A prosocial value intervention in gateway STEM courses.

Many college students, especially first-generation and underrepresented racial/ethnic minority students, desire courses and careers that emphasize helping people and society. Can instructors of introductory science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) courses promote motivation, performance, and equity in STEM fields by emphasizing the prosocial relevance of course material? We developed, implemented, and evaluated a prosocial utility-value intervention (UVI): A course assignment in which students were asked to reflect on the prosocial value of biology or chemistry course content; our focus was on reducing performance gaps between first-generation and continuing generation college students. In Studies 1a and 1b, we piloted two versions of a prosocial UVI in introductory biology (N = 282) and chemistry classes (N = 1,705) to test whether we could encourage students to write about the prosocial value of course content. In Study 2, we tested a version of the UVI that combines personal and prosocial values, relative to a standard UVI, which emphasizes personal values, using a randomized controlled trial in an introductory chemistry course (N = 2,505), and examined effects on performance and motivation in the course. In Study 3, we tested the prosocial UVI against a standard UVI in an introductory biology course (N = 712). Results suggest that the prosocial UVI may be particularly effective in promoting motivation and performance for first-generation college students, especially those who are more confident that they can perform well in the class, reflecting a classic expectancy-value interaction. Mediation analyses suggest that this intervention worked by promoting interest in chemistry. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Using latent variable models to make gaming-the-system detection robust to context variations.

Gaming the system, a behavior in which learners exploit a system's properties to make progress while avoiding learning, has frequently been shown to be associated with lower learning. However, when we applied a previously validated gaming detector across conditions in experiments with an algebra tutor, the detected gaming was not associated with reduced learning, challenging its validity in our study context. Our exploratory data analysis suggested that varying contextual factors across and within conditions contributed to this lack of association. We present a new approach, latent variable-based gaming detection (LV-GD), that controls for contextual factors and more robustly estimates student-level latent gaming tendencies. In LV-GD, a student is estimated as having a high gaming tendency if the student is detected to game more than the expected level of the population given the context. LV-GD applies a statistical model on top of an existing action-level gaming detector developed based on a typical human labeling process, without additional labeling effort. Across three datasets, we find that LV-GD consistently outperformed the original detector in validity measured by association between gaming and learning as well as reliability. LV-GD also afforded high practical utility: it more accurately revealed intervention effects on gaming, revealed a correlation between gaming and perceived competence in math and helped understand productive detected gaming behaviors. Our approach is not only useful for others wanting a cost-effective way to adapt a gaming detector to their context but is also generally applicable in creating robust behavioral measures.

Utility-value intervention promotes persistence and diversity in STEM.

We tested the long-term effects of a utility-value intervention administered in a gateway chemistry course, with the goal of promoting persistence and diversity in STEM. In a randomized controlled trial (N = 2,505), students wrote three essays about course content and its personal relevance or three control essays. The intervention significantly improved STEM persistence overall (74% vs. 70% were STEM majors 2.5 y later). Effects were larger for students from marginalized and underrepresented racial/ethnic groups, who were 14 percentage points more likely to persist in STEM fields in the intervention condition (69% vs. 55%). Mediation analysis suggests that the intervention promoted persistence for these students by bolstering their motivation to attain a STEM degree and by promoting engagement with course assignments. This theory-informed curricular intervention is a promising tool for educators committed to retaining students in STEM.

The Utility Value of a Broad, Comprehensive Theory of Motivation.

We provide a brief commentary on the scope and impact of situated expectancy-value theory, as articulated by Eccles and Wigfield in many influential papers. In particular, we consider the long history and legacy of this theory as discussed in their legacy paper (Eccles & Wigfield, 2022).

Inside the STEM pipeline: Changes in students' biomedical career plans across the college years.

Researchers often invoke the metaphor of a pipeline when studying participation in careers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), focusing on the important issue of students who "leak" from the pipeline, but largely ignoring students who persist in STEM. Using interview, survey, and institutional data over 6 years, we examined the experiences of 921 students who persisted in biomedical fields through college graduation and planned to pursue biomedical careers. Despite remaining in the biomedical pipeline, almost half of these students changed their career plans, which was almost twice the number of students who abandoned biomedical career paths altogether. Women changed plans more often and were more likely than men to change to a career requiring fewer years of post-graduate education. Results highlight the importance of studying within-pipeline patterns rather than focusing only on why students leave STEM fields.

College Students' Reasons for Leaving Biomedical Fields: Disenchantment with Biomedicine or Attraction to Other Fields?

This study examined whether students who left biomedical fields of study during college did so primarily because they became disenchanted with those fields or because they felt attracted to alternative fields of study. We identified 1193 students intending to pursue biomedical fields of study early in college, collected data about their beliefs and performance throughout college, and interviewed them near graduation about their future plans. Descriptively, we examined the topics students discussed as affecting their attrition decisions. Predictive research aims were to determine how academic performance, interest, and demographic factors predicted students' likelihood of overall attrition and likelihood of reporting distinct reasons for attrition. Among the 192 students who left biomedical fields, 62.5% described leaving only in terms of feeling disenchanted, whereas 37.4% expressed that they left at least in part due to feeling attracted towards non-biomedical fields. Most students who left biomedical fields expressed changing plans for reasons related to interest; this was especially prevalent among students who reported leaving due to attraction towards non-biomedical fields. Predictive analyses showed that interest in biology and grades at the end of an introductory biology course predicted the likelihood of overall attrition and likelihood of leaving due to feeling disenchantment, whereas underrepresented ethnic minority status predicted these outcomes positively. Interest and course grades also predicted the likelihood of students leaving due to feeling attraction towards other fields, but interest was a stronger predictor relative to grades. Results highlight distinct types of attrition that may have implications for policies to promote STEM retention.

Feeling superior is a bipartisan issue: extremity (not direction) of political views predicts perceived belief superiority.

Accusations of entrenched political partisanship have been launched against both conservatives and liberals. But is feeling superior about one's beliefs a partisan issue? Two competing hypotheses exist: the rigidity-of-the-right hypothesis (i.e., conservatives are dogmatic) and the ideological-extremism hypothesis (i.e., extreme views on both sides predict dogmatism). We measured 527 Americans' attitudes about nine contentious political issues, the degree to which they thought their beliefs were superior to other people's, and their level of dogmatism. Dogmatism was higher for people endorsing conservative views than for people endorsing liberal views, which replicates the rigidity-of-the-right hypothesis. However, curvilinear effects of ideological attitude on belief superiority (i.e., belief that one's position is more correct than another's) supported the ideological-extremism hypothesis. Furthermore, responses reflecting the greatest belief superiority were obtained on conservative attitudes for three issues and liberal attitudes for another three issues. These findings capture nuances in the relationship between political beliefs and attitude entrenchment that have not been revealed previously.