Individuelle Einflussfaktoren auf Motivationsregulation: Wer reguliert wann und wie die eigene Lernmotivation?

Especially in higher education, the self-regulation of cognitive, metacognitive, environmental, but also motivational aspects of learning is an important prerequisite for academic success (Dresel et al., 2015; Robbins et al., 2004). While there is much evidence for the positive effects of motivational regulation on effort expenditure, performance, well-being, reduced procrastination and dropout tendencies, the influence of individual, person-related dispositions on the process of motivational regulation is less well understood, characterised by inconsistent or small associations between motivational regulation and rather general and comparatively stable individual factors examined (such as cognitive abilities and personality traits), and lack of clarity to which aspects of the motivational regulation process these dispositions are related. This dissertation therefore addresses the questions 1) whether stable, but malleable individual dispositions that are more specific to the motivational regulation process are related to motivational regulation beyond general individual dispositions (manuscripts 1 & 2), 2) by which mechanisms they are related to motivational regulation and willingness to exert effort, and 3) how such specific individual dispositions and different aspects of the motivational regulation process can be validly assessed in self-reports (Manuscripts 1, 2 & 3). Manuscripts 1 and 2 found in five student samples that self-efficacy for motivational regulation and implicit theories about motivation as individual dispositions more specific to motivational regulation were related to the use of motivational regulation strategies and effort expenditure beyond respective general dispositions. Regarding possible mechanisms, self-efficacy for motivational regulation was associated with a more frequent use of motivational regulation strategies and effort expenditure, but not with a more effective strategy use. Implicit theories about extrinsic motivation were also related to more frequent strategy use and effort expenditure via self-efficacy for motivational regulation. Study 3 showed that various constructs of the motivational regulation process, which are closely related in terms of content and theory, can be validly assessed via self-report questionnaires under certain conditions (for example, if methodological artefacts are controlled for), but that their use also bears disadvantages. Implications of these findings for future assessment of the motivational regulation process, the expansion of existing models describing motivational regulation and the practical promotion of motivational regulation in training are discussed.