Ir al menú de navegación principal Ir al contenido principal Ir al pie de página del sitio
##common.pageHeaderLogo.altText##

Artículos originales

Vol. 4 Núm. 7 (2024): Simbiosis, Revista de Educación y Psicología

Determinantes volitivas y emocionales epistémicas del desempeño matemático bajo en estudiantes universitarios mexicanos

Volitional and epistemic emotional determinants of low mathematical performance in Mexican university students
Publicado
2024-01-02

El objetivo fue poner a prueba un modelo hipotético de variables volitivas y emocionales, sobre el desempeño en habilidades matemáticas de aritmética y álgebra, en una muestra de 678 estudiantes de siete instituciones de Educación Superior de México. La recolección de datos se llevó a cabo mediante: a) un inventario de auto reporte sobre variables volitivas, de regulación y de emociones epistémicas y b) una prueba de ejecución en matemáticas, ambos validados previamente. El modelo resultante se validó mediante análisis de senderos y mostró índices altos de ajuste práctico donde, se identificaron dos efectos principales: las variables volitivas y de regulación emocional ejercen efectos indirectos sobre el desempeño en matemáticas; mientras que las emociones epistémicas de confusión ejercen un efecto directo sobre los diferentes niveles de desempeño matemático.

The objective was to test a hypothetical model of volitional and emotional variables, on the performance about mathematical skills of arithmetic and algebra, in a sample of 678 students from seven Higher Education Institutions from Mexico. Data collection was carried out through: a) a self-report inventory on volitional variables, emotion regulation and epistemic emotions and b) a performance test in mathematics, both previously validated. The resulting model was validated through path analysis and showed high rates of practical fit where two main effects were identified: volitional and emotional regulation variables exert indirect effects on mathematics performance; while the epistemic emotions of confusion have a direct effect on the different levels of mathematical performance.

O objetivo foi testar um modelo hipotético de variáveis volitivas e emocionais sobre o desempenho em habilidades matemáticas de aritmética e álgebra, em uma amostra de 678 estudantes de sete instituições de ensino superior no México. A coleta de dados foi realizada por meio de: a) um inventário de autorrelato sobre variáveis volitivas, de regulação e emoções epistêmicas e b) um teste de desempenho em matemática, ambos previamente validados. O modelo resultante foi validado através de análise de caminho e apresentou altos índices de ajuste prático onde foram identificados dois efeitos principais: as variáveis de regulação volitiva e emocional exercem efeitos indiretos no desempenho em matemática; enquanto as emoções epistêmicas de confusão exercem um efeito direto em diferentes níveis de desempenho matemático.

Número:
Vol. 4 Núm. 7 (2024): Simbiosis, Revista de Educación y Psicología
Sección:
Artículos originales

Referencias

  1. Alexander, P. A. (2017). Issues of Constructs, Contexts, and Continuity: Commentary on Learning in Higher Education. Educational Psychology Review, 29(2), 345-351. https://doi:10.1007/s10648-017-9409-3.
  2. Bentler, P. (2006). EQS 6.1 for Windows (Build 90) [Software de Computadora]. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software, Inc.
  3. Boekaerts, M. (1996). Personality and the psychology of learning. European Journal of Personality, 10, 377-404. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0984(199612)10:53.0.CO;2-N.
  4. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. Estados Unidos: John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118619179.
  5. Boyle G. J. (1983). Effects on academic learning of manipulating emotional states and motivational dynamics. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 53(3), 347-357. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1983.tb02567.x.
  6. Boyle, G. J. (1985). Self-report measures of depression: Some psychometrics considerations. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 24(1), 45-59. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8260.1985.tb01312.x.
  7. Boyle, G. J. (1987). Typological mood-state factors measured in the Eight State Questionnaire. Personality and Individual Difference, 8(1), 137-140. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-869(87)90022-5.
  8. Boyle, G. J. (1991). Item analysis of the subscales in the Eight State Questionnaire (8SQ): Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Multivariate Experimental Clinical Research, 10(1), 37-65. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308071866_Item_analysis_of_the_subscales_in_the_Eight_State_Questionnaire_8SQ_Exploratory_and_confirmatory_factor_analyses.
  9. Byrne, B. M. (1989). A primer of LISREL: Basic applications and programming for confirmatory factor analytic models. New York: Springer-Verlag.
  10. Byrne, B. (2006). Structural equation modeling with EQS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Estados Unidos: Psychology Press.
  11. Byrne, B. M., Shavelson, R. & Muthén, B. (1989). Testing for the Equivalence of Factor Covariance and Mean Structures: The Issue of Partial Measurement Invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 105(3), 456-466. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033- 2909.105.3.456.
  12. Castañeda, S. (2012). El sentido de agencia en el aprendizaje de contenidos teóricos. XX Congreso Mexicano de Psicología. Campeche, México.
  13. Castañeda, S. & Martínez, R. (1999). Enseñanza y aprendizaje estratégicos: Modelo integral de evaluación e instrucción. Revista Latina de Pensamiento y Lenguaje, 4(2), 251- 278. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272151009_Ensenanza_y_aprendizaje_estrategicos_Modelo_integral_de_evaluacion_e_instruccion.
  14. Castañeda, S., Peña, R. & Pérez, I. (2017). Prediciendo comprensión de textos a partir de componentes agentivos. Revista de Psicología de la Universidad Católica de Santa María, 13, 12-34. https://www.academia.edu/34599726/Prediciendo_comprensi%C3%B3n_de_textos_a_partir_de_componentes_afectivos.
  15. Castañeda, S., Peñalosa, E. & Austria, F. (2014). Perfiles agentivos y no agentivos en la formación del psicólogo. México: CONACyT. https://www.academia.edu/17224533/Perfiles_Agentivos_y_no_Agentivos_en_la_Formaci%C3%B3n_del_Psic%C3%B3logo.
  16. Cervone, D. (2005). Personality architecture: Within-person structure and processes. Annual Review of Psychologie, 22, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070133
  17. Cervone, D., Mor, N., Orom, H., Shadel, W. G. & Scott, W. D. (2011). Self-efficacy beliefs and the architecture of personality. En K. D. Vohls y R. F. Baumeister (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation: research, theory, and applications (pp. 461-484). Estados Unidos: The Guilford Press.
  18. Cuttance, P. & Ecob, R. (Eds.). (1987). Structural modeling by example: Applications in educational, sociological, and behavioral research. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511601118.
  19. D’Mello, S., Lehman, B., Pekrun, R. y Graesser, A. (2014). Confusion can be beneficial for learning. Learning and Instruction, 29, 153-170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.05.003.
  20. De Raad, B. & Schouwenburg, H. C. (1996). Personality in learning and education: A review. European Journal of Personality, 10, 303-336. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0984(199612)10:53.0.CO;2-2.
  21. Dinsmore, D. L. (2017). Toward a dynamic, multidimensional research framework for strategic processing. Educational Psychology Review, 29(2), 235-268. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-017-9407-5.
  22. Fryer, L. K. (2017). Building Bridges: Seeking Structure and Direction for Higher Education Motivated Learning Strategy Models. Educational Psychology Review, 9(2), 325- 344. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-017-9405-7.
  23. Gross, J. J. (1998). The emerging field of emotion regulation: An integrative review. Review of General Psychology, 2, 271-299. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.3.271.
  24. Gross, J. J. (2001). Emotion regulation in adulthood: Timing is everything. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10, 214-219. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00152.
  25. Gross, J. J. & Thompson, R. A. (2007). Emotion regulation: Conceptual foundations. En J. J. Gross (Ed.), Handbook of emotion regulation (pp. 3-24). Estados Unidos: Guilford Press.
  26. Heckhausen, H. & Kuhl, J. (1985). From wishes to action: The dead ends and short cuts on the long way to action. En M. Frese y J. Sabini (Eds.), Goal-directed behavior: Psychological theory and research on action (pp. 134-160). Nueva Jersey: Erlbaum.
  27. John, O. P. & Gross, J. J. (2007). Individual differences in emotion regulation. En J. J. Gross (Ed.), Handbook of emotion regulation (pp. 351-372). Estados Unidos: The Guilford Press.
  28. Jostmann, N. B. & Koole, S. L. (2010). Dealing with High Demands: The role of action versus state orientation. En R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Handbook of personality and self-regulation (pp. 332-352). Singapur: Wiley-BlackWell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444318111.ch15.
  29. Kuhl, J. (1985). Volitional mediators of cognition-behavior consistency: Selfregulatory processes and action versus state orientation. En J. Kuhl y J. Beckmann (Eds.), Action control: From cognition to behavior (pp. 101-128). Berlín: SpringerVerlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-69746-3_6.
  30. Kuhl, J. (1994). Actions and state orientation: Psychometric properties of the action control scales (ACS-90). En J. Kuhl y J. Beckmann (Eds.), Volition and Personality: Action versus State Orientation (pp. 47-59). Alemania: Hogrefe.
  31. Kuhl, J. (2000). A functional-design approach to motivation and self-regulation: The dynamics of personality systems interaction. En M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich y M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 111-169). Estados Unidos: Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50034-2.
  32. Kuhl, J. & Beckmann, J. (1994). Volition and personality: Action versus state orientation. Alemania: Hogrefe & Huber.
  33. Mischel, W. (1973). Toward a cognitive social learning reconceptualization of personality. Psychological Review, 80, 252-283. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0035002.
  34. Morton, A. (2010). Epistemic emotions. En P. Goldie (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of philosophy of emotion (pp. 385-399). Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://10.0.4.69/oxfordhb/9780199235018.003.0018.
  35. Muis, K. R., Psaradellis, C., Lajoie, S. P., Di Leo, I. & Chevrier, M. (2015). The role of epistemic emotions in mathematics problem solving. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 42, 172-185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2015.06.003.
  36. Ochsner, K. N. & Gross, J. J. (2007). The neural architecture of emotion regulation. En J. J. Gross (Ed.), Handbook of emotion regulation (pp. 87-109). Estados Unidos: Guilford Press.
  37. Pekrun, R. & Linnenbrink-Garcia, L. (Eds.) (2014). Handbook of emotions and education. Nueva York: Francis & Taylor / Routledge.
  38. Pekrun, R. & Stephens, E. J. (2012). Academic emotions. En K. R. Harris, S. Graham, T. Urdan, S. Graham, J. M. Royer y M. Zeidner (Eds.), APA educational psychology handbook (Vol. 2, pp. 3-31). Washington: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/13274-001
  39. Peña, R. & Castañeda, S. (2016). Componentes de personalidad en agencia académica: volición y regulación emocional. En S. Castañeda y E. Peñalosa (Coord.), Fenomenología de Agencia Académica (pp. 305-321). México: Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana. https://www.academia.edu/34463098/Componentes_de_personalidad_en_agencia_acad%C3%A9mica_volici%C3%B3n_y_ regulaci%C3%B3n_emocional.
  40. Peña, R., Castañeda, S. & Pérez, I. (2022). Inventario de habilidades matemáticas y componentes no cognitivos del aprendizaje. Alternativas en Psicología, 1(48), 172-196.
  41. Pérez, I., Castañeda, S., & Peñalosa, E. (2016). Meta-Evaluador Web. En S. Castañeda y E. Peñalosa (Coord.), Fenomenología de Agencia Académica (pp. 61-80). México: Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana. https://www.academia.edu/33688660/Meta_evaluador_Web.
  42. Pérez, E., Medrano, L. A. & Sánchez, J. (2013). El Path Analysis: conceptos básicos y ejemplos de aplicación. Revista Argentina de Ciencias del Comportamiento, 5(1), 52-66. https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/3334/333427385008.pdf.
  43. Ross, D. (2007). Introduction: science catches the will. En D. Ross, D. Spurrett, H. Kincaid, y G. L. Stephens (Eds.), Distributed cognition and the will: individual volition and social context (pp. 1-16). Estados Unidos: The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/7463.003.0001.
  44. Trevors, G. J., Muis, K. R., Pekrun, R., Sinatra, G. M. & Winne P. H. (2016). Identity and epistemic emotions during knowledge revision: A potential account for the backfire effect. Discurses Processes, 53, 339-370. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2015.1136507.
  45. Weston, R. & Gore, Jr. P. A. (2006). A brief guide to structural equation modeling. The counseling Psychologist, 34, 719-751. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000006286345.