Hubbry Logo
Expectancy-value theoryExpectancy-value theoryMain
Open search
Expectancy-value theory
Community hub
Expectancy-value theory
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Expectancy-value theory
Expectancy-value theory
Expectancy-value theory
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Expectancy–value theory has been developed in many different fields including education, health, communications, marketing and economics. Although the model differs in its meaning and implications for each field, the general idea is that there are expectations as well as values or beliefs that affect subsequent behavior.

Education model

[edit]

History and model overview

[edit]

John William Atkinson developed the expectancy–value theory in the 1950s and 1960s in an effort to understand the achievement motivation of individuals.[1] In the 1980s, Jacquelynne Eccles expanded this research into the field of education.[1] According to expectancy–value theory, students' achievement and achievement related choices are most proximally determined by two factors:[1] expectancies for success, and subjective task values. Expectancies refer to how confident an individual is in his or her ability to succeed in a task whereas task values refer to how important, useful, or enjoyable the individual perceives the task. Theoretical[1] and empirical[2][3] work suggests that expectancies and values interact to predict important outcomes such as engagement, continuing interest, and academic achievement. Other factors, including demographic characteristics, stereotypes, prior experiences, and perceptions of others' beliefs and behaviors affect achievement related outcomes indirectly through these expectancies and values. This model has most widely been applied and used in research in the field of education.

Expectancies

[edit]

Expectancies are specific beliefs individuals have regarding their success on certain tasks they will carry out in the short-term future or long-term future.[4] An individual's expectancies are related to their behaviors as well as the choices they make. Expectancies are related to ability-beliefs such as self-concept and self-efficacy. Self-concept is a domain specific concept that involves one's beliefs about their own abilities based on their past experiences in the specific domain.[5] Self-efficacy is the belief that an individual has the ability to successfully engage in a future specific task or series of related tasks [6][7]

Subjective task values

[edit]

According to Eccles and colleagues[1] subjective task value can be thought of as the motivation that allows an individual to answer the question "Do I Want to do This Activity and Why?"[8] Subjective task values can be broken into four subcategories:[1] Attainment Value (Importance for identity or self), Intrinsic Value (Enjoyment or Interest), Utility Value (Usefulness or Relevance), and Cost (loss of time, overly-high effort demands, loss of valued alternatives, or negative psychological experiences such as stress). Traditionally, attainment value and intrinsic value are more highly correlated. What's more, these two constructs tend to be related to intrinsic motivation, interest, and task persistence.[9] Alternatively, utility value has both intrinsic and extrinsic components.[10] and has been related to both intrinsic and extrinsic outcomes such as course performance and interest.[11] Other research shows that utility value has time-dependent characteristics as well.[12] Cost has been relatively neglected in the empirical research;[8] however, the construct has received some attention more recently.[13] Feather combined subjective task values with more universal human values[14] and suggested that the former are just one type of general human motives that help to direct behavior.[15]

Applications

[edit]

Developmental trajectories

[edit]

Researchers have found that expectancies and values can be distinguished as separate types of motivation as early as 6 years old.[16] Similarly, types of value (e.g., attainment vs. utility) can be distinguished within an academic domain as early as fifth grade.[16] Generally speaking, Eccles and colleagues[1] implicate a wide array of different factors that determine an individual's expectancies and values, including:

  • the cultural milieu
  • socializer's beliefs and behaviors
  • differential aptitudes of the individual
  • previous achievement-related experiences
  • individual perceptions of social beliefs
  • individual's interpretations of experiences
  • affective memories
  • general goals
  • self-concepts

Experts agree that student motivation tends to decline throughout their time in school.[4] Longitudinal research has confirmed this general trend of motivational decline and also demonstrated that motivation is domain specific.[17] Researchers have also demonstrated that there are gender differences in motivation.[1] Motivation decline is particularly steep for Math achievement, but less so for reading or sports domains among both boys and girls.[17] Researchers offer two general explanations for these declines in motivation.[14] The first is that students' conceptualizations of different domains become more complex and nuanced—they differentiate between subdomains, which results in an appearance of mean-level decrease. In fact, children as young as 11 years old have demonstrated that they can differentiate between academic domains.[16] The second is that the focus of their environment changes as they age. As students reach higher grades, the focus shifts from learning to achievement. In fact, a large body of research exists showing that shifts from learning to performance as an educational focus can be detrimental to student motivation.[18]

Interventions

[edit]

Expectancy–value theory constructs can and have been applied to intervention programs that strive to change motivational beliefs. These interventions are able to increase expectancy[19] and value[18] or decrease cost.[20] Such interventions not only target motivation, but also ultimately increase general student achievement and help to close traditionally problematic achievement gaps.[11][21] For example, value- focused interventions have been developed to help teachers design their curriculum in ways that allow students to see the connections between the material they learn in the classroom and their own lives.[11] This intervention is able to boost student's performance and interest, particularly for students who have low initial expectancy. According to the expectancy–value theory, this intervention is effective because it increases students interest in the material.[11]

Psychology, health, communications, marketing, and economics model

[edit]

Expectancy–value theory was originally created in order to explain and predict individual's attitudes toward objects and actions. Originally the work of psychologist Martin Fishbein[citation needed], the theory states that attitudes are developed and modified based on assessments about beliefs and values. Primarily, the theory attempts to determine the mental calculations that take place in attitude development. Expectancy–value theory has been used to develop other theories and is still utilized today in numerous fields of study.

History

[edit]

Dr. Martin Fishbein is credited with developing the expectancy–value theory (EVT) in the early to mid-1970s.[citation needed] It is sometimes referred to as Fishbein's expectancy–value theory or simply expectancy–value model. The primary work typically cited by scholars referring to EVT is Martin Fishbein and Icek Ajzen's 1975 book called Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. The seed work of EVT can be seen in Fishbein's doctoral dissertation, A Theoretical and Empirical Investigation of the Interrelation between Belief about an Object and the Attitude toward that Object (1961, UCLA) and two subsequent articles in 1962 and 1963 in the journal Human Relations. Fishbein's work drew on the writings of researchers such as Ward Edwards, Milton J. Rosenberg, Edward Tolman, and John B. Watson.

Concepts

[edit]

EVT has three basic components. First, individuals respond to novel information about an item or action by developing a belief about the item or action. If a belief already exists, it can and most likely will be modified by new information. Second, individuals assign a value to each attribute that a belief is based on. Third, an expectation is created or modified based on the result of a calculation based on beliefs and values. For example, a student finds out that a professor has a reputation for being humorous. The student assigns a positive value to humor in the classroom, so the student has the expectation that their experience with the professor will be positive. When the student attends class and finds the professor humorous, the student calculates that it is a good class. EVT also states that the result of the calculation, often called the "attitude", stems from complex equations that contain many belief/values pairs. Fishbein and Ajzen (1975) represented the theory with the following equation where attitudes (a) are a factorial function of beliefs (b) and values (v).

Theory of reasoned action: Formula In its simplest form, the TRA can be expressed as the following equation:

where: = behavioral intention

= one's attitude toward performing the behavior

= empirically derived weights

= one's subjective norm related to performing the behavior

(Source: Hale, 2002)

Current usage

[edit]

In the late 1970s and early 1980s, Fishbein and Ajzen expanded expectancy–value theory into the theory of reasoned action (TRA). Later Ajzen posited the theory of planned behavior (TPB) in his book Attitudes, Personality, and Behavior (1988). Both TRA and TPB address predictive and explanatory weaknesses with EVT and are still prominent theories in areas such as health communication research, marketing, and economics. Although not used as much since the early 1980s, EVT is still utilized in research within fields as diverse as audience research (Palmgreen & Rayburn, 1985) advertising (Shoham, Rose, & Kahle 1998; Smith & Vogt, 1995), child development (Watkinson, Dwyer, & Nielsen, 2005), education (Eklof, 2006; Ping, McBride, & Breune, 2006), health communication (Purvis Cooper, Burgoon, & Roter, 2001; Ludman & Curry, 1999), and organization communication (Westaby, 2002).

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Expectancy-value theory

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Expectancy-value theory (EVT) is a motivational framework in asserting that an individual's choice, effort, , and performance on a task are jointly determined by their expectancy for success—beliefs about their ability to achieve the desired outcome—and the subjective task value they assign to it, where is modeled as the multiplicative product of these factors. Originating in the achievement motivation research of John Atkinson during the and 1960s, the theory posits that expectancies derive from prior experiences, self-perceptions of competence, and perceived task difficulty, while values encompass attainment (personal importance tied to identity), intrinsic (inherent or enjoyment), (instrumental usefulness for future goals), and (perceived sacrifices like time or effort). Refined and expanded by Jacquelynne Eccles, Allan Wigfield, and colleagues into a situated expectancy-value model, EVT incorporates sociocultural influences on these components, explaining developmental declines in academic as shifts in perceived value and competence beliefs. Empirical studies, including meta-analyses across educational settings, consistently demonstrate EVT's predictive power for outcomes like course enrollment, achievement, and , with expectancy and value explaining significant variance beyond ability alone, though effects vary by domain and population. Applications extend to interventions enhancing value perceptions to boost engagement, underscoring causal links from beliefs to without reliance on extrinsic rewards, though challenges persist in measuring multifaceted costs and generalizing across cultures where values may dominate.

Historical Development

Early Psychological Foundations

The concept of level of aspiration emerged in the 1930s as a key precursor to expectancy-value frameworks, originating from Kurt Lewin's field theory of . Lewin and his students, including Tamara Dembo, investigated how individuals set performance following or experiences, revealing that aspiration levels reflect an implicit weighing of the probability of achieving a against its perceived attractiveness or valence. Early experiments, dating from around 1930, demonstrated systematic shifts in aspiration: typically raised goals toward one's ability limits, while lowered them, underscoring the motivational tension between expected outcomes and desirability. This work emphasized that behavior arises from vector forces in a psychological field, where positive valences pull toward rewarding and negative ones repel, laying empirical groundwork for integrating expectancy and value in . Parallel foundations appeared in Edward C. Tolman's , articulated in his 1932 book Purposive Behavior in Animals and Men. Tolman challenged strict stimulus-response by introducing "expectancy" as a cognitive intervening variable, positing that organisms form mental anticipations of environmental signs signaling rewards or punishments, directing goal-oriented actions. Through experiments with rats navigating mazes, Tolman showed that behavior is guided not by immediate but by cognitive maps and hypotheses about probable outcomes, effectively linking expectancy of success to motivational drive. These ideas highlighted causal mechanisms where perceived expectancies mediate between stimuli and responses, providing a non-associative basis for value-driven choices that influenced subsequent motivational models. Together, Lewin's valence-based field dynamics and Tolman's expectancy constructs established core psychological principles of anticipated outcomes and subjective worth, empirically validated through controlled studies on goal adjustment and learning. These elements demonstrated that involves multiplicative interactions—high expectancy alone or value alone insufficient without both—shaping the trajectory toward formalized theories of achievement .

Formulations by Atkinson and Successors

John William Atkinson introduced the expectancy-value formulation within achievement theory in the 1950s, with key developments in his 1957 paper on risk-taking and his 1964 book An Introduction to . He posited that the tendency to approach success on an achievement-oriented task (Ts) is the multiplicative product of three factors: the strength of the individual's motive to achieve success (Ms), the subjective probability of attaining success (Ps), and the incentive value of that success (Is), expressed as Ts = Ms × Ps × Is. The incentive Is was operationalized as 1 - Ps, capturing the intuition that success yields diminishing subjective value as task difficulty decreases, since easy successes provide little challenge or pride. Atkinson symmetrically incorporated a countervailing tendency to avoid failure (Tf), driven by a motive to avoid failure (Maf), such that Tf = Maf × (1 - Ps) × Ps, where the incentive for failure avoidance rises with task difficulty (as Ps decreases). Net task engagement thus derives from Ts - Tf, yielding predictions that individuals high in Ms and low in Maf select moderately difficult tasks (Ps ≈ 0.5), where Ts peaks due to balanced expectancy and value, while Tf remains subdued. Motives Ms and Maf were assessed via projective techniques like the Thematic Apperception Test for achievement imagery and anxiety questionnaires for failure avoidance, with empirical tests in laboratory settings confirming choice patterns aligned with these equations—for instance, high achievers opting for 50% success probability gambles over sure-thing or near-impossible ones. Subsequent refinements by Atkinson's collaborators addressed limitations in the static model, such as its assumption of immediate outcomes. Joel O. Raynor, working with Atkinson, proposed a temporal extension in the , distinguishing distal goal-setting phases (governed by initial Ts calculations) from proximal performance phases, where expectancy updates based on interim influence sustained effort; this two-process framework explained how early preferences propagate to long-term persistence in complex achievements like academic or athletic pursuits. These developments preserved the core multiplicative logic while integrating causal sequences, enhancing predictive power for real-world behaviors beyond isolated choices.

Eccles' Situated Model in Education

Eccles' situated expectancy-value model extends the core expectancy-value framework by embedding individuals' expectancies for success and task value beliefs within broader social-cognitive and cultural contexts, emphasizing how these motivational constructs influence achievement choices, performance, and persistence in educational settings. Developed initially by Jacquelynne S. Eccles (then Parsons) and colleagues in 1983, the model posits that expectancies—individuals' beliefs about their likelihood of succeeding in a task—are shaped by prior achievements, perceptions, and self-concepts of , while subjective task value encompasses attainment value (personal importance tied to identity), intrinsic value (enjoyment and ), utility value (task's usefulness for future goals), and costs (effort, opportunity, and psychological risks). In , these components interact multiplicatively to predict behaviors such as course enrollment and study effort, with empirical tests showing that high expectancies combined with elevated values correlate with greater in academic domains like and . The "situated" aspect highlights contextual influences, including family socialization, teacher expectations, peer norms, and cultural , which mediate the formation of expectancies and values over developmental stages. For instance, longitudinal studies from the Childhood and Beyond project, tracking U.S. students from elementary through high school, demonstrate that children's expectancies tend to decline with age due to increased and self-comparisons, while task values differentiate more sharply, leading to specialization in preferred subjects by . differences emerge prominently in STEM fields, where girls often report lower utility and intrinsic values for despite comparable expectancies, attributed partly to societal stereotypes and parental encouragement patterns rather than innate ability gaps, as evidenced by cross-national data from Eccles' showing variability by culture. Applications in educational interventions leverage the model to enhance ; for example, utility-value interventions, where teachers link course material to students' future aspirations, have boosted expectancies and values, resulting in improved grades and enrollment in advanced courses, with effect sizes around 0.15–0.20 standard deviations in randomized trials. The model also informs persistence, predicting that high costs (e.g., time demands conflicting with extracurriculars) can override positive expectancies, leading to dropout risks, as observed in profiles of low-expectancy/high-cost students who underperform relative to their abilities. Refinements over decades, including integration of cost as a distinct negative value component since 2000, have strengthened predictive power, with meta-analyses confirming stronger associations between expectancies/values and choices (β ≈ 0.30–0.50) than with alone (β ≈ 0.20). Despite robust support from diverse samples, including underrepresented minorities, the model's reliance on self-reported measures warrants caution, as response biases may inflate correlations in achievement-oriented cultures.

Core Theoretical Components

Expectancy Beliefs

Expectancy beliefs in expectancy-value theory (EVT) refer to an individual's subjective estimates of their likelihood of succeeding at a specific task or achieving a desired outcome, often conceptualized as future-oriented predictions of performance. These beliefs encompass perceptions of personal competence and the controllability of outcomes, distinguishing them from general of ability by focusing on anticipated success rather than current self-appraisal. In the situated expectancy-value model developed by Eccles and colleagues, expectancy beliefs are influenced by prior achievements, aptitude perceptions, and contextual factors such as task difficulty and available support. Measurement of expectancy beliefs typically involves self-report instruments, such as Likert-scale items asking respondents to rate statements like "How well will you do on this upcoming math test?" on a scale from low (e.g., 1) to high (e.g., 7) expected performance. Eccles et al. (1983) operationalized these as children's explicit forecasts of task performance, validated through longitudinal studies linking them to subsequent choices and achievements. Empirical assessments confirm moderate to strong correlations with actual performance, with meta-analytic evidence indicating an average of r = 0.27 for predicting learning behaviors and engagement. Within EVT, expectancy beliefs interact multiplicatively with task value components to determine motivational outcomes, such that low expectancies diminish effort even for valued activities; for instance, students with high expectancy beliefs select challenging courses more frequently, as supported by choice behavior studies in educational settings. Developmental research shows these beliefs decline from childhood to in domains like , correlating with reduced persistence, though interventions enhancing feedback and mastery experiences can bolster them. Cross-domain applications, including behaviors, reveal similar patterns, where higher expectancies predict adherence to regimens like exercise, independent of value perceptions.

Task Value Components

In expectancy-value theory, task value represents the subjective appraisal of a task's worth, influencing individuals' alongside expectancy beliefs. As developed by Eccles, Wigfield, and colleagues, task value comprises four primary components: attainment value, intrinsic value, utility value, and cost, which collectively determine the overall incentive to engage with a task. These components are distinct yet interrelated, with empirical studies showing they predict achievement-related choices and persistence, particularly in educational contexts. Attainment value refers to the personal significance attached to succeeding or failing on a task, tied to one's core identity, , or alignment with central life domains such as gender roles or occupational aspirations. For instance, an individual might value excelling in highly if it affirms their self-perception as competent in STEM fields. This component draws from earlier theories linking value to ego involvement, where success validates intrinsic self-worth. Intrinsic value captures the inherent enjoyment, interest, or pleasure derived from the task itself, independent of external rewards or outcomes. It aligns closely with constructs like intrinsic motivation, where engagement stems from the activity's appeal rather than instrumental benefits; research indicates it correlates strongly with positive affect and sustained effort. For example, a might pursue reading for its own sake due to fascination with the content, fostering deeper processing and retention. Utility value involves the perceived instrumental usefulness of the task for attaining current or future goals, such as preparation or meeting immediate needs. This short-term (e.g., passing an exam to advance) or long-term (e.g., skill-building for professional success) linkage enhances by connecting the task to broader objectives; interventions emphasizing real-world often boost this component. Cost constitutes the negative aspects detracting from task value, including effort required, time investment, opportunity costs (foregone alternatives), and emotional or psychological strain such as anxiety or risk. Unlike the additive positive components, is typically subtractive in models, reducing net value; for instance, high perceived effort can diminish even when positive values are present. Wigfield and Eccles delineate subtypes like effort (energy expended) and emotional (stress incurred), with from longitudinal studies linking higher costs to reduced task engagement.

Multiplicative vs. Additive Models

In expectancy-value theory (EVT), the multiplicative model posits that is the product of expectancy beliefs and task value, such that = expectancy × value; this implies a non-compensatory interaction where low levels in either component can nullify overall , as zero expectancy or value yields zero . This formulation, originating from John Atkinson's work in the 1950s and 1960s, emphasizes that individuals require both confidence in success and perceived importance for strong motivational force, with empirical tests in achievement contexts showing that the interaction term explains variance in outcomes like task choice beyond main effects alone. In contrast, additive models treat expectancy and value as independent, compensatory factors where motivation = expectancy + value, allowing high levels in one to offset deficits in the other and predicting sustained effort even if expectancy is low but value is high. Proponents argue this better captures real-world behaviors, such as persistence driven by intrinsic value despite doubts about success, with studies in educational settings finding additive integrations more common among participants when self-reporting motivational processes. Empirical comparisons reveal mixed support, with latent interaction modeling in modern EVT variants detecting multiplicative effects in some datasets—particularly for academic performance and persistence—but additive patterns prevailing in others, especially when costs (a value subcomponent) dominate or individual differences like prior achievement moderate the relationship. For instance, a 2012 study using structural equation modeling on adolescent samples found the expectancy-value product significantly predicted math enrollment intentions after controlling for additive terms, yet meta-analytic reviews indicate weaker interaction evidence across broader achievement domains, suggesting context-specific applicability. Researchers recommend testing both models via nonlinear regressions to avoid assuming universality, as compensatory dynamics may align better with situated EVT extensions incorporating opportunity costs.

Applications in Education

Choice and Persistence Behaviors

In educational settings, expectancy-value theory predicts that students select academic tasks, such as courses or majors, based on the anticipated product of their success expectancies and the subjective task values, favoring options with high competence beliefs and perceived benefits like intrinsic interest, utility for future goals, or attainment identity. This framework, as refined in Eccles' situated model, emphasizes contextual influences on these appraisals, where prior achievements and shape toward domains aligning with self-perceived abilities and long-term aspirations. Empirical evidence from demonstrates that expectancy components, particularly competence beliefs, exhibit strong positive correlations (r ≈ 0.70) with intentions to pursue advanced courses, while intrinsic and values further reinforce selection by offsetting integrated costs like anxiety or time demands. In higher education, similar patterns emerge, with students enrolling in challenging programs when expectancy-value combinations outweigh perceived opportunity or effort costs, as validated in longitudinal surveys of course enrollment decisions. Regarding persistence, the theory holds that elevated expectancies and values sustain task and re-enrollment by motivating effort amid setbacks, with attainment and values showing moderate effect sizes (≈ 0.25) in predicting continued participation in skill-building activities. Structural equation models in contexts reveal multiplicative synergies, where interacts with interest and values to significantly enhance retention rates among first-year undergraduates (n=2420), surpassing additive models or isolated considerations. Conversely, diminished values due to high psychological or effort erode perseverance, leading to higher dropout intentions when expectancies falter. These dynamics underscore EVT's in explaining why students persist in valued domains despite challenges, with reciprocal between expectancy beliefs and task values fostering long-term academic commitment.

Developmental Changes

Children's perceptions of their competence (expectancy beliefs) begin as relatively undifferentiated and optimistic in , gradually becoming more domain-specific and realistic with age. By middle childhood, children differentiate ability perceptions across subjects like math and reading, with longitudinal data from elementary cohorts showing a progressive decline in self-perceived competence, particularly during the transition to around ages 11-12. This decline correlates with increased social comparison and exposure to normative feedback in settings. Subjective task values exhibit parallel developmental shifts, starting with high intrinsic interest in and early elementary years, then differentiating into components like attainment, intrinsic, and values by late elementary . Across grades 1-6, intrinsic value tends to decrease, while value may rise as children recognize long-term benefits of academic tasks, though overall value profiles vary by domain—declining more sharply in math for some groups. These patterns persist into , where expectancy-value combinations predict enrollment choices, with steeper drops in both expectancies and values during early teens linked to pubertal changes and transitions. Gender differences emerge developmentally, with girls often reporting lower expectancy beliefs in math by compared to boys, though initial values may be similar; these gaps widen post-elementary due to differential and exposure rather than innate factors. Longitudinal analyses confirm that such changes are not uniform, as individual trajectories depend on prior achievement and contextual supports, underscoring the theory's emphasis on situated influences over fixed traits.

Intervention Strategies

Interventions grounded in expectancy-value theory seek to elevate students' expectancies for and subjective task values to foster greater , , and achievement in educational settings. These strategies typically target one or both core components multiplicatively, as is posited to arise from their interaction, with empirical support from randomized controlled trials demonstrating causal effects on outcomes like course grades and persistence. For instance, expectancy-focused interventions emphasize building competence beliefs through skill-building exercises, while value-focused ones highlight and reduce perceived costs. Utility value interventions, among the most rigorously tested, involve brief activities where students reflect on and write about connections between academic material and their personal goals, careers, or daily lives, thereby increasing perceived usefulness. A series of studies by Harackiewicz and colleagues, implemented in introductory courses, showed these interventions improved end-of-semester grades by 0.3 to 0.5 standard deviations, particularly benefiting underrepresented minority students and closing achievement gaps without harming high-achievers. Replications across multiple universities confirmed effects on and retention, with one indicating sustained impacts on STEM persistence up to two years later. Allowing student in intervention content further amplifies utility perceptions and outcomes, as choice enhances feelings of and personal relevance. To boost expectancies, interventions draw on overlapping principles, such as growth mindset training that reframes abilities as malleable through effort and strategies, thereby elevating success expectations. A study integrating growth mindset messages with expectancy-value-cost frameworks in undergraduate settings found improved expectancy beliefs and reduced avoidance of challenging tasks, leading to higher exam performance (effect size d=0.45). Mastery-oriented feedback and modeling successful problem-solving also empirically raise expectancies; for example, providing students with progressive skill tutorials in math contexts increased persistence by 20-30% in longitudinal trials. These approaches causally link to outcomes via heightened confidence in task completion. Strategies addressing other value facets include intrinsic value enhancements through or curiosity-driven explorations, which meta-analyses link to greater , and cost-reduction tactics like time-management workshops that mitigate effort and opportunity perceptions. Combined interventions targeting multiple components, such as expectancy and simultaneously, yield additive effects in comparative trials, outperforming single-focus ones for diverse learners. However, efficacy varies by developmental stage and context, with stronger impacts in early where values are more malleable.

Applications Beyond Education

Organizational Motivation and Performance

Expectancy-value theory (EVT), as formulated by Eccles and colleagues, posits that individuals' motivation in organizational contexts stems from the interaction between their expectancy beliefs—perceptions of success likelihood in performing job-related tasks—and subjective task values, which encompass intrinsic interest, attainment utility (personal importance of success), instrumental utility (instrumental benefits like promotions), and associated costs such as time or effort. In workplace settings, higher expectancy beliefs, akin to task-specific self-efficacy, correlate with increased effort and persistence on roles perceived as achievable, while elevated task values amplify engagement by aligning tasks with employees' goals or interests. Empirical applications demonstrate EVT's relevance to employee outcomes. For instance, in a 2024 study of intervention engagement at a European university, employees exhibited higher reporting rates and training participation when expectancy ( in identifying and mitigating threats) combined with value components like (organizational cyber ) and intrinsic satisfaction ( in contributions), with qualitative data from 34 participants revealing that low feedback reduced perceived value, discouraging proactive behaviors. Similarly, research in Jakarta's sector (2024) found that EVT-informed positively predicted (β = 0.517, p < 0.001), mediated by employee engagement, where expectancy-value alignments fostered vigor and dedication in sustainability-oriented tasks. These findings extend to broader performance dynamics, such as task choice and retention, where multiplicative interactions in EVT suggest that diminished expectancy (e.g., due to unclear procedures) or devalued tasks (e.g., high opportunity costs) erode motivation, leading to lower productivity. Interventions leveraging EVT, including targeted training to bolster expectancy and goal-linking to enhance utility, have shown promise in elevating performance metrics, though organizational extensions remain less validated than educational ones, with calls for longitudinal studies to assess causal impacts amid confounding factors like culture.

Health Behavior and Decision-Making

Expectancy-value theory posits that health behaviors, such as engaging in physical activity or adhering to preventive measures, arise from the interaction of individuals' expectancies for success in performing the behavior and the subjective value they assign to its outcomes, including intrinsic interest, utility for health gains, and attainment of personal goals. Empirical applications demonstrate that higher expectancy beliefs correlate with improved cardiovascular fitness among at-risk youth, with a standardized beta coefficient of 0.19 (p < 0.01) in a 2023 study of 107 boys aged around 11.8 years participating in a summer sports camp. Similarly, importance and interest values predicted greater effort (β = 0.26 and 0.34, respectively, p < 0.01) and intentions for future physical activity participation (β = 0.28 for interest, p < 0.01), though utility value showed no significant effects. Meta-analytic evidence from 31 physical education studies spanning 2010 to 2020 further validates EVT's predictive power for health-related outcomes, with expectancy beliefs and task values explaining variance in fitness levels (effect sizes 0.30–0.37), out-of-school physical activity (0.32–0.41), and overall health behavior function (0.37). Antecedents like social support from teachers and peers (effect size 0.57 for utility value) and positive class climates (0.49 for intrinsic value) bolster these motivational components, facilitating sustained engagement in activity that supports long-term health decision-making, such as choosing active lifestyles over sedentary alternatives. In health decision-making, EVT addresses amotivation—prevalent in scenarios like treatment non-adherence or reluctance to exercise, affecting approximately 30% of individuals with no initial behavioral intentions—by targeting deficits in self-efficacy, outcome expectancies, and value perceptions. Interventions grounded in EVT, often integrated with self-determination theory, employ techniques like motivational interviewing to enhance confidence in behavioral success and emphasize personalized benefits, thereby promoting shifts toward health-promoting choices in domains such as chronic disease management or lifestyle modifications.

Economic and Consumer Choices

Expectancy-value theory (EVT) applies to consumer choices by modeling purchase decisions as a function of individuals' expectancies regarding a product's ability to yield desired outcomes and the subjective value placed on those outcomes, often operationalized multiplicatively to predict behavioral intentions. In utilitarian consumer contexts, such as evaluating functional attributes like durability or cost-effectiveness, EVT effectively forecasts selections by weighting expected performance against perceived utility, though it less adequately captures hedonic motivations driven by emotional or experiential factors. For instance, during the COVID-19 pandemic, a study of 312 U.S. consumers found that expectancies of success in online apparel rental (e.g., receiving suitable items) interacted with task value components—including attainment value (alignment with self-identity) and intrinsic value (enjoyment)—to explain 42% of variance in rental intentions, highlighting EVT's utility in predicting adoption of novel consumption modes amid uncertainty. In economic decisions, EVT extends to occupational choices, where individuals select careers based on the product of expectancy (perceived probability of success, influenced by skills and barriers) and value (encompassing economic returns like income alongside non-monetary aspects such as prestige). Modifications to Atkinson's original formulation, tested on samples of high school students, incorporate subjective probabilities of alternatives and opportunity costs, improving predictive accuracy over additive models; for example, valence for an occupation increases with its relative attractiveness compared to feasible options, aligning choices with realistic labor market constraints. Similarly, in personal finance, longitudinal data from 363 emerging adults revealed that adolescent personal expectancies for financial success (β = 0.24) and values (β = 0.19) independently predicted objective behaviors like net worth and credit scores a decade later, outperforming parental influences and underscoring EVT's role in intertemporal economic planning. EVT's integration with behavioral economics further refines consumer models by accounting for intertemporal trade-offs, such as in expectation-based purchases where present biases alter perceived values; a 2022 model demonstrated that incorporating multiple selves (current vs. future) enhances explanations of delayed gratification in buying decisions, with empirical validation showing higher predictive power for sustainable consumption patterns. However, applications emphasize that expectancies must be context-specific, as cultural or informational asymmetries can distort values in market settings, necessitating inclusion of cost factors like time or financial opportunity to avoid overestimation of choice probabilities.

Empirical Evidence and Validation

Key Studies and Meta-Analyses

Eccles and Wigfield's expectancy-value model received early empirical validation through longitudinal research, including the Michigan Study of Adolescent and Adult Transitions, which tracked children's expectancies for success and subjective task values from elementary through high school, demonstrating that higher initial values and expectancies predicted enrollment in advanced mathematics courses and sustained engagement in science activities. These studies, spanning data collected starting in the 1980s, revealed moderate correlations (r ≈ 0.20–0.40) between expectancy-value constructs and later achievement outcomes, underscoring the model's utility in explaining domain-specific choices beyond general ability measures. Subsequent cross-sectional and intervention-based studies extended this evidence, such as Wigfield et al.'s (1991) examination of early adolescent transitions to junior high, where declines in expectancy beliefs and intrinsic value were linked to reduced self-concept of ability and increased disengagement, with path analyses confirming bidirectional influences between values and performance. In higher education contexts, recent applications, like a 2024 study of over 1,000 students, tested multiplicative interactions between expectancies and values, finding they explained variance in dropout intentions beyond additive effects, with standardized betas indicating expectancies as stronger predictors (β = -0.35) than values alone. A key meta-analysis synthesizing 31 studies on expectancy-value theory's application in physical education, published in 2022, reported that antecedents such as social support (effect size r = 0.57 for utility value) and positive class climate (r = 0.49 for intrinsic value) robustly predict expectancy and value beliefs, which in turn forecast outcomes like situational interest (r = 0.49) and physical skill acquisition (r = 0.30 for expectancies). This analysis, covering data from diverse student samples through 2021, affirmed the theory's efficacy in promoting mastery-oriented behaviors but highlighted smaller effects for long-term health outcomes (r < 0.20), suggesting contextual moderators like teacher autonomy support enhance predictive power. While domain-general meta-analyses remain limited, these findings align with broader educational evidence, though physical education applications show stronger interpersonal predictors compared to cognitive domains.

Cross-Cultural and Longitudinal Findings

Cross-cultural examinations of expectancy-value theory (EVT) reveal substantial generalizability in its core predictions, with expectancies for success and task values consistently forecasting achievement across diverse national contexts. A 2022 multilevel analysis using data from over 300,000 fourth-grade students across 80 societies in the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) 2016 demonstrated that reading self-concept—a proxy for expectancy—and intrinsic value positively predicted reading achievement, with standardized effects of β = 0.25 for self-concept and β = 0.12 for intrinsic value, respectively; these associations persisted after controlling for socioeconomic factors and held uniformly across high- and low-performing countries, underscoring the theory's robustness beyond Western samples. Similarly, comparisons of expectancy-value profiles among adolescents in Western (e.g., Germany, United States) and Eastern (e.g., China) contexts identified four distinct motivational profiles—high expectancy/high value, high expectancy/low value, low expectancy/high value, and low expectancy/low value—with identical profile structures and mean levels for three profiles across regions, though Eastern students showed elevated utility values linked to cultural priorities on collective achievement. Cultural variations modulate the relative salience of value components, yet do not undermine EVT's foundational mechanisms. In a study of U.S. and Chinese middle schoolers (grades 6–8, n=1,200+), both groups exhibited age-related declines in expectancies and intrinsic values, aligning with EVT's predictions of diminishing motivation amid increasing task demands; however, Chinese participants reported stronger utility values (mean difference of 0.45 SD units), attributed to Confucian emphases on education as a pathway to social mobility and familial duty, which amplified persistence in academic tasks compared to U.S. peers. Assessments of values and costs in Germany, the U.S., and South Korea (n=2,000+ secondary students) confirmed invariant structural relations between expectancies, attainment/utility values, and achievement outcomes across samples, but revealed higher perceived costs (e.g., effort cost) in collectivist Korea, suggesting cultural norms shape cost-value trade-offs without altering predictive validity. Longitudinal studies provide causal evidence for EVT by tracking expectancy-value dynamics over time and their downstream effects on behavior. In the Michigan Study of Adolescent Life Transitions (MSALT), following 1,200+ U.S. students from grades 1–12, expectancies for success rose through elementary school (e.g., math self-concept increased 0.3 SD units from grades 1–5) before declining sharply in early adolescence (drop of 0.5 SD units by grade 9), while task values declined monotonically (intrinsic value fell 0.4–0.6 SD units across domains like math and English), patterns replicated in subsequent cohorts and linked to pubertal shifts and curricular mismatches. These trajectories prospectively predicted domain-specific choices; for example, higher grade 6 expectancies and utility values forecasted greater high school math enrollment (odds ratio 1.8–2.2) and performance (β=0.15–0.20 for GPA), independent of prior achievement, with gender gaps widening as values diverged (girls' math values declined faster, β=-0.25 vs. boys' -0.10). Further longitudinal evidence affirms EVT's role in developmental cascades. A multi-wave analysis of college majors (n=500+, over 4 years) found that early expectancy-value beliefs mediated 25–30% of variance in persistence, with utility value exerting stronger longitudinal effects (β=0.22) than intrinsic value (β=0.11) on retention, particularly in STEM fields where opportunity costs loomed larger. Across studies spanning 20+ years, expectancies and values in childhood (as early as grade 1) reliably predicted adolescent outcomes like career aspirations, with path coefficients of 0.20–0.35, though external influences (e.g., teacher feedback) accounted for 10–15% of intraindividual change, highlighting EVT's integration of stability and situated variability.

Criticisms and Limitations

Neglect of Cost and Opportunity Factors

Expectancy-value theory (EVT), in its foundational formulations by Eccles and colleagues, emphasizes expectancies for success and subjective task values as primary drivers of achievement-related choices and performance, yet it has faced criticism for underemphasizing the role of costs, including opportunity costs, in the motivational calculus. Critics argue that without explicitly accounting for the resources expended—such as time, effort, or forgone alternatives—EVT provides an incomplete model of decision-making, as individuals weigh net value rather than gross benefits alone. For instance, opportunity costs represent the value of alternative activities displaced by task engagement, a factor central to rational choice but often omitted in empirical tests of the theory. Historical neglect of cost measurement stems from early EVT research prioritizing positive value components like intrinsic interest and utility, with costs treated as implicit rather than directly assessed. Wigfield and Eccles introduced three cost subtypes in the 1990s—effort cost (energy required), opportunity cost (lost alternatives), and emotional/psychological cost (anxiety or stress)—yet subsequent studies frequently failed to operationalize or include them, obscuring their predictive power for outcomes like persistence or dropout. A 2010 analysis highlighted this gap, noting that the absence of cost scales in most EVT instruments leads to unclear links between perceived costs and behaviors, such as students avoiding high-cost tasks despite high expectancy or value. In educational settings, for example, a student's choice to pursue mathematics may hinge on opportunity costs like reduced time for social activities, but models excluding these factors overestimate enrollment intentions. This omission particularly weakens EVT's application to real-world trade-offs, where high opportunity costs can override expectancy-value products; empirical evidence from adolescent career choices shows that incorporating opportunity costs improves prediction of vocational decisions by 15-20% over value-only models. Critics, including those refining EVT into expectancy-value-cost frameworks, contend that treating costs as mere subtractions from value ignores their independent deterrent effects, such as how perceived time trade-offs amplify avoidance in resource-constrained environments like overloaded curricula. Longitudinal data from science undergraduates further reveal that unmeasured costs correlate with diminished persistence, underscoring how neglect distorts causal inferences about motivation. Recent meta-analyses confirm that while updated EVT variants address this by validating cost scales, the theory's core equations still risk oversimplification without routine cost integration.

Oversimplification and Measurement Issues

Critics argue that expectancy-value theory (EVT) oversimplifies motivational processes by frequently employing additive models that treat expectancy and value as independent predictors, neglecting the theoretically central multiplicative interaction where motivation peaks only when both are high. This approach, common in empirical tests since the 1990s, risks underestimating the joint influence of components and leading to incomplete interventions, as simulated power analyses indicate such interactions are detectable but require large samples (N > 500) to avoid Type II errors. Furthermore, by prioritizing cognitive expectancies and values, EVT may undervalue non-cognitive factors like emotional , habitual behaviors, or immediate environmental cues, reducing the theory's explanatory power for dynamic real-world choices. Measurement challenges compound these issues, as expectancy and value constructs rely heavily on self-report scales that are susceptible to response biases, retrospective distortion, and cultural variations in interpretation. Early instruments, such as those refined by Eccles and colleagues in the 1980s using longitudinal data from over 1,000 students, showed initial promise but suffered from low reliability for subjective task value subscales (e.g., Cronbach's α ≈ 0.60-0.70 for utility value). Recent efforts to incorporate cost—effort, opportunity, and psychological—as a distinct negative value dimension have highlighted inconsistencies, with meta-analyses revealing weak or null links to outcomes due to inconsistent operationalization across studies (e.g., varying from 3- to 7-point Likert items). These psychometric limitations persist, as evidenced by debates over whether cost subtracts from value or forms a separate pathway, complicating valid assessment in diverse populations.

Debates on Interaction Effects

A central debate in expectancy-value theory (EVT) revolves around whether the expectancy and value components interact multiplicatively to predict motivation and outcomes, as originally proposed, or whether their effects are primarily additive. Proponents of the multiplicative model, rooted in early formulations by Atkinson (1964) and Vroom (1964), argue that motivation requires both high expectancy of success and high task value; if either is absent (approaching zero), overall motivation collapses to negligible levels, reflecting a synergistic rather than compensatory dynamic. This interaction term—typically expectancy × value—implies non-linear effects where high levels of one component amplify the impact of the other, a notion theoretically appealing for explaining why individuals disengage entirely from low-value or low-expectancy tasks. However, critics contend that insisting on multiplicativity overlooks empirical realities, as additive models often explain variance equally or better without assuming zeros nullify motivation entirely. Empirical evidence for the interaction has been inconsistent and often weak, fueling skepticism about its practical significance. Meta-analyses and large-scale studies frequently report that main effects of expectancy and value dominate predictions of achievement, persistence, and choice, with interaction terms rarely significant or of small magnitude even when detected. For instance, high positive correlations between expectancy and value (often r > 0.40) introduce multicollinearity, inflating standard errors and reducing statistical power to detect interactions, particularly in cross-sectional designs with restricted variability in student samples. Advanced methods like latent moderated have probed for multiplicative effects but yield mixed results: some confirm synergistic patterns in specific domains like math achievement, while others find compensatory effects where high expectancy offsets low value (or vice versa), challenging the strict zero-motivation assumption. This elusiveness has led researchers to question whether the interaction's theoretical centrality justifies its pursuit, or if methodological artifacts—such as self-report biases or failure to model costs separately—undermine detection. Recent scholarship defends the interaction's potential importance despite empirical frailty, attributing weakness to underpowered studies and calling for targeted interventions that boost both components simultaneously. Simulations demonstrate that even modest interactions (e.g., explaining 1-2% additional variance) can yield detectable effects in longitudinal or high-stakes contexts, such as dropout intentions or career choices, where synergies manifest more robustly. Critics of abandoning the multiplicative approach warn that additive models may overestimate compensatory mechanisms, ignoring causal thresholds where low expectancy renders value irrelevant—a pattern observed in situated EVT extensions incorporating costs. Yet, debates persist on measurement: ordinal scales and subjective valuations may distort true interactions, prompting calls for objective proxies or experimental manipulations. Overall, while additive formulations offer parsimony for broad applications, the multiplicative debate underscores EVT's tension between elegant theory and rigorous empirics, with ongoing research favoring hybrid models that test interactions conditionally on individual differences like prior achievement.

Recent Advances and Extensions

Situated and Dynamic Formulations

Situated expectancy-value theory (SEVT) represents an extension of the original expectancy-value framework, emphasizing that individuals' expectancies for success and subjective task values are not fixed traits but vary systematically across specific contexts, influenced by immediate social, cultural, and environmental cues. This formulation, proposed by Eccles and Wigfield in 2020, integrates developmental changes with social cognitive processes, positing that motivation emerges from interactions between personal beliefs and situated affordances, such as classroom dynamics or peer influences, rather than global dispositions. Empirical support derives from longitudinal studies showing context-dependent shifts; for instance, students' math expectancies fluctuate more within specific lessons than between stable trait-like measures, highlighting the theory's sensitivity to proximal antecedents like teacher feedback. Dynamic formulations within SEVT further model these beliefs as temporally interdependent, evolving over short intervals through reciprocal influences and feedback loops. Panel network analyses of introductory calculus students across a semester reveal that daily expectancies predict subsequent task values, with bidirectional links strengthening over time, as captured in experience sampling data from multiple course sections. This approach counters static assumptions by incorporating autoregressive effects, where prior-day expectancies forecast next-day values (β ≈ 0.25–0.40), underscoring motivation's intra-individual variability rather than mere inter-individual differences. Such dynamics align with causal realism, as interventions like targeted utility value prompts demonstrably alter trajectories, evidenced in randomized trials boosting STEM persistence via real-time expectancy recalibration. Methodological advances, including diary studies and ecological momentary assessments, validate these situated-dynamic processes by tracking fluctuations in real-world settings, such as STEM courses where values decay without contextual supports but rebound with sociocultural reinforcements like . Cross-sectional validations across grade levels confirm that situated measures outperform global ones in predicting , with network centrality analyses indicating expectancies as pivotal hubs in motivational cascades. Future extensions prioritize computational modeling to simulate these interactions, addressing gaps in long-term stability amid acute perturbations.

Integration with Other Theories

Expectancy-value theory (EVT) intersects with (SDT) by linking basic psychological needs to expectancy and value constructs, where competence satisfaction enhances success expectancies and autonomy bolsters intrinsic task value. Empirical integrations, such as in studies of first-generation college students, demonstrate that SDT's perceived competence longitudinally predicts EVT expectancies, thereby amplifying achievement outcomes through combined motivational pathways. Similarly, SDT's emphasis on volitional complements EVT's value appraisal, as evidenced in motivation research where autonomous regulation from SDT mediates the effects of EVT's subjective task values on study abroad persistence. EVT aligns with (SCT) through conceptual overlap between expectancies for success and beliefs, both serving as proximal predictors of effort and performance. In educational contexts, SCT's outcome expectancies extend EVT by incorporating and environmental influences on value perceptions, with meta-analytic evidence showing 's stronger predictive power for goals when fused with EVT's value components. This synthesis has been applied to predict career aspirations, where EVT-SCT models outperform standalone frameworks in accounting for variance in behavioral intentions. The theory also integrates with achievement goal theory (AGT), positing that mastery-approach goals elevate both expectancies and intrinsic values, whereas performance-avoidance goals diminish them, creating interactive effects on outcomes like persistence. Person-centered analyses combining AGT orientations with EVT beliefs reveal distinct motivational profiles, such as high-mastery/high-value patterns linked to superior academic engagement, underscoring their complementary roles in longitudinal achievement prediction. In behavioral intention models, EVT underpins the (TPB) via expectancy-value formulations of attitudes and perceived behavioral control, where success expectancies inform control beliefs and task values shape normative influences. Applications in health behaviors, for instance, show TPB's expectancy components enhancing EVT's predictive utility for adherence, as validated in operationalizations emphasizing belief summation for intention formation.

Emerging Research Hotspots

Recent applications of expectancy-value theory (EVT) have increasingly focused on motivation for (AI) education, particularly amid rapid technological integration in workplaces and curricula. Studies from 2023 to 2025 demonstrate that students' expectancy beliefs—such as perceived success in mastering AI concepts like —and task values, including utility for future , strongly predict intentions to learn and apply AI tools. For instance, an EVT-based instrument developed in 2023 revealed that higher attainment value and interest in generative AI correlated with reduced anxiety and greater perceived long-term benefits in educational settings, informing interventions to boost AI among undergraduates. Emerging work extends this to self-belief formation in AI-driven societies, where situated expectancies shaped by AI interactions influence choices, with longitudinal data showing dynamic shifts in values during exposure to AI tasks. In cognitive and physical training domains, research hotspots emphasize EVT's role in fostering persistence, often incorporating cost considerations overlooked in earlier models. A 2025 study on cognitive tasks like the found that feedback signaling rapid improvement elevated expectancies and values, increasing continuation rates by 3.71 to 4.80 times compared to stagnant performance, though high initial skills without gains failed to sustain effort due to diminished perceived value. Similarly, a 2023 in physical education highlighted the understudied "cost" dimension—such as effort and opportunity costs—as a key demotivator, with calls for targeted measures to profile motivation across K-12, particularly for high schoolers where data gaps persist. Future directions include scaling interventions to real-world durations, enhancing intrinsic values post-skill plateaus, and evaluating knowledge gains as outcomes in applied settings. Workplace applications represent another burgeoning area, linking EVT to decisions and adoption in evolving job markets. Investigations from onward apply EVT to predict with AI-enhanced roles, where expectancies of in tech-upskilled positions drive value perceptions and retention, mitigating concerns over . This aligns with broader trends toward expectancy-value-cost frameworks in organizational contexts, urging empirical tests of how costs like training demands interact with values to influence productivity and turnover, though causal evidence remains preliminary pending larger-scale validations.

References

  1. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0361476X99910159
  2. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9679505/
  3. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9923428/
  4. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.992372/full
  5. https://doi.apa.org/doi/10.1037/h0059521
  6. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1999-02247-006
  7. https://meehl.umn.edu/sites/meehl.umn.edu/files/files/031tolman.pdf
  8. https://www.learning-theories.org/doku.php?id=learning_theories:sign_learning
  9. https://personality-project.org/revelle/syllabi/301/achievementmotivation.pdf
  10. http://personality-project.org/courses/371/nach.html
  11. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED101244.pdf
  12. https://www.careershodh.com/atkinsons-theory-of-motivation-1/
  13. https://acmd615.pbworks.com/f/ExpectancyValueTheory.pdf
  14. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0361476X20300242
  15. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2023-52327-001
  16. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10648-024-09888-9
  17. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10629353/
  18. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2025-06352-001
  19. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2018-33248-024
  20. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5191917/
  21. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01662/full
  22. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6188906/
  23. https://edpsych.pressbooks.sunycreate.cloud/chapter/expectancy-value-theory/
  24. https://education.okstate.edu/site-files/documents/motivation-classrooms/motivation-minute-expectancy-value-theory.pdf
  25. https://commons.lib.jmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1221&context=master201019
  26. https://www.jstor.org/stable/25835500
  27. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/239840207_Probing_for_the_Multiplicative_Term_in_Modern_Expectancy-Value_Theory_A_Latent_Interaction_Modeling_Study
  28. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11321232/
  29. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1041608024001717
  30. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/jee.20456
  31. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11031-024-10088-9
  32. https://greenlab.psych.wisc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/280/2025/06/Expectancy_Value_in_Motivation_Anthony_et_al_2025.pdf
  33. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21582440231180671
  34. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2300463120
  35. https://par.nsf.gov/servlets/purl/10107236
  36. https://sfbuild.sfsu.edu/sites/default/files/documents/Closing%2520Achievement%2520Gaps%2520with%2520a%2520Utility-Value%2520Intervention%2520-%2520Harackiewicz%25C2%25A0et%2520al.%252C%25202016.pdf
  37. https://motivatelab.org/publications-2/2017/11/13/making-connections-replicating-and-extending-the-utility-value-intervention-in-the-classroom
  38. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7413295/
  39. https://digitalcommons.denison.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1291&context=studentscholarship
  40. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00461520.2021.1984242
  41. https://www.usenix.org/system/files/soups2024-chen.pdf
  42. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11128673/
  43. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10341207/
  44. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11002-022-09650-7
  45. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20562
  46. https://repository.lsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1034&context=textile_pubs
  47. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/230257419_Occupational_choice_and_expectancy-value_theory_Testing_some_modifications
  48. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0001879181900543
  49. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0361476X18303199
  50. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12144-022-03014-0
  51. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1041608024001122
  52. https://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1252&context=internationaleducation
  53. https://bmri.korea.ac.kr/bbs/pdf/1780/Gaspard_et_al_%25282020%2529_Assessing_students%2527_task_values_and_costs_in_three_countries.pdf
  54. https://oasis.library.unlv.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5743&context=thesesdissertations
  55. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1041608022000322
  56. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265965932_Expectancy-Value-Cost_Model_of_Motivation
  57. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273400406_Measuring_cost_The_forgotten_component_of_expectancy-value_theory
  58. https://par.nsf.gov/servlets/purl/10093497
  59. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11031-020-09822-w
  60. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0361476X23000036
  61. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6558974/
  62. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/51486738_Who_Took_the_out_of_Expectancy-Value_Theory
  63. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40881818/
  64. https://positivepsychology.com/expectancy-theory/
  65. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0361476X15000089
  66. https://ascnhighered.org/ASCN/change_theories/collection/evt.html
  67. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956797611415540
  68. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1041608020300194
  69. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/390675885_Why_Elusive_Expectancy_Value_Interactions_May_Be_Critical_for_Theory_and_Intervention_A_Simulated_Power_Analysis
  70. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/21582440211059176
  71. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1041608022001200
  72. https://pure.uva.nl/ws/files/99136682/1_s2.0_S1041608022001200_main.pdf
  73. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/23328584221117168
  74. https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/vmn9e
  75. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/250151596.pdf
  76. https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd/4704/
  77. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.841122/full
  78. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1994-23385-001
  79. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5113774/
  80. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0361476X19304370
  81. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11031-012-9282-9
  82. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2011-25164-001
  83. https://people.umass.edu/aizen/pubs/tpb-faq.pdf
  84. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2047535/
  85. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/386505026_Expectancy-Value_Beliefs_as_Predictors_of_Student_Intentions_in_AI_Learning_and_Application
  86. https://slejournal.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40561-023-00284-4
  87. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1403242
  88. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1041608025001074
  89. https://www.ewadirect.com/proceedings/lnep/article/view/21811
  90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41465-025-00332-6
  91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jshs.2022.01.003
  92. https://www.linkedin.com/posts/adrianwu_insead-careercoaching-motivation-activity-7386206224444383232-aMYv
  93. https://easychair.org/publications/preprint/5VQC/open
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.