The mediating role of engagement in the relation between incentives and task value

Transcription

1 Title The mediating role of engagement in the relation between incentives and task value Author(s) Ng, Hoi-yan; 吳凱欣 Citation Ng, H. [ 吳凱欣 ]. (2012). The mediating role of engagement in the relation between incentives and task value. (Thesis). University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong SAR. Retrieved from Issued Date 2012 URL Rights The author retains all proprietary rights, (such as patent rights) and the right to use in future works.

2 The University of Hong Kong Department of Psychology Student Name: Ng Hoi Yan Angel University Number: Degree: M. Soc. Sc (Educational Psychology) Title of Thesis: The Mediating Role of Engagement in the Relation between Incentives and Task Value Supervisor: Dr. S. Lau Year of Submission: 2012

3 Running head: MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 1 The Mediating Role of Engagement in the Relation between Incentives and Task Value Ng Hoi Yan Angel Department of Psychology The University of Hong Kong

4 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 2 Abstract The present study examined the relations between incentive, engagement and task value with reference to the Regulatory Engagement Theory (Higgins, 2006).With two incentive interventions (reward and utility), contribution of engagement on task value was tested through a mediation analysis. Significant results were obtained in the utility intervention group. Participants demonstrated higher task value and stronger engagement after intervention, a significant mediated effect also revealed that engagement explained the effects of intervention on task value. Results in the reward intervention group did not yield statistical significance but were in expected direction. The mediating effect of engagement in the relation between incentive and task value was generally supported, but the strength of effect varied upon the choice of incentives. Theoretical and practical implications were discussed.

5 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 3 The Mediating Role of Engagement in the Relation between Incentives and Task Value Introduction The expectancy-value model (Atkinson, 1957; Eccles et al, 1983), a long- standing perspective on achievement motivation, posited a variety of constructs, including ability belief, task expectancy and subjective task value, in explaining how motivation influences choices and performance. Although it was generally agreed that achievement-related choices, persistence, engagement and performance can be determined by both people's competence-related beliefs (expectancy) as well as their subjective task valuation (value), a great deal of research attention was put on the 'expectancy' component, to which it has been studied extensively in various cognitive theories of motivation through different operationalization of the same construct, e.g. 'competence' in Self Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985), 'perceived control' in Attributional Theory (Weiner, 1986) and 'self efficacy' in Self Efficacy Theory (Bandura, 1977), all tapping on similar meanings of the 'expectancy' construct: individual s belief and expectation on how well they can perform on a task. In contrast to the proliferation in expectancy-related literature, few lines of research focused on the 'value' component until the recent decade, regardless of defining, measuring or assessing its relationship with other constructs (Brophy, 2008; Eccles &

6 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 4 Wigfield, 1995). Despite the disproportionate research emphasis between the two components, existing research on value component revealed its significant relationship with other motivational constructs e.g. interest development (Hidi & Renninger, 2006), expectancy and ability perception in math (Eccles & Wigfield,1995; Nurmi & Aunola, 2005), achievement choice and performance (Greene, DeBacker, Ravindran, & Krows 1999), and achievement behaviors (Cox & Whaley, 2004). In regard to these significant associations with a great deal of achievement-related concepts, the value component certainly warrants more research attention. Task Value Value, first defined by Klinger (1977), is the degree of affective changes that a person expects to derive from a potential goal object. It is the anticipated emotional payoffs that determine whether a person becomes committed to a goal pursuit. In area of achievement motivation, theorists have narrowed down the construct into a more specific form termed 'subjective task value', in which Eccles and her colleagues (1983) conceptualized it in terms of four subcomponents, namely attainment value, intrinsic value, utility value and cost, supported with a growing consensus in the use among empirical studies (Bong, 2001). Attainment value is defined as the importance of succeeding a task in terms of one s self concept; intrinsic value is the inherit

7 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 5 enjoyment and pleasure one gets from engaging in a task; utility value refers to the instrumentality or relevance of a task in one s life; while cost is any negative aspect of engaging in a task like effort or negative emotion state. In spite of this distinct conceptualization, task value has often been analyzed as a single factor in most empirical studies, with most of them combining attainment, intrinsic, and utility value (Anderman, et. al, 2001; Jacobs, Lanza, Osgood, Eccles, & Wigfield, 2002). In reviewing existing work on task value, a substantial body of research has focused heavily on investigating the consequences of value creation. Fishbach (2009) found a positive causal link between valuation and engagement, while others indicated a correlation between task value and subsequent behaviors (Feather, 1982; Chouinard, Karsenti, & Roy, 2007). Task value was also proven to be related to various positive outcomes like interest development, effort and persistent (Hidi & Renninger, 2006; Chouinard et al., 2007), etc. However, fewer attentions have centered on how value is established and enhanced in the first place before these positive outcomes follow. Regulatory Engagement Theory The regulatory engagement theory (RET) proposed by Higgins (2006) is an antecedent theory in explaining value in relation to the goal-pursuit process, on top of classical perspective of value reflecting only the end-goal outcome. Historically, value

8 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 6 is understood or defined in terms of properties of the end-state, e.g. people attach value to something that produce pleasure or positive affect, or that is useful and fulfill some of their needs (Kahneman, Diener & Schwarz, 1999). However, Higgins argued that while the properties of goal outcome contributed to people's overall valuation, the goal process itself also mattered, by which he referred to any factor that affected a person's experience during the goal pursuit activity. It is also revealed by other researchers that the value of a task to a student was determined not only by its consequences, but also the stimulating experience of being engaged in it (Baumert & Demmrich, 2001). Value, as in the regulatory engagement theory, is conceptualized as a motivational force experience that varies in both directional dimension (positive or negative) and intensity dimension (weak to strong). Attaching positive or negative value experience to something corresponds to having attraction towards or repulsion from it respectively, and this directional attraction / repulsion varies from weak to strong intensity. Higgins identified three sources of value experience in relation to the properties of the goal outcome. While hedonic properties, such as subjective pain and pleasure associated with the goal objects, is the major determinant of value experience; whether the goal outcome can fulfill some needs (need satisfaction) and live up to some norms and expectations (standards) are also contributors to value experience

9 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 7 even they do not produce hedonic experience. These three sources, as shown in Figure 1, are expected to influence value experience through their contributions to both value direction and value intensity. The two motivational force experience of direction and intensity, though experienced holistically, are conceptually distinguishable in RET in regard to their respective sources. While value direction is primarily determined by the quality of goal outcome, value intensity can be strengthened by both the quality of goal outcome and other sources. With the emphasis on how the process of goal pursuit itself may have direct effect on value experience, one of the unique contribution of RET lies in its consideration of sources of value intensity that are non-directional and independent of the outcome goal's hedonic properties. In particular, Higgins proposed that 'engagement strength' played a crucial role in the creation of value intensity. Engagement, a state of being involved, occupied, fully absorbed and engrossed in something (i.e. sustained attention), is a non-directional source unique to value intensity during the goal pursuit process. With this non-directional contribution, the more engaged a person is in the goal pursuit activity, the more intense his or her value experience would be towards the initial attraction or repulsion direction. Higgins termed this the value intensification effect, where a higher engagement strength during the goal pursuit process makes a positive target more positive and a negative

10 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 8 one more negative. He further identified five sources of engagement strength (i.e. opposing interfering forces, overcoming personal resistance, regulatory fit, likelihood and use of proper means) that are independent from sources of value direction and that arise from the goal pursuit process itself. However, they are not with the scope of current study and therefore will not be discussed in detail in this paper. As shown in the conceptual framework of RET (Fig 1), those sources in relation to the end-goal properties (hedonic properties, need satisfaction and standards) contribute to value experience not only directly by influencing value direction and intensity, but also indirectly through its effect on engagement strength. This proposed relations among variables in the model implies a mediation effect of engagement between value experience and any of its sources. The present study would investigate this mediation through an incentive manipulation. Figure 1. Conceptual framework of Regulatory Engagement Theory

11 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 9 Key Variables Incentive. Incentive, the goal object that a person desires to attain, is expected to bring about positive affect. With the conceptualization of value as having affective changes from a potential goal object, incentive by definition creates and enhances value, which is often termed as incentive value (the degree to which an object is desired). Also, research indicated that offering students incentives for success in academic tasks led to increased effort, intrinsic motivation and persistence (Schunk, 1984; Joke, Siegfried, & Willy, 2004), all of which demonstrate considerable overlaps with the engagement construct. According to the RET, sources in relation to the end-goal properties, like 'hedonic experience', 'need satisfaction' and 'standards', impact both value and engagement strength, and that the relations between these sources and value are implied to be mediated through engagement strength. Comparably, incentive, with its effects on both value and engagement strength, takes similar role as the above three sources; and therefore, the relations between incentive and value could also be postulated to be mediated through engagement strength. Engagement. Relationship between students' engagement in school and their learning motivation has been a growing interest to many educators. While there have been considerable studies on engagement, existing literatures reflect little consensus on both the definition and measurement of the engagement construct (Appleton,

12 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 10 Christenson & Furlong, 2008). Among the variations in conceptualization, engagement is typically agreed as a multidimensional construct, containing behavioral, cognitive, affective, academic, or psychological component, with different number of components being identified in different theories. Fredricks and colleagues (2004) came up with a tripartite conceptualization of engagement incorporating cognitive (psychological investment in learning such as being thoughtful, strategic or self-regulated), behavioral (participation in learning such as being effortful, persistent and involved) and emotional components (affection in learning such as feelings and appreciation of school-related outcomes). Engagement, defined in the RET as absorption and sustained attention, captures mainly the cognitive component. However, in educational context, researches focused almost exclusively on behavioral engagement (Zyngier, 2008), and both cognitive and behavioral engagement appeared to have a strong relationship with students' learning achievement (Miller, Greene, Montalvo, Ravindran, & Nicholas, 1996). In view of this, engagement construct in the RET was modified in current study by incorporating also the behavioral component like effort and participation so as to fit better the classroom context. While both cognitive and behavioral components describe students' engagement in a specific task, emotional component in contrast focuses on students' engagement to the school on the whole (such as belongingness and

13 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 11 identification to school, or affective reaction to peers and teachers). Therefore, with the investigation of specific task value in current study, emotional component did not fit well the conceptualization of engagement construct. Engagement is thus defined as both cognitive engagement and behavioral engagement in present study. Incentive manipulation. To investigate the relationship between incentive, engagement and task value, present study started out with an incentive intervention. Research indicated that task value is determined by the anticipated incentive an individual will receive from participating in an activity, in which this incentive may derive either directly from the activity itself or indirectly through the activity's instrumental role in acquiring other desired consequences (Rotter, 1982). Two conditions of incentive, namely reward incentive and utility incentive, were used in present study. i) Reward Incentive. The use of external rewards, such as monetary payment, gifts or even social activities, was proliferated in the study of achievement motivation (Marinak & Gambrell, 2008; Ames, 1992), with evidence that rewards impact students' attitude, motivation and engagement (Fawson, Reutzel, Read, Smith & Moore, 2009). Deci, Koestner and Ryan (1999) introduced three typology of reward contingencies: task-noncontingent reward (given for things other than the task itself, such as participation in a study), task-contingent reward (given for engaging or

14 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 12 completing a task) and performance-contingent reward (given for achieving some standard of excellence), each of which to be effective under various experimental conditions. To maximize the effect of intervention, present study captured all three subtypes in the reward incentive condition. Therefore, participants were given rewards for participating in the study (task-noncontingent), working on (task-contingency) as well as attainting a pre-determined rate of accuracy in (performance-contingency) a grade-level math task. On top of the postulated effect of reward incentive on subsequent task value, the use of task-contingent and performance-contingent reward was also expected to enhance behavioral and cognitive engagement respectively. ii) Utility Incentive. Besides offering tangible rewards, helping students to find value and meaning in their schoolwork is also a common way to enhance achievement motivation (Brophy, 1999; Wigfield & Eccles, 2002). Utility intervention has proven to promote a number of motivational outcomes like interest, task value and task performance (Hidi & Renninger, 2006; Durik & Harackiewicz, 2007; Hulleman, Godes, Hendricks & Harackiewicz, 2010). While informing students about the relevance of the learning materials for their lives is a common way of utility intervention (Godes, 2007), Hulleman and colleagues (2010) suggested that a more effective approach would lie on encouraging students to generate their own

15 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 13 connections and discover for themselves the relevance of learning materials for their lives. Therefore, present study drew on both methods, where participants were told explicitly the usefulness and relevance of Math learning to their everyday lives, as well as were asked to describe the personal relevance of Math learning in life. Aim and Significance Traditional research on Regulatory Engagement Theory (RET) investigated value mainly in consumer decision making (Higgins, Camacho, Idson, Spiegel, & Scholer, 2008; Sehnert, Franks, & Higgins, 2009) or laboratory setting (Higgins, Marguc, & Scholer, 2009), which bears little relevance in understanding task value in educational context. Yet if conceptualization of value, as affective changes in general, is comparable among contexts, it makes sense to postulate a generalization of RET to education setting, in specific the relation between engagement and value, which both are commonly studied constructs in the field of achievement motivation. The present study aimed to investigate the mediation effect of engagement between incentive and task value. While RET did not make explicit this implied relationship, a testing of this mediated effect poses theoretical significance to the RET, especially the mechanism of value intensification effect of engagement strength. Also, with the generalization of theory to educational setting, present study made modifications on the engagement construct in RET to incorporate both cognitive and

16 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 14 behavioral components to fit better the learning context. Moreover, as engagement task, like class work and homework, is commonly used in nowadays' schooling (Tam, 2009), establishing a significant link between incentive, engagement and value also offers practical implications to educators in making use of engagement strength as a way to foster task value during the learning process of students. Hypotheses Three hypotheses were postulated among the relationship between incentive, engagement and task value. First hypothesis proposed that incentive (with its affective elements by definition) enhances task value. The total effect on task value of both incentive conditions was expected to be significantly higher than that of control group. Also, with the considerable positive outcomes brought by incentive in traditional incentive intervention, second hypothesis proposed that incentive enhances engagement strength, in which engagement strength was expected to be higher in both incentive conditions than the control group. On top of the first two hypotheses, the third one examined the unique contribution of engagement strength on task value. It is hypothesized that engagement strength mediates the relations between incentive and task value. According to RET, the value intensification effect of engagement operates independently from value

17 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 15 direction, therefore when hypothesis one postulated a positive (directional) enhancement in task value, it is incompatible with hypothesis three if participants experience an initial negative task value. The intensification effect towards the negative end will be reduced or offset by the positive directional change and makes the net effect unexplainable. To avoid this interpretation difficulty, present study focused only on participants with positive initial value. Figure 2 demonstrated a conceptual framework of the present study: Hypothesis 1: incentive enhances task value (pathway c) Hypothesis 2: incentive enhances engagement strength (pathway a) Hypothesis 3: engagement strength mediates the relations between incentive and task value (pathway ab) Engagement strength pathway a pathway b Incentive Task value pathway c Figure 2. Conceptual framework of present study

18 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 16 Method Participants An intact form of secondary one, a total of one hundred and twenty-eight students, were recruited from a local co-educated mainstream school. Subject to the incompatibility between hypothesis one and three, twenty six students were excluded from the study after completion of pre-test indicating their negative initial task value (i.e. any score below 0). As a result, one hundred and two students participated in the current study. Participants were first stratified by class before they were randomly assigned within each class into either one of the two experimental groups, or control group. They completed the experiment within a single session individually. Procedure Participants first filled in a pre-test questionnaire measuring their initial task value in math two hours before the actual experiment. Participants with negative score were screened out and resumed their normal school activity. Remaining participants were tested in their own classroom accordingly. After completing the consent form, participants were briefed that they are going to finish a math exercise and a questionnaire according to instructions given. Experimenters further informed participants that there were different set of instructions so they might finish the exercise at different time. Yet all participants were required to stay until the end of the

19 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 17 experiment (i.e. 60 minutes) even some of them would finish the exercise earlier. This is to ensure participants who were in the experimental groups (supposed to need a longer time as compared to control group) would not rush through the math exercise for the sake of leaving earlier. After the briefing, experimenter gave out written instructions to participants according to their group assignment. Reward group: Before working on the math exercise, participants received instruction on the reward contingency. According to the instruction, they needed to finish a math exercise with 14 questions, during the working process, experimenter would reward one sticker on a small record form placed on their table after completion of each question regardless of the accuracy (so participants could at most obtain 14 stickers). The instruction also indicated that the experimenter would mark their exercise at the end, and reward two extra stickers upon 70% of performance (i.e. 10 out of 14 questions answered correctly). Participants would receive a gift upon finishing the exercise, and an additional gift upon collecting fifteen stickers or above (i.e. requiring at least completion of 13 questions with 70% of performance, to boost both behavioral engagement and cognitive engagement). During the process, each experimenter was responsible for 5 participants in checking of completion and giving out stickers. Participants then filled in post test questionnaires containing measurement of task value, engagement strength and affect. By the time participants

20 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 18 filled in the post test questionnaire, experimenter marked their exercises. Participants then received one or two gift according to their performance. Utility group: Participants were first handed with reading passages on the relationship between math and daily living, for example calculating discount in retail store and analyzing voting statistic on different products (Durik & Harackiewicz, 2007), as well as the usefulness of math in university admission and future careers. After reading, they had a writing exercise on the usefulness of math learning to their daily living, they were given hints to use the information from the passages or to write their own opinions. They then finished the math exercise and post test questionnaire accordingly. Control group: Participants were given a math exercise to work on and then filled in the post test questionnaire. No other instruction was given. The math exercise used in the present study contained fourteen grade-level questions. It was worded in English as this is a school with English as medium of instruction in daily teaching. When all participants finished the post test questionnaires, they were debriefed and dismissed. The math exercise and instructions for the experimental groups were attached in appendix for reference. Measures Task value. Participants' task value in math was measured before and after the

21 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 19 experimental session using a self-report scale (Eccles & Wigfield, 1995), including subtypes of attainment value (e.g. Is the amount of effort it will take to do well in math worthwhile to you?), intrinsic value (e.g. How much do you like math?) and utility value (e.g. How useful is what you learn in math for your daily life outside school?). To better investigate the value intensification effect, Eccles & Wigfield's seven-item scale was expanded to a twenty-item scale, ranged from negative ten to positive ten, in present study so as to capture even small changes in value intensity. Engagement. Engagement strength in participants was measured by five items, adapted and modified from Fan's (2011) research on behavioral engagement as well as Fredricks's cognitive engagement scale (2004). Participants rated themselves in a four-point scale on items of behavioral engagement (e.g. I work as hard as possible when doing the math exercise) and cognitive engagement (e.g. If I don t understand what the question means, I go back and read it over again). Affect. With the definition of incentive as bringing positive affect, present study also took measurement on participants' subjective affect, to see if offering incentives resemble another source of value - hedonic experience (subjective pleasure and pain). If incentive do not link to higher hedonic experience, the role of incentive may worth further exploration as an additional source of value experience on top of hedonic experience, need satisfaction and standards. To measure hedonic properties, the

22 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 20 two-dimensional structure of affect proposed by Barrett and Russell (1998) provided a conceptual framework in understanding affect in both the degree of pleasantness (positive to negative) and degree of activation (activated and deactivated). As the present study involved participants with positive initial task value, only the positive affect dimension was measured. Participants were given eight adjectives of positive affect (e.g. happy, excited, content, calm) to rate their feelings at the moment of the experiment using a five-point scale. All individual items for each self-report scale used in this study were listed in the appendix. Reliability. Reliability analysis was used to estimate internal consistency of items in each self report scale. Cronbach's alpha, a measure of reliability, for pre-test task value measure (α=.73), affect (α=.653), engagement strength (α=.755), and post-test task value measure (α=.786) indicated satisfactory homogeneity of items. Results Randomization check With unequal class size and within-class randomization, sample size of the three conditions were unequal (35 participants in reward group, 34 in utility group, and 33 in control group). To test whether randomization was successful in equating groups on expectation of task value before experimentation, ANOVA on pre-test task value was conducted. Result indicated that participants in the three groups did not significantly

23 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 21 differ in initial task value before the experiment, F (2, 99) =.103, p =.902. Randomization was therefore considered successful. Task value and Engagement ANOVA indicated participants' engagement strength in the reward group (M = 3.18, SD = 0.57), utility group (M = 3.36, SD = 0.34) and control group (M = 3.01, SD = 0.55) differed significantly after intervention, F (2, 99) = 4.08, p <.05. However, ANOVA, as an omnibus analysis, did not reveal significant difference on task value among groups (reward group: M = 4.73, SD = 2.39; utility group: M = 5.24, SD = 2.28; control group: M = 4.06, SD = 2.74) after intervention, F (2, 99) = 1.91, p >.05. Cohen's d, a measure of effect size, of reward group v.s. control group and utility group v.s. control group were.259 and.485 respectively, revealing small to medium effect size. Mediation Traditionally, the causal steps approach by Baron and Kenny (1986) is highly popular and dominant in testing mediation. Yet its specific use on investigating continuous variables poses challenges in establishing mediation effect of categorical independent variables, for example the difference between experimental groups and control group as in the present study. Preacher and Hayes (2011) offers a statistical mediation analysis - MEDIATE- of indirect and direct effect of multi-categorical

24 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 22 variables. The present study adopted this analysis to test the mediation effect of engagement strength between incentive and task value, with participants' pre-test task value as covariate. To represent group membership of the three groups, 2 dummy variables (D1 and D2) were coded, with D1 representing the contrast between reward and control group, while D2 representing the contrast between utility and control group. Owing to the multi-categorical nature of independent variables (reward and utility incentive group), no single parameter can be interpreted as the total effect of incentive. A specific statistic contrasting each incentive group to the control group addressed more precisely the relationship between variables than an omnibus statistic which contained general effect of incentive without specifying the nature of that effect with respect to comparison between groups. Table 1 The total, direct and indirect effect of mediation analysis VARIABLES IN THE FULL MODEL: Y = posttest_value M1 = engagement X = D1 D2 COVARIATES: pretest_value

25 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 23 OUTCOME VARIABLE: engagement MODEL SUMMARY R R-sq Adj R-sq F df1 df2 p MODEL COEFFICIENTS Coeff. s.e. T p Constant D D pretest_value OUTCOME VARIABLE: posttest_value MODEL SUMMARY R R-sq Adj R-sq F df1 df2 p MODEL COEFFICIENTS Coeff. s.e. T p Constant Engagement D D pretest_value OMNIBUS TEST OF DIRECT EFFECT R-sq F df1 df2 p

26 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 24 INDIRECT EFFECT(S) THROUGH: engagement Effect SE(boot) LLCI ULCI D D OMNIBUS Table 1 illustrated the total, direct and indirect effect among variables. The model estimation yielded 1 omnibus statistic showing the total effect of incentive on task value, 2 coefficients (c'1, c'2) quantifying the direct effect of different incentive groups on task value while holding engagement strength constant, 2 coefficients (a1, a2) estimating the difference between incentive groups on engagement strength, as well as 1 coefficient (b) indicating the effect of engagement strength on task value while statistically equating the groups on the independent variable. Figure 3 demonstrated these total, direct and indirect effect with coefficients. Engagement Strength a1 a2 b Reward group (D1) Utility group (D2) c'1 Task Value c'2 Figure 3. Total, direct and indirect effect in mediation analysis.

27 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 25 The basic model indicated that incentive accounted for a significant portion of the variance in task value, F(4, 97) = , p <.05, R²= This significant effect demonstrated that participants in both incentive groups altogether had higher post test task value than the control group. Although a significant omnibus statistic was found, contrast comparisons indicated significance only in utility group, c' 2 =.7226, p <.05, but not reward group, c' 1 =.297, p >.05, meaning that with engagement strength holding constant, only the utility group had a higher task value after experiment as compare to the control group. Likewise, in estimating the difference between incentive groups on engagement strength, only utility group was shown to have significant effect, a 2 =.3413, p <.01. Reward group was not statistically different from the control group in terms of engagement strength, a 1 =.1574, p >.05. Last, relationship between engagement strength and task value was statistically significant, b=.8476, p <.01. The bootstrap confidence interval was used to test the indirect/mediated effect. If zero is outside of the interval, the mediated effect is considered to be statistically different from zero. Table 1 illustrated a significant mediated effect only in the utility group, 95% CI (.0782,.4937), but not in the reward group, 95% CI (-.1024,.3213), indicating that utility incentive indirectly influenced task value through the mediation of engagement strength.

28 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 26 Affect Participants' positive affect were measured in the post test questionnaire. With pre-test task value serving as covariate, ANCOVA result did not yield significant difference among the three groups, F (2, 98) = 1.221, p =.299. Three groups did not differ in their positive affect after interventions. Discussion Results demonstrated partial support for the three hypotheses, depends on the types of incentive used. Utility intervention was successful in enhancing both task value and engagement strength, as well as triggering the mediation effect of engagement strength on task value. Present finding was also consistent with previous researches on the association between relevance intervention and perceptions of value (Hulleman, et. al., 2010), as well as the causal link between perception of meaning in activities and subsequent task engagement (Eccles & Harold, 1991). Qualitative analysis on the utility writing exercise indicated that participants did not merely copy ideas from the given passages, but generated their own personal usefulness of math to their daily living. It implied that both informing participants the usefulness and encouraging them to generate their own connections might have contributed to a successful intervention. With the ease of use and its effectiveness even in one single trial, educators are encouraged to implement it across time and subjects, especially in

29 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 27 encouraging students' self-discovery on the relevance of what they are learning, on top of simply telling them that learning is important. On the other hand, reward intervention did not produce significant effect on engagement strength and task value, nor the mediation of engagement on task value. In contrast to the consistent findings among prior utility interventions, previous researches on reward intervention identified various factors, such as initial interest, expectancy or attribution, in affecting the effectiveness of offering external rewards (Lepper, Henderlong & Gingras, 1999). Positive effects are more likely when rewards are informative, unexpected and verbal, with a task of little initial interest to participants. If these favorable conditions are not met, external reward risks an undermining effect on intrinsic motivation. In present study, it is therefore possible that the selection of participants with positive initial value regardless of how weak or strong their positivity was, as well as their expectancy in reward contingent upon some pre-determined criteria might have undermined participants' intrinsic motivation. As Eccles' measure of task value incorporated both intrinsic and extrinsic value, when reward enhanced extrinsic motivation but undermine intrinsic one, the net effect may be weaken or balanced off, causing a non-significant result. Stipek (1993) also indicated that external reinforcements are not universal in their effect, and that they are generally effective while reward contingencies are in

30 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 28 force. According to the cognitive evaluation theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985), the effect of rewards on intrinsic motivation depend on how participants perceive it as a means of behavioral control or a source of information on self competence, in which 1) task-noncontingent rewards often do not impact intrinsic motivation at all, 2) task-contingent reward always have negative effects as participants perceive it as a means to control their task engagement, and 3) performance-contingent reward can lead to both negative perception of control as well as positive perception of competence information, and therefore final effect is not so clear cut. When present study incorporated all three typology of reward contingencies, the enhancement and undermining effect brought by different contingencies may offset each other and thus weaken the final net effect. Despite the statistical non-significance, it is noteworthy that the results were still in expected direction, implying that the general direction of hypothesis might likely be supported in future research when better reward manipulations/ contingencies are adopted. In present study, inducing a sense of importance/ usefulness in learning worked more effectively than giving external rewards. Students, especially secondary school ones, may tend to perceive utility in learning as associated to their academic or career prospects, for example math as important in university admission or other aspired careers like scientist or engineer. Utility intervention, which is supposed to be

31 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 29 extrinsic in nature, may also help promote intrinsic motivation if students attached personal meaning to it such as perceiving it as important in accomplishing a personal goal. When utility intervention is both extrinsically and intrinsically motivating, the stronger effect it has over reward intervention is understandable, for external reward offers only extrinsic motivation which is less stable and autonomous. The difference in effectiveness between the two incentive manipulations offered implications on the choice of incentives in daily classroom setting. Educators, aiming to enhance students' learning motivation through the use of incentives, should therefore select appropriate one by careful consideration of students' age development and aspiration/interest, as well as the nature, sustainability and intensity of effectiveness in different incentives. Next, supporting the mediation effect of engagement between utility intervention and task value implied that the experience in goal pursuit process, on top of the outcomes goal, also contributes to subsequent task value. In actual classroom environment, the outcome of the end-states (i.e. what students want as their ultimate goal) such as the learning content itself or satisfactory attainment may hardly be modified or controlled, students have to learn the assigned content or to accept sometimes they cannot attain an expected level. While educators can barely work to change or enhance the value or attractiveness of these end-state, the mediation effect demonstrated another way out through the goal pursuit process. Knowing that the

32 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 30 experience (in particular stronger engagement) during learning process can affect task value, teachers and parents can therefore find ways to enhance task value through boosting engagement, on top of merely modifying the end-state to make it more valuable. Theoretical implications In testing the relations between incentives, engagement strength and task value, present study supplements the RET in providing an explicit measure of engagement which is often left unmeasured in Higgins' s experiments. Engagement in consumers' decision making process (as studied in Higgins's experiments) involves mainly cognitive thinking, while engagement in learning context often involves both behaviors and cognitions. With this modification, results still demonstrated significant connection between engagement strength and task value. Having emphasized the intensification effect of engagement, RET discussed separately the pathways between sources of value and engagement, as well as engagement and subsequent value. Present study helps to make explicit and proves this implied mediation effect of engagement strength between value and any of its sources. Last, as affective measure did not show any significant difference among three groups, it is assumed that hedonic experience remains the same among groups after experimentation. Therefore, the role of incentive may be different, theoretically or practically, from hedonic

33 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 31 experience. Its position as an additional source of task value could be a future direction of study. Limitations As both incentive manipulations were conducted in single session experimental setting, it remains to be seen if the results can be generalized to actual classroom environment. With more complexities in actual classroom such as difference in students' abilities or task difficulties, effect of incentive on engagement strength and task value may be less straight forward. Moreover, although the mediation effect tested in the present study revealed a connection between engagement and task value, it only partially demonstrated the intensification effect of engagement. According to the RET, the intensification effect of engagement operates in both positive and negative directions of value experience. The present research studied only positive value group because the use of incentive (to trigger engagement) is likely to cause also a positive directional change in value, which will offset or make unclear the intensification effect of negative value group (which is supposed to intensify towards the negative direction). Future research will need to investigate further on the connection of engagement to value specifically among the negative value group in order to offer more solid support for the intensification effect.

34 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 32 Conclusion The present study examined the relationship between incentive, engagement and task value with reference to the regulatory engagement theory through two incentive manipulations - reward and utility intervention. Results indicated partial support on the mediation effect of engagement between incentive and value, with significant result found in the utility group but not the reward group. Participants in the utility group showed significantly higher task value and engagement after intervention, and a significant mediated effect of engagement further explained the effect of intervention on task value. Results in the reward group were in expected direction although it did not yield statistical significance. While utility intervention was proved to be effective even in a single trial, it is still promising that, with better reward contingencies, a significant result can be obtained in reward intervention in future study. In sum, the present study provides support for the RET by demonstrating the pathway by which task value can be promoted through experience during the goal pursuit process.

35 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 33 Acknowledgement I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisor Dr. S. Lau for his continuous guidance and advise in all the time of research and writing of this paper. I thank Mr. M. Chung, Ms. C. Ho, and Ms. P. Tong for their help in subject recruitment and data collection. My sincere thanks also goes to Ms. M. Chan, Mr. J. Chan, Mr. B. Law and Mr. K. Ching for their personal support and encouragement along the process.

36 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 34 Reference Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), Anderman, E. M., Eccles, J. S., Yoon, K. S., Roeser, R., Wigfield, A., & Blumenfeld, P. (2001). Learning to value mathematics and reading: Relations to mastery and performance-oriented instructional practices. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26, Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., & Furlong, M. J. (2008). Student engagement with school: critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. Psychology in the Schools, 45(5), Atkinson, J. W. (1957). Motivational determinants of risk taking behavior. Psychological Review, 64, Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behavioral Change. Psychological Review, 84, (2), Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, Baumert, J. & Demmrich, A. (2001). Test motivation in the assessment of student skills: The effects of incentives on motivation and performance. European Journal and Psychology of Education, 16, (3), Bong, M. (2001). Role of self-efficacy and task value in predicting college students' course enrollments and intentions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26, Brophy, J. (1999). Toward a model of the value aspects of motivation in education: Developing appreciation for particular learning domains and activities. Educational Psychologist, 34, 75 85

37 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 35 Brophy, J. (2008). Developing students appreciation for what is taught in school. Educational Psychologist, 43, Chouinard, R., Karsenti, T., & Roy, N. (2007). Relations among competence beliefs, utility value, achievement goals, and effort in mathematics. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, Cox, A.E., & Whaley, D.E. (2004). The influence of task value, expectancies for success, and identity on athletes achievement behaviors. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 16, Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum. Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999). Meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 125 (6), Durik, A. M., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2007). Different strokes for different folks: How personal interest moderates the effects of situational factors on task interest. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, Eccles, J. S., & Harold, R. D. (1991). Gender differences in sport involvement: Applying the Eccles expectancy value model. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 3, Eccles, J.S., & Wigfield, A. (1995). In the mind of the actor: The structure of adolescents achievement task values and expectancy-related beliefs. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, Eccles, J., Adler, T. F., Futterman, R., Goff, S. B., Kaczala, C. M., Meece, J. L., & Midgley, C. (1983). Expectancies, values, and academic behaviors. In J. T. Spence (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motives, San Francisco, CA: Freeman. Fan, Weihua (2011). Social influences, school motivation and gender differences: an application of the expectancy-value theory. Educational Psychology, 31(2),

38 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 36 Fawson, P. C., Reutzel, D. R., Read, S., Smith, J. A., & Moore, S. A. (2009). The influence of differing the paths to an incentive on third graders' reading achievement and attitudes. Reading Psychology, 30(6), Feather, N. T., & Newton, J. W. (1982). Values, expectations, and the prediction of social action: An expectancy-valence analysis. Motivation and Emotion, 6, Fishbach, A. (2009). The function of value in self-regulation. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19, Fredricks, J.A., Blumenfeld, P.C., & Paris, A.H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, Godes, O., Hulleman, C. S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2007, April). Boosting students interest in math with utility value: Two experimental tests. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL. Greene, B.A., DeBacker, T.K., Ravindran, B., & Krows, A.J. (1999). Goals, values, and beliefs as predictors of achievement and effort in high school mathematics classes. Sex Roles, 40(5), Hayes, A. F., & Preacher, K., J. (2012). Statistical mediation analysis with a multicategorical independent variable. Manuscript submitted for publication. Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41, Higgins, E. T. (2006). Value from hedonic experience and engagement. Psychological Review, 113, Higgins, E. T., Camacho, C. J., Idson, L. C., Spiegel, S., & Scholer, A. A. (2008). How making the same decision in a proper way creates value. Social Cognition, 26, Higgins, E. T., Marguc, J., & Scholer, A. A. (2009). Working under adversity:

39 MEDIATING ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT 37 How opposing versus coping affects value.: Unpublished manuscript, Columbia University Hulleman, C. S., Godes, O., Hendricks, B. L., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2010). Enhancing interest and performance with a utility value intervention. Journal of Educational Psychology,102(4), Jacobs, J. E., Lanza, S., Osgood, D. W., Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Changes in children's self-competence and values: Gender and domain differences across grades one through twelve. Child Development, 73, Joke, S., Siegfried, D., & Willy, L. (2004). The role of different types of instrumentality in motivation, study strategies, and performance: Know why you learn, so you'll know what you learn!. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, Kahneman, D., Diener, E., & Schwarz, N. (1999). Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Klinger, E. (1977). Meaning and void: Inner experience and the incentives in people lives. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Marinak, B. A., & Gambrell, L. B. (2008). Intrinsic motivation and rewards: What sustains young children s engagement with text? Literacy Research and Instruction, 47(1), Mark, R, Lepper., Jennifer, Henderlong., & Isabelle Gingras. (1999). Understanding the effects of extrinsic reards on intrinsic motivation - uses and abuses of meta-analysis: comment and Deci, Koestner, and Ryan (1999). Psychology Bulletin, 125, 6, Miller, R. B., Greene, B. A., Montalvo, G. P., Ravindran, B., & Nichols, J. D. (1996). Engagement in academic work: the role of learning goals, future consequnces, pleasing others and perceived ability. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21, Nurmi, J.E., & Aunola, K. (2005). Task-motivation during the first school year: A person-oriented approach to longitudinal data. Learning and Instruction,