Students’ expectancy-value profiles in the West and the East: Cross-cultural similarities and differences

• Published in: Learning and individual differences Vol. 116; p. 102519
• Main Authors: Li, Jiajing, King, Ronnel B., Leung, Shing On, Wang, Chuang
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Elsevier Inc 01.12.2024
• Subjects: Cross-culture; Expectancy-value beliefs; Multigroup latent profile analysis; Reading achievement; Reading achievement; Cross-culture; Multigroup latent profile analysis; Expectancy-value beliefs
• ISSN: 1041-6080
• DOI: 10.1016/j.lindif.2024.102519

The renaming of expectancy-value theory (EVT) to situated expectancy-value theory (SEVT) highlights researchers' recognition that culture and context are fundamental to understanding students' motivation. Much of the work on SEVT, however, has taken a variable-centered approach. Despite the growth of studies using SEVT, researchers have seldom examined differences in the configurations of expectancy-value beliefs of students from different cultural contexts. We aimed to examine cross-cultural similarities and differences in the configurations of expectancy and value beliefs. Data were from Western (N = 42,182; Australia, New Zealand, UK, and USA) and Eastern (N = 41,488; Hong Kong, Macau, Mainland China, and Taipei, Japan, Korea) cultures. Multigroup latent profile analysis identified four profiles in each culture, categorizing students into high, moderate, low, and very low expectancy-value groups. Results revealed both cross-cultural similarities (same number of profiles, means of expectancy and value for three out of four profiles) and differences (within-profile differences, profile sizes, and associations of profiles with predictors and outcomes). The findings emphasize importance of taking culture into account when exploring students' motivation across diverse contexts. •Four profiles emerged in the East and West, with students classified into high, moderate, low, and very low expectancy-value beliefs.•There were both cross-cultural similarities (i.e., the same number of profiles, means of expectancy and value for three out of four profiles) and differences (i.e., within-profile interindividual differences, differences in profile sizes, and distinct associations of profiles with predictors and outcomes).•The findings emphasize the necessity of tailored interventions for students from diverse cultures.