心理科学进展, 2018, 26(6): 1054-1062 doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2018.01054

研究前沿

日常性学业弹性:日常学业压力下的积极适应机制 *

赵凤青1, 俞国良,2

1 中国人民大学心理学系

2 中国人民大学心理研究所, 北京 100872

Everyday academic resilience: Active adaption to everyday academic pressures

ZHAO Fengqing1, YU Guoliang,2

1 Department of Psychology

2 Institute of Psychology, Renmin University of China, Beijing 100872, China

通讯作者: 俞国良, E-mail: yugllxl@sina.com

收稿日期: 2017-09-7   网络出版日期: 2018-06-10

基金资助: * 国家自然科学基金项目.  81571337
中国人民大学科学研究基金(中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金)资助项目.  

Received: 2017-09-7   Online: 2018-06-10

摘要

日常性学业弹性是指学生积极适应并成功应对日常学习中典型学业挫折、挑战和困难的能力, 其“弹性”体现为学生的学习投入、适应性应对方式和学习坚持性三个方面的动态作用过程。测量方式主要包括Martin等人从能力角度的测量和Skinner等人从过程角度的测量。对日常性学业弹性具有重要催化作用的因素主要包含积极的学习动机, 适应性的情绪和人格特征, 以及良好的师生和同伴关系。日常性学业弹性对学生的学业表现和心理健康具有重要影响。未来研究应进一步探讨日常性学业弹性的概念内涵、作用机制和神经生理基础, 关注其促进因素和抑制因素的共同作用, 并采取针对性的干预与提升措施。

关键词: 日常性学业弹性 ; 学业浮力 ; 动机弹性和易感性的作用模型

Abstract

Everyday academic resilience refers to students' ability to successfully deal with academic setbacks and challenges that are typical of the ordinary course of school life. The “resilience” lies in the dynamic interaction of academic engagement, coping and re-engagement. The measures include Martin’s Academic Buoyancy Scale and Skinner’s Motivational Resilience and Vulnerability scale. The important influence factors of everyday academic resilience include positive academic motivation, adaptive emotional and personality factors, as well as good teacher-student and student-student relationships. Everyday academic resilience is significantly predictive of students’ academic performance and mental health. Future studies should further explore the concept, mechanism, and neurobiological basis of everyday academic resilience, explore the combined effects of promoting factors and inhibition factors, and adopt targeted intervention and promotion strategies.

Keywords: everyday academic resilience ; academic buoyancy ; motivational resilience and vulnerability framework

PDF (446KB) 元数据 多维度评价 相关文章 导出 EndNote| Ris| Bibtex  收藏本文

本文引用格式

赵凤青, 俞国良. 日常性学业弹性:日常学业压力下的积极适应机制 * . 心理科学进展[J], 2018, 26(6): 1054-1062 doi:10.3724/SP.J.1042.2018.01054

ZHAO Fengqing, YU Guoliang. Everyday academic resilience: Active adaption to everyday academic pressures. Advances in Psychological Science[J], 2018, 26(6): 1054-1062 doi:10.3724/SP.J.1042.2018.01054

1 引言

心理弹性是积极心理学的重要研究课题。心理弹性存在领域差异性(Luthar, 1993), 并由此逐渐形成了不同领域的心理弹性研究。在学业领域中, 学业弹性(academic resilience)主要关注遭遇重大的或长期的消极学业事件的学生的积极适应能力(Martin, 2013; Ricketts, Engelhard, & Chang, 2017; 殷铭泽, 郭成, 2016)。学业弹性所覆盖的研究对象范围较小, 仅限于长期低学业成就或学习困难的学生以及少数种族的学生等。然而已有研究却表明, 在可确定的压力源中, 81.1%的压力为日常性压力, 日常烦心事甚至可以解释67.2%的学业压力(Ross, Neibling, & Heckert, 1999)。在日常学习中, 大多数学生会遭遇各种挫折、挑战和困难, 这些压力性事件并非长期的、重大的学业挫折, 而是在日常学业生活中普遍的、典型的学业挑战。例如, 课堂作业难度大、考试成绩不理想、完成作业时间紧等日常性学业压力, 均会对学生的学习动机、学业自信产生消极的影响(Martin & Marsh, 2008), 也可能导致考试焦虑、暂时性血压上升, 甚至会对学生的身心健康产生长期性伤害(Conley & Lehman, 2012)。同时, 日常性学业压力比重大生活事件对个体心理问题的预测作用更强(Kanner, Coyne, Schaefer, & Lazarus, 1981)。因此, 探讨日常性学业压力下学生的积极适应机制, 是一件迫切且尤其重要的事情。近年来, Martin和Marsh (2008)开创性地探究了日常性学业弹性(everyday academic resilience), 并详细地分析了学生在日常性学业压力下复原与成长的心理机制。这一研究为探究日常性学业压力下学生的积极适应机制指明了方向, 也为随后的研究提供了坚实的理论基础。具体而言, 日常性学业弹性较高的学生, 其情绪体验更积极(Martin, 2013; Martin, Ginns, Brackett, Malmberg, & Hall, 2013; Putwain & Daly, 2013; Putwain, Connors, Symes, & Douglas- Osborn, 2012), 学业认同度更高, 学业成就感更强(Collie, Martin, Malmberg, Hall, & Ginns, 2015; Miller, Connolly, & Maguire, 2013)。可以说, 日常性学业弹性是学生面对日常学习困难与挫折时, 产生的一种积极的、建构性的、适应性的反应(Collie et al., 2015; Miller et al., 2013)。同时, 日常性学业弹性还能够进行动态累加, 并逐渐形成学生在学习生涯关键节点上重要的个人资产和社会资源, 进而增强学生的学业弹性和心理弹性(Dicorcia & Tronick, 2011; Dicorcia, Sravish, & Tronick, 2013; Tronick & DiCorcia, 2015)。鉴于日常性学业弹性在学生学习生涯中的重要价值, 本文将基于国外学者的系列研究, 对日常性学业弹性的概念界定、测量方法、影响因素和效应等方面进行系统的梳理与分析, 以期为后续研究提供有价值的借鉴。

2 日常性学业弹性的概念界定

2.1 概念内涵

心理学家Martin和Marsh最早关注日常性学业弹性, 认为日常性学业弹性是指学生成功应对学校日常学习活动中典型的学业挫折、挑战和困难的能力(Martin & Marsh, 2008, 2009)。这些典型的学业挫折、挑战和困难通常包括课堂作业难度大、某次考试成绩不理想、课后作业时间紧、作业上交时间存在冲突等。他们使用“学业浮力” (academic buoyancy)这一概念来解释日常性学业弹性, 因为“浮力”一词可以形象地描绘学生面对学习压力和挫折时的应对能力。也就是说, 如果把学生在学习过程中遇到的挫折和逆境比喻成一桶水, 那么学业浮力就意味着学生有能力浮在水面之上。

在Martin和Marsh“学业浮力”研究的基础上, Skinner等人结合他们多年来对日常性应对方式的研究, 提出日常性动机弹性和易感性的作用模型(everyday motivational resilience and vulnerability framework), 试图从过程视角来分析日常性学业弹性的作用过程(Pitzer & Skinner, 2017; Skinner & Pitzer, 2012; Skinner, Pitzer, & Brule, 2014; Skinner, Pitzer, & Steele, 2013; Skinner, Pitzer, & Steele, 2016)。这一模型以学生面对日常性学业困难和挑战时的学习投入为起点, 将学生面对日常性学业困难和挑战时的适应性应对方式作为关键路径, 以学生经历日常性学业困难和挑战之后的学习再投入(表现为坚持性)为终点, 形成了一个学习投入-应对-再投入的整合系统(Skinner & Pitzer, 2012), 如图1所示。日常性学业弹性高的学生往往学习投入水平较高, 倾向于采取适应性的应对策略, 并表现出较高的学习坚持性(Skinner et al., 2014, 2016)。具体而言, 在小学生和中学生中, 高学习投入的学生通常会使用一些适应性的策略, 如, 积极应对、自我依赖/问题解决、寻求社会支持、寻求帮助、寻求安慰、自我鼓励、承诺等。相反, 那些在行为或情绪上表现出不满的学生, 常常会采用一些非建设性的应对方式, 如, 否认、投射、焦虑、逃避、困惑、隐瞒、自怜和抱怨等。总之, 在压力情境下, 高学习投入的学生更倾向于采取适应性的应对策略, 而对学习不满的学生更容易采取非适应性的应对策略(Skinner et al., 2016)。

图1

图1   动机弹性和易感性的作用模型

资料来源:Skinner等(2016)


在Skinner和Pitzer的动机弹性与易感性作用模型中, 学习再投入(re-engagement)是指学生从日常的学业挑战和挫折中恢复的能力。也就是说, 学生在遭遇日常性学业挫折之前的“学习投入”与之后的“学习再投入”之间的差距, 恰好体现了他们的学业浮力水平。尽管Martin和Marsh在其研究中也关注了学生在面对日常性学业问题时的努力情况 (Martin & Marsh, 2008), 但是他们仅仅从能力角度对日常性学业弹性进行了界定, 并未体现学生对日常性学业压力、挫折与挑战的应对方式。相比较而言, Skinner等人对日常性学业弹性的理解不仅包含了“学业浮力”, 而且包括了“日常性应对方式”(Skinner et al., 2016)。

总之, Martin等人和Skinner等人都从积极心理学的视角, 关注学生如何成功地应对日常性学业压力。其中, Martin等人更侧重成功应对的能力, Skinner等人更关注成功应对的过程。无论是从能力的角度还是过程角度对日常性学业弹性进行界定, 其本质上都突出了“日常性学业压力”和“成功应对”两个核心内容。具体而言, 基于能力视角的理解有助于从静态的角度, 解释学生成功应对日常性压力的促进因素和抑制因素; 而基于过程视角的理解则有助于从动态的角度, 揭示学生成功应对日常性学业压力的内在应对过程。综合考量两种研究视角, 我们认为:日常性学业弹性是指学生积极适应并成功应对日常学习中的典型学业挫折、挑战与困难的能力, 并主要表现在学习投入、应对方式和学习坚持性三个方面。

2.2 特点

日常性学业弹性具有两个突出的特点。第一, 日常性学业弹性具有跨学科一致性。一项研究调查了学生在不同学科上的日常性学业弹性, 结果发现, 尽管学生对英语、数学、科学、物理课程难度的评估不同, 在不同课程上的努力程度也有差异, 但学生在各个科目上的日常性学业弹性表现出跨学科一致性(Malmberg, Hall, & Martin, 2013)。第二, 日常性学业弹性存在跨文化差异性。一项对中国、北美和英国中学生日常性学业弹性的跨文化研究显示, 中国学生的日常性学业弹性显著高于北美学生, 英国学生日常性学业弹性最低(Martin, Yu, Ginns, & Papworth, 2017)。

2.3 近似概念辨析

2.3.1 日常性学业弹性与学业弹性

日常性学业弹性与学业弹性两个概念之间的区别, 主要体现在研究对象、压力源、压力/挫折的后果、师生关系、应对与干预角度等方面(Martin, 2013)。第一, 在研究对象方面, 两者关注的学生群体范围不同。日常性学业弹性的关注对象覆盖全体学生; 而学业弹性所覆盖的范围较小, 主要是少数种族学生、长期低成就或长期学习困难的学生、学习障碍的学生等。第二, 在压力源方面, 两者针对的挫折强度不同。日常性学业弹性所针对的是日常学习生活中的挫折、挑战和困难, 如, 学习表现不良等。这些挫折虽然会对学生的自信、自我完整性产生威胁, 但是其挫折强度相对较低。与之不同, 学业弹性所针对的是重大的、长期的学业挫折, 或者个人学业发展进程中遭受的重大打击, 如, 长期学习困难、学习障碍等。这些挫折会使学生感到虚弱无力、无法应对, 并使学生随之产生强烈的焦虑感, 因而其挫折强度相对较高。第三, 从压力/挫折的后果来看, 两者对学生心理和学业指标的影响不同。日常性学业弹性关注学生在学习动机方面的表现, 如, 成就动机、学习投入和学业自信; 而学业弹性多关注学生的焦虑、抑郁等临床方面的情感体验, 以及旷课、厌学等学业行为。第四, 在师生关系方面, 两者关注的内容不同。日常性学业弹性着重关注教师在师生互动中给予的消极反馈, 而学业弹性则注重学生长期与教师的对抗与疏远行为。第五, 从应对与干预的角度来看, 两者对应的机制不同。日常性学业弹性是个体对压力事件的一种预测机制, 而学业弹性是一种反应机制。日常性学业弹性的提升, 使得学生能够应对呈现在他们面前的持续挑战和挫折, 这可能是对学业弹性进行干预的第一步(Martin & Marsh, 2008, 2009)。学业弹性较高的学生, 其日常性学业弹性也会较高, 因而提高日常性学业弹性仅是改善学业弹性的必要不充分条件。

2.3.2 日常性学业弹性与适应性应对方式

日常性学业弹性强调学生面对日常性学业挫折时, 所表现出的积极适应状态。因此日常性学业弹性虽然与适应性应对方式(adaptive coping)有交叉之处, 但是二者却属于不同的概念。首先, 基于Skinner等人的动机弹性与易感性模型, 适应性应对方式是连接学习投入和学习坚持性(即持续的学习投入)的关键因素, 也是日常性学业弹性的主要体现。日常性学业弹性高的学生, 更可能采取一系列的适应性应对策略, 如寻求帮助、自我鼓励、承诺等; 而日常性学业弹性低的学生更倾向于采取一系列适应不良的应对策略, 例如, 逃避、自我可怜、责备他人等(Skinner et al., 2013)。第二, 日常性学业弹性仅与某些适应性应对方式存在中等程度相关。例如, Putwain等人探讨了日常性学业弹性与适应性应对方式对考试焦虑的预测作用, 他们有关适应性应对方式的测量包含三个维度:任务导向、寻求社会支持和考前回避策略。结果显示, 日常性学业弹性与适应性应对方式存在中等程度相关, 其中与寻求社会支持呈现显著正相关(r = 0.38, p < 0.01), 与任务导向和考前回避策略都无显著相关。第三, 日常性学业弹性具有独立于适应性应对方式的结构。例如, 在控制适应性应对方式的各个维度后, 日常性学业弹性仍然可以负向预测考前焦虑, 包括担忧、紧张、躯体症状等指标(Putwain et al., 2012)。总之, 日常性学业弹性可能与某些适应性应对方式存在中等程度的相关, 但它仍与适应性应对方式具有不同的结构。

3 测量方法

目前测量日常性学业弹性的方法主要有Martin和Marsh的学业浮力量表(ABS)和Skinner等人的动机弹性和易感性量表。此外, Ricketts等人在Martin等人的学业浮力量表基础上编制了数学学业弹性量表(ARM), Cassidy则编制了具体情境下的学业弹性量表(ARS-30)。

3.1 Martin和Marsh的学业浮力量表

目前对日常性学业弹性的测量主要采用Martin和Marsh (2008)的学业浮力量表(Academic Buoyancy Scale, ABS)。“学业浮力”的操作化定义是被试知觉到自己应对日常性学习压力、挑战或挫折的能力。他们选取4种典型的日常性学习挫折, 包括学习压力、作业压力、成绩较差、学业反馈消极。该量表包含4个条目, 要求被试在5点量表上做出反应。例如, “我善于应对日常学习中的挫折(如, 学习成绩差, 学业反馈消极)”, “学习成绩差不会影响我的自信心”。这一量表的内部一致性信度为0.82, 重测信度为0.67, 其因子负荷介于0.66~0.75之间。此外, 学业浮力量表具有较好的区分效度, 例如, 它与适应性认知、适应性行为、非适应性认知、非适应性行为等指标之间的相关系数在0.18~0.39之间, 与Wagnild和Young (1993)的心理弹性量表之间相关为0.57。

后来研究者多采用这一量表测量日常性学业弹性(Collie et al., 2015; Putwain, Daly, Chamberlain, & Sadreddini, 2016; Symes, Putwain, & Remedios, 2015)。例如, 在一项追踪研究中, 这一量表显示出较高的内部一致性信度(时间点1:α = 0.80; 时间点2:α = 0.82)和重测信度(r = 0.67) (Martin & Marsh, 2008)。在其它研究中, Martin和Marsh (2008)的学业浮力量表也表现出较好的信度(Bakhshaee, Hejazi, Dortaj, & Farzad, 2017; Bowen, 2010; Putwain et al., 2016)。

3.2 Skinner等人的动机弹性和易感性量表

Skinner等人基于动机弹性和易感性的作用模型编制了动机弹性和易感性量表。与动机弹性和易感性相对应, 量表包含学习投入/学习不满、适应性/适应不良的应对方式、学习坚持性/放弃三个分量表(Skinner et al., 2013, 2016; Skinner, Kindermann, & Furrer, 2009)。第一, 学习投入/学习不满分量表包含行为投入/不满、情感投入/不满两个维度。其中, 行为投入指学生在班级学习中的努力、集中注意力、坚持学习活动等行为, 行为不满指学生在班级学习中缺乏努力、撤出学习等行为, 各包含5个条目; 情感投入指学生在班级学习中的热情、卷入与兴趣, 情感不满指学生在学习活动中的厌倦、焦虑和沮丧, 分别包含6个和9个条目(Skinner et al., 2009)。这一分量表具有较好的信度, 学习投入与学习不满的内部一致性信度均为0.77 (Skinner et al., 2016)。第二, 适应性/适应不良应对方式包含11个维度, 其中适应性应对方式包含拟定策略、寻求帮助、寻求安慰、自我鼓励、承担责任5个维度; 适应不良的应对方式包含困惑、逃避、隐瞒、自怜、投射、反刍等6个维度; 每个维度均包含5个条目, 共计55个条目(Skinner et al., 2013)。各个维度的内部一致性信度在0.59~0.85之间, 重测信度在0.47~0.70之间。第三, 学习坚持性/放弃的量表中, 4个条目测量坚持性, 例如, “当我遇到困难的问题时, 我会更努力”, 其信度系数为0.70; 5个条目测量放弃, 例如, “当有个问题非常困难时, 我就会放弃它”, 其信度系数为0.78 (Skinner et al., 2013)。

3.3 其它量表

Ricketts等人基于Martin等人的学业浮力量表, 进一步编制了数学学业弹性量表(Measure of Academic Resilience in Mathematics, ARM)。这一量表包含两部分, 来自Martin和Marsh学业浮力量表的4个条目测量学生知觉到自身应对数学学习环境中挫折的能力, 另外5个条目测量学生对自身目标的信念和对获得支持的能力所持的信念, 例如, “我相信未来数学会对我有用”, “有人会在数学上给予我帮助”。量表采用李克特6点计分法, 1表示“非常不同意”, 6表示“非常同意”(Ricketts et al., 2017)。这一量表信度为0.79。Cassidy编制的学业弹性量表(The Academic Resilience Scale, ARS-30)包含30个条目, 分为坚持性(如, “我会更加努力学习”)、反思与寻求帮助(如, “我会尝试不同的学习方法”)、消极情绪(如, “我可能会变得抑郁”)三个维度。量表采用李克特5点计分法, 测量具体情境中学生的学业弹性(Cassidy, 2015, 2016)。该量表的三个维度以及总量表的信度分别为0.83, 0.80, 0.78, 0.90。

4 日常性学业弹性的影响因素

在日常性学业弹性的众多影响因素中, 以下三个方面的因素发挥着重要的催化作用:积极的学习动机, 适应性的情绪与人格特征, 以及良好的师生与同伴关系。

4.1 积极的学习动机

积极的学习动机与日常性学业弹性之间存在着密切的联系。第一, 基本心理需求的满足有利于提高学生的日常性学业弹性。例如, Pitzer和Skinner以3~7年级的学生为被试, 探讨了个体的自我系统对其动机弹性的影响, 结果表明自主需求和能力需求的满足能够显著预测学生随后的动机弹性(Pitzer & Skinner, 2017)。第二, 掌握目标取向的学习动机能正向预测中学生和大学生的日常性学业弹性(Bowen, 2010; Carrington, 2014; Yu & Martin, 2014), 而回避失败的动机则会抑制随后的日常性学业弹性(Martin et al., 2013)。与学习动机相关的积极心理品质有利于提升学生的日常性学业弹性。例如, Martin等人对高中生为期1年的追踪研究显示, 在控制时间点1的日常性学业弹性后, 自我效能感、计划性、坚持性、低焦虑和高控制感等积极心理品质可以显著预测中学生在时间点2的日常性学业弹性(Martin, Colmar, Davey, & Marsh, 2010)。

4.2 适应性的情绪和人格特征

在个体层面, 适应性的情绪和人格特点有利于提高学生的日常性学业弹性。一项基于中小学生的追踪研究显示, 在人际关系中消极情绪性反应(如, 焦虑、沮丧等)不利于日常性学业弹性的发展(Pitzer & Skinner, 2017)。同样, 另一项对中学生的交叉滞后研究也表明, 情绪稳定性是日常性学业弹性的一个重要预测变量(Martin et al., 2013), 情绪不稳定的学生, 其日常性学业弹性也较低。其中, 焦虑是影响日常性学业弹性的主要因素之一(Martin et al., 2010, 2013)。此外, 神经质人格可以负向预测日常性学业弹性(Martin et al., 2013), 这在以往关于日常性压力事件与应对关系的研究中得到证实(Gunthert, Cohen, & Armeli, 1999)。Martin等人(2013)进一步表明, 情绪稳定性、神经质都与日常性学业弹性互相影响。

4.3 良好的师生与同伴关系

良好的人际关系是影响学生日常性学业弹性的重要因素。对学生而言, 良好的师生关系和同伴关系均会明显增强学生的日常性学业弹性。首先, 师生关系是影响学生日常性学业弹性的一个有力因素。一项追踪研究对3~7年级学生在秋季和春季两个学期日常性学业弹性的调查结果显示, 积极的、温暖的、结构化的、自主支持的师生关系能够正向预测学生的日常性学业弹性(Furrer, Skinner, & Pitzer, 2014)。对于日常性学业弹性较低的学生, 温暖、卷入和支持性的师生关系能够改善其动机作用过程, 增强其日常性学业弹性; 相反, 低教师支持则会降低学生的日常性学业弹性(Pitzer & Skinner, 2017)。基本心理需求的满足在师生关系与日常性学业弹性的关系中起到中介作用(Pitzer & Skinner, 2017)。其次, 良好的同伴关系也与日常性学业弹性显著正相关(Furrer et al., 2014)。对同伴负面影响的抵抗力体现了学生在同伴关系中的自主性, 它也可以增强学生的日常性学业弹性(Nicholls, Morley, & Perry, 2016)。在先前相关研究的基础上, Pitzer和Skinner (2017)最近提出了动机弹性的内外部动态模型(Model of internal and external dynamics of motivational resilience), 认为积极的环境因素(如师生关系、亲子关系和同伴关系)通过满足个体的基本心理需求, 提高情绪稳定性, 进而提升其动机弹性。综合以往研究, 外部环境因素可以通过影响个体的学习动机系统、情绪和人格特征, 进而影响个体的日常性学业弹性, 如图2所示。

图2

图2   日常性学业弹性的整合模型


5 日常性学业弹性的效应

5.1 对学业表现的影响

第一, 高日常性学业弹性有利于提升学习动机(Skinner & Pitzer, 2012)。例如, 对中国、北美和英国12~16岁中学生的跨文化研究表明, 学业浮力越高的学生, 其学习动机和学习投入水平更高, 且学业浮力的这一积极影响在中国学生中效应最强(Martin et al., 2010)。追踪研究也表明, 时间点1的日常性学业弹性可以通过提升与学习动机相关的积极心理品质, 进一步增强学生在时间点2的日常性学业弹性(Martin et al., 2010)。第二, 高日常性学业弹性有助于提高学业表现(Putwain et al., 2016; Putwain & Daly, 2013)。这是因为日常性学业弹性不仅有助于提高学生的学业认同水平(Collie et al., 2015; Miller et al., 2013)、增强其学业控制感(Collie et al., 2015), 还有利于提高学生的学习投入水平、增强学习坚持性(Martin et al., 2010)、降低考试焦虑程度(Putwain & Daly, 2013)。第三, 日常性学业弹性对特殊学生学业表现的保护性作用更为明显。例如, Martin (2014)发现, 学业浮力对注意缺陷障碍学生的学业成就具有中等程度的影响(效应量为0.41), 而对普通学生的学业成就仅具有中低程度的效应(效应量为0.24)。

5.2 对心理健康的影响

日常性学业弹性较高的学生, 其考试焦虑程度更低(Putwain et al., 2012), 情绪体验也更积极(Martin et al., 2013; Putwain et al., 2012; Putwain & Daly, 2013)。Martin等人以澳大利亚21所中学2971名中学生为被试, 采用交叉滞后的研究范式探讨了学业浮力与心理风险之间的关系(如图3所示), 发现低学业浮力会增加学业方面的心理风险(如, 学业焦虑、回避失败和对自身能力的不确定性), 也会增加非学业方面的心理风险(如, 情绪不稳定、神经质); 同时, 学业浮力与心理风险因素之间相互影响、互为因果关系(Martin et al., 2013)。

图3

图3   学业浮力与心理风险的相互关系图

资料来源:Martin等(2013).


6 研究展望

日常性学业弹性从积极心理学的视角, 关注学生学业发展过程中积极品质的培养, 扩大了学业弹性的研究范畴, 对推动学生积极发展具有重要的意义。但是, 目前日常性学业弹性的研究仍处于起步阶段, 有关日常性学业弹性的概念内涵、作用机制、影响因素等方面均存在许多值得探讨和关注的内容。基于对已有文献的梳理和整合, 本文认为未来学者们可以从以下三个方面对日常性学业弹性进行更为深入的分析与探究。

首先, 在研究内容上, 进一步探讨日常性学业弹性的概念内涵和作用机制。日常性学业弹性这一概念本身就体现了对学习动机、学习投入、学业应对策略等概念的整合趋势。尽管有研究者创新性地提出了动机弹性与易感性模型来解释日常性学业弹性的动机作用过程(Skinner et al., 2016), 但是这一作用过程尚未得到大量实证研究的检验。因此, 仍需要进一步探讨日常性学业弹性的概念内涵, 尤其是日常性学业弹性在动机和行为层面的表现, 从而更好地揭示其本质。基于Garmezy等人关于学业弹性的保护性因素和危险性因素的挑战模型, 日常的低程度到中等程度的学业压力可以唤醒或激活个体的保护性机制, 这种保护性机制体现在日常性学业弹性的作用过程中(Garmezy, Masten, & Tellegen, 1984)。这种保护性机制是如何形成的?其促进因素和抑制因素有哪些?这些重要的理论问题仍然需要更多的研究加以探讨。

第二, 在研究方法上, 应采用多种研究方法进一步揭示日常性学业弹性的行为、动机和神经生理基础。未来研究者可以考虑采用多种研究方法来探讨日常性学业弹性的作用机制。首先, 变量中心与个体中心结合的研究方法值得提倡。例如, Barnett (2012)采用个体中心的研究方法分析中学生的日常性学业弹性, 揭示了4种不同类型的学生, 发现日常性学业弹性强的学生在随后的学业成就中表现更好。此外, 研究者也可以采用现代认知神经科学技术(如, 事件相关电位、功能磁共振成像等)探究日常性学业弹性的作用机制, 以获得更为客观的电生理指标, 例如, 皮质醇对个体逆境适应的重要意义(Charney, 2004)。

第三, 进一步探讨日常性学业弹性的影响因素, 并采取对应的干预措施。目前研究主要关注了师生关系、个体心理和学业的风险性因素对学生日常性学业弹性的影响, 但是已有研究不仅数量较少, 而且内容相对单一。因此, 未来研究应该加强对个体层面、家庭层面、学校层面各种促进因素和抑制因素的探讨, 从而形成一个整合性的作用模型, 以期对日常性学业弹性进行有针对性的、高效率的干预与培养。同时, 这些促进因素和抑制因素对日常性学业弹性的共同作用效果如何?这也是目前学者们忽视的一个重要问题, 十分值得未来研究进行探究。Garmezy等人的学业弹性结构模型可能为这一问题提供一些有益的参考。Garmezy等人曾针对学业弹性的保护性因素和危险性因素共同作用的效果提出了三种作用模型:补偿模型(compensatory model)、挑战模型(challenge model)和保护模型(protective factor model)(Garmezy et al., 1984)。其中, 补偿模型假设危险性因素与保护性因素的作用可以直接抵消。挑战模型假设保护性因素对于学业结果的影响是变化的, 它依赖于危险性因素的危险程度。在这个模型中, 中低等程度的危险性因素可以唤醒或激活个体的保护性机制, 从而增强个体的学业韧性。保护模型假设保护性因素可以缓冲或防御危险性因素所带来的负性影响, 即两者存在相互作用。根据这个模型, 当个体在存在多重保护性因素的前提下进行学习时, 尽管其面临的危险性因素增加, 其仍能保持良好的适应能力。因此, 未来研究仍有待深入探讨日常性学业弹性的保护性和危险性因素。

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
作者已声明无竞争性利益关系。

参考文献

殷铭泽, 郭成 . ( 2016).

学业韧性研究综述

心理技术与应用, 4( 1), 53-59.

[本文引用: 1]

Bakhshaee F., Hejazi E., Dortaj F., & Farzad V . ( 2017).

Self-management strategies of life, positive youth development and academic buoyancy: A causal model

International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 15( 2), 339-349.

URL     [本文引用: 1]

Academic buoyancy is defined as the capacity to overcome challenges that are a part of everyday academic life. The present study sought to determine the relationship between self-management strategies

Barnett, P. A . ( 2012).

High school students' academic buoyancy: Longitudinal changes in motivation, cognitive engagement, and affect in English and Math (Unpublished master’s dissertation)

Fordham University, US.

[本文引用: 1]

Bowen, D. (2010).

Academic buoyancy: Investigating measures and developing a model of undergraduates’ everyday academic resilience (Unpublished doctorial dissertation)

Charles Sturt University.

[本文引用: 2]

Carrington, C. C . ( 2014).

Psycho-educational factors in the prediction of academic buoyancy in second life (Unpublished doctorial dissertation)

Capella University, US.

[本文引用: 1]

Cassidy, S. (2015).

Resilience building in students: The role of academic self-efficacy

Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1781.

URL     PMID:26640447      [本文引用: 1]

Self-efficacy relates to an individual's perception of their capabilities. It has a clear self-evaluative dimension leading to high or low perceived self-efficacy. Individual differences in perceived self-efficacy have been shown to be better predictors of performance than previous achievement or ability and seem particularly important when individuals face adversity. The study investigated the nature of the association between academic self-efficacy (ASE) and academic resilience. Undergraduate student participants (N= 435) were exposed to an adverse situation case vignette describing either personal or vicarious academic adversity. ASE was measured pre-exposure and academic resilience was measured post-exposure. ASE was correlated with, and a significant predictor of, academic resilience and students exhibited greater academic resilience when responding to vicarious adversity compared to personal adversity. Identifying constructs that are related to resilience and establishing the precise nature of how such constructs influence academic resilience will assist the development of interventions aimed at promoting resilience in students.

Cassidy, S. (2016).

The Academic Resilience Scale (ARS-30): A new multidimensional construct measure

Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1787.

URL     PMID:27917137      [本文引用: 1]

Resilience is a psychological construct observed in some individuals that accounts for success despite adversity. Resilience reflects the ability to bounce back, to beat the odds and is considered an asset in human characteristic terms. Academic resilience contextualizes the resilience construct and reflects an increased likelihood of educational success despite adversity. The paper provides an account of the development of a new multidimensional construct measure of academic resilience. The 30 item Academic Resilience Scale (ARS-30) explores process—as opposed to outcome—aspects of resilience, providing a measure of academic resilience based on students’ specific adaptive cognitive-affective and behavioral responses to academic adversity. Findings from the study involving a sample of undergraduate students (N= 532) demonstrate that the ARS-30 has good internal reliability and construct validity. It is suggested that a measure such as the ARS-30, which is based on adaptive responses, aligns more closely with the conceptualisation of resilience and provides a valid construct measure of academic resilience relevant for research and practice in university student populations.

Charney, D. S . ( 2004).

Psychobiological mechanisms of resilience and vulnerability: Implications for successful adaptation to extreme stress

American Journal of Psychiatry, 161( 2), 195-216.

URL     PMID:14754765      [本文引用: 1]

Most research on the effects of severe psychological stress has focused on stress-related psychopathology. Here, the author develops psychobiological models of resilience to extreme stress.An integrative model of resilience and vulnerability that encompasses the neurochemical response patterns to acute stress and the neural mechanisms mediating reward, fear conditioning and extinction, and social behavior is proposed.Eleven possible neurochemical, neuropeptide, and hormonal mediators of the psychobiological response to extreme stress were identified and related to resilience or vulnerability. The neural mechanisms of reward and motivation (hedonia, optimism, and learned helpfulness), fear responsiveness (effective behaviors despite fear), and adaptive social behavior (altruism, bonding, and teamwork) were found to be relevant to the character traits associated with resilience.The opportunity now exists to bring to bear the full power of advances in our understanding of the neurobiological basis of behavior to facilitate the discoveries needed to predict, prevent, and treat stress-related psychopathology.

Collie R. J., Martin A. J., Malmberg L. E., Hall J., & Ginns P . ( 2015).

Academic buoyancy, student's achievement, and the linking role of control: A cross-lagged analysis of high school students

British Journal of Educational Psychology, 85( 1), 113-130.

URL     PMID:25604513      [本文引用: 5]

Previous research has indicated that although academic buoyancy and student's achievement are associated, the relationship is relatively modest.We sought to determine whether another construct might link academic buoyancy and student's achievement. Based on prior theoretical and empirical work, we examined a sense of control as one possible linking mechanism.The study analysed data from 2,971 students attending 21 Australian high schools.We conducted a cross-lagged panel design as a first means of disentangling the relative salience of academic buoyancy, control, and achievement (Phase 1). Based upon these results, we proceeded with follow-up analyses of an ordered process model linking the constructs over time (Phase 2).Findings showed that buoyancy and achievement were associated with control over time, but not with one another (Phase 1). In addition, control appeared to play a role in how buoyancy influenced achievement and that a cyclical process may operate among the three factors over time (Phase 2).The findings suggest that control may play an important role in linking past experiences of academic buoyancy and achievement to subsequent academic buoyancy and achievement.

Conley, K. M., & Lehman, B. J . ( 2012).

Test anxiety and cardiovascular responses to daily academic stressors

Stress & Health, 28( 1), 41-50.

URL     PMID:22259157      [本文引用: 1]

Abstract Routine academic events may cause stress and produce temporary elevations in blood pressure. Students who experience test anxiety may be especially prone to cardiovascular activation in response to academic stress. This study drew on self-reported stress and ambulatory blood pressure measurements provided by 99 undergraduate participants (30% men, mean age=21 years) who participated over 4 days. Posture, activity level, recent consumption and the previous same-day reading were considered as covariates in a series of hierarchical linear models. Results indicate elevations in systolic blood pressure at times of acute academic stressors; neither diastolic blood pressure nor heart rate was linked with academic stress. In addition, those participants higher in test anxiety exhibited especially pronounced elevations in systolic blood pressure during times of acute academic stress. This research suggests that everyday academic stressors are linked with temporary increases in blood pressure and that test anxiety may contribute to these elevations. Test anxiety has implications for future academic and job success, and cardiovascular responses to everyday stress may contribute to health problems later in life. Copyright 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

DiCorcia J. A., Sravish A. V., & Tronick E . ( 2013).

The everyday stress resilience hypothesis: Unfolding resilience from a perspective of everyday stress and coping

In G. Laviola & S. Macrì(Eds.), Adaptive and maladaptive aspects of developmental stress

URL     [本文引用: 1]

Resilience is often associated with extreme trauma or overcoming extraordinary odds. This way of thinking about resilience leaves most of the ontogenetic picture a mystery. In this chapter, we put for

DiCorcia, J. A., & Tronick, E. (2011).

Quotidian resilience: Exploring mechanisms that drive resilience from a perspective of everyday stress and coping

Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 35( 7), 1593-1602.

URL     PMID:21513731      [本文引用: 1]

Resilience is often associated with extreme trauma or overcoming extraordinary odds. This way of thinking about resilience leaves most of the ontogenetic picture a mystery. In the following review we put forth the Everyday Stress Resilience Hypothesis where resilience is analyzed from a systems perspective and seen as a process of regulating everyday life stressors. Successful regulation accumulates into regulatory resilience which emerges during early development from successful coping with the inherent stress in typical interactions. These quotidian stressful events lead to activation of behavioral and physiologic systems. Stress that is effectively resolved in the short run and with reiteration over the long-term increases children's as well as adults’ capacity to cope with more intense stressors. Infants, however, lack the regulatory capacities to take on this task by themselves. Therefore, through communicative and regulatory processes during infant–adult interactions, we demonstrate that the roots of regulatory resilience originate in infants’ relationship with their caregiver and that maternal sensitivity can help or hinder the growth of resilience.

Furrer C. J., Skinner E. A., & Pitzer J. R . ( 2014).

The influence of teacher and peer relationships on students’ classroom engagement and everyday motivational resilience

National Society for the Study of Education, 113( 1), 101-123.

URL     [本文引用: 2]

Abstract The quality of students' relationships with teachers and peers is a fundamental substrate for the development of academic engagement and achievement. This chapter offers teachers and researchers a motivational framework that explains how positive and negative student-teacher and student-peer relationships are sustained in the classroom, and strategies for creating solutions to improve relationships.

Garmezy N., Masten A. S., & Tellegen A . ( 1984).

The study of stress and competence in children: A building block for developmental psychopathology

Child Development, 55( 1), 97-111.

URL     PMID:6705637      [本文引用: 2]

This article discusses the building blocks for a developmental psychopathology, focusing on studies of risk, competence, and protective factors. The current Project Competence studies of stress and competence are described, with particular attention to the methodology and strategies for data analysis. The authors present a 3-model approach to stress resistance in a multivariate regression framework: the compensatory, challenge, and protective factor models. These models are illustrated by selected data. In the concluding section, an evaluation of the project is offered in terms of future directions for research.

Gunthert K. C., Cohen L. H., & Armeli S . ( 1999).

The role of neuroticism in daily stress and coping

Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 77( 5), 1087-1100.

[本文引用: 1]

Kanner A. D., Coyne J. C., Schaefer C., & Lazarus R. S . ( 1981).

Comparison of two modes of stress measurement: Daily hassles and uplifts versus major life events

Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 4( 1), 1-39.

URL     [本文引用: 1]

Luthar, S. S . ( 1993).

Methodological and conceptual issues in research on childhood resilience

Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 34( 4), 441-453.

URL     PMID:8509489      [本文引用: 1]

Luthar SS.

Malmberg L. E., Hall J., & Martin A. J . ( 2013).

Academic buoyancy in secondary school: Exploring patterns of convergence in English, mathematics, science, and physical education

Learning and Individual Differences, 23, 262-266.

URL     [本文引用: 1]

Past research into the ability of students to ‘bounce back’ from everyday academic setback (academic buoyancy) has lacked sensitivity to the contexts in which children demonstrate this behavior. Here we aimed to contextualize past findings by reporting the results of an exploratory investigation that featured: (1) repeated measurement of students' self-reported buoyancy across English, mathematics, science, and physical education; (2) measures of students' psychological appraisal as a test of external validity; (3) a novel national context (England rather than Australia). In total 260 English secondary school students aged 11–1602years completed self-report questionnaires. Students were found to hold relatively consistent views about their ability to bounce back from everyday academic setbacks (e.g., negative feedback, poor results, study stress or pressure) compared to the relatively less consistent views they held regarding the difficulty of the four school subjects as well as corresponding personal competences and effort. These results are discussed in the context of past research, the implications for interventions, and the need for further confirmatory investigations.

Marsh, A. J., & Marsh, H. W . ( 2009).

Academic resilience and academic buoyancy: Multidimensional and hierarchical conceptual framing of causes, correlates and cognate constructs

Oxford Review of Education, 35( 3), 353-370.

URL     [本文引用: 2]

‘Academic resilience’ refers to a student’s capacity to overcome acute or chronic adversities that are seen as major assaults on educational processes. Although intersecting with highly vulnerable and important populations, academic resilience does not map onto the many students who are faced with setbacks, challenges and pressures that are part of more regular academic life. This, it is argued, reflects ‘academic buoyancy’ that maps onto the many students who must negotiate the ups and downs of everyday academic life as distinct from acute and chronic adversities relevant to more traditional constructions of academic resilience. Inherent in this argument, then, is a proposed hierarchical framework in which academic buoyancy is a necessary but not sufficient condition for academic resilience. Such a hierarchical framework, therefore, has the potential to speak to all students and so represents an encompassing framework that can more fully explain the nature and extent of adversities and challenges that are part of academic life. We further contend that academic resilience and academic buoyancy require multidimensional approaches to their conceptualising and measurement in order to most effectively differentiate the factors that are (and are not) components, causes, correlates and cognate to them. We conclude by proposing a number of conceptual and empirical approaches to a next generation of research into academic resilience and academic buoyancy, develop the notion of ‘leading’ and ‘lagging’ indicators of buoyancy and resilience, and identify the implications of our framework for intervention and policy in the academic domain and beyond.

Martin, A. J . ( 2013).

Academic buoyancy and academic resilience: Exploring 'everyday' and 'classic' resilience in the face of academic adversity

School Psychology International, 34( 5), 488-500.

URL     [本文引用: 2]

Abstract Academic buoyancy has been defined as a capacity to overcome setbacks, challenges, and difficulties that are part of everyday academic life. Academic resilience has been defined as a capacity to overcome acute and/or chronic adversity that is seen as a major threat to a student educational development. This study is the first to examine the extent to which (a) academic buoyancy and academic resilience are distinct (but correlated) factors, and (b) academic buoyancy is more relevant to low-level negative outcomes (anxiety, uncertain control, failure avoidance), whereas academic resilience is more relevant to major negative outcomes (self-handicapping, disengagement). The findings, based on 918 Australian high school students from nine schools, showed that academic buoyancy and academic resilience represented distinct factors sharing approximately 35% variance. Also, academic buoyancy was more salient in negatively predicting low-level negative outcomes whereas academic resilience was more salient in negatively predicting major negative outcomes. In supplementary analyses, the effect of academic buoyancy on low-level negative outcomes tended to be direct, whereas the effect of academic buoyancy on major negative outcomes was mediated by academic resilience. Implications for practice and research are discussed.

Martin, A. J . ( 2014).

Academic buoyancy and academic outcomes: Towards a further understanding of students with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), students without ADHD, and academic buoyancy itself

British Journal of Educational Psychology, 84( 1), 86-107.

URL     PMID:24547755      [本文引用: 1]

Academic buoyancy is students' capacity to successfully overcome setback and challenge that is typical of the ordinary course of everyday academic life. It may represent an important factor on the psycho-educational landscape assisting students who experience difficulties in school and schoolwork.This study investigated the role of academic buoyancy in the achievement and cognitive, affective and behavioural engagement of (1) students with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and (2) 'regular' (or 'general') students residing in the same classrooms and schools. The study also sought to extend prior research into academic buoyancy by including previously neglected and potentially influential factors such as personality and socio-economic status.Participants were n = 87 high school students with ADHD, n = 3374 non-ADHD peers, and n = 87 randomly drawn non-ADHD students.Survey-based data were analysed using multigroup (ADHD, non-ADHD, randomly weighted non-ADHD) multivariate (multiple independent/covariate and dependent variables) path analysis.The findings revealed a significant and positive association between academic buoyancy and outcomes for students with ADHD that generalized to non-ADHD groups. On occasion where academic buoyancy effects differed between the groups, effects favoured students with ADHD. Furthermore, academic buoyancy explained significant variance in outcomes for both groups of students after covariates (age, gender, parent education, language background, socio-economic status, personality) were entered.It is concluded that there is merit in widely promoting and fostering academic buoyancy among ADHD and non-ADHD students alike - and that academic buoyancy explains variance in outcomes beyond major intrapersonal factors such as personality, socio-economic status, ethnicity, and the like.

Martin A. J., Colmar S. H., Davey L. A., & Marsh H. W . ( 2010).

Longitudinal modelling of academic buoyancy and motivation: Do the ‘5Cs’ hold up over time?

British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80( 3), 473-496.

URL     PMID:20170601      [本文引用: 5]

Academic buoyancy is students' ability to successfully deal with setbacks and challenges that are typical of academic life. The present study extends previous preliminary cross-sectional work that tentatively identified five motivational predictors of academic buoyancy - referred to as the '5Cs' of academic buoyancy: confidence (self-efficacy), coordination (planning), commitment (persistence), composure (low anxiety), and control (low uncertain control).The study seeks to more clearly ascertain the effects of motivation (and its mediating role) on academic buoyancy over and above prior academic buoyancy.The study comprised N=1,866 high school students from six schools.Longitudinal data were collected (1 year apart) and the hypothesized model exploring longitudinal effects was tested using structural equation modelling.After controlling for prior variance in academic buoyancy, the 5Cs were significant predictors of subsequent academic buoyancy. Furthermore, over and above the direct effects of prior academic buoyancy on subsequent academic buoyancy, the 5Cs significantly mediated this relationship.The study concludes with a discussion of the substantive, applied, and methodological implications for researchers and practitioners seeking to investigate and address the academic buoyancy of students who require the capacity to effectively function in an ever-challenging school environment.

Martin A. J., Ginns P., Brackett M. A., Malmberg L. E., & Hall J . ( 2013).

Academic buoyancy and psychological risk: Exploring reciprocal relationships

Learning and Individual Differences, 27, 128-133.

URL     [本文引用: 10]

Based on hypothesized reciprocal relations between psychological risk and academic buoyancy (dealing with ‘everyday’ academic setback in the ordinary course of school life), the present study used cross-lagged structural equation models to examine the relative salience of (1) prior academic buoyancy in predicting subsequent psychological risk and (2) prior psychological risk in predicting subsequent academic buoyancy. Academic buoyancy and psychological risk (academic anxiety, failure avoidance, uncertain control, emotional instability, neuroticism) measures were administered to 2971 students (11–1902years) from 21 Australian high schools at two time waves across a one-year interval. Analyses confirmed a reciprocal effects model in which psychological risk impacts academic buoyancy and academic buoyancy impacts psychological risk. The findings hold applied and conceptual implications for practitioners and researchers seeking to help students deal more effectively with adversity in school life.

Martin, A. J., & Marsh, H. W . ( 2008).

Academic buoyancy: Towards an understanding of students' everyday academic resilience

Journal of School Psychology, 46( 1), 53-83.

URL     PMID:19083351      [本文引用: 8]

Academic buoyancy is developed as a construct reflecting everyday academic resilience within a positive psychology context and is defined as students' ability to successfully deal with academic setbacks and challenges that are typical of the ordinary course of school life (e.g., poor grades, competing deadlines, exam pressure, difficult schoolwork). Data were collected from 598 students in Years 8 and 10 at five Australian high schools. Half-way through the school year and then again at the end of the year, students were asked to rate their academic buoyancy as well as a set of hypothesized predictors (self-efficacy, control, academic engagement, anxiety, teacher-tudent relationship) in the area of mathematics. Multilevel modeling found that the bulk of variance in academic buoyancy was explained at the student level. Confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling showed that (a) Time 1 anxiety (negatively), self-efficacy, and academic engagement significantly predict Time 1 academic buoyancy; (b) Time 2 anxiety (negatively), self-efficacy, academic engagement, and teacher-tudent relationships explain variance in Time 2 academic buoyancy over and above that explained by academic buoyancy at Time 1; and (c) of the significant predictors, anxiety explains the bulk of variance in academic buoyancy.

Martin A. J., Yu K., Ginns P., & Papworth B . ( 2017).

Young people’s academic buoyancy and adaptability: A cross-cultural comparison of China with North America and the United Kingdom

Educational Psychology, 37( 8), 930-946.

URL     [本文引用: 1]

We investigated academic buoyancy (a response to challenge) and adaptability (a response to change) among a sample of 12-16-year-olds in China (N02=023617) compared with same-aged youth from North America (N02=02989) and the United Kingdom (UK; N02=021182). We found that Chinese students reported higher mean levels of buoyancy and adaptability. We also found that correlations between buoyancy and adaptability, and between these two factors and motivation and engagement outcomes, were significantly higher for Chinese students than for North American and UK samples. In path analyses, buoyancy and adaptability positively and significantly predicted motivation and engagement (typically at p02<020.001) in all three regions; however, buoyancy effects were significantly stronger for the Chinese students.

Miller S., Connolly P., & Maguire L. K . ( 2013).

Wellbeing, academic buoyancy and educational achievement in primary school students

International Journal of Educational Research, 62, 239-248.

URL     [本文引用: 2]

The study explored the relationship between student wellbeing and academic achievement among 7–11 years old students and whether the relationship was moderated by gender and deprivation. 1081 students in Northern Ireland participated in a cross-sectional survey that captured data on academic achievement and a range of wellbeing indicators. Findings suggested the existence of an underlying wellbeing factor, which was positively related to achievement. The relationship was not moderated by gender and/or deprivation. Findings were explored using a model of ‘academic buoyancy’. There was no evidence that suggested efforts to improve achievement that focus on wellbeing should be targeted specifically at students in economically deprived areas or be modified in terms of gender.

Nicholls A. R., Morley D., & Perry J. L . ( 2016).

The Model of Motivational Dynamics in sport: Resistance to peer influence, behavioral engagement and disaffection, dispositional coping, and resilience

Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 2010.

URL     PMID:4703820      [本文引用: 1]

The Model of Motivational Dynamics (MMD; Skinner and Pitzer, 2012) infers that peers influence behavioral engagement levels, which in turn is linked to coping and resilience. Scholars, however, are yet to test the MMD among an athletic population. The purpose of this paper was to assess an a priori model that included key constructs from the MMD, such as resistance to peer influence, behavioral engagement and disaffection, coping, and resilience among athletes. Three hundred and fifty-one athletes (male n = 173, female n = 178; M age = 16.15 years) completed a questionnaire that measured each construct. Our results provide support for the model. In particular, there were positive paths between resistance to peer influence and behavioral engagement, behavioral engagement and task-oriented coping, and task-oriented coping with resilience. There was also a positive path between resilience and resistance to peer influence, but a negative path from resistance to peer influence to behavioral disaffection. Due to the reported benefits of enhancing resistance to peer influence and behavioral engagement, researchers could devise sport specific interventions to maximize athletes scores in these constructs.

Pitzer, J., & Skinner, E. (2017).

Predictors of changes in students' motivational resilience over the school year: The roles of teacher support, self-appraisals, and emotional reactivity

International Journal of Behavioral Development, 41( 1), 15-29.

URL     [本文引用: 6]

Putwain D. W., Connors L., Symes W., & Douglas-Osborn E . ( 2012).

Is academic buoyancy anything more than adaptive coping?

Anxiety Stress and Coping, 25( 3), 349-358.

URL     PMID:21644112      [本文引用: 4]

Academic buoyancy refers to a positive, constructive, and adaptive response to the types of challenges and setbacks experienced in a typical and everyday academic setting. In this project we examined whether academic buoyancy explained any additional variance in test anxiety over and above that explained by coping. Two hundred and ninety-eight students in their final two years of compulsory schooling completed self-report measures of academic buoyancy, coping, and test anxiety. Results suggested that buoyancy was inversely related to test anxiety and unrelated to coping. With the exception of test-irrelevant thoughts, test anxiety was positively related to avoidance coping and social support. Test-irrelevant thoughts were inversely related to task focus, unrelated to social support, and positively related to avoidance. A hierarchical regression analysis showed that academic buoyancy explained a significant additional proportion of variance in test anxiety when the variance for coping had already been accounted for. These findings suggest that academic buoyancy can be considered as a distinct construct from that of adaptive coping.

Putwain, D. W., & Daly, A. L . ( 2013).

Do clusters of test anxiety and academic buoyancy differentially predict academic performance?

Learning and Individual Differences, 27, 157-162.

URL     [本文引用: 4]

In this study we adopted a person-centred approach to examine whether students could be identified in distinct clusters on the basis of their test anxiety and academic buoyancy scores, and whether students' academic performance differed accordingly. We performed a cluster analysis on a sample of 469 secondary school students preparing for high-stakes examinations and we identified five empirically-distinct clusters. Three corresponded to a continuum of high test anxiety/low academic buoyancy, mid test anxiety/mid academic buoyancy and low test anxiety/high academic buoyancy. Two clusters corresponded to students with mid-high test anxiety and mid-high academic buoyancy. Academic performance was highest for students in clusters of low test anxiety/ high academic buoyancy or mid test anxiety/ high academic buoyancy. Performance was lowest for students in clusters of high test anxiety/ low academic buoyancy. These findings show how academic buoyancy may lower threat appraisal in some students and show a performance protective role in others.

Putwain D. W., Daly A. L., Chamberlain S., & Sadreddini S . ( 2016).

‘Sink or swim’: Buoyancy and coping in the cognitive test anxiety-academic performance relationship

Educational Psychology, 36( 10), 1807-1825.

URL     [本文引用: 3]

Ricketts S. N., Engelhard G., Jr., & Chang M. L . ( 2017).

Development and validation of a scale to measure academic resilience in mathematics

European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 33( 2), 79-86.

URL     [本文引用: 2]

The purpose of this study is to describe the development and validation of a scale designed to measure academic resilience in mathematics (ARM). The ARM scale includes nine items and was administered to 528 7th and 8th grade students in a low-income urban school in the United States. The Many-Facet Rasch model was used to investigate the psychometric quality of the scale. Students responded to a six-category rating scale with responses ranging from 1 (= strongly disagree) to 6 (= strongly agree). The overall reliability of person separation was good (Rel = .79), and the scale exhibited good model-data fit. The data indicated that there were no statistically significant differences in student perceptions of their academic resilience by socioeconomic status (SES) or by performance levels on a statewide-standardized mathematics assessment. There were, however, statistically significant differences in student perceptions of their academic resilience by gender and teacher-assigned grades. The ARM scale is a pr...

Ross S. E., Neibling B. C., & Heckert T. M . ( 1999).

Sources of stress among college students

College Student Journal, 33( 2), 312-317.

URL     [本文引用: 1]

Determines the major sources of stress among college students. Examination of interpersonal, intrapersonal, academic and environmental sources of stress; Top five sources include change in sleeping habits, vacations/breaks and increased work load; Implications of findings in creating stress management programs.

Skinner E. A., Kindermann T. A., & Furrer C. J . ( 2009).

A motivational perspective on engagement and disaffection: Conceptualization and assessment of children's behavioral and emotional participation in academic activities in the classroom

Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69( 3), 493-525.

URL     [本文引用: 2]

Skinner, E. A., & Pitzer, J. R . ( 2012).

Developmental dynamics of student engagement, coping, and everyday resilience

In S. Christenson, A. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement(pp. 21-44). Boston, MA: Springer.

URL     [本文引用: 3]

The goal of this chapter is to present a perspective on student engagement with academic work that emphasizes its role in organizing the daily school experiences of children and youth as well as their

Skinner E., Pitzer J., & Brule H . ( 2014).

The role of emotion in engagement, coping, and the development of motivational resilience

In International handbook of emotions in education(pp. 331-347). New York: Routledge.

URL     [本文引用: 2]

AbstractThis chapter presents a perspective on emotions in the classroom that emphasizes their role in organizing students' effort and commitment to academic work as well as their coping and persistence in the face of obstacles and setbacks. A developmental model of motivational resilience, based in self-determination theory, provides a foundation for identifying self- perceptions and interpersonal relationships that can act as resilience resources, focusing especially on how supportive relationships with teachers, along with authentic academic work and constructive interpretations of failure, can promote emotional investment in learning. Suggestions are made for teacher practices, with special attention to the role of teachers' own emotions and motivational needs.

Skinner E., Pitzer J., & Steele J . ( 2013).

Coping as part of motivational resilience in school: A multidimensional measure of families, allocations, and profiles of academic coping

Educational and Psychological Measurement, 73( 5), 803-835.

URL     [本文引用: 5]

Skinner E. A., Pitzer J. R., & Steele J. S . ( 2016).

Can student engagement serve as a motivational resource for academic coping, persistence, and learning during late elementary and early middle school

Developmental Psychology, 52(12), 2099-2117. Symes, W., Putwain, D. W., & Remedios, R. (2015).

The enabling and protective role of academic buoyancy in the appraisal of fear appeals used prior to high stakes examinations

School Psychology International, 36(6), 605-619.

URL     PMID:27893248      [本文引用: 7]

How children and youth deal with academic challenges and setbacks can make a material difference to their learning and school success. Hence, it is important to investigate the factors that allow students to cope constructively. A process model focused on students’ motivational resources was used to frame a study examining whether engagement in the classroom shapes students’ academic coping, and whether coping in turn contributes to subsequent persistence on challenging tasks and learning, which then feed back into ongoing engagement. In fall and spring of the same school year, 880 children in 4th through 6th grades and their teachers completed measures of students’ engagement and disaffection in the classroom, and of their re-engagement in the face of obstacles and difficulties; students also reported on 5 adaptive and 6 maladaptive ways of academic coping; and information on a subset of students’ classroom grades was collected. Structural analyses, incorporating student-reports, teacher-reports, and their combination, indicated that the model of motivational processes was a good fit for time-ordered data from fall to spring. Multiple regressions examining each step in the process model also indicated that it was the profile of coping responses, rather than any specific individual way of coping, that was most centrally connected to changes in engagement and persistence. Taken together, findings suggest that these internal dynamics may form self-perpetuating cycles that could cement or augment the development of children’s motivational resilience and vulnerability across time.

Tronick, E., & DiCorcia, J. A . ( 2015).

The everyday stress resilience hypothesis: A reparatory sensitivity and the development of coping and resilience

Children Australia, 40( 2), 124-138.

URL     [本文引用: 1]

Resilience is often associated with extreme trauma or overcoming extraordinary odds. This way of thinking about resilience leaves most of the ontogenetic picture a mystery. In the following review we put forth the Everyday Stress Resilience Hypothesis, in which resilience is analysed from a systems perspective and seen as a process of regulating everyday life stressors. Successful regulation accumulates into regulatory resilience, which emerges during early development from successful coping with the inherent stress in typical interactions. These quotidian stressful events lead to activation of behavioural and physiological systems. Stress that is effectively resolved in the short run and with reiteration over the long term increases children090005s, as well as adults090005, capacity to cope with more intense stressors. Infants, however, lack the regulatory capacities to take on this task by themselves. Therefore, through communicative and regulatory processes during infant090009adult interactions, we demonstrate that the roots of regulatory resilience originate in infants090005 relationships with their care givers and that maternal sensitivity can help or hinder the growth of resilience.

Wagnild, G. M., & Young, H. M . ( 1993).

Development and psychometric evaluation of the Resilience Scale

Journal of Nursing Measurement, 1( 2), 165-178.

[本文引用: 1]

Yu, K., & Martin, A. J . ( 2014).

Personal best (PB) and 'classic' achievement goals in the Chinese context: Their role in predicting academic motivation, engagement and buoyancy

Educational Psychology, 34( 5), 635-658.

URL     [本文引用: 1]

Prior research has shown personal best (PB) goals to be significantly related to students’ motivation, engagement and achievement. However, research thus far has investigated PB goals only among Western samples and it is unclear to what extent PB goals hold academic merit in the Asian context. It is also unclear whether PB goals explain variance in motivation and engagement beyond that explained by ‘classic’ performance, mastery and avoidance goals. With a sample of 3753 middle school students in China, the present study showed that mastery and PB goals explained the bulk of variance in motivation, engagement and academic buoyancy outcomes. It therefore appears that the effects of PB and ‘classic’ goals derived in Western contexts generalise to the Chinese context. Further, although correlated, mastery and PB goals explain unique variance in distinct academic outcomes such that mastery goals appear more salient in mapping onto motivation factors while PB goals appear more salient in mapping onto engagement and buoyancy factors.

版权所有 © 《心理科学进展》编辑部
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发  技术支持:support@magtech.com.cn

/