See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/226621664

Motivation and study habits

Article in Higher Education · November 1974

DOI: 10.1007/BF00153949

CITATIONS READS

84 19,387

3 authors, including:

Noel Entwistle John Dewar Wilson

The University of Edinburgh Burapha University
166 PUBLICATIONS 15,190 CITATIONS 32 PUBLICATIONS 431 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Second Teaching Quality Improvement Project Bangladesh - TQI-II View project

STUDENT LEARNING AND ACADEMIC UNDERSTANDING: A RESEARCH PERSPECTIVE AND ITS IMPLICATIONS View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Noel Entwistle on 10 September 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Higher Education 3 (1974) 379-396
O Elsevier ScientificPublishing Company, Amsterdam - Printed in the Netherlands

MOTIVATION AND STUDY HABITS

N. J. ENTWISTLE, JENNIFER THOMPSON

Departm en t of Edu ca tional R esearch,
University of Lancaster, Lancaster, United Kingdom

and

J. D. WILSON
Moray House College of Education,
Edinburgh, United Kingdom

ABSTRACT

The first part of the article reviews the literature (mainly British) on the
relationships between academic performance in higher education and motivation and
study habits. The distinction between goal-orientated and intrinsic motivation is used
to clarify the meaning of previous studies. Among the investigations of study habits,
the dimension of syllabus-boundness/syllabus-freedom helps to relate psychiatric work
on study difficulties to research using self-report inventories.
The weakness of the questionnaire approach in explaining the relationships
observed led to the use of semi-structured interviews. In the second part of the article
the students' explanations of their reactions to higher education demonstrate, in
particular, that "fear of failure" and "hope for success" present alternative motiva-
tions towards academic success.

The Concept of Motivation

M o t i v a t i o n has r e c e n t l y b e e n described as a " c o n c e p t u a l c h a r l a d y "

widely used for sweeping up variance in academic a t t a i n m e n t u n a c c o u n t e d
for b y traditional intellectual or e d u c a t i o n a l variables (Jones et al., 1973).
T h e enthusiasm with which m o t i v a t i o n and s t u d y habits have been used
b y e d u c a t i o n a l psychologists to explain o t h e r w i s e u n e x p e c t e d variations
in s t u d e n t s ' academic a t t a i n m e n t perhaps has its origins in the f a m o u s
Hullian e q u a t i o n , which simplifies to
P e r f o r m a n c e = Drive • Habit ( E y s e n c k , 1957)
and which appears to be implicit in m u c h c u r r e n t research. In universities

379
and colleges academic failure is often attributed by lecturers to a lack of
motive power in the students or the ineffective utilization of such power
by inappropriate study habits (Entwistle and Percy, 1973).
It is now some time since Peters (1958) criticized the conceptual
confusion surrounding the use of the term "motivation". The mechanical
model of motivation, described in terms of underlying drives, negates the
goal-directed motivation which Peters saw as common to much human
activity. He also drew attention to the need to distinguish between
extrinsic and intrinsic motivation. Essentially extrinsic motivation is
aroused by rewards external to the learning situation - a bicycle for
passing an examination, for example - while intrinsic motivation is
derived from the task itself. Extending this analysis, Wilson (1972)has
distinguished between intrinsic motivation which is clearly related to the
activity itself (learning for learning's sake) and intrinsic motivation which
is aroused because the activity can be used to satisfy some inner "need" of
the individual, for example to increase self-esteem or to overcome feelings
of inferiority (Carter, 1973). Most educational research has failed to
respond to such pleas for conceptual clarity and has relied on intuition,
experience or factor analysis in defining and measuring students' motiva-
tion - irrespective of the conceptual confusion, and consequent lack of
explanatory power, of many of the measurement techniques employed.
The philosophical clarification of the ways in which the term "motiva-
tion" has been used does, however, provide a thread with which to begin
to unravel the tangle of approaches to motivation present in the literature.

Review of the Literature

GOAL-ORIENTATED MOTIVATION

Research in higher education has often used single questions in

assessing goal-orientated motivation. Students are simply asked their
reasons for embarking on a university or college course. In Britain, such
studies have indicated that unsuccessful students entered university
mainly for "extrinsic" reasons (such as parental pressure) rather than out
of "intrinsic" interest in a particular discipline (Hopkins et al., 1958;
Wankowski, 1969, 1970). Wankowski also showed that students who were
progressing normally had clearer goals, both short-term and long-term,
than students who failed in their first-year examinations. Jones et al.
(1973) have pointed out that such goal-orientated motivation may vary
from discipline to discipline. They found that successful psychologists at
Edinburgh University were likely to endorse positive reasons for entering

380
university (such as, studying subjects relevant to a future job) while
successful sociologists tended to give negative responses to vocational
reasons and indicated that their choice was "the least unattractive of
alternatives", or involved "the postponement of a career choice".
McPherson suggests that these findings imply that a rejection of conven-
tional motives may be of positive benefit in courses which demand an
imaginative consideration of alternative social structures. In other words
the effectiveness of goal-orientated motivation is dependent on a con-
fluence of student values and the specific educational objectives of a
course or area of study.
Attempts to explain academic achievement in terms of underlying
drives are, perhaps, best represented by studies which investigate
"anxiety" or "achievement motivation". While "anxiety" is often con-
sidered as a drive which will inevitably facilitate learning, Eysenck (1972)
has emphasized that this is an over-simple view. Anxiety can be "trait",
representing a general tendency, or "state", relating to a specific situation.
While trait anxiety is normally measured, state anxiety is more likely to
have a direct effect on examination performance. Moreover trait anxiety,
while acting as a motivating force, will interact with previous habits in
determining the actual behaviour. Anxiety prior to assessment may lead,
for different students, either to intensified revision or to a drinking spree
to relieve tension. These different reactions to anxiety might well lead to
contrasting examination results and so confound predictions made on the
basis of trait anxiety. Such speculations seem to fit in with the empirical
studies of Alpert and Haber (1960) who identified two types of anxiety,
one of which facilitated, while the other debilitated, academic perform-
ance. Other complications are found in the possibilities of curvilinear
relationships in which high and low anxiety both lead to poor perform-
ance (Lynn and Gordon, 1961) or of interactions with ability in which
able students utilize their anxiety effectively, but less able students do not
(Spielberger, 1962).

NEED FOR ACHIEVEMENT

The literature on achievement motivation also introduces-contrasting

drives. Atkinson and Feather (1966) distinguish the motive of "hope for
success", which facilitates performance, from "fear of failure", which
they see as debilitating However Birney et al. (1969) explain how
students' academic performance might be improved by both of these
motives. Some students might respond to the "carrot" of success, while
others would see only the "stick" of possible failure. In these studies
achievement motivation is measured by the thematic apperception test in

381
which the student is asked to write stories about situations shown in
drawings. The student is expected to project into his writing indications of
his need for achievement ( " n " Ach) or fear of failure. To date the
literature describing the application of this technique to the prediction of
academic performance has produced inconsistent patterns of results
(Lavin, 1967). It may be that achievement motivation measured in this
way is too general a drive; academic achievement is only one of the goals
which would satisfy it. For this reason more effort has been expended
recently in developing self-report inventories designed to tap the more
specific dimensions of "academic motivation" which appear to have been
conceptualised in terms of the type of intrinsic motivation which links
competitive academic attainment with self-esteem.

ACADEMIC MOTIVATION

Some Of the earlier studies derived the factor of academic motivation

from item analyses of more general personality inventories. For example,
Finger and Schlesser (1965) used their Personal Values Inventory to
produce factors which were related to academic performance while
remaining independent of scholastic aptitude. In Britain specific scales of
academic motivation and study methods have been developed (Entwistle
et al., 1971), both of which show consistent relationships with degree
results across different subject areas (Entwistle and Percy, 1973).
In an earlier validation study the motivation scale was found to be
linked with emotional stability (low neuroticism). This finding again
contradicts the simple view of anxiety as always acting as a motivating
force. In fact, item analyses of motivation, study methods and personality
inventories led to a pen-portrait of a well-adjusted and motivated student
who
plans his work carefully and thinks ahead, and who is conscientious and
recognises the importance of finding conditions suitable for efficient
studying. There seems to be a certain obsessiveness towards being correct
in behaviour (lie scale items) which, coupled with independence and
self-confidence, ties in with the determination to do things well (Entwistle
and Entwistle, 1970, p. 139).
In this portrait there is a link between motivation and study
methods, but in fact it is by no means easy to identify study methods
which are consistently effective.

STUDY HABITS

The simplest indicator of study habits must surely be based on

382
estimates of the number of hours worked by a student in a typical week.
Thoday (1957) reported a "fairly clear relationship between examination
results and the amount of work done", but later studies failed to confirm
this finding (Malleson, 1963; Cooper and Foy, 1969): Working on the
assumption that students would find difficulty in reporting their activities
accurately, Entwistle and Entwistle (1970) provided a specially designed
grid from which "hours worked" could be derived. Using this grid-
method consistently significant relationships with degree results have
subsequently been reported (Entwistle and Percy, 1973). However it is
clear that quality, as well as quantity, of studying is important. Long
hours of obsessive, but ineffective, work will rarely lead to academic
success. Obsessiveness is, in fact, one of the symptoms of study difficulties
associated with psychiatric disturbances which has been described in
clinical investigations (Malleson, 1963; Ryle, 1969). Another pattern of
study behaviour which involves unconscious conflict has been described
by Blaine and McArthur (1971). Here the student has a desperate need for
autonomy in his studying, rejecting pressures to conform to conventional
academic requirements.
A study which links clinical with psychometric approaches in
research on students was recently reported by Crown et al. (1973). Their
questionnaire produced three factors of study difficulty - anxiety and
depression, obsessiveness in seeking work satisfaction, and a combination
of low motivation and disorganisation. The first factor is clearly the
debilitating anxiety discussed earlier, while the third factor is also familiar,
at least in part. It surely reflects the negative pole of the academic
motivation scale, but it also focuses on the importance of organised study
methods. The well-known Survey of Study Habits and Attitudes (Brown
and Holtzman, 1966) contains goal-orientated motivation (educational
acceptance), conformity to conventional standards (teacher approval) and
organised study methods (work methods and delay avoidance) in its four
sub-scales. Significant correlations of these scales with academic perform-
ance have been reported both in the U.S.A. (Brown and Holtzman,
1955) and in Britain (Cowell and Entwistle, 1971), implying that it is
possible to define study methods which will be effective for a majority of
students.
Newman (1957) could not accept that defined methods of studying
would be helpful. He maintained that students must develop their own
individual approaches. Small (1966) appeared to be sympathetic with this
view, but did find that successful students in New Zealand consistently
adopted systematic study methods, even though some of the systems did
not appear, to the outsider, to be particularly efficient. Pond (1964)
compared the comments of contrasting groups of Australian students. The

383
"high-achievers" reported that they organized their studying and time
allocations, worked during free periods, decided on priorities and tried to
improve their study techniques. The "low-achievers" did not consider
organized study to be important. Their comments tended to be critical of
facilities in, for example, libraries - too much chatter, overcrowding and
scarcity of books. Presumably better-organized students are able to adapt
their approach to overcome any defects in the academic environment and
to maintain a more positive attitude to their studies, while the "low-
achievers" seek to excuse their poor performance.

SYLBS AND SYLFS

Perhaps the most interesting recent work on study methods has been
provoked by the ideas of Hudson (1968). He suggested that students
adopted different styles of studying which parallel the cognitive distinc-
tions between convergent and divergent thinking. He described "sylbs"
who were syllabus-bound, and "sylfs" who were syllabus-free. Parlett
(1970) explored these differences further and developed a scale of
syllabus-boundness for American students. Essentially syllabus-bound
students may be expected to have systematic and conscientious study-
habits, but these will also be associated with anxiety and obsessiveness in
some students. Syllabus-free students demand independence and hence
may come into conflict with the system. It is easy to see that extreme
syllabus-freedom may be associated with the pathological autonomy
described earlier.
Although Parlett's scale produces a single score of syllabus-bound-
ness, it is composed of two sets of items, representing acceptance of
academic requirements and imaginative independence of mind. Intuitively
the summation of these different types of item seems unreasonable,
although they may well be statistically related. Perhaps some of the best
students will see acceptance of the system as only a minor constraint on
their intellectual freedom.
A recent Canadian study (Biggs, 1970a) isolated six study dimensions
which fit, to some extent, into the framework suggested by Hudson's
speculations. The factors included study organisation, intrinsic motiva-
tion, tolerance of ambiguity and independence in studying. An examina-
tion of the items defining the first two factors suggests syllabus-bound-
ness, while the others represent aspects of syllabus-freedom. Although
Biggs (1970b) did not find consistently significant relationships with
academic performance, there were interesting relationships with other
measures. Both "syllabus-free" dimensions were found to be negatively
related to dogmatism and, with the exception of one sub-group, positively

384
correlated with divergent thinking. |ntrinsic motivation was linked with
introversion, while high scores on study organisation were associated with
high "lie scale" scores (conformity) and fewer "uses of objects" (conver-
gent thinking).
Biggs' contention that study strategies reflect more fundamental
personality dispositions is worth exploring further. Certainly Eysenck
(1972) expected neurotic introverts to have efficient study habits, but
recent studies have suggested, on the contrary, that stability and introver-
sion are related to high scores on study habits inventories (Cowell and
Entwistle, 1971 ).
From these varying approaches to describing study habits the
consistent value of organised strategies emerges, but there is still much
uncertainty. One might anticipate some curvilinear relationships between
academic performance and syllabus-boundness, where conscientiousness
shades into obsessiveness and neurosis, and where imaginative independ-
ence leads towards paranoia and demands for total autonomy. But until
a clearer understanding is obtained of how motivation, study habits and
personality interact and interrelate with academic performance, little
progress can be expected. It also seems to be important to move away
from the current emphasis on psychometric procedures, which may
incorporate the academic values of "rigid intellectual authority" (to quote
a student). Investigations which examine how students view study
methods within their own framework of values offer the possibility of
additional insights into the explanation of differential achievement in
higher education. The second half of this article reports one such study in
which data were collected by semi-structured interviews with university
students. Simple analyses combined with tabulations may not create
definitive findings: they do however support and amplify the patterns of
relationships identified in the review of the literature.

Survey of Students' Experiences

INTERVIEWS WITH STUDENTSl

As part of a large scale follow-up study at Lancaster (Entwistle and

Wilson, 1975) a sub-group of 60 university students (31 women and 29
men) were interviewed at the beginning of the second term of their final
year of study using a detailed semi-structured schedule designed to
investigate motivational factors subsumed under the following headings:

1 These interviewswere all conducted by Jennifer Thompson.

385
 (i) P r e - u n i v e r s i t y e x p e r i e n c e - incidence of pressure or encouragement
to enter higher education from home and school; preparation and
guidance received; experience of academic success;
(ii) E x p e r i e n c e at u n i v e r s i t y - difficulties in transition; satisfaction with
intellectual demands of courses; relevance of courses to student's
present interests; effort expended on studying; contact with
academic staff; extra-curricular activities; reactions to examina-
tions;
(iii) A n t i c i p a t e d p o s t - u n i v e r s i t y e x p e r i e n c e - perceived relevance of
courses to student's future goals; plans for work, training or further
study.
Test scores of personality (Eysenck and Eysenck, 1964), and motiva-
tion and study methods (Entwistle et al., 1971) were available from the
main study, together with "A" level grades and degree results. Transcripts
of the interviews allowed analyses to be made of the comments of
students falling into four distinct groups, categorized in terms of " A " level
grades and degree performance. "High achievers" had above average "A"
level grades combined with at least upper-second class degrees, while "low
achievers" were in the lower category of achievement at both school and
university; "overachievers" had below average " A " level grades, but good
degree results; and "underachievers" showed the converse pattern of
achievement. In many respects both groups of more successful students
were similar, and those with lower-second class degrees or worse also made
comparable comments. The full details of these analyses are being
prepared, but in the present study comments made by the two groups
whose performance changed between school and university are used to
illustrate how certain factors related to academic motivation vary with the
perception of the university experience.

OVERACHIEVERS

There were 1 1 students in this group, 4 men and 7 women. Their

parents were "pleased" and "proud" that they were going to university,
"very helpful, but not forceful". All these students were satisfied with the
extent of their preparation at school. Most mentioned that "the approach
was similar to university", with lectures, small discussion groups, and
independent study. Most felt that guidance on courses and careers was
"good personally", "but not if you weren't interested in higher educa-
tion". Fortunately for them, they were: "it just seemed like a natural
continuation". They experienced no pressure from home nor school, only
encouragement. On the negative side, the majority of this group felt
disappointed with performance at " A " Level - a result, they felt, of "an

386
unhappy choice of subjects", "poor teaching", or "an off year" on their
part. All looked forward to going to university. It was "an experience I
wanted to have", "an orientation for the future".
In every respect, these students settled down quickly and easily to
university life. They experienced no difficulties at all in the transition.
No-one changed course at any point, nor considered doing so. Most felt
that they had been more successful in their university studies than they
had expected to be. In the words of one student, "there's been a terrific
breakthrough. I find myself far more interested, and able to work far
harder. There's been more of a challenge in the standard of the work. And
I find that I've enjoyed it". All found the course intellectually challenging,
and "incredibly challenging if you're going to do the work properly". All
felt that they put a lot of effort into their work, and "increasingly so,
with Finals next term". They accept that, "if you want to get good marks,
you do it. So I do it". Or again, "I find it interesting, so I don't mind",
and "I've set myself fairly high standards now, in which case I haven't left
a great deal of work undone". All consider their course to be relevant to
their present interests, mainly because "there's a broad scope, and you're
allowed to follow your own interests". All were pleased and satisfied with
academic life, and with relationships with tutors and lecturers. Most felt
they had been "extremely lucky" to have had "a lot of individual
attention": they either belonged to a small Department, sat on Depart-
mental staff/student committees, had "managed to make it" into a
respected Professor's "small group, which he chooses" or, in the Sciences,
had got to know their supervisor very well during vacation courses. Staff,
they found, were always very "accessible", "helpful" and "sympathetic".
As a group, these students were equally satisfied with the non-
academic side of university life. Although they were "concentrating on
work this year", they had taken an active part in student societies. Most
felt that they had achieved "a very good balance" between study and
other interests, "a fairly flexible pattern". Five of the 11 students had been
"fairly involved" and "active" on various committees, which they perceive
as "worthwhile experience in public relations, etc."
These students were overwhelmingly in favour of examinations. Any
nervousness seemed to facilitate performance, both in the preparation
stage and in the exam itself. "It gingers you up, keeps you on your toes";
"I'm glad I'm nervous. It's an extra sign that I care"; "it keys me up to do
well". Taking an exam "can be fun, a challenge"; "it's a bit like doing
crosswords or quizzes". In the opinion of one woman student, "I enjoy
doing exams. I think it's the challenge. You've got 3 or 4 hours and,
somehow or other, you've got to get out of yourself enough of a pattern
to knit something up, to knit 3 or 4 different garments out of a tangle of

387
wool. It's fun, when you know enough to make it fun". But, of course, '7
can do them. I feel very sorry for people who're completely floored by
them, because they're just not exam-minded. But, in the meantime, I'm
alright Jack!"
What plans did these students have for the future? All had definite
goals, most of which were formulated during the first two years of their
university course. Three intended remaining within the sphere of educa-
tion, in either teaching or research. The others were aiming for a variety of
professions: they were satisfied with the perceived relevance of their
present course to their future career insofar as it had given them "a
background"; "it develops you intellectually, that's the greatest thing
about it"; "it's been a training of the mind, given me a broad outlook on
things".
Looking back over their university life, "overachievers" emphasise
gains which were both academic and personal: "Academically, I think I've
gained a lot, from the point of view of learning and understanding various
processes, and enjoying them, which I hadn't really done with much
academic work before". No-one voices any regrets.

UNDERACHIEVERS

There were 21 students in this group, 10 men and 11 women. Only 5

of them felt at all satisfied with the extent of their preparation at school.
The remaining 16 complained of "typical old-fashioned school methods",
"geared to getting you through exams", "spoonfeeding", and "dictated
notes to copy out, and learn off pat". This entire group of students
express dissatisfaction with the lack of guidance on courses or careers,
which amounted to "just university or college of education; they tried to
talk you out of anything else". Half of the group felt under consider-
able pressure to apply to university, mainly from parents. "There's always
been a lot of pressure on me, education-wise". Or "unless I'd just packed
up everything and gone off, going to university was the only way I could
get my father off my back". Half the group felt "satisfied" with their
academic performance at school; the others were "more than satisfied" in
the sense that they "did much better than expected at "A" level". Just
over half looked forward to university. The rest suggested that they
"wouldn't have been too disappointed" if not accepted.
Academically, the transition to university posed problems for 16 of
these 21 students. Some felt ill-prepared and "didn't really understand
what was happening", "didn't realise that you were supposed to prepare
for tutorials", or "didn't have any idea of how to take lecture-notes".
Some felt "a lack of self-discipline". Others felt unable to conform to

388
conventional academic requirements. Some grew steadily more disen-
chanted. "I suppose the lecture technique was strange for a start. And,
depending on who lectured, you didn't seem to gain an awful lot from
lectures. Some were pretty useless. So, you acclimatise, and just don't
bother going to all the lectures you don't think are worth going to. Then,
as you start doing that, you start getting alienated, I suppose, from the
system, and it doesn't work for you. This was true for the whole of the
first year. I never managed to get completely involved in my work. And it
was dissatisfying because, without being able to put anything in, I wasn't
getting much out of the work, and it was just a vicious circle. I never
broke out of it". A number experienced difficulties in personal and social
terms, in making friends, in "fitting in" to university life. For m a n y o f
them, things went from bad to worse. "I'm just about realising how to
settle down to university life after two and a half years! You're just
thrown in! I was really terrified. There are about 850 new students, and
you're just cast into the multitude. You're an eighth of a per cent of the
intake, and nobody gives a damn. Then, too, I had a lot of friends before I
came. But you had to make a completely new set of friends. And you had
to live with people. And you had to get on with people. Then there's the
problem of girls. I had no relationships with girls before. I'd been out with
a few, but they were " t h e m " , and I was one of "us", " t h e blokes". And
this was a big problem, definitely, because it resulted in very unhappy
friendships. Even now, I'm in a permanent maze of problems".
Of the 21, 9 changed courses, mostly at the end of the first y e a r ) 11
seriously considered leaving university altogether; 4 actually did take a
year off. The majority feel that they have been less successful in their
university studies than they had expected to be: "It's m y own short-
comings, m y own inability to work and, I suppose inevitably, some
shortcomings in the courses". Most perceive their courses to be "anything
but intellectually challenging". Some were interested in only part of the
course; for the rest, "anything which doesn't particularly interest me I
tend not to respond to, and not to do much with" or, "if I'm not
interested in something, it just becomes an exercise" and "it's fairly easy
to get by without doing much at all". Most saw very little relevance in
what they were required to study. And, on the whole, they found that "it
isn't easy to approach members of staff. They tend to be a bit inacces-
sible. Also, one feels a bit diffident about taking any problems to a member
of staff''. Most would have appreciated more informal relationships. The
initiative, they felt, must come from the staff. In the view of some,

2 In this institution about one-third of the students normally change courses at the
end of the first year.

389
however, "I don't think they care about us any more than we care about
them, really. There's no reason why they should". Similarly, "I don't
think the staff are under any obligation to be friendly. You can't really
force a member of staff to hold cosy gatherings in his home if he's a 9 to 5
guy. The same as a motor-car worker can hardly be expected to take his
motor-cars home with him and put a few more nuts on".
As for the nonacademic side of university life, just under half of the
group have found it "enjoyable". The others, although they might have
"enjoyed it at first", had "come to hate it". "University has become
claustrophobic". "! don't really like being a student very much". And "I
don't like other students very much". They were "disappointed" and
"disillusioned". Their interests tend to be divorced from university life.
For most of these students, their reaction to examinations was one
of "fear", "panic", and "sheer terror", either because "I know I've not
prepared adequately" or because "under pressure, I just tend to go
blank". The anxiety felt by these students is always debilitating, both
beforehand and in the exam itself. "I was hysterical at "O" levels, "A"
levels too. I don't know what's going to happen this summer". Or, "I'm
already beginning to get neurotic, now Finals are coming on, and it's still
only January. I hate to think what I'm going to be like in a couple of
months' time". Or again, "as soon as I look at the paper, I panic and think
I can't do anything. Eventually, I get my nerve back and regain control.
Occasionally, though, perhaps two or three times throughout the exam, I
go all hot, and think I've got it all wrong. And one bad question really
mucks me up".
What plans did these students have for the future? Of the 21, 6 had
applied for further study or training, a further 5 were "thinking" of
applying for courses, and the remaining 10 had yet to come to any
decision. As one student put it, "It's the first time I've ever had to do this,
to sit down and decide where I want to start my future". Of those who
had reached some decision, the majority had done so during their final
year, and only because they were "forced to, because now is the year of
decision, unfortunately".
Looking back over their time at university, less than half of these
students felt that they had benefitted in any way, and purely in terms of
"personal development", "increased maturity" and "independence".
Their evaluation of academic life at university was expressed in terms such
as "disappointed", "disillusioned", "dull", "useless", "totally irrelevant",
"artificial" and "academically stultifying". For many of these students,
university was equated with "depression", "strain", and "abysmal
failure".

390
TABLEI

Meansbylnte~iew Comparison Groups

Variables High Low Over- Under- Total

Achievers Achievers achievers achievers

(N) (12) (16) (11) (21) (60)

Academic Motivation 6.4 7.6 9.5** 7.0 7s

Study Methods 5.4 7.5 8.8" * 5.5 6.6
Extraversion 12.7 14.7 15.3 14.5 14.3
Neuroticism 15.1 12.4 10.7 * 13.7 13.1

Two-tailed t-test comparing group means with total sample mean: ** = 0.01 level * =
0.05 level.
Key to Table:

Academic motivation scale (0-14)

Study methods scale (0-14)
E.P.I. Extraversion scale (0-24)
E.P.I. Neuroticism scale (0-24)

PERSONALITY AND DEGREE PERFORMANCE

Table I presents the mean test scores of the four comparison groups
from the interview samples. The comments of the "overachievers" and
"underachievers" are paralleled b y statistically significant differences in
mean scores on motivation, study methods and neuroticism. In fact, the
"overachievers" fit in extremely well with the characteristics already
noted in earlier studies, where stability, high motivation and " g o o d " study
methods were associated with academic success. The pattern was suffi-
ciently striking to suggest a simple zonal analysis of the whole sample in
terms o f personality types created by dividing b o t h personality dimen-
sions into three at approximately half a standard deviation above and
below the mean for the sample. The degree results, and combined motiva-
tion and study methods scores were similarly grouped to produce high,
medium and low categories. Table II shows the frequency distribution of
students with different personality types on these dimensions. For
simplicity~ only the extreme personality groupings are shown; b u t the tess
extreme groups did fall in to the expected intermediate positions to
present a convincing overall pattern. Poor degree performance was found
among unstable extraverts who had particularly poor study methods, b u t
also among stable introverts with high motivation and good study

391
TABLE II

Frequency distributions of degree performance, motivation and study methods for

students of contrasting personality types.

Unstable extraverts Unstable introverts

(N=7) (N=8)

Degree Motiv- Study Degree Motiv- Study

Result ation Methods Result ation Methods

High 0 2 0 High 4 1 2

Med. 5 4 3 Med. 3 4 3

-Low 2 1 4 Low 1 3 3

Stable extraverts Stable introverts

(N=7) (N=5)

Degree Motiv- Study Degree Motiv- Study

Result ation Methods Result ation Methods

High 3 4 4 High 1 3 3

Med. 3 2 3 Med. 2 1 1

Low 1 1 0 Low 2 1 1

methods. Particularly successful students were found among anxious

students (unstable introverts) with low motivation and poor study
methods and in the opposite group of stable extraverts with high scores on
both study methods and motivation.
The small numbers in this sample leave these findings without statis-
tical conviction, but it is possible to combine these simple analyses with
the strengths of the interview data - the students' own perceptions of
their situation. From the comments of the two groups identified above,
the anxious students appeared to be motivated mainly by "fear of
failure". They tended to believe that academic work came first, to the
virtual exclusion of all other considerations and, while not adopting
orthodox "good" study methods, they had developed systematic
approaches to studying which worked effectively for them. The other
group of students gave quite different comments. They showed that their
source of motivation was more positive altogether - it was "hope for

392
success" and this was combined with conventionally effective study
methods.
Bringing together previous studies on motivation and study methods,
the simple and zonal analyses and comments from the students, a sur-
prisingly consistent pattern of results emerges. Clearly there are quite
distinct motivational patterns which lead to academic success for different
types of student. Some students are stable, confident and highly moti-
vated by hope for success, while others are anxious, uncertain of them-
selves and haunted by fear of failure, and yet both groups are capable of
high levels of academic performance. The interview data take the differ-
ences even further. Students of differing personality and motivational
types not only tackle their academic work in different ways but, from
their descriptions of their university experience, they evidently perceive
themselves to be in differing environments. Yet indications of how
students construe their own subjective reality are difficult to obtain from
conventional psychometric techniques of measurement. Complementary
approaches - inventories and exploratory interviews - offer explanations
within alternative frameworks of values, which may help us to understand
more fully the educational processes involved in universities and colleges
(Entwistle, 1973; Kallos, 1973). It may only be through a combina-
tion of these approaches that research can provide findings of direct
assistance to lecturers and counsellors in their dealings with students -
but, of course, this research leads to questions, not to solutions, which
imply agreed aims and shared values.
- How can institutions adapt their courses to suit students of different
personality types?
- How can students be afforded easier access to members of staff
within an increasingly impersonal system?
- How can we offset the difficulties in settling down which seriously
affect the academic performance and happiness of some students?
- How can the personal relevance of academic work to students be
improved?
Underlying each of these questions are either comments or relation-
ships in the research which indicate ways of improving students' levels of
academic achievement. The solutions may not be clear at present, but the
questions are surely worth considering.

A c k n o w l e d g e m e n t s

The interview survey was made possible by a research grant from the
Joseph Rowntree Memorial Trust.

393
 References

Alpert, R. and Haber, R. N. (1960). "Anxiety in Academic Achievement Situations".

J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol., 61: 207-215.
Atkinson, J. W. and Feather, N. T. (1966). A Theory of Achievement Motivation. New
York: Wiley.
Biggs, J. (1970a). "Faculty Patterns in Study Behaviour". Aust. J. Psychol., 22.2:
161-174.
Biggs, J. (1970b). "Personality Correlates of Certain Dimensions of Study Behaviour".
Aust. J. PsychoL, 22.3: 287-297.
Birney, R. C., Burdick, H. and Teevan, R. C. (1969). Fear of Failure. New York: Van
Nostrand.
Blaine, G.B. and McArthur, C. C. (1971). Emotional Problems of the Student.
London: Butterworth.
Brown, W.F. and Holtzman, W.H. (1955). "A Study-attitudes Questionnaire for
Predicting Academic Success". J. Educ. Psychol., 46: 75-84.
Brown, W. F. and Holtzman, W. H. (1966). Manual of the Survey of Study Habits and
Attitudes. New York: Psychol. Corp.
Carter, C. F. (1973). "President's Address" In: Page, C. F. and Gibson, J. Motivation:
Non-cognitive Aspects of Student Performance. Papers Presented at the Eighth
Annual Conference of the Society for Research into Higher Education. London:
SRHE. pp. 1-5.
Cooper, B. and Foy, J. M. (1969). "Students' Study Habits, Attitudes and Academic
Attainment". Univ. Q., 23.2: 203-212.
Cowell, M.D. and Entwistle, N.J. (1971). "Personality, Study Attitudes and
Academic Performance in a Technical College". Brit. J. Educ. PsychoL, 41: 85-89.
Crown, S., Lucas, C. J. and Supramaniam, S. (1973). "The Delineation and Measure-
ment of Study Difficulty in University Students". Brit. J. Psychiatry, 122:
381-393.
Entwistle, N.J. (1973). "Complementary Paradigms for Research and Development
Work in Higher Education". Paper presented to the Congress on Methodology of
Research in Higher Education of the European Association for Research and
Development in Higher Education, Rotterdam, December 1973.
Entwistle, N. J. and Entwistle, D. M. (1970). "The Relationships between Personality,
Study Methods and Academic Performance". Brit. J. Educ. Psychol., 40: 132-141.
Entwistle, N.J., Nisbet, J.B., Entwistle, D.M. and Cowell, M.D. (1971). "The
Academic Performance of Students. I-Prediction from Scales of Motivation and
Study Methods". Brit. J. Educ. PsychoL, 41: 258-267.
Entwistle, N. J. and Percy, K. A. (1973). "Critical Thinking or Conformity? - An
Investigation of the Aims and Outcomes of Higher Education". In: Research into
Higher Education 1973. Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Conference. London:
Society for Research into Higher Education.
Entwistle, N. J. and Wilson, J. (1975). Predicting Academic Performance in Univer-
sities (provisional title). London: ULP.
Eysenck, H. J. (1957). The Dynamics of Anxiety and Hysteria. London: Routledge.
Eysenck, H. J. (1972). "Personality an(/ Attainment: An Application of Psychological
Principles to Educational Objectives". Higher Educ., 1 : 39-52.
Eysenck, H.J. and Eysenck, S. B. G. (1964). Manual of the Eysenck Personality
Inventory. London: ULP.

394
 Finger, J.A. and Schlesser, G. E. (1965). "Non-intellective Predictors of Academic
Success in School and College". Sch. Rev., 73: 14-29.
Hopkins, J., Malleson, N. B. and Sarnoff, I. (1958). "Some Non-intellectual Correlates
of Success and Failure among University Students". Brit. J. Educ. Psychol., 28:
25-36.
Hudson, L. (1968). Frames of Mind. London: Methuen.
Jones, C. L., Mackintosh, H. and McPherson, A. F. (1973). "Questions of Uncertainty:
Non-cognitive Predictors of Achievement". In: Page, C. F. and Gibson, J. Motiva-
tion: Non-cognitive Aspects of Student Performance. Papers presented at the
Eighth Annual Conference of the Society for Research into Higher Education.
London: SRHE. pp. 35-54.
Kallos, D. (1973). On Educational Scientific Research. Report no. 36. Lund: Univer-
sity of Lund Institute of Education.
Lavin, D. E. (1967). The Prediction of Academic Performance. New York: Wiley.
Lynn, R. and Gordon, I. E. (1961). "The Relation of Neuroticism and Extraversion to
Educational Attainment". Brit. J. Educ. PsychoL, 31: 194-203.
Malleson, N.B. (1963). "The Influence of Emotional Factors on Achievement in
University Education". Soeiol. Rev. Monogr., 7: 141 - 159.
Newman, S. E. (1957). "Student vs. Instructor Design of Study Method". J.
Educ. PsychoL, 48: 328-333.
Parlett, M. R. (1970). "The Syllabus-bound Student" In: Hudson, L. The Ecology of
Human Intelligence. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Peters, R. S. (1958). The Concept of Motivation. London: Routledge.
Pond, L. (1964). "A Study of High Achieving and Low Achieving Freshmen". Aust. J.
Higher Educ., 2.1: 73-78.
Ryle, A. (1969). Student Casualties. London: Allen Lane.
Small, J.J. (1966). Achievement and Adjustment in the First Year at University.
Wellington: New Zealand Council for Educational Research.
Spielberger, C. D. (1962). "The Effects of Manifest Anxiety on the Academic Achieve-
ments of College Students". Ment. Hyg., 46: 420-426.
Thoday, D. (1957), "How Undergraduates Work". Univ. Q., 11:172 181.
Wankowski, J.A. (1969). "Some Aspects of Motivation in Success and Failure at
University", In: Research into Higher Education 1968. Papers Presented at the
Fourth Annual Conference of the Society for Research into Higher Education.
London: SRHE. pp. 1-39.
Wankowski, J. A. (1970). Random Sample Analysis: Motives and Goals in University
Studies. (2 vols.) Birmingham: University of Birmingham Educational Survey.
Wilson, J. (1972). Philosophy and Educational Research. Slough: NFER.

395

View publication stats