Unpacking the Triggers of Interest in Academic Material: An Appraisal Perspective
by Connelly, Daniel Andrew, Ph.D., AUBURN UNIVERSITY, 2010, 204 pages; 3430605

Abstract:

A study was conducted to apply a recent model of interest (Silvia, 2006) to educational goals and an educational context. The model is based on appraisal theory, and contends that interest is an emotional state dependent on appraisals of the novelty-complexity of an object of study and of one’s coping potential to understand the object. Thus far, this model has been validated when the activity under investigation is viewing polygons and paintings, or reading poems, but the model’s applicability to educational goals hasn’t been investigated previously.

The present research attempted to evaluate the significance of the model regarding the activity of reading expository, academic-oriented text, and to evaluate whether interest could be manipulated through alterations to a treatment text and contribute to increased learning compared to a control group as measured by a text comprehension test. Sixty-five Auburn undergraduate psychology students completed several instruments after random assignment to treatment and control groups, including assessments of interest and three appraisals at two times (pretest and one-third complete), the comprehension test, and measures of three control variables: trait curiosity, modal learning preference, and verbal ability. In addition to investigating effects on interest and learning, a third appraisal—goal relevance (Lazarus, 1991)—was postulated and measured to respond to a call in the literature (Silvia, 2005c) for a third appraisal for interest.

Results showed that manipulations of the treated portion of the treatment text enhanced appraisals of coping potential to a statistically significant degree at a within-person level across time (F = 5.315; p = .025; partial eta sq. = .079). Additionally, the previously untested third appraisal, goal relevance, was shown to predict interest across the sample to a statistically significant degree (Unstandardized β = .567; t = 6.258; p < .001), displaying more predictive power than the combined effects of the original two appraisals. Non-significant findings included the absence of statistically significant differences in coping potential between-persons, in interest at between and within-person levels, and in learning.

Statistical analysis of the present research and two pilot studies yielded the following implications. First, interest in academic material appeared to be manipulable rather than simply present or not present in the student without attributable cause. Second, this manipulated interest appeared to affect learning in a way consistent with the literature such that higher interest leads to higher learning. Third, hints of an extended appraisal model of interest emerged. A new model would include goal relevance alongside novelty-complexity and coping potential as interest’s appraisals, and would identify vividness, coherence, and concreteness as key objective features strongly affecting the original two appraisals.

The implications of this proposed extended model contribute two important features to our understanding of interest. First, additional insight is offered into the causes of text-based interest, including three key text features and a new appraisal. Second, in addition to a functionalist approach to interest, which accounts for novelty-complexity and coping potential appraisals, there appears to be a role for functional autonomy (Allport, 1961) in the generation and function of interest as well, which adds the effects of personality features and other individual differences to the functionalist account. Goal relevance, whose predictive power was the most significant finding of the study, fits well within the theoretical framework of functional autonomy, and would account for a diverse element of interest that enriches what the literature has already acknowledged about its universal element.

 
AdviserJill Salisbury-Glennon
SchoolAUBURN UNIVERSITY
SourceDAI/A 71-12, p. , Nov 2010
Source TypeDissertation
SubjectsEducational psychology; Cognitive psychology
Publication Number3430605
Adobe PDF Access the complete dissertation:
 

» Find an electronic copy at your library.
  Use the link below to access a full citation record of this graduate work:
  http://gateway.proquest.com/openurl%3furl_ver=Z39.88-2004%26res_dat=xri:pqdiss%26rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dissertation%26rft_dat=xri:pqdiss:3430605
  If your library subscribes to the ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (PQDT) database, you may be entitled to a free electronic version of this graduate work. If not, you will have the option to purchase one, and access a 24 page preview for free (if available).

About ProQuest Dissertations & Theses
With over 2.3 million records, the ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (PQDT) database is the most comprehensive collection of dissertations and theses in the world. It is the database of record for graduate research.

The database includes citations of graduate works ranging from the first U.S. dissertation, accepted in 1861, to those accepted as recently as last semester. Of the 2.3 million graduate works included in the database, ProQuest offers more than 1.9 million in full text formats. Of those, over 860,000 are available in PDF format. More than 60,000 dissertations and theses are added to the database each year.

If you have questions, please feel free to visit the ProQuest Web site - http://www.proquest.com - or call ProQuest Hotline Customer Support at 1-800-521-3042.