and Ryan, R.M. (2000) ‘The “What” and “Why” of Goal Pursuits: Human Needs and the Self-Determination of Behavior’, Psychological Inquiry11: 227–268.
14.
Deci, E.L. , Eghrari, H., Patrick, B.C. and Leone, D.R. (1994) ‘Facilitating Internalization: The Self-Determination Theory Perspective’, Journal of Personality62: 119–142.
15.
Deci, E.L. , Vallerand, R.J., Pelletier, L.G. and Ryan, R.M. (1991) ‘Motivation in Education: The Self-Determination Perspective’, Educational Psychologist26: 346–352.
16.
Goudas, M. , Biddle, S.J.H. and Fox, K.R. (1994) ‘Perceived Locus of Causality, Goal Orientations, and Perceived Competence in School PhysicalEducation Classes’, British Journal of Educational Psychology64: 453–463.
17.
Guay, F. , Vallerand, R.J. and Blanchard, C. (2000) ‘On the Assessment of Situational Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation: The Situational Motivational Scale (SIMS)’, Motivation and Emotion24: 175–213.
18.
Keys, W. and Fernandes, C. (1993) What do Students Think about School? A Report for the National Commission on Education. Slough: National Foundation for Educational Research.
19.
Lee, O. and Brophy, J. (1996) ‘Motivational Patterns Observed in Sixth-Grade Science Classroom’, Journal of Research in Science Teaching33: 303–318.
20.
Mechelen, W.V. , Twisk, J.W.R., Post, B., Snel, J. and Kemper, H.C.G. (1999) ‘Physical Activity of Young People: The Amsterdam Longitudinal Growth and Health Study’, Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise1610–1616.
21.
Ntoumanis, N. (2001) ‘A Self-Determination Approach to the Understanding of Motivation in Physical Education’, British Journal of Educational Psychology71: 225–242.
22.
Ntoumanis, N. (2002) ‘Motivational Clusters in British Physical Education Classes’, Psychology of Sport and Exercise3: 177–194.
23.
Pedhazur, E.J. and Schmelkin, L. (1991) Measurement, Design, and Analysis: An Integrated Approach. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
24.
Ryan, R.M. and Connell, J.P. (1989) ‘Perceived Locus of Causality and Internalisation: Examining Reasons for Acting in Two Domains’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology57: 749–761.
25.
Ryan, R.M. and Deci, E.L. (2000) ‘Self-Determination Theory and the Facilitation of Intrinsic Motivation, Social Development, and Well-Being’, American Psychologist55: 68–78.
Shephard, R.J. and Trudeau, F. (2000) ‘The Legacy of Physical Education: Influences on Adult Lifestyle’, Pediatric Exercise Science12: 34–50.
28.
Standage, M. , Duda, J.L. and Ntoumanis, N. (in press) ‘A Model of Contextual Motivation in Physical Education: Incorporating Constructs and Tenets from Self-Determination and Goal Perspective Theories to Predict Leisure-Time Exercise Intentions’,Journal of Educational Psychology.
29.
Swain, H. (1996) ‘Boring Teaching Leads to Unrest’, The Times Higher Education Supplement. Retrieved from http://www.thes.co.uk
30.
Tabachnick, B.G. and Fidell, L.S. (2001) Using Multivariate Statistics, 4th edn.Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
31.
Vallerand, R.J. (1997) ‘Toward a Hierarchical Model of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation’, in M. Zanna (ed.) Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, pp. 271–360. New York: Academic Press.
32.
Vallerand, R.J. (2001) ‘A Hierarchical Model of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation in Sport and Exercise’, in G.C. Roberts (ed.) Advances in Motivation in Sport and Exercise, 2nd edn, pp. 263–319. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
33.
Vallerand, R.J. , Fortier, M.S. and Guay, F. (1997) ‘Self-Determination and Persistence in a Real-Life Setting: Toward a Motivational Model ofHigh School Dropout’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology72: 1161–1176.
34.
Vallerand, R.J. , Pelletier, L.G., Blais, M.R., BriËre, N.M., SenÈcal, C. and ValliËres, E.F. (1992) ‘The Academic MotivationScale: A Measure of Intrinsic, Extrinsic, and Amotivation in Education’, Education and Psychological Measurement52: 1003–1017.
35.
Vallerand, R.J. , Pelletier, L.G., Blais, M.R., BriËre, N.M., SenÈcal, C. and ValliËres, E.F. (1993) ‘On the Assessment of Intrinsic, Extrinsic, and Amotivation in Education: Evidence on the Concurrent and Construct Validity of the Academic Motivation Scale’, Educational and Psychological Measurement53: 159–172.
